Comments on: HTML 5 Excitement http://www.longwalkhome.org/blog/2009/07/01/html-5-excitement/ Big shifting plans, shoe horned into a small blog...coupled with short attention span. Fool proof! Sun, 07 Mar 2010 03:54:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ryan http://www.longwalkhome.org/blog/2009/07/01/html-5-excitement/comment-page-1/#comment-26771 Ryan Thu, 16 Jul 2009 06:43:31 +0000 http://www.longwalkhome.org/blog/2009/07/01/html-5-excitement/#comment-26771 Nope. There is debate on which codec to use H.264 or Ogg stuff. Mozilla leaning on Ogg and Apple on H.264 with Google's chrome supporting both. Internet Explore hasn't brought any of this into the fold yet. The big difference seem to lie in the cost and the hardware support. H.264 requires royalties, Ogg is open source. H.264 is supported by chip developers who already made hardware accelerates (like the new Zune that can HD video without eating batteries for dinner). There is some neat stuff out there now that says "Fug it, let's do both". They keep both versions (and a flash file, just in case) and have the browser play the one it supports. Nope. There is debate on which codec to use H.264 or Ogg stuff. Mozilla leaning on Ogg and Apple on H.264 with Google’s chrome supporting both. Internet Explore hasn’t brought any of this into the fold yet.

The big difference seem to lie in the cost and the hardware support. H.264 requires royalties, Ogg is open source. H.264 is supported by chip developers who already made hardware accelerates (like the new Zune that can HD video without eating batteries for dinner).

There is some neat stuff out there now that says “Fug it, let’s do both”. They keep both versions (and a flash file, just in case) and have the browser play the one it supports.

]]> By: devin http://www.longwalkhome.org/blog/2009/07/01/html-5-excitement/comment-page-1/#comment-26751 devin Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:34:51 +0000 http://www.longwalkhome.org/blog/2009/07/01/html-5-excitement/#comment-26751 i thought the browser groups couldn't decide on html 5 video and dropped it? i thought the browser groups couldn’t decide on html 5 video and dropped it?

]]>