Re:No double standards: supporting Google's push for WebM
by commandar on Wednesday January 19, 2011 @03:26PM
(#2121138)
>Dropping support for h.264 means slower adoption of <video> How's that better for the open standards?
20% of the browser market was never going to adopt H.264. That's a fifth of the market cut out from using <video> entirely.
How in the world is that possibly good for web standards?
>The most infuriating part of this is, that FSF and Google are so busy with their own agenda, that they forget users.
That majority of the market has the entrenched Flash until HTML5 <video> gets sorted out as a standard everyone can use.
Re:No double standards: supporting Google's push for WebM
by evgen on Wednesday January 19, 2011 @06:03PM
(#2121670)
20% of the browser market was never going to adopt H.264. That's a fifth of the market cut out from using <video> entirely.
20% and dropping... Should we also stop the <video> train in its tracks because IE6 does not support it?
Re:No double standards: supporting Google's push for WebM
by sid0 on Thursday January 20, 2011 @03:16AM
(#2123057)
Dropping?
Re:No double standards: supporting Google's push for WebM
by evgen on Thursday January 20, 2011 @04:04PM
(#2125244)
All lists for browser share that I have seen show FF as having either plateaued or started to drop by small percentages. If you add mobile browsers into the mix then even the plateau becomes a small drop.
Re:No double standards: supporting Google's push for WebM
by sid0 on Thursday January 20, 2011 @05:40PM
(#2125618)
And you really think that going to continue once Firefox 4 and Firefox for Android are released? Firefox is going to be relevant for a long while, so comparing it to IE6 is pretty disingenuous.
Dropping support for h.264 means slower adoption of <video> How's that better for the open standards? The most infuriating part of this is, that FSF and Google are so busy with their own agenda, that they forget users.