Slashdot Mirror


No HTML5 Hulu Anytime Soon

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF writes "The Hulu website briefly commented the other day about why they would not be implementing HTML5 video for their service: 'We continue to monitor developments on HTML5, but as of now it doesn't yet meet all of our customers' needs. Our player doesn't just simply stream video, it must also secure the content, handle reporting for our advertisers, render the video using a high performance codec to ensure premium visual quality, communicate back with the server to determine how long to buffer and what bitrate to stream, and dozens of other things that aren't necessarily visible to the end user.' They plan to release a dedicated application for the iPad and iPhone instead, likely a paid subscription service. Perhaps this is a good sign for Web-based television, as it will move more users away from the single, locked down channel from the networks and to more diverse options less interested in extracting subscription fees (like YouTube)."

5 of 202 comments (clear)

  1. Re:OK ... by jaryd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's probably more along the lines that Hulu isn't interested in rushing out an HTML5 app that will cost X to develop while their current client works perfectly well for the majority of their customers.

    Rather than retooling their website it is more logical to do what they are actually doing and code a standalone app that will probably get rejected from the app store.

  2. Re:OK ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, if a corporation dares to choose a widely-used product with a large install base, which fits their use requirements, as opposed to a relatively new, only moderate install base with different features available (no Firefox/Opera with H.264, no Safari/iPhone with Theora, no Internet Explorer period), which does not fit their use requirements on even one browser, then they must be 'in cahoots' with the company who makes that product.

    I know you were going for a better-than-average first post without too much thought, but really, stop listening to Apple. Adobe is not a conspiracy.

  3. Re:OK ... by Deadplant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is not a surprise, I work with online video professionally and html5 is not yet a serious option.
    RealPlayer, Windows Media Player and Flash are the only players that have the suite of features that are required to stream live and on-demand video properly.

    I am looking forward to the day when html5 is ready but it looks like it is a long way off.

    The "Flash is dead!" people have no idea what they're talking about.
    I mean just look at the API for windows media player or realplayer and then go look at html5... they're not in the same league.

  4. Re:At least they are honest... by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Honesty in this case - admitting that "our customers" (plus their needs) and their users aren't the same thing...

    Indeed. For any sort of no-cost-to-view "broadcaster" the actual customers are the advertisers. The correct use of the term "consumer" describes those who watch the programs for free in exchange for having to view advertisements. Customers as individual entities and small groups have barganing power while consumers only matter in very large numbers and thus the "broadcaster" relates to them in more of a "take it or leave it" fashion by comparison. Customers can take their business elsewhere; consumers must go to particular providers (i.e. copyright holders of shows) if they want a particular product.

    I have always regarded it as a form of Newspeak that a term indicative of diminished power and significance in the marketplace that comes from the jargon of one particular industry suddenly became applied to all customers in all economic transactions. One day about five to seven years ago it became in vogue to use "customer" and "consumer" interchangably as though they were the same thing. In conformance to the usual pattern, all the talking heads in the media suddenly adopted this usage and parroted each other as though they had always spoken this way. Always such Newspeak is in the form of using the degrading term to cover both cases and never in the form of using the elevating term to cover both cases.

    Observe this pattern once and understand it and you will then see it everywhere.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  5. Re:Performance is another issue by evilviper · · Score: 5, Informative

    While people love to hate on Flash, it actually performs quite will for video on most systems. It can chat with the video card and use it to accelerate decoding.

    Flash is a horrible dog. It's only VERY, VERY recently started performing well on Windows, because they gave up decoding video, and handed it off to the OS, which can accelerate it via the videocard. For fuck's sake, Flash didn't even do the most basic hardware overlay until maybe a year ago, available in the mid 90s on damn near every video card, and standalone video player.

    And while Flash may have gotten lucky on Windows, no such luck on other platforms. Flash on Linux is as big of a dog now as it ever was. Jumpy, flickery, tearing mess. And don't claim they can't do better, VADPU support on Linux has been in MPlayer for many months. Besides, I shouldn't need hardware acceleration just so stupid 480kbps 400x300 Hulu videos don't bring my 2GHz+ CPU to a grinding halt...

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant