Browsers' bid for relevance is turning them into time-bombs

Re:Browsers' bid for relevance is turning them into time-bombs by tempestn on Saturday July 09, 2016 @03:49AM (#12060596)

"EME-style rules" meaning similarly restrictive rules on the core browser functions of the time, not streaming video.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Browsers' bid for relevance is turning them into time-bombs by millstone on Saturday July 09, 2016 @04:11AM (#12060639)

I understand the case that EME makes it more difficult to create a browser, but none of the biggest tech companies got their start by writing browsers.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Browsers' bid for relevance is turning them into time-bombs by Sylos on Saturday July 09, 2016 @07:22AM (#12060961)

Somewhat of a quip, but I suppose technically still true: Without the creation of new browsers, we'd still be in the Internet Explorer age, and we can all imagine how much potential revenue would have been lost for internet companies, if that was the case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Browsers' bid for relevance is turning them into time-bombs by rocqua on Saturday July 09, 2016 @04:45AM (#12060697)

Perhaps it is building the backend that is considered to burdensome? A youtube competitor would need to serve DRMed video and thus be able to do EME.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Browsers' bid for relevance is turning them into time-bombs by nsgi on Saturday July 09, 2016 @09:21AM (#12061219)

No they wouldn't. YouTube doesn't use EME, at least for user-generated content.

[ Parent | on HN ]