Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Edge To Support Dolby Audio

jones_supa writes: Microsoft has revealed that its new Edge web browser will come with support for Dolby Audio in order to offer high-class audio when visiting websites. "It allows websites to match the compelling visuals of H.264 video with equally compelling multi-channel audio. It works well with AVC/H.264 video and also with our previously announced HLS and MPEG DASH Type 1 streaming features, which both support integrated playback of an HLS or DASH manifest," Microsoft explains in a blog post. Windows 10 will also ship with a Dolby Digital Plus codec.

105 comments

  1. I'm not the target audience apparently by Dreth · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'm not that big on streaming unless it's my girlfriend's Netflix which I don't even pay for, so I didn't even know sound quality was an issue that had to be addressed in browsers.

    --
    All glory to Arstotzka!
    1. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by taustin · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's OK, it will probably only be used for browser hijacking ads anyway.

    2. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by jonadab · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Indeed. Web browsers have generally not been on my list of applications that are permitted to play sound, ever since the capability to play MIDI was introduced in Netscape. Why would anyone want that? I do NOT want random websites that I look at to be able to decide what sound comes out of my speakers. I already have a media player, thanks, and the web browser is not it.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    3. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We know you're lying... you said you have a girlfriend. That's an instant red flag on Slashdot.

    4. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Web browser capability has moved beyond your late-1990s definition of what a web browser is, whether you like it or not.

    5. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo. On the VM I use to browse the Web, with the audio killed, it isn't surprising to see the speaker icon on the tab of many sites, especially the clickbait ones that people link, "OMG, #7 will BLOW YOUR MIND!!!111one!!!!".

      MS can add sound; it will still get disabled, and if some DRM mechanism requires the service to be in play, well, it can play to a bogus speaker. However, being the cynic I am, I wouldn't be surprised to see some elaborate DRM stack mechanism built into the browser that validates the user can hear the audio by checking the mic as well as signed drivers before access to a site is allowed... maybe even validating a user is present and paying attention via the web camera.

    6. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I have been married for more than 20 years and have two children and I'm on slashdot.... He/She can have a girlfriend...

    7. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG! Burn! Finally a fresh joke on /.!

    8. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by MightyMartian · · Score: 0

      If you're running Windows 8/8.1, why would even be running Netflix in a browser? The only time I run Netflix in a browser is when I'm on a Windows 7 machine, and even then, isn't Netflix running in a Silverlight plugin?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    9. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      He means Rosey Palm and her five daughters

    10. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Yes true. Today's browser is the means to create cross platform compatible applications. It's also the reason application development was more complicated than it needed to be. The progression towards better standards both at the visual rendering level and security level has really helped web app developers leverage the browser better.

      If it's an HTML only browser you want there are options (even within your existing browsers) but beware of the awful browsing adventure you are about to embark.

    11. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by taustin · · Score: 1

      However, being the cynic I am, I wouldn't be surprised to see

      the web become even more useless than it already is. There are damned few web sites that I have more than a vague passing interest in, and none that can't do without.

    12. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about what you got going on in TheSims.

    13. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by lgw · · Score: 2

      Hey, I have been married for more than 20 years and have two children and I'm on slashdot.... He/She can have a girlfriend...

      No, no, /.ers can totally be "married for several years", or have no girlfriend at all - either way you're not getting laid. It's that in-between zone that we don't see here. (There's an old joke: put a pebble in a jar every time you have sex until your first anniversary. Remove a pebble from the jar every time you have sex after that. The jar will never be empty.)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    14. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      web program developers

      HAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA HAHAHA hahahaha oohhh... wow.... you're funny

    15. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      That's OK, it will probably only be used for browser hijacking ads anyway.

      Just imagine how awesome they will sound!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    16. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by kevmitch · · Score: 1

      For Microsoft, this is just about sticking a brand name people recognize on their shiny new browser. For Dolby it's about collecting more patent royalties. If it were really just about sound quality, they would touting opus for lossy and flac for lossless. Opus is superior to the now ancient ac3/Dolby digital codec in sound quality per byte and flac is superior to lossless Dolby TrueHD in compression ratio.

