- From: Spartanicus <mk98762@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:21:56 +0100
"Silvia Pfeiffer" <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote: >> Imo for content providers to choose <video> over Flash, client support >> needs to be close to Flash. Requiring IE and Safari users to go and >> download and install third party software to play content would imo be >> considered too much of a hindrance when Flash "simply works". > >Cortado is a java applet that "simply works" (apart from a few bugs :) >and provides Ogg Theora support to Web Browsers even now. There is no >need to install third-party-software, apart from Java. > >For Flash video to work, you have to have the Flash plugin installed. >For Cortado to work, you have to have Java installed. The install-base >of Flash and Cortado is probably comparable. So, "client support needs >to be close to Flash" can be fulfilled with a bit of effort. Personally I detest Java (resource hog, slow as wading through molasses) and don't have it installed, so forgive my potential ignorance. Why create an HTML <video> element with the express purpose of supporting video natively in clients if video needs to be coded as a Java applet with Java handling it? And didn't MS stop including their "Java" in recent OSs after they lost the court case with Sun? -- Spartanicus
Received on Sunday, 24 June 2007 07:21:56 UTC