This is clever-ish:
http://www.atoker.com/blog/2010/02/04/html5-theora-video-codec-for-silverlig...
He says there that this will Just Work on ~40% of Windows boxes. Not bad.
- d.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:39 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
This is clever-ish:
http://www.atoker.com/blog/2010/02/04/html5-theora-video-codec-for-silverlig...
He says there that this will Just Work on ~40% of Windows boxes. Not bad.
Cortado works wherever Java is installed, which is probably quite a lot more machines -- including Safari on Mac, for instance. If we used anything non-Java, it would surely be Flash, which has much greater penetration than Silverlight on all platforms.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Aryeh Gregor Simetrical+wikilist@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:39 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
This is clever-ish:
http://www.atoker.com/blog/2010/02/04/html5-theora-video-codec-for-silverlig...
He says there that this will Just Work on ~40% of Windows boxes. Not bad.
Cortado works wherever Java is installed, which is probably quite a lot more machines -- including Safari on Mac, for instance. If we used anything non-Java, it would surely be Flash, which has much greater penetration than Silverlight on all platforms.
Yes, Cortado works in more places but there is no reason that BOTH can't be used, extending support to places with silverlight but without Java.
Additionally, although cortado will work the Java ~1.1 VM that came with Navigator 4... it's rather slow except in the latest JVMs. I expect that a lot of systems with silverlight are not running an especially modern JVM.
Flash isn't something in the running because you still need to be using encumbered media formats to use it... unless you're only playing audio: There are several independent Vorbis implementations for the flash virtual machine, no video codecs yet, and sadly the flash architecture is no where near as nice as the silverlight one for remote-loaded codecs so you have to completely reinvent all the media infrastructure.
On 5 February 2010 21:53, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, Cortado works in more places but there is no reason that BOTH can't be used, extending support to places with silverlight but without Java.
The thirty-second startup time of Java for Cortado makes it unusable, in my experience. Here's to Firefox 3.5.
Flash isn't something in the running because you still need to be using encumbered media formats to use it... unless you're only playing audio: There are several independent Vorbis implementations for the flash virtual machine, no video codecs yet, and sadly the flash architecture is no where near as nice as the silverlight one for remote-loaded codecs so you have to completely reinvent all the media infrastructure.
Indeed. What's the performance of the Flash ActiveScript Theora decoder like? Horrible, or just bad?
- d.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 4:58 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 February 2010 21:53, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, Cortado works in more places but there is no reason that BOTH can't be used, extending support to places with silverlight but without Java.
The thirty-second startup time of Java for Cortado makes it unusable, in my experience. Here's to Firefox 3.5.
Geesh. What JVM is this? I just stop-watched it here on http://myrandomnode.dyndns.org:8080/~gmaxwell/cortest/cortest1.html and timed a bit over 3 seconds... fresh browser reload, no prior java applets run, random 1.6ghz x86_64 laptop, and whatever JVM fedora 12 shipped with.
But yes, I'd hope and expect the silverlight stuff to load faster.
Indeed. What's the performance of the Flash ActiveScript Theora decoder like? Horrible, or just bad?
I'm guessing you meant Vorbis, as there is no Theora port. I've not benchmarked it, but it's supposedly a "significant multiple of realtime", but I think significant is something like 10x, which doesn't bode well for a video codec implementation.
The testing I did with the C->flash compiler on another audio codec convinced me that it could be made to work... though the performance may not ultimately be satisfactory. (e.g. it may only work acceptably on fast computers, at low resolutions, etc). Although the flash vm might be a lot faster by the time its done. I think it is somewhat moot to speculate on it when it doesn't exist and, as far as I know, no one is actively working on it.
In other news, There is some progress being made on an installable video native code tag for IE. (http://cristianadam.blogspot.com/2010/01/ie-tag.html there should be some more news on this in a few days)
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Providing support for Silverlight means that it needs to be tested tp ensure that the support remains stable. Silverlight does not really add value as far as I understand it. It competes with more open standards so reasons can be easily found not to support it. We have to invest in supporting Silverlight, the question is, how does it help us, our readers.
We have a reputation that we support open standards ... so how open is Silverlight ?
David's post isn't about "supporting silverlight" it's about (ab)using it to shim in support for open formats for IE users.
