FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-15-2010, 10:46 PM
Ng Oon-Ee
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 23:51 +0200, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:09:40 +0300
> schrieb Ionuț Bîru <biru.ionut@gmail.com>:
>
> > lightspark
>
> Lightspark can't play YouTube videos and Samorost 1 and 2 (from The
> Humble Indie Bundle) and it needs pulseaudio (yet another one of those
> senseless, resource-wasting daemons).
>
> YouTube and Samorost 1 and 2 are the only reasons for me for using
> Flash.
>
> The HTML5 version of YouTube doesn't work for me, too.
>
> Heiko

HTML5 only works on Chrome/IE I think. Firefox devs decided they would
go with the Vorbis rather than x264 codecs, while youtube decided the
other way round.
 
Old 06-15-2010, 10:51 PM
Muhammed Uluyol
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

> HTML5 only works on Chrome/IE I think. Firefox devs decided they would
> go with the Vorbis rather than x264 codecs, while youtube decided the
> other way round.
Youtube uses webm now, not h.264.

Firefox should have support in their nightly builds.
 
Old 06-15-2010, 11:15 PM
Ng Oon-Ee
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 17:51 -0500, Muhammed Uluyol wrote:
> > HTML5 only works on Chrome/IE I think. Firefox devs decided they would
> > go with the Vorbis rather than x264 codecs, while youtube decided the
> > other way round.
> Youtube uses webm now, not h.264.
>
> Firefox should have support in their nightly builds.

Oh, my information is outdated then. When did this happen? I do recall
searching before (probably when all this html5-youtube stuff started)
and seeing clear statements that firefox would not support h.264 due to
HTML5 being an open standard or something along those lines.
 
Old 06-15-2010, 11:22 PM
Denis A. Alto Falqueto
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

2010/6/15 Ng Oon-Ee <ngoonee@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 17:51 -0500, Muhammed Uluyol wrote:
>> > HTML5 only works on Chrome/IE I think. Firefox devs decided they would
>> > go with the Vorbis rather than x264 codecs, while youtube decided the
>> > other way round.
>> Youtube uses webm now, not h.264.
>>
>> Firefox should have support in their nightly builds.
>
> Oh, my information is outdated then. When did this happen? I do recall
> searching before (probably when all this html5-youtube stuff started)
> and seeing clear statements that firefox would not support h.264 due to
> HTML5 being an open standard or something along those lines.

I think that there's a misunderstood here. Youtube is using webm in
the experimental version of the site. And Firefox nightly build has
support for webm, not h.264.

--
A: Because it obfuscates the reading.
Q: Why is top posting so bad?

-------------------------------------------
Denis A. Altoe Falqueto
-------------------------------------------
 
Old 06-15-2010, 11:40 PM
C Anthony Risinger
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Denis A. Alto Falqueto
<denisfalqueto@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/6/15 Ng Oon-Ee <ngoonee@gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 17:51 -0500, Muhammed Uluyol wrote:
>>> > HTML5 only works on Chrome/IE I think. Firefox devs decided they would
>>> > go with the Vorbis rather than x264 codecs, while youtube decided the
>>> > other way round.
>>> Youtube uses webm now, not h.264.
>>>
>>> Firefox should have support in their nightly builds.
>>
>> Oh, my information is outdated then. When did this happen? I do recall
>> searching before (probably when all this html5-youtube stuff started)
>> and seeing clear statements that firefox would not support h.264 due to
>> HTML5 being an open standard or something along those lines.
>
> I think that there's a misunderstood here. Youtube is using webm in
> the experimental version of the site. And Firefox nightly build has
> support for webm, not h.264.

let's just all chant together in hopes that flash video will endure a
quick, fiery demise, and webm/VP8 will rise from the ashes to claim
it's place.

we just may see an HTML5 video standard.

yay to google for buying a company and releasing their codec.
vorbis/theora wasn't going anywhere.
 
Old 06-15-2010, 11:57 PM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:40 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@extof.me> wrote:
> let's just all chant together in hopes that flash video will endure a
> quick, fiery demise, and webm/VP8 will rise from the ashes to claim
> it's place.

meh! flash works... I don't think I've tried the webm stuff... but I
did try the youtube html5 beta and it just didn't work well. flash
does more than just video anyways. I'll be ok with html5 <video> if it
works as good as flash for the purpose... but flash does so much more,
and it will certainly is better than going back to the days of
'proprietary plugins, and codecs'.

