... 3) Mozilla isn't doing so great with Firefox engine speeds and it's pretty hard to only have Opera in your corner with Ogg Theora support when every major player from HW decoders to OSes to browsers to websites are supporting H.264 because it's the best option. They're in a tough spot they can't win. Their only savior right now looks to be Google's VP8, but who know if that will be widely adopted.
Mozilla will find themselves quickly irrelevant if they don't adopt H.264. Maybe they can be useful as a dedicated Wikipedia reader, assuming Wikepedia don't dump Ogg Theora because no one can view it in the browsers they use.
Hey Quado....looks like it's working! May I change my 'signature' now from 'Help Kill Flash....' to something like, 'McDonald's use's too much 'Poison,' ie., SALT or Coca-Cola uses too much 'Poison,' ie., SUGAR?'
Yes! PDFs in Safari suck ass, so this will be good news if it sticks.
Of course Scribd is also facing a huge class-action for massive copyright infringement...
They tried to jump the gun on Google's identical service by just kind of forgetting about the legal ramifications of earning profit by distributing millions of copyrighted works without permission. Oops!
Haha I never heard about that case. For years Scribd has been scraping content made by others and dumping it onto their site and locking it down, and doing the web a great disservice. As soon as you'd see content hosted on Scribd... everyone just groans as it's always awful to work with.
Anything that helps it users free up content . ... if they're genuine about it .... is a good move. If they do any kind of copy protection on the stuff they host, they should just shoot themselves in the foot now and be done with it.
:sigh: HTML5's video tag currently supports H.264/MPEG-4 AVC AND Ogg Theroa, the latter is used by Firefox and Opera, but any can be used. This article has nothing to do with the HTML5 video tag.
Right?! Excellent comparison. That had nearly complete penetration, too. Look where they are now. Of course, Flash has many more uses than RealPlayer and HTML5 is still very far from replacing many aspects of Flash. But for video, audio and other simpler aspects it's on the way out, which comprising the majority of Flash uses on the web.
The new Chrome 5 Beta scores 142 out of 160.
Picking up momentum. The biggest thing I see missing from the HTML5 video option is full screen. Once modern browsers are updated with that ability I think we'll see a pretty jump in that as the default option for those desktop browsers.
realplayer, never had close to the market penetration flash had.
And realplayer, was primarily, a video player. Video capabilities, was something flash added years later long after it had market dominance in the high 90s.
It's amazing the level of noise one sees generated from the "I hate flash" crowd. If ever a balanced debate ever happened, I'd be very surprised.
realplayer, never had close to the market penetration flash had.
And realplayer, was primarily, a video player. Video capabilities, was something flash added years later long after it had market dominance in the high 90s.
It's amazing the level of noise one sees generated from the "I hate flash" crowd. If ever a balanced debate ever happened, I'd be very surprised.
You're responding to a post about HTML5's video tag being a more efficient option over Flash to stream video, not Flash as a whole. You point out that Flash does other things and then infer Flash is the best option for streaming video in the future (assuming we are staying on track with the post you are replying). Finally, you make snide comments and then claim that a balanced debate on Flash hasn't happened. Hmm...
Perhaps you should reread this thread an others about Flash and how various aspects of open standards are being set up chip away at Flash. There are a lot more in the "I blindly love Flash" camp than in the "I hate Flash" camp; most of us see very real benefits that the HTML5 video tag has brought to the table. Mark my words, Flash's marketshare for streaming video will not be increasing.
You're responding to a post about HTML5's video tag being a more efficient option over Flash to stream video, not Flash as a whole. You point out that Flash does other things and then infer Flash is the best option for streaming video in the future (assuming we are staying on track with the post you are replying). Finally, you make snide comments and then claim that a balanced debate on Flash hasn't happened. Hmm...
