Got a tip for us?
');NS_AdDivs.push(NS_AdDiv);NS_AdZones.push(NS_AdZone);NS_Ads++;
22 hours ago on
1 day ago on
2 days ago on
2 days ago on
2 days ago on
2 days ago on
2 days ago on
New in OS X: Get MacRumors
on your Mac
4.7-Inch iPhone 6 Rear Shell Shown in High-Quality Photos and Video
Wednesday July 9,
am PDT by Eric Slivka
Over the past six weeks, we've seen a
and even a
of what has been claimed to be the actual rear shell of the 4.7-inch iPhone 6, showing a nearly all-metal design with separate bands presumably to accommodate the antennas at the top and bottom.
Inside of rear shell
(Click for larger)
MacRumors has now received a number of new photos and a video showing a similar version of the part. The first part comes via
[], a Moscow-based company selling modified luxury versions of the iPhone. Feld & Volk says it has been working with the same factories that make spare parts for Apple products for more than six years, enabling it to get a head start on modifying the device for its customers. Feld & Volk has been using sapphire crystal on its
for several years, and says that its sapphire suppliers are the same ones Apple has begun working with more recently.
Bottom edge with holes for headphone jack and Lightning port - mic and speaker holes not yet cut
(Click for larger)
The part is shown on video and in a number of high-quality images, showing detail of the complex internals of the rear shell to accommodate the various features of the device. The part is not quite complete, with some features such as the full set of camera/mic/flash holes yet to be punched out of the shell, and Feld & Volk notes that some of physical features such as a number of screw holes shown on the part are actually from the manufacturing process and would be removed in later steps of production as the part is cleaned up.
As seen on previous leaks, the Apple logo is cut out of the shell, unlike on current iPhone models. Some have speculated that Apple may looking to incorporate a lighted logo, but more likely the company is simply planning to use a durable embedded logo as it does on its iPad models. Embedding a logo make of a non-metal material would also give the device another radio-transparent window that could be used to improve reception.
Exterior of rear shell
(Click for larger)
Feld & Volk speculates that the Apple logo could house a near field communications (NFC) antenna, but rumors have been split on whether the iPhone 6 will include that capability given Apple's emphasis on Bluetooth 4.0 for close-range communications and a long history of NFC iPhone rumors that have failed to come to fruition.
The photo of the rear of the shell also offers a decent view of the antenna breaks, with Feld & Volk noting that they appear to be made of a "non-conductive polymer" to insulate the different antennas from each other.
Left edge with holes for mute switch and volume buttons and right edge with SIM tray and hole for power button
(Click for larger)
Photos of an essentially identical rear shell have also been shared with MacRumors by a separate source. The photos show a part in a darker gray than the Feld & Volk part, and even darker than the current space gray color used on the iPhone 5s. The part is in the same state of production, with temporary mounting screw holes still intact and only a single pilot hole for the rear flash.
Darker gray rear shell part
(Click for larger)
The iPhone 6 is expected to launch around September of this year, with both 4.7-inch and 5.5-inch models supplanting the current 4-inch screen that has been the iPhone standard for the past several years. Rumors had suggested the 5.5-inch model might launch somewhat later than the 4.7-inch version, but more recent claims have pointed toward the possibility of a simultaneous debut.Related roundup:
from this, if those breaks are real and make it from production... looks like i'm going with a black iPhone.
Rating: 16 Votes
I'm a big fan of this design....like the curves on the sides as opposed to the square design of the 5/5S.
Can't wait!
Rating: 12 Votes
Well, Steve never would have imprinted < on the shell.
Rating: 12 Votes
The band separator lines are big! Nooooooooooooooo
Rating: 11 Votes
Something tells me 5.5-inch version doesn't even exist. :mad:
Rating: 11 Votes
Beautifully, Unapologetically White Bands..
Rating: 9 Votes
Dear Apple: this freaking divider lines are ugly. Have you lost your mind?
Rating: 7 Votes
Most people are going to put a case on it, probably the same leather I put on my 5S. Who cares what the banding looks like?
Rating: 6 Votes
Now that's what I'm talking about! :apple:
Rating: 6 Votes
Sounds like all of the "Big phone" haters are slowly coming around. They will buy big, and like big and never say they didnt want big.
once you go black...
Rating: 5 Votes
MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.
Arnold Kim
Editorial Director
Eric Slivka
Editor in Chief
Jordan Golson
Marianne Schultz
Juli Clover
Husain Sumra
Contributing Editor
Richard Padilla
Contributing Editor
Kelly Hodgkins
Contributing Editor
Copyright & 2000- , LLC.From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
specification introduced the video element for the purpose of playing videos, partially replacing the . HTML5 video is intended by its creators to become the new standard way to show video on the web without plugins, instead of the previous de facto standard of using the proprietary
plugin, but has been hampered by lack of agreement as to which
should be supported in web browsers.
The &video& element was proposed by
in February 2007. Opera also released a preview build that was showcased the same day, and a manifesto that called for video to become a first-class citizen of the web.
The following HTML5 code fragment will embed a
video into a web page.
&video src="movie.webm" poster="movie.jpg" controls&
This is fallback content to display if the browser
does not support the video element.
The "controls" attribute enables the browser's own user interface for controlling playback. Alternatively, playback can be controlled with , which the web designer can use to create a custom user interface. The optional "poster" attribute specifies an image to show in the video's place before playback is started. Its purpose is to be representative of the video.
Video format support varies among browsers (see below), so a web page can provide video in multiple formats. For other features,
is used sometimes, which may be error-prone: any web developer's knowledge of browsers will inevitably be incomplete or not up-to-date. The browser in question "knows best" what formats it can use. The "video" element supports fallback through specification of multiple sources. Using any number of &source& elements, as shown below, the browser will choose automatically which file to download. Alternatively, the
canPlayType() function can be used to achieve the same. The "type" attribute specifies the
and possibly a list of codecs, which helps the browser to determine whether it can decode the file. Even with only one choice, such hints may be necessary to a browser for querying its
for third party codecs.
&video poster="movie.jpg" controls&
&source src="movie.webm" type='video/ codecs="vp8.0, vorbis"'&
&source src="movie.ogv" type='video/ codecs="theora, vorbis"'&
&source src="movie.mp4" type='video/mp4; codecs="avc1.4D401E, mp4a.40.2"'&
&p&This is fallback content&/p&
The HTML5 specification does not specify which video formats browsers should support. User agents are free to support any video formats they feel are appropriate, but content authors cannot assume that any video will be accessible by all complying user agents, since user agents have no minimal set of video formats to support.
The HTML5 Working Group considered it desirable to specify at least one video format which all user agents (browsers) should support. The ideal format in this regard would:
Have good compression, good image quality, and low decode processor use.
Be royalty-free.
In addition to software decoders, a hardware
should exist for the format, as many embedded processors do not have the performance to decode video.
Initially,
was the recommended standard video format in HTML5, because it was not affected by any known patents. But on December 10, 2007, the HTML5 specification was updated, replacing the reference to concrete formats:
User agents should support Theora video and Vorbis audio, as well as the Ogg container format.
with a placeholder:
It would be helpful for interoperability if all browsers could support the same codecs. However, there are no known codecs that satisfy all the current players: we need a codec that is known to not require per-unit or per-distributor licensing, that is compatible with the open source development model, that is of sufficient quality as to be usable, and that is not an additional
risk for large companies. This is an ongoing issue and this section will be updated once more information is available.
The result has been the polarisation of HTML5 video between ,
formats, and ,
Although Theora is not affected by known non-free patents,
has expressed concern about
that might affect it, whose owners might be waiting for a corporation with extensive financial resources to use the format before suing. Formats like
might also be subject to unknown patents in principle, but they have been deployed much more widely and so it is presumed that any patent-holders would have already made themselves known.
has also opposed requiring Ogg format support in the HTML standard (even as a "should" requirement) on the grounds that some devices might support other formats much more easily, and that HTML has historically not required particular formats for anything.
criticized the removal of the Ogg formats from the specification. A follow-up discussion also occurred on the W3C questions and answers blog.
support only the open formats of
and . Google stated its intention to remove support for H.264 in 2011, specifically for the HTML5 video tag. Although it has been removed from , it has yet to be removed from
over a year later.[]
The adaptive bitrate streaming standard MPEG-DASH can be used in Web browsers via the
and JavaScript-based DASH players. Such players are, e.g., the open-source project dash.js of the DASH Industry Forum, but there are also products such as bitdash (using HTML5 with JavaScript, but also a Flash-based DASH players for legacy Web browsers not supporting the HTML5 MSE).
's acquisition of
in 2010 resulted in its acquisition of the
video format. Google has provided a
license to use VP8. Google also started , which combines the standardized open source VP8 video codec with
audio in a
based container. The opening of VP8 was welcomed by the .
When Google announced in January 2011 that it would end native support of H.264 in Chrome, criticism came from many quarters including Peter Bright of
and Microsoft web evangelist Tim Sneath, who compared Google's move to declaring
the official language of the United States. However, Haavard Moen of Opera Software strongly criticized the Ars Technica article and Google responded to the reaction by clarifying its intent to promote WebM in its products on the basis of openness.
After the launch of WebM, Mozilla and Opera have called for the inclusion of VP8 in HTML.
On March 7, 2013, Google Inc. and , LLC announced agreements covering techniques that "may be essential" to VP8, with Google receiving a license from MPEG LA and 11 patent holders, and MPEG LA ending its efforts to form a VP8 patent pool.
is widely used, and has good speed, compression, hardware decoders, and video quality, but is patent-encumbered. Users of H.264 need licenses either from the individual patent holders, or from the , a group of patent holders including Microsoft and Apple, except for some Internet broadcast video uses. H.264 is usually used in the MP4 container format, together with
(AAC) audio. AAC is also patented in itself, so users of MP4 will have to license both H.264 and AAC.
In June 2009, the WHATWG concluded that no existing format was suitable as a specified requirement.
Apple and Microsoft support only H.264.
On October 30, 2013,
announced that they were making a binary H.264 module available for download. Cisco will pay the costs of patent licensing for those binary modules when downloaded by the using software while it is being installed, making H.264 free to use in that specific case.
In the announcement, Cisco cited its desire of furthering the use of the
project as the reason, since WebRTC's video chat feature will benefit from having a video format supported in all browsers. The H.264 module will be available on "all popular or feasibly supportable platforms, which can be loaded into any application".
Cisco is also planning to publish source code for those modules under , but without paying the royalties, so the code will practically be
only in countries without H.264 , which has already been true about other existing implementations.
Also on October 30, 2013, Mozilla's
announced that Firefox would automatically download Cisco's H.264 module when needed by default. He also noted that the binary module is not a perfect solution, since users do not have full
rights to "modify, recompile, and redistribute without license agreements or fees". Thus Xiph and Mozilla continue the development of .
The release concerns only H.264 video and not AAC audio formats, since "the standards bodies have aligned on
as the common audio codecs for WebRTC". So software to play MP4 video (H.264+AAC) is still not freely (as in beer) available, and there is doubt as to whether a capped global licensing like like Cisco's for H.264 can be created.
Main article:
This table shows which video formats are likely to be supported by a given . Most of the browsers listed here use a
for decoding and display of video, instead of incorporating such software components. It is not generally possible to tell the set of formats supported by a multimedia framework without querying it, because that depends on the
and third party codecs. In these cases, video format support is an attribute of the framework, not the browser (or its layout engine), assuming the browser properly queries its multimedia framework before rejecting unknown video formats. In some cases, the support listed here is not a function of either codecs available within the operating system's underlying media framework, or of codec capabilities built into the browser, but rather could be by a browser add-on that might, for example, bypass the browser's normal HTML parsing of the &video& tag to embed a plug-in based video player.
The video format can be specified by
in HTML (see ). MIME types are used for querying multimedia frameworks for supported formats.
Of these browsers, only Firefox and Opera employ libraries for built-in decoding. In practice, Internet Explorer and Safari can also guarantee certain format support, because their manufacturers also make their multimedia frameworks. At the other end of the scale, Konqueror has identical format support to Internet Explorer when run on Windows, and Safari when run on Mac, but the selected support here for Konqueror is the typical for GNU/Linux, where Konqueror has most of its users. In general, the format support of browsers is much dictated by conflicting interests of vendors, specifically that
support commercial standards, whereas
cannot legally support other than free formats by default on the free operating systems that they are intended for.
Operating system
Latest stable release
Video formats supported
4.4.4 "KitKat" (June 19, 2014; 6 months ago))
Unix-like and Windows
Manual install
Windows, OS X, Linux
39.0.2171.95 (December 9, 2014; 14 days ago))
11.0.12 (v11.0.) (9 September 2014; 3 months ago))
Windows Phone
11.0 (February 10, 2014; 10 months ago))
Windows RT
All supported
4.14.2 (October 14, 2014; 2 months ago))
Windows 7+
34.0.5 / 34.0 (December 1, 2014; 22 days ago))
ESR 31.3.0 (December 1, 2014; 22 days ago))
Windows Vista
Windows XP
manual install
26.0 (using GStreamer)
Firefox OS
26.0. (December 1, 2014; 22 days ago))
Symbian S60
12.0.22 (June 24, 2012; 2 years ago))
Windows Mobile
10.0 (March 16, 2010; 4 years ago))
Windows, OS X, Linux
26.0.1656.60 (December 17, 2014; 6 days ago))
for OS X Yosemite
8.0 (October 16, 2014; 2 months ago))
for OS X Mavericks
7.1 (September 18, 2014; 3 months ago))
for OS X Mountain Lion
6.2 (September 18, 2014; 3 months ago))
Manual install
(previously Epiphany)
All supported
3.14.2 (November 13, 2014; 40 days ago))
Third-party codec packages are available.
On 11 January 2011 the removal of support for H.264 was announced on Chromium Blog. As of 8 September 2012 neither actual support was removed, nor the change to this plan was announced.
VP9 support in 25, turned off by default. Enabled by default in version 29.
Any format supported by
4.5. Any format supported by Phonon backend. Available Phonon backends include , , backends using
are in development.
As of version 20, prefed off by default. Enabled by default beginning in version 21.
DivX supports HTML5 integration only in Web Player version 2.x.
Disabled by default until version 26. Also, depends on the codec on the system.
Any format supported by
on Webkit/GTK+. The support for Ogg Theora, WebM and h.264 formats is included with base, good, and bad plugins respectively.
Main article:
HTML has support for
(DRM, restricting how content can be used) via the HTML5
(EME). The addition of DRM is controversial because it allows restricting users' freedom to use media restricted by DRM, even where fair use gives users the legal right to do so. A main argument in W3C's approval of EME was that the video content would otherwise be delivered in plugins and apps, and not in the web browser.
added support for HTML5 video using EME, beside their old delivery method using a
plugin (also with DRM).
As of April 2010, in the wake of Apple
launch, a number of high-profile sites have started to serve H.264 HTML5 video instead of Flash for user-agents identifying as iPad.
As of May 2010, HTML5 video is not currently as widespread as Flash videos, though recent rollouts of experimental HTML5-based video players from DailyMotion (using Ogg Theora and Vorbis format), YouTube (using the H.264 and WebM formats), and Vimeo (using the H.264 format) suggest that interest in adopting HTML5 video is increasing.
Some major video-providing websites have announced decisions to continue using technologies other than HTML5 video. According to a YouTube blog post from June 2010, the &video& tag "does not currently meet all the needs of a website like YouTube". The main reasons stated include the lack of a standard format, the absence of an effective and reliable means of delivering the video to the browser, JavaScript unable to display video fullscreen, and
issues. Hulu also has not adopted HTML5 video due to the inability of providing the user with adaptive bandwidth videos, securing the producer's content, and providing advertisers with data. Netflix stated that there are a number of issues preventing them from using HTML5 video: acceptable A/V acceptable au a way for the streaming protocol to adapt to a way of conveying information about available streams and other parameters to the str a way of supporti and a way of exposing all this functionality into HTML5.
On January 11, 2011, Google's Chromium Project announced on their blog that support for closed codecs (particularly H.264) would be removed from future releases of Chrome. The Chromium announcement specifically mentioned that this removal was an effort to increase the use of license-free HTML5 and the &video& tag, driving web-wide adoption of the open-source codecs VP8 and Theora. On February 2, 2011 Microsoft released the Windows Media Player HTML5 Extension for Chrome for Windows 7 which added the ability to use the licensed H.264 player included with Windows 7 to play back H.264 media content using Chrome.
. HTML5: A vocabulary and associated APIs for HTML and XHTML. . 24 June 2010. A video element is used for playing videos or movies.
van Kesteren, Anne (28 February 2007). . What Working Group mailing list. .
Hickson, Ian (10 December 2007). . What WG mailing list. .
Amador, Manuel (). .
mailing list. .
. The Register 2011.
Hickson, Ian (). .
mailing list. .
Stachowiak, Maciej (). .
mailing list. .
mailing list. . .
Connolly, Dan (December 18, 2007). . .
Jazayeri, Michael 'Mike' (). .
Shankland, Stephen (). . CNET.
Google. . Google.
Lee, Matt (May 19, 2010). . .
Jazayeri, Michael 'Mike'. . The Chromium Blog.
Bright, Peter (). . .
Sneath, Tim (). .
Moen, Haavard K (). . .
Metz, Cade (). . The Register.
djwm (). . . .
. WebM Project blog. .
(PDF). MPEG LA. .
Hickson, Ian (). .
mailing list. .
. Cisco. .
Brendan Eich (). . Brendan Eich's blog.
Monty Montgomery. . Monty Montgomery blog.
"Phonon documentation of backends", , Nokia
"Phonon documentation of querying", , Nokia
"GNU GPL - GNU General Public License Version 3 Free Software Foundation", 29 June 2007
Kyrnin, Jennifer, , About
"Get Chromium on Ubuntu To Play MP4, H.264, MP3 & view PDF files natively", ,
"Issue 2093007: Chromium side changes for enabling VP8 and WebM support", , Google
. Chrome Releases. . December 9, .
"Google Chrome support Theora and Vorbis", , Google,
Mike, Jazayeri (11 January 2011). . The Chromium Blog 2012.
Bankoski, Jim (), "WebM and VP8 land in Chromium",
( log), Google
Kersey, Jason (), "Dev Channel Update", , Google
. . Fahmida Y. Rashid. 9 September .
. Security TechCenter. . 9 September .
McCracken, Harry (), , Technologizer
, Microsoft,
. . 14 October .
Vestb?, Tor Arne (), , Nokia
(release notes), Mozilla,
, Phoronix
. . Archived from
J?genstedt, Philip (),
(official blog), Core developers (Opera)
Lie, H?kon Wium (), , Opera
Mills, Chris (), , Opera
October 16, .
September 18, .
"HTML5 video formats", , About.
"Media formats supported by the HTML audio and video elements", , Mozilla.
"WebM plugin available", , Google
. GNOME mailing list. November 13, .
Persch, Christian (April 1, 2008),
(announcement), epiphany mailing list-list
. Dailymotion. .
Carle, K Zacharias, Chris (). . Youtube. Google.
Dougherty, Brad (). . Vimeo.
Herrman, Johan (). . .
"Netflix has no plans to use HTML5", .
"Why HTML5 won't replace Flash", .
. You tube. Google.
, PC Magazine .
Caldato, Claudio ().
(blog). . Microsoft.
"HTML5 – The Video Element", , W3C.
Daoust, F Hoschka, P Patrikakis, Charalampos Z (2010),
(), Barcelona: NEM Summit.
Lawson, B Lauke, Patrick H. (), , Opera.
video platform software and news.
Pieters, Simon (), , Opera
: Hidden categories:
