What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
136 Comments
- smoothmedia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+80Coming to a YouTube near you? I hope.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -5/+60Porn in HD. The human endevour is now complete
- OBKenobi, on 10/10/2007, -3/+551) The H.264 support means superior video quality; it is also an open standard. [Open standard good. - OBK]
2) High Efficiency Advanced Audio is, says Mark Randall, a "successor to MP3". He said it is a higher quality audio, but at a lower bit rate. [DRM? Yes/No? - OBK]
3) It means "hardware acceleration" for Web video. [That means full-screen porn will be possible. - OBK]
Silverlight, we hardly knew ye. - robuk24, on 10/10/2007, -0/+45"Mr Bandwidth ran to his room sobbing and slammed his door very hard."
- Shorties, on 10/10/2007, -0/+27Bye bye cable tv... *Waves*
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -5/+31Well, since most of YouTube's content looked like ***** originally, this isn't going to save it.
- championchap, on 10/10/2007, -0/+23But for everything that isn't phoned on a webcam or a phone, this could be a very good thing.
Nobody actually uses youTube to watch all those 14yr olds "dance" to terrible hip hop songs do they? - JonXP, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17H.264 != HD Quality
It means it is using one of the same codecs available to HD-DVD/Bluray (among several others), but at an obviously lower-for-streaming bandwidth.
MPEG2 is *also* an "HD Standard", but that doesn't make your DVD player high def. - nukem996, on 10/10/2007, -3/+18Still waiting on the 64bit plugin...
- cr3ative, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16Evidently you've never used early versions of Firefox.
*ducks* - tensionhead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Lots more info:
http://www.kaourantin.net/2007/08/what-just-happened-to-video-on-web_20.html - srg13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14Well, they are converting everything to H.264 (from the original uploaded files IIRC) for the iPhone and AppleTV, so it would make sense.
- jonesin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Here's hoping us Linux users won't have to wait long for the new version.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9*****! Says my CPU.
- brianbb98, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9yes, now we can get right down into the shots of the sweaty man asses. yay.
- wholly2b, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8No, there's just a lot of ***** who digg down comments for the ***** of it. Don't sweat it.
- xike, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9No joke. Their plugin alone makes me use a 32bit browser.
- anonym41414, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Do you often need to address more than 2 GB of RAM in your WEB BROWSER!?
- aliguana, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7the point is, afaik, that you don't need to encode as FLV files. You just point your Flash player/routine to open a mp4/mov/3gp file, instead of a flv file. No more transcoding to flv, by the look of it. Which is a plus in my book
- dw2005, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I personally think Adobe should concentrate more on making Flash Player more stable. Ever since they took over from Macromedia the product has become less and less stable. Not to mention how annoying it is to have to visit some tucked away Flash configuration page on the adobe website to change flash player settings.
- MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -0/+7There are some things you want to be a little low-res.
- e68895f, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8FTA: It means "hardware acceleration" for Web video.
***** = desperate silverlight developer - championchap, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6..must be hell.
- jkramlich, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Or it may be that crappy YouTube videos of people singing dumb songs don't need to be encoded in Dolby Digital surround sound. I'm all for the lower bit rate because it means that 1.) The current quality of content will download quicker over the same pipe and 2.) Higher quality content will download at the same rate as the current lower quality content.
Not everything needs to be, or should be that high of quality. - melat0nin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7The player seems to be out now.. anyone know of any H.264 flash content we can watch?
- e68895f, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I wonder if this version will have some kind of DRM support, as was rumored before. It sucks for consumers, but major players will not adopt without it.
- roxics, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9I don't really get how this works. Does this mean an H.264 .flv could be renamed to .mp4 and still work? Because isn't H.264 a version of mpeg4?
Also how do we encode these new H.264 .flv files. Do we need and even newer encoder then what is found in Flash Video Encoder CS3? - Ub3rg33k, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6H.264 doesn't wash blacks. LCDs and many other digital displays are the cause of washed out blacks. If you're still having issues, its because you have no idea how to work your encoder. You seem to favor Sorenson, but when it was reverse engineered ... surprise! it was found to be H.264 with some minor tweaks. You say H.264 is not an HD standard? Funny, it says so right in the HD DVD spec and the Blu-Ray spec. Also, don't tell all those Europeans that the HD the BBC and others air is fake since its 264 encoded. Better not mention it to all the subscribers of DirecTV or Dish Network either, since both services are moving to it. VC-1/WMV-HD borrows heavily from the same bag of tricks as 264 but you don't get nearly as many profiles or 4:4:4 colorspace encoding.