Perhaps you should reread this thread an others about Flash and how various aspects of open standards are being set up chip away at Flash. There are a lot more in the "I blindly love Flash" camp than in the "I hate Flash" camp; most of us see very real benefits that the HTML5 video tag has brought to the table. Mark my words, Flash's marketshare for streaming video will not be increasing.
actually, I'm responding to the sensationalist title, Scibd scrapping flash and betting the company on HTML5. No where does it make the distinction that it's only video there, and if you read the whole thread, it's once again, like most of these threads, a love in for more misinformation of flash haters.
That and comparing flash, to realplayer. A silly comparison. Does this make sense?
actually, I'm responding to the sensationalist title, Scibd scrapping flash and betting the company on HTML5. No where does it make the distinction that it's only video there, and if you read the whole thread, it's once again, like most of these threads, a love in for more misinformation of flash haters.
That and comparing flash, to realplayer. A silly comparison. Does this make sense?
1) No one said the title had anything to do with video. That's all you!
2) You're getting your panties all bound up over a funny comment. If we dissect everything we'll find differences so arguing with you about the hilarious and apropos comparison between RealPlayer and Flash is pretty much pointless unless you choose to be fair and balanced.
3) Sensationalism is part of journalism. It provokes interest. You seem to be inferring that Scribd isn't going to be converting to open standards. If that is the case then by all means post some evidence to the contrary so we can read it, don't just make derisive remarks, actually form an argument as to why it's not the case.
1) No one said the title had anything to do with video. That's all you!
2) You're getting your panties all bound up over a funny comment. If we dissect everything we'll find differences so arguing with you about the hilarious and apropos comparison between RealPlayer and Flash is pretty much pointless unless you choose to be fair and balanced.
3) Sensationalism is part of journalism. It provokes interest. You seem to be inferring that Scribd isn't going to be converting to open standards. If that is the case then by all means post some evidence to the contrary so we can read it, don't just make derisive remarks, actually form an argument as to why it's not the case.
what? Ok, merry-go-round, right. I get it.
I siad, I responded to the sensationalist title, which indeed said nothing of video. Thanks for pointing this out...
and where did I say anything, of open standards?
I merely addressed the silly notion that you can compare flash to realplayer. You're going around in circles.
Comments
... 3) Mozilla isn't doing so great with Firefox engine speeds and it's pretty hard to only have Opera in your corner with Ogg Theora support when every major player from HW decoders to OSes to browsers to websites are supporting H.264 because it's the best option. They're in a tough spot they can't win. Their only savior right now looks to be Google's VP8, but who know if that will be widely adopted.
Mozilla will find themselves quickly irrelevant if they don't adopt H.264. Maybe they can be useful as a dedicated Wikipedia reader, assuming Wikepedia don't dump Ogg Theora because no one can view it in the browsers they use.
Hey Quado....looks like it's working! May I change my 'signature' now from 'Help Kill Flash....' to something like, 'McDonald's use's too much 'Poison,' ie., SALT or Coca-Cola uses too much 'Poison,' ie., SUGAR?'
uhm, no.
Yes! PDFs in Safari suck ass, so this will be good news if it sticks.
Of course Scribd is also facing a huge class-action for massive copyright infringement...
They tried to jump the gun on Google's identical service by just kind of forgetting about the legal ramifications of earning profit by distributing millions of copyrighted works without permission. Oops!
Haha I never heard about that case. For years Scribd has been scraping content made by others and dumping it onto their site and locking it down, and doing the web a great disservice. As soon as you'd see content hosted on Scribd... everyone just groans as it's always awful to work with.
Anything that helps it users free up content . ... if they're genuine about it .... is a good move. If they do any kind of copy protection on the stuff they host, they should just shoot themselves in the foot now and be done with it.
:sigh: HTML5's video tag currently supports H.264/MPEG-4 AVC AND Ogg Theroa, the latter is used by Firefox and Opera, but any can be used. This article has nothing to do with the HTML5 video tag.
Right?! Excellent comparison. That had nearly complete penetration, too. Look where they are now. Of course, Flash has many more uses than RealPlayer and HTML5 is still very far from replacing many aspects of Flash. But for video, audio and other simpler aspects it's on the way out, which comprising the majority of Flash uses on the web.
