| |||||||||||||
More about the Chrome HTML Video Codec Change (The Chromium Blog)More about the Chrome HTML Video Codec Change (The Chromium Blog)Posted Jan 17, 2011 2:04 UTC (Mon) by jmorris42 (subscriber, #2203)In reply to: More about the Chrome HTML Video Codec Change (The Chromium Blog) by kepstin Parent article: More about the Chrome HTML Video Codec Change (The Chromium Blog)
> Instead, use system media libraries...
That doesn't help Google at all. Remember that their browser is just the first component in what will be a complete OS offering called Chrome OS. So they will be the one packaging those system libraries as well. They would have two choices, pay the royalties for H264 support and include it in Chrome OS or don't... and have angry customers who get an inferior Chrome experience on the Google branded operating system vs Chrome on other platforms.
Nope, they are doing the right thing here. Perhaps for the most selfish of reasons, but as a Libertarian it is hard to find fault with that.
(Log in to post comments)
More about the Chrome HTML Video Codec Change (The Chromium Blog) Posted Jan 17, 2011 9:38 UTC (Mon) by DonDiego (subscriber, #24141) [Link]
> They would have two choices, pay the royalties for H264 support and include it in Chrome OS or don't...
This is a choice they already made:
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx
Google has previously shipped H.264 in the browser, shipping it in the system libraries (don't they already?) would not be a problem.
|
|||||||||||||