Slashdot Mirror
A Skeptical Comparison of HTML5 Video Playback To Flash
gollum123 writes "Think we'd all be better off if HTML5 could somehow instantly replace Flash overnight? Not necessarily, according to a set of comparisons from Jan Ozer of the Streaming Learning Center website, which found that while HTML5 did come out ahead in many respects, it wasn't exactly a clear winner. They did find that HTML5 clearly performed better than Flash 10 or 10.1 in Safari on a Mac, although the differences were less clear cut in Google Chrome or Firefox. On the other hand, Flash more than held its own on Windows, and Flash Player 10.1 was actually 58% more efficient than HTML5 in Google Chrome on the Windows system tested. As you may have deduced, one of the big factors accounting for that discrepancy is that Flash is able to take advantage of GPU hardware acceleration in Windows, while Adobe is effectively cut out of the loop on Mac."
gollum123 also links to additional tests indicating that Flash "does not perform consistently worse on Mac than on Windows."
Well, I can't speak for Google, but Apple was one of three companies (two others being Mozilla and Opera) which founded WHATWG, thus putting a start to HTML5 development.
Also, it doesn't make sense for them to "comply with the standard" when there's no standard yet. As it is, both Google and Apple (and others) are writing the standard, and implementing the current drafts. Google also provides HTML5 beta of YouTube. If, as you say, there is no real business case for them to promote HTML5, they wouldn't do either thing.
The reason why Google touts Flash support in Android at the same time is because Flash is still relevant today, and because this is a major competitive advantage that Android has over iPhone. It would be foolish of them not to raise that point.
I wasn't particularly impressed with the Youtube HTML5 beta (using Chrome) and ended up opting out. Playback wasn't very smooth, the video controls are slightly buggy, and HD videos seemed to take more time buffering. As of right now, the Flash player provides a far better experience.
(And Youtube's player controls are probably far better than anything the average developer could come up with.)
Internet nerds are predicting that HTML5 will be the death of Flash Video, but IMO it still looks like it has a long way to go.
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Super cookies, yes. Maybe you have some? Read:
http://www.imasuper.com/66/technology/flash-cookies-the-silent-privacy-killer/
http://www.fightidentitytheft.com/blog/new-breed-super-cookie-defies-removal-almost
http://lifehacker.com/5245418/betterprivacy-prevents-tracking-by-flash-other-super+cookies
In short, if you don't know any better, Adobe enables web sites to install a cookie that your browser doesn't even know about, let alone manage. And, those cookies persist forever, tracking anything that the website chooses to track.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
It's not quite true on OS X. There is a standard way of playing back H.264 using hardware acceleration: use QuickTime. Adobe can't use this because they ship their own H.264 implementation (which is slower than the QuickTime one and ffmpeg), rather than using the supplied one. There aren't hooks for adding GPU acceleration to arbitrary CODECs, unless you use OpenCL, but there are APIs for playing back H.264.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News