HTML5: First YouTube, and now Vimeo

[*LTD*]

http://gizmodo.com/5454115/first-youtube-now-vimeo-how-html5-could-finally-kill-flash-video

First YouTube, Now Vimeo: How HTML5 Could Finally Kill Flash Video

Flash powers almost all the video on the web nowadays, so it's obviously good enough. But is there a better way? YouTube, and now Vimeo, who're both giddily jumping into bed with HTML, sure seem to think so.

Vimeo's new HTML5 system is just like YouTube's, in both execution and technical details, in that it'll only work with a few browsers—Safari and Chrome, for now—and that it's compatible with most, but not all, of the company's video libraries. It's something that most people won't bother to try at this point, and if they do, they're probably be underwhelmed, since HTML5 video playback is almost indistinguishable from Flash video playback. (Moving pictures!)

But it's primed to be something that everyone ends up using, and that would be a Very Good Thing. Flash video performs terribly on Mac OS X and Linux, and on the few mobile devices that do support it, playback is uniformly terrible. And generally speaking, it's a plug-in. We whine about having to install Silverlight to use Bing Maps or watch some kinds of video, but it's a plugin the same way that Flash is.

HTML5 allows certain types of video to be rendered in the browser natively, like JPEGs or GIFs are now. It's an objectively simpler, more efficient solution, and disregarding the massive infrastructure built up around Flash video, it would be the obvious choice.

Luckily, YouTube accounts for a hefty chunk of said architecture, their catalog is rendered in HTML5-friendly h.264 format already—that's how you watch in on the iPhone and Android, by the way—and with help from smaller sites like Vimeo, they could actually get the ball rolling on, you know, murdering Flash video. In a world where everybody's browser fully supports h.264 HTML5 video—a world that's a few years away, at least—we wouldn't have to wait years for Flash support in our new phones, wouldn't have to settle of chugging video playback on near-new machines, and we wouldn't have to put up overladen, poorly-designed proprietary Flash players getting in the way of our content. We'd just have...video.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Maybe this will help you fanbois along so you stop bitching about the lack of flash. One day it will be as necessary as animated GIFs.

 

[Peace]

Maybe this will help you fanbois along so you stop bitching about the lack of flash. One day it will be as necessary as animated GIFs.

ummm..

*peace stares at your avatar.*

 

[NT1440]

I think youtube ditching flash may be the spark for a chain reaction.

 

[rdowns]

Easy there boys and girls. These are both beta tests. I've had quite a few YouTube videos not load for me under HTML5. It's a start but Flash, high CPU temps and roaring fans are here to stay for the foreseeable future.

That said, what a pleasure HTML5 is. Quality seems to be equivalent and CPU temps and fans are noticeably lower.

 

[Frisco]

Silverlight is the future.

 

[NT1440]

I want to see HTML5 kill Flash. I don't understand why people get so up in arms about needing propriety software for things, unless it comes to adobe's crap.

 

[ArrowSmith]

I want to see HTML5 kill Flash. I don't understand why people get so up in arms about needing propriety software for things, unless it comes to adobe's crap.

I don't get why people get so up in arms about needing proprietary Apple software for things.

 

[NT1440]

I don't get why people get so up in arms about needing proprietary Apple software for things.

Thats what I'm getting at. We see people scream bloody murder about being tied to itunes, yet they don't seem to give a **** when it comes to crap like flash.

It. doesnt. make. sense.

 

[localoid]

Key point below:

Flash powers almost all the video on the web nowadays

Keyword below:

nowdays

Personally I exist "nowdays", e.g. in the present, rather than the future. Rather than escaping into some "perfect", imaginary world that might exist sometime in the future I chose to deal with the here and now.

So tonight, I'll chose to use "the devil tool", e.g. Flash, to view the latest South Park episode rather than dreaming about the glorious days when the HTML5 version might be available. I really don't care about the @!@#$# protocol in use -- I just want to watch the damn show -- while I'm still alive to enjoy it.

 

[neiltc13]

How many times guys? Flash is more than just video, just ask the hundreds of millions of people who play games through their browser, something they can't do on iPad, iPhone or iPod touch.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

How many times guys? Flash is more than just video, just ask the hundreds of millions of people who play games through their browser, something they can't do on iPad, iPhone or iPod touch.

So? The biggest use of Flash on the internet is Flash video. I think we might ee HTML5 being used for low end systems, by that I mean slowers computers, mobile phones, etc. Flash is probably going to be popular, at least for a little while, on high end systems, like real laptops and desktops, where you have better and faster hardware.

YouTube now loads faster and plays better quality video. The interface just feels quicker and more responsive.

 

[Ambrose Chapel]

the only fear i have is that not enough web designers will actually switch to HTML5 - it's like the sites that are still optimized for IE instead of adhering to standards. but i guess as long as the major sites make the move the others can just fall by the wayside...

 

[GoCubsGo]

How many times guys? Flash is more than just video, just ask the hundreds of millions of people who play games through their browser, something they can't do on iPad, iPhone or iPod touch.

So? You don't think stupid farmville that everyone keeps bitching about can't be re-written in HTML5?

 

[MacDawg]

Call me incredibly boring, but I don't play games on my computer... ever... not even Flash games on the Internet. And Farmville notifications from "friends" almost singlehandedly drove me off my brief foray into Facebook.

And on top of that, I may view a YouTube video once a month, and usually from a link here on MR. I never go to YouTube on my own.

Flash means nothing to me

I realize others are passionate about it, but to me it does not affect my quality of life

Woof, Woof - Dawg

 

[SactoGuy18]

One thing that could hold back HTML 5.0 implementations is the need to re-encode ALL your audio and video in Ogg Vorbis and Ogg Theora formats; the code may be free, but the time involved in transcoding from Flash video to Ogg video could be enormous.

Mind you, HTML 5.0 could be the thing that could make the Ogg formats universally supported, even on hardware devices. It might even make Apple implement Ogg support on 3G and later iPod nanos, 6G and later iPod classics, and all versions of the iPhone and iPod touch.

 

[themoonisdown09]

One thing that could hold back HTML 5.0 implementations is the need to re-encode ALL your audio and video in Ogg Vorbis and Ogg Theora formats;

I believe you're misinformed.

 

[LethalWolfe]

So? You don't think stupid farmville that everyone keeps bitching about can't be re-written in HTML5?

It's not about Flash vs HTML5 it's about the iPad, which is being marketed as having the best browsing experience around, being crippled right out of the gate by not supporting a very common element of the web.

If everything that is Flash now gets rewritten into HTML5 before the iPad hits the streets that'll be awesome and it will make this a moot point, but I don't think that's a very reasonable expectation.


Lethal

 

[maflynn]

Flash isn't going anywhere soon.

No matter how the apple fanboys spin-it html5 has not been embraced to the extent that it can unseat flash. No matter what you say, surfing on the iphone and soon on the ipad is incomplete thanks to apple having a hissy fit with adobe.

While html5 may be the long term successor to flash, right now apple's decision to exclude flash only hurts them as the competitors certainly have been able to use flash on their smart phones.

 

[hotzenplotz]

Well, the only way I can see Flash surviving the onslaught of HTML5 and h.264 is as a niche product for online games and some database driven content. h.264 and possibly ogg video playback will inevitably displace Flash in the near future and we're at the very beginning of that process.

 

[mkrishnan]

Silverlight is the future.

Do you know, I'm really impressed with Netflix's Silverlight player... on 1.5MBPS DSL, it takes a long time to decide on video quality and buffer, but it's really quite rare (compared, *cough* to Youtube, Hulu, or anything else on Flash) for it to then stutter or deplete buffer once the movie starts.

I'm not sure how much of this was the buffer design decisions Netflix made (or being conservative in video quality), but it's impressive.

That being said, Silverlight is a problem in that it's just another language that needs a plugin that can only be sourced from one company, isn't it? If HTML5 pans out, it finally goes beyond that, and one wouldn't need to depend on these plugins anymore.

 

[kdarling]

So? The biggest use of Flash on the internet is Flash video..

Just barely. According to Adobe, 75% of video, and 70% of games, use Flash on the web.

I know that a tablet without Flash is useless to my young daughter, who likes girl game sites. It would also confuse my parents (and even my wife) if they went to a site and found a blue box instead of a menu, video or display.

I'm all for ivory tower standards, heck pushed for many all my life. But Apple's no saint in that area, with their custom set of HTML meta-tags to allow iPhone websites to look good only on iPhones.

When the iPhone hit, I was looking forward to a ton of mobile optimized websites, and instead got iPhone specific sites. So much for Apple and open standards.

.