Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Firefox Mozilla News

Mozilla Combines Social API and WebRTC 44

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the neckbeards-in-hi-def dept.
theweatherelectric writes "Mozilla has put together a demo which combines WebRTC with Firefox's Social API. Over on Mozilla's Future Releases blog, Maire Reavy writes, 'WebRTC is a powerful new tool that enables web app developers to include real-time video calling and data sharing capabilities in their products. While many of us are excited about WebRTC because it will enable several cool gaming applications and improve the performance and availability of video conferencing apps, WebRTC is proving to be a great tool for social apps. Sometimes when you're chatting with a friend, you just want to click on their name and see and talk with them in real-time. Imagine being able to do that without any glitches or hassles, and then while talking with them, easily share almost anything on your computer or device: vacation photos, memorable videos — or even just a link to a news story you thought they might be interested in – simply by dragging the item into your video chat window.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mozilla Combines Social API and WebRTC

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    this sounds like it should be an addon, not something native.

    • by ganjadude (952775)
      Most of it is an addon currently. This is more about bringing the tech into the browser standards if i can read through this badly written summary anyway
    • by Hsien-Ko (1090623)
      Indeed.
      For every "FIREFOX IS FAST!!" there's always got to be another design decision to slow it back down with some sort of new bloat.
      • Phoenix through Firefox1.x were light browsers.

        Modern Firefox is so damn bloated that it might be the fattest browser on any system I own.

        On my work laptop, only three things kick on the system fan: 1) compiling, 2) opening Eclipse or doing anything in it whatsoever, 3) launching Firefox with one or two tab set to auto-open.

        Which is why I use Chrome now, and if I couldn't for some reason then I'd run Safari or (*shudder*) Opera.

        Firefox is a browser of last resort, like IE. It's a clunky beast like Netscape

        • by Lennie (16154)

          I really don't understand your choice and I've heared this before. The code base of Chrome is a lot larger and Chrome actually uses more memory (partly because of it's multi process model). So it really does not make a lot of sense.

          • All I know is launching Chrome with two dozen tabs open is faster than launching Firefox with two, and doesn't make my system fan kick on. It also doesn't make my other heavyweight applications less responsive like having FF open does; I get way more busy spinners and unresponsive GUI elements system-wide when FF is running. I can open a new tab without delay with tons of other tabs open, while FF is always sluggish to do the same even with only a couple tabs open.

            Everyone where I work has noticed the sam

  • by Trepidity (597) <.gro.hsikcah. .ta. .todhsals-muiriled.> on Sunday December 02, 2012 @06:26PM (#42163673)

    If you were likewise confused by this blurb about clicking on friends' names in the browser, what WebRTC actually is at a technological level, at least, is basically a collection of real-time P2P streaming-media stuff that is currently usually implemented via browser plugins or 3rd-party software. W3C is trying to standardize and expose it via more normal javascript APIs.

    The basic functionality will include things like: users opening video or audio streams with each other (which includes NAT-punching, negotiating codecs, etc.) to support Skype-style video chat in the browser; streaming logic to deal with sending/buffering/etc. for P2P streams; support for data connections directly between users, to allow browser-based multiplayer gaming to bypass a central server; and some kind of management of local multimedia resources that I don't fully understand.

    The draft standard is here [w3.org].

  • It'll now be easier to camwhore all day without relying on unstable flash or java \o/

  • Let me know when... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Agent ME (1411269) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (94emtnega)> on Sunday December 02, 2012 @07:13PM (#42163999)

    ... the documentation on these features exist, and the Social API works for more things than just Facebook. There's literally a whitelist in the browser (about:config, key social.activation.whitelist) which only allows Facebook to use the Social API features. (And if you edit the whitelist yourself and try to use the feature on a different site, it just re-opens the Facebook sidebar because Facebook's siderbar seems to be hardcoded in other places too.)

  • by ipquickly (1562169) on Sunday December 02, 2012 @07:46PM (#42164211) Homepage

    The web browser is the GUI of the cloud. The operating system is irrelevant as Firefox on OS X, Linux or Windows will provide exactly the same user experience reducing the OS to an api.

    I wonder if these standards will result in an explosion of new web browsers or of specialized applications, each claiming to be better/faster than the other.

    • by Lennie (16154)

      Firefox isn't more of an OS than any other browser, but of course there is also the Boot2Gecko / Firefox OS, now that is Firefox as an OS. :-)

  • iChat (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tom (822) on Monday December 03, 2012 @01:34AM (#42165971) Homepage Journal

    Imagine being able to do that without any glitches or hassles, and then while talking with them, easily share almost anything on your computer or device: vacation photos, memorable videos â" or even just a link to a news story you thought they might be interested in â" simply by dragging the item into your video chat window.'"

    In other words, what iChat has allowed me to do for half a decade? I've used it to run contract negotiations with the contract document shared via iChat to all parties, for example.

    So what exactly is new here?

  • "it will enable several cool gaming applications" Any product that includes 'Cool' in the description is automatically off my list of things I need. You don't see a "cool,new seatbelt design' or a 'cool, new high fiber cereal'..... do ya?
  • by yourlord (473099) on Monday December 03, 2012 @12:33PM (#42169971) Homepage

    Is that the IETF WebRTC draft mandates the Opus audio codec for all clients..
    http://www.opus-codec.org/ [opus-codec.org]

    From:
    http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-01 [ietf.org]
    3. Codec Requirements

          To ensure a baseline level of interoperability between WebRTC
          clients, a minimum set of required codecs are specified below. While
          this section specifies the codecs that will be mandated for all
          WebRTC client implementations, it leaves the question of supporting
          additional codecs to the will of the implementer.

          WebRTC clients are REQUIRED to implement the following audio codecs.

          o Opus [RFC6716], with any ptime value up to 120 ms

If a camel is a horse designed by a committee, then a consensus forecast is a camel's behind. -- Edgar R. Fiedler

Working...