YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#361

Post by Ntrails » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 2:44 PM UTC

exprL wrote: post #347

Ntrails wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing I find is that ever time the HTML5 window changes size is that it appears to drop all data and start loading again. So my old tactic of open 5 tabs, maximise and watch one by one is completely nerfed

The Flash-based player would do exactly the same (with a slight delay) even if it wasn't as obvious from the UI. To prevent YouTube from switching sources when resizing the content, select a specific quality first (it defaults to “Auto”). I wouldn't be surprised if there were browser extensions that automatically do this (e.g. always choose the highest quality).

I think the flash player doesn't change quality on resize and thus was able to keep using buffered quality?

I switched to forcing HTML a while ago so can't test. Either way, I'll try that - thank you :)

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#362

Post by spain » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 2:58 PM UTC

Nexxxeh wrote: post #356

spain wrote: post #354

Seems like it isn't perfect yet. At least on Firefox I don't get to watch videos in 1080p anymore on Youtube with the HTML5 player.

I watched a 1080p video using HTML5 on Opera yesterday. As a test, I just popped open the first interesting looking video on my signed-in YouTube front page (my account has been set to HTML5 for a while). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmRI3Ew4BvA I'm not a fan of the Yeah Yeah Yeahs but the video does have Lily Cole is in 1080p. Opera 27.0.1689.54 on Win 8.1 x64.

I think it might be an issue with codecs which is why it works with some browsers and doesn't with others.

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#363

Post by bzbarsky » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 3:15 PM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #331

bzbarsky wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but there's an important distinction between what you said and what EME is. EME is a spec for a communication channel between script in a web page and a browser, with the idea that the browser then talks to a DRM module. It's not a spec for a communication channel between the browser and a DRM module. This is important, because it means that you end up with DRM modules that are tied to a particular browser. Th…

Is there any current or proposed implementation that can support W3C SMIL in the browser? A decade ago, RealPlayer was able to seamlessly edit video excerpts (defined by start::stop intervals) into a single video stream. The excerpts could have originated from different servers. Will the new DRM formats support this use case? E.g. if I'm a paying Netflix subscriber, could I view a dynamically defined (XML or JSON) ma…

You could build something like that in Javascript on top of HTML and MSE, probably. The EME (DRM) spec is not really related to this.

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#364

Post by Nux » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 3:32 PM UTC

The smoother way for me to watch (at least some) youtube videos is youtube-dl and mplayer; otherwise I get a lot of "buffering".

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#365

Post by shmerl » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 3:57 PM UTC

slederer wrote: post #348

shmerl wrote: post #149

By the way, is MPEG-DASH* patent encumbered or not? I didn't find clear answer on that. Youtube is using DASH (on the server side) to implement adaptive streaming. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_Adaptive_Streaming_ove...

MPEG-DASH is completely royality free. Find also more info on www.dash-player.com

Thanks. Do you know if this is documented anywhere?

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#366

Post by TheRealDunkirk » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 4:05 PM UTC

People are pointing out how every site will now (optionally) need its own DRM module. So how is this not a worse situation for users than Flash? Now there will be several popular modules that will all have their own vulnerabilities, and need patching, with the added disadvantage that they don't all have the same set of eyes watching them, as Flash does now.

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#367

Post by notdan » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 4:10 PM UTC

tim333 wrote: post #262

notdan wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since you are using youtube to learn songs on guitar, you might try this out (I made it): http://tunetranscriber.com Let's you do marks and loops as well as using the playback controls.

That's cool. What did you use to slow the music/vid?

The YouTube slowdown is just using the YouTube API. For mp3, it is using the html5 file and audio Apis, and a JavaScript port of the sound touch library. Everything is done in client side javascript, there is currently no application server, just a static site.

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#368

Post by roel_v » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 4:11 PM UTC

jsprogrammer wrote: post #343

roel_v wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They would have to get all their pieces from you" If you're suggesting that it's only copyright violation if you download a complete work from somebody, you're flat out wrong.

I'm saying that whoever was proving a violation would have to show infringing distribution of a protected work. Bit torrent pieces generally contain a small fraction of the total work, which could easily be fair use. You'd have to show that the person was actually transmitting a protected work against its license. That piece may have been a short clip in a more encompassing work. You won't know until you get more of…

Nope, still wrong (not 'arguably wrong', plain factually wrong). That's not how 'fair use' works - it's not because you send a part (what you call a 'clip') of a work, that it becomes fair use all of a sudden.

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#369

Post by antihero » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 4:17 PM UTC

click170 wrote: post #219

munificent wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube, Spotify, Google Play Music, SoundCloud, Pandora, et. al.

Those just aren't sufficient IMO. I like being able to listen to music when I have no internet connection. I like being able to listen to something when the original was taken down. I like being able to listen to something that the vendor no longer offers. I like having smart playlists in my library and on my devices that automatically update themselves based on meta data such as what I've played recently. Unfortunat…

Other than smart playlists, your requirements describe pretty much any media player released in god knows how long.

Personally I usually have an internet connection except on the train, so I use a Subsonic server, and my Android Subsonic client is set to aggressively precache my playlist (so it plays happily through tunnels, even if the tunnel lasts 10+ songs).

Re: YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video

#370

Post by mod » Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 4:35 PM UTC

shenoyroopesh wrote: post #326

marvin wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This actually makes sense; the porn industry has much higher earnings per user and hence a much greater loss due to lower conversion for those who don't have Flash installed. So for them, it's a "my hair is on fire" kind of thing. Whereas for Youtube et al., it's a nice-to-have.

But won't it be same if you look at percentages? Unless you hypothise that porn users not having flash installed is somehow a larger percentage compared to average web user not having flash installed?!

He didn't say the percentages would be different.

The idea is youtube loses maybe 20 cents or something for losing a user. A porn site loses $30/month or something.