[yardie]

I watch plenty of videos and I've never had a problem with the big streaming sites delivering h264 versions. The only flash videos I still encounter are on older, lightly, maintained sites or sites that just download flv files.

And if iPad sales are any indication I don't think it's as big a deal as you make it out to be.

[gcp]

The iPad includes H264 support, as does Chrome. Firefox doesn't (and neither does Chromium, does it?). So this does screw anyone over who wants to watch H264, which really is the majority of video on the web.

[daleharvey]

nobody wany yo watch h264, they want to watch video, its up to the site to accomodate them

[gcp]

Yeah right, websites really care for the Linux user on Firefox and are willing to go to extra lengths to accommodate him.

[cookiecaper]

People won't serve you HTML 5 video unless you impersonate a mobile device. It's still a problem if you don't want to change your user-agent every time you visit a website and just cross your fingers that they think you're mobile and therefore serve up HTML 5 (and as others have pointed out, often in a format that non-Chrome won't play anyway).

[jrockway]

youtube.com/html5

[cookiecaper]

Right, YT is one among a handful of exceptions that serve HTML 5 to a desktop browser. That doesn't really change the general argument -- almost all sites are not going to give HTML 5 video as an option to desktop clients.

[jrockway]

I didn't realize anybody used other sites for video :)

[lazugod]

They somewhat appear to want to: http://daringfireball.net/linked/2012/02/21/apple-google-col...

[jrockway]

I don't think this is "Fuck Google" so much as it is "Fuck people uploading stuff through this interface."

If I write some software that costs $999 and only works on HP/UX, it's not "Fuck Microsoft" or "Fuck Apple". It's "Fuck me."

I think they call it cutting off your nose to spite your face.