W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2009

[whatwg] H.264-in-<video> vs plugin APIs

From: Simon Spiegel <simon@simifilm.ch>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:27:39 +0200
Message-ID: <34F0C46C-D9F3-4AC3-AEAA-310824714E0E@simifilm.ch>

On 14.06.2009, at 04:02, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> As for Safari and any other software on the Mac that is using the
> QuickTime framework, there is XiphQT to provide support. It's a
> QuickTime component and therefore no different to installing a Flash
> plugin, thus you can also count Safari as a browser that has support
> for Ogg Theora/Vorbis, even if I'm sure people from Apple would not
> like to see it this way.

It's actually quite different, on a technical level and for the user.  
Flash is a browser plugin and XiphQT is an additional Quicktime codec.  
Quicktime has supported third party codec for years; the whole point  
of this is that any app which uses Quicktime can make use of these  
third party codecs ? like Safari does. A browser plugin like Flash  
OTOH is useless outside the browser. So like I said: these are quite  
different things on several level.


Simon Spiegel
Steinhaldenstr. 50
8002 Z?rich

Telephon: ++41 44 451 5334
Mobophon: ++41 76 459 60 39


?Was soll aus mir mal werden, wenn ich mal nicht mehr bin?? Robert  
Received on Sunday, 14 June 2009 10:27:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:13 UTC