SublimeVideo HTML5 Video Player Now Free & Unlimited, Real-Time Stats & More

[aidanhornsby]

http://blog.jilion.com/2011/11/29/sublimevideo-unleashed

[tomsaffell]

I see you're using wmode transparent for your flash fallback. Have you seen (or tested for) performance issues using transparent, rather than direct? My understanding is that it prohibits both StageVideo, and HW rendering, and may also cause unnecessary re-rendering of overlaying HTML. Would love to know whether any of those are material in your case.

http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/fplayer10_1... http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/127/tn_12701.html#main_Browser_supp...

[marcusestes]

They were one of the first to do a full-screen implementation in HTML5. Lovely UI as well. I'm glad to see them moving towards a freemium model. But now there are lots of completely open source HTML5 players that do fullscreen, without the need for a watermark.

[chadillac → marcusestes]

my first thought was "wait wait... you want me to pay for a standards based video solution... what the f-"

[ch0wn]

This is great news. I really hate to see companies charging for SSL, though. Security on the web is something so essential, forcing people to pay in order to be safe is just evil, in my opinion.

[aroberge → ch0wn]

Words like "evil" get thrown around rather too quickly, imo.

Paraphrasing the above: I really hate seeing companies charging for door locks. Security of your house is something so essential, forcing people to pay in order to be safe is just evil, in my opinion.

... Someone has invested time and money to develop a product; there's nothing evil for them in wanting to recoup their money and build a business around it.

[ch0wn → aroberge]

I have no problem with paying for a good product, and this is definitely worth paying for. What I don't like is driving customers into a corner where they have to decide whether they want to pay or keep their users unprotected. Too many go for the latter choice and harm the web as a whole.

[andrewfelix]

We had been using the wonderful mediaelementjs.js But this would have been our first choice if it had been free.

Now if we can just all agree on a single video format.

[andyfleming → andrewfelix]

Broader video format support or an established standard would be nice!

[gsk → andrewfelix]

Can you say what specific feature(s) would make this your first choice instead of mediaelement? (I am a code contributor to mediaelement).

[andrewfelix → gsk]

Hi, thanks for contributing to such an awesome script! My main issues were with inconsistency across browsers. In particular fullscreen. I ended up disabling fullscreen on Firefox because it was too flaky. Flash would behave differently between browsers too.

Having said that, it really is an amazing script. Will probably come back to it once it's matured a little further.

[padenot]

Not everybody wants to host his/her video at a centralized point in the internet.

[quellhorst]

Is there something like this where I could just use amazon s3 and cloudfront for hosting the videos?

[firefoxman1 → quellhorst]

There's always Video.js

[nodesocket]

Just switched over to SublimeVideo. Loving it. Bravo.

[nextparadigms]

Does it support WebM or only h.264?

[natedub → nextparadigms]

Any HTML5 player will play WebM in Firefox 4, Chrome and Opera 10.6. IE9 can play WebM with a plugin. Every other browser cannot, nor can any Flash player.

[icebraining → nextparadigms]

https://docs.sublimevideo.net/encode-videos-for-the-web

[lostsock → nextparadigms]

nextparadigms: Looks like it supports WebM (https://docs.sublimevideo.net/quickstart-guide - Look in Step 3)