3 ms·
Their opposition to H264 and MP3 was always more about political grandstanding than anything to do with them having to pay money. They gave in on the MP3 issue
by anon1385 13y ago
Their opposition to H264 and MP3 was always more about political grandstanding than anything to do with them having to pay money.
They gave in on the MP3 issue too: http://stackoverflow.com/a/12203792 http://stackoverflow.com/a/12203792
Update October 2012: Wooohooo! Brendan Eich just announced on his blog that work for MP3 and H264 support in Firefox is underway. You can track the work on BugZilla: Support H.264/AAC/MP3 video/audio playback on desktop Firefox
Update February 2013: After much heavy lifting from Firefox developer Chris Pearce, this patch flips the switch to enable MP3, MP4, H.264, and AAC playback by default in HTML5 <audio> and <video> elements when running on Windows 7 and later. We should see some native web MP3 support in the next stable FF release.
Update April 2013: Woohooo! The latest stable Firefox has experimental support for MP3. To turn it on, type about:config in Firefox, find media.windows-media-foundation.enabled and set it to true. Restart Firefox, and you're all set; go to a site with HTML5 audio (e.g. my radio site) and you'll see Firefox is indeed playing the native MP3 and not resorting to a Flash fallback.
Update May 2013: At last! Firefox 21 was released today, and it includes native HTML5 MP3 support on Windows. I just verified it supports native MP3 audio out-of-the-box, provided your operating system supports it. I tested on Windows 8, but I believe this will automatically work on Windows 7 and Vista.
- shmerl 13y agoSuch opposition is reasonable. Someone has to fight against closed codecs. But fighting alone is hard. Google pretended to be the "white knight" when they promised that they'll drop H.264 support from Chrome, but they deserted the battle and didn't keep the promise. They could really influence the industry by dropping H.264 support from Youtube, but they don't have guts to do it since it's quite disruptive. See also https://hacks.mozilla.org/2012/03/video-mobile-and-the-open-web/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2012/03/video-mobile-and-the-open-...
- 0x09 13y agoI'm positive that anyone who misuses the word "closed" to refer to patent encumbrance has never had to suffer through working with actual by-definition closed codecs.
- shmerl 13y agoYou should have enough information from the context, to distinguish closed as "no known specs", from closed as "not free to use". May be the term non free / free (as liberated) codec is more descriptive, but closed/open will do as well.