--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-16-2010, 12:50 AM
Heiko Baums
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Am Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:51:51 +0200
schrieb Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de>:

> The HTML5 version of YouTube doesn't work for me, too.

For the time until webm is implemented in every browser and YouTube's
HTML5 version is the default also for the embedded videos, I found a
solution for Firefox for watching YouTube videos without Flash.

There are two userscripts for Greasemonkey.

Greasemonkey:
https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/748/

Youtube without Flash Auto (for YouTube itself):
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/50771

Youtube without Flash Embedded (for embedded YouTube videos):
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/60977

Heiko
 
Old 06-16-2010, 12:51 AM
Alexander Lam
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Hello,

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:40 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@extof.me> wrote:
>> let's just all chant together in hopes that flash video will endure a
>> quick, fiery demise, and webm/VP8 will rise from the ashes to claim
>> it's place.
>
> meh! flash works... I don't think I've tried the webm stuff... but I
> did try the youtube html5 beta and it just didn't work well. flash
> does more than just video anyways. I'll be ok with html5 <video> if it
> works as good as flash for the purpose... but flash does so much more,

Javascript+HTML5 does a lot of what flash can do now (all of these
HTML5 demos work in firefox):
http://craftymind.com/factory/html5video/CanvasVideo.html

And an asteroids game:
http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/asteroids/


> and it will certainly is better than going back to the days of
> 'proprietary plugins, and codecs'.
>
> --
> Caleb Cushing
>
> http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
>


--
Alexander Lam
 
Old 06-16-2010, 01:18 AM
Heiko Baums
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Am Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:57:56 -0400
schrieb Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com>:

> meh! flash works... I don't think I've tried the webm stuff... but I
> did try the youtube html5 beta and it just didn't work well.

For me YouTube HTML5 is working much better than the Flash stuff
(despite the missing implementations of the proper video codecs in the
browsers), particularly the cache is loaded much faster than with Flash
and the playback and skipping through the video by clicking onto the
progress bar is much faster and smoother.

> flash
> does more than just video anyways. I'll be ok with html5 <video> if it
> works as good as flash for the purpose... but flash does so much more,
> and it will certainly is better than going back to the days of
> 'proprietary plugins, and codecs'.

I completely disagree. Flash can, of course, do much more than just
video. But video currently is the most important feature. And I never
understood why all those video portals thought they had to implement
those videos in this proprietary Flash than just using the already
existing and well and better working video plugins like mplayer-plugin
resp. gecko-mediaplayer.

I also hate these websites which are completely and only implemented in
Flash. They are usually loaded and rendered much slower than simple
HTML websites, look at least not better, sometimes even worse and can
only be seen with such a proprietary plugin.

There are very few exceptions. For building small games like
Samorost 1 and 2 e.g. Flash is quite nice, because such games can easily
be written and played in a webbrowser. Disadvantage again: If the
proprietary plugin doesn't work or doesn't exist these games can't be
played anymore. So better such games should better be written in C.

And last but not least there are those annoying flickering Flash ads.

All in all Flash is just annoying and superfluous.

Heiko
 
Old 06-16-2010, 01:21 AM
C Anthony Risinger
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Alexander Lam <lambchop468@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:40 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@extof.me> wrote:
>>> let's just all chant together in hopes that flash video will endure a
>>> quick, fiery demise, and webm/VP8 will rise from the ashes to claim
>>> it's place.
>>
>> meh! flash works... I don't think I've tried the webm stuff... but I
>> did try the youtube html5 beta and it just didn't work well. flash
>> does more than just video anyways. I'll be ok with html5 <video> if it
>> works as good as flash for the purpose... but flash does so much more,
>
> Javascript+HTML5 does a lot of what flash can do now (all of these
> HTML5 demos work in firefox):
> http://craftymind.com/factory/html5video/CanvasVideo.html
>
> And an asteroids game:
> http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/asteroids/
>
>
>> and it will certainly is better than going back to the days of
>> 'proprietary plugins, and codecs'.

like... flash? ;-D

alexander beat me to the punch; i was also going to say that the
extensive javascript APIs present in HTML5 are more than sufficient
for the vast majority of reasons people use flash today.

my personal favorite:

http://www.nihilogic.dk/labs/wolf/

... in javascript! brilliant.

C Anthony
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:04 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org