Am 27.08.15 um 13:18 schrieb Kirill Kirichenko:
On 27.08.2015 9:29, Dr. Michael Paus wrote:
To me this sounds again like a Java/JavaFX specific solution which, to
my opinion, is a dead-end road. I think it would be much more important
that JavaFX can directly use all system installed codecs. I simply don't
understand why it is possible to install a codec pack on a machine and
almost all software, with the exception of JavaFX, is able to
immediately use that and only JavaFX based applications are not.
Although this is an off-topic I'll answer to your question.
Security and testing are the reasons.
It's virtually impossible to test every possible codec on every
possible platform. Many of them are proprietary so we don't control
their code/can't fix their bugs. And all blame that JavaFX can't play
this/can't play that will fall on our heads.
And it can open many potential security vulnerabilities.
1. Why do you consider my comment off-topic? It's a direct response to a
statement made by Scott Palmer.
2. Why do you want to control other peoples code? Actually, if you were
just using the system APIs it should
be completely transparent to you whether the user has installed
additional codecs on his system or not.
3. How do you explain to your customers that a JavaFX-based application
cannot even play a .mov file on a
Mac whereas every other media-aware application can?
