6 ms·
Who are exactly are the W3C if not the big three, with Mozilla, Adobe and Yahoo etc tagging along? I can't stand naive comments from those who complain about s
by vfclists 12y ago
Who are exactly are the W3C if not the big three, with Mozilla, Adobe and Yahoo etc tagging along?
I can't stand naive comments from those who complain about standards bodies when the standards bodies are the big companies and/or their proxies.
It is like Javascript and HTML5. They've both been inadequate from day one, and are still going to be inadequate in their future incarnations, yet every company blames the standards body as though they are not the standards bodies themselves, Mozilla included.
This is where Mozilla's disingenuity comes in.
Javascript and HTML5 are generally inadequate, and Flash if open and bug free would be a whole lot better. Mozilla then decides to implement Flash in Javascript, which is an underpowered language and difficult for large scale programs.
This is the problem with Mozilla.
You sit on a board which devises an inadequate Javascript language, then you decide to implement Flash in the same inadequate language, then you go and make an agreement with the original creators of Flash for your EME/DRM implementation, because your implementation doesn't look like it is going to do too well.
Why didn't you create your Flash replacement, even a superior superset of Flash, in Nimrod, or even C, then make it the plugin standard, rather than have to go cap in hand to Adobe for some closed implementation, and top it off with some reassuring comments to Adobe's board from your CEO?
This what happens when Mozilla executives are beholden to the competition for their income. Expecting Mozilla to take a strong stance is like expecting the SEC and banking regulators to tackle TBTF banks effectively. It ain't gonna happen.
It is time to tidy up/clean up/restructure/refactor/rearchitect their code base, document it properly, hand it over to the any interested hackers, then prepare to close down, else go on to make a better browser which will have all the users and content providers flocking to your implementation
for those who don't know Nimrod I like to think of it as my favorite language du jour. C and C++ are so meh
- hajile 12y agoFlash is written in actionscript. Actionscript is Javascript (ECMAscript) with some additional functions added. Implementing flash on a highly optimized JS JIT is probably better than Adobe's buggy and insecure VM.
- vfclists 12y agoMay I ask when the highly optimized JS JIT is going to arrive? My question is why they are implementing a Flash replacement in Javascript when C or C++ would be better. Adobe's problem with Flash is that it is not open source and its bugs can't be tracked down. An open source Flash replacement might as well be written in a faster language. It is the open source nature that matters, not the language it is implemented in.
- pcwalton 12y ago> My question is why they are implementing a Flash replacement in Javascript when C or C++ would be better. Using JavaScript reduces memory safety problems, and interfacing with the Web APIs from JS is simpler than for C++.
- vfclists 12y agoI suspect I've rubbed a few redditors the wrong way. Why does should the announcement of acquiescence to DRM have to mention Adobe? They could have announced that they have capitulated first, and they are sorting out the details later. Oh no, Adobe had to get a mention. Why are some redditors in such denial? This is really about a deal between Mozilla and Adobe in which Adobe becomes the Mozilla preferred vendor for those who seek to use DRM in Firefox, for whatever Adobe offers in return. It isn't just an announcement of acquiescence to DRM. Quite a few content providers will have to be dealing with Adobe and Mozilla will probably get a share of the income stream. Denial is not a river in Egypt. I am not concerned about what deals Mozilla does, but they will have to deliver technical superiority faster and better and make their browser the one developers recommend to their clients if they are to survive in the long term.
- hsivonen 12y agoSince people who understand the issue understand that Mozilla is incapable of developing a Hollywood-approvable CDM, if we had just announced the intent to do EME, it would have raised a big unanswered question: Where is the CDM going to come from? Instead, whe chose to talk abour EME when we were able to answer that crucial question.
- pcwalton 12y ago> You sit on a board which devises an inadequate Javascript language No board devised JavaScript. > then you decide to implement Flash in the same inadequate language, then you go and make an agreement with the original creators of Flash for your EME/DRM implementation, because your implementation doesn't look like it is going to do too well. EME has nothing to do with Shumway.
- vfclists 12y agoI mean they sit on a board responsible which is taking years to make Javascript a tractable language, and at this rate it looks like that is never going to happen. Shumway has everything to do with EME not on a technical level, but on a business level because a superior Flash replacement games developers and other content providers found more dependable than the original Flash would put them in a stronger bargaining position vis-a-vis the other majors. Good technical execution is Mozilla's strongest bargaining chip and if they fail at that they make themselves less relevant.