4 ms·
For example, most (all?) browsers do not support the vastly upgraded H.265 yet. If we had ffmpeg, H.265 could've been supported in the browser over a year ago.
by btym 10y ago
For example, most (all?) browsers do not support the vastly upgraded H.265 yet. If we had ffmpeg, H.265 could've been supported in the browser over a year ago.
- gcp 10y agoWho would ship the ffmpeg though? It's filled to the brim with heavily patented codecs. That's also why the browsers don't support H265. Note that Chromium and Firefox don't support H264 either exactly due to the patents. (Firefox will fall back to the system decoder, which, coincidentally, will be ffmpeg on a Linux system!)
- btym 10y agoIf ffmpeg was a JS library, it wouldn't need to have anything to do with the browser vendors, it would be provided by the content host. The only concern is the binary size (and hey, that could be optimized by dropping codecs from the build that don't appear on the site).