    17. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      If there is one thing I truly can not tolerate is a web site screaming ads at me without asking first and especially being arrogant enough to make volume control awkward (even with a media keyboard and a mute button, that sheer arrogance of making volume control awkward infuriates me). Generally earns those sites and their advertising agencies, a script and cookie block, lasting about a year, possibly permanent. Want to show me ads (as in dominates the page), please may I is a prerequisite and be seen and not heard unless you I specifically allow it each and every time.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    18. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      if I'm streaming on my PC it's through Winamp or Windows Media Center. Otherwise, I go through my TiVO.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    19. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Dreth · · Score: 1

      I'm not running Win8. So there ya go.

      --
      All glory to Arstotzka!
    20. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Dreth · · Score: 1

      No fancy hardware for me, just a laptop and an external, bigger, monitor I watch from afar. I have a 2.1 Gigaware "sound system" (or the integrated soundbar on the monitor when I want something "quieter") and don't watch that many movies or shows, so that's why I instantly recognized I'm not the target audience.

      --
      All glory to Arstotzka!
    21. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Did anyone actually upgrade willingly to Windows 8? It looks like Wikipedia agrees with my gut feeling:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    22. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Do Opus or FLAC support directional encoding? I've always dealt with FLAC as a music codec, so it is possible it supports such features.

      What I find odd about this announcement is that MS Edge was supposed to be a lightweight browser, now they are tacking on Dolby? What next, will they tack on the old IE as a sub program?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    23. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FTFY: Today's browser is the means to create more malware + exploits than ever.

    24. Re:I'm not the target audience apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FTFY: Web browser capability has moved into more malware and exploits than in the late 1990's.

  2. Should have kept the Spartan name by thewebsiteisdown · · Score: 1

    Regardless, this is a surprisingly good browser. I think Microsoft has finally taken the feedback to heart. Now they just need to drag IE out behind the woodshed and put it out of its misery.

    1. Re:Should have kept the Spartan name by blueshift_1 · · Score: 1

      If only the could have changed the logo just a bit more... the edge logo still brings back bad memories.

  3. Finally! by gnu-sucks · · Score: 0

    I have been suffering browsing the web with only one audio channel per ear for literally decades.

    What to them so long, this is embarrassing. When I go to the movies I get to smell expensive popcorn and experience 6 to 16 channels of high-def audio. Why not on my windows smart phone and my tablet?

    1. Re:Finally! by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      I have been suffering browsing the web with only one audio channel per ear for literally decades.

      What to them so long, this is embarrassing. When I go to the movies I get to smell expensive popcorn and experience 6 to 16 channels of high-def audio. Why not on my windows smart phone and my tablet?

      The packaging of a phone would need to get larger to accommodate 14 additional ears with each phone. Not good for the environment. This won't happen until you can download the ears from the internet after receiving the phone.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    2. Re:Finally! by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      These two posts are like reading a technical treatise written by Lewis Caroll.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  4. Exactly what I needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I will be able to listen to obnoxious ads in glorious Dolby. Not really - I don't use MS's trash, and I have AdBlock in my browser anyway.

  5. Caught Up by darkain · · Score: 0

    So their web browser finally caught up to their media player from the '90s? Good job, Microsoft!

    1. Re:Caught Up by bobbied · · Score: 2

      How much you want to bet they just embedded the old media player?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Caught Up by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Everything about the web is like that. We are in the process of doing "on the web" everything we have already been doing locally for decades,

    3. Re:Caught Up by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Everything about the web is like that. We are in the process of doing "on the web" everything we have already been doing locally for decades,

      And we're doing it in a way that brings us right back to the era of mainframes. Although far more advanced, the model is highly similar to that of the IBM mainframe systems whose semi-smart terminals understood form fields and submission.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Caught Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just way slower + more insecure to give the losers of computing (webdouches) jobw instead of creating another welfare case that the real coders pay taxes for and who also wrote the browsers and operating systems you play coder on.

  6. Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Embedded MIDIs in 5.1 without the need for plugins!!!

    1. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your loss!

  7. that's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes, that's exactly what I need: trillala from my loudspeakers when I watch a website.
    Just great.
    If I want music - I connect a dac and a real amplifier to it.
    get lost mikrosoft

  8. Proprietary codec by danbob999 · · Score: 1

    Exactly what we don't need.

    1. Re:Proprietary codec by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Funny

      Don't worry - it runs in kernel space for performance.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:Proprietary codec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse. A patented and aggressively licensed codec that even with a non proprietary implementation would be a burden on anyone manufacturing devices using it

    3. Re:Proprietary codec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's opening the kernel for insertion while giving the Edge a sound position behind you.

