I would like it to automatically ping Adobe looking for the Flash player

that is not available.  When I'm particularly irritated with some site

that demands Flash, I follow the link to Adobe's site where they "don't

have a plugin for my platform" and refresh 10-20 times to sprinkle some

love in their web server logs.  FF automating that for me would be

great!
Jim

-----Original Message-----

From: Jim Razmus [mailto:jim@bonetruck.org]

Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 3:58 PM

To: misc@openbsd.org
Oh, you think that anyone who reads their logs is allowed to talk to a

developer there?
I think that Adobe is making enough money doing what they're doing that

they do not want an open plug in for Flash.  Period.  They think that

protecting their source optimizes their revenue.

--
Ed Ahlsen-Girard

I for one am glad there is no plugin for that infectious disease called

flash.

On the other hand, web developers think this thing is hot shit.  I

certainly share your sentiment, but having just come from a web

development class where the instructor essentially proselytized

Flash/Flex(/maybe-Silverlight) for 3 hours as the solution to

cross-browser-AJAX compatibility headaches, I think most of the world

doesn't care about what's right or best-- they just want what's easy.

This is something that gives web developers consistent sites across >90%

of existing browsers, because there's ONE runtime, and that's worth the

price tag for the development tools.
This guy's day job is at a bank, and they're really into it-- it

"solves" a number of problems for them.  So if this is the kind of thing

that developers are going to pick up en masse, then it's something that

will need to be addressed, else people who won't or can't run Flash will

be increasingly marginalized.

I'd just be a little more comfortable if you qualified that a little.

Perhaps with something like `wrong-thinking web developers think...'
The current breed of standards-based web developers - which in my

estimation form the bulk of all web developers currently doing

anything anyone is seeing, and of which I am fairly representative,

would think nothing of the sort.
Truly well-versed web developers find cross-browser issues bothersome,

but far from insurmountable; certainly not worthy of abandoning xhtml,

css and javascript for something with funny names and registered

trademarks.
Flash has a place on the web, just like any other rich media format.

It should be used responsibly, as semantically as possible, and

degrade nicely for those who care not to use it. I make every effort

to use it within these guidelines, and present them as gospel to my

clients. Many (most?) modern web developers do too, except for the

ones at a Flex conference who still think drawing entire websites in

Flash is a good idea. Shame on them, but they are a dying breed.
At a bank? Yeesh...

Flash has one huge technical benefit.  There are a number of sites that

generate large amounts of dynamic images.  Doing this in a fast and

efficient manner requires an enormous amount of computing resources.

Using flash pushes that work out to the client where it can be rendered

on their own system.
--

Jason Dixon

DixonGroup Consulting

http://www.dixongroup.net/

Hi!
What about four letters: Java? One advantage: No blob required. And at

least a *bit* more portable. And will eventually be quite open source.
Kind regards,
Hannah.

I don't have any customers that use Java for client-side image

rendering, so I can't speak as to how it would compare.  I suspect that

Java wouldn't be as efficient as flash for passing instructions to the

client, but that's just a hunch.
--

Jason Dixon

DixonGroup Consulting

http://www.dixongroup.net/

On 17.07-10:26, Jason Dixon wrote:
performance of "image rendering" ? ? ?

	"passing instructions" ???

that's as meaningful as the banana flavoured lube.

	;-)
java is a language, flash is a solution.
many would like to see an open alternative to flash but since flash

is "not microsoft" i think it's below most radars.  it's also, as many

here have noted, 99.9% meaningless junk; and i'm 100% confident that

any flash application could be re-implemented in Java, should needs,

must.
personally, i avoid flash as a retard filter; remove it and lots of

sh1t suddenly disappears.
p.s: java's "image rendering" is perfectly performant (assuming you

accept java as an overhead in the first place ... of course, flashplayer

is just as bad)

