"While HTML5's video support enables us to bring most of the content and features of YouTube to computers and other devices that don't support Flash Player, it does not yet meet all of our needs," said YouTube programmer John Harding in a blog post Tuesday. "Today, Adobe Flash provides the best platform for YouTube's video distribution requirements, which is why our primary video player is built with it."
Post a Comment
Member since:
2006-03-27
Member since:2010-04-09
Member since:2006-03-27
Member since:2005-11-02
Member since:2008-11-25
RE[3]: YouTube HTML5 Support is Great
Member since:2007-12-16
RE[5]: YouTube HTML5 Support is Great
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-07-12
In other words, Harding re-iterated every single point I've made on the subject ever since their alleged HTML 5 demo came along. HTML 5's "openness" is what's going to make commercial content providers NOT embrace it... relegating it to the "PBS of the Internet" fringe whackos. (You know, the nutjobs who won't install binaries on moral grounds)
Though I'd still point out that slapping the VIDEO tag into a XHTML 1.0 Tranny document is NOT a HTML 5 demo - it's half-assed broken code...
But that's the new Youtube and the new Google all-over. Give them another five years of 'progress' like this and they'll be the next Yahoo!
Edited 2010-07-06 06:40 UTC
Member since:2005-11-10
Not everything has to pander to the big corps.
I’m glad I can publish video which is widely accessible and the source video is available for people to do as they please; and I know that new devices and browsers may support it without me having to change my code (I got Amiga support via MorphOS and I didn’t have to wait for Adobe to support Amiga—oh wait, they don’t and never will).
Stop judging all developers by YouTube’s incompetence.
Member since:2009-08-26
I’m glad I can publish video which is widely accessible and the source video is available for people to do as they please;
Flash has a 97% install base and nothing is preventing you from making your source video available.
Stop judging all developers by YouTube’s incompetence.
How are they being incompetent? You're just upset that they are not leading the war against Flash, just as I said they wouldn't. Maybe the HTML5 warriors here will pay more attention to skeptics next time.
I would like to see Flash at least partially replaced with something else but that isn't going to happen when the competition completely fails to acknowledge the needs of content creators.
Member since:2006-07-25
Member since:2009-08-26
Member since:
2010-03-30
I wonder why the HTML5 group didn't think of (and address) all those shortcomings before hand. Or is it that their 2014 (or whatever date they chose for the completion of the norm) deadline is so far that they felt compelled to deliver something that looks, in the light of the linked article, incomplete and crippled?
After all the fuss, Flash isn't dying now. I'm disappointed.
Member since:2005-11-02
Could be a lot of reasons. I don't believe these issues were raised very early in the process. Remember also that no matter how often someone blogs about it nothing matters unless someone in the HTML5 working group hears about it and brings it up on their mailing list.
Regardless, going from "no video natively" to "we have a video tag" is a fine first step. Solving 100% of all problems out of the gate is unlikely and attempting it is unwise.
Member since:2010-03-30
Fine.
I don't agree with this. First, because I see the norm as the equivalent of the architecture in a software project or the foundations in a building project. It can't cover all possible use cases but it must be thoroughly thought, with respect to the intended functionalities, or specify the extension points.
Moreover, HTML5 doesn't have the excuse of pioneering its field like HTTP 1.0 or XForms 1.0. These were designed with not much previous art (although HTTP formalized HTTP/0.9 practices that existed). Videos in web pages are neither new nor rare. Whether now or back 5 or 6 years ago. HTML5, which covers more than just videos let's not forget it, was designed with numerous examples of its future purpose available. So what happened? to the point that it can't be a viable replacement not because of adoption but because of it lacking existing features?
Adding a <video> tag without thinking about the controls, subtitles, multi soundtracks or full-screen mode doesn't look well-thought in my eyes. And no, trying to think things thoroughly can't be unwise. At least, that's what I like to think.
Saying that the standard is still a draft is a better reason.
