What is Digg?Sponsored by wix.com
139 Comments
- synotic, on 10/22/2009, -1/+143The main difference is that the browser is rendering the video itself rather than handing it off to an external plugin. There are a few benefits to this but presumably the problem where a video lags behind when you scroll on a page are gone. The delay and jumpiness as the browser has to load the plugin before the video shows up should be gone. And finally, you can layer other elements on top of the rendered video. This is why the player controls are on top of the video in the HTML5 video. This has been the reason that it's been impossible to create a YouTube-like interface with controls integrated on top of the video (and showing related videos, etc...).
- Zippo, on 10/22/2009, -0/+91I'm glad Wikipedia has switched to HTML5 for the random videos that are embedded in certain articles. The java applet method they were using before was *painfully* slow... and, like most java applets (and Flash, for that matter), brutal on CPU.
I wonder when YouTube will go HTML5... won't that be a sight to see. - xM55, on 10/22/2009, -14/+88So... Anytime someone makes a positive claim about Apple, it's fanboyism? LOL, that's fair.
- krymson, on 10/22/2009, -0/+45the difference is that you can hear the sound of Adobe executives weeping every time you play a html5 video in your browser.
- jgram, on 10/22/2009, -5/+49Why has no one mentioned DailyMotion? They set up a version of their site using HTML5 video immediately after it was introduced in the latest version of Firefox. I'd argue that DailyMotion, one of the leading video hosting sites on the internet, is leading the way with online video, not Apple.
- LaughingMan11, on 10/22/2009, -0/+41Google has talked about bringing YouTube up to speed with HTML5. They demonstrated this at Google IO a few months ago :
http://www.youtube.com/html5
(this link will only work in html5 compatible browsers supporting mp4 such as Safari and Chrome). - Radan, on 10/22/2009, -0/+38Firefox doesn't support videos in h.264.
- Ndelangen, on 10/22/2009, -0/+36Plugins are a major problem, now the browser can display video's n it's own, and we need Flash less and less. This is good, why?
Well security for starters, stability, performance.
You remember the google chome comic? They said, the only problem with chome was:
yes you got it: Plugins.
And by plugins I mean those pesky Flash, Java Silverlight *****.
Plugins and Addons are not the same.
Plugin = bad
Addon = good - epyon180, on 10/22/2009, -4/+36So, what is the difference exactly? are there performance improvements or just cosmetic differences.
- sobri, on 10/22/2009, -0/+30Performance benefits (no Flash churning CPU), stability benefits (no Flash gearing up for a crash), and opens up possibilities for more advanced page layouts as the video can be integrated into the page in more flexible ways.
- Kipu2021, on 10/22/2009, -23/+51Hooray, apparently. It makes no difference to the average user, but for those who care, coolah-coolay.
- davidron, on 10/22/2009, -2/+23I'm surprised it worked at all. Firefox only supports Ogg Theora HTML5 video. Safari only supports H.264 HTML5 video. Until there is a fully open non patent encumbered version of H.264 that doesn't require an expensive license, open source browsers such as Firefox won't support H.264. And, until devices like the iPhone and Android devices ship with decent hardware accelerated playback of Theora, those commercial vendors probably won't support Theora.
We're kind of currently stuck between expensive but well supported in hardware vs. free but quite a bit less popular. Apple's H.264 is the circa 1999 Internet Explorer of the video codec world.
And, as for quality, I understand H.264 is a little better, but that may be due to the fact that many more people are working on that implementation. - ltethe, on 10/22/2009, -0/+19Score, I ***** hate flash.
- NoNameWorks, on 10/22/2009, -4/+21No, how is that related?
- munikho, on 10/22/2009, -1/+17I wish they would support the ogg format, that would be real news.
Why do they see the need to support this proprietary format? Why not at least support both? That would make things a lot easier and better for us webdevelopers. - MakinBacon, on 10/22/2009, -4/+19three80: There was a time (maybe 2006-07) where listing your OS of choice as something other than OS X would get you dugg down. Today it's the opposite... the Apple haters are out in full force on Digg. Usually any positive comment about Apple automatically makes one a brainwashed fanboy/drone/smug *****/gaytard/iDiot. Which is exactly the point xM55 makes.
