Hacker News Reader

Comment by app | Hacker News Reader

A big step backwards for HTML5 video adoption and premature IMO. Other than Android there isn't an existing consumer device out there that plays WebM that I know of. Certainly there is no hardware decoding. Now content creators who host their own video will have to double storage costs or be relegated to Flash and the smallest of the big browsers.

View on HN

Wouldn't you already need to encode everything twice due to Firefox's lack of H.264 support?

For full compatibility, yes, but realistically there was no reason to use to WebM. With h.264 you cover the following:

1) All browsers with Flash players 2) Any "web connected" set top device/TV 3) About 50% of HTML5 video compatible browsers

With this move by Google #3 falls to 25% or less. And they're looking to add WebM support to #2. At some point consumer demands you support both because their shiny new Macbook Air/Chrome OS tablet/TV doesn't play video. Good move by Google to justify their $125M investment in On2, but end users will end up being inconvenienced as the splintering continues.

This is just going to feel like a regression to most end users who really don't give a crap about who holds what patents.

Flash will support vp8, that should level the playing field. IE can be extended to use vp8 also, google chrome frame should be a required install everywhere ;p

Still not quite sure I see the big deal.

Firefox has something like twice the browser share of Chrome. If you were OK sticking Firefox users with Flash video, I don't see how that's hugely different from sticking Firefox AND Chrome users with Flash video.

If you want to support all modern browsers, you used to have to do two encodings. After this announcement, you will still have to do two encodings.

Given that flash is reportedly going to support WebM, you may not have to do 2 encodings in the near future.

Don't forget hardware.

That's true, my only point is that it's a trend in the wrong direction: after Google makes this change there will be people will be using Flash for playback than there were before.

Adobe announced that Flash is going to support WebM. When that happens, landscape will look like this:

1) All desktop browsers play WebM natively or via Flash/OS codec. 2) (perhaps no change, as I don't expect GoogleTV to go anywhere) 3) Majority of HTML5 implementations, and also market-share wise, support only VP8/Theora (with Google flipping the switch it's already the case)

In that landscape it might make sense to encode WebM for desktop and low-res H.264 for mobiles.

If you don't want to encode twice, you can fall back to using Flash on Firefox to play the H.264 video.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com