Hacker News Reader

The parent's point was that only a myopic definition of the web does not already include video.

But I agree with the article that video is not an integral part of the Web -- up until HTML5 the browsers even didn't have the ability to play video natively, relying on plugins like Flash.

If you watch YouTube videos on your iPhone, you don't even have a browser to play the video at all. It's true that it's still transferred using the HTTP -- the Web protocol -- but that's the whole point of the article: a new Web, which uses much the same protocols but don't rely on the browser for consumption.

I've previously given a thought to the whole concept at http://berislav.lopac.net/post/615858128/the-future-of-web-b...

But 9 times out of 10, I'm viewing video in a web browser. Splitting it out only makes sense if they track which videos are being viewed in a web page and which ones are viewed in apps, and they aren't doing that, so the graph is meaningless.

Should Gmail be counted as Web or email?

It's all about usage, not about the technology. Think out of the box.

Once upon a time browsers couldn't render images either.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com