Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Previews IE9 — HTML5, SVG, Fast JS
suraj.sun sends this excerpt from CNET on Microsoft's preview of IE9 in Las Vegas just now. "At its Mix 10 conference Tuesday, Microsoft gave programmers, Web developers, and the world at large a taste of things to come with its Web browser. Specifically, Microsoft released what it's calling the Internet Explorer 9 Platform Preview, a prototype designed to show off the company's effort to improve how the browser deals with the Web as it exists today and, as important, to add support for new Web technologies that are coming right now. Coming in the new version is support for new Web standards including plug-in-free video; better performance with graphics, text, and JavaSript by taking advantage of modern computing hardware. One big change in the JavaScript engine Hachamovitch is proud of is its multicore support. As soon as a Web page is loaded, Chakra assigns a processing core to the task of compiling JavaScript in the background into fast code written in the native language of the computer's processor." Microsoft didn't say what codec they were using for the HTML5 video demo, but the Technologizer says it's H.264.
Flash is an optional addon. There is no optional addon to play h.264. The support for the video is built into the browser, and once it's built in the browser cannot be redistributed due to patents. This is why Firefox can't play H.264, and the reason Theora doesn't have support from some key players. Without the patents, there is no control.
Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
Meaning Microsoft controls the kinds of video IE can stream?
This is a big opportunity for Microsoft to force the Internet media standards AND generate some meaningful license fees. Those fees would be paid to Microsoft to enable streaming your hot-new-VC-backed media format. Microsoft would never have to deal with those pesky media streaming competitors they used to call partners.
If I made decisions at Microsoft, that's how I'd do it.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Recently? Firefox ceded the "lightweight alternative" throne to Opera years ago and it seems like ever since Chrome dropped they've just been rearranging deck chairs instead of trying to get out of the hole they're in.
When did we decide it was a good idea for a browser to interrupt its own startup procedure to ask you about reopening tabs and updating extensions?
When I clicked the icon, I wanted to go to a web page! Do all that other crap after you service my initial intent.
I knew Firefox was on its way out when I got a nag screen on startup asking me to upgrade. When I declined, it didn't go away and launch the browser, no, it popped up a survey web page, inside a modal dialog which was way too small and could not be scrolled or resized.
WAY TO GO, FIREFOX
I know this is going to sound trollish, but hear me out.
I can't be the only one noticing that there is a recent upswing in what I'd call Microsoft "prototype news." All the blogs are full of Win Mobile 7 System Phone (or whatever they are calling it...), something called Courier that's probably vaporware, Natal, and now IE enhancements that aren't quite done yet. It feels to me like Microsoft shifted a good chunk of change into marketing for some reason.
It kind of feels like they are saying "Oh, don't look at that, we'll have something soon..."
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
You don't get it. If Firefox had h.264 support, it could not be redistributed. Period. Everyone would have to download the 'offical' version from Mozilla. No Linux distro could include it. No one could change the code and distribute it. It would cripple Firefox. Why the hell doesn't anyone understand this?
Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
Ubuntu doesn't seem to have a problem redistributing H.264 support in libavcodec.