Google Releases All-HTML5 Chrome 56 With FLAC Support

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Those of you who keep Chrome running in the background may want to restart the browser, as it could very well have auto updated. The biggest deal with the latest version is that it defaults to HTML5; Adobe Flash has basically been permanently sidelined for all users. The Chrome team also decided to add FLAC support, a format I am a staunch supporter of—although I have no idea what really prompted that or why they waited until now. (Firefox did the same thing in its latest update.) Maybe someone is even contemplating the idea of letting you upload FLAC to Google Music.

The latest version of the world's most used browser brings with it a number of new security features and bug fixes. Top of the list is that this is the first stable version of Chrome to be 100 per cent HTML5 by default for all users, meaning if there's an option not to use nasty plugins, it will take it. Chrome already blocks Flash content, but this gives the full enchilada to HTML5, a symbolic milestone in the interwebs history. Chrome 55 brought in the HTML5 first rules but only for a small number of test users. Also new is a clearer labelling of unencrypted HTTP sites, promised for some time as the company continues its crusade to make the web as HTTPS as possible. Anything that collects data but isn't secure will now be marked clearly in the address bar.
 
SO I mostly use chrome now.. I have been googlified I guess.
So google knows all...
Oh well,
 
Google Play Music has always supported FLAC uploads but it will still auto-match/convert them to MP3 - if Google has intentions of allowing people to upload FLAC files and then also be able to play them from their own collections without that stupid auto-match and conversion crap to lossy MP3 then yes, that's a very big deal indeed.
 
Megalith said:
Those of you who keep Chrome running in the background may want to restart the browser, as it could very well have auto updated. The biggest deal with the latest version is that it defaults to HTML5; Adobe Flash has basically been permanently sidelined for all users.
Click to expand...

Fatality -- Steve Jobs wins.
 
Tiberian said:
Google Play Music has always supported FLAC uploads but it will still auto-match/convert them to MP3 - if Google has intentions of allowing people to upload FLAC files and then also be able to play them from their own collections without that stupid auto-match and conversion crap to lossy MP3 then yes, that's a very big deal indeed.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is what initially drew me to Google Music. But even if they let you upload and play back actual FLAC, they will still need to fix the gross UI and artist images before I give them another shot.
 
I gave up on trying to make use of it a long time ago but I still have several thousands songs "stashed" there just in case; of course Google trashes them utterly with the tag info and the artwork so I don't mess with it much anymore. I have 2300+ CDs backed up as FLACs (collected CDs since 1984-ish) and spent about a week last year converting all of the FLACs to Opus which sounds just damned fine to my aging ears and that's what I keep on a microSD card for use in portable devices as needed.

I know I can stream all I want since I have T-Mobile but unless Google decides to support Opus (which they will eventually) for uploads (they do if I change the extension from .opus to .ogg, go figure) and stops fucking up the artwork and tags (which I do almost literally by hand to ensure they are all exactly the same and correct) then I'll just keep using local playback.

As for streaming FLACs, I don't see the point really, just a waste of bandwidth to me - as noted I'm getting up there in years and while I may not have the best hearing anymore I do know that Opus is pretty much the very best lossy codec that's ever been created so far and it works great for my purposes even if I do choose a lower bitrate than what it's capable of but then again that's why it was created in the first place (aside from the open source license free aspects).

EDIT:
Made a booboo above and called Opus lossless but thankfully someone pointed out my colossal booboo there, now fixed. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone tried Chrome with the stock charts on Google Finance? They want Flash when I look at them.
 
Tiberian said:
As for streaming FLACs, I don't see the point really, just a waste of bandwidth to me - as noted I'm getting up there in years and while I may not have the best hearing anymore I do know that Opus is pretty much the very best lossless codec that's ever been created so far and it works great for my purposes even if I do choose a lower bitrate than what it's capable of but then again that's why it was created in the first place (aside from the open source license free aspects).
Click to expand...

Think you meant that Opus is lossy. But yes, it is a good codec, just wish more devices supported it but that will come with time like it did with FLAC.
 
I still wonder about high school computer teachers running multiple class periods of kids creating Flash content.
Mr. Neiderhofer, why won't the browser play my animation?
Click to expand...
 
Tiberian said:
Google Play Music has always supported FLAC uploads but it will still auto-match/convert them to MP3 - if Google has intentions of allowing people to upload FLAC files and then also be able to play them from their own collections without that stupid auto-match and conversion crap to lossy MP3 then yes, that's a very big deal indeed.
Click to expand...

Simply put, if you're playing your music through a pipeline that includes a web browser, your OS' mixer and volume control, and a sound device that was integrated with your motherboard/laptop, then the difference between a lossy and lossless audio format is the least of your fidelity concerns.
 
Oh a story about Chrome? I can't wait to see all the Win10 haters showcase their common sense and display equal opportunity raging at how Google basically bends you over and data-mines and monetizes the living hell out of everything they make including Chrome, Android, Search, etc etc etc.

I'll wait.
 
Quartz-1 said:
Interestingly, while Chrome 55 has no problem rendering http://www.hardocp.com it fails horribly with https://www.hardocp.com
Click to expand...

Looks like the only issue with that is the link to the css file.

It is currently this:
Code: 
href="http://www.hardocp.com/css/hardocp.css"

It should be changed to this to work on http and https:
Code: 
href="//www.hardocp.com/css/hardocp.css"
 
SoRnMaN said:
Looks like the only issue with that is the link to the css file.

It is currently this:
Code: 
href="http://www.hardocp.com/css/hardocp.css"

It should be changed to this to work on http and https:
Code: 
href="//www.hardocp.com/css/hardocp.css"
Click to expand...

Good find, I wondered about this. Have you notified Kyle or someone on this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top