Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Sep 2010 21:49 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Graphics, User Interfaces "Adobe Flash Player 'Square' is a preview release that enables native 64-bit support on Linux, Mac OS, and Windows operating systems, as well as enhanced support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 beta. We have made this preview available so that users can test existing content and new platforms for compatibility and stability."
Thread beginning with comment 441383
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

" HTML5/WebM will be supported on Firefox, Chrome, Opera and also on IE9 (if the user installs a suitable WebM codec, which would doubtless be made available by Google). Being the most widely supported, this could therefore become the default for delivery of video over the web.
I'm all for HTML5 websites since they will encourage a movement away from older browsers and Flash ads but video delivery is still a problem because of DRM. Dealing with Flash brings to mind the expression very slowly catchy monkey. You'd have to get the install base of HTML5 comparable to Flash before even proposing it as an alternative to content producers like Hulu. When it comes to video there aren't enough advantages to make up for the low install base. However HTML5 has a significant advantage over Flash when it comes to website interfaces. Not only does HTML5 work on mobiles but the early interactive demos of HTML5 feel damn smooth in comparison to Flash. Exclusive content is what will push HTML5 adoption. "

The vast majority of video on the web is not DRM protected ... it comes largely from sources such as people's own video cameras and phones.

In any event, commercial interests (i.e. videos for rent) such as Hulu represent only a tiny portion of the "video over the web" market. Such interests do not set the agenda. If Hulu want to deliver video for rent via DRM, they can simply provide their own separate client player software for the purpose.

"Exclusive content" is a niche market that won't IMO have much influence at all in HTML5 adoption. DRM is a horribly borked concept anyway. BTW, apparently the master HDCP key may have been revealed recently, were you aware?.
http://www.osnews.com/story/23806/HDCP_Master_Key_May_Have_Leaked

http://www.osnews.com/permalink?441318
It's time the content industry starts looking at optimum curves for their pricing.


Now there is a thought. If video disks and downloads were say a quarter or less of their current price and had no DRM, and downloads could be delivered to and played on any device the users wanted, then digital videos would probably sell like hotcakes and no-one would bother with piracy.

Edited 2010-09-16 23:08 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26


The vast majority of video on the web is not DRM protected ... it comes largely from sources such as people's own video cameras and phones.

So what? Just because there are 10 million movies of guys getting kicked in the nuts does not change the fact that people will keep installing Flash to watch their favorite shows.


If Hulu want to deliver video for rent via DRM, they can simply provide their own separate client player software for the purpose.

They'll just keep using Flash which keeps the install base going which in turn makes it more attractive for other uses.


"Exclusive content" is a niche market that won't IMO have much influence at all in HTML5 adoption. DRM is a horribly borked concept anyway. BTW, apparently the master HDCP key may have been revealed recently, were you aware?.


I don't think you understand what I meant. HTML5 will get adopted by exclusive content as in websites and games that require HTML5. Saying "DRM Sucks" isn't an argument against the use of Flash. Flash has the higher install base and videos can't be saved with a right click.


If video disks and downloads were say a quarter or less of their current price and had no DRM, and downloads could be delivered to and played on any device the users wanted, then digital videos would probably sell like hotcakes and no-one would bother with piracy.

We can talk all day about the economics of video production but Hulu and other media companies will keep using Flash because it has the higher install base and offers DRM. You're pissing in the wind here.

If you are serious about HTML5 adoption then you should start working on some demos or templates. There isn't currently a strong incentive for media companies to adopt HTML5 and you can't change that.

Look I hate Flash too but I also know that companies find it useful and most people don't mind installing it. Work on the install base first. Create some demos or templates, show web designers what it is capable of.

Reply Parent Score: 3

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

There isn't currently a strong incentive for media companies to adopt HTML5 and you can't change that.


Absence of royalties is a strong incentive for hardware/software companies to adopt WebM/HTML5. Coming shortly, the majority of new releases of web browsers will support it. Once these products hit the market in the near future, near-universal support plus no royalties to pay will bring support from other parties soon enough.

Look I hate Flash too but I also know that companies find it useful and most people don't mind installing it.


Granted. Flash will be around for some time yet (and indeed I have begrudingly installed it myself), but it is proprietary, available in full only from a sole source supplier (major weakness there), and difficult to accomodate on low power devices. When the HTML5/WebM/CSS/SVG/Canvas/ECMAscript vs Flash battle starts in earnest, Flash will begin to wane soon enough.

Work on the install base first. Create some demos or templates, show web designers what it is capable of.


This will come soon enough. There will be a rash of sites pop up as soon as the upcoming round of new releases of major browsers is out. They will all support the new tech (Safari being the only holdout, and even then only the WebM codec will be missing. At first, Safari will only support HTML5/H264/CSS/SVG/Canvas/ECMAscript).

Adobe have promised support for the webM codec in Flash also.
http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplatform/2010/05/adobe_support_for_vp8....

So even sites using Flash won't be an impediment to WebM. Safari won't be able to hold out for long in not offering WebM, IMO.

BTW ... I can make it so that I can click on a Flash video and save it to disk. It is also possible to suppress the ability to right-click on a HTML5/WebM video and save it to disk.

Reply Parent Score: 2