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

Netflix on Linux with Chrome

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 61 posts

Re: Netflix on Linux with Chrome

#21

Post by girvo »

Karunamon wrote: post #19
fafner wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they mean is that the "Digital Restriction Management in HTML5" proposal is pushed by Google, Microsoft, and Netflix into the W3C spec. Apple has simply followed the proposal and implemented it as well. AFAIK Chrome, IE, Safari ship with it. Firefox will follow suite by adding a Restriction Module from Adobe (given Adobe's track record it will certainly be an amazingly fast, flexible, beautiful, efficient, and n…

"No DRM" was never an option. The option was between 1 DRM standard and 50 (so silverlight and widevine and....). The W3C made the most pragmatic choice, here. I think DRM is still crap, but one system is unambiguously better than >1.

Except Flash was at least used for stuff other than just DRM, so there was an incentive to get it working across all OSes. Linux is going to struggle once this is adopted, at least open browsers will, and that makes me sad

Re: Netflix on Linux with Chrome

#22

Post by Retr0spectrum »

revasm wrote: post #17
batram wrote: post #14

If you use Ubuntu 14.04 (like me) you have to install a newer version of libnss3 (at least 3.16.2) and than it works. Runs smoother than pipelight + firefox at least for me.

Full instructions for reference. Run: wget http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/pool/main/n/nss/libnss3{_3.16.3-1ubuntu1_amd64,-1d_3.16.3-1ubuntu1_amd64,-nssdb_3.16.3-1ubuntu1_all}.deb sudo dpkg -i libnss3*.deb Create a new Tampermonkey script: // ==UserScript== // @name Netflix HTML5 for Linux // @namespace 0d0a3443-cc79-4f86-bf62-2dac581d2b3a // @version 0.1 // @description Enables HTML5 video support for the Linux…

I tried this, but I just get prompted to install the silverlight plugin. I am using Lubuntu 14.04.

Re: Netflix on Linux with Chrome

#23

Post by emergentcypher »

nacs wrote: post #4
aroman wrote: post #2

i don't think the explanation as to why this works is correct. the poster says it's because Google and Microsoft "have been working closely with Netflix to get the needed DRM code required for HTML5 streaming", yet: 1. the user-agent switch involves adding a Safari identifier (rather than IE or a new Chrome one) 2. at WWDC 2014, Apple announced that it had been working closely with Netflix along those lines, and that…

That is the Chrome user agent. It mentions Safari and AppleWebkit for compatibility reasons but it's Chrome. Windows Chrome user-agent for reference: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/36.0.1985.125 Safari/537.36

Ah, yes, another reminder of the hilariously bad user-agent situation in today's web...

Re: Netflix on Linux with Chrome

#24

Post by jiggy2011 »

higherpurpose wrote: post #10
aroman wrote: post #2

i don't think the explanation as to why this works is correct. the poster says it's because Google and Microsoft "have been working closely with Netflix to get the needed DRM code required for HTML5 streaming", yet: 1. the user-agent switch involves adding a Safari identifier (rather than IE or a new Chrome one) 2. at WWDC 2014, Apple announced that it had been working closely with Netflix along those lines, and that…

I thought the whole point of "HTML5 DRM" was to be backed by hardware DRM. So are they giving up on that idea for Linux? And if they are, maybe hardware DRM isn't necessary on other platforms either.

HTML5 DRM (EME) only defines an interface between the DRM system and the browser, it doesn't specify the mechanism for the DRM itself, the CDM is a black box . You could have a DRM scheme based on ROT13 and it would be entirely valid.

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/encrypted-med...

Re: Netflix on Linux with Chrome

#27

Post by jiggy2011 »

girvo wrote: post #21
Karunamon wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No DRM" was never an option. The option was between 1 DRM standard and 50 (so silverlight and widevine and....). The W3C made the most pragmatic choice, here. I think DRM is still crap, but one system is unambiguously better than >1.

Except Flash was at least used for stuff other than just DRM, so there was an incentive to get it working across all OSes. Linux is going to struggle once this is adopted, at least open browsers will, and that makes me sad

The openness of the browser has nothing to do with it, the browser provides an interface to the DRM mechanism which could be open or closed source. Open source browsers like firefox already support proprietary plugins such as Flash.

If anything this makes Linux support easier, because you no longer have to provide support for an entire virtual machine and all APIs such as Flash or Silverlight. The only software required will be the DRM module itself as everything else can be provided by the browser.

Re: Netflix on Linux with Chrome

#29

Post by themartorana »

finnn wrote: post #28

In other news, bittorrent continues to work on all platforms, without placing any restrictions on what viewers can do.

Including participating in massive copyright infringement.

I struggle with the sentiment that if offered no other way to legally consume media, BitTorrent will show them! I can't find "The Money Pit" anywhere but BT. Does that make it ok to download?

I don't know. Morally, legally, etc., I've never been quite so torn for quite so long.

Re: Netflix on Linux with Chrome

#30

Post by bsdetector »

Karunamon wrote: post #19
fafner wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they mean is that the "Digital Restriction Management in HTML5" proposal is pushed by Google, Microsoft, and Netflix into the W3C spec. Apple has simply followed the proposal and implemented it as well. AFAIK Chrome, IE, Safari ship with it. Firefox will follow suite by adding a Restriction Module from Adobe (given Adobe's track record it will certainly be an amazingly fast, flexible, beautiful, efficient, and n…

"No DRM" was never an option. The option was between 1 DRM standard and 50 (so silverlight and widevine and....). The W3C made the most pragmatic choice, here. I think DRM is still crap, but one system is unambiguously better than >1.

It's not just 1 DRM standard, it's 1 simple DRM standard that is only DRM.

The DRM plugin is basically just request/provide license and decrypt frame. Even if it was encrypted media extensions vs silverlight that's 100k plugin vs 10 MiB plugin.

Post reply on HN