PDA

View Full Version : Adobe Announces H.264 Support in Flash




MacRumors
Aug 21, 2007, 12:40 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Adobe is releasing (http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070820006124&newsLang=en) an update to their popular Flash Player 9 with support for the H.264 video codec.

The updated support will allow (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6203500.html) Flash Player to take advantage of hardware acceleration provided in computer video cards and is also optimized for Dual-Core processors.
Support for the H.264 standard will lead to more Web video content being available in high definition, Randall said. He said Adobe chose to support the standard now because it is being adopted more by content producers and media distributors like cable companies.

A public beta will be available today at labs.adobe.com (http://labs.adobe.com/), with a final release expected in the fall.

Apple supports H.264 (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/technologies/h264/) as a standard codec in Quicktime. Meanwhile, Apple and Youtube struck a deal (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/06/01/youtube-for-apple-tv-uses-h-264-not-flash/) in which Youtube has been encoding their content into H.264 for playback on Apple TV and iPhone. This H.264 content has only been available to Apple TV/iPhone users, but Youtube could conceivably start offering the H.264 content to web visitors with the latest Flash plug-in.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/08/21/adobe-annouces-h-264-support-in-flash/)



flopticalcube
Aug 21, 2007, 12:42 AM
Wow! Rumors are coming fast and thick now!

The updated support will allow Flash Player to take advantage of hardware acceleration provided in computer video cards

Like the new HD 2600's in the Alu iMacs!

Multimedia
Aug 21, 2007, 12:43 AM
Looks like H.264 is gaining support from all over the place now.

drayon
Aug 21, 2007, 12:52 AM
GREAT- Hi-Def advertising and annoyances just what we DON'T NEED!!!!

Asar
Aug 21, 2007, 12:54 AM
flash for iphone, here we come :D

todd2000
Aug 21, 2007, 12:55 AM
This is all well and good, but I wish they would get off their arses, and release a UNIVERSAL BINARY of Shockwave Player already! This is getting ridiculous. Yes I know about Rosetta Emulation Mode, but it's slow, and it crashes, with the games I try to play.

Telp
Aug 21, 2007, 12:56 AM
What exactly does this mean for the iPhone exactly.

note235
Aug 21, 2007, 12:58 AM
now maybe we can see all flash things?

arn
Aug 21, 2007, 01:03 AM
it probably doesn't mean anything for the iPhone.... however, if many sites start adopting h.264 encoding, it could open the door to better Flash support on the iPhone. In that, the iPhone has hardware decoders for h.264 but not the normal flash encoding.

Apple reportedly told developers the lack of hardware decoding was one of the reasons for not including Flash... in that doing all the decoding in software burned a lot of battery life.

arn

NewSc2
Aug 21, 2007, 01:04 AM
What exactly does this mean for the iPhone exactly.

exactly exactly? Grammar aside, what does this mean exactly? Will other websites be able to program flash movies to H.264, or can we even do H.264 games, and view these all on the iPhone?

Or does this just mean flash has a different encoding technique, and still has to be reconverted to a different format to view on the iPhone.

EDIT: Never mind, arn just answered it above.

DoFoT9
Aug 21, 2007, 01:11 AM
its about time they finally added this support and got with it!!

DaftUnion
Aug 21, 2007, 01:20 AM
Hopefully a lot more media sites start using h.264 in the coming year.

samh004
Aug 21, 2007, 02:41 AM
Can the news story be updated when the beta is available... I went over but the latest release appears to be from June, so I took it that wasn't the release.

aLoC
Aug 21, 2007, 02:56 AM
I watch a lot of trailers on apple.com and have to say h.264 is *not* actually that good of a codec.

I mean I know it has all the hype and all but I nearly always notice artifacts especially when there are large areas of black in the image.

Sorensen (was that the name of the older codec?) *just looked better.* Should we or should we not all jump on the bandwagon of a bad thing?

Peace
Aug 21, 2007, 03:02 AM
I watch a lot of trailers on apple.com and have to say h.264 is *not* actually that good of a codec.

I mean I know it has all the hype and all but I nearly always notice artifacts especially when there are large areas of black in the image.

Sorensen (was that the name of the older codec?) *just looked better.* Should we or should we not all jump on the bandwagon of a bad thing?


HUH? :confused:

JackAxe
Aug 21, 2007, 03:03 AM
Cool. I've been wanting h.264 support.

<]=)

DoFoT9
Aug 21, 2007, 03:29 AM
I watch a lot of trailers on apple.com and have to say h.264 is *not* actually that good of a codec.

