Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

techblog.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 524 posts

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#111

Post by YSFEJ4SWJUVU6 »

pitaj wrote: post #58
YSFEJ4SWJUVU6 wrote: post #35

Netflix video quality sucks on browsers anyway – at least for movies. Half of them seem to be limited to something which could only be described as "less than DVD quality", some noticeably so. That's the reality for the paying customer – for a “pirate”, most of the movies in HD quality are a quick web search away, without needing to install any programs.

If you're looking for quality, you want to go with a Bluray, not a rip.

I'm not a “videophile”, video quality comparable to a 10 GB rip is more than enough for my tastes, and for lesser content even less is fine.

Netflix, however, at times doesn't come even close to that, with the video bitrate often hovering just above 1000 kbps in browsers.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#112

Post by criddell »

azakai wrote: post #79
criddell wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that the only change was that the DRM mechanism was turned into an open standard. How is this worse than before? As someone that occasionally uses Linux, I think it's great that Netflix works there now. Previously, the audience on Linux wasn't worth the development effort for Netflix. Am I missing something? Is this a case where an open standard is a bad thing?

First, the DRM is still not standard. Only the interface to it is. Every browser must still deal directly with the DRM provider and hope to reach an agreement with them, both technically and financially. As a result, only certain platforms are supported. New browsers face a new barrier to entry, in particular - the exact opposite of how the Web is support to work. Second, this is worse in the sense that Netflix, Goog…

> First, the DRM is still not standard. Only the interface to it is.

Is a programming language a good analogy? The C++ spec says what a switch-statement should do, but nothing about how it must be implemented, right?

> New browsers face a new barrier to entry

It's not really a new barrier to entry though, is it? If I wrote a browser last year, were my chances of getting Netflix to support it better then than they are now?

What about if I wrote a new DRM scheme? With a standard interface, are the barriers to entry for me now lower?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#113

Post by tptacek »

shmerl wrote: post #109
tptacek wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's true, why does every major content provider disagree with you?

They don't disagree. The usage of DRM has nothing to do with normal reasons. See https://www.gog.com/forum/general/introducing_gogcom_drmfree...

What the hell is Gog? Serious question.

It was obviously never going to be my contention that there were no DRM-free video content producers. Just the major ones.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#114

Post by shmerl »

tptacek wrote: post #113
shmerl wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't disagree. The usage of DRM has nothing to do with normal reasons. See https://www.gog.com/forum/general/introducing_gogcom_drmfree...

What the hell is Gog? Serious question. It was obviously never going to be my contention that there were no DRM-free video content producers. Just the major ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOG.com (the article incorrectly calls it Cypriot company, it's Polish).

And I meant major ones. They admit that DRM isn't needed. See the report in the link above. Their usage of DRM isn't caused by business enabling requirements, but has completely crooked unrelated reasons.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#115

Post by hathawsh »

Why do companies put so much effort into DRM when a commonly available $20 device strips it away in real time? I don't want to steal streams, I just want my HDMI devices to work together. This little gem strips HDCP so my old (but nice) receiver can talk to my newer projector:

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B004F9LVXC

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#116

Post by wildmusings »

zanny wrote: post #108
hsivonen wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you prefer letting streaming companies have full code execution on you desktop instead of having browsers mediate?

I wouldn't, and they knew that. They knew the adoption rates for out-of-browser proprietary content viewers were awful. That is why they dedicated resources to usurp the open web. If Mozilla had fought back, we might have progressed towards the death of the obsolete content model big media wants to keep in place and prevent change in the market. It would have at least been a step in the right direction - instead, the…

Or more realistically, if Mozilla had fought back, more people would simply have stopped using Firefox.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#117

Post by kefka »

davexunit wrote: post #10
cyborgx7 wrote: post #2

Translation: Netflix successfully lobied DRM into what is supposed to be the OPEN web standard, to the point where even Firefox couldn't afford not to support it. Dark days for the free exchange of information enabled by the web.

Dark days, indeed. Sacrificing the open web so some can watch movies.

I wonder how long it will be for newsprint media companies to use this to "secure" their websites so that Adblockers cannot process the 'encrypted but you can't see' data?

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#118

Post by Hydraulix989 »

azakai wrote: post #79
criddell wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that the only change was that the DRM mechanism was turned into an open standard. How is this worse than before? As someone that occasionally uses Linux, I think it's great that Netflix works there now. Previously, the audience on Linux wasn't worth the development effort for Netflix. Am I missing something? Is this a case where an open standard is a bad thing?

First, the DRM is still not standard. Only the interface to it is. Every browser must still deal directly with the DRM provider and hope to reach an agreement with them, both technically and financially. As a result, only certain platforms are supported. New browsers face a new barrier to entry, in particular - the exact opposite of how the Web is support to work. Second, this is worse in the sense that Netflix, Goog…

No post body was provided.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#119

Post by simplyluke »

sandov wrote: post #102
josteink wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Am I missing something? Is this a case where an open standard Yes. The bit where this is an "open standard" to implement completely closed, non-standard plugins, which cannot be implemented by reading the spec. With this "open standard" any browser or OS not blessed by Hollywood can't have a full web experience. And I take great issues with that.

Could we "fork the web" or something?. Someone could create a parallel stack of web standards that is fully free/open. For the most part it would be the same as the conventional web standard, but open source browser developers would have something to base their developments on, something like the "OpenWeb Stack". Sorry for my bad english.

Could you? Absolutely. Would it be used widely? Unlikely.

Re: Update on HTML5 Video for Netflix

#120

Post by amluto »

criddell wrote: post #112
azakai wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, the DRM is still not standard. Only the interface to it is. Every browser must still deal directly with the DRM provider and hope to reach an agreement with them, both technically and financially. As a result, only certain platforms are supported. New browsers face a new barrier to entry, in particular - the exact opposite of how the Web is support to work. Second, this is worse in the sense that Netflix, Goog…

> First, the DRM is still not standard. Only the interface to it is. Is a programming language a good analogy? The C++ spec says what a switch-statement should do, but nothing about how it must be implemented, right? > New browsers face a new barrier to entry It's not really a new barrier to entry though, is it? If I wrote a browser last year, were my chances of getting Netflix to support it better then than they are…

> Is a programming language a good analogy? The C++ spec says what a switch-statement should do, but nothing about how it must be implemented, right?

That's not what's going on, though. It's an API that a DRM provider can implement. A website that gets a DRM provider it doesn't recognize will refuse to work with it.

Post reply on HN