Author Topic: Open Video on a more Open Internet (Read 4780 times)

dankles · « **on:** June 03, 2009, 01:46:07 PM »

Maybe I'm a little slow, but I just found out that the new firefox 3.5 will include the "open Ogg Theora format" which plays natively on the browser in the new HTML5 <video> <audio> tags. Meaning that you don't have to have any media players or addons installed to be able to play any video/audio in this format.

One site that is working to move to this new specification is Dailymotion:
http://blog.dailymotion.com/2009/05/27/watch-videowithout-flash/

I don't know if I like the idea of converting from 'lossy codec' to 'lossy codec', however it's still a big win for the Free Software Community. I can picture Richard Stallman watching his first 'community' online video ever lol (e.g. Youtube type stuff or in this case dailymotion).

Also, anything on http://www.wikimedia.org/ will work out of the box in the new firefox.

Anyways, I thought it was cool especially since I prefer free software over anything else. And I hope you think it's cool too.

EDIT July 6:
Codec debate for the HTML 5 video element:
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/07/decoding-the-html-5-video-codec-debate.ars

Looks like all the major browsers minus IE will have native codec support for the HTML5 <video> tag. The only problem is that they can't agree on which codec will be supported. It is basically split between two: Ogg Theora and H.264.

bloody000 · « **Reply #1 on:** June 03, 2009, 03:46:38 PM »

gay. more useless shit that nobody cares.

Arveene · « **Reply #2 on:** June 03, 2009, 03:52:15 PM »

Quote from: bloody000 on June 03, 2009, 03:46:38 PM

gay. more useless shit that nobody cares.

That's great that YOU don't care about it. If you don't have anything constructive to say, don't post. Also, your sig is too large.

For anyone who supports/uses free software, it's great news.

dankles · « **Reply #3 on:** June 03, 2009, 04:26:26 PM »

It's a great step towards broadening open internet standards. Which is helpful to both developers and customers. The companies that refuse open standards do so only to promote their own agenda and revenue while leaving the customer on the back seat.
Take a look at IE on acid3 tests: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3#Desktop_browsers
Do you see what I mean? That's known as Anti-competitive.

That said, I'm not against corporations making money. Only against them making money at the expense of molesting the internet and it's users.

Is it wrong for me to think that way?

Natheria · « **Reply #4 on:** June 03, 2009, 04:54:49 PM »

I for one find this news very heartening, and from Mozilla no less! This is definitely a huge leap forward for open source codecs when they get this kind of support. No doubt Richard Stallman is very happy as well.

And in my experience Dankles, there's always one in every crowd that thinks it's wrong for you to think "that way".

dankles · « **Reply #5 on:** June 03, 2009, 04:58:34 PM »

Quote from: Natheria on June 03, 2009, 04:54:49 PM

And in my experience Dankles, there's always one in every crowd that thinks it's wrong for you to think "that way".

hehe yeah... I just hope it won't turn into a serious flame war (though my guns are locked and loaded if it does evolve into that

)

iindigo · « **Reply #6 on:** June 03, 2009, 05:01:38 PM »

Doesn't hurt my feelings, flash is a hog anyway and really isn't the best solution for web video.

Now Apple just needs to get this into Safari/WebKit (they already have the HTML5 media tags implemented, just need the ogg theora half).

dankles · « **Reply #7 on:** June 03, 2009, 05:14:44 PM »

Quote from: iindigo on June 03, 2009, 05:01:38 PM

Doesn't hurt my feelings, flash is a hog anyway and really isn't the best solution for web video.

Now Apple just needs to get this into Safari/WebKit (they already have the HTML5 media tags implemented, just need the ogg theora half).

From what I hear I think that it's on the way. Though what really needs to happen is for apple to cross Safari over to linux so I can start using it :'(

EDIT:
Never mind. It was not theora... o well... Though I certainly see apple supporting theora in their brower sooner than MS would

iindigo · « **Reply #8 on:** June 03, 2009, 05:20:30 PM »

Quote from: dankles on June 03, 2009, 05:14:44 PM

Quote from: iindigo on June 03, 2009, 05:01:38 PM
Doesn't hurt my feelings, flash is a hog anyway and really isn't the best solution for web video.

Now Apple just needs to get this into Safari/WebKit (they already have the HTML5 media tags implemented, just need the ogg theora half).

From what I hear I think that it's on the way. Though what really needs to happen is for apple to cross Safari over to linux so I can start using it :'(

Check out Midori and Arora. Both are webkit browsers that run on Linux (among other platforms). Midori uses GTK while Arora makes use of qt.

dankles · « **Reply #9 on:** June 03, 2009, 05:50:41 PM »

Quote from: iindigo on June 03, 2009, 05:20:30 PM

Check out Midori and Arora. Both are webkit browsers that run on Linux (among other platforms). Midori uses GTK while Arora makes use of qt.

