SILVERLIGHT NOT WORKING ON MAC NETFLIX SOFTWARE
SILVERLIGHT NOT WORKING ON MAC NETFLIX FREE
SILVERLIGHT NOT WORKING ON MAC NETFLIX WINDOWS

The last thing they’d want is for web devs to start using vorbis, if the IE team haven’t committed to supporting it and/or possibly can’t support it due to licensing*. More likely, they would have attempted to hush-hush the vorbis business since the IE team have been trying really hard to repair their image in the web browser market.

SILVERLIGHT NOT WORKING ON MAC NETFLIX WINDOWS

IIRC, just paying for the h264 support that comes included with Windows costs more than they get in h264 royalties as a whole. MPEG-LA isn’t important, since they don’t own a significant enough portion of the patents for it to be a lucrative business for them. I highly doubt MS cared how they looked due to their membership within MPEG-LA.

SILVERLIGHT NOT WORKING ON MAC NETFLIX SOFTWARE

You may use both formats and only mirror the Theora and webM content to servers in the software patent zone. That may be solved by faster intercontinental networks or by just not using h264 indeed. The downside is that the consumers in software patent areas will have slower access since the server will be far from them.

SILVERLIGHT NOT WORKING ON MAC NETFLIX FREE

New Zealand is software patent free for now but that may change once the drafted bill has passed so I suggest to stay out of it as well. The risk is still high so I would avoid Europe too. They don’t allow patents on “programs for computers” but they allow patents on “technical solutions”, even if that solution is applied using a computer program. Just avoid Australia (the worst one), Japan, south Korea and the US. Almost anywhere will do provided the country does not have software patent laws and that is most of the world: Russia, India, China, The Philippines, etc will do. If you want to productize x264 without paying anything to the MPEG-LA, just loan a server in the software patent free area. Google dropping support for it in their browser is nothing but a glancing blow – and the big players are so enthralled with DRM I don’t see what difference it makes – they were never going to using HTML5 video anyway… If there is a step backwards here for the commercial world, it is a very very tiny step…

I don’t expect h.264 to go away, that is a pipe dream being peddled by irrational people – it ain’t going anywhere. That imo is more important than the “practical” concerns he expresses in his article.

I think the existence of such a scenario would open the floodgates to large scale participation in the video ecosystem for the “little man” – the gates keepers would lose their power. Best case scenerio is that flash supports webm container format in the near future – this would, for the first time (I think ever) give a royalty free video format an across the board delivery mechanism – tag for those that support webm and flash as a fallback. Google dropping h.264 will more than likely increase the uptake of webm at least to some degree, which will result in hopefully a royalty free standard that has enough legs to at least survive. He is also right that webm is no more “open” than h.264, they are both open in the sense of being transparent from an implementation point of view. Sure you can work on x264 or some other encoder/decoder, but you can’t actually productize it – actually implementating your work into any kind of product is simply off the table with h.264 if you don’t want to play ball with MPEG-LA.

On the other hand, if you are interested in actually participating in the development and enhancement of video distribution on the internet webm is a great thing – because without it unless you are financially backed by a large corporation you are not allowed to participate in any meaningful way. If you are a business that distributes video content through multiple channels, there are certainly downsides to Google dropping support for h.264 – at the very least it complicates your options. To me though, how you see this depends on which side of the fence you are looking at it from. He is absolutely right the argument against h.264 isn’t about “openness”, it boils down to money. That said, I read his piece with great interest and unlike most of the silliness I usually see posted about this he presented the arguments accurately and rationally, there really isn’t a single factual error in the whole article. It is obvious to anyone from my posts that I don’t agree with this guys conclusion.

Silverlight not working on mac netflix