  9. Disappointing by afidel · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is only Dolby Digital Plus, TrueHD support would have been much, much better and would have helped Dolby which has been losing the high end to DTS HD Master Audio.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    1. Re:Disappointing by lgw · · Score: 1

      TrueHD needs to die in a fire. DTS is CD-quality audio, while TrueHD and DTS HD-MA are just a waste of space. The latter is always mastered such that you can trivially rip the DTS track when you're ripping the DVD, but TrueHD leaves you with just the AAC track if you don't want to double the size of your rip. TrueHD is a copy-protection measure, nothing more.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Disappointing by afidel · · Score: 2

      LOL, more like it's audio for people who care about the quality of audio. I use the DTS HD-MA or TrueHD track with my receiver in pure direct mode so that I don't get all sorts of crap filtering and can just listen to the audio as it was intended to be presented (and how you'd hear it if you saw the movie in a theater, though generally with fewer tracks)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:Disappointing by lgw · · Score: 1

      DTS is CD-quality. AAC isn't - you can hear the difference between AAC and DTS. Beyond DTS is a gimmick.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re:Disappointing by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      I have some pure super HD gold fidelity-cables I want to sell to you.

    5. Re:Disappointing by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

      Neither TrueHD or DTS-MA are ever included on DVDs, so your ripping example is nonsensical.

      Ripping involves re-encoding, so just reencode the TrueHD audio on your BluRay rip as you do the video. If you believe that lossy DTS is "CD-quality" then the re-encoded-from-losseless audio should also be entirely acceptable.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    6. Re:Disappointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, more like it's audio for people who care about the quality of audio. I use the DTS HD-MA or TrueHD track with my receiver in pure direct mode so that I don't get all sorts of crap filtering and can just listen to the audio as it was intended to be presented (and how you'd hear it if you saw the movie in a theater, though generally with fewer tracks)

      If that was the case they would have used FLAC or MLP. Both DTS HD-MA and TrueHD are lossless codecs, so are mathematically equivalent to FLAC, MLP, PCM or PKZIP. The reason for yet another (two) proprietary codec is simply to throw lots of patents into a standard to extract license fees from AV equipment manufacturers.

    7. Re:Disappointing by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      TrueHD needs to die in a fire. DTS is CD-quality audio...

      With very, very few exceptions "CD-quality audio" sucks. Ripping crap gives you more or less lossy crap.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    8. Re:Disappointing by lgw · · Score: 1

      Did you know that a Bluray is a disc, holding video, in a digital format? It's true!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  10. Throwback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I read the headline, I assumed this meant that when you play your cassette tapes from a tape player hooked up to your computer through Edge, that you won't hear quite as much hissing noise due to Dolby Audio.

    To everyone who had no idea what a cassette tape was, I'm just showing my age.

    1. Re:Throwback by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Was that Dolby B or C? Or.... The dreaded professional A format? DBX was better if you ask me. Oh wait, Hang on, I need to go clean my 8 Track...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  11. Re:I assume IIS is required? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This has nothing to do with a web server at all, only the encoding of the content. And the entire point to supporting it within the browser is to make an extension unnecessary.

  12. De da dee da dee da do do by Glires · · Score: 1

    You haven't really heard the Hamster Dance until you've heard it in Dolby

    --
    -Glires
    1. Re:De da dee da dee da do do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New Dolby Digital / THX cross-promo logo?

      Imagine this:

      [Hamster dances]

      Dolby Digital

      [Hamster dancing intensifies]

      ****Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmm***

      [Hamster morphs into a chipmunk and gives a dramatic look]

      "The Audience Is Listening"

      [Goat faints]

  13. Dolby??? What's that. by goombah99 · · Score: 0

    Dolby means zip in the age of AAC et al. In the 80's dolby was a useful compander for your cassette tapes. Anyone could make a compander, but there had to be a standard. Dolby did the research, came out with a good one, and there ya go. Way better than no compander because of the physics of writing audio to magnetic media. In the 90s when the world had moved onto CDs and no compander was needed, They kept the name alive by introducing multi-channel stereo and big base to movie theaters. Again it was a standard and backed by research so it worked great. The shaking big base sound was novel too. So we got all the disaster movies, like who can forget Towering Inferno?
    But we've been in the digital age since the 2000s and there's just nothing left for them to add. There's all sorts of formats for pristine audio (PONO) or streamed audio or 1000 songs in your pocket (AAC). these days your headphones matter more than the avialability of a good sound storage algorithm.
    Dolby is just a name that people of a certain age will buy because if it's reputation from the days of Cassettes.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  14. Re:I assume IIS is required? by bobbied · · Score: 1

    IF you want the full integrated experience, you got to stay with one vendor.... You know how this game is played, at least until the EU forces you to unbundle...

