On Saturday 23 September 2006 16:20, Lee Revell was like: > On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 15:40 +0700, Patrick Shirkey wrote: > > tim hall wrote: > > > On Friday 22 September 2006 15:03, Lee Revell was like: > > >> 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? > > > > 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... > > 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. .mpg is great for video. I agree that flash players for other media suck. However .mpg doesn't provide animated vector graphics with scriptable interactivity, unless I've missed something. > 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. Flash works on my system, but it drops frames all over the place. Sure would be nice to break the monopoly. I'll dream on for now. :) -- cheers, tim hall http://glastonburymusic.org.uk/tim We are the people We've been waiting for.
