Slashdot Mirror
Netflix Ditches Silverlight With HTML5 Support In IE11
An anonymous reader writes "Netflix today announced that it has finally taken the first step towards ditching Silverlight for HTML5, largely thanks to Microsoft, no less. The company has been working closely with the Internet Explorer team to implement its proposed 'Premium Video Extensions' in IE11 on Windows 8.1, meaning if you install the operating system preview released today, you can watch Netflix content using HTML5 right now. Back in April, Netflix revealed its plans to use HTML5 video in any browser that implements its proposed 'Premium Video Extensions.' These extensions allow playback of premium video (read: with DRM protection) directly in the browser without the need to install plugins such as Silverlight or Flash."
I like how it touts the fact that you don't need to install flash or silverlight but you still need to install Netflix's DRM stuff to decode the data. And if your operating system or machine isn't supported by Netflix, then you can't view the data. I don't see how this is any better than flash or silverlight. With those, you just need to install either flash or silverlight but now you need to install a DRM from each provider.
If I still have to have an approved OS and browser and install a DRM plugin, it's not really just HTML5.
Oh wow, we swapped one plugin for another.
If it's still MS only, who gives a shit?
According to Netflix, Microsoft made this possible by implementing three features in its still-unfinished IE11:
The Media Source Extensions (MSE), using the Media Foundation APIs within Windows. Since Media Foundation supports hardware acceleration using the GPU, Netflix can achieve high quality 1080p video playback with minimal CPU and battery utilization.
The Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) using Microsoft PlayReady DRM. This provides the content protection needed for media services like Netflix.
The Web Cryptography API (WebCrypto), which allows Netflix to encrypt and decrypt communication between its JavaScript application and its servers.
Sounds like this is locked into windows via the Media Foundation APIs
Geez, talk about stretching the meaning of "such as." The whole point of this is that it lets you play it in the browser by installing a proprietary single-source plugin. Sure, you can argue that your plugin isn't "like" Sliverlight or Flash, just like Microsoft might say Silverlight is also not a plugin like Flash, and Adobe might argue that Flash is not a plugin like Java. And the guy serving malware on porn sites might argue his video codec is not a malware plugin like the other ones are. "My plugin takes spam-sending orders from this botnet, not that botnet! See? It's totally different!"
That is exactly how these extensions are not plugins like Flash or Silverlight. In other words: totally meaningless bullshit. It's just another plugin, which happens to use a newer API.
Lie all you want about it not being a plugin, but the lie is pretty transparent and does more to discredit the speaker than it does to really deceive anyone.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
So in other words - Linux users get screwed as usual.
I'd be interested in hearing what other protocols would work?
The only ones I know of for network traffic are TCP and UDP. TCP guarantees in-order delivery of packets which think would be important for things like video, but I suppose that would cause lag if there were a lot of dropped packets.
Disclaimer, I do very little network stuff and only had exposure to Networking 1 and 2 during University ten years ago and setting up the occasional WiFi. So I'm probably out of date and this is a serious question not a troll.
I don't know if it changed but when I was in Canada, Netflix content was horribly outdated. In the US however, not so. They have a lot of brand new stuff.
Without DRM, someone could use a basic chrome plugin or a greasemonkey script to download the original video straight up, with virtually no need to rip anything.
Im not saying I agree, but its not as simple as you make it sound.
That said, Im curious how many people actually watch netflix online anymore, with the proliferation of set top boxes and netflix being built in every console, smart TVs and mobile devices under the sun.
Just on top of my head, at home we have 3 phones, 4 nintendo 3DS, WiiU, Xbox, blu ray player, the smart tv, the Roku and 2 android tablets with HDMI output that can run Netflix. Thats not counting any x86 machines....
I don't have to install a plugin. I have to install an extension instead. Can someone tell me how/why this is better/different? FFS!
A) people don't like Silverlight
B) the rumor is Microsoft is dropping Silverlight
If (B) is true then you probably want some sort of alternative. For example, depending on how they code, the plug-in could be fairly modular. If that company / group goes belly-up then hopefully by then there are more modules to pick from.
If that suggests/implies it'll eventually work on Linux with HTML5/extensions on Chrome browser, I can live with that.
