or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Google drops support for H.264 video in Chrome to push WebM
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google drops support for H.264 video in Chrome to push WebM - Page 8

post #281 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post

Well at least theora tried in good faith to make sure they were not stepping on MPEG-LA's patents. MPEG-LA being douche bags about it doesn't help nor win any points in my book.

Well the whole point of the MPEG-LA is to protect the patents.


Quote:
Even MPEG said h.265 isn't going to be a big improvement, and will take even more processing power. Theora is set in stone just like webm is.

H.264 used to require more processing power than the average machine could provide, things always improve.

Theora and WebM being set in stone is not good, codecs should continue to improve.
post #282 of 335
Show me an Android phone that looks the way it does now before there was the iPhone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sourcer View Post

How is Android a rip of iOS?
post #283 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

so posters are either 'google shills' or 'deluded' unless they are siding with apple and the h.264?

so google is out to make more money and ads are the way they do it. flash does about 94% of ads so of course they like flash. apple apparently likes h.264 because they make lots of money off of google and others to license it. wow. but yet 'google' are the bad guys.
anyone who thinks apple is looking out for 'them' is just brainwashed. apple is out for filling its own coffers just like every other business. the difference is you have somehow convinced yourself that apple is more 'noble' than the rest. dream on, they ain't.

You almost got it right, but sort of backwards. Here's a correct summary:

Quote:
Posters siding with Google on this are either shills (from Google or Adobe), or deluded into thinking Google is doing this for any sort of "public good".

In other words, Google looks out for no one but itself, which isn't necessarily an aberration in the business world, and, yes, Apple is looking out for its interests, too.

The difference here is that what Apple has decided is in its best interests happens to coincide with what's in the public interest: high quality, open standards that are widely accepted and implemented, and which further serve the purpose of freeing the Internet from proprietary content traps -- namely Flash. (Again, WebM isn't going anywhere.)

Google, apparently, has decided that promoting these widely adopted open standards isn't giving it the leverage it wants in certain markets. So, they dump the open standard in favor of a move that essentially drives content providers back into the arms of closed, proprietary Flash. (Again, because, WebM isn't going to be adopted by anyone who matters.) Sure, lot's of "open" and "openness" thrown around in their statements as justification, but it's just a smokescreen to hide the fact that they have abandoned open. (Just as Android effectively undermines the highly desirable, from a consumers perspective, forcing of carriers to be more open.)

Talk of "open" and "openness" from Google is just so much self serving bullshit. All they are really interested in doing is undermining anything that they perceive may allow anyone to gain success, any such success they see as limiting their ability to exploit markets. The mentality at Google in regard to this sort of thing is actually quite similar to Microsoft, where they have always felt they had to dominate in anything remotely related to their business, because every successful company is perceived as a threat. The only difference is their respective methodologies.

The shills require no more discussion: we all know they are among us. The deluded open source advocates are actually a sad case. Many of them are highly idealistic people who believe they are working for a greater good. Unfortunately, their uncritical acceptance of Google as the company that can do no evil, because, after all, they are always talking about their strong support for open source leaves them open to exactly this sort of manipulation by Google. The reality is that Google doesn't give a shit about the open source community, except as a demographic they can easily rile up with a carefully worded press release.
post #284 of 335
No one is getting rich directly from H.264. There are about 40 or so companies and organizations contributing IP to it. This is not a major source of profit for any of them.

Simply because they receive payment for their contribution you make baseless claims to their over all motivations. Microsoft did not want to support HTML5 at all originally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

this article is interesting. why? because it states that Apple and Microsoft are a part of MPEG-LA and receive money for the licensing of h.264? how very sweet of them to support h.264 and proclaim google as 'rubbish'. so noble it makes me want to vomit.
post #285 of 335
BTW, where do I get my copy of Google's source code, all of it? I don't find it credible that they haven't used large amounts of open source code in their various products: Search, GMail, AdSense/Analytics, etc., etc.

