4 ms·
That's just wishful thinking, I fear. In reality, all that will happen is that users will continue to be forced into using native applications where DRM can be
by matthewmacleod 9y ago
That's just wishful thinking, I fear.
In reality, all that will happen is that users will continue to be forced into using native applications where DRM can be enforced arbitrarily by whatever service they are trying to use.
- AnthonyMouse 9y agoAnd then DRMed content will be properly separated off into its miserable DRM slum that everyone hates, the cost of using it will be higher, users will complain more, companies who don't use DRM will capture more of the market, etc. That's the entire point.
- kelnos 9y agoWhat "miserable slum", though? Honestly, I find Netflix's Android app an absolute delight to use. Even if I'm sitting on my couch with my laptop, I'll pick up my phone to cast something to the TV before I use my laptop for that purpose. All in all, average customers (as in, not the majority of the HN crowd) seem perfectly happy with the current experience. Even if they had to install a native app to watch Netflix on their laptop, I doubt that would change their perception much.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- AnthonyMouse 9y agoThen what purpose does EME serve? That seems to be the false dichotomy. The claim is that EME is justified in order to get rid of the oh-so-evil Adobe Flash. But if using native apps is a satisfactory alternative that can also replace Flash then why do we need to corrupt the web?
- kelnos 9y agoBecause "corrupting the web" is still going to be a better experience for consumers, and cheaper/easier to implement for producers. If EME didn't make it in, they'd build their own native apps, but they don't want to have to do that if they can help it.