What sort of websites are those?  no wonder I have not seen them--no

flash!
Even if you could deliver something meaningful with flash, the

bandwidth and CPU time wasted when plain HTML would do is nothing

short of a crime in my book.
My friends keep sending me youtube videos but I tired of their

inanity (mostly the videos) and don't watch them anymore.  I can't

remember the last time that flash improved my computing experience.
Finally, I hate to rattle the paranoia sabre...  but flash is just

another way into a box on an increasingly hostile web.
--

Travers Buda

Somehow the word Java comes to mind...
Flash is only good for a few things such as "naked ladies performing

anatomic tricks", "dude getting punched in the ding-dong" & "Trogodor

the burninator".  Nothing makes me happier than visiting a website and

having some ad puking its irrelevant content on me.
What's perplexing to me is that most people sit idle watching the

internet as we know it disintegrate in front of their eyes.  Allowing

themselves to be bombarded with ads.  Removing the actual reason for why

html exists which is indexing content so that it can be retrieved and

used by many.  Those people are all ok with being shat on as long as

they can watch youtube or $whatever_infantile_site_here.  The 14 year

old demographic is apparently the dominating one on teh intartubez

these days.
I for one can't wait to be marginalized.

Are you saying that Java is not being used widely?  All of the fundamental

courses in my CS department are taught using Java, and I don't think my

department is an exception.  Seems like a home run to me-- I'm sure that 
That's not what the instructor was pushing for-- he's suggesting that

people build an entire site using Flash.  That's the whole point of Flex.

I don't think that banking websites fall into the category you mention.

His argument was this: Flash is available for Windows, Mac, Linux-- that

gives you pretty much everybody-- and anybody else has marginalized

themselves.
Now, I strongly disagree with him.  For my employer, Flash is not an

option-- our applications need to be able to run on anything, even

cellphones, and they need to be accessible.  The application has to run on

many different backends as well.  But if you don't have those

requirements, or have had the experience of being locked in to a 
I doubt that you really feel that way.

I am saying that each java app requires its own java runtime because the
Your instructor is making money using flash.  I am sure he had sound

advice.
My bank uses html; the day they change is the day I'll cancel all my
I can't begin to imagine why I would agree or work in such an
I am glad you are an internet psychologist that knows me well enough to

tell me what is good for me.

On 17.07-10:13, Marco Peereboom wrote:
this is wrong.  java versions are largely compatible and most requirements

are library problems, not runtime compatibility (although i believe

distribution rights to core components would often restrict packaging

for forward compatibility).
--

        t

 t

                 w

If you get java awt rendering animations half as decently as the

official flash plugin, I would be suprised!
-- 
Best Regards
Edd
http://students.dec.bournemouth.ac.uk/ebarrett

On 17.07-19:33, Edd Barrett wrote:
i apologise if i'm becoming overly terse but it's becoming clear that

any attempt at discourse here deteriorates, at best, to pissing contest

and i'm finding it difficult to dissern between that behaviour and

genuine enquiry.
the short answer is, it is perfectly possible.
--

        t

 t

                 w

Actually, http://solarcollector.ca/create.php doesn't look too bad.

It still feels crufty to me though, on Windows Java pops up going "oh

look i'm java" and it's kind of slow.

Flash is definitely faster. Java was not originally meant for the web

and it's always been a hack in there. I too am rooting for gnash to be

finished some day. I hate all-flash sites as much as anyone, but it's

sticking your head in the sand to avoid it.
-Nick

i agree with the "faster" point but the key issue with java is not

getting it to render stuff well, it is with the amount of effort

required to actually develop the application.  flash has cool tools

for animating 2D objects, and performing interactions with them; java

requires you to write a shit load of code for the same effect.  i'm

sure SUN was/is hoping that someone will develop a java based animation

toolkit to compete with flash but that's yet to happen.
in short, flash is a good tool.  we'll all look forward to the day

that the formats, behaviours and protocols are opened so that we can

implement a native, opensource viewer.
--

        t

 t

                 w

> animation toolkit to compete with flash but that's yet to happen.
I think this is what JavaFX is aiming to be - unfortunately, it's

probably missed the boat, what with Flash having been around for years

and Microsoft having released Silverlight.
One of the reasons Flash on Windows is so fast is that it is

JIT-compiled to native code, plus it probably takes advantage of

accelerated graphics rendering where it can. Neither of these seem to

happen with the Linux flash plugin from Adobe (or if they do, it doesn't

help - it's still dog slow).
I think that was one of the things holding Adobe back from releasing an

amd64 version of Flash (even for Windows!) - they didn't seem to be

capable of porting their JIT compiler!
The bug reference for that is here:
	https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-37
Looks like the JIT was released under the MPL/GPL/LGPL in 2006:
	http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/
--

Russell Howe

rhowe@bmtmarinerisk.com

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 09:03:14PM +0000, n0g0013 wrote:
No it is not.  I sucks and is retarded.  It breaks the internet as we

know it and not for the better.
Your we does not include me and many others.

And I type like a retard too...

Like, this month?
Google: openscreen.
Flash protocol is open source.
-- 
Best Regards
Edd
http://students.dec.bournemouth.ac.uk/ebarrett

I love your optimism.  Integration efforts I worked on for a large

company always required to drop 1 run time environment per app.  I

promise we tried really really hard to make that one.  This meant that

when a loaded box went out the door there were as many as 8 java

runtimes installed on your box.
Spare me the "but my app is totally 1337 and doesn't need that"; it

simply doesn't apply to many scenarios.

you are the first person in a long time to accuse me of optimism, i

suppose i should thank you for that, but the statement was made from

experience.  whatever your personal experiences i still maintain that

your orginal statement was wrong, or at the very least, an extremely

harsh assessment.
--

        t

 t

                 w

So I can't call a spade a spade?
Sorry buddy I don't do politics well.  If something sucks it is

perfectly ok to call that out.
I haven't even begun being harsh towards java and/or flash.

The problem with flash is that you just cannot get away from it on the web these days.  A lot of sites use it. 
gnash is an okay solution, but I still cannot view a lot of content.  And I'm not happy that netflix went with a ms solution for their instant viewing content, which is worse.
The whole flash situation just sucks.
Brian

Interesting!  In my (admittedly limited) experience, software built with

an older version of Java nearly always runs just fine with a later

version of the Java runtime.  The only exceptions I'm aware of involve

one of the rare and well publicized API changes in the class libraries

or Microsoft's pseudo-Java, which was deliberately incompatible (in

violation of the Java licence) as a marketing move.
	Dave
--

Dave Anderson

<dave@daveanderson.com>

I have done just fine without flash for years.  For me it is very

simple; if your site has flash it means:

1. I suddenly don't care

2. I will not purchase anything from you

3. I'll find alternatives who make my experience better

4. I'll save some time by not watching some retarded video
It wouldn't be the first business/site I abandon.  It wouldn't be the

first site at work that I simply reply to originators saying: "sorry

can't view the content".
Making excuses for flash isn't helping.  You can't say: "I agree but I

use it anyway because I want teh nekid ladies".

In my opinion it's not always that simple.
Take skydiving equipment for example. This is a small and highly

specialized market in which often few alternatives are available.

When it comes to gear that my life is going to depend on, I'd much

rather base my choice on the quality of the product itself than on

the quality of the manufacturer's website, thank you. I refuse to

say: "I'll buy that other parachute because even though I trust it

less, at least the manufacturer doesn't have Flash on his website."
Don't get me wrong, I hate the use of Flash when it has nothing

substantial to add and I do try to point out to offending

manufacturers that their websites basically just suck ass, but I for

one can't afford the "you use Flash so I won't buy your stuff"

attitude. I value my life a little bit too much for that. When

buying cars, CDs or other everyday goods there are so many

alternatives that you can safely avoid Flash and simply buy your

stuff elsewhere, but with more specialized goods there often simply

aren't enough (viable) alternatives to do so.
Just my two cents,
Alphons
--

If riding in an airplane is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.

If you want to experience the element, get out of the vehicle.

You are the one jumping out of a perfectly good working airplane...
Lame example but don't worry most people who give these types of

examples think that the recipient is an idiot and could not have come up

with it themselves.  I appreciate you treating me like a 3 year old.

Last time I checked, my name wasn't Most People.

I don't remember calling you an idiot or other such name.

For a 3-year old you display pretty impressive thought capabilities and

linguistic skills.
On a slightly more mature note:

If I posted such bold black and white statements I wouldn't be surprised

(let alone offended) if others pointed out that they agree with the

general concept but find them inaccurate or unpractical in certain

situations.
Perhaps there's a masturbating monkey sitting on your shoulder ;-)
Alphons
--

If riding in an airplane is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.

If you want to experience the element, get out of the vehicle.