All the shouting about DRM being evil and everything doesn't really accomplish what we want. You end up looking like a zealot, and you would have better luck holding back the tide with a thimble. If you want to get rid of DRM, you need to show them that it's not necessary. The best way you can do that is by not pirating their stuff, and actually paying for it if you feel that it's worth paying for. If you don't think it's worth the price they're charging, then don't pay it, but don't download it and then rationalize it by saying that it's too expensive to pay for, or you plan on deleting it once you've watched it. The people creating content have a right to set the price they want to charge for it, and you, the consumer, have a right to vote with your wallet. But voting with your wallet does *not* mean circumventing the rights of the creators, it means not consuming the product at all.
And I realize there's a very good chance that you don't download stuff that you haven't paid for, and that I'm ranting at the wrong person, but I have absolutely zero sympathy for the people who piss and moan about DRM in one breath, and then talk about how they download their movies and music because information wants to be free. These people are the reason DRM exists in the first place. I don't like DRM either, but as long as it doesn't interfere with the legitimate use of a product or service I'm paying for, I don't really notice it. If it starts to interfere with my use, I simply won't buy the product in question. The market will sort itself out, but as long as people keep giving them a reason to invent more draconian methods, those methods are going to keep being created.
Indeed. Netflix current works for Mac users... what's going to happen to them?
Sounds like this is locked into windows via the Media Foundation APIs
There may be lock in, but it's not exclusive to Microsoft:
Media Source Extensions (MSE) This specification extends HTMLMediaElement to allow JavaScript to generate media streams for playback. Allowing JavaScript to generate streams facilitates a variety of use cases like adaptive streaming and time shifting live streams.
Encrypted Media Extensions (EME) This proposal extends HTMLMediaElement providing APIs to control playback of protected content.
Web Cryptography API (WebCrypto) This specification describes a JavaScript API for performing basic cryptographic operations in web applications, such as hashing, signature generation and verification, and encryption and decryption.
They're all W3C standards track specifications. The first two have editors from the same three corporations; Google, Microsoft and Netflix. Google, in particular, can't tolerate not being capable of playing Netflix (10% of the population of the US subscribes to this) on its platforms (Android and Chrome OS.) It already works on both and you can take it for granted that Google expects to achieve parity with these specifications.
The last specification is not specific to streaming; it's a general purpose Javascript API to perform common cryptographic operations.
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
If so, what is stopping other people (e.g. some Firefox extension developers) to build the exact same thing, allowing Netflix videos to play in other browsers?
Nothing prevents Firefox from implementing HTML5 ECE, but then nothing is requiring Netflix to support Firefox as an approved browser for their ECE module. Of course, trying to re-implement the ECE module itself to independently support Netflix is a federal crime under the DMCA.
Bullshit. The W3C "standard" is only a plugin API.
The EME is tied to vendor provided Content Decryption Modules (CDMs). The standard does not specify the CDMs at all. It's a black box with "do as you like" label.
So even if the web content is using EME it does not mean at all that you can watch the content in your web browser. Just like you cannot watch Flash content without Flash, you will not be able to watch content without the vendor CDM.
http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
It doesn't in the slightest.
Rejecting flawed schemes that do nothing to accomplish the intended goal is zealotry?
It isn't necessary. It has already failed and will always fail. The problems is those who demand it the most are engaging in magical thinking and, like the most common magical thinkers, believe in DRM with blind faith.
DRM is about enforcing decaying business models and exerting control well past the point of sale (or eliminating the "sale" completely and moving towards perpetual rentership. See DivX.
You lock out a lot of users/platforms denting bottom line.
While no DRM would please the users, it would mightily displease the content owners, which Netflix is contracting with to legally provide their video streams. The vast majority of them *ABSOLUTELY DEMAND* DRM, as in not having it means Netflix can't legally offer their content.
Less content = less value = no customers anyways.
It's a bit of a crappy spot for Netflix to be in. Annoy the customers with DRM, or have no real content?
I don't read AC A human right
Even if HTML5 EME isn't "locked into Windows", Netflix appears to have chosen a Content Decryption Module that is.
Any argument made that says DRM is completely necessary for video MUST also be true for music or books.
We already know that is not true.
Video is not some special magical thing that needs different protection. IP is IP is IP. End of story.
...