3 ms·

I disagree. The CEO of the W3C thinks this unlikely, and there's already the example of Netflix. They are one of the primary agitators behind EME, and they re

I disagree. The CEO of the W3C thinks this unlikely, and there's already the example of Netflix. They are one of the primary agitators behind EME, and they refuse to make their system available on Linux.

wavefunction 13y ago
So you want to demand that Netflix provide at their expense a solution for every possible OS out there? Don't like it, don't partake. I can't understand this mentality...
- duncan_bayne 13y ago
  > So you want to demand that Netflix provide at their expense a solution for every possible OS out there? > > Don't like it, don't partake. I can't understand this mentality... What mentality? Perhaps you should read my other posts. To summarise, my position is: - if Netflix wants to build their own DRM system, fine - if they don't want to include my chosen operating system, that's their perogative, they just lose out on my money - what is _not_ okay is for Netflix to lobby the W3C to include DRM in HTML5 The point I'm trying to make is that having a DRM standard in HTML5 does not mean that Netflix will suddenly start to support Linux. Several posters have expressed this idea, and it's just plain incorrect.
  - wavefunction 13y ago
    I guess I agree with you then, and thank you for clarifying.
- AnthonyMouse 13y ago
  >So you want to demand that Netflix provide at their expense a solution for every possible OS out there? Who says it has to be made by Netflix or at their expense? I'm sure there are open source developers (e.g. Mozilla) who would be happy to create a multiplatform open source Netflix client. Netflix are the ones who make that impossible, and having done that their remaining alternatives are a) provide the client themselves, or b) incur the wrath of angry users. They've decided to go with (b), so here we are.