I mean I know it has all the hype and all but I nearly always notice artifacts especially when there are large areas of black in the image.

Sorensen (was that the name of the older codec?) *just looked better.* Should we or should we not all jump on the bandwagon of a bad thing?

lol do you know what you just said??

un1ty
Aug 21, 2007, 04:09 AM
As a Flash developer, this is great news. I won't have to encode FLV's anymore, and just encode H.264 versions. It was very smart of Adobe to do this.

I can't help but think that this seems to be some kind of positioning with Apple. The iPhone, which doesn't support Flash, does support H.264. Also, according to MainConcept (http://www.mainconcept.com/site/), the creators of the decoder being used by Adobe, they licensed the x86, PowerPC and ARM (iPhone Processor) versions.

Here's some more interesting information form Adobe.

http://www.kaourantin.net/2007/08/what-just-happened-to-video-on-web_20.html

Also note that we support the 'covr' meta data stored in iTunes files, these are also accessible as byte arrays.

Meta data stored in the 'ilst' atom. This is usually present in iTunes files. It contains ID3 like information and is reported in the onMetaData callback as key/value pairs in a mixed array with the name 'tags'. ID3V2 is not supported right now.

rcha101
Aug 21, 2007, 04:41 AM
I think this is better news for youtube fans, if we (apple users) are all ready benefiting.

SthrnCmfrtr
Aug 21, 2007, 06:08 AM
or can we even do H.264 games

I think most industry hopes are currently placed with the MP3 games we've been seeing on Digg.

MrCrowbar
Aug 21, 2007, 06:35 AM
I watch a lot of trailers on apple.com and have to say h.264 is *not* actually that good of a codec.

I mean I know it has all the hype and all but I nearly always notice artifacts especially when there are large areas of black in the image.

Sorensen (was that the name of the older codec?) *just looked better.* Should we or should we not all jump on the bandwagon of a bad thing?

H.264 is a great codec for high definition. With a high compression rate, fine grained textures like fur or sand lose their detail and look like melted. Also some of those trailers look horrible because the people making them don't know how to use it. Lots of those trailers are encoded in MPEG2 or MPEG4 before they are encoded in H.264 for the Apple trailer site, so that significantly lowers the quality. We got the same problem with cable TV here in Germany. The signal coming into my old TV is analog, but has ben reencoded multiple times on the way from the studio to my home. You see artefacts, missing keyframes, out of sync sound, interlacing lines etc. Digital technology really made TV worse around here. I don't watchi it that much anyway, so my eyeTV with a DVB-T (over the air TV in bad quality) receiver does the job just fine for me.

You'll also notice that XVid often looks better for small sized DVD rips than H.264. I found out that as soon as your material has some film grain, it takes a lot of bandwidth in H.264. H.264 is also way more demanding hardware-wise so it's taking its time to get mainstream.

DoFoT9
Aug 21, 2007, 06:41 AM
H.264 is a great codec for high definition. With a high compression rate, fine grained textures like fur or sand lose their detail and look like melted. Also some of those trailers look horrible because the people making them don't know how to use it. Lots of those trailers are encoded in MPEG2 or MPEG4 before they are encoded in H.264 for the Apple trailer site, so that significantly lowers the quality. We got the same problem with cable TV here in Germany. The signal coming into my old TV is analog, but has ben reencoded multiple times on the way from the studio to my home. You see artefacts, missing keyframes, out of sync sound, interlacing lines etc. Digital technology really made TV worse around here. I don't watchi it that much anyway, so my eyeTV with a DVB-T (over the air TV in bad quality) receiver does the job just fine for me.

You'll also notice that XVid often looks better for small sized DVD rips than H.264. I found out that as soon as your material has some film grain, it takes a lot of bandwidth in H.264. H.264 is also way more demanding hardware-wise so it's taking its time to get mainstream.

you forgot that they support variable block sizes!!! i.e. 4x4 here, 16x16 there. i like that feature

MrCrowbar
Aug 21, 2007, 06:58 AM
you forgot that they support variable block sizes!!! i.e. 4x4 here, 16x16 there. i like that feature

Yea, there's a ton of options there, but most people. even pros, don't know about them, or don't know how to use them. For quicktime pro users, there's no way to access those options. I'd love to have an app that renders a few second preview of the movie so you can adjust the options to match the material best quickly. Simple UI: move slider, click "preview", see the new video next to other encodes and the original. Why not a method that automatically compares the encode to the original and tweaks the sliders itself....

