Linked by David Adams on Thu 15th Sep 2011 07:08 UTC, submitted by kristoph
Windows Microsoft announced during the build conference, and Steve Sinofsky reiterated in a blog posting that: "For the web to move forward and for consumers to get the most out of touch-first browsing, the Metro style browser in Windows 8 is as HTML5-only as possible, and plug-in free. The experience that plug-ins provide today is not a good match with Metro style browsing and the modern HTML5 web." Sinfosky goes on explain why Microsoft will not include Flash and why it's no longer needed. It's as close as we'll get to an obituary for Flash. Update from Thom: Added a note in the 'read more'!
Thread beginning with comment 489791
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by shmerl
by Lennie on Thu 15th Sep 2011 23:45 UTC in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

They won't be supporting WebM.

They are one of the members of the organisation that created/owns H.264

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by lemur2 on Fri 16th Sep 2011 01:54 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

They won't be supporting WebM. They are one of the members of the organisation that created/owns H.264


It hardly matters if Microsoft don't support webM, because WebM supports Windows and IE9+.

http://www.webmproject.org/code/#webm-repositories

From a website developers point of view, HTML5/WebM will have far, far wider support than HTML5/H264 ever will.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by kristoph on Fri 16th Sep 2011 04:37 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

A user has to install this. Most user don't know what DirectShow or a codec are, how or why to install it, etc.

Consequently, for most people, a site that only supported webm would be 'broken'.

Realistically most sites will simply support both h264 and webm sources with h264 probably more prominent simply because browsers which don't support it support flash players which can then play h264.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by lucas_maximus on Fri 16th Sep 2011 17:39 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

As a web dev it actually easier just to say

"MP4 for iPads and IE9, and everything else can have flash".

I spoken with a few other web devs and they have told me they have done it exactly the same.

Also means I don't have to encode the same video 3 times. Only Twice ... saves disk space, and the crunching server has to do less.

Reply Parent Score: 2