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  15. Good news for Netflix by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Funny

    This is potentially good for Netflix since Windows users have been limited to stereo from Netflix for some time now since Netflix uses Silverlight.

    1. Re:Good news for Netflix by sexconker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's not a Silverlight limitation. Netflix limits the general web user to stereo for piracy concerns.

    2. Re:Good news for Netflix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not (entirely) correct. - You can use the Windows 8 App, which gives you Dolby Digital 5.1.
      That's the only reason for me to have Windows 8.1 on my HTPC instead of Windows 7...

    3. Re:Good news for Netflix by NDrinks · · Score: 1

      That could be a blessing in disguise. The bitrate Netflix uses on Dolby Digital Plus was reduced and now gives a horrible quality centre channel, considering that's the most active speaker because it's for dialogue it's painful to listen to. Voices sound garbled, constant sibilance artifacts and the telltale "underwater" sound similar to a low bitrate mp3. I've had to resort to forcing my player (a PS4) to report to Netflix that it doesn't support DD+, causing it to output multi-channel PCM which sounds fine. I'm fairly sure the DD+ codec allows you to specify more bits to specific channels so that's all they need to do, it's definitely not my hardware either as it used to be fine before they made the reduction. They surely can't be making so much of a saving in bandwidth that it's worth wrecking the audio for.

    4. Re:Good news for Netflix by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      I'm using the Windows 7 media center player version of Netflix, which was been abandoned about 5 minutes after it was released. Apparently Windows 7 is an ancient operating system that no one uses any more.

  16. Up Next: Monster Cable Ethernet Protocol by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Microsoft will no doubt partner with Monster Cable to come up with a new IP Layer for transporting web pages with perfect fidelity, much the way that Monster Cable CAT-5 provides perfect Ethernet.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Up Next: Monster Cable Ethernet Protocol by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      At $45 a foot per cable.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Up Next: Monster Cable Ethernet Protocol by Rasperin · · Score: 1

      But it's made with 0.0001% of gold! Totally worth it guyz.

      --
      WTF Slashdot, why do I have to login 50 times to post?
    3. Re:Up Next: Monster Cable Ethernet Protocol by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      I laughed harder than I should at this, thanks funny guy.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    4. Re:Up Next: Monster Cable Ethernet Protocol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A move like that is more Apple style than anything else. By the way, I like how you totally got owned here and here, but I'd like to add that the original Dolby B noise reduction system wasn't that good. Dolby C and S, however, were.

    5. Re:Up Next: Monster Cable Ethernet Protocol by OutOnARock · · Score: 1

      i hear that making the keys on your keyboard out of wood also helps fidelity :)

  17. Noticably lacking: by SuricouRaven · · Score: 0, Troll

    Still no Vorbis support. Or WebM.

    Strange. It almost looks like Microsoft is only supporting technologies that require patents they own.

    1. Re:Noticably lacking: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, only supporting codecs that have a known IP licensing path. That's worth paying some money, especially compared to the alternative of relying on the vague and either naïve or cynical IP promises (promises they've shown willingness to walk away from when pressed) from a company which makes no bones about wanting to destroy them.

    2. Re:Noticably lacking: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ogg is not in grey IP limbo, especially not Vorbis. I'll agree with you on Google's WebM, but only because it's comedy gold how they got everyone else to agree to use it, then decided to keep h263 support, effectively rendering WebM completely pointless, presumably because it would cost more to transcode all of YouTube than it would to just let all that effort on WebM be rendered completely pointless. And yet they still think people will adopt WebP like being burned once wasn't enough.

    3. Re:Noticably lacking: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Vorbis on my phone, but fuck you for even mentioning WebM. It sucks big donkey dick, looks like shit, and encoding is slow as fuck. Again, FUCK YOU and shove that WebM bullshit up your conceded asshole.

  18. Re:I assume IIS is required? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the HLS support that Microsoft is talking about, yes. Their DASH works out of the box, but their HLS support is going to require you transcode the HLS stream via IIS. There is an alternative option provided by a third party plugin that adds HLS support to Microsoft's Player Framework for "universal" (windows) apps, however it is not supported by Microsoft and won't have support for this new Dolby Digital Plus feature. This all may change in the near future, but that's what I understand is the case at the moment.