DoFoT9
Aug 21, 2007, 07:15 AM
Yea, there's a ton of options there, but most people. even pros, don't know about them, or don't know how to use them. For quicktime pro users, there's no way to access those options. I'd love to have an app that renders a few second preview of the movie so you can adjust the options to match the material best quickly. Simple UI: move slider, click "preview", see the new video next to other encodes and the original. Why not a method that automatically compares the encode to the original and tweaks the sliders itself....

oohhhh my god that would be incredible!!!! there are tha many features about h.264 that no1 is taking advantage of. i would love for there to be a quaility program to do that.

Small White Car
Aug 21, 2007, 07:38 AM
I watch a lot of trailers on apple.com and have to say h.264 is *not* actually that good of a codec.

I mean I know it has all the hype and all but I nearly always notice artifacts especially when there are large areas of black in the image.

Sorensen (was that the name of the older codec?) *just looked better.* Should we or should we not all jump on the bandwagon of a bad thing?

ANYTHING can look good or bad depending on what data rate you use. Comparing the best Sorensen to any random web-H.264 doesn't make much sense.

H.264 can be scaled from web video to iPod video to HD DVDs or HD satelite TV.

Just because you're looking at some web videos where the owner has (reasonably) decided to make their downloads as small as possible, that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the format.

Have you ever heard of HD Sorensen? You know why you haven't? Because the files size would be WAY larger than an H.264 HD file. It's just not going to work.

DoFoT9
Aug 21, 2007, 07:43 AM
Have you ever heard of HD Sorensen? You know why you haven't? Because the files size would be WAY larger than an H.264 HD file. It's just not going to work.

do u have any links for this format?? i cant seem to find any. im interested

etjazz
Aug 21, 2007, 07:59 AM
The updated support will allow Flash Player to take advantage of hardware acceleration provided in computer video cards and is also optimized for Dual-Core processors.

Does this mean I'll be able to watch youtube videos without the fans on my macbook going berserk? Flash doesn't seem very optimized for os x...

Small White Car
Aug 21, 2007, 08:47 AM
do u have any links for this format?? i cant seem to find any. im interested

When I said "have you heard of it" I meant it in the rhetorical sense...in other words, it doesn't exist.

Sorensen software products still exist, however. Here's Squeeze:

www.sorensonmedia.com

But if you look, even though Squeeze lots of different things, they're now mostly focused on promoting the fact that it does Flash and H.264.

jhero
Aug 21, 2007, 09:52 AM
Does this mean I'll be able to watch youtube videos without the fans on my macbook going berserk? Flash doesn't seem very optimized for os x...

You read my mind :D

ChildOL
Aug 21, 2007, 11:04 AM
I guess this means on my old Dual 533Mhz with a new Radeon 9800 pro that flash would perform better, at least flash video, being better optimized for dual-core and graphics cards etc.

morespce54
Aug 21, 2007, 11:05 AM
Great. Now if they could only provide a proper player for OS X...

iBunny
Aug 21, 2007, 11:33 AM
Does this mean I'll be able to watch youtube videos without the fans on my macbook going berserk? Flash doesn't seem very optimized for os x...

This is exactly what this means. Instead of using 200% of your CPU, it will use 100% of your GPU and very little of your CPU.

diamond.g
Aug 21, 2007, 11:58 AM
This is exactly what this means. Instead of using 200% of your CPU, it will use 100% of your GPU and very little of your CPU.

Actually the fans should still go crazy. As the GPU's in the notebooks almost pull as much power as the CPU does.

SpinThis!
Aug 21, 2007, 01:36 PM
This should be interesting. It's about time Flash used a decent codec for video.

On the other hand, Adobe appears to be eating some of Apple's lunch now. This is certainly not a push from Apple. Think about this... If you're a web developer, why would you even consider QuickTime now as a container when you can just put H.264 video in a Flash. Getting people to upgrade to the newest Flash is a lot easier than getting people to install QuickTime on their machines. That leaves little incentive for developers to use QuickTime.

irun5k
Aug 21, 2007, 02:41 PM
Why would youtube continue to use a Flash based player at all if all the content will soon be available in H.264?

Personally, I hate all these proprietary players websites use. You get one experience if you go to your local news channel's web site, another if you go to CNN, yet another if you go to TLC, another if you go to YouTube.

In my experience YouTube's player works poorly. I'm not sure why there are any other buttons or controls available besides play and pause, since those are the only ones that reliably work.

jhero
Aug 21, 2007, 03:38 PM
It is now available at labs.adobe.com

DoFoT9
Aug 21, 2007, 04:05 PM
When I said "have you heard of it" I meant it in the rhetorical sense...in other words, it doesn't exist.

