4 ms·
It's not worth invoking a flash container for 4 seconds of video.
by frandroid 13y ago
It's not worth invoking a flash container for 4 seconds of video.
- shmerl 13y agoDid I say anything about Flash? I was talking about a video tag. And are you saying that a 4 seconds video in the video tag will be less efficient than an img tag with an animated GIF? Personally I see no point in using GIFs, unless on a site which allows embedding images, but not videos. On a site which you control, video tag works just fine.
- alexcroox 13y agoI think they can spend the following required time on better things: - Deal with cross browser inconsistencies with html5 video. - Create a poster image for the video - Save the video format in mp4, ogg, webm - Save out and build flash alternative for older browsers ... ... - Realize that a gif probably would have been the best option for this post.
- shmerl 13y agoI'd simply: - ignore older browsers (today practically all browsers support the video tag, caring about older browsers in this context is like caring about IE6, i.e. it's bad). - stick with a compromise solution (H.264, yeah that's sad, but until Daala will come this mess will remain, but now Firefox already supports H.264 easily, so it's not a problem anymore). If the space allows it, I wouldn't mind encoding in both WebM and MP4, just for the sake of supporting free formats.
- pritambaral 13y agoAgreeing with co-commenter shmerl, I'd urge you to look at gfycat.