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.
Microsoft Looks to a Future of H.264-Based HTML5 for Web Video Content
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
@shervieux
What is it with your long posts?
I don't get what you want to say/prove honestly.
Like Darkroom said, since when does HTML display same on every browser?
I don't believe HTML5 will be any different in this matter.
The article is ONLY about H.264 video playback and that IE9 will support HTML5's video capabilities - it doesn't mean that IE9 won't support Flash at all.
And I never said Illustrator is used for web design, even though many use it for that. All I was referring to that Adobe will not suddenly disappear from the planet even though Flash losses marked share.
What is it with your long posts?
I don't get what you want to say/prove honestly.
Like Darkroom said, since when does HTML display same on every browser?
I don't believe HTML5 will be any different in this matter.
The article is ONLY about H.264 video playback and that IE9 will support HTML5's video capabilities - it doesn't mean that IE9 won't support Flash at all.
And I never said Illustrator is used for web design, even though many use it for that. All I was referring to that Adobe will not suddenly disappear from the planet even though Flash losses marked share.
Forget it - not worth arguing over. I deleted my posts. commenting on a thread with adobe on it is turning out to be just a waste of time....
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.50 (Nintendo DSi; Opera/507; U; en-US))
As a web developer, it's only btter. 60-70% of web users are on IE. The more standards support it has, the better
Mintin8 said:
As a web developer, it's only btter. 60-70% of web users are on IE. The more standards support it has, the better
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.50 (Nintendo DSi; Opera/507; U; en-US))
I thought it was the HTML5 video and audio tags that spelled doom...
Cyroceon said:
I thought it was the HTML5 video and audio tags that spelled doom...
This is a prime example of the complete ignorance of the typical fanboy.
Hey, iEdd, what exactly is HTML5 video?
How clueless can you get?
By the way, the BIG news should be:
GOOGLE TO OPEN VP8 FOR HTML5 VIDEO
http://newteevee.com/2010/04/12/google-to-open-source-vp8-for-html5-video/
"Google will soon make its VP8 video codec open source, weve learned from multiple sources. The company is scheduled to officially announce the release at its Google I/O developers conference next month, a source with knowledge of the announcement said. And with that release, Mozilla maker of the Firefox browser and Google Chrome are expected to also announce support for HTML5 video playback using the new open codec."
GOOGLE TO OPEN VP8 FOR HTML5 VIDEO
http://newteevee.com/2010/04/12/google-to-open-source-vp8-for-html5-video/
"Google will soon make its VP8 video codec open source, weve learned from multiple sources. The company is scheduled to officially announce the release at its Google I/O developers conference next month, a source with knowledge of the announcement said. And with that release, Mozilla maker of the Firefox browser and Google Chrome are expected to also announce support for HTML5 video playback using the new open codec."
Yes, I'm aware of this... However, I want adobe to be gone primarily because of flash!???
Adobe makes a lot more than just Flash.
Ever heard of Photoshop, Illustrator or InDesign?
I hope to be streaming my Windows Media Center recordings next year via Windows Home Server V2. It should support many other file types as well.
I agree 100% I hope if / when google open sources vp8 all browsers adopt it, not only will it be open then but vp8 kills h.264, not to mention theora.
Open standards and open source are not the same thing.
An open standard, as defined by ISO, is one administered by a consortium or alliance and available to the public and any interest adopter under RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory) terms. Many open standards are patented, and many charge licensing fees. For example, USB and HDMI are both open standards that are not royalty-free. So is H.264.
The Open Source Initiative doesn't consider any patent royalty scheme acceptable for its definition, but their view is not by any means unbiased or universally held.
Anyone who says H.264 is definitively not an open standard doesn't know what they're talking about. It is if you follow the ITU/ISO definition; it isn't if you are an open source advocate. It would only be inappropriate to call it an open standard if no common definition applied; since (more than) one does, it's an accurate statement to make. Why OSI can't just call its standard a "free standard" like they call open source software "free" software and avoid creating new confusion is a mystery.
Of course it does. Not doing so is what is illogical. If you expect an open standard to be royalty-free as well, you're adding more to the definition than it has historically had.
There's nothing wrong with having that ideological position, but don't shoehorn additional criteria into established industry terms to advocate it.
Wow...I'm OK with this!
