What’s more, any such changes are irrelevant if made only on desktop Chrome - not on Google’s mobile browsers for Android - because authors typically do not encode twice (once in H.264, once in WebM), they instead write Flash fallback in an tag nested inside the tag. It is now March 2012 and the changes promised by Google and Adobe have not been made. These changes will occur in the next couple months….Ī followup post three days later confirmed that Chrome would rely on Flash fallback to play H.264 video. Though H.264 plays an important role in video, as our goal is to enable open innovation, support for the codec will be removed and our resources directed towards completely open codec technologies. Specifically, we are supporting the WebM (VP8) and Theora video codecs, and will consider adding support for other high-quality open codecs in the future. … we are changing Chrome’s HTML5 support to make it consistent with the codecs already supported by the open Chromium project. On January 11, 2011, Mike Jazayeri of Google blogged: Then in 2009 Google announced that it would acquire On2 ( completed in 2010), and Opera and Mozilla had a White Knight.Īt Google I/O in May 2010, Adobe announced that it would include VP8 (but not all of WebM?) support in an upcoming Flash release. We were told that we could never overcome the momentum behind H.264 (possibly true, but Mozilla was not about to give up and pay off the patent rentiers). We were told that we were rolling a large stone up a tall hill (and how!). We were called naive (no) idealists (yes). We carried the unencumbered HTML5 torch even when it burned our hands.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |