On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 4:57:49 AM UTC+8, Michael Heuberger wrote: > Thanks but I won't switch until the MediaRecorder is fully implemented > on all major browsers. Cannot risk breakage for a heavily used > webservice. > > I ll observe this closely and see how it goes ... > > - Michael > > --- > Binary Kitchen > Michael Heuberger > 1/33 Parrish Road > Sandringham > Auckland 1025 > (New Zealand) > > Mobile (text only) ... +64 21 261 89 81 > Email ................ [email protected] > Website .............. http://www.binarykitchen.com > > On 2015-10-20 04:00, Maire Reavy wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 5:19 PM, > > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I do not recommend MediaRecorder, since it is not implemented in all > >> Browsers. Using websockets to send frames to the server already works > >> very > >> well for my prototype www.videomail.io - check it out, it is open > >> source > >> and available on npm: > >> https://github.com/binarykitchen/videomail-client > > > > > > > > That certainly is a viable alternative. I will say that MediaRecorder > > is > > coming to browsers very soon. Firefox has it. Chrome has video > > support > > for MediaRecorder, and they are actively working on audio. It is the > > most > > starred bug in all of Chrome (not just all of WebRTC -- all of Chrome). > > It > > is the hot new feature, and you could get ahead of the curve by > > starting to > > use it now. And I certainly would appreciate getting more devs using > > it in > > Firefox. > > > > -Maire
Hello Michael, It's almost 1 year since this thread was created and I just want to ask you, did you stay on your prototype or did you consider the MediaRecorder? _______________________________________________ dev-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-media
