1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

html5 video tags

Discussion in 'HTML & Website Design' started by FrontEndDev, Feb 9, 2016.

  1. #1
    Trying to figure out why there needs to be 3 video formats declaired when using the html5 video tag? can someone explain this to me please?
     
    FrontEndDev, Feb 9, 2016 IP
  2. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,732
    Likes Received:
    1,998
    Best Answers:
    253
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #2
    Oh, that's easy. Browser makers are territorial pricks, the people owning the rights to video codec schemes traditionally border on being patent trolls viciously defending their IP and extorting money for the use, and HTML 5's VIDEO tag was created specifically to CREATE vendor lock-in and dictate to us what we can use, since browser makers were too lazy to sandbox plugins properly much less how DARE the users decide what format they like.

    A LOT of that stemming from the sour grapes of the LAST format war between Microsoft, Apple, and Realplayer, who to this day hold a grudge over the "upstart" flash having basically destroyed the public giving a flying **** about WMP, Quicktime or RA files. (not that anyone outside of spanking porn fetishists and effite eurotrash beatnik wannabe's ever gave a flying *** about Realplayer.)

    To put it more simply, the MPEG group wants browser makers to pay them money to use MP4 video or anything derivitive of it, or MP3 level audio, or MPEG2 video... Something many browser makers are unwilling to do, but others are. VP8 was similar until Google snatched it up and said go ahead, use it... Ogg Vorbis is fringe whackjob "free as in freedom" FSF nutjob BS that the "rage against the man" hipster crowd still creams their panties over like FLAC, even while it's quality, efficiency, and usability remains an utter and complete joke. It gets worse when there are competing video codecs, competing audio codecs, competing CONTAINER formats to stick the encoded data streams into -- AND EVERY BLASTED BROWSER MAKER HAS THEIR OWN FAVORITE PET!

    We went through the EXACT same BS 17 years ago, just today the competing "standards" and corporate greed vs. dirty hippy pissing contests are taking place inside the browser instead of via plugins.

    Apple pretty much wants you to use H.264 video (a Mpeg4 derivitive) with MP3 audio in a MP4 container file, and has only recently BEGRUDGINGLY accepted AAC audio in same. So far as Theora video with Vorbis audio in a OGG container goes, Apple says go **** youself. LITERALLY. The only reason there's VP8 Video and Vorbis Audio (confused yet?) support is at one point Google was helping maintain webkit. In that same way Microsoft has zero plans to ever really accept Ogg.

    VP8 in WebM is Google's baby, which is why Safari got back-support via webkit contributions, and why I wouldn't hold my breath on seeing Apple add VP9 or Opus audio any time soon. When Google gave Apple the finger, forked off their own version of Webkit called "Blink" and stopped contributing back to the parent project, they also absconded with MOST of the talented developers as well -- hence why Safari is aging like milk, to the point there's now a blue tree of mold growing out of it. (likely held in place by the -webkit browser prefix)

    Google has made it open which is why FF and IE9 both added support really quick as it's VERY easy to implement in new software. (The API is ridiculously well thought out).

    Firefox remaining the media darling of the "downtrodden elite" and the "championing of open source" first and foremost handles Ogg better than anyone else... probably because they are the only ones who ever REALLY gave a shit about it. They've begrudgingly agreed to implement WebM and MP4 on certain platforms in the actual firefox builds, but the granola crunch-me "Oh noes, they trademarked the logo and name" Starbucks hipster nutjobs who use things like Iceweasel because "corporationz bads" nuttters will never have support for anything but Ogg. (So basically the "Church of Stallman" cultists)

    Microsoft used to have a giant patent portfolio, but since they had the rights to use MP4 already in place and paid for, they followed Apple's suit, but as they are no longer really a player (making that investment in Indeo having paid out SO well for them) in codec extortion -- uhm, I mean creation and development -- and are trying to improve their image in terms of web standards, they said "fine" when Google opened up WebM for everyone.

    Basically it's a pissing contest between Capitolist money-grubbers and communist whackjobs playing out on the browsers, with us web developers basically caught in the crossfire. The LAUGH being both sides started this pissing war because "Flash bad" -- the corporate side out of jealousy and sour grapes of having lost the last round to it, the open source nutters because Adobe is a "big evil corporation" trying to start a new world order, or one world government, or some other tinfoil hat conspiracy BS.

    Because of course the result has been SO much better than simply sticking with Flash and then yelling at Apple to stop hobbling it on their damned platform and ride Microsoft's ass about FIXING THE DAMNED OBJECT TAG!

    Not that the <audio> or <video> tag serve any legitimate purpose apart from pointless redundancies that HTML 4 Strict was trying to get rid of USING <object>.... but no, let's introduce two new redundant tags AND allow people to use the IE proprietary EMBED, instead of just FIXING THE DAMNED BROWSERS!

    Of course, if Microsoft had actually fixed OBJECT in IE7 maybe we could have had the PROPER successor to HTML 4 strict and gotten rid of the IMG tag too... Then we could start using formats like JPEG2000 or WEBP right away instead of hoping against hope to SOMEDAY see proper support for them.
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2016
    deathshadow, Feb 9, 2016 IP
  3. FrontEndDev

    FrontEndDev Peon

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    #3
    ok, that clears it up!!
     
    FrontEndDev, Feb 10, 2016 IP
  4. deathshadow

    deathshadow Acclaimed Member

    Messages:
    9,732
    Likes Received:
    1,998
    Best Answers:
    253
    Trophy Points:
    515
    #4
    Oh, don't know if you've ever seen it, but the MDN page on the supported formats:
    https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Supported_media_formats

    Is damned handy, particularly the "browser table" halfway down the page.
    https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Supported_media_formats#Browser_compatibility

    If you look at the browsers, the versions in which support is added, on both the desktop and mobile tabs, you can almost see what I described above playing out. You can actually be kind-of thankful today that we're past FF's "Ogg or GTFO" vs. Apple's "MP4 or GTFO" pissing contests.

    I don't know if I actually cleared it up or not, I started to get lost writing it out and I've been mostly observing this "behind the scenes" first-hand at a few of said companies. It IS ridiculously confusing.

    ... and FRUSTRATING as it's a stunning example of how Browser makers have those of us making websites by the balls, could really give a flying purple fish about web developers, or even good development practices. We're basically at the whims and mercy of their little pissing contests, and nowhere is that more evident than the AUDIO and VIDEO tags.

    If you look at font format support -- TTF vs. EOT vs. OTF vs. WOFF vs. SVG you can see the same thing and the same battle-lines drawn... disturbing since the ENTIRE mechanism is a copy of what Microsoft introduced in IE5 roughly 18 years ago; but because it came from Microsoft everyone else had to "go their own way" and do EVERYTHING in their power to sabotage it.

    Just be glad we're past the age of screwing around with nonsense like CuFon or sIFR.
     
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2016
    deathshadow, Feb 11, 2016 IP
  5. FrontEndDev

    FrontEndDev Peon

    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    #5
    They definitively do not have the developers best interest in mind...

    Thanks for the resource!
     
    FrontEndDev, Feb 11, 2016 IP