From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 26 13:04:36 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8CEB106568A for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:04:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rock_on_the_web@comcen.com.au) Received: from angel.comcen.com.au (angel.comcen.com.au [203.23.236.69]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A048C8FC2B for ; Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:04:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rock_on_the_web@comcen.com.au) Received: from [192.168.0.195] (unknown [202.172.126.254]) by angel.comcen.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 542ED5C2E5C6 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:05:56 +1100 (EST) From: Da Rock To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20090126131237.f38c572c.andreas.xanke@edvax.de> References: <1232945177.32181.27.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20090126130242.F69204@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20090126131237.f38c572c.andreas.xanke@edvax.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 23:04:44 +1000 Message-Id: <1232975084.41990.12.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Solaris Compat? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:04:37 -0000 On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 13:12 +0100, Andreas Xanke wrote: > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:04:13 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > it's nonsense to FreeBSD developers to do workaround just because adobe > > don't want to make FreeBSD binary. > > > > If they don't want to make, then they DONT WANT US to use their product. > > They DO HAVE RIGHT to do so, and please respect their rights! > > > > PS. Of course it's nonsense what they do, but again it's their right to do > > stupid things > > I do share this point of view, but sadly, an open system like > the Web has been polluted and made unusable (or at least has the > tendency to be this way) for those who cannot access this > propretary product / format. > > Don't get me wrong, I've played a bit with "Flash" on FreeBSD, > found it useless and am living happily now without it, without > getting bothered to install strange "Plugins" or "Extensions" > all day long. The day "Flash" will be an open standard and will > be integrated into browsers (such as graphic formats are, or > even other media), then I'll think about it again, for sure. > But as long as something that unimportant hooks so deeply into > the system that it's hard work to create workarounds to use > it (swfdecoder, linux-flash, gnash etc.), it simply isn't > worth thinking about. > > Or could you imagine that a company would release some software > that makes it possible to view PNG images within a webpage, but > your OS isn't intended to have support for this, because it would > require the modification of the OS kernel? :-) Understandable. Try clipsal.com , or try freeview.com.au - and this is just a few of the sites and organisations I deal with that don't offer workarounds (and I have said words to them regarding accessibility). Unfortunately, some organisations don't believe flash is that unaccessible.