So, shouldn't the source code for this stuff be made available when they provide the software to users, over the web? Or, is it OK for Google to freeload on the open source community? At the very least, there should be an audit -- I have a feeling they are violating open source licenses all over the place.
post #286 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

BTW, where do I get my copy of Google's source code, all of it? I don't find it credible that they haven't used large amounts of open source code in their various products: Search, GMail, AdSense/Analytics, etc., etc.

So, shouldn't the source code for this stuff be made available when they provide the software to users, over the web? Or, is it OK for Google to freeload on the open source community? At the very least, there should be an audit -- I have a feeling they are violating open source licenses all over the place.


Probably why they use Python for everything.

GPL-compatible doesnt mean that were distributing Python under the GPL. All Python licenses, unlike the GPL, let you distribute a modified version without making your changes open source. The GPL-compatible licenses make it possible to combine Python with other software that is released under the GPL; the others dont.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #287 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Probably why they use Python for everything.

GPL-compatible doesnt mean that were distributing Python under the GPL. All Python licenses, unlike the GPL, let you distribute a modified version without making your changes open source. The GPL-compatible licenses make it possible to combine Python with other software that is released under the GPL; the others dont.

So, they found a loophole that allows them to do an end-run around the GPL? But, still, I find it hard to believe all their development is in Python. I still think we need an audit of Google's code to see if they are in violation. I mean, after all, they are all about openness, they should welcome an audit.
post #288 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

No one is getting rich directly from H.264. There are about 40 or so companies and organizations contributing IP to it. This is not a major source of profit for any of them.

Simply because they receive payment for their contribution you make baseless claims to their over all motivations. Microsoft did not want to support HTML5 at all originally.

anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed or scum.

http://gigaom.com/video/nero-sues-mp...buse-of-power/
post #289 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed or scum.

So, are you here as a shill or just deluded?
post #290 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

So, are you here as a shill or just deluded?

glad you had the capability to see the tie in....

but i really am not for apple, ms, or google. i think they all stink. but i am for open code no matter who releases it.
post #291 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

glad you had the capability to see the tie in....

OK, we'll assume shill since you don't deny it. Glad we cleared that up.
post #292 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

this article is interesting. why? because it states that Apple and Microsoft are a part of MPEG-LA and receive money for the licensing of h.264? how very sweet of them to support h.264 and proclaim google as 'rubbish'. so noble it makes me want to vomit.

http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/We...elf-71647.html

So that means Samsung, Sony and others who make google products are scum as well?
post #293 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed or scum.

http://gigaom.com/video/nero-sues-mp...buse-of-power/

That means Google is scum because they back it heavily on Google Video and YouTube.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #294 of 335
I honestly don't know why anyone's gettign worked up. Opera browser works on my Iphone just fine.
post #295 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

So that means Samsung, Sony and others who make google products are scum as well?

Yep, everyone who isn't fully on the Google train when it leaves the station is scum. At least that's my understanding of what he said.
post #296 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That means Google is scum because they back it heavily on Google Video and YouTube.

I see what you did there.
post #297 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

OK, we'll assume shill since you don't deny it. Glad we cleared that up.


can i take more than 30 seconds to finish? i am trying to get my work done too...
post #298 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

"How can it be anti-competitive when [Microsoft] gives the [internet browser] away for free?” You may want to learn what anti-competitive means.



Why would they or anything adopt this when there is a better codec that is already adopted and invested?

Gruber sums it up nicely.

http://daringfireball.net/2011/01/pr..._vs_idealistic

Really the best argument is...they don't tell people weather or not to use .gif, .jpg, .png for images why should Google be trying to impose their will on people as it relates to video codecs. Gif is a known patent troll. Chrome should disable it.

I think given that size is in fact an issue I think its best for the developers and content providers to only have to serve up one codec for the web.

IE will be supporting WebM btw...

