Re: video codecs in HTML 5
Sam Morris schrieb:
> It's probably more accurate to say that no matter what the standard says,
> Microsoft will ignore it and only implement Windows Media formats, which
> everyone will use, and we'll be screwed. :(
Microsoft is not part of WHATWG. Having a free video format in browsers
like Firefox and Opera (or Safari, if that's what you like) is a good
thing no matter what.
Once Microsoft implements <video> (that may take a long time, they're
not really fast adopting new standards that are not their own) there may
be enough content out there to make them look not so clever if they
don't support the baseline format that is long since in use (well, that
didn't stop Microsoft in the past, though)
Anyway, even if Microsoft joins the party with "Windows Media only" the
free software community has a common interchange format in place for
their own web-video needs (how many of you use the Microsoft Internet
Explorer?).
Taken that e.g. Mozilla and the KHTML team aren't able to build browsers
with integrated (that's what <video> is for: Video without plugins)
MPEG4 support without the appended patent licenses restricting the
freedom of distribution it's worth to try to get a free format into as
many browsers as possible.
Here in Germany (according to what stats you trust) the Mozilla based
browsers have a market share beyond 30%. If Mozilla happens to support a
free format but Microsoft decides to use Windows Media content providers
most likely need to provide a free codec version of their content anyway
- and that'd mean Debian users can enjoy at least some of the content.
No matter what: Having Mozilla and Opera support a free format is good
in any case. If something proprietary gets recommended Debian can only
lose. If a free format is in place Debian users can at least watch
parts of the content no matter what Microsoft does.
Maik Merten
Reply to: