If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
No announcement yet.
G-Streamer For Google's Chrome Proposed But Denied
I'd consider that bad practise. Do most people even use the static version of Opera? I don't and I haven't seen many that do. I find it runs noticeably slower.
I do. I'm running a Solaris 10 machine at work and don't have the ability to install packages... like Qt. It's not that I don't know how, I just don't have root access. In this case, the statically-linked Opera works great for me, as I can just install Opera in my home directory and it works fine. It actually works much better than Firefox 3.5.x (faster, much more stable, and handles 20+ tabs much better).
But what's more important is DirectShow backend on Windows and QuickTime one on MacOSX.
Going to QT4 or not is irrelevant and using phonon would of solved zero issues for Google vs using Gstreamer or ffmpeg or anything else.
They still would have to ship ffmpeg or gstreamer codecs or something like that with their browser. There is nothing with Phonon that solves the patent licensing problem that Google faces; which is the core of the problem here.
BTW.. gstreamer runs quite happily on Windows and OS X. As does ffmpeg's codec libraries. So there is nothing to be gained in portability either.
The reason is GStreamer loads the untrusted code at runtime. It would cause a potential security breach to the Chrome's security architecture.
What happens if security is breached because of the untreated GStreamer plugin? You blame Chromium right?