1966560 - Create H.265/HEVC article

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(support.mozilla.org :: Knowledge Base Content, task)

Description

[08xjcec48]

Some users are confused about whether Firefox can play H.265 (HEVC) videos or not: examples. Other users, who lack the necessary components, file webcompat issues about sites that use HEVC exclusively: examples. Please create an article to explain the current status of HEVC support to them.

The latest Firefox version can stream most HEVC videos as long as your operating system has the required playback components.

The necessary component is not pre-installed on all Windows versions. Bug 1963910 lists them. Depending on your particular setup, you may have to download it from Microsoft using either of these Windows Store pages:

• HEVC Video Extensions from Device Manufacturer (only available for some users)
• HEVC Video Extensions (not available for free)

Linux users may also have to manually install the appropriate FFmpeg libraries: Bug 1894818#c27.

---

This page has sample videos that are supposed to work if you have the right components.

Some specific video configurations are not supported for now, e.g. HEVC videos with the MKV extension (Bug 1835393) and Bug 1839107.

Comment 1

[Alice Wyman]

In case it helps, the MDN Web video codec guide has an HEVC (H.265) section that includes more information, including browser compatibility. See:
https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/Media/Guides/Formats/Video_codecs#hevc_h.265

Comment 2

[Paul]

I am not sure if this needs a new article, perhaps an edit to https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/html5-audio-and-video-firefox (maybe editing the title to remove "HTML5") would be a better solution. Just a couple of notes and a link to the MDN content.

Comment 3

[Dayana]

Hi Mandy! Could you help validate this request?

Comment 4

[Dayana]

(In reply to Seburo from comment #2)

I am not sure if this needs a new article, perhaps an edit to https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/html5-audio-and-video-firefox (maybe editing the title to remove "HTML5") would be a better solution. Just a couple of notes and a link to the MDN content.

Hi Paul, this is a great suggestion. Would you like to help with this edit?

Comment 5

[08xjcec48]

The article mentioned in the previous comment is:

• not helpful for non-technical users, as it just presents a list of several confusing technical terms with unnecessary links to Wikipedia articles. It mentions that Firefox relies on your operating system to play H.264/AVC, the most popular video format on the Internet, but doesn't explain how to actually get your operating system to support it: this information needs to be found elsewhere
• inconvenient for technical users, as a simple table with the supported formats would be more useful for them than unreadable paragraphs full of Wikipedia links

I believe that adding a "couple more notes" and links to MDN won't make it any more helpful. It needs a full rewrite - preferably with embedded sample AVC and HEVC videos for users to test them (I've already pointed you to a website with videos you can use for free), and direct instructions on how to get your operating system to actually play them.

Comment 6

[Alice Wyman]

The edit/rewrite of https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/html5-audio-and-video-firefox (remove HTML5 from the title, a couple of notes and link to the MDN content) could include details about H.265/HEVC content and Firefox compatibility (the article already mentions H.264/AVC under the Patented media section). We could also add a link to the https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/open-h264-plugin-firefox article on playing H.264 content in Firefox ... but see the references I posted in https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/open-h264-plugin-firefox/discuss/6459 for more information. If a new H.265/HEVC article is the better route, that's up to SUMO KB staff.

Comment 7

[Flavius Floare]

(In reply to 08xjcec48 from comment #5)

The article mentioned in the previous comment is:

• not helpful for non-technical users, as it just presents a list of several confusing technical terms with unnecessary links to Wikipedia articles. It mentions that Firefox relies on your operating system to play H.264/AVC, the most popular video format on the Internet, but doesn't explain how to actually get your operating system to support it: this information needs to be found elsewhere
• inconvenient for technical users, as a simple table with the supported formats would be more useful for them than unreadable paragraphs full of Wikipedia links

I believe that adding a "couple more notes" and links to MDN won't make it any more helpful. It needs a full rewrite - preferably with embedded sample AVC and HEVC videos for users to test them (I've already pointed you to a website with videos you can use for free), and direct instructions on how to get your operating system to actually play them.

I'll go with rewriting/updating the article:

• Members will be able to find everything about video codecs in Firefox in one place, and it will become their go-to SUMO article when in doubt whether Firefox supports a codec or not.

• I agree with fully rewriting it: the article needs to be more readable, easier to follow. In its current state, as mentioned, it's quite frustrating to read.

• Even if we were to write a new article, the existing one still needs a rewrite, so it would be easier to just update it.

• My assessment is that a new article could be useful, but it would require users to juggle between several KBs. Having them in one place is more practical.

If it doesn't work, and members still want a dedicated KB for this specific codec, then we'll write one.

So, for now, I'll rewrite + update the existing one. (I'll also add all the information you folks provided me with, many thanks, btw)

Comment 8

[Fabio]

If you are going to rewrite the article, consider adding a note that would answer the question at:
https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/15358/why-can-firefox-use-openh264-for-video-calls-but-not-to-play-videos

Indeed from the article it looks like openh264 is used just for "WebRTC streams" but not for regular videos which needs OS support?

Comment 9

[Paul]

(In reply to Dayana from comment #4)

(In reply to Seburo from comment #2)

I am not sure if this needs a new article, perhaps an edit to https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/html5-audio-and-video-firefox (maybe editing the title to remove "HTML5") would be a better solution. Just a couple of notes and a link to the MDN content.

