Then you have no clue to discuss anything if you don't know what those terms imply.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hulu Sticking With Flash For Now, Says HTML5 Not Ready Yet
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Then you have no clue to discuss anything if you don't know what those terms imply.
I applaud Hulu for being reasonable here!
HTML5 is the futur, that's sure - but for right now Flash is the way to go for online video.
Funny how Apple Fanboys now bash Hulu and calling fail and all - priceless.
HTML5 is the futur, that's sure - but for right now Flash is the way to go for online video.
Funny how Apple Fanboys now bash Hulu and calling fail and all - priceless.
This claim is largely FUD. It's clear to see the progression of HTML5, and I can't think of anything in HTML5 that Hulu would need that isn't there yet. Just look at the progression of support over the last 2-3 years:
http://html5readiness.com/ (View it with a browser that supports HTML5)
Ya know, the colors I see missing most frequently from that chart are pinkish and purplish, which corresponds to IE. Coincidence? Both video and canvas (the basics of what you'd need to stream video) are supported in Safari, Firefox, Chrome, and Opera. I'd love to see more detail about what seems to not be ready.
Actually, I'd like to see Hulu optionally serve HTML5 content to browsers that support it, much as YouTube has done. There are ways to secure content without hiding everything inside Flash. Pandering to the lowest common denominator is a bummer of an excuse.
WHAT?! i was certain that once the ubiquitous Scribd.com denounced Flash that Hulu would follow suite immediately! /sarcasm
I ♥ Adobe
I ♥ Adobe
Looks like the note on HTML5 was only a very small part of a hulu press release. Adaptive bitrate streaming should help people with video stuttering:
This is the cached version of the actual source of Hulu's "aside on HTML5":
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=ht...5&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=3441454b,2f202d1c
This is the cached version of the actual source of Hulu's "aside on HTML5":
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=ht...5&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=3441454b,2f202d1c
You aren't seeking a career in customer services for perhaps, Adobe, are you?!
No, it's that I'm genuinely miffed as to how many people say on here that Flash wrecks their Macs.
I have three - one a recent MBP, an old Macbook, and a 2005 Mini. I've never had an issue with Flash on ANY of them. Nobody ever complained about Flash until Jobs decided to focus on it, and Apple didn't complain about Flash when it upcoming products in the wings. Nobody complains about the Flash ads on the tops of these pages. The only possible issue I've ever had with Flash was with slow-loading pages on Stubhub and it cleared up when they updated the site, leading me to believe it was crappily-written code and not a crappy product.
I genuinely think that a lot of the Flash moaning on here is FB-me-too-ism.
This claim is largely FUD. It's clear to see the progression of HTML5, and I can't think of anything in HTML5 that Hulu would need that isn't there yet. Just look at the progression of support over the last 2-3 years:
http://html5readiness.com/ (View it with a browser that supports HTML5)
Ya know, the colors I see missing most frequently from that chart are pinkish and purplish, which corresponds to IE. Coincidence? Both video and canvas (the basics of what you'd need to stream video) are supported in Safari, Firefox, Chrome, and Opera. I'd love to see more detail about what seems to not be ready.
Actually, I'd like to see Hulu optionally serve HTML5 content to browsers that support it, much as YouTube has done. There are ways to secure content without hiding everything inside Flash. Pandering to the lowest common denominator is a bummer of an excuse.
And this is how the site looks on my iPod touch:
Big oops!
There is no HTML5
There is no HTML5. Period.
What you have is an HTML5 draft that is a long way from being finished. If you did not learn anything from WiMax or 802.11n or any of the other standards that changed a lot near the end and caused a lot of software to break you should study your technology history.
1. HTML5 has not even reached full recommendation status.
2. Even core structures could change at any time.
Those two things alone should be enough to tell you that a big operation like HULU would be INSANE to try and redo everything using HTML5.
Google is known for having things in beta for ages so they do not mind when things break.
Apple is quite comfortable shipping new products that are not compatible with older products. They do not care if your **** breaks when they make a change to Safari.
The rest of the world is smart enough not to screw their customers by shipping products that target a changing spec.
From the folks creating the spec: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html
There is no HTML5. Period.
What you have is an HTML5 draft that is a long way from being finished. If you did not learn anything from WiMax or 802.11n or any of the other standards that changed a lot near the end and caused a lot of software to break you should study your technology history.
1. HTML5 has not even reached full recommendation status.
2. Even core structures could change at any time.
Those two things alone should be enough to tell you that a big operation like HULU would be INSANE to try and redo everything using HTML5.
