Quote:
Originally Posted by irishjayhawk
Dying codec aside, we're at the same point we've been over. HTML4 can serve h264 video. H.264 is not an HTML5 only deal. So your point is moot, but I don't expect you to get that on the eighth time around.
|
And once again you don't get the technologies involved at all. html4 CAN NOT SERVE VIDEO OF ANY KIND. HTML4 can offer a link to video that a browser plug-in will then attempt to play (Flash, Quicktime, etc etc).. that is not at all the same. PLEASE don't tell me what I don't get when you clearly have no clue here. Do you even know what the big difference with html4 vs html5 video is? (hint.. html4 video DOESN'T EXIST)
Quote:
Originally Posted by irishjayhawk
I frankly don't care if WebM takes hold. I'm sure Apple will support it because it's performance will be fine whereas flash is not.
Which is mostly a moot point because Apple will most likely support WebM. They aren't against open web technologies. They're against CLOSED web technologies. Also, that's a different stance that being a CLOSED business model.
|
As of right now, Jobs has taken a public stance AGAINST WebM.. so yes, they SHOULD adopt WebM but Jobs' ego may prevent them from doing so in time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by irishjayhawk
For what? Online games? Sure. Video? It's a draw, whether you like it or not.
I still don't see the huge draw for flash.
|
The huge draw is being able to see the vast majority of video out there... RIGHT NOW an iTouch Senior Citizen Edition can NOT. Big media companies are loathe to move to HTML5 because there is no DRM. Flash or a custom app fills this need for them. If you want to argue FOR a custom app for every video enabled website... that makes more sense (annoying and unsustainable as it may be).