• Youtube HTML5 Beta
    41 replies, posted
[QUOTE=johanz;19850122]This video contains content from ManyMorningsMovie, who has decided to block it in your country.[/QUOTE] I think that's what he means.
i can't tell the difference between flash and HTML5
The quality!!!! It's awful!!!!! Gah!!
[QUOTE=johanz;19850122]This video contains content from ManyMorningsMovie, who has decided to block it in your country.[/QUOTE] I'm in the US and it asks me to rent the video. $4 for a 78 minute video with no preview. No thanks.
[QUOTE=Doug52392;19849606]I lost all respect for YouTube after seeing this video: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK91Gsx1ePE&feature=featured[/url] [sp]This is what all YouTube videos will look like very soon.[/sp] So that would be over 90% of all YouTube videos?[/QUOTE] I love all the comments and ratings there. They truly reflect on how bad of an idea it was to start charging $ for videos. YouTube/Google needs to get it together. I remember back in 2006 when they said they would never have advertisements here. next thing you know, they did. I didn't mind the ads in the right side of the page or on the bottom of the video, but they truly became annoying when you had to watch them for 30 seconds before the video could begin.
Can someone explain to me what HTML5 is? Most I could gather from the wikipedia article is that it would reduce the need for plug-ins.
[QUOTE=Doug52392;19849606]I lost all respect for YouTube after seeing this video: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK91Gsx1ePE&feature=featured[/url] This is what all YouTube videos will look like very soon.[/QUOTE] It's not as though Google is charging people to watch the video. The [i]owners[/i] of the video are charging people to watch it on Youtube. You're completely overreacting. Most people on Youtube are not going to start charging people to watch their videos because no one is willing to pay money to watch that sort of stuff. The only things you're going to have pay for are things like the video you posted: actual films that you would normally have to pay money to watch in any form. [QUOTE=damian001;19856399]I love all the comments and ratings there. They truly reflect on how bad of an idea it was to start charging $ for videos. YouTube/Google needs to get it together. I remember back in 2006 when they said they would never have advertisements here. next thing you know, they did. I didn't mind the ads in the right side of the page or on the bottom of the video, but they truly became annoying when you had to watch them for 30 seconds before the video could begin.[/QUOTE] And you too. Think before you post. Do you honestly think that this is Google charging you to watch someone else's movie? NO. The makers of the film wanted to let people watch it online and they didn't want to just give it away for free, so Google started letting them charge people to watch it. Complaining about it is like complaining that you have to pay for games on Steam. Yes, there are free games on Steam, but some of them you have to pay for. It's not like you're paying for something you would normally get for free. I highly doubt that we're going to have to start paying money to watch shit like David after dentist or keyboard cat.
[QUOTE=MercZ;19856507]Can someone explain to me what HTML5 is? Most I could gather from the wikipedia article is that it would reduce the need for plug-ins.[/QUOTE] New standard for HTML because everyone (well not everyone) hates XHTML (previously everyone was saying "oh my god XHTML is the future of the internets") Anyway, HTML5 is the newest HTML specification which among other changes introduced a <video> tag. And with that came the arguments over which codec(s) should be supported. Mozilla is in the ogg bandwagon because ogg has no patents on it. [b]However[/b] there's a good reason for that - [URL="http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/weblog/2010/01/html5-video-and-h-264-what-history-tells-us-and-why-were-standing-with-the-web/"]some people[/URL] are concerned about H.264's patents being abused once it becomes widespread The reason why (if everyone settles on a standard) it would reduce the need for plugins is because the video tag would be handled by the browser - Flash is external and not part of the HTML spec
[QUOTE=damian001;19856399]I love all the comments and ratings there. They truly reflect on how bad of an idea it was to start charging $ for videos. YouTube/Google needs to get it together. I remember back in 2006 when they said they would never have advertisements here. next thing you know, they did. I didn't mind the ads in the right side of the page or on the bottom of the video, but they truly became annoying when you had to watch them for 30 seconds before the video could begin.[/QUOTE] I've yet to see a video that makes me wait 30 seconds to watch it. I think I had to watch a deodorant ad or something once, but that was like a year ago.
They better fucking add Firefox...
Use this: [url]https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/kchoimdlcbapmcdnheaahjcdpdjdpfco[/url] It's a Chrome extension that loads almost all YouTube videos in HTML5 format along with automatically selecting the highest HD mode supported for any given video.
[QUOTE=Odellus;19857987]Use this: [url]https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/kchoimdlcbapmcdnheaahjcdpdjdpfco[/url] It's a Chrome extension that loads almost all YouTube videos in HTML5 format along with automatically selecting the highest HD mode supported for any given video.[/QUOTE] Holy shit that is amazing. I love you.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.