Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

For all discussions on Safari and Chrome browsers, and any other browsers that uses WebKit as the rendering engine.

Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

Postby Antony » Wed 12 Jan, 2011 1:48 am

Google announced that Chrome will drop the support for H.264 video in Chrome's HTML5 component with an intend to increase Google's internally-developed WebM format as well as Ogg Theora.

Google does acknowledge the popular H.264 format had an "important role" but claimed that Google's WebM is open despite MPEG-LA standards group, Microsoft and Apple have warned that WebM may violate patents and could face legal trouble.

Abandoning H.264 could be a potentially risky move for Google. The majority of HTML5-enabled video on the web uses H.264 and in many cases was put online to help support the iPad and other devices that don't have built-in Flash.

Many web users pointed out that Google being hypocrisy on Chrome's integration of Adobe's proprietary Flash standard which contradicts Google's claim of only support open video formats.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 15261
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

Postby Antony » Wed 12 Jan, 2011 7:40 am

According to TechCrunch, H.264 has 66 percent of web videos.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 15261
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

Postby Don_HH2K » Wed 12 Jan, 2011 12:10 pm

The idea behind embedding Adobe Flash into Chrome was to provide for a leaner user experience, not just for Web videos.

In other news, Opera is supporting Google's move.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:2.0b9pre) Gecko/20110104 Firefox/4.0b9pre
Laptop: HP Compaq nx6325 - Turion 64 X2 @ 2GHz, 2GB DDR2, 100GB HD, ATI Radeon X300, 15" LCD, Seven Pro
Handheld: Palm Treo 650 - Intel PXA270 @ 312MHz, 10MB RAM, 32MB flash, 2.7" LCD, Palm OS 5.4
User avatar
Don_HH2K
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5112
Joined: Sun 09 May, 2004 3:59 pm

Re: Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

Postby Antony » Wed 12 Jan, 2011 7:37 pm

In terms of standards, it is more about the de facto standard support, not blind supporting of just open.

Without a doubt, open source extremists would insist everything open.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 15261
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

Postby crazypenguin » Wed 12 Jan, 2011 8:06 pm

I rubs me the wrong way what Google is doing in this case. It just doesn't make sense. Chrome will become another IE if they keep an making such changes.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/4.5; Windows) KHTML/4.5.4 (like Gecko)
crazypenguin
junior member
junior member
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed 11 Dec, 2002 11:26 pm

Re: Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

Postby Antony » Sat 15 Jan, 2011 2:41 am

Google has offered an lengthy excuse on why WebM was the codec in HTML5 <video> tag.

Despite the lengthiness of the excuse and the word "Flash" was mentioned, Google smartly avoided to explain its double standards on integrating proprietary Flash video.

Google acquired the VP8 technology (the heart of WebM) from On2 Technologies last year.
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 AlexaToolbar/alxf-2.0 Firefox/3.6.13
User avatar
Antony
diamond member
diamond member
 
Posts: 15261
Joined: Tue 18 Jun, 2002 11:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Google's Chrome hypocrisy move

Postby Fulvio » Sat 15 Jan, 2011 12:49 pm

I am not interested in going into this issue, more than superficially. What does the word support mean? With ISP, a program can work, but the ISP is not assisting the user. Is this the way with Google Chrome? Or they will make the
H264 unusable? What difference does it make to an average user? Other than Apple users?
UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:2.0b8) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0b8
A minority may be right, and a majority is always wrong.
~ Henrik Ibsen
WinXP, SP3, 512 MB, SM2.30, FF33, TB31.2, IE8.0 Ghostwall , Avast2014 Pro, also Toshiba Satellite laptop, 4GB, Win 8.1, IE11, Google Chrome 38
User avatar
Fulvio
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 12097
Joined: Wed 19 Jun, 2002 10:08 am


Return to Safari and Chrome

Who is online

Registered users: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Google [Bot]