23 Sep
2006
23 Sep
'06
1:19 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 15:40 +0700, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
tim hall wrote:
What's wrong with embedded .mpg or .wmv, other than being easy to
download (or "pirate" if you talk to the content people). Those work on
a much wider range of OSes than Flash.
For example, why in the hell do YouTube and Google Video default to
flash? Embedded .mpg would be MUCH more user friendly.
Flash does not work at all on my Linux system (terrible AV sync,
probably because my machine is slow), but I can watch DVD-quality .mpgs
and .avis without dropping a frame.
Lee
On Friday 22 September 2006 15:03, Lee Revell was
like:
The paradigm that Flash represents is great but the way they license it
and continue to keep it private when it is very obviously a monopoly is
evil.
It's still the most effective way to get high quality animation or video
into a webpage and you know that 95% of the browsers in the world
support it. Compared to embedded mpg, wmv or rm... I would call it "sheer idiocy" and yet
another reason Flash is evil.
Yeah, Flash is evil.
Unfortunately most know-nothing computer users expect it to work out of the
box. What open-source alternative is there that gives the same kind of
scriptable interaction? The merciless MNG didn't turn out to be much of an
adversary did it?