Suspected PayPal Hackers Seek Deal To Stay Out Of Prison
Did A Google Earth Mistake Cause A Couple's Brutal Murder?
Google Chrome drops H.264 support to focus purely on open technologies like WebM
Google has just dropped a bomb shell: Chrome will no longer support H.264 HTML5 video playback. The open-sourced WebM (VP8) and Ogg Theora video codecs will be the only options for HTML5 video. H.264 will not be dropped immediately, but probably with the next stable build of Chrome.Google cites plenty of damning reasons for the exiling of H.264. Open codecs are improving faster, thanks to the contributions of "dozens of developers"; open codecs are more readily adopted by browsers and hardware vendors; and most importantly, codecs like WebM and Theora are free. Free from patents, free from licensing fees; free to use however you like.
Mozilla stated a few months ago that Firefox would never support H.264, which now leaves just Internet Explorer 9 as the sole supporter of H.264 HTML5 video. IE9 also supports WebM, however, which means H.264 will hopefully just fade away into patent-encumbered nothingness -- or perhaps Flash, which will still support H.264 video, has finally found its HTML5-era niche.
In other news, frothy blogger John Gruber mentions that this will force publishers and broadcasters to use Flash, or force them to re-encode their content for WebM delivery. The fact is, these companies don't want to distribute their content via HTML5 video. Flash, with its DRM and P2P, is a far more suitable platform for commercial broadcasting. Flash also has the advantage of being universally installed -- again, let's not forget that Firefox never intended to support H.264, and has a much larger market share than Chrome.
Update: apparently Safari also has native support for H.264 video, via WebKit rendering engine.
Comments
17
Subscribe to commentsStevenJan 12th 2011 7:46AM
Research much? IE9 is not the "sole supporter of H.264." You're forgetting Safari.
Sebastian AnthonyJan 12th 2011 7:51AM
@Steven Hahahaha.
Sorry, I meant to say "the last major supporter of H.264" of course :)
NickJan 12th 2011 7:55AM
Safari doesn't support H.264, unless you install QuickTime.
AFAIK QuickTime also supports WebM or at least VP8.
RyanJan 12th 2011 8:37AM
I find this whole situation very suspicious.
Google claims that the reason to move away from H.264 is so that Chrome will use "completely open codec technologies." This is curious seeing as they bundle Flash with their browser, which is the antithesis of open source, no matter how ubiquitous it is. It also calls into the use of other codecs. My knowledge is limited here, but I don't think .mp3 is a open source format, will they remove support for that?
The gist of what I'm saying is, it seems to me that Chrome supports many non-open source formats, so removing just one for the sake of "openess" seems hypocritical and a little underhanded (seeing as WebM is a standard Google developed).
hazardJan 12th 2011 9:30AM
Nothing suspicious at all. This will save Google a lot of money and hassle while at the same time get the kudos for promoting a open source product. Just a smart business decision really.
JoshJan 12th 2011 11:46AM
@Ryan
It's not suspicious at all. Google uses open formats, but no one ever said they had to be open source. Their formats, for the most part, are free to be used by all (i.e. there are no licensing fees, though one could argue that you have to pay for Flash to build a player or whatnot). Flash is free to use. You don't have to pay Adobe to have Flash on your site or supported by your browser, h.264, however, will in the near future after their little escapade is over with.
SilverWaveJan 12th 2011 12:53PM
@Ryan
>I find this whole situation very suspicious.
Thats because you are ill informed I think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3
so that was a 30 second google search.
Come on guy if you don't want to look ignorant educate your self.
ProlornJan 12th 2011 3:51PM
@Ryan Flash is already ubiquitous on the web, and any browser that dropped Flash support would just drive its users to other browsers. As such, Google behaves smart and practically by bundling Flash with Chrome, to save users hassle and improve security (by keeping Flash up-to-date automatically).
But since H.264 (in the form of HTML5 video) is not yet entrenched, it is still plausible for Google to persuade the web to adopt open codecs like WebM and Ogg Theora. Thus, Google's actions in this event.
hazardJan 12th 2011 9:36AM
If YouTube dropped h264 support .. that would be a bomb
SilverWaveJan 12th 2011 12:46PM
@hazard
Oh yeah :-D
here is hoping
theloststoryJan 12th 2011 12:03PM
Google is being Evil. They have this thing against Mac lately (perhaps the rivalry starts from Google's copying the iPhone design-by-design-byapp-by-app). APPLE has been pushing H.264 over flash. Google is licking Adobe ass by continuing to support something as cranky as Flash. there, I am deleting Chrome from my MacBook Pro. Not that I used it, but deleting it nevertheless.
SilverWaveJan 12th 2011 12:47PM
@theloststory
LOL
what a whiner :-)
RBYJan 13th 2011 2:55AM
Research much? This article is a piece of crap. Name one good reason for dropping h264 that's not hypocritical when keeping in mind that proprietary Flash will still be bundled?
There's no "development" or energy needed for keeping h264 in. The standard is finished, and free as well.
Find new journalists who know how to factcheck.
SilverWaveJan 12th 2011 12:50PM
@RBY
Whats hypocritical about dropping h264?
Google wont have to pay for h264 and WebM is free, after they bought it up.
Seems just good business and in keeping with doing the right thing on the web.
SilverWaveJan 12th 2011 1:00PM
@RBY
>Research much? This article is a piece of crap.
well its not that bad... although he should have known that Apple supports H.264
If you look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG_LA
The following organizations hold one or more patents in the H.264/AVC patent pool.[13]
* Apple Inc.
...
You can see that apple has an interest in this game.
>apparently Safari also has native support for H.264 video
SilverWaveJan 12th 2011 1:04PM
Just for the record:
H.264/MPEG-4 AVC Licensors
The following organizations hold one or more patents in the H.264/AVC patent pool.[13]
* Apple Inc.
* DAEWOO
* Dolby Laboratories Licensing Corporation
* Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute
* France Télécom, société anonyme
* Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.
* Fujitsu Limited
* Hitachi, Ltd.
* Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.
* LG Electronics Inc.
* Microsoft Corporation
* Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
* NTT docomo
* Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation
* Panasonic Corporation
* Robert Bosch GmbH
* Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
* Scientific-Atlanta Vancouver Company
* Sedna Patent Services, LLC
* Sharp Corporation
* Siemens AG
* Sony Corporation
* Ericsson
* The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York
* Toshiba Corporation
* Victor Company of Japan, Limited
DanJan 13th 2011 9:02AM
I guess Google is perfectly entitled to do this, but if they're really after an open browser they're leaving a lot of proprietary stuff in (the main offender, of course, being Flash).
Will this push for open extend to Android anytime soon? I can't imagine Android users would be too happy if they suddenly lost the ability to play MP3 files and were forced to convert all their media to OGG Vorbis...