Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 16th Oct 2009 21:26 UTC
"HTML5 defines a standard way to embed video in a web page, using a video element. Support for the video element is still evolving, which is a polite way of saying it doesn't work yet. At least, it doesn't work everywhere. But don't despair! There are alternatives and fallbacks and options galore."
Thread beginning with comment 389858
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: That didn't look so hard
by StephenBeDoper on Sun 18th Oct 2009 16:46
in reply to "RE[5]: That didn't look so hard"
Member since:2005-07-06
RE[7]: That didn't look so hard
by galvanash on Mon 19th Oct 2009 16:58
in reply to "RE[6]: That didn't look so hard"
Member since:2006-01-25
Of course the content producers matter, they're the ones who will ultimately decide what formats/methods they'll use to provide content to users. I'd say it's one of those "it takes two to tango" situations.
Sure. They can decide to distribute their content as collection of colored dots painted on the backs of turtles if they want to... see how they works out for them. The point is they can do whatever they want, but the only thing that will in the end make them _money_ is to do what makes customers want to pay for it. DRM does NOT make customers happy, nor does any other method of limiting what can be done with paid for data.
The studios like to think of it as selling media - but people don't buy media, they buy content. That disconnect has always existed, but until recently the studios have managed to hide it well enough that most people didn't notice the difference enough to care - that is changing rapidly.
It only "takes two to tango" if both parties actually want to. If you dance partner decides your an a**hole and leaves your kinda screwed...
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-01-25
I realize you are just taking a pragmatic view on this, and there is no doubt there is truth to your statement. But while you may consider this a barrier to adoption, I see it as a feature and a _benefit_ - it is just a matter of time before the majority of users see it that way as well. And users are what matter, not content producers...
The video tag is useful for many different reasons, one _specific_ reason is that it does _not_ support any method of DRM or other such nonsense. It doesn't hide things. In fact any implementation that included any form of DRM or source masking would be by definition non-conforming.
It has been said thousands of times by many different people, but I will again state the boringly obvious: Any programmatic endeavor to keep people from using data that you have given them in any way they see fit is futile. If you give someone something there is simply no credible way to keep them from doing what they want with it - no matter how much you obfusticate things in the end they still have it, and as long as they have it it is just a matter of time. This has been demonstrated over and over and over and over again. You simply cannot give people access to a video on the internet without in reality giving them the video.
The point is as soon as all these low-brow users you speak of realize how utterly simple it is to just download the video by right clicking and hitting save-as, they will actually want to take the videos with them and will _demand_ things to work that way. If you are a content distributer, and you want use the internet to do so, you need to accept the fact that this will happen. If you don't like it don't distribute your content. My hope is that there is enough content available this way that one day in the not too distant future when some Everyday Joe right-clicks on his video and sees "About Adobe Flash Player x.0" instead of "Save As..." he will just go somewhere else.