Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Nov 2012 22:12 UTC
Internet Explorer "In Windows 8, we reimagined the browser with IE10. We designed and built IE10 to be the best way to experience the Web on Windows. With the IE10 Release Preview for Windows 7 consumers can now enjoy a fast and fluid Web with the updated IE10 engine on their Windows 7 devices. The release preview of IE10 on Windows 7 is available for download today."
Thread beginning with comment 542642
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: IE10 still disappointing
by kaiwai on Thu 15th Nov 2012 14:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: IE10 still disappointing"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes and we'd all love to live in a world where unicorns crap jelly beans, all the southern states have gay marriage and I have a boyfriend but unfortunately we live in reality and what we have is the best of the worse. There is a reason why h264/AAC is chosen and all the conspiracy theories in the world won't change the fact that it is chosen because it is best fit for the mixture of narrow and wide band connections that exist - from broadband mobile through to cable internet, from ADSL2+ to fibre optic.

Secondly, I provided a link to the WebM plugin for Media Foundation which would simply be an extra download for someone wanting to use said format. When it comes to Apple, why should they step out of what is pretty much an industry standard? pretty much all the large companies have agreed on it so why go against the grain? what's in it for them?

Reply Parent Score: 3

westlake Member since:
2010-01-07

There is a reason why h264/AAC is chosen and all the conspiracy theories in the world won't change the fact that it is chosen because it is best fit for the mixture of narrow and wide band connections that exist - from broadband mobile through to cable internet, from ADSL2+ to fibre optic.


I have the plug-in for IE --- which works just fine with IE 10.

But finding a WebM video in the wild is quite the challenge. There doesn't seem to be anything out there but a transcode for YouTube.

There seems to be no such thing as a hardware product --- amateur or pro --- that supports WebM natively. While H.264 hardware is available for every video application you could name.

The final problem is HEVC. The next-generation proprietary codec. There are huge potential savings in bandwidth here for all users and video providers.

Reply Parent Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

There seems to be no such thing as a hardware product --- amateur or pro --- that supports WebM natively.


I beg to differ.

http://blog.webmproject.org/

Under the heading: "Sixth Generation VP8 Hardware Accelerators Released"

I quote: "The VP8 hardware cores have now been licensed to over 80 chip companies, and both the decoder and encoder are in mass production from a number of partners."

Every single Android device since Android 2.3 Gingerbread supports VP8 & WebM. Every single Android device since Android 4 Ice Cream Sandwich supports WebM decoding in hardware.

Android activations now number over 1.3 million per day. There are now over 500 million Android devices (not all of them are Android 2.3 or better, I grant you, but most of them are).

http://androidandme.com/2012/09/news/android-activations-now-at-1-3...

Every new video uploaded to Youtube is encoded to WebM. Over 99% of videos viewed can be viewed as WebM.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/20/youtube-starts-transcoding-all-n...

Google's entire infrastructure, obviously, supports WebM. If one chooses HTML5/WebM for YouTube, one now effectively suffers no penalty for doing so.

Ubuntu is heading towards 9% of the PC market. Ubuntu supports WebM.

http://www.thevarguy.com/2012/11/06/open-source-ubuntu-os-makes-str...

You are a long, long way behind the times.

Edited 2012-11-16 10:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: IE10 still disappointing
by helf on Thu 15th Nov 2012 20:22 in reply to "RE[3]: IE10 still disappointing"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

Ha! We might end up with gay marriage at some point. The view of "gays" down here is getting pretty good believe it or not and the older generations are dying off.

I live in Alabama and couldn't give a shit, so I always vote "yes" to anything relating to it. Because the limitation is so pointless and ridiculous.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

There is a reason why h264/AAC is chosen and all the conspiracy theories in the world won't change the fact that it is chosen because it is best fit for the mixture of narrow and wide band connections that exist - from broadband mobile through to cable internet, from ADSL2+ to fibre optic.

It's not a matter of quality, it's a matter of inertia.

H.264 is around because the various companies that were involved in the matter decided to support it at a time where the only alternative was Theora (which, indeed, made sense). And AAC went along the way because it is comes for free with H.264 video support.

Changing to any other codec will be painful now, because no one took the time to make a proper codec-agnostic video decoding infrastructure in web browsers and SoCs. Hacking away hard-coded support for one codec is simply faster and cheaper. Thus, I am ready to bet that by the time HEVC is around, even if it is as good as the MPEG-LA claims it to be, it will encounter exactly the same issues as WebM today.

If audio and video quality was truly an issue, everyone would be using Vimeo over Youtube ;)

Edited 2012-11-16 07:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2