You are actually at +1 as I write this so you're not being buried... likely those who dugg you down just did so because you're trying to back up someone's illogical opinion.
The article merely states a fact that many people in the industry agree with. "Apple has always been a leading innovator". Not THE leading innovator. But among them. Just as Microsoft has been a leading innovator or Google has been a leading innovator... - hongkongjapie, on 10/22/2009, -6/+21You know that Quicktime (.mov) is an ISO standard? You know MPEG-4 is based on Quicktime file format? Quicktime .mov is a container format and supports many different codecs. Although not open source, it's an open standard. So what was your point?
- PicklePower, on 10/22/2009, -3/+18Did anyone else notice the red, watery eyes in the video? It had to be unpleasant for those guys to have lights brighter than the sun blasted on them for those shots.
- deadbaby, on 10/22/2009, -0/+15There's not really such thing as "Apple's H.264" It's a VGEG/MPEG standard. Apple does not own it or control it. Apple has an implementation to playback H.264 baed on the ratified standard. Theora is actually based on a codec that borrows heavily from MPEG4 implementations that pre-date the H.264 standard. This is one of the reasons it's not getting much support. The basis of the Theora codec was released as public domain code however many people believe it would not stand up to a patent infringement lawsuit. Along the same lines the x264 open source implementation of H.264 faces the same patient issues. All things being equal on the patient front I would expect x264 to gain more acceptance for HTML5 implementations since it supports the most widely used video codec on the Internet and is basically in the same questionable legal standing as Theora right now.
- jgram, on 10/22/2009, -1/+15How exactly is their implementation "better" and "seamless" when it only works under webkit? And the codec they require is under patent and requires licensing fees? And Apple helped bog down the HTML5 video process by refusing to allow the use of a free and open codec alongside their own, like how Chrome supports both? Apple is the reason HTML5 video will never actually be a standard. Their implementation is designed only for their own browser and is no better than designing a site which only works in IE.
- Crazysticks, on 10/22/2009, -4/+17I'm digging you up for your comment, but down for your coolah-coolay.
- vicsvenge, on 10/22/2009, -3/+15how do you figure that?
- ChasInVictoria, on 10/22/2009, -5/+16I see the mindless Ballmer-boys who hate anything Apple are out in full force ...
- ploke, on 10/22/2009, -0/+10The problem is that they want a standard across media players, computers and ipods/iphones. Hardware chips to decode ogg theora aren't nearly as cheap or as advanced as chips to decode h.264. I can't see apple changing their mind so long as those constraints are in place.
It sucks that this divide exists, but I can understand both side of it. - srg13, on 10/22/2009, -1/+11I can't believe you included FLV in that list - pretty much all Flash video sites use H.264 now instead (that's the _exact same codec_ as Apple is using) because the other codecs they used for FLV were so crap...
- TallestSkil, on 10/22/2009, -1/+11At the above: it worked. Now update your browser or shut up.
- hongkongjapie, on 10/22/2009, -2/+11Maybe lagging in features and plugin architecture, not lagging in HTML rendering
- SeaICIubber, on 10/22/2009, -1/+10What about redtube?
- danboy, on 10/22/2009, -2/+11sorry, I misused the term proprietary, but would still prefer a free(open) format such as ogg theora. I'm am happy to see the advances we are making with the web and can't wait until we can all just play and it will "just work", but that takes a touch of embracing "open" standards and open source.
- pyrates, on 10/22/2009, -0/+8Hmm it also doesn't seem to work in chrome either. Must use the quicktime plugin to decode the video. Which means Apple pulled a Microsoft and put something in that would only work with their browser, Safari, for the time being.
- Ndelangen, on 10/22/2009, -0/+7which is why it's not the default yet.