- Shorties, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Welcome to my block list
- mmeads, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4ads? what are those?
- macslut, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5What kind of H.264 encoder are you using? You should either switch or learn how to use it.
- tropican8, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4H.264 is part of the MPEG-4 Standard, meaning it is a video type that is supported by the MPEG-4 Part 14 container. The ".mp4" file format has to contain a supported video stream, but that doesn't mean a supported video stream will always be in that container. So if you see something touted as being an H.264 with a weird file extension, renaming might not work. However, based on the blog post someone mentioned in the comments above, it looks like Adobe is using a normal MPEG-4 container will a few custom atoms, so there shouldn't be any problems.
- roxics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4That sounds great. No more FLV encoding.
BTW why am I getting dugg down in my original post for asking a couple of questions?
Is asking questions not cool on Digg? - MiDri, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4WTF are you talking about? I watch Level 3 encoded h.264 all freaking day on my iphone -- stfu and gtfo.
- e68895f, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4"still nothing compare to silverlight..."
you talk the talk, but can you walk the walk ? - killercow, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5lets just hope it won't take them a year to release a linux version like it did the last time.
Ps, where's the 64 bits version of any flash player anyway. im sorry?, you didn't see 64bits computing coming? are you blind!? - kris33, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5iPhone handles h.264 very good. Youtube on iPhone uses h.264 and Apple recommends that you encode your videos in that format.
- joegibes, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4High Efficiency Advanced Audio = Heaa! (abbreviated)
MUCH more fun to pronounce than "mp3" - aliguana, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4not sure mate, it was a good question. You definately need a new encoder, try Handbrake (I assume the Flash Encoder will get updated to encode 264 eventually)
- oneoverzero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Divx already has this.
With added bugs. - mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"Nobody actually uses youTube to watch all those 14yr olds "dance" to terrible hip hop songs do they?"
Except for all of those web sites specifically dedicated to posting those videos for losers to jack off to.. - aliguana, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3FLV is broadcast quality, if you take a movie (DVD rip for instance) and encode it high. If you take a crap TV rip, encode it as DIVx, then upload it to YouTube and it gets converted again to FLV, at low "streaming" quality, its going to look rubbish.
- aliguana, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I doubt it. Once YouTube switches to 264, millions of people will upgrade their players to use it. Millions of Flash 9.264 players, means any other site that wants to use it will be able to.
Mac/Linux is a very small part of the web-viewing public, so lack of Flash player for them isn't holding back progress (Unless the web designers themselves use Macs/Linux. Which is probable) - Emery, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3From Main Concepts (company Adobe licensed h.264 decoder from) press release:
'Adobe has licensed the x86, PowerPC and ARM versions of MainConcept’s H.264 and AAC decoders.'
ARM version? I smell iPhone support! - geoken, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2When you say it 'clearly didn't fit the bill' is your opinion solely based on YouTube videos?
- Garf13ld, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Personally, I just hope this helps put a deathknell in the coffin of MS's VC-1 codec. There's just too many codecs imo. More standards please.
- dvirsky, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I hope you're just joking. Of course higher quality at lower bitrate means MUCH HIGHER quality per same bitrate.
All codecs can produce HD quality, even MJPEG. the question is at what bitrate.
Right now flash support two codecs - Sorenson, which is really crap at low bitrates (it starts being decent at about 800kb/s), and ON2 VP6, which is much nicer and not that inferior to h264. the main problem with VP6 is that it is not an open standard. I mean, look at the stuff they put on veoh.com, that's ON2. - Wyzard, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I don't know about the Windows version of Firefox, but in Linux, nspluginwrapper can be used to run 32-bit plugins in a 64-bit browser. (It sidesteps the link incompatibility by running the plugin in a separate 32-bit process.) Debian has recently packaged Flash for the x86_64 platform using this trick.
- Just, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I was wondering the same
i dont want to read about all the specs this can do i want to see what it can do in my machine
a preview someone anyone ? - Wyzard, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Generally not, but installing 32-bit applications on an otherwise 64-bit system can be a pain. A 64-bit browser is preferable in a 64-bit OS.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 136 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is