Ginger's thoughts » HTML5 video: 25% H.264 reach vs. 95% Ogg The. Vimeo started last week with a HTML5 beta test. They use the H.264 codec, probably because much of their content is already in this format through the Flash player. But what really surprised me was their claim that roughly 25% of their users will be able to make use of their HTML5 beta test. The statement is that 25% of their users use Safari, Chrome, or IE with Chrome Frame. I wondered how they got to that number and what that generally means to the amount of support of H.264 vs Ogg Theora on the HTML5-based Web.
According to Statcounter’s browser market share statistics, the percentage of browsers that support HTML5 video is roughly: 31.1%, as summed up from Firefox 3.5+ (22.57%), Chrome 3.0+ (5.21%), and Safari 4.0+ (3.32%) (Opera’s recent release is not represented yet). Out of those 31.1%, 8.53% browsers support H.264 and 27.78% browsers support Ogg Theora. Given these numbers, Vimeo must assume that roughly 16% of their users have Chrome Frame in IE installed. Christopher Blizzard · HTML5 video and H.264 – what history tell. Recently Youtube announced that you could test out an HTML5-enabled version of their site.
They said that they were doing this partially based on people’s “number one request” that Youtube do more with HTML5. (They left out the other half of that #1 request – that the implementation be based on open codecs, but more on that later.) Not to be outdone, Vimeo rushed to announce a beta version of their player based on their site that claims HTML5 support as well. To be clear, this is great news. This is just the latest in a long string of changes for video on the web. We started with a raw “player” delivered by Real Media. The players from Google and Vimeo do present a pretty serious problem, though. If you think that this isn’t an issue that’s worth worrying about you need to read the rest of this post. The web has always been based on the assumption of Royalty Free.
But that’s just a technicality. It’s worth saying twice. Their choice for H.264 had an immediate effect. OK. The Present and Future of HTML5 Video Experiences | Brightcove B. As commercial availability of the Apple iPad draws near, we have been getting a lot of inquiries from customers looking for guidance on what they need to do to deliver great video experiences on these devices that exclusively support the HTML5 approach to video. These customers are excited about the possibilities of the iPad, but they also have concerns about what it will take to deliver great video experiences in this environment. They want to know what the tradeoffs and gotchas are, and what we're doing to help them navigate this new landscape.
Customers have been thrilled and somewhat surprised to learn that Brightcove has supported HTML5 in basic form since 2008, which is when we began to support the H.264 video format and released our open Media APIs for accessing content stored in the Brightcove online video platform. I should pause here and clarify a couple of things.
That is a long list of requirements, but represents the reality of what our customers are looking for. Dear Mozilla, Please Don't Kill HTML5 Video! | Brian Crescimanno. Mozilla and I have a long and not-so-storied history together. I first began running what was at the time called the Mozilla App Suite with the "Milestone 10" release in October 1999. I was (I believe) one of the first people outside of the core team to build (as in compile) the browser that would come to be known as Firefox. It was called Phoenix at the time and the team hadn't released any binaries. I remember talking to the core team on IRC getting instructions as to what build flags to add to build Phoenix rather than the app suite.
Until now. I'm a huge supporter of open formats; I always have been. Three of Four With Microsoft announcing support for H.264 video in IE9, three of the four "big name" browsers will be supporting H.264 video. Encoding is slow and expensive Video encoding is a very processor-intensive process; it's time consuming, expensive, and the resulting files are large which lead to bandwidth and storage costs. Theora Sucks There's a Precedent Too Don't Break the Web. John Nack on Adobe: Sympathy for the Devil. Sympathy for the Devil In the last couple of years, it has become trendy to bash the Adobe Flash Player. I need to say a few things on that subject. First, let’s be very clear: I’m not on the Flash team. I don’t speak for them. I came to Adobe ten years ago to build an open standards (SVG)-based Web animation tool. Flash is flawed, but it has moved the world forward.Open standards are great, but they can be achingly slow to arrive.Talk of “what’s good for standards is bad for Adobe” is misinformed nonsense.Flash will innovate or die.
Let’s be clear: It’s fine to say that Flash is flawed; it is. Macromedia was the only company that delivered truly ubiquitous (99% penetration) video playback. All these years later, we still don’t have a standard, browser-native alternative, much less one that’s achieved widespread viewership. I don’t doubt that some video standard will eventually emerge & make its way into most if not all browsers. . – On Standards – Guess what, though? – On Mac vs. YouTube se lance dans le HTML 5. YouTube vient de lancer la version beta de son service en HTML 5. Concrètement, il suffit d'activer l'option sur cette page pour voir le format Flash disparaître de votre navigateur. Le format choisi par YouTube est le H.264, ce qui limite la chose aux navigateurs tels que Chrome et Safari (quoi qu'il soit également possible d'y accéder avec Internet Explorer pour peu que ses utilisateurs aient choisi d'installer le plugin Chrome Frame).
La nouvelle est de taille car elle apporte un soutien de poids au codec H.264, alors que le W3C est perclus de querelles intestines quant au standard à adopter. Dailymotion pour sa part propose une version HTML 5 qui propose tant le H.264 que l'Ogg Theora, préféré par Mozilla Firefox. D'autre part, à l'inverse de Flash, le HTML 5 ne permet pas d'empêcher d'intégrer une vidéo dans un autre lecteur que celui de YouTube, un problème que la plupart des diffuseurs ont soulevé auprès du groupe de travail dédié au futur standard du web.