[jwcooper]

> The sticking point like always will be media playback (read: DRM/widevine). That is the graveyard where Linux browsers go to die. If Kagi can legally and technically solve the widevine integration on a non-standard Linux webkit build, they win. If not, it will be a secondary browser for documentation reading only.

I'm hopeful that some day Linux will have enough users where the media companies can't ignore them. Hopefully, that day is sooner than later.

It's pretty frustrating that peacock (and all xfinity streaming) doesn't work and you can't get 1080p or 4k on most other streaming platforms.

[Fiveplus]

Hmm good point. The issue is also the distinction between widevine L1, i.e hardware-backed DRM and L3 (the software backed one).

Correct me if I'm wrong but to stream 4K, studios require a hardware root of trust and a verified media path. They need a guarantee that the video frames are decrypted inside a trusted execution environment and sent directly to the display without the OS kernel or user space being able to read the raw buffer.

AFAIK Windows and macOS provide this pipeline at the OS level. OTOH, ChromeOS gets 1080p/4K not because it has massive market share but cause the hardware and boot chain are locked down by the almighty Google.

On desktop Linux, where you have root access and can modify the kernel or compositor to inspect memory, there is technically no way to guarantee that secure path to the studios' satisfaction. Am I right in this assumption?

Unless the DRM providers change their threat model, which sounds unlikely to me. Or distros start shipping signed and locked-down kernel modules that prevent the user from being root, which is again unacceptable to most (me included), we will likely be capped at 720p for some time now.

[rixthefox]

> Am I right in this assumption?

Yes. I tried using Chrome on Linux just to watch movies that I purchased on Youtube at HD/4K and watched as the stream was limited to 240P. IMHO regardless of what Google says in their ToS they have already broken the trust agreement by not providing what I paid for. Regardless of what the studios want, all this does is push me back towards piracy because once again the industry fails to understand that piracy is a accessibility problem, not a financial problem. If I pay for 4K then regardless of where I want to watch that movie it better be in 4K, that's what I paid for. Google hides behind their ToS to get around the fact that they sold me a product then failed to deliver.

> ChromeOS gets 1080p/4K not because it has massive market share but cause the hardware and boot chain are locked down by the almighty Google.

ChromeOS is based on Gentoo Linux underneath just very stripped down and Googlefied. It's the same BS that Bungee pulled with Destiny 2 and Linux. If you so much as dared to run Destiny 2 on Linux you would be banned. Stadia used Linux but because Google controlled the platform they allowed it to be played there.

These are the games they play to make other platforms that aren't MacOS/Windows appear like they are incapable but in reality it's just corporate greed and grift.

[imbnwa]

I'd imagine only SteamOS on the GabeCube could make this guarantee on Linux

[yencabulator]

> They need a guarantee

s/need/want/ but yes.

[pixelpoet]

I really wish more people would appreciate this distinction.

[digiown]

I don't think there is a difference. They can need or want or demand and it doesn't matter. They don't have the right to weaponize my computer against me to fulfill their goals.

[h4x0rr]

As far as I understand, on the mobile implementation not even the OS can access the buffers. So even with root you can stream L1 content but not screen record it

[hulitu]

> Correct me if I'm wrong but to stream 4K, studios require a hardware root of trust and a verified media path.

Oscilloscopes and signal analysers exist.

[tadfisher]

As do HDCP strippers. Judging by the availability of 4K Netflix content on torrent sites, I do believe the only people being prevented from watching their content are paying customers acting in good faith.

[mistercheph]

You can work around the Widevine issues by pirating the content you're interested in.

[rixthefox]

This is the way. Widevine is a cancer that only serves to lock down the browser market to a small handful of web engines that have been approved by Google. If your browser isn't based on Chrome, Firefox, or Safari you're out of luck.

Most people will not use a browser that can't open youtube videos and they know and exploit this with extreme precision.

[doublerabbit]

If you are already paying for the streaming service that offers the content and they restrict you from watching because of your OS are you harming the industry by downloading it? Nothing is stopping you from buying a 4k webcam and recording your computer monitor.

You're already paying the monthly fee to stream it, you're just streaming it in a more friendly way. Granted if you cancel the service, you should delete the content.