  19. Dolby Atmos or DTS:X? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like we need a overhead channels on the web maybe for movies but 4K + good 8-64 channel sound will kill your data cap.

  20. This is NOT new, and there are other problems... by StandardCell · · Score: 2

    Not too long after Windows 8 launched with the AC-3 and E-AC-3 codecs, Internet Explorer has had the capability to decode these audio formats. It recognizes the FourCC codes in the ISO Base Media File Format container as well as the MIME tags.

    Part of the problem, however, is the perceived shift in both audio loudness and the perceived location of speech. All AC-3 and E-AC-3 content, when properly measured, should play dialog back at -31dB relative to full digital scale. Unfortunately, this makes the codec inherently quieter unless the decoder is set to something called RF mode, which boosts the loudness to -20dB and compresses the audio more heavily. Such control for loudness is not typically found in HTML5-based apps, though the W3C has a committee working on this issue. The loudness can be a particular problem on the Windows 8 tablet devices out there, as many programs in AAC format come pre-normalized to somewhere around -23dB to -24dB relative to full scale. Unless all content is pre-normalized to the same consistent playback level - which AAC ads will definitely not be, and probably not AAC stereo content - there will be an inconsistency of experience.

    All of this also presupposes that you have either a proper surround virtualizer or a discrete 5.1 speaker system such as is found in a properly set up home theater. Considering that less than a third of homes have any kind of surround sound in them, and given the loudness issues, I'm not certain what the benefits will be here. But it gets even worse, as dialog in multichannel AC-3 and E-AC-3 is steered to the center channel in most programs, whereas in stereo content it is mixed into left and right without regard to position. This can result in disturbance to the listener. Furthermore, any channel configuration changes to an audio-video receiver will typically cause muting when switching modes between stereo output and multichannel output, potentially interrupting the experience for the listener.

    Part of this is the add-on nature of AC-3 and E-AC-3 to Windows and an inherent failure to integrate stereo AAC and HE AAC playback behavior with that of stereo and multichannel AC-3 and E-AC-3. Until then, this will be more of a curiosity than anything substantially improving the consumer's experience, and developers should take note if they believe that HTML5/CSS/Javascript development of their apps can really unify their experience across devices yet.

  21. Re:I assume IIS is required? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I forgot to mention that if you use the tag in their Edge browser, the HLS and DASH will both be supported. The IIS transcoding or Player Framework third party plugin for HLS are only for non-web app development.

  22. Re:I assume IIS is required? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll take that over the bulk of Google's services which either only work in Chrome or Google pretends to only work well in Chrome when they spam me with the "Modern Browser" download button.

  23. Netflix surround sound? by SilverBlade2k · · Score: 1

    Does this mean that Netflix will (finally) be surround sound through the browser?

  24. Finally! by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    Each click in panoramic 3D HD Audio Surround Sound! I can hardly wait

  25. Dolby by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is a free elf...

  26. What about Opus? by cynicist · · Score: 1

    Where is Opus support? It's a royalty-free, open standard, and one of the best performing codecs available, especially when it comes to low bitrate streaming. It's also already supported by two major browser vendors. Of course you can't lock people into your platform with it... but that shouldn't matter, right?

    1. Re:What about Opus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, then they'd have to compete with other browsers already supporting Opus, instead of putting out a shiny-sounding PR about being the first instead of merely being third. After all they have a decade of ill-will and resentment toward Internet Explorer to wash away, and they won't do that by pulling a Mozilla... they have to aim more for Google or Apple here.

  27. Re:Dolby??? What's that. by adolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Dolby does a lot of good research. That you throw them aside as a relic of the past, while at the same time discrediting them for some of the formats you praise (AAC is a thing in part due in part to Dolby's participation in creating the standard) simply shows that you have a myopic and illogical view of the world.

  28. Vorbis defunct by mister_playboy · · Score: 1

    Opus has replaced for Vorbis for all use cases AFAIK, since it is better at low bit rates and equal at high bit rates.

    --
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    1. Re:Vorbis defunct by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      By most accounts Opus is superior - but it's also more recent, so there's a lot of content already in Vorbis format. IE supports neither.

    2. Re:Vorbis defunct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft supports Opus in WebRTC. Opus is built from the combination of CELT codec from Xiph and SILK codec from Skype, which Microsoft now owns. So it'll be a shame if they don't support end up supporting Opus for at least HTML5 audio as well as WebRTC in Edge.

  29. Re:This is NOT new, and there are other problems.. by dj245 · · Score: 1

    All of this also presupposes that you have either a proper surround virtualizer or a discrete 5.1 speaker system such as is found in a properly set up home theater. Considering that less than a third of homes have any kind of surround sound in them, and given the loudness issues, I'm not certain what the benefits will be here. But it gets even worse, as dialog in multichannel AC-3 and E-AC-3 is steered to the center channel in most programs, whereas in stereo content it is mixed into left and right without regard to position. This can result in disturbance to the listener.

    I'm deaf in one ear, you insensitive clod!

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  30. Feature by Livius · · Score: 1

    I would pay actual money for a browser that had *no* sound capability.

    Or even just one that I could reliably disable sound on.

  31. Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why even bother trying to boast about High Quality playback (other than marketing)? Almost any audio and video on the web is compressed anyway and having "Dolby Audio" isn't going to make this significant difference. Even if you did load lossless audio and video, why would I do it in a web browser?

  32. Re:Dolby??? What's that. by ihtoit · · Score: 4, Informative

    Thank Dolby Labs for no-hiss DACs, noise-cancelling headphone cans, ADC floor filters, echo and feedback cancellation, cellular handsfree...

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  33. Just trolling by GinRummy33 · · Score: 1

    Man, that Thomas Dolby guy is such a genius. Science!

  34. Re:Dolby??? What's that. by Smauler · · Score: 1

    They did a lot of good research, but you don't do heavy metal in Dobly.

  35. Re:Dolby??? What's that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the amount of time you put into this post you sure as hell are utterly ignorant.

  36. Mostly for consuming music on YouTube... by vhogemann · · Score: 1

    It seems that young folk these days use YouTube, and other video sites, a lot to listen to music videos. So probably Microsoft just want another brand to use on its marketing war.

    But I don't see how this will actually matter without support from other browsers. Who will waste CPU time and storage to create a stream that only one minor browser can take advantage of?

    --
    ---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
  37. So this week by sproketboy · · Score: 0

    It's called Edge? Wasn't it Spartan before? Next week it will be called???? Slashdot poll please!

  38. Re:This is NOT new, and there are other problems.. by neo-mkrey · · Score: 1

    I wish I had mod points today so I could give you +1 Informative.

  39. Which services does it support? by tepples · · Score: 1

    I already have a media player, thanks, and the web browser is not it.

    How many streaming music and video services does your preferred media player support? And how can a new streaming music or video service arrange to be supported in your preferred media player? Finally, how should a browser-based video game play its music and sound effects? Or is the concept of a "browser-based video game" itself abhorrent to you?

    1. Re:Which services does it support? by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > How many streaming music and video services does your preferred media player support?

      One. It streams from my playlist. Only. Ever.

      > And how can a new streaming music or video service arrange to be
      > supported in your preferred media player?

      Streaming services can go jump in a lake. I listen to what *I* want
      to listen to. If I wanted to hear random ear-punishing junk somebody
      else picks without consulting me that doesn't match my tastes at all,
      I could turn on a radio.

      > Finally, how should a browser-based video game play its music
      > and sound effects?

      A) I can't think of any reason for a video game to be browser based.
      B) When I do play games that have sound and music, I normally
              turn the game's sound and music off so I can listen to what *I*
              want to listen to, which is generally much better than listening
              to video game music.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    2. Re:Which services does it support? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Streaming services can go jump in a lake. I listen to what *I* want to listen to.

      Then how do you discover new music that matches your tastes?

      I can't think of any reason for a video game to be browser based.

      Not everybody has privileges to permanently install games to a given machine, and not every game happens to have been ported to a given native platform.

  40. Re:Dolby??? What's that. by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

    Dolby has moved far beyond the original analog companding system. Digital Dolby systems are used for the sound in the majority of movie theaters, most DVD and Blu-Ray discs, all digital television broadcasting in the US, and both Amazon and Netflix can send Dolby Digital sound with their streams so you can have surround sound. On a computer that generally means pass-through to a digital output that you can connect to your receiver: at first it was usually a separate stream via S/PDIF or Toslink, now it's usually part of the HDMI signal along with the video.