LATEST CHATTY HEADER
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
New to Shacknews? Signup for a Free Account
Already have an account? Login Now
Subscribe to Shacknews Mercury starting at $1/month!
Chrome Shack Community Guidelines Chatty Search
Scroll down to join the conversation.
http://blog.chromium.org/2011/01/more-about-chrome-html-video-codec.html
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 202 replies.
See http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?id=25013087 for why that assumption is flat wrong. Google's move here cannot possibly make Flash-as-a-container "more likely to win" because unless everyone agrees on WebM that likelihood was already 100%.
I am aware that Flash and h.264 are not perfectly analogous. The truth here is that whether or not Google ships Flash has absolutely no relevance to whether or not it makes any sense that they care about not having a <video> codec be patent-encumbered.
The post has been reported. Thank you!
You must be logged in to post.
You must be logged in to post.