I know that if I had to buy something which had a direct impact on

me being dead or alive, I'd probably move my ass to the store, and

probably a few stores even, rather than just buying it on internet
Anyway, your comment seemed like most people spend their time buying

vital items, I assume they are not and most people are buying items

and using services which are available from various sites.
I understand marco and I have adopted the same attitude of not giving

money to companies which ... make it hard for me to give them my

money. If they don't want it, it's fine I'll buy from a competitor

which isn't an annoyance. I've had to change bank recently because

they turned their authentication into a flash interface that

forced me into keeping a dual boot and rebooting whenever I wanted

to check my account. There are competitors, they offer similar

services, more or less, why cope with the annoyance ?
Gilles
--

Gilles Chehade

http://www.poolp.org/~gilles/

                                    Please, contribute to my happiness ;)

                http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/wishlist/2O09ACKR1A8HD/

Very true of course. However, not every store sells every make. In

fact, many stores specialize in just one or two. So, skydivers need

to do a lot of research before strolling into a shop. Or even before

choosing which shop to go to. The Internet is a valuable tool for
I did mention that the situation is different when buying common goods

available from many sources. However, I felt the need to point out

that in my opinion it's *not always* as simple as Marco makes it seem.
Alphons
--

If riding in an airplane is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.

If you want to experience the element, get out of the vehicle.

and I agree.
my point is that there are many times, particularly in artistic

communitities, where this simply does not apply.
and no, I could not care less about the flash ladies.
Regards,

~Jason

There are also many educational sites that use flash.  These are highly

interactive (and dare I say, fun) learning experiences.  I see a lot of

value in that.  I look forward to the day that my daughter can use

http://www.starfall.com/ on OpenBSD.
--

Jason Dixon

DixonGroup Consulting

http://www.dixongroup.net/

No, no, take it from an old Masturbating Monkey, most of the pr0n

videos out there on teh Intartubes do not in fact require aBLOBe

Flush.
(There, now I've blown my chances of future employment with any

company competent enough to use teh Google. But I did it for the

lulz.)
--ropers

I agree, a flash site means "you don't want my business" for me. It's annoying.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA256
there are a lot of informative and useful videos and documentaries on

youtube, and a lot of news or otherwise "public service" websites
noscript and adblock-plus take care of this wonderfully.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFIfsQtXhfCJNu98qARCPfyAJ4wi7uQhUrMEJHDujH/Tg264BG0lgCghZbo

whFk1k2nmaHzuut1KFe1sZc=

=htkV

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

*cough* XviD + Vorbis *cough*
And no, Flash does not help with content protection (read DRM).

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Hash: SHA256
i'm not quite sure what you're saying, but i'll give interpretation a try.
i'm not advocating flash over a fantastic alternative like xvid+vorbis.

 the point is the masses use flash now.  i don't know or care why it has

become popular as a medium, but it is.  it is valuable in that it is not

just used for stupid videos mentioned above, which many people might

think, but is used for informative and other public service needs, like

is mentioned elsewhere in this thread about skydiving equipment.
if i had to guess i would compare it to your friendly government website

requiring internet explorer.  they don't have the skilled staff to write

a web page based on standards since they have sold out to microsoft, so

they continue on the easy route and use some microsoft website builder

which breaks countless standards but is easy for them to implement.  now

they are serving 90% of internet users with a public service which was

otherwise unavailable.  meanwhile, the other 10% of people like us are

bitter.  overall, though, a great benefit has been bestowed upon society

as a whole.  blah blah viruses, blah blah security holes.. it obviuosly

doesn't matter if it is easy and serves a large majority.
and i'm not sure where content protection came into this or what it has

to do with anything.  i hate content protection though, i'll say that much.
who are we to deny a user their right to the content on the internet?  i

think we should stop arguing on moral grounds and put effort towards a

viable and secure solution to those without a microsoft operating system.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFIf8ZtXhfCJNu98qARCM8IAJ9XtBurknekhsa391d7c1UecrJ3tACgt6Zv

V4CMykPr3qLMNnaXLKy54OA=

=G8uy

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

But then how will I watch "Ow!  My balls!" videos online?  What will I do?
-Mark

Hi!
There's plenty of add-ons for firefox/... to download them. E.g.

DownloadHelper (which knows how to download the stuff from much more

than youtube/google video).
Kind regards,
Hannah.

Adobe will certainly get that exactly right:

You clearly want foobar binary plugins!                  :-/
Scratching my head,

  Ingo
P.S.  << __ME_TOO_SCNR__

Certainly, you will all listen to Marco.  He is advocating small doses

of sanity, difficult as that may seem with respect to firefox...

__ME_TOO_SCNR__