Sorensen software products still exist, however. Here's Squeeze:

www.sorensonmedia.com

But if you look, even though Squeeze lots of different things, they're now mostly focused on promoting the fact that it does Flash and H.264.

aawww ya mean bugger, i thought it actually was. stupid blonde nature to trust people.

Links
Aug 21, 2007, 04:25 PM
Tinic Uro, an engineer at Adobe on the new Flash Player,
has an information packed post that summarizes what's new
with Flash Player 9 (currently at Update 3 Beta 2).

http://www.kaourantin.net/2007/08/what-just-happened-to-video-on-web_20.html

twoodcc
Aug 21, 2007, 06:02 PM
good news. the more HD content, the better

Kilamite
Aug 21, 2007, 06:18 PM
In my experience YouTube's player works poorly. I'm not sure why there are any other buttons or controls available besides play and pause, since those are the only ones that reliably work.

Exactly. The controls and fuctionality are awful. It drives me nuts when I'm trying to skip to a certain point in a video and can't. Say a clip is 40 seconds long, I can't place the slider anywhere between start and finish, it just jumps back to where it was.

Really irritates me.

sknifton
Aug 21, 2007, 06:50 PM
bear with me:

i create podcast files for various clients ... i render them as mp4's (or m4v's) so they can be distributed through itunes. my clients also want a file that their windows users can play back instantly, without downloading. i've been converting my .mp4's to .wmv .... but i was hoping to give them flash files.

some clients put the files up on their own websites, some clients ask me to host their files on my website (created through iweb, hosted on .mac)

a few questions, and thanks in advance for your patience:

i) what does this adobe flash/h264 announcement mean to my scenario? will any file rendered or converted with an h264 codec be playable as a flash file ?

ii) imac will not support any files other than quicktime --- does this announcement mean i'll soon be able to post up .swf files on my iweb site?
if so, will windows users be able to play/stream them back real time with the flash player they have embedded ?

iii) a related question: if iweb won't support a flash file, is it true that if i reconstruct my web page with dreamweaver, that that app WILL allow me to utilize flash files ?

thanks profusely for trying to clear this up for me.

Dustman
Aug 21, 2007, 07:18 PM
Oh goodie! Now I can surf even slower! Here's to hoping that Flash performance on mac will one day out beat a Pentium 2 Win 95 machine.:rolleyes:

Kilamite
Aug 21, 2007, 07:19 PM
ii) imac will not support any files other than quicktime

Get VLC Player (http://www.videolan.org/vlc/). Also, get the Flip4Mac plugin for QuickTime so you can play .wmv files with it.

Pretty shocking that Windows Media Player doesn't support .mp4 - MS really need a kick up the arse and get supporting this increasingly popular video format.

madmax_2069
Aug 22, 2007, 12:59 AM
adobe needs to get off there arse and fix the performance issues in flash player for Mac.

when you compare flash player on Mac PPC or intel vs a much older and much slower windows PC, the PC version makes the Mac version seem as if its flash player is running in emulation.

this addon is nice, but adobe could be working on optimizing flash player for PPC and intel Macs allot more.

flash player for Mac is a huge system resource hog on Mac when compaired to the windows PC version.

any one can do this test and see the big difference in performance between the Mac version vs the windows PC version.

i do hope they work on getting this resolved some time, and not keep pushing it off like they don't care.

i will stop complaining about performance issues with flash player on Mac when my G4 system can play flash player content at the same speed as the same spec windows PC can.

samh004
Aug 22, 2007, 01:31 AM
It is now available at labs.adobe.com

Flash seems snappier in Safari :p

Get VLC Player (http://www.videolan.org/vlc/). Also, get the Flip4Mac plugin for QuickTime so you can play .wmv files with it.

Don't forget Perian (http://www.perian.org/#detail).

adobe needs to get off there arse and fix the performance issues in flash player for Mac.

i will stop complaining about performance issues with flash player on Mac when my G4 system can play flash player content at the same speed as the same spec windows PC can.

Somehow I reckon they'll be focusing more time and effort on the Intel architecture, and less on the PPC.

ChildOL
Aug 22, 2007, 11:52 AM
Somehow I reckon they'll be focusing more time and effort on the Intel architecture, and less on the PPC.

That would not be wise since most Mac users are still on PPC Macs and will be for at least the next 5 years, especially the G4s and G5s.

Kugo
Aug 25, 2007, 01:32 PM
I think this means I will finally get universal flash on my beloved iPhone.