On 4/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 19/04/07, Beech Rintoul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 April 2007, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri said:
> > On 4/18/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 17/04/07, Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote: . . .
> > >
> > > > Porting Flash to more OSes will sure will make adobe beats MS
> > > > when it comes to web media.
> > >
> > > I hope they kill each other and take the whole
> > > retch-media enhanced web experience with
> > > them flaming into the pit of hell from which
> > > they came.
> > >
> > > But that's just my opinion.
> > >
> > > References:
> > > http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=boiling_blood
> >
> > I'm sorry but rich media is a fact in the web, and you can't ignore
> > it.
> >
> > Flash is used with Yahoo! maps, and so with alot of useful apps
> > like stocks prices ..etc.
> >
> > Instead of ignoring it, we should see it ported to FreeBSD.
>
> I agree. As much as I personally dislike flash, I have business
> clients who would be willing to switch from Micro$oft to FreeBSD. The
> main stumbling block is the lack of stable flash support.
>
> Where I have deployed test versions of FreeBSD with either OO or KDE
> with Firefox, they were generally happy except for flash. This is one
> of the things we need to overcome if we're ever going to be seriously
> considered as a desktop os. Most clients expect the browser to at
> least work as well as Micro$oft, however misguided that is.
Being taken seriously is over-rated.
Being taken seriously as a desktop OS would
be an excellent joke was the reality of it not so
horrifying.
Televisions are much better at providing the sort
of cacaphonic nonsense that flash users have
come to expect.
I am pleased clicking a link and coming across the
dreadful, "Must have MorkothMedia Flush Player
45.6 or newer installed to use this site". Honestly,
I was expecting something jumbly but likely full of
information. The "download plugin" box tells me
that I have just saved the time of listening to some
irritating music while it dawns on me that I have hit
a dead end.
The primary use of flash, as I have seen it in such
places as you-tube and yahoo, is as a content slash
copyright management* frontend. That they, the
shadowy and sinister "They" in this case being
that loveable and fuzzy company named after dried
mud, even tried porting flash to linux was probably
widely regarded as a mistake, at least internally.
Porting it to even smaller-market operating systems,
as far as the desktop is concerned, sounds like a
losing proposition to me. Especially ones with users
Quote:
"What should the BSDs do? As I've said several times in the last five
years, that depends on what the projects want. But if we want to be
seen as a viable alternative for use by non-developers, my big issue
is that we need to understand the end user perspective. We can't just
say of any feature "If there's nobody there to support it, axe it." As
long as there are people who want that feature, we need to support it.
If we don't, BSD is gradually going to be usable only by software
developers."
Greg Lehey, 2004
http://ezine.daemonnews.org/200402/dadvocate.html
Quote:
"FreeBSD developer Scott Long told ZDNet UK on Thursday that the
operating system, descended from the Unix derivative BSD, is "quickly
approaching" feature parity with Linux.
"Lots of work is going on to make FreeBSD more friendly on the
desktop," Long said. "Within the year, we expect to have, or be near,
parity with Linux."
--
Regards,
-Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri
Arab Portal
http://www.WeArab.Net/
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
