W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Open Source implementations Re: Encrypted Media proposal (was RE: ISSUE-179: av_param - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals)

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:27:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+fyth74E1HNrr7QYLhxq8VW7kj2rVJrdOcsJD-Jc0nfJQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, Kornel LesiƄski <kornel@geekhood.net>, "<public-html@w3.org>" <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com> wrote:

> The issue has been with JS implementations, not hardware.
>

I beg to differ. In the case of TVs (as oposed to STBs or HPs), the amount
of RAM and CPU capacities available for JS implementations are
significantly less (sometimes orders of magnitude). The traditional focus
on absolute minimization of BoM (bill of materials) cost continues to
produce a performance barrier for most TVs. Sure, more capacity could be
added until it becomes merely a JS/VM implementation issue, but that has
not happened in general in this device class.
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 19:28:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:46 GMT