MS was able to stifle progress like this in the past with IE's then-total market share, but those days are thankfully no more. Whether they have ulterior motives or not, I'm just glad future versions of IE won't use such haphazard layout engines.
MS was able to stifle progress like this in the past with IE's then-total market share, but those days are thankfully no more. Whether they have ulterior motives or not, I'm just glad future versions of IE won't use such haphazard layout engines.
I will believe it when I see it. Companies LIE all the time. About product release dates, standards they will support, etc. MS is notorious for NIH syndrome. They have tried to kill every common cross platform standard since inception with embrace and "extend". Do not forget who we are dealing with here. The road of technology is littered with the bodies of players who embraced open cross platform standards only to have MS come along and embrace it and "extend" it in a non open cross platform way.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend, huh?
Question, how is Silverlight's performance in OSX? (Is it even available?) It's pretty much non existent in Linux (Moonlight is a ****ing joke, I'm sorry).
The reason I ask is because MS will obviously want to push Silverlight, and as far as I've seen with Photosynth and Bing Maps, Silverlight is better than Flash.
This is fantastic to see Microsoft kinda agreeing with Apple, Adobe I think personally, is in a loosing battle.
Open != Open Source or Free. BTW, the Web Browser makers pay for the patents, smart person...
End of Flash... finally
Thank all the Gods and little fishes for that... I've been banging on about how utterly awful it is since I can remember. I've even lost web design jobs because I refused to use it. That's stupid, I hear you say... cutting your nose off to spite your face... the odd thing is that all the sites I didn't do, which were done with a heavy reliance on Flash are all gone, and the ones I did with html/xhtml/css/javascript are still going strong!
I put the rise of Flash down to lazy designers - learn Illustrator in college, see all those lovely well paid web jobs, switch over to Flash rather than that nasty, geeky coding business, and presto! Web full of hideous junk. As for anyone who defends Flash, well, you're just plain wrong, about everything. And damn Adobe for buying Macromedia just to get their hands on Flash and killing Freehand in the process - a programme far superior to Illustrator. Yeah, thanks guys... you made the world a little bit nastier.
Thank all the Gods and little fishes for that... I've been banging on about how utterly awful it is since I can remember. I've even lost web design jobs because I refused to use it. That's stupid, I hear you say... cutting your nose off to spite your face... the odd thing is that all the sites I didn't do, which were done with a heavy reliance on Flash are all gone, and the ones I did with html/xhtml/css/javascript are still going strong!
I put the rise of Flash down to lazy designers - learn Illustrator in college, see all those lovely well paid web jobs, switch over to Flash rather than that nasty, geeky coding business, and presto! Web full of hideous junk. As for anyone who defends Flash, well, you're just plain wrong, about everything. And damn Adobe for buying Macromedia just to get their hands on Flash and killing Freehand in the process - a programme far superior to Illustrator. Yeah, thanks guys... you made the world a little bit nastier.
Whilst I agree that Flash as a mainstream video platform is dying, it's still a fantastic tool for games and animations. What we'll see is sites slowly move away from Flash as HTML5 allows developers to create interactive "experiences" within it, but I'm not sure if it can handle games+animation like Flash can.
Then again, users could just export their animations as movie files..
Then again, users could just export their animations as movie files..
I've played some laggy FPSs in Flash. I agree that it is still a viable platform at the moment for some non-video applications such as games and animations, however browsers competing for better performance will only push the performance of gaming using newer technologies implemented into browsers recently higher and higher past Adobe's Flash.
Just take a look at Quake II running inside Safari:
http://code.google.com/p/quake2-gwt-port/
You never know, it may go the way of PDF into the public domain once it becomes widespread and ubiquitous enough.
I imagine they'll keep their current practice (?) - free for free downloads, licenced for paid downloads.
But that was the whole point of Flash, for designers to do designery interactive web stuff without having to stop being designers and become programmers instead.
I think perhaps the web has matured beyond Flash anyway, with users now wanting content more than fluff and to get to it faster and easier rather than taking the scenic route. There was a time when a lot of websites had tricked-up Flash intro pages before getting to the site proper. I can't recall the last time I've seen one actually.
The Ironic thing is Flash requires learning Actionscript to use its full potential.
Web Designers can't avoid code... ever.