Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Chrome Firefox Music The Internet Technology

JavaScript Decoder Plays MP3s Without Flash 250

An anonymous reader writes "The introduction of HTML5 and super-fast JavaScript engines to the latest web browsers has brought with it a wealth of new functionality. The focus seems to have been put on the ability to play video in a browser without Flash, or making games. But a project born out of a Music Hackday in Berlin is just as exciting. It's called jsmad and is a pure JavaScript decoder that allows you to play MP3s in a browser without Flash. So, for example, a music artist could create a website and upload songs for visitors to listen to without need of any plug-ins. Alternatively, why not have an MP3 jukebox that can play songs off your hard drive or Dropbox folder just by loading a website? You can try out the decoder by visiting the jsmad.org website where there is a sample song, on the same site you can browse for your own local file to play. Be warned, it only works in Firefox 4+ at the moment, but Chrome support is coming and already works in some cases." Another reader tips news of a JavaScript PDF viewer.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

JavaScript Decoder Plays MP3s Without Flash

Comments Filter:
  • mp3? Acrobat! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @02:48PM (#36478240) Homepage

    I'd say that getting rid of the Acrobat plugin is far more interesting.

  • Re:Err (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dishwasha ( 125561 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @03:00PM (#36478404)

    Not having to have a native mp3 decoder codec on your machine. Also being javascript it is theoretically compatible across all platforms that the browser supports, particular those that may not have native mp3 decoder codecs. The HTML5 standard isn't attempting to establish a standard for codecs. Not saying it's worthwhile or anything, just pointing out potential benefits as you requested.

  • by TerranFury ( 726743 ) on Friday June 17, 2011 @03:10PM (#36478524)

    your options pretty much break down into "javascript" or "assorted architecturally superior; but single-platform and/or deeply fucked in the code quality plugins".

    You'd think Java would be filling this role, but it isn't.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17, 2011 @03:14PM (#36478572)

    And once agan, just like with H.264, they wouldn't have to pay any license fees if they just used the OS's own media API instead of trying to support specific codecs themselves.

    Modern OSs provide such an API for playing audio and video, and some (ie. Mac OS and Windows) even provide licensed proprietary codecs... not to mention that OS-provided codecs often work with things like video drivers to provide hardware acceleration that is transparent to applications. For example, VLC, while awesome, uses a huge amount of my CPU to play 1080p H.264 video, since it's software decoding (possibly with some generic "hardware assist"). On the other hand, Windows Media Player, which uses Microsoft's DirectShow codec which takes advantage of my GeForce card's full H.264 decoding, uses 1% of my CPU to play the same video.

    Browsers already make use of other OS-specific features, and this would make the whole codec licensing thing a non-issue for the browser makers, and for the vast majority of users. They need to stop trying to reinvent the wheel. The OS provides services to applications... browsers should use them.

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Working...