Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: New player has begun

Expand Messages
  • elbowsofdeath
    Or one format if you dont mind forcing firefox etc users to fallback to flash. On a vaguely related note, anybody tried IE9 yet? Cheers Steve
    Message 1 of 9 , Sep 16, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Or one format if you dont mind forcing firefox etc users to fallback to flash.

      On a vaguely related note, anybody tried IE9 yet?

      Cheers

      Steve

      --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
      >
      > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Adam Warner <awarner20@...> wrote:
      >
      > >
      > > ...like Stan said. The price will be the determining factor, but I am willing o
      > > pay in order to export to ONE format for most devices and browsers....
      > >
      >
      > The problem is that there isn't one format that will work for most
      > devices and browsers no matter how much you are willing to pay. The
      > closest you can get today is two formats.
      >
      > - Verdi
      >
      >
      > --
      > http://michaelverdi.com
      > http://twitter.com/michaelverdi
      >
    • Michael Verdi
      ... But you can t do that. If you use the video tag, it will see it but no valid source. The fallback won t work. Unless, you use javascript to do some browser
      Message 2 of 9 , Sep 16, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 4:54 AM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Or one format if you dont mind forcing firefox etc users to fallback to flash.
        >

        But you can't do that. If you use the video tag, it will see it but no
        valid source. The fallback won't work. Unless, you use javascript to
        do some browser sniffing first and then do the embed but that adds to
        the complexity which is what you were hoping to avoid.

        - Verdi


        --
        http://michaelverdi.com
        http://twitter.com/michaelverdi
      • elbowsofdeath
        Who says that complexity is what we were hoping to avoid? Yes in an ideal world the video tag stuff would be working perfectly on its own in a nice and simple
        Message 3 of 9 , Sep 17, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Who says that complexity is what we were hoping to avoid? Yes in an ideal world the video tag stuff would be working perfectly on its own in a nice and simple way. But for those who are just looking for a way to host just one format of video, and who either dont mind a little complexity or use someone elses solution that hides the complexity from them, this does the job.

          Granted this then raises the question of 'why not just stick to using flash as a wrapper for everyone', which is ok on the desktop but obviously not a full solution if you want iOS device compatibility.

          Oh well. I'll certainly be interested to see if there is much benefit in paying for the Sublime video player as opposed to one of the other free solutions. In theory I dont see why it would be that much better than the free alternatives, but time will tell.

          What a shame the format issues stopped the real simple and elegant one-sie-fits-all solution from emerging in this era. Whats occuring with WebM, I seem to have heard painfully little about it since the initial Google announcement, is it doing as badly as I feared or even worse?

          Cheers

          Steve

          --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
          >
          > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 4:54 AM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Or one format if you dont mind forcing firefox etc users to fallback to flash.
          > >
          >
          > But you can't do that. If you use the video tag, it will see it but no
          > valid source. The fallback won't work. Unless, you use javascript to
          > do some browser sniffing first and then do the embed but that adds to
          > the complexity which is what you were hoping to avoid.
          >
          > - Verdi
          >
          >
          > --
          > http://michaelverdi.com
          > http://twitter.com/michaelverdi
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.