Hi Paul, this is a great suggestion. Would you like to help with this edit?

I was hoping to, but I think I will back out of this one and keep clear. Thank you.

Comment 10

[Flavius Floare]

I have written a draft here. Please request access if you can't access it.

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated: I'm also particularly interested in whether the draft is clearer, more digestible, so to speak, in comparison to the current one. Thanks.

Comment 11

[Flavius Floare]

KB here.

Comment 12

[Alice Wyman]

See https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/audio-and-video-firefox/history
Revisions are pending review, including a change from "H.264 (HEVC)" (typo?) to "H.265 (HEVC)" in multiple places.

Comment 13

[Flavius Floare]

(In reply to Alice Wyman from comment #12)

See https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/audio-and-video-firefox/history
Revisions are pending review, including a change from "H.264 (HEVC)" (typo?) to "H.265 (HEVC)" in multiple places.

Thank you, Alice! It was a typo, indeed. I have approved your revision, and the KB is also ready for localization.

Comment 14

[08xjcec48]

Attachment: current table.png

Most English speakers will take the "Free" header in your table as meaning "gratis," while it actually means whether a format is "libre" or not.

In the "Download" column, most links are irrelevant pages about licenses (not downloads), and the links that do point to a Windows Store download take users to a more expensive codec pack sold by a third-party company instead of the official Microsoft downloads.

I'd do these things to summarize the article:

• Tidy up the table and remove the redundant "Windows support" section
• Rewrite "...systems that don't support MP4/H.264..." as "...systems that don't support H.264 or H.265..." and add direct links to H.264 and H.265 videos (preferably hosted on SUMO if it allows video uploads)

Please open the attached images to see how I'd use conditional tags to get the user's operating system and make the first rows in the table show only relevant information. Unsupported versions and formats don't need to be in the table, and I only kept a reference to Firefox 120 because 115ESR is still supported.

Comment 15

[08xjcec48]

Attachment: proposed concise table with conditional tags.png

Comment 16

[08xjcec48]

Attachment: markdown.txt

Comment 17

[08xjcec48]

Attachment: markdown.txt

Comment 18

[Fabio]

Windows 11 24H2 is listed in both columns (Automatically/Doesn’t automatically) in the table.

"Yes/No Patents expired Free to use" -> maybe reword, it's not clear its meaning.

Theora is reported as supported from 3.5, but other codecs just "All versions".

MP4V-ES, H.263 and AAC are also "Free to use" by now (like MP3)?

Comment 19

[Flavius Floare]

(In reply to 08xjcec48 from comment #14)

Created attachment 9493846 [details]
current table.png

Most English speakers will take the "Free" header in your table as meaning "gratis," while it actually means whether a format is "libre" or not.

In the "Download" column, most links are irrelevant pages about licenses (not downloads), and the links that do point to a Windows Store download take users to a more expensive codec pack sold by a third-party company instead of the official Microsoft downloads.

I'd do these things to summarize the article:

• Tidy up the table and remove the redundant "Windows support" section
• Rewrite "...systems that don't support MP4/H.264..." as "...systems that don't support H.264 or H.265..." and add direct links to H.264 and H.265 videos (preferably hosted on SUMO if it allows video uploads)

Please open the attached images to see how I'd use conditional tags to get the user's operating system and make the first rows in the table show only relevant information. Unsupported versions and formats don't need to be in the table, and I only kept a reference to Firefox 120 because 115ESR is still supported.

Thank you so much for your input. These are excellent suggestions, and I'll be looking to implement some of them into the article ASAP. I'm thinking of turning the Windows support table into an FAQ section.

Comment 20

[Flavius Floare]

(In reply to Fabio from comment #18)

Windows 11 24H2 is listed in both columns (Automatically/Doesn’t automatically) in the table.

"Yes/No Patents expired Free to use" -> maybe reword, it's not clear its meaning.

Theora is reported as supported from 3.5, but other codecs just "All versions".

MP4V-ES, H.263 and AAC are also "Free to use" by now (like MP3)?

I see. If MP4V-ES, H.263, and AAC are free, then I would recommend updating the developer article about this topic, as I got all the information from there.

Meanwhile, I'm working on editing the article, and I'll incorporate some of your suggestions and feedback.

Comment 21

[Flavius Floare]

I have drafted an updated version here. Please request access to it, and leave your feedback and suggestions in comments. Once you have access to it, scroll down to the Updated Version headline: you'll find it there.

Edit: I've updated the link, and you should be able to access it once you get access to it.

Comment 22

[Fabio]

This looks much better! Just want to add that HEVC is also supported on Linux since 137: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/137.0/releasenotes/

Comment 23

[Alice Wyman]

<See below>

Comment 24

[Alice Wyman]

See https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/audio-and-video-firefox/history
I submitted a revision to table formatting that's pending review, to consolidate entries for Windows 10 and Windows 11 versions.

Disregard the above.
I just viewed the updated version of the google doc, which is much better than the current Audio and video files in Firefox SUMO article.

Comment 25

[Paul]

Only feedback from me is to use white on black rather than blue on black for the icons for easier visibillity and better presentation.

Comment 26

[Flavius Floare]

Thank you all for your feedback. Greatly appreciated. I will update the KB ASAP.