From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 11 06:00:14 2010 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 DD4E91065696 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 06:00:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx01.qsc.de (mx01.qsc.de [213.148.129.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87BBE8FC17 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 06:00:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r55.edvax.de (port-92-195-157-147.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.157.147]) by mx01.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 821D83D598 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 08:00:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from r55.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r55.edvax.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id o8B60BuA001542 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 08:00:11 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 08:00:11 +0200 From: Polytropon To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-Id: <20100911080011.99b2d379.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <4c8a4eaa.5b8bcc0a.7880.62d3@mx.google.com> References: <4c8a4eaa.5b8bcc0a.7880.62d3@mx.google.com> Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: this is probably a little touchy to ask... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 06:00:14 -0000 Preface: Sorry for messing up the quotes and all, this message got a bit untidy so that even *I* am unsure who I am currently replying to. :-) On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 15:24:31 +0000, four.harrisons@googlemail.com wrote: > On 10. sep. 2010, at 16:29, merlyn@stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote: > > Except for video playback, which HTML5 fixes as well. And yes, until > > then, we're stuck with Flash. Sadly not. While HTML5 standardizes the embedding of video content, there still seems to be a problem with codec to use. All this idiotic crap of patenting, licensing, and all the fee-loaded lawyer-stuff that has NO need to exist in a technical discussion brought "Flash" where it is today: "Flash" is abused as a replacement of HTML, mostly by "professional program managers" and script kiddies. HTML5 browsers would need to be able to play video content out of the box, WITHOUT the need for installing additional codecs "that are illegal to use in my country" - you know what I mean. It's like requiring a plugin at OS kernel level to display text in bold face, or showing a PNG image in a web page! > > I repeat... Java had its day. Time to move on. > > You are forgetting - or conveniently ignoring - that many still > NEED Java support in their browsers - and not of their own choice. I think the initial suggestion to move on was directed exactly at the reasons you mentioned in the next sentence: > Banks, insurances, digital signature services etc. Still frequently > use Java as carrier for their services. Often this cannot be changed > easily as such organizations have long turn-around times and make > investments in the long term. Good software can always be changed easily. :-) > Java is still very much alive, and until html5 can validate and run > signed code it'll stay that way even on the client. And that is just > one of the reasons/scenarios. It's also very famous in education. For example, basic programming courses (not BASIC programming courses!) often use Java to teach the basics