Then again, they could just put a "beta" sticker on it.... - three80, on 10/22/2009, -8/+15Perhaps he meant they haven't _always_ been the leading innovator of hardware design and OS improvements. It's just that anyone that likes apple seems to see it that way?
I've never owned an apple product, I'm a Windows and Linux user, so I'm not sure when they put out their improvements or if he is correct, I'm just guessing that that is what he meant. - Enisity, on 10/22/2009, -4/+11Yah but no one uses the Video Bay... lol
- r2builder, on 10/22/2009, -0/+7Either that or they're really baked.
- gordigor, on 10/22/2009, -0/+7When I played it in Chrome, the progress bar didn't actually move. I had no idea how long the video was.
- JakePT, on 10/22/2009, -8/+14Buried for smugness.
- papashawn, on 10/22/2009, -1/+7why the anger? HAVE I INSULTED YOUR MASTER
- willy1234x1, on 10/22/2009, -3/+9Mozilla.com has HTML 5 video, I just said that, they redesigned their site with 3.5's release and included HTML 5 video with it.
- happyseamonster, on 10/23/2009, -0/+6...and less CPU than Flash.
- deadbaby, on 10/22/2009, -3/+8Your comment makes no sense. HTML5 is an open standard. You're basically making up an alternative reality and getting upset about the story you made up. Creepy.
- three80, on 10/22/2009, -0/+5MakinBacon: I was at negative diggs when i mentioned it.
"the article merely states a fact that many people in the industry agree with. "Apple has always been a leading innovator". Not THE leading innovator."
^^ I agree with you and that is what i pointed out, that what i assumed the person i replied to was saying.
"three80: There was a time (maybe 2006-07) where listing your OS of choice as something other than OS X would get you dugg down. Today it's the opposite... the Apple haters are out in full force on Digg."
Wait so all the Pro windows comments on a 'Pro' Windows article getting dugg down with all the OS X is better, Apple rules, ***** win7 Apple is our savior, those comments are in the past? i don't think so.
The anti Linux comments on the pro Linux submissions are gone or never existed? Do you pay attention to how often they bitch at this? and just say "Year of the linux desktop!" and talk about features they don't know ***** about?
"Or how Apple sux, they are just a linux/unix ripoff, and you can use the same desktop with their 'quicklaunch' or iwhatevertheruck' in linux?
(sorry apple ***** is minimal cuz ive never used it (thats a lie i used it for 30 minutes once)so i can't compare it to anything or call it *****
However you see my point MakinBakin, its not that 'there was a time' its that now everone attacks everyone, and its ***** useless. - JakePT, on 10/22/2009, -6/+11They're leading the way by actually using it on a very popular website, the article isn't talking about Safari.
- willy1234x1, on 10/22/2009, -8/+13Mozilla.com had HTML 5 with Ogg Theora back when they released 3.5, if you go there now it still has it so no they aren't leading the way just pretending to. I have no problems with Apple and I know their products are useful for some things but they aren't the first to implement HTML 5 <video> tags.
- InMSWeAntitrust, on 10/22/2009, -0/+4Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
Result: 8 Errors, 2 warning(s)
I know, being a dick here. - usingpond, on 10/22/2009, -1/+5Heh. Think I'll just post on the Internet about how little I care about something.
- ThreeDee912, on 10/23/2009, -0/+4You know, everyone bashes Apple for not having Flash on the iPhone, but then they bash Flash because it eats up way too much resources. Full blown Flash would probably drain the battery way too quick, or be slow as hell. Or both.
- FredFredrickson, on 10/22/2009, -11/+15They already ruined the spec by throwing a fit about the video standard (which was subsequently removed from the spec)... they should just leave HTML5 alone after that.
- wicketr, on 10/22/2009, -4/+8***** Apple and their demands
- sirhomer, on 10/22/2009, -0/+3Wikipedia has supported HTML5 video for some time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Edit_01-12-09_sm ... - TrancePhreak, on 10/22/2009, -8/+11since H.264 still beats out Theora, your analogy totally fails.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 141 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is