dos386, Could you please stop your excessive use of satirized names for companies or technologies? I know you have a point you want to make in there somewhere but you lose me when I have to parse and substitute your satirized names for these things (like Flu$h for Flash).
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 11:07 AM, dos386 <dos...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 21 July Eric Auer said: >> indeed I am trying to motivate people to use TLS/SSL > > This (and without HeartBleed's, MD5-certificates, crippled 40-bit keys,...) > definitely makes sense when hunting around big bucks or sensitive > personal data ... however obligatory HTTPS for things like BUGzilla's > and user or developer forums isn't that sane. > >> I don't recall ever seeing an MNG file, and if I were Mozilla, I >> wouldn't bother to add support for something no one actually >> used, even if it produced *no* bloat. > > 10 + 5 = 2 ;-) > >> More to the point, who *needed* it? > > - people using AGIF and being happy with it > - people using AGIF but being concerned about its technical issues > (256 colors etc) > - people using AGIF but being concerned about its legal issues > - people using Flu$h for animations and being happy with it > - people using Flu$h for animations but being concerned about its > technical issues (bugged Plugin) > - people using Flu$h for animations but being concerned about its legal issues > - people who would like to use animations on the Internet but couldn't > since both AGIF and Flu$h sucked > >> What sort of other stuff might you *omit* from Mozilla code to >> trim bloat? What do you consider bloat? > > Maybe cca 80% of stuff added during recent 4 years. > >> H_264 got the nod because it provides better compression, and >> video takes bandwidth. Google > > But the very same Google notoriously tries to prevent people from > downloading movies from its Loo-Tube. 10 times viewed -> 10 times wasted > bandwidth. Now let's assert than bandwidth is an issue. :-D > >> was looking at Theora as an alternative when they decided to make Chrome > > Please point me to the full test report with test materials. > >> We *have* a usable spec, and it's being implemented. > > We have a codec with legal problems ... when the legal problems expire > one day the codec will be deprecated ... maybe H265 or H266 will be "in" > and guess what ... have new legal problems. > >> There's a lot more to HTML5 than the new <video> keyword > > The new <video> keyword (together with Theora+Vorbis codecs) > was the useful part of HTML5. > >> I don't think "most" video pages rudely cry for flash >> Got a site where you would really like to see Flash go away in favor of >> HTML5? > > http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36961338 > >> Download Flash Player now >>You need to install Flash Player to play this content. > > https://get.adobe.com/flashplayer > >> and video isn't the only reason Flash is deployed. > > The other one were animations, see above about MNG. > >> Folks are moving away from it as fast as they can. > > sure :-D > >> But getting rid of Flash is a complex exercise. >> Are *you* willing to pay what it will cost > > Definitely NO. Why? Becasue it does NOT need 1000's of > hours of work done by 1000's of state-of-the-art programmers. > > Instead of the malware link "https://get.adobe.com/flashplayer"; they > could just provide the download link for the movie, or embed it > using the simple HTML5 style. This would cost actually nothing. > >> Since you seem to have missed the fact > > oops > >> I'll be a good guy > > damn > >> What worked 20 years ago *won't* work now. > > Because of "good guy" 's like you notoriously deliberately break things. > >> world is bigger than you are and doesn't *care* what *you* think > > Why the hell have *you* subscribed to the *FreeDOS* list? > > BTW, FireFox now includes an excellent PDF viewer. It's only > cca 100 times slower than MUPDF. ;-) > > One more bad news for you: > >> FF 1-4 do *not* support current standards, and are likely to fail >> in odd ways if you try to use them now > > check > > http://www.4p8.com/eric.brasseur/gamma_dalai_lama.html > > with FireFox 48 > > then check with Links 2.13. Oops, you can't since you don't > have DOS ? Then check the shot I made for you: > > http://www.xaver.me/drdoswiki/uploads/Main/li213gam.png > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Freedos-user mailing list > Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Freedos-user mailing list Freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-user
