4 ms·
HTML5 video is DOA and Google might as well lay the groundwork for the next round. Major content providers don't support HTML5 video. Netflix, Hulu, and anyone
by pedanticfreak 16y ago
HTML5 video is DOA and Google might as well lay the groundwork for the next round. Major content providers don't support HTML5 video. Netflix, Hulu, and anyone else with intellectual property to protect want nothing to do with it. So we're going to need to keep our proprietary plugins and our proprietary apps through the HTML5 era. Even YouTube needs to stay proprietary.
So if HTML5 video is DOA, why support h264? Why be democratic when people are going to use Flash and Silverlight anyway? At least this way there might be a real push for the standard HTML5 video codec to be free and open source.
- guywithabike 16y agoWebM video is DOA and Google might as well lay the groundwork for the next round. Major content providers don't support WebM video. Netflix, Hulu, and anyone else with intellectual property to protect want nothing to do with it. So we're going to need to keep our proprietary plugins and our proprietary apps through the WebM era. Even YouTube needs to stay proprietary. Your argument goes both ways.
- pedanticfreak 16y agoActually they are equivalent. HTML5 video tag is codec agnostic. In this instance HTML5 includes to both WebM and h264 video over HTML5. Both are DOA. So why support h264, which is scary and patent encumbered, when Google can give a little boost to its own WebM standard at no risk to Chrome's viability in the browser market?