3 ms·
Firefox couldn't display those files/streams, but it would notice and could cope, eg. by displaying some informative message instead that lays the blame where i
by pgeorgi 13y ago
Firefox couldn't display those files/streams, but it would notice and could cope, eg. by displaying some informative message instead that lays the blame where it belongs to: the website.
Since FF is still popular enough in certain regions, that it (plus legacy IE versions) could kill EME before it gets popular, except for certain special use cases like Netflix on Chromebooks (where, honestly, a fully custom plugin solution would work just as well).
- ben0x539 13y ago> by displaying some informative message instead that lays the blame where it belongs to: the website. Surely the website will detect FF and instead of serving an encrypted stream, display some informative message laying the blame with Mozilla and link to a DRM-enabled browser download.
- pgeorgi 13y agoOf course they're free to do that, like they are now. So instead of installing a plugin, the user is now expected to install a new browser (with different UI and everything) _and_ a plugin for the DRM implementation. That surely helped the DRM vendors' cause.
- madeofpalk 13y agoOr, the user would see their browser not supporting Netflix, think it's a poor product and which to a 'superior' one.
- pgeorgi 13y agoA browser that refuses to implement EME is an inferior set-top box. Question is if becoming Hollywood's set-top box is really Firefox's (and Mozilla's) mission.
- chris_wot 13y agoJust because a browser implements EME doesn't mean it can still play content. It needs a CDM written for it first. What if that CDM requires an underlying DRM system that only runs on one OS?
- asadotzler 13y agoThey don't have to install a new browser. Most users already have IE on their system and it'll work just fine with no effort at all except clicking on the blue e.