The new Chrome 5 Beta scores 142 out of 160.
Picking up momentum. The biggest thing I see missing from the HTML5 video option is full screen. Once modern browsers are updated with that ability I think we'll see a pretty jump in that as the default option for those desktop browsers.
realplayer, never had close to the market penetration flash had.
And realplayer, was primarily, a video player. Video capabilities, was something flash added years later long after it had market dominance in the high 90s.
It's amazing the level of noise one sees generated from the "I hate flash" crowd. If ever a balanced debate ever happened, I'd be very surprised.
realplayer, never had close to the market penetration flash had.
And realplayer, was primarily, a video player. Video capabilities, was something flash added years later long after it had market dominance in the high 90s.
It's amazing the level of noise one sees generated from the "I hate flash" crowd. If ever a balanced debate ever happened, I'd be very surprised.
You're responding to a post about HTML5's video tag being a more efficient option over Flash to stream video, not Flash as a whole. You point out that Flash does other things and then infer Flash is the best option for streaming video in the future (assuming we are staying on track with the post you are replying). Finally, you make snide comments and then claim that a balanced debate on Flash hasn't happened. Hmm...
Perhaps you should reread this thread an others about Flash and how various aspects of open standards are being set up chip away at Flash. There are a lot more in the "I blindly love Flash" camp than in the "I hate Flash" camp; most of us see very real benefits that the HTML5 video tag has brought to the table. Mark my words, Flash's marketshare for streaming video will not be increasing.
You're responding to a post about HTML5's video tag being a more efficient option over Flash to stream video, not Flash as a whole. You point out that Flash does other things and then infer Flash is the best option for streaming video in the future (assuming we are staying on track with the post you are replying). Finally, you make snide comments and then claim that a balanced debate on Flash hasn't happened. Hmm...
Perhaps you should reread this thread an others about Flash and how various aspects of open standards are being set up chip away at Flash. There are a lot more in the "I blindly love Flash" camp than in the "I hate Flash" camp; most of us see very real benefits that the HTML5 video tag has brought to the table. Mark my words, Flash's marketshare for streaming video will not be increasing.
actually, I'm responding to the sensationalist title, Scibd scrapping flash and betting the company on HTML5. No where does it make the distinction that it's only video there, and if you read the whole thread, it's once again, like most of these threads, a love in for more misinformation of flash haters.
That and comparing flash, to realplayer. A silly comparison. Does this make sense?
actually, I'm responding to the sensationalist title, Scibd scrapping flash and betting the company on HTML5. No where does it make the distinction that it's only video there, and if you read the whole thread, it's once again, like most of these threads, a love in for more misinformation of flash haters.
That and comparing flash, to realplayer. A silly comparison. Does this make sense?
1) No one said the title had anything to do with video. That's all you!
2) You're getting your panties all bound up over a funny comment. If we dissect everything we'll find differences so arguing with you about the hilarious and apropos comparison between RealPlayer and Flash is pretty much pointless unless you choose to be fair and balanced.
3) Sensationalism is part of journalism. It provokes interest. You seem to be inferring that Scribd isn't going to be converting to open standards. If that is the case then by all means post some evidence to the contrary so we can read it, don't just make derisive remarks, actually form an argument as to why it's not the case.
1) No one said the title had anything to do with video. That's all you!
2) You're getting your panties all bound up over a funny comment. If we dissect everything we'll find differences so arguing with you about the hilarious and apropos comparison between RealPlayer and Flash is pretty much pointless unless you choose to be fair and balanced.
3) Sensationalism is part of journalism. It provokes interest. You seem to be inferring that Scribd isn't going to be converting to open standards. If that is the case then by all means post some evidence to the contrary so we can read it, don't just make derisive remarks, actually form an argument as to why it's not the case.
what? Ok, merry-go-round, right. I get it.
I siad, I responded to the sensationalist title, which indeed said nothing of video. Thanks for pointing this out...
and where did I say anything, of open standards?
I merely addressed the silly notion that you can compare flash to realplayer. You're going around in circles.