3 ms·

I really enjoyed that "open standards" event, which was broadcast via HTML5 that only worked in Safari and on Mac.

tzs 16y ago
Didn't they submit this format for standardization a year or so ago? If so, you can't blame Apple that others have not implemented it.
- gecko 16y ago
  Is that also your stance towards OfficeXML?
  - pmjordan 16y ago
    In fairness, it's a lot easier to implement than OfficeXML - it's basically HTML + dynamic M3U playlists + MPEG. OfficeXML is more or less a core dump of Word/Excel/Whatever serialised as XML.
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  No, they didn't, but lots of people got confused and thought they had. Here's Gruber making the same mistake and correcting himself: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/09/01/http-live-streaming http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/09/01/http-live-stream...
thought_alarm 16y ago
At one point I had it streaming on four different devices at once. It was awesome.
pavlov 16y ago
It's called "embrace and extend". The phrase was coined by some other company than Apple, though -- I forget, but they were big in the '90s...
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
danilocampos 16y ago
> I really enjoyed that "open standards" event, which was broadcast via HTML5 HTML5 is a markup language, not a streaming transport. Apple used HTTP Live Streaming, which is tech they're trying to push as a new standard. It has certain technical benefits: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Live_Streaming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Live_Streaming I believe the VLC nightly build has support for it, but Apple's not going to go out and tell people "Hey, go use this weird beta client to access the stream."
- Keyframe 16y ago
  You are right, of course. I was using HTML5 as it is commonly used as an umbrella term for everything new and standards related on the web these days in my snark comment. Interestingly enough, I tried with VLC to no avail. I liked that new nano, seems like something we ought to have in the year 2010, straight out of future.
tienshiao 16y ago
One possible reason to restrict would be that they used the event as sort of a beta test for streaming/live broadcasting infrastructure/process. Sort of like Gmail with the invites. Artificially restrict access, so you don't need huge scale from the get go.

tzs 16y ago

Didn't they submit this format for standardization a year or so ago? If so, you can't blame Apple that others have not implemented it.

gecko 16y ago
Is that also your stance towards OfficeXML?
- pmjordan 16y ago
  In fairness, it's a lot easier to implement than OfficeXML - it's basically HTML + dynamic M3U playlists + MPEG. OfficeXML is more or less a core dump of Word/Excel/Whatever serialised as XML.
ZeroGravitas 16y ago
No, they didn't, but lots of people got confused and thought they had. Here's Gruber making the same mistake and correcting himself: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/09/01/http-live-streaming http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/09/01/http-live-stream...

thought_alarm 16y ago

At one point I had it streaming on four different devices at once. It was awesome.

pavlov 16y ago

It's called "embrace and extend". The phrase was coined by some other company than Apple, though -- I forget, but they were big in the '90s...

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

danilocampos 16y ago

> I really enjoyed that "open standards" event, which was broadcast via HTML5 HTML5 is a markup language, not a streaming transport. Apple used HTTP Live Streaming, which is tech they're trying to push as a new standard. It has certain technical benefits: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Live_Streaming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Live_Streaming I believe the VLC nightly build has support for it, but Apple's not going to go out and tell people "Hey, go use this weird beta client to access the stream."

Keyframe 16y ago
You are right, of course. I was using HTML5 as it is commonly used as an umbrella term for everything new and standards related on the web these days in my snark comment. Interestingly enough, I tried with VLC to no avail. I liked that new nano, seems like something we ought to have in the year 2010, straight out of future.

tienshiao 16y ago

One possible reason to restrict would be that they used the event as sort of a beta test for streaming/live broadcasting infrastructure/process. Sort of like Gmail with the invites. Artificially restrict access, so you don't need huge scale from the get go.