Martin Sourada wrote:
That's not what I meant. They are forcing you to use format they've
chosen and it does not matter if it's patent encumbered or not, the idea
is that you are restricting choice and forcing your users to use what
you think is good for them.
It does matter whether it is patent encumbered or not. Even if you only
one format to pick and what you have is not patent encumbered, everybody
is free to use it. Remember that Firefox is a cross platform application
and itself a platform and cannot rely on gstreamer being available.
Bundling gstreamer with Firefox is worse than bundling liboggplay.
Yes, it uses various backends depending on platform for <video>/<audio>
tags, in linux it's most likely gstreamer both for GTK a and QT, which
basically means that on our platform it supports whatever gstreamer
supports (depends on what plugins you have installed). Meaning in webkit
you'll be able to play same range of videos you can with totem, while in
firefox you'll be restricted to open source, not patented codecs and ogg
format. Well, we'll see if the <video> tags will actually be used and
how...
Supporting one codec natively on all the platforms makes it easier for
websites to rely on what is available consistently. You can bet Apple
which controls WebKit won't be using gstreamer on other platforms which
means you cannot rely on any codec support being available natively.
a) WebKit is not popular enough to make a difference and support for
codecs is very fragmented (no support in Chrome, differs depending on
the operating system, browser etc)
b) Linux is not popular enough on desktops to make a difference
It takes a popular cross platform FOSS app like Firefox to even stand a
fighting chance.
Rahul
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