Also h.264 is far superior to WebM but you could argue that WebM will never get the attention it needs to become better than h.264 or at the very least on par with h.264 if Google didn't put it's name on the line here.
post #299 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed or scum.

http://gigaom.com/video/nero-sues-mp...buse-of-power/

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That means Google is scum because they back it heavily on Google Video and YouTube.

let me add this to it so as to not cause confusion for you unibrows

"anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed, scum or coerced"

so yes you could add google to that.
post #300 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist

anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed or scum.

http://gigaom.com/video/nero-sues-mp...buse-of-power/

That means Google is scum because they back it heavily on Google Video and YouTube.

That also means the majority, if not all, of these companies are also scum for backing H.264.

http://www.webmproject.org/about/supporters/
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

reread the post moron.

Cool it with the personal attacks.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #301 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Yep, everyone who isn't fully on the Google train when it leaves the station is scum. At least that's my understanding of what he said.

of course sony is scum. one of the worst. apple has become the new sony.
post #302 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

That also means the majority, if not all, of these companies are also scum for backing H.264.
http://www.webmproject.org/about/supporters/

Cool it with the personal attacks.

was i addressing you with that one? i don't think so.
post #303 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

of course sony is scum. one of the worst. apple has become the new sony.

So, everyone is scum, except the pure as the driven snow open source coders struggling to free mankind from the scourge of intellectual property?

And, if Google are scum, as well as everyone else, shouldn't we expect that they have an ulterior motive in backing WebM? Maybe, just maybe, they have an evil plan to pervert open source to their own ends... gasp!
post #304 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

I honestly don't know why anyone's gettign worked up. Opera browser works on my Iphone just fine.

because its fun to do when you are bored with work....ha.
post #305 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

was i addressing you with that one? i don't think so.

Who you are attacking is irrelevant to the point. If anonymouse was making personal attacks against you Id tell him to stop, too. Go on if you insist, but I warned you for your own good.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #306 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

So, everyone is scum, except the pure as the driven snow open source coders struggling to free mankind from the scourge of intellectual property?

And, if Google are scum, as well as everyone else, shouldn't we expect that they have an ulterior motive in backing WebM? Maybe, just maybe, they have an evil plan to pervert open source to their own ends... gasp!

yes, pretty much everyone is scum except for the open source coders.
post #307 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Who you are attacking is irrelevant to the point. If anonymouse was making personal attacks against you Id tell him to stop, too. Go on if you insist, but I warned you for your own good.

oh. okay, so the 'tone' of ones post can be as slimy as you wish just don't use any exact derogatory word....

where were you when i objected to the use of 'freetard' and was told 'i shouldn't take it personally as it wasn't directed at me'? guess you weren't patrolling the streets that day.

removed the objectionable word from the post.
post #308 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Who you are attacking is irrelevant to the point. If anonymouse was making personal attacks against you Id tell him to stop, too. Go on if you insist, but I warned you for your own good.

Be gentle with the innocent open source accolyte, he's on a mission from god.
post #309 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Be gentle with the innocent open source accolyte, he's on a mission from god.

i couldn't be. god is just a made up fairy tale to frighten the sheep of the world.
post #310 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

oh. okay, so the 'tone' of ones post can be as slimy as you wish just don't use any exact derogatory word....

where were you when i objected to the use of 'freetard' and was told 'i shouldn't take it personally as it wasn't directed at me'? guess you weren't patrolling the streets that day.

removed the objectionable word from the post.

I didn’t see any freetard comment.

Anyway, according to the rules of the forum you can’t attack the person. You can go after their ideas. for instance, “Your idea is stupid” is okay, but “You are stupid” is not okay

While that might save you from being banned from the site it doesn’t make a foundation for a sound argument. Remember that the posters make up a small percentage of the total readers. You can say you don’t care what anyone thinks, but that isn’t true or you won’t be making an argument for your case in the first place.

