Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by zozbot234 1459 days ago
> Refusing to spec it would have just given us another two decades of Flash-equivalent hell.

That's pretty much what we got with EME, since the technology relies on proprietary plugins. The only difference is that EME got a pointless stamp of approval from the W3C as supposedly a part of the "open" Web, even though there's nothing open about DRM-encumbered media.
1 comments
shadowgovt 1459 days ago
Widevine is currently in the Chrome, Brave, and Firefox browsers. What are the odds we'd have gotten that (instead of a Chrome DRM solution, Firefox DRM solution, and Brave DRM solution) without the EME standard?
link
zozbot234 1459 days ago
How's that different from the Flash browser plugin? Widewine is every bit as proprietary as Flash.
link
usrusr 1459 days ago
The w3c spec can be expected to put as small a subset of the client stack as possible into the black box, whereas a proprietary API would try to pull in as much as it can, aiming to eventually usurp the entire client. Remember silverlight?
link