Google is known for having things in beta for ages so they do not mind when things break.
Apple is quite comfortable shipping new products that are not compatible with older products. They do not care if your **** breaks when they make a change to Safari.
The rest of the world is smart enough not to screw their customers by shipping products that target a changing spec.
From the folks creating the spec: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html
Video of flash 10.1 running on a Nexus One: http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/11/android-2-2-froyo-and-flash-run-like-butter-on-nexus-one-vide/
It can be done on iPhone... will it be allowed though??
Did you REALLY think just because SJ pulled some crap out of his back part that entire net is going to jump for it!?!?!
LOL
Not only Hulu, but MILLIONS of other sites will remain using Flash?
Why?
Because it works, and it works rather well too - yesterday, today and tomorrow...
Simple as that really
LOL
Not only Hulu, but MILLIONS of other sites will remain using Flash?
Why?
Because it works, and it works rather well too - yesterday, today and tomorrow...
Simple as that really
DRM is a requirement for Hulu, and thus so is Flash for now.
What they can still do (and should do), is make a dedicated iPad and iPhone app.
Problems solved for most of us then.
What they can still do (and should do), is make a dedicated iPad and iPhone app.
Problems solved for most of us then.
I asked you a simple question: how would an open standard DRM prevent the implementation of a client that saves an unencrypted video stream instead of playing it once (which is exactly what Hulu is about). Your reply was "Server side DRM or client side DRM.", which is not even a sentence. Is it not reasonable for me to ask you to elaborate on that? I'm beginning to get the impression that it's you who is not qualified for this discussion, and that dropping half-understood terms and links you found with google is all you can contribute.
This claim is largely FUD. It's clear to see the progression of HTML5, and I can't think of anything in HTML5 that Hulu would need that isn't there yet. Just look at the progression of support over the last 2-3 years:
http://html5readiness.com/ (View it with a browser that supports HTML5)
Ya know, the colors I see missing most frequently from that chart are pinkish and purplish, which corresponds to IE. Coincidence? Both video and canvas (the basics of what you'd need to stream video) are supported in Safari, Firefox, Chrome, and Opera. I'd love to see more detail about what seems to not be ready.
Actually, I'd like to see Hulu optionally serve HTML5 content to browsers that support it, much as YouTube has done. There are ways to secure content without hiding everything inside Flash. Pandering to the lowest common denominator is a bummer of an excuse.
... It's in their statement: "Our player doesn't just simply stream video, it must also secure the content, handle reporting for our advertisers, render the video using a high performance codec to ensure premium visual quality, communicate back with the server to determine how long to buffer and what bitrate to stream..."
I have 3 iMacs in my office, an old white Macbook, an old Powermac, a Macbook Pro, a Unibody Macbook Pro and a Mac Pro and I've had problems with flash on nearly all of them.
As I explained earlier, the DRM does not have to be an open standard. The client does not have to be open source. HTML5 does not specify a video codec.
Server side DRM is similar to what Flash does, but the server enforces it not the flash client.
Or they could simply ask you to install the OpenIPMP plugin before viewing any content.
They had to block the PS3 thing because their contracts don't allow streaming to televisions, which obviously doesn't include video-out to televisions(nor can they stream internationally, of course VPNing makes this easier).
If they are able to change their distribution contracts, seeing as the 3 major networks whose content they hold also own a stake in them, maybe we'll see a change sooner. HTML5 isn't the best for ad tracking and data security though, as they point out.
I have a ridiculous number of Macs and PC's. My 2002 Powerbook can't handle Hulu and stutters video occasionally with sound running fine and barely using system resources. My December 2008 Unibody Macbook runs Hulu fine with almost maximum CPU and RAM usage(which AppleCare support says is normal given the volatility of Flash). I've been using Macs since 1992 and I think they keep getting worse and worse...might not buy another one after this.
If you say so, although I thought I was clear. What you're saying is irrelevant... It's akin to saying its cute that Apple stating "this affects a small number of users" but really means, "hey, this problem is so bad we are issuing an official statement that we are working on a problem." In other words, why pick apart completely normal wording?
As soon as the client has the decrypted video, the server can not enforce anything.
And what's stopping anyone from writing their own OpenIPMP plugin where the video is not just played, but also saved to disk? It's an open standard, right?
My point was not about the sharing, but about having every clip and every show. I realize that the TV and movie companies are the ones that set this requirement, but that's really the point, isn't it?