Video Playback

Reply

  #1  
Old 11-07-12, 05:25 AM
kolias's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,302
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Video Playback

Why we need the Adobe Flash Player for video playback?

Is there an alternative?

I try to minimize my downloads to avoid future problems
 
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 11-07-12, 06:45 AM
ray2047's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 33,597
Received 13 Votes on 11 Posts
Best way to avoid future problems is never turn it on. Despite the misleading Microsoft advertising the OS does nothing directly. It is simply a platform for the software which does the real work. With out installing software to run flash you can't run flash.
 
  #3  
Old 11-07-12, 06:52 AM
kolias's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,302
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Nicely said, I guess have no option but to install the Flash Player
 
  #4  
Old 11-07-12, 05:45 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,446
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
There is supposed to be some kind of new standard for video coming and I think from what I heard it is called html 5 or something like that which would replace flash but it isn't really to completion yet for the new standard and is still being worked on. I think it will be a problem for many websites as most of them use flash to one degree or the other and there has been some resistance to the idea.
 
  #5  
Old 11-07-12, 06:33 PM
kolias's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,302
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
I know about this html 5 and was trying to find a setting on youtube but found non and that's why I started this topic. Now I installed the flash player and all is ok (for now).

I was trying to avoid it because some friends have problem with it ( a window pops often saying Adobe Flash Player needs updating etc. but they do have the latest update and cant get rid of this annoying window)

How about Quick time, doesn't do the same as the flash player?
 
  #6  
Old 11-07-12, 06:55 PM
PJmax's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Northern NJ - USA
Posts: 52,706
Received 344 Votes on 322 Posts
WebM is another tricky thing to watch.

and no.....Flash is strictly from Macromedia.
 
  #7  
Old 11-08-12, 05:55 AM
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 4,647
Received 19 Votes on 18 Posts
Web videos are available in a wide variety of formats (mp3, wmv, flash, mp4, mov, ogg, ...) each requiring their own player (Windows Media Player, Flash, Quicktime, DVD player, etc). Unfortunately, you're really tied to whatever the web designer who made the website decided to use.

Certain sites are smart enough to give a couple options, so as long as you have something installed, it'll work. Other sites will only pick one (which you probably don't have the plug-in for), and on really annoying sites, they'll use either their own plug-in or one you (and I) have never heard of. So really you're stuck with whatever plug-in the site requires.

When I set up a computer, I typically install Flash, QuickTime, and Windows Media Player (usually automatically installed with Windows). On a side note, Flash is definitely one of those software packages that you want to keep up-to-date as recent bugs have been pretty significant security holes. You don't want to be running an old version of Flash.

Good luck!
 
  #8  
Old 11-08-12, 06:30 AM
kolias's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,302
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Very nice primer Zorfdt, thanks for taking the time

One day there will be a standard for all these and we all going to be happy. Problem is when this day will arrive
 
  #9  
Old 11-09-12, 04:07 AM
Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Near Buffalo, NY
Posts: 4,239
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
According to W3C, HTML5 is the new standard that will be "recommended" by 2014.
 
  #10  
Old 11-09-12, 05:31 AM
ray2047's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 33,597
Received 13 Votes on 11 Posts
But you will still need software to implement them.
 
  #11  
Old 11-09-12, 07:43 AM
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 4,647
Received 19 Votes on 18 Posts
Yeah... standards. Like SCSI was (small computer standard interface) that actually had what, 12-15 different variants. Or USB, with 4 (or more) different connectors and 3 different speeds...

The problem with software standards is as soon as some group says that X is the new standard, there's already an Y and a Z out there that do it faster, better, and cheaper.
 
  #12  
Old 11-09-12, 02:40 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,947
Received 0 Votes on 0 Posts
Despite the misleading Microsoft advertising the OS does nothing directly. It is simply a platform for the software which does the real work.
Ray I agree, and I know you are technically correct when you point out that Windows, like any OS, is just a platform, and instead it is the Applications that allow the computer fulfill purpose and give it a personality. But comparing even the most complicated Application(s) to the OS is like comparing building a simple electrical circuit to building the enormously complex circuitry in a computer.

Building an OS (Windows at least and many others) is many 1000 times more complex than building any Application. Because the OS manages everything, it makes developing the Applications so much simpler. Applications donít worry about scheduling across multiple processors, memory management, disk management, etc. and all the other management and sharing required in a computer. That all can get unbelievably complicated! You write an Application (these days) as if you had all the resources in the world (RAM, Disk, etc.) and you are running in the computer by yourself. That tremendously simplifies the Application.

It tells you something when Microsoft has 40 teams of 25 people working to develop Windows (Thousands of man-years?) That boggles my mind! Iíve worked on multi-year projects with 80-100 people and the coordination and management in the development was extremely difficult. I donít even see how Microsoft could manage a program like that. But I believe itís the truth and I donít think they are lying!

In other words, the OS without the Applications is useless, but without that tremendously powerful and complex OS there wouldnít be any Applications!
 
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes
 
Ask a Question
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: