Firefox 46.0 Is Ready To Ship, GTK3 Support Appears Finally Baked

[anda_skoa]

They don't need google or anyone else to support an HTML5 client.

I guess this is a misunderstanding.

Of cource they don't need anyone else to support HTML5, but the content of certain sources is in an encrypted format, using proprietary encryption schemes, so supporting that content needs support from the vendors of these schemes.

Cheers,
_

[duby229]

I guess this is a misunderstanding.

Of cource they don't need anyone else to support HTML5, but the content of certain sources is in an encrypted format, using proprietary encryption schemes, so supporting that content needs support from the vendors of these schemes.

Cheers,
_

And that's the point and the reason netflix needs boycotted.

[anda_skoa]

CDMs are handled by HTML5's own EME. It doesn't get more standard than that.

While EME is part of the HTML5 "package" it is such a high level standard, that all the interesting parts, e.g. the CDMs. are unfortuntely non-standard.

EME is basically a standard that standardizes non-interoperability, allowing to detect which of the vendor specific incompatible methods are being used to handle encrypted content.

Cheers,
_

[bug77]

Do you think DRM mechanisms protect you the user? No they certainly do not. EME is so far from standards it isn't funny. SSL would be far better for everyone including you and netflix

EDIT: There must be a distinction made here between Restrictions enforcement and security enforcement. DRM does -NOT- imply security at all.

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how DRM works and what it does (e.g. DRM has nothing to do with SSL).
There are those who own content and won't release it on non-DRM platforms.
There are those who have problems watching DRMed content. And there are those who don't have such problems.
Firefox with CDMs caters to everybody. Firefox with no support for CDMs caters only to the last category.

This is not about whether DRM is good or evil. This is about browser in general not wanting to alienate users.

[duby229]

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how DRM works and what it does (e.g. DRM has nothing to do with SSL).
There are those who own content and won't release it on non-DRM platforms.
There are those who have problems watching DRMed content. And there are those who don't have such problems.
Firefox with CDMs caters to everybody. Firefox with no support for CDMs caters only to the last category.

This is not about whether DRM is good or evil. This is about browser in general not wanting to alienate users.

Oh trust me I do understand, Your DRM has nothing to do with securing content. Nothing at all. If what netflix wanted was secured content they could get it with just html5 and ssl. But that's not the point of DRM. And that's why netflix needs boycotted.

[bug77]

Oh trust me I do understand, Your DRM has nothing to do with securing content. Nothing at all. If what netflix wanted was secured content they could get it with just html5 and ssl. But that's not the point of DRM. And that's why netflix needs boycotted.

Like I said, there's fundamental misunderstanding in your head.
Content sent over SSL can be freely duplicated on the receiving end. DRM is not about security, is about making sure you don't pay for one copy and produce 1,000 others in return - SSL does not help you there.

If you wanted to fight for content freedom, you should have fought HDCP. That's a truly useless piece of technology that only Hollywood benefits from. And without HDCP, you wouldn't have today's DRM.

[duby229]

Like I said, there's fundamental misunderstanding in your head.
Content sent over SSL can be freely duplicated on the receiving end. DRM is not about security, is about making sure you don't pay for one copy and produce 1,000 others in return - SSL does not help you there.

If you wanted to fight for content freedom, you should have fought HDCP. That's a truly useless piece of technology that only Hollywood benefits from. And without HDCP, you wouldn't have today's DRM.

Like I said, I do understand. You got a camera right? There is absolutely nothing about DRM that can secure that content. If you wanted make copies of netflix programs you can do it right now.

Netflix can't prevent you from recording a program.

EDIT: You obviously don't understand what HDCP is, it prevents line recording. (Not to mention, HDCP has already been cracked many times.) (Also, not to mention HDCP is certainly not the first DRM mechanism) But there is absolutely no mechanism that can prevent screen capturing.

[bkor]

Well, you have a funny definition of "guaranteeing stability". Taking 3.0 through 3.20 to reach a solution that is scheduled to break again in 4.0 doesn't exactly define stability in my book. In fact, there aren't many projects I can think of that routinely break backwards compatibility on minor releases. Planned or not.

Edit: I'm not bashing GTK+ in any way here. I just have a problem when I see "GTK+" and "stability" in the same phrase.

It's not scheduled to break, nor were themes in any API/ABI guarantee, ever. Further, GTK+ follows semantic versioning. The major is increased when there's a need to break API/ABI. Not just "because".

Themes always had to follow the GTK+ version. Pretending they're not so you have something to complain about, while there's been loads of communication telling otherwise coupled with a complete lack of documentation that would've been guaranteed in any way is rather good example of trolling.

[bug77]

Like I said, I do understand. You got a camera right? There is absolutely nothing about DRM that can secure that content. If you wanted make copies of netflix programs you can do it right now.

Netflix can't prevent you from recording a program.

EDIT: You obviously don't understand what HDCP is, it prevents line recording. But there is absolutely no mechanism that can prevent screen capturing.

Well, if you think screen capturing yields an acceptable copy...

[duby229]

Well, if you think screen capturing yields an acceptable copy...

It may not be original quality, but I guarantee there are folks that can make a decent one.