Html5


aesir911 said:
hosant said:
aesir911 said:
hosant said:
So, Youtube html5 Beta just released. This is pretty good for the us, pandora (future <_< ) users, since now we are less defendant on Adobe Flash. However, following Apple's lead, Youtube requires the h.264 video codec, while Firefox (and opera) uses ogg. F*** you Apple! We are trying to get away from proprietary stuff here :( .

dude, you're just not buying the right products...
Huh? What is that supposed to mean?

buy apple!!!
Nah, when i bought my (now ancient) Toshiba e800 I promised myself to not upgrade unless it was a complete upgrade. Im still stuck with it ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lulzfish said:
aesir911 said:
hosant said:
aesir911 said:
hosant said:
So, Youtube html5 Beta just released. This is pretty good for the us, pandora (future <_< ) users, since now we are less defendant on Adobe Flash. However, following Apple's lead, Youtube requires the h.264 video codec, while Firefox (and opera) uses ogg. F*** you Apple! We are trying to get away from proprietary stuff here :( .

dude, you're just not buying the right products...
Huh? What is that supposed to mean?

buy apple!!!
Is this sarcasm, or are you seriously telling us that the solution to patented video codecs is to sponsor the people who use those codecs, and in doing so ensure their continuation?

yeah... 50% of my posts are questions and the other 50% of my posts are filled with sarcasm.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
aesir911 said:
yeah... 50% of my posts are questions and the other 50% of my posts are filled with sarcasm.

Which one is this? I don't see a question there...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
B-ZaR said:
aesir911 said:
yeah... 50% of my posts are questions and the other 50% of my posts are filled with sarcasm.

Which one is this? I don't see a question there...

sarcasm of course. cause 50% are questions, 25% is sarcasm, and 25% is picking fights!!! (now which one is this classified under...)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
aesir911 said:
B-ZaR said:
aesir911 said:
yeah... 50% of my posts are questions and the other 50% of my posts are filled with sarcasm.

Which one is this? I don't see a question there...

sarcasm of course. cause 50% are questions, 25% is sarcasm, and 25% is picking fights!!! (now which one is this classified under...)

Well, as it ends on a question...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
According to youtube, the html5 videos will work in Chrome, so would it work with a Pandora port of Chromium?
 
Aethix said:
According to youtube, the html5 videos will work in Chrome, so would it work with a Pandora port of Chromium?
Maybe, if someone patches h264 into Chromium, the standard-build does not have h264 enabled. I have no idea how hard that would be. Maybe it's just a flag, maybe it's a lot more work.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Klaus said:
Google aquired On2 last year. I would guess that Google will release their codecs to the public under a liberal FLOSS-license (probably Apache) and most modern Browsers integrate them. Google needs an open web, they don't want to exclude Firefox from YouTube. My guess is, they chose h.264 because it's already on their servers and they will be switching to an On2-codec eventually.

Google tried to acquire On2 last year but
their first offer was turned down.

February, 17th 2010 the On2 stock holders will be
voting upon a sweetened offer by Google.

This vote will have a major effect upon the
future of Internet video.

OGG is based upon On2's ancient VP3 codec.
Flash .flv is based upon On2's VP6 codec.

The latest version of On2's codec is VP8
which when encoded at similar bitrates
makes h.264 look like crap.

So basically it is likely to go like this.
Google finishes the purchase of On2, upgrades
OGG to VP8 ,and open sources it.

This would make OGG like HTML an open specification
that anyone can use without locensing or
patent concerns, thus sending H.264 patent pool
members like Microsoft to the showers along with
the aspirations of Rupert Murdoch and others to
gain a media lock on Internet video.

This February ,17th vote by On2 stock holders
will be a pivital point for the Internet.

Assuming the vote goes through, not only
will Internet video become standardized
upon a license free specification, but
HTML 5 will take off like wildfire.

Adobe Flash will start to fade away from
the Internet just as it has already
been banned from Apple devices like
the iPhone and iPad.

Arcade quality games are already appearing
written entirely in HTML5, with such games
demonstrating just about if not every
ability of flash, with but this video
standards issue needing some resolution.

A failure in the On2 acquisition by Google
would likely stall HTML5 in some regards
and cause some major havoc for open-source browsers
like Mozilla , who producing a FREE browser
can't be expected to cough up $5 million a year
to the patent pool members like Microsoft.

With a name like Google backing VP8, chip makers
will be motivated to implement the codec in hardware
which will make it even faster. On2's existing
involvement in the mobile device video space
will make the standard spread like wildfire.

This will speed the integration of TV/Internet in
general and help bring down the cost of
TV's , mobile devices and just about anything
else that currently is saddled with the costs
of paying the h.264 patent pool members tolls

Heres hoping the On2 stock holders go for it!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
H.264 would be an issue on the pandora in general, not just for Firefox. So the solution would be the same, the user would have to install the codecs. Hopefully Fluendo or TI will be able to provide a legal alternative for patent-encumbered patents.

As for youtube, I think it's just too hard to switch to Theora, at least in the short term. H.264 profile 4 (which is always used for streaming) is actually on average a bit worse than Theora at the same bitrate. For anything other than streaming though, H.264 can end up looking much better than Theora, but much much more resource intensive.

Hopefully VP8 will follow the way of VP3 or Dirac will get more traction.
 
@Dr. Clue:
Thanks for clarification! Let's hope for the best...
 
Back
Top