Hacker News Reader

Comment by svlla | Hacker News Reader

But... Google is putting in resources toward integrating Flash into Chrome. The Chrome Flash version is actually different than what is even publicly available from Adobe. My version of Flash that comes with Chrome is 10.1.103.19. The latest version available from Adobe directly is 10.1.102.64.

So Google puts its own resources toward a plugin (Flash) that, itself, can play H.264 video. I find this interesting to say the least.

View on HN

Version number increase may mean either: 1) Adobe provided Google with a newer build, than it publicly offers. No Google resources are spent on Flash. 2) Google got Flash from Adobe and actually did some work to improve it.

We don't know which one it is, but personally, I'd consider (1) to be more possible than (2).

Sorry, by resources, I meant real resources building an implementation of H.264 and supporting that in an official capacity, and assisting Adobe's implementation of Flash. I'm pretty sure that the resources needed to implement H.264 was on a different scale then providing assistance with Adobe.

This all ignores the fact that Google's involvement was improving the plugin experience alongside Mozilla, and it wasn't just benefit Flash.

Even still, all this is to say that it's still Adobe's version of Flash that goes into Chrome. Google isn't writing their own Flash implementation. What this means is that someone could build and H.264 plugin for Chrome. Google just doesn't want to be the person to do this. Considering the fact that handling this plugin would likely cost them money, I don't see a problem with their decision.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com