15 Mar
2013
15 Mar
'13
12:21 p.m.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net>
To: linux-audio-user <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Subject: Re: Channel Linux - BETA
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 11:58:15 +0100
PS: Firefox 19.0.2 claims that additional plugins are required to play
all media contend on http://channellinux.com/. However, it can play the
videos. Firefox claims that there's a try to redirect to another page.
Ghostery informs about e.g. a Zuckerberg connection. We know that your
website is a serious website, but if I wouldn't know you from the
mailing lists, I wouldn't stay on this website, even if I should be fine
with advertising. It's against my self-responsibility when using the
Internet to stay on sides that come with to much nick-nack.
15 Mar
15 Mar
2 p.m.
Am 15.03.2013 12:21, schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net>
To: linux-audio-user <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Subject: Re: Channel Linux - BETA
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 11:58:15 +0100
PS: Firefox 19.0.2 claims that additional plugins are required to play
all media contend on http://channellinux.com/. However, it can play the
videos. Firefox claims that there's a try to redirect to another page.
Ghostery informs about e.g. a Zuckerberg connection. We know that your
website is a serious website, but if I wouldn't know you from the
mailing lists, I wouldn't stay on this website, even if I should be fine
with advertising.
The page works for me without any extra-install requests in
Firefox/Ubuntu 12-04 after I allowed some 12 other pages to spawn
content on it using NoScript.
Anyway *if* the page would be worked out right, it could be OK for a
media-page that akkumulates from other pages. But w3c says:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fchannellinux.c…
and that is *not* acceptable anymore.
Plus: the design is a complete mess. To have a banner blocking the sight
on a video is not even amateurish, regardless if the banner is a newsfeed.
My proposition: cut it down to something simple and most of all: let the
visitors choose, what source of video they would like to see, do not
load all available...
It's against my self-responsibility when using
the
Internet to stay on sides that come with to much nick-nack.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
2:34 p.m.
New subject: [Channel Linux - Feedback]
On Sat, March 16, 2013 12:00 am, Hartmut Noack wrote:
The page works for me without any extra-install requests in
Firefox/Ubuntu 12-04 after I allowed some 12 other pages to spawn
content on it using NoScript.
I forgot to mention that the site relies explicitly on jquery to do all
the fun stuff. I have some other requests for a noscript version of the
site and I am looking into the best way to enable that while also
retaining the more "game" like functionality of the randomiser (Roulette)
system.
Anyway *if* the page would be worked out right, it
could be OK for a
media-page that akkumulates from other pages. But w3c says:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fchannellinux.c…
and that is *not* acceptable anymore.
Thanks for reminding me. All those errors are harmless. A few end tags
missing "/"'s in the header section (easily fixed) and the majority of the
other errors come from the external scripts which I have no control of.
I understand that some people are adverse to social media but the whole
point of the site is to be social and share the information as much as
possible to build as much traffic as possible so that we can make money
from advertising and use that revenue to pay people to create high quality
content on a regular basis so in this case the naysayers are going to be
left behind to a certain degree unfortunately ;-)
Plus: the design is a complete mess. To have a banner
blocking the sight
on a video is not even amateurish, regardless if the banner is a newsfeed.
Can you send me a screenshot offlist please? I am not seeing what you
describe here as a problem. It is by design that the ticker would overlap
just a little but maybe you have a very tiny screen and it is taking up
more room?
My proposition: cut it down to something simple and
most of all: let the
visitors choose, what source of video they would like to see, do not
load all available...
By source do you mean let the viewer choose between ogv, webm, h264,
etc...? Can you elaborate please?
FYI, I haven't tried to process the individual media that I have included
in the playlists for multiple encodings. That is a bit more effort than I
am prepared to commit to at this early stage of development.
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
3:43 p.m.
New subject: [Channel Linux - Feedback]
Am 15.03.2013 14:34, schrieb Patrick Shirkey:
Yes, I have given in trying to correct Google and the like, when you
need Maps or external Videos, you cannot get a perfect result anymore...
No, by source I mean, if they want to see a stream from a YT-channel or
from anywhere else...
On Sat, March 16, 2013 12:00 am, Hartmut Noack wrote:
I think, that jquery is near-inevitible nowadays and I think, that is OK
as long as it is used properly and as long as the page degrades
gracefully...
The page works for me without any extra-install requests in
Firefox/Ubuntu 12-04 after I allowed some 12 other pages to spawn
content on it using NoScript.