Many won't though and that's the problem but that problem is caused by the fact that you're being restricted in the first place.

[rkagerer]

I'd love to explore this comment further:

Nothing is stopping you from buying a 4k webcam and recording your computer monitor

Video DRM that doesn't protect the stream all the way through to a decryption key embedded in your eyeballs always seemed somewhat futile to me.

[michaelmrose]

a 4K webcam recording of a screen will produce a trash copy that isn't notably better than ripping off the 720p you can already screen record.

[freehorse]

There are still other, non-trashy ways to record your screen. Motivated actors have no problem with such restrictions, as happens with everything. It is for exerting control over the normal users' behaviours and habits.

[doublerabbit]

Figure of speech.

[cyberpunk]

I really thought I was done with the wild seas back when Netflix was new, but turns out I can't kick my put.io subscription even 10 years later.

[dartharva]

But the browser still won't get mainstream and will eventually die.

[pseudosavant]

This isn't even a strictly Linux problem. On Windows, Edge has by far the best encrypted streaming playback using their PlayReady DRM. Many services like Netflix will only do 4K for Edge. Chrome is often 1080p, and Firefox was 720p last time I tried it.

Same situation on Mac where Apple's Fairplay DRM enables 4K playback in Safari, but Chrome and Firefox have the same limitations as on Windows.

Last time I tried to use Firefox on Windows as my daily driver, video playback was one of the biggest gaps that made me go back to Edge.

[Mindwipe]

> I'm hopeful that some day Linux will have enough users where the media companies can't ignore them.

The entirety of personal computer viewing doesn't have enough users where the media companies can't ignore them.

Fundamentally higher resolution playback happens on platforms like Windows and MacOS because they have closed, signed driver stacks, same as anti-cheat in games. Not because of the browser. So it will only ever happen if someone forks Linux to a more restricted, closed browser stack and offers that as a product (which is basically how a cable set-top box works in practice).

[k4rli]

Perhaps a blessing in disguise. You're not missing out on anything of value.

[rapind]

> I'm hopeful that some day Linux will have enough users where the media companies can't ignore them. Hopefully, that day is sooner than later.

Does YouTube and Netflix work? That's the lion's share right there. A lot of users probably don't even care about the other streaming platforms. I'm probably being too optimistic, but I think the upcoming Steam machines will have a significant adoption of the linux desktop. Microsoft is certainly working 'round the clock to alienate their users.

[presbyterian]

YouTube does, Netflix doesn't

[zamadatix]

If you're using a "common browser" on Linux (Firefox/Chrome) Netflix should work, just at 720p for most of the content. If you're using a minor Chromium based fork the customized Chromium package provided by your distro it probably doesn't have Widevine by default.

The same is true for running a vanilla Chromium build on Windows, the big difference is the quality of content you can get on Windows can be higher than 720p in the mainstream browsers (as long as the rest of the system is compliant as well).

[michaelmrose]

If you are limited to 720p you might as well pirate it even if you do pay for it if you intend to watch it on your computer rather than on a TV.

[zamadatix]

One correction to my message above: apparently Chrome on Windows is still 720p for Netflix, it was Edge that had 4k support. Or you can install the Netflix App on Windows too.

I agree it's a bit silly, but I think a lot of people don't really care about quality so long as they can watch it. I guess that'd also explain how Netflix gets away with such low bitrates for even the "high quality" versions of content.

[michaelmrose]

I think people most do care about quality and most watch on their TV.

[Mindwipe]

Chrome on Windows now has 4K support (if you have the supported hardware).

[cyberpunk]

Yeah I'm probably switching over to a BSD desktop -- So it'll be 720p on a 5k display. Sad face. Arrrr. It's the pirate lyphe for me...

[presbyterian]

> If you're using a "common browser" on Linux (Firefox/Chrome)

Right. The user I was replying to was asking about a browser that isn't either of those.

[zamadatix]

Yeah, and that leads to the DRM'd content in YouTube (like Movies & TV) not working for me in Kagi on Linux. Unless you're saying I've done something wrong and it really is working for you... in which case I may have some tinkering to do to find out what I did to break it :D.

One correction to my message above: apparently Chrome on Windows is still 720p for Netflix, it was Edge that had 4k support. Or you can install the Netflix App on Windows too.