Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 29th Apr 2010 16:59 UTC
Editorial Holier-than-thou, an adjective, meaning "marked by an air of superior piety or morality". Everybody has moments in their life where they get into a "holier-than-thou" attitude, and I think Steve Jobs' open letter regarding Adobe, and Flash in particular, really fits the bill. There are three specific points I want to address to illustrate just how holier-than-thou, hypocritical, and misleading this letter really is.
Thread beginning with comment 421540
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by macUser
by wargum on Thu 29th Apr 2010 20:07 UTC in reply to "Comment by macUser"
wargum
Member since:
2006-12-15

You either want open standards web or you don't.

Apple's supportive nature for H.264 must be an illusion, then. Because it's not an open standard. You just can't be against Flash because it's proprietary and support H.264 with a sane mind. You either propose a web that's fully open or you opt for choice.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by macUser
by macUser on Thu 29th Apr 2010 20:33 in reply to "RE: Comment by macUser"
macUser Member since:
2006-12-15

"You either want open standards web or you don't.

Apple's supportive nature for H.264 must be an illusion, then. Because it's not an open standard. You just can't be against Flash because it's proprietary and support H.264 with a sane mind. You either propose a web that's fully open or you opt for choice.
"

I can't quite say that I am for or against H.264. Because things like video codecs are always going to change. But you are right... An open standard for video should be supported by Apple.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by macUser
by apoclypse on Thu 29th Apr 2010 20:58 in reply to "RE: Comment by macUser"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

Here is my thing. People deride Apple for supporting h.264 like they are the only ones who are pushing it, which is not true. Google had no issues moving all of Youtube over to h.264. Even Adobe uses h.264. In-fact most video that use flash are encoded in h.264. Apple just wants to take the middle man out, especially when that middle man happens to run like crap and is lazy.

The fact of the matter is that at this time there are no real alternatives to h.264 that are even remotely in the same quality spectrum. Ogg has too many issues and has been around for years before they even got their asses in gear. Will it be better in the future , maybe but Apple has been using h.264 for years and Ogg wasn't ready, other manufacturers are supporting the codec and have been able to hardware decode it for years as well. All this talk about h.264 but here are no alternatives. As much as you hate h.264 the fact of the matter is that its a spec that can be implemented by anyone in varying degrees and that makes it far more open that Flash which has only one company behind it, with one real implementation. How well they implement the runtime is solely up to them. Meanhwhile the best h.264 encoder on the market is an opensource one that anyone can freely download and use and that even most who use flash as the container format use to encode their videos.

For Thom to call Apple hypocrites because they back h.264 is disingenuous, naive and/or just shows plain ignorance on his part. As patent encumbered as the codec is its still far more open that Flash in every respect because it can be implemented anywhere by anyone, can you say the same for Flash? Patent encumbered doesn't mean closed, having to pay a license doesn't mean closed, it means you have to pay. The only real difference between using flash for video instead of HTML5 is that Adobe has already payed the license for h.264 for you. Half the world has already declared that h.264 is the codec for the internet age. Why use Flash when your video card and decode it directly. There is no difference, the majority have already declared it the winner. So Apple should just go with an inferior product that doesn't have hardware support and is not heavily used? Pray tell how was Apple supposed to do this 3 years ago when the iphone was released? How good is Google's support for hardware accelerated Ogg on Android?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by macUser
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 29th Apr 2010 21:01 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by macUser"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

because it can be implemented anywhere by anyone


...as long as you have the money to pay the hefty license fee, that is, which most project DO NOT have.

can you say the same for Flash?


Actually, yes. The specifications are all there. It's just that all non-Adobe implementations suck even more.

How good is Google's support for hardware accelerated Ogg on Android?


This good: http://www.osnews.com/story/23135/Google_Puts_Weight_Behind_Theora_...

Edited 2010-04-29 21:02 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3