I forgot to mention that the site relies explicitly on jquery to do all
the fun stuff. I have some other requests for a noscript version of the
site and I am looking into the best way to enable that
while also
retaining the more "game" like functionality of the randomiser (Roulette)
system.
Such a function would be the last I would do in JS. I mean, that is all
about, what content is to be delivered to the visitor no? So I would use
a system, that runs on the server to assemble the list of stuff, that is
to land in the visitors browser...
Python, Perl even or... Run for the hills!! PHP
Anyway *if* the page would be worked out right,
it could be OK for a
media-page that akkumulates from other pages. But w3c says:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fchannellinux.c…
and that is *not* acceptable anymore.
Thanks for reminding me. All those errors are harmless. A few end tags
missing "/"'s in the header section (easily fixed) and the majority of the
other errors come from the external scripts which I have no control of.
I understand that some people are adverse to social media
As long as it is not irritating in design and not laced with the
commonly used bullshit *in the articles*, I do not see a real problem
with "social media"
but the whole
point of the site is to be social and share the information as much as
possible to build as much traffic as possible so that we can make money
from advertising and use that revenue to pay people to create high quality
content on a regular basis so in this case the naysayers are going to be
left behind to a certain degree unfortunately ;-)
I have a 1368x768 Laptop screen(Lenovo ideapad) The ticker overlaps
about 40px of the two videos in the second row.
Plus: the design is a complete mess. To have a
banner blocking the sight
on a video is not even amateurish, regardless if the banner is a newsfeed.
Can you send me a screenshot offlist please? I am not seeing what you
describe here as a problem. It is by design that the ticker would overlap
just a little but maybe you have a very tiny screen and it is taking up
more room? My proposition: cut it down to something simple
and most of all: let the
visitors choose, what source of video they would like to see, do not
load all available...
By source do you mean let the viewer choose between ogv, webm, h264,
etc...? Can you elaborate please?
FYI, I haven't tried to process the individual media that I have included
in the playlists for multiple encodings. That is a bit more effort than I
am prepared to commit to at this early stage of development.
I would find that quite hard a task also...
I mean: if the publisher of a Linux-related video chooses some weired
format not viewable in a out-of-the-box Linux with say VLC and Mplayer
installed...
Maybe filtering those vendors would be the better choice...
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
16 Mar
16 Mar
9:36 a.m.
New subject: [Channel Linux - Feedback]
On Sat, March 16, 2013 1:43 am, Hartmut Noack wrote:
Yes, I have given in trying to correct Google and the like, when you
need Maps or external Videos, you cannot get a perfect result anymore...
Thanks. I'll tweak that, it shouldn't be overlapping the controls.
No, by source I mean, if they want to see a stream from a YT-channel or
from anywhere else...
Do you mean having a "tuner" so they can choose to have just
youtube/vimeo/flash/non-affiliated, etc...?
I'll think about that. It's not a bad idea for adding more interactivity.
I think we could do better than excluding media simply because some people
might not be able to view it. We definitely have the hardware and skillz
to do the transcoding that would be necessary to make the content
available to anyone in any format. I'm just not sure it is the best way to
handle the problem. Perhaps it should be made clearer to producers that if
they want their content distributed there are a few formats that are more
widely acceptable. For example ogv will definitely work on a "Linux"
community channel. Anyone who doesn't have that will need to sort their
end out.
Another thing I could do is add an icon to let the viewer know what format
the media associated with the button is so they don't waste their time
clicking only to be told they don't have all the codecs/plugins that they
needs to view it. It keeps a certain element of surprise without
sacrificing it completely.
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
Am 15.03.2013 14:34, schrieb Patrick Shirkey:
I use PHP/JSON for the backend on this site.
Funnily enough the busiest website in the world also uses PHP. How weird
is that?
On Sat, March 16, 2013 12:00 am, Hartmut Noack wrote:
I think, that jquery is near-inevitible nowadays and I think, that is OK
as long as it is used properly and as long as the page degrades
gracefully...
The page works for me without any extra-install requests in
Firefox/Ubuntu 12-04 after I allowed some 12 other pages to spawn
content on it using NoScript.
I forgot to mention that the site relies explicitly on jquery to do all
the fun stuff. I have some other requests for a noscript version of the
site and I am looking into the best way to enable that
while also
retaining the more "game" like functionality of the randomiser
(Roulette)
system.
Such a function would be the last I would do in JS. I mean, that is all
about, what content is to be delivered to the visitor no? So I would use
a system, that runs on the server to assemble the list of stuff, that is
to land in the visitors browser...
Python, Perl even or... Run for the hills!! PHP
Anyway *if* the page would be worked out right,
it could be OK for a
media-page that akkumulates from other pages. But w3c says:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fchannellinux.c…
and that is *not* acceptable anymore.
Thanks for reminding me. All those errors are harmless. A few end tags
missing "/"'s in the header section (easily fixed) and the majority of
the
other errors come from the external scripts which I have no control of.
I understand that some people are adverse to social media
As long as it is not irritating in design and not laced with the
commonly used bullshit *in the articles*, I do not see a real problem
with "social media"
but the whole
point of the site is to be social and share the information as much as
possible to build as much traffic as possible so that we can make money
from advertising and use that revenue to pay people to create high
quality
content on a regular basis so in this case the naysayers are going to be
left behind to a certain degree unfortunately ;-)
I have a 1368x768 Laptop screen(Lenovo ideapad) The ticker overlaps
about 40px of the two videos in the second row.
Plus: the design is a complete mess. To have a
banner blocking the
sight
on a video is not even amateurish, regardless if the banner is a
newsfeed.
Can you send me a screenshot offlist please? I am not seeing what you
describe here as a problem. It is by design that the ticker would
overlap
just a little but maybe you have a very tiny screen and it is taking up
more room? My proposition: cut it down to something simple
and most of all: let
the
visitors choose, what source of video they would like to see, do not
load all available...
By source do you mean let the viewer choose between ogv, webm, h264,
etc...? Can you elaborate please?
FYI, I haven't tried to process the individual media that I have
included
in the playlists for multiple encodings. That is a bit more effort than
I
am prepared to commit to at this early stage of development.
I would find that quite hard a task also...
I mean: if the publisher of a Linux-related video chooses some weired
format not viewable in a out-of-the-box Linux with say VLC and Mplayer
installed...
Maybe filtering those vendors would be the better choice...
9:50 a.m.
New subject: [Channel Linux - Feedback]
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 19:36 +1100, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
I think we could do better than excluding media simply
because some people
might not be able to view it. We definitely have the hardware and skillz
to do the transcoding that would be necessary to make the content
available to anyone in any format. I'm just not sure it is the best way to
handle the problem. Perhaps it should be made clearer to producers that if
they want their content distributed there are a few formats that are more
widely acceptable. For example ogv will definitely work on a "Linux"
community channel. Anyone who doesn't have that will need to sort their
end out.
It should be made clear that Linux isn't a replacement for Windows as
e.g. DR-DOS was a replacement for MS-DOS.
Perhaps my Firefox does bitch about missing pulgins, because it guess
flash is needed, but it isn't, the videos can be played without flash
and also without gnash.
If people do expect flash or some exotic win codec to show their video,
than IMO they should stay away from Linux.
More acceptance for Linux? Yes.
Linux as a replacement for Windows or as a Windows emulator? No.
IIUC your target is to make Linux more popular as it's own OS and not to
make it a replacement for Windows or a Windows emulator.
If people want Windows crap, why should they use Linux? Windows can do
Windows things much better than Linux can do Windows things.
10:35 a.m.
New subject: [Channel Linux - Feedback]
On 03/15/2013 10:50 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 19:36 +1100, Patrick Shirkey
wrote:
Firefox's ability to play HTML5 video can be dependent on the video
hardware and driver in use. On my little old laptop, running Debian Sid
here on its trusty old Intel 855GM video hardware, the only video
formats that play are Flash because playing the other formats isn't
supported by the video driver. Apparently many of the non-Flash formats
require that the video hardware and driver have functionality that Flash
apparently provides independently of video hardware/driver.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
I think we could do better than excluding media
simply because some people
might not be able to view it. We definitely have the hardware and skillz
to do the transcoding that would be necessary to make the content
available to anyone in any format. I'm just not sure it is the best way to
handle the problem. Perhaps it should be made clearer to producers that if
they want their content distributed there are a few formats that are more
widely acceptable. For example ogv will definitely work on a "Linux"
community channel. Anyone who doesn't have that will need to sort their
end out.
It should be made clear that Linux isn't a replacement for Windows as
e.g. DR-DOS was a replacement for MS-DOS.
Perhaps my Firefox does bitch about missing pulgins, because it guess
flash is needed, but it isn't, the videos can be played without flash
and also without gnash.
4260
days inactive
4261
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
david -
Hartmut Noack -
Patrick Shirkey -
Ralf Mardorf