HTML5 vs Flash: War on the Horizon

[admin]

jmet has posted a story about adult website Digital Playground possibly choosing HTML5 over Flash, over on the main website:

http://www.digital-digest.com/news-62532-Bad-News-for-Adobes-Flash.html

[dr_ml422]

These sites where you can purchase a movie and download it can you keep the flic since you paid for it? Or is this where that DRM stuff comes into play? I haven't used any of the streaming/buying services yet. I will now though since I have Time Warner Cable ISP and getting some download times around 25Mbps.

[jasonnjon]

Adobe is good i like it.. it works fine too.i dont see any problem with it

[admin]

MPEG LA, the people behind H.264 licensing, has promised that H.264 streaming will be free forever. This is good news for websites like YouTube, meaning they won't have to one day pay licensing fees for streaming the website's videos using H.264. This move is seen as the MPEG LA's response to Google's WebM format, which is gaining popularity through being supported by browsers like Opera and Firefox. More:

http://newteevee.com/2010/08/26/mpeg-la-h-264-streaming-will-be-free-forever/

[cynthia]

Adobe Flash 64 bit support. Not a day to soon.

http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html

[dr_ml422]

Hi Cynthia. Why are there 2 versions of this Flash Player Square if it's geared toward 64 bit windows? I see a 32 bit installer and 64 bit installer. Does this mean when the final build is released that it will automatically support both 32 and 64 bit Windows, or you would still need to install separate versions? Thnx.

Btw, you're right. It couldn't of come any sooner. 64 bit IE screams!

[admin]

You'll need to use the 64-bit installer if you have 64-bit Windows. There are some stuff in the new version that's for non 64-bit Windows as well, like the IE 9 stuff, so that's where there are two versions.

[dr_ml422]

Ok thanks. Anyone trying this preview release yet? I feel like creating a restore point and giving it a whack, though I ususally let others play before it's bug free etc...

I'm not playing w/IE 9 until it's final though. That might be a lil more complicated if things go nuts.

[cynthia]

If you mean the Adobe, yes. No issues with that one + IE8 64 bit.

Didn't uninstall the old one first, just installed these new ones (32 + 64).

[dr_ml422]

If you mean the Adobe, yes. No issues with that one + IE8 64 bit.

Didn't uninstall the old one first, just installed these new ones (32 + 64).

So the suggested installation instructions on Adobe Labs about uninstalling any installed versions don't need to be applied? Since 7 64 bit has both x86 and x64 bit both new preview versions need to be applied then correct? That's odd that the OS will pick up the new 32 bit preview.

[admin]

An interesting development, Mozilla Firefox's dislike of H.264 has forced Microsoft to write an add-on for its competitor's browser, so that Firefox can tap into the Windows 7 codec framework and get H.264 videos to play on the browser.

More:

http://www.zdnetasia.com/microsoft-gives-firefox-an-h-264-video-boost-62205194.htm

[dr_ml422]

An interesting development, Mozilla Firefox's dislike of H.264 has forced Microsoft to write an add-on for its competitor's browser, so that Firefox can tap into the Windows 7 codec framework and get H.264 videos to play on the browser.

More:

http://www.zdnetasia.com/microsoft-g...t-62205194.htm

This is almost like a reverse psychology move only in business. Might as well call it Industrial Psychology. You don't want what we want and have to offer, we'll give it to you and let everyone decide what's best for them. We'll even pay w/e monies are involved, which to Uncle Bill and coherts is chump change.

Anybody have any inside info on whether or not Uncle Bill uses the new i4 cell phone to keep in touch w/Redmond? Wow, MS is really going all out now pulling no punches. Now I don't know if the word force is used here as a bad outcome, or turn of events, though I'm looking at it as a wise move by MS. Apple for sure wants no part of anything Google, so I would presume they too are on MS's side for this if I'm not mistaken correct?

I know Apple doesn't want Flash, and even went as far as trying until now to have the i4 only available through whomever he wants, not through any non-approved vendor.

Is there any word on when HTML 5 will actually be implemented as the standalone integrated encoder, if in fact it will be?

[admin]

HTML5 is just a standard for HTML, the code that websites use. It does attempt to bring in a standard for web videos, but due to indecision, this is where the mess is at the moment. The W3C working group, should come out and say that WebM is the official video codec and all browsers must support this natively, and then add H.264 as optional, because I don't think it's fair to make H.264 mandatory for the open source browsers, but without any kind of mandatory standard (as is the case right now), it's just a big big mess.

[dr_ml422]

HTML5 is just a standard for HTML, the code that websites use. It does attempt to bring in a standard for web videos, but due to indecision, this is where the mess is at the moment. The W3C working group, should come out and say that WebM is the official video codec and all browsers must support this natively, and then add H.264 as optional, because I don't think it's fair to make H.264 mandatory for the open source browsers, but without any kind of mandatory standard (as is the case right now), it's just a big big mess.

I have to disagree that WebM should be the official video codec. It's not better than H.264 as you have expressed, and there will be no fees as also been quoted. So it's not even a logical/rational option, even for open source browsers.

I'm all for open source and freeware etc... as long as it's good, though I wouldn't dilute the quality of anything, even a little, for any reason.

The Generic doesn't cut it all the time.

[admin]

Firefox will never accept H.264, not even if it's free, or even if the MPEG-LA gives money to them for accepting it, because the open source license of the browser is just not compatible with the way H.264 is distributed. At best, we'll see an add-on like the Microsoft one, it will never be included as a native part of Firefox, not legally anyway. Same with Opera. If HTML5 made H.264 mandatory, then browsers like Firefox and Opera will have to do without having official HTML5 support, which will kill the standard straight away (both combined, account for 30% of the browser market).

So that leaves only WebM/VP8, and the inferior Ogg Theora. If HTML5 adopts either as standard (most likely WebM), then Apple and Microsoft will have to adopt it too (Google obviously already supports it), even if it is slightly against their own financial interests. At least there wouldn't be any legal issues, such as with doing things the other way around, and HTML5 as a standard would be safe.

WebM can be improved though, and it's probably already good enough for SD/720p web videos, and if it gains industry support, hardware support will arrive shortly after.