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

Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

blog.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 358 posts

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#81

Post by yason »

bphogan wrote: post #17

The choice has been made by many places to simply use h264 video via the HTML5 tag to hit the iPhone/iPad and then fallback to a Flash video player which can easily play the h264 source video. Content producers would rather encode videos once, which is why they moved to FLV in the first place. There's no incentive to use anything else here. This hurts users. I am all for standards, but not for hurting users. And like…

You rarely gain much unless you let yourself hurt a bit first and reap the benefits later.

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#82

Post by danh »

marbletiles wrote: post #25

Google's assumption: People will add WebM encoding to their already complicated video workflows What will actually happen: Chrome will get served h.264 wrapped in Flash. Lose all round, then.

Maybe that is somehow what Google wants? It has cozied up to Adobe to the point of including flash in Chrome itself. And YouTube apparently can't be bothered to make html5 video work reliably.

I can't think of why anyone would want to promote flash, though.

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#83

Post by roadnottaken »

davidedicillo wrote: post #48

I'm kinda tired of this Google openness, especially when it so congenially damage their competitors. It would have been different if they never implemented it in first place, but this now it just looks like a move to target Apple.

Well, it's better than Apple's strategy of using closed-ness to damage their competitors. All companies make strategic decisions. But if you're going to use ideology strategically, it might as well be a good ideology.

Note: I'm a huge Apple fan and I use lots of their products with alacrity.

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#84

Post by msbarnett »

salmonsnide wrote: post #80
marbletiles wrote: post #25

Google's assumption: People will add WebM encoding to their already complicated video workflows What will actually happen: Chrome will get served h.264 wrapped in Flash. Lose all round, then.

Once Adobe adds WebM support in Flash, it might happen the other way around.

There's a massive volume of h.264 out there that isn't going to get converted just to satisfy some dogmatic commitment to 'openness'.

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#85

Post by OpieCunningham »

salmonsnide wrote: post #80
marbletiles wrote: post #25

Google's assumption: People will add WebM encoding to their already complicated video workflows What will actually happen: Chrome will get served h.264 wrapped in Flash. Lose all round, then.

Once Adobe adds WebM support in Flash, it might happen the other way around.

You'll have to add these caveats in as well:

Once Apple supports WebM.

Once chipset manufacturers produce WebM optimized hardware decoders.

Once handset, set-top, etc. manufacturers purchase and integrate those WebM hardware decoders.

Once handset, set-top, etc. manufacturers develop or license software players that support WebM encoded video and file format.

Could happen the other way around. But it ain't likely.

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#86

Post by Raphael_Amiard »

marbletiles wrote: post #25

Google's assumption: People will add WebM encoding to their already complicated video workflows What will actually happen: Chrome will get served h.264 wrapped in Flash. Lose all round, then.

Well i don't know. What i see :

Adobe is gonna support webm. So having only one format is gonna be possible.

Browsers who supported or were gonna support H264 :

- Safari (5% market share) - IE9 (0% market share right now, probably around 15% in 3 years) - Chrome (around 13 %)

Browsers who supports Webm :

- Firefox (30% market share) - Chrome - IE9 will probably support it via codecs which is better than nothing

The big deal breaker i see is the mobile devices who natively support H264. But as a long term move i can only approve what google is doing.

Also :

> People will add WebM encoding to their already complicated video workflows

Most people video workflow is youtube/vimeo/dailymotion video workflow. All of which seems ready to support webm.

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#87

Post by eelco »

Raphael_Amiard wrote: post #59
bphogan wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just having a hard time understanding why they're ok with bundling the Flash player with Chrome, but not carrying an h264 decoder.

well they are nothing alike. Flash player is a free but proprietary implementation of an swf player. H264 is a licensed and patented codec specification.

Of course, Flash isn't patented at all. And H264 codecs always costs money.

I didn't know Google fanboyism existed.

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#88

Post by sid0 »

rradu wrote: post #50
redthrowaway wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when has Apple supported open standards simply because it makes sense to do so? Apple almost invariably chooses closed over open.

Apple is fully behind HTML5 - http://www.apple.com/html5/

You call this being "fully behind HTML5"? http://grab.by/grabs/0b694089e83975c385627b134ee8ece7.png

Even Microsoft's better than this.

edit: could whoever downvoted me explain why he did so?

Re: Google Removing H.264 Support in Chrome

#90

Post by minalecs »

tzs wrote: post #79
buster wrote: post #38

People should really blame MS and Apple for only supporting their own video codec here. I am fully behind the decision of Mozilla, Opera, Google and others to support open and patent unencumbered video formats. Can someone just look at the table at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5_video and really tell me that this mess isn't the fault of MS and Apple in the first place? Ogg is ready to play a big role and WebM is…

> People should really blame MS and Apple for only supporting their own video codec here. H.264 is not Apple's codec, nor is it Microsoft's. Both of them have to license it, just like any random company off the street would. Apple does own one or two of the several hundred patents involved, so might get a very slight discount on their license. > I am fully behind the decision of Mozilla, Opera, Google and others to s…

edit [removed no citation available]
Post reply on HN