The current video infrastructure supports a half dozen different modes of playback, maintaining one more would be work, but I think it would have a decent value especially compared to some of the ones already there (VLC plugin? oy)
As far as openness goes, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novell_Moonlight
But I think it's quite reasonable to have different expectations for a technology used as an openness shim. For example, using flash normally has the effect of promoting a proprietary-web but if you use flash only as a <canvas> replacement for IE users it has a neutral or the opposite long term effect.
To the best of my ability to tell, Silverlight is in a much stronger openness position than Flash is, for whatever thats worth. Microsoft has been rather giving and inclusive in this particular bid for world domination. ;)
On 2/6/10, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The thirty-second startup time of Java for Cortado makes it unusable, in my experience. Here's to Firefox 3.5.
Firefox supports <video> since 3.5, so there's no need to use Cortado.
On 6 February 2010 10:32, Liangent liangent@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/10, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
The thirty-second startup time of Java for Cortado makes it unusable, in my experience. Here's to Firefox 3.5.
Firefox supports <video> since 3.5, so there's no need to use Cortado.
That's what I just said ...
- d.
Hoi, Providing support for Silverlight means that it needs to be tested tp ensure that the support remains stable. Silverlight does not really add value as far as I understand it. It competes with more open standards so reasons can be easily found not to support it. We have to invest in supporting Silverlight, the question is, how does it help us, our readers.
We have a reputation that we support open standards ... so how open is Silverlight ? Thanks, GerardM
On 5 February 2010 22:53, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+wikilist@gmail.com Simetrical%2Bwikilist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:39 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
This is clever-ish:
http://www.atoker.com/blog/2010/02/04/html5-theora-video-codec-for-silverlig...
He says there that this will Just Work on ~40% of Windows boxes. Not
bad.
Cortado works wherever Java is installed, which is probably quite a lot more machines -- including Safari on Mac, for instance. If we used anything non-Java, it would surely be Flash, which has much greater penetration than Silverlight on all platforms.
Yes, Cortado works in more places but there is no reason that BOTH can't be used, extending support to places with silverlight but without Java.
Additionally, although cortado will work the Java ~1.1 VM that came with Navigator 4... it's rather slow except in the latest JVMs. I expect that a lot of systems with silverlight are not running an especially modern JVM.
Flash isn't something in the running because you still need to be using encumbered media formats to use it... unless you're only playing audio: There are several independent Vorbis implementations for the flash virtual machine, no video codecs yet, and sadly the flash architecture is no where near as nice as the silverlight one for remote-loaded codecs so you have to completely reinvent all the media infrastructure.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
We have a reputation that we support open standards ... so how open is Silverlight ?
It seems to be on a similar lines to Flash, Microsoft retains the reference implementation, and there's an open-source wannabe implementation struggling along behind. Both have a reputation for being "closed source", and Silverlight is of course tarnished in the eyes of many by the Microsoft link.
If we are to support either, Flash would make more sense, it is as close as you can get to an ubiquitous plugin - but as noted below video codecs are probably beyond what is sensible to do with it.
Are there any stats to suggest there are a significant number of people who have Silverlight but not Java?
Conrad
Thanks, GerardM
On 5 February 2010 22:53, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+wikilist@gmail.com Simetrical%2Bwikilist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 3:39 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
This is clever-ish:
http://www.atoker.com/blog/2010/02/04/html5-theora-video-codec-for-silverlig...
He says there that this will Just Work on ~40% of Windows boxes. Not
bad.
Cortado works wherever Java is installed, which is probably quite a lot more machines -- including Safari on Mac, for instance. If we used anything non-Java, it would surely be Flash, which has much greater penetration than Silverlight on all platforms.
Yes, Cortado works in more places but there is no reason that BOTH can't be used, extending support to places with silverlight but without Java.
Additionally, although cortado will work the Java ~1.1 VM that came with Navigator 4... it's rather slow except in the latest JVMs. I expect that a lot of systems with silverlight are not running an especially modern JVM.
Flash isn't something in the running because you still need to be using encumbered media formats to use it... unless you're only playing audio: There are several independent Vorbis implementations for the flash virtual machine, no video codecs yet, and sadly the flash architecture is no where near as nice as the silverlight one for remote-loaded codecs so you have to completely reinvent all the media infrastructure.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 8:39 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
This is clever-ish:
http://www.atoker.com/blog/2010/02/04/html5-theora-video-codec-for-silverlig...
He says there that this will Just Work on ~40% of Windows boxes. Not bad.
A truly Faustian deal..
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org