Comments on: YouTube Introduces Flash-free Videos http://www.popularfront.com/posts/youtube-introduces-flash-free-videos/ Popular Front is a full-service agency with a digital core dedicated to growing and improving our clients' businesses by creating rich, engagement media campaigns. Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:57:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Dan Nordquist http://www.popularfront.com/posts/youtube-introduces-flash-free-videos/comment-page-1/#comment-5192 Dan Nordquist Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:53:16 +0000 http://www.popularfront.com/?p=5022#comment-5192 Vimeo isn't far behind. And like YouTube's, it's h.264, so Firefox is excluded. What would it take for Firefox to support h.264? And where's IE8 in all this? http://www.vimeo.com/blog:268 Vimeo isn’t far behind. And like YouTube’s, it’s h.264, so Firefox is excluded. What would it take for Firefox to support h.264? And where’s IE8 in all this?

http://www.vimeo.com/blog:268

]]> By: Bobby Marko http://www.popularfront.com/posts/youtube-introduces-flash-free-videos/comment-page-1/#comment-5191 Bobby Marko Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:49:00 +0000 http://www.popularfront.com/?p=5022#comment-5191 Plus if we're going down the road of serving up multiple files you could provide a flash backup for browsers that don't support the new html5 elements: http://henriksjokvist.net/archive/2009/2/using-the-html5-video-tag-with-a-flash-fallback I just can't imagine how much work it would be for Youtube to re-encode all of their videos, and I don't see Google putting in that work when they want people to use Chrome. Also, Vimeo joined the html5 party too: http://vimeo.com/blog:268 Plus if we’re going down the road of serving up multiple files you could provide a flash backup for browsers that don’t support the new html5 elements: http://henriksjokvist.net/archive/2009/2/using-the-html5-video-tag-with-a-flash-fallback

I just can’t imagine how much work it would be for Youtube to re-encode all of their videos, and I don’t see Google putting in that work when they want people to use Chrome.

Also, Vimeo joined the html5 party too: http://vimeo.com/blog:268

]]> By: Dan Nordquist http://www.popularfront.com/posts/youtube-introduces-flash-free-videos/comment-page-1/#comment-5137 Dan Nordquist Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:59:12 +0000 http://www.popularfront.com/?p=5022#comment-5137 It seems that you can use video with two source elements in it - if the browser comes across a source it doesn't support, it should skip to the first one it does. (Browsers that support more than one specified source just use the first one they support.) So YouTube would just have to encode everything twice (or three times, if they're not using h.264 for the Flash version). John Gruber has written about why Apple and Mozilla disagree on formats: http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/wee_bit_more_on_aac It seems that you can use video with two source elements in it – if the browser comes across a source it doesn’t support, it should skip to the first one it does. (Browsers that support more than one specified source just use the first one they support.) So YouTube would just have to encode everything twice (or three times, if they’re not using h.264 for the Flash version).

John Gruber has written about why Apple and Mozilla disagree on formats: http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/wee_bit_more_on_aac

]]> By: Bobby Marko http://www.popularfront.com/posts/youtube-introduces-flash-free-videos/comment-page-1/#comment-5135 Bobby Marko Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:02:38 +0000 http://www.popularfront.com/?p=5022#comment-5135 Now if only browser vendors could all agree on a single codec so all the browsers can join the party with a single video file - preferably the open source route Firefox is taking with OGG. Now if only browser vendors could all agree on a single codec so all the browsers can join the party with a single video file – preferably the open source route Firefox is taking with OGG.

]]>