![]() ![]() As far as HTML5 is concerned, I expect MS to play nice – they need IE9 to keep them relevant in the browser space, which won’t happen if they go against a united opposition. Microsoft no longer have the dominance to dictate standards to the content providers – particularly given that Google is one of those providers. Webkit isn’t even the smallest or most memory efficient rendering engine out there, but it has support from a company that actively develops it and its opensource.įact 1) MS needs to keep its browser in competetion.Īgreed. 3rd party adoption is precisely because a huge company like Apple is actively developing the engine and throwing their resources behind it. If the LGPL was an issue for Apple they wouldn’t have used it in the first place. There are a lot of instances where Apple could have gone with the more closed solution and instead opted for the more open solution. They chose KHTML because they saw some merit in the technology and chose to go with it despite it being LGPL. Apple could have created their own web engine if they chose to and/or licensed a commercial one. ![]() It doesn’t make Apple open but your Logic is flawed. if it was closed, it wasnt going to have any success. They could not have changed the license.Ģ) whole webkit’s success was because of wider adoption of it by third parties. Having a few opensource projects doesnt make Apple ‘open’.Īlso, Webkit, the most-mentioned apple foss project, is foss for the following reasons:ġ) Its a fork of khtml which is LGPL. It will likely be up to a third party or Apple itself to implement support for VP8 in QuickTime. While Google announced plugins for Gstreamer, and has already made the DirectShow filters available, there’s no peep yet about QuickTime plugins (Safari’s video falls back on whatever QuickTime can decode). This leaves only Apple’s Safari out of the loop. This puts support for VP8/WebM in Internet Explorer 9 on the same level as support for H264, with the only caveat being that Windows ships with H264 out of the box, whereas support for VP8/WebM has to be installed separately by the user. “In its HTML5 support, IE9 will support playback of H.264 video as well as VP8 video when the user has installed a VP8 codec on Windows,” writes Dean Hachamovitch, General Manager, Internet Explorer. Most likely pressured by the prospect of a VP8/WebM-only YouTube, Microsoft has now given in. It would be the only video codec supported by Internet Explorer 9, no matter which codecs the user had installed. When the company detailed its HTML5 video support, the company was very adamant in that it would go all-in on H264. ![]() This is a major shift from what Microsoft said before about HTML5 video in Internet Explorer 9. ![]() Update III: The H264 supporters’ hardware argument for mobile is sounding moot too, since ARM explains on its blog that mobile devices with Cortex-A8 and Snapdragon processors “will be able to take advantage of WebM” through those chips’ NEON SIMD engine. Support for Android browsers is underway too. Update II: Zencoder’s side project, video.js, offers a player that can fallback between h.264, OGG and VP8 on most browsers. Microsoft has just announced it will support VP8 in HTML5 video in Internet Explorer 9, but only if the user has the DirectShow filter installed. This warrants a new post as far as I’m concerned, mostly because the original post is getting buried in updates and will soon drop below the fold. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |