Re: "A Modest Proposal" - was [Re: flash? [OT]]
On Wednesday 16 March 2016 00:42:48 Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 3/15/2016 11:45 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 10:35:12 Richard Owlett wrote:
> >> On 3/15/2016 3:57 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >>> The BBC isn't going to take a blind bit of notice if Brian and I don't
> >>> watch Happy Valley. It really isn't going to care. It has its licence
> >>> money.
> >>>
> >>> Even Channel 4, which relies on advertising for its revenue, is totally
> >>> indifferent to the fact that Linux users can't watch it on a computer.
> >>> Well, Brian probably can. But he hasn't let the rest of us into the
> >>> secret. [snip]
> >>
> >> Have any that think flash is inferior actually written a polite
> >> letter {preferably the snail mail variety] to a senior executive
> >> (President, CEO, COO, etc) of the content provider?
> >
> > And in the context of my posting "the content provider" would be?
> >
> > Do you really think that no-one, out of 60,000,000 potential users, a few
> > of whom use Linux, has thought of asking??? But tell me who you think
> > the content provider is, and I'll try again. I admittedly used
> > electronic means. The BBC has improved things. At least we can now get
> > it. (As opposed to not getting it at all.)
> >
> > Lisi
[snip]
>
> For an explicit response to your question, before you clicked on
> a link, whose logo was most prominent? They have likely paid cold
> hard cash to someone. I doubt they would appreciate paying
> someone to trash their reputation.
In the context of what I originally said this makes absolutely no sense at
all. Sorry. That was why I asked what you meant. You simply didn't read
the thread.
And what worked 50 years ago wouldn't work now anyway.
Lisi
Re: "A Modest Proposal" - was [Re: flash? [OT]]
On 3/15/2016 11:45 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
On Tuesday 15 March 2016 10:35:12 Richard Owlett wrote:
On 3/15/2016 3:57 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
[snip]
The BBC isn't going to take a blind bit of notice if Brian and I don't
watch Happy Valley. It really isn't going to care. It has its licence
money.
Even Channel 4, which relies on advertising for its revenue, is totally
indifferent to the fact that Linux users can't watch it on a computer.
Well, Brian probably can. But he hasn't let the rest of us into the
secret. [snip]
Have any that think flash is inferior actually written a polite
letter {preferably the snail mail variety] to a senior executive
(President, CEO, COO, etc) of the content provider?
And in the context of my posting "the content provider" would be?
Do you really think that no-one, out of 60,000,000 potential users, a few of
whom use Linux, has thought of asking??? But tell me who you think the
content provider is, and I'll try again. I admittedly used electronic means.
The BBC has improved things. At least we can now get it. (As opposed to not
getting it at all.)
Lisi
I was trying to make my response as generic as possible.
There is another philosophy re "How to effectively complain".
The useful answers tend to resemble "Follow the money".
I'll give an example from over 50 years ago. ;)
My father was having problems with service from the local Ford
dealership.
A business trip took him to Detroit.
He walked into Ford corporate HQ saying "I have a problem."
By the time he got home, he had multiple responses saying "How
can I help?" !!!
For an explicit response to your question, before you clicked on
a link, whose logo was most prominent? They have likely paid cold
hard cash to someone. I doubt they would appreciate paying
someone to trash their reputation.
Re: "A Modest Proposal" - was [Re: flash? [OT]]
On Tuesday 15 March 2016 10:35:12 Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 3/15/2016 3:57 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > The BBC isn't going to take a blind bit of notice if Brian and I don't
> > watch Happy Valley. It really isn't going to care. It has its licence
> > money.
> >
> > Even Channel 4, which relies on advertising for its revenue, is totally
> > indifferent to the fact that Linux users can't watch it on a computer.
> > Well, Brian probably can. But he hasn't let the rest of us into the
> > secret. [snip]
>
> Have any that think flash is inferior actually written a polite
> letter {preferably the snail mail variety] to a senior executive
> (President, CEO, COO, etc) of the content provider?
And in the context of my posting "the content provider" would be?
Do you really think that no-one, out of 60,000,000 potential users, a few of
whom use Linux, has thought of asking??? But tell me who you think the
content provider is, and I'll try again. I admittedly used electronic means.
The BBC has improved things. At least we can now get it. (As opposed to not
getting it at all.)
Lisi
Re: "A Modest Proposal" - was [Re: flash? [OT]]
On 3/15/2016 9:09 AM, deloptes wrote:
Richard Owlett wrote:
On 3/15/2016 3:57 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
[snip]
The BBC isn't going to take a blind bit of notice if Brian and I don't
watch
Happy Valley. It really isn't going to care. It has its licence money.
Even Channel 4, which relies on advertising for its revenue, is totally
indifferent to the fact that Linux users can't watch it on a computer.
Well,
Brian probably can. But he hasn't let the rest of us into the secret.
[snip]
Have any that think flash is inferior actually written a polite
letter {preferably the snail mail variety] to a senior executive
(President, CEO, COO, etc) of the content provider?
When I was not able to watch the national channel with flash player under
linux, few days later they wrote back, that the problem was fixed and
indeed since then it is working fine.
The transition to HTML5 will take years - be patient and pray ;-)
regards
I don't know current statistics, but in the pre-WEB era one
letter written indicated that 100 or more others had the same
problem. As to "flash" etc, I've yet to find a site that actually
needed it to give me relevant content. YMMV ;/
Re: "A Modest Proposal" - was [Re: flash? [OT]]
Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 3/15/2016 3:57 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> The BBC isn't going to take a blind bit of notice if Brian and I don't
>> watch
>> Happy Valley. It really isn't going to care. It has its licence money.
>>
>> Even Channel 4, which relies on advertising for its revenue, is totally
>> indifferent to the fact that Linux users can't watch it on a computer.
>> Well,
>> Brian probably can. But he hasn't let the rest of us into the secret.
>> [snip]
>
> Have any that think flash is inferior actually written a polite
> letter {preferably the snail mail variety] to a senior executive
> (President, CEO, COO, etc) of the content provider?
When I was not able to watch the national channel with flash player under
linux, few days later they wrote back, that the problem was fixed and
indeed since then it is working fine.
The transition to HTML5 will take years - be patient and pray ;-)
regards
