Google drops support for h264 video in Chrome...

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=116615

Looks like those of us who like standards have another system to cater to and that Flash might be staying at the party longer than we thought?

Another interesting take on this story:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/google-chrome-to-drop-h264-support-roadblock-to-html5/2856

Now that’s a surprise. Economically driven decision?

You have to wonder. Maybe something to do with the iPhone and Verizon announcement making Google jumpy?

I think Apple bashers and Google fans will like this. On theory it sounds OK. But h264 is a much more polished coded currently. Its now used everywhere. Even IE9 has fully adopted h264. The HTML5 and web standards seem to be focussing on h264.

Google’s moves sort of throws a lot of questions into this mix. They have leverage with Youtube etc. This also keeps Flash alive longer which I am not sure about.

Time will tell I guess.

Did this mean you could play H.264 videos straight from their Android’s Chrome browsers?

Quote from: Photowebmax at Jan 11, 2011, 08:11 PM

The HTML5 and web standards seem to be focussing on h264.

Really? Could you expand on "focusing"?

Isn’t h264 patent encumbered(in 5 years or something?) whereas Googles webm isn’t? Although this move does seem a little premature.

Quote from: shamblett at Jan 12, 2011, 02:34 AM

Isn’t h264 patent encumbered(in 5 years or something?) whereas Googles webm isn’t? Although this move does seem a little premature.

h264 is patented but licence-fees are currently having a undefined time-out. But that’s the problem of it. It’s not an open source. And it might change some time to a very costly codec.
WebM is a open source standard. This is the background why it’s been developed by Google and will be adopted and supported by Google Chrome, Opera and Firefox!

I like the decision to drop support in Chrome. But it extends the time for us devs to even export in more formats and code another fallback.
Think this is one of the major problems, video / audio HTML5 support currently has.

Problem is webM depends on the apply of concerns like Microsoft (IE9) and Apple (Safari) to be a real alternative. Before that, dropping support in Chrome seems a bit premature, yes!
But I think they’re dropping as an earliest date with Chrome 11 which means in 3-6 months. And, of course, until then there should be true support and a real standard release of webM codec...

But Flash in not open source but Google is using it. That is one of the things that does not make sense. That and the fact that h264 is one of the simplest and most effective video codecs. I noticed a comment on anther blog that this is going to be a battle, one made more difficult by the porn industry adopting h264.

I really don’t think Google is doing this to better web standards and make everything simper or easier here. This might be good for Google and their mobile device technology.

I just hope this does not become a war like we saw ten years ago...

@Photowebmax

In the case of Flash, the h264 license might be paid by Acrobat, which is not the case with the codec integrated in the browser.

Plus, as a user of FF i would largely prefer a standard that can be used widely by all browsers. Note that Opera dosn’t support h264 either for the exact same reason.

H264 is the best but it’s not free and open for a wide use on the internet.