Just compiled arura into a deb:

(click to show/hide)

In contrast, here is firefox 3:

(click to show/hide)

Though my firefox setup is not in a default state so that might be chopping out a point or two.

dankles · « **Reply #10 on:** June 03, 2009, 05:59:52 PM »

Sorry for the double post, but damn! Webkit is fast as hell!!! Widgets sometimes look funny in arura, but thats a QT thing... The page rendering speed is great!!

I'm buying a mac, it's settled now

bloody000 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 03, 2009, 06:01:18 PM »

Fx 3.5 only does theora/vorbis, and Safari 4 uses the superior H.264/AAC.
Not sure about Opera, but I'm going to switch back to it when 10 comes out anyway.

dankles · « **Reply #12 on:** June 03, 2009, 06:20:22 PM »

Quote from: bloody000 on June 03, 2009, 06:01:18 PM

Fx 3.5 only does theora/vorbis, and Safari 4 uses the superior H.264/AAC.
Not sure about Opera, but I'm going to switch back to it when 10 comes out anyway.

I feel kinda like Eugenia Loli-Queru in this article:

Quote

Truth is, I prefer open standards and open source and Free Software and what not, over proprietary royalty/patent-ridden solutions. But pictures (and videos) don't lie. Theora is simply not at the same league as h.264. Vorbis fairs well compared to the big 3 audio formats, but Theora is visibly worse in comparison. By their own admission in the past, the Theora developers had to use less efficient algorithms to go around patents. This sucks of course, but it all comes down to this: do you want an open FOSS solution, or you want the best solution? Many readers on OSNews will choose the first option, but their teenager brother would probably choose the second.

So I'm sort of at odds with my self. However, the main reason Theora isn't as good is because of the patent issues (I dislike software patents, though that is another story).

However, I still feel that mozilla's choice is a step in the right direction. And super HQ media isn't always needed for everything either. Like from now on (or after FF3.5) I can embed my vlogs directly into the browser

iindigo · « **Reply #13 on:** June 03, 2009, 06:52:17 PM »

One thing that helps WebKit out tremendously in the speed category is the fact that it isn't dragging a ton of other stuff along with it. Firefox and other Mozilla-based products have XUL tacked on, bloating things considerably.

Not saying Firefox isn't a good product (it is) but it could be better.

dankles · « **Reply #14 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:02:20 PM »

Codec debate for the HTML 5 video element:
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/07/decoding-the-html-5-video-codec-debate.ars

It is basically split between two: Ogg Theora and H.264.

I'm in favor of either having both or just Ogg Theora. Cuz open codecs need more support even if they arent the best (the only reason Theora isn't better than it is, is because of efing software patents

)

EDIT:
O yeah, IE isn't in the article.... I'm guessing cuz they don't have plans to even support the <video> tag yet. Can anyone confirm?

And H.264 patents expire in roughly 2025.... So maybe we can all get along in 15 years ^^

fohfoh · « **Reply #15 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:14:24 PM »

Isn't there a way to disable XUL in mozilla? There's probably a hack somewhere... Kind of like the "Make mozilla faster" fix where you just toy with settings.

Honestly though, this seems almost like a utorrent (and similar) vs Azureus/Vuze type of argument. Webkits are smaller resource usage, Mozilla is more control and additions. But seriously, get a decent comp and connection and the resource usage is a null argument.

vuzedome · « **Reply #16 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:29:06 PM »

I think the audio and video native support has just been dropped.

dankles · « **Reply #17 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:32:17 PM »

Quote from: vuzedome on July 06, 2009, 08:29:06 PM

I think the audio and video native support has just been dropped.

From IE?

iindigo · « **Reply #18 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:41:35 PM »

Quote from: fohfoh on July 06, 2009, 08:14:24 PM

Isn't there a way to disable XUL in mozilla? There's probably a hack somewhere... Kind of like the "Make mozilla faster" fix where you just toy with settings.

Honestly though, this seems almost like a utorrent (and similar) vs Azureus/Vuze type of argument. Webkits are smaller resource usage, Mozilla is more control and additions. But seriously, get a decent comp and connection and the resource usage is a null argument.

XUL is kinda innate to Mozilla. It's built with it. You can eliminate the XUL used for the user interface outside of the browser frame (toolbar, statusbar, menus, etc) (as demonstrated by Camino, which uses Gecko for page rendering but native Cocoa for the UI), but XUL will still make up the rendering engine itself.

I agree that with today's computers resource consumption is somewhat moot, but my point is that because of WebKit's compact nature, it's more suited to mobile applications like smartphone and PDA browsers.

flaresignal · « **Reply #19 on:** July 06, 2009, 08:52:52 PM »

Quote from: dankles on July 06, 2009, 08:02:20 PM

O yeah, IE isn't in the article.... I'm guessing cuz they don't have plans to even support the <video> tag yet. Can anyone confirm?

There hasn't been a peep out of the IE developers about support for <video> or <audio>.