You could further make your argument sound better by making sure an opinion is stated as such. For instance, “I think your idea is stupid.” You can further make your argument better by removing pejorative terms like stupid that put your opponent on the defensive and replace it with something less harsh and then explaining why you think so. “I think your idea doesn’t work. Here’s why…”


PS: Disparaging remarks about religion (and politics) also don’t help.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #311 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

i couldn't be. god is just a made up fairy tale to frighten the sheep of the world.

I think god is supposed to be Mr. Stallman.
post #312 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

i couldn't be. god is just a made up fairy tale to frighten the sheep of the world.

I was speaking metaphorically. But, we all worship something, whether we realize it or not.
post #313 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I didn’t see any freetard comment.

Anyway, according to the rules of the forum you can’t attack the person. You can go after their ideas. for instance, “Your idea is stupid” is okay, but “You are stupid” is not okay

While that might save you from being banned from the site it doesn’t make a foundation for a sound argument. Remember that the posters make up a small percentage of the total readers. You can say you don’t care what anyone thinks, but that isn’t true or you won’t be making an argument for your case in the first place.

You could further make your argument sound better by making sure an opinion is stated as such. For instance, “I think your idea is stupid.” You can further make your argument better by removing pejorative terms like stupid that put your opponent on the defensive and replace it with something less harsh and then explaining why you think so. “I think your idea doesn’t work. Here’s why…”


PS: Disparaging remarks about religion (and politics) also don’t help.

hmm, or i could read Weston's little book....nah.
are disparaging remarks about santa claus okay?
post #314 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post

I think god is supposed to be Mr. Stallman.

i like Woz, Wittgenstein, Peirce, Polya, Turing, Von Neumann, Quine, Weinberg.
oh and i would be okay with Bill Joy being a demi-god

those could be called gods and i wouldn't object ha.
post #315 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I was speaking metaphorically. But, we all worship something, whether we realize it or not.

profound.
post #316 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

well unless a lawsuit stops webm prepare to install the codecs on your safari and ie browser. so you guys stick with your DC and the rest of the world will go with AC.
all that matters is the legality of it all. otherwise rest in peace h.264
have a banana, chimp.

No professional tools, not much use. Kinda hard to kill H.264 when there is only a promise and an absolute disaster of a WebM tech spec.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #317 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro View Post

No professional tools, not much use. Kinda hard to kill H.264 when there is only a promise and an absolute disaster of a WebM tech spec.

Yes, but, remember, this isn't really about promoting WebM. Even Google knows that isn't going anywhere. It's about propping up Flash, which won't kill H.264 either, since it depends on it. Basically, Google has decided it's in its best interest to try to sabotage direct HTML video.
post #318 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Google, apparently, has decided that promoting these widely adopted open standards isn't giving it the leverage it wants in certain markets. So, they dump the open standard in favor of a move that essentially drives content providers back into the arms of closed, proprietary Flash.

Because they have seen the light of the currently completely uncontrolled use of Flash cookies. Those are wide open to really evil uses with absolutely no adequate oversight. Most people don't even know they exist or how much powerful they are when used "properly" from the trackers point of view. They are an advertisers wet dream compared to cookies just being a webmasters dream.
.
Reply
.
Reply
post #319 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Yes, but, remember, this isn't really about promoting WebM. Even Google knows that isn't going anywhere. It's about propping up Flash, which won't kill H.264 either, since it depends on it. Basically, Google has decided it's in its best interest to try to sabotage direct HTML video.

None of that really matters unless Google takes away H.264 from YouTube, then the DOJ will have to get involved. Not a likely scenario. The whole thing is a non-issue.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #320 of 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

I see what you did there.

Yes, it was nicely played and shows just how poorly though-out every one of screamingfist's arguments are. The amusing part is he still doesn't understand how completely he destroys his own arguments. He probably still won't and he'll just get more frustrated and do an even better job now.
.
Reply
.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Google drops support for H.264 video in Chrome to push WebM