Solution for HTML 5 Video tag

EDITED: 14 Jan 2010

Read:

• http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2011/01/googles-dropping-h264-from-chrome-a-step-backward-for-openness.ars
• http://www.osnews.com/story/24259/Microsoft_Opera_s_Haavard_Respond_to_Google_s_H_264_Move
• http://www.osnews.com/story/24243/Google_To_Drop_H264_Support_from_Chrome

The same stupidity of HTML 5 all bloated with ego of whoever is involved whether it be Google, Apple, Microsoft, Mozilla, Opera or whoever else that is inside.

A good solution is to support all formats (since the video tag allows specifying many video options) be it AVI, MP4, WMV, OGG, WebM, H264... everything. If the basic browser cannot handle the format, it would keep trying to look for available formats in the HTML 5 codes and if all options are exhausted without a satisfactory answer, it would look for a VLC or MPlayer or Quicktime or WMP plugin or some media player plugins and use these media players to execute it.

Just get this troublsome HTML 5 thing going rather than squabbling about what H264 or OGG or WebM stupidity.

If nothing can be agreed upon, then a forced truce whereby H264, WebM and OGG MUST BE SUPPORTED OR IT IS NOT HTML 5 VIDEO COMPLIANT !!!

If all else fails, simply scrap off HTML 5 video and make it an optional / experimental item and revert back to proprietary Flash video or the simplest is a good old hyperlink for download.

I don't like the way Peter Bright from Ars wrote that article although I refered it in the above reading list. His arguements are flawed by the way.

HTML5 flash video

Visit:

• http://www.skyfire.com/ (Skyfire mobile browser homepage)

What I felt is just not appropriate of the Skyfire technology which converts flash videos to html5 videos is because, you have to convert flash to html5 videos, which needs an extra step then just having a flash player in the page. Imagine if you want to watch flash videos, you need to send it to their cloud servers somewhere to convert the video you wanted and then send it back to you. It's such a long route and it takes much much longer then a native flash player built-in.

Since Apple doesn't allow Adobe Flash player, why not create a plugin that would replace the flash codes to a Smokescreen player call which would use Javascript and HTML 5 to become a flash video player ? Or maybe, the page should run their flash videos with a backup Smokescreen player in the event no Adobe Flash player is detected. Since Smokescreen is HTML 5 and Javascript, it should theoretically work well with HTML5 enabled players like Apple's Safari.

Why not take a shorter route than a longer route ?

Insecurity and Malicious Ferocity

Twitter Insecurity

Read:

• http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9187160/Twitter_antibodies_help_kill_worm_says_researcher

Twitter should serious look into it's input sanitization mechanism. Don't end up like in this XKCD comic depiction... catastrophy... but this comic is about SQL Injection, Twitter's problem is unsanitized input... similar to SQL Injection.

HTML 5 Insecurity

Read:

• http://samy.pl/evercookie/
• http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/09/lawsuit-targets-advertiser-over-sneaky-html5-pseudo-cookies.ars

PLEASE, the World needs less of these stupid insecurity and dirty business tricks. Why can't the World be in peace and less of these trickery and human flaws ? Oh... humanity loves these hypes and daily miserable drama.... I almost forgot about that... that's why we have so much meaningless things going on.

HTML 5... is just as INSECURE... that's my conclusion. It's time someone write a Free and Open Source software to take out these insecurities in HTML 5 and disallow others from misusing it. I suggest browsers should give users some sort of user friendly control to literally 'WIPE__CLEAN' all available storage areas. Browser makers knows best where and which corner in the browser data could be stored and hidden and what sort of mechansim can be made to cause data to resurrect like evercookie. We need a huge 'NUKE OUT THE NASTIES' button to take out these yucky things and never allow them to replicate on our side.

Browser makers should also step up security, making sure what sort of javascript and client side scripts that can be safely executed and not harvest user informations. It's unethical to disturb a person's privacy but what if one day YOU ARE A VICTIM OF PRIVACY ISSUES ? Ever consider that ?

HUMANS... think ....there are always consequences to actions we do. Consider well.

Read: http://www.osnews.com/story/23068/H_264_vs_Theora_Does_It_Really_Matter_to_Consumers_

I have commented about Theora and H264 in my blog post before. The above OSNews story is pretty good and it's true why should firefox and Opera support Theora when most people would use H264 on their machines? Imagine 98% would be using H264 and 2% using Theora as the article states as an example.Admittingly Theora is a very good as I have tried a HTML 5 powered by Theora and it is just isn't as good (smooth) as H264. I thought of another solution to this H264 and Theora tug-of-war, which is to get all browsers to have both H264 and Theora implemented. This would solve the problem for everyone in the near future and people (content providers, end users, uploaders...) would get to choose to support H264 or Theora. It's going to be a bloat admittingly but if you want a 'peaceful' HTML 5 in an attempt to break away from Flash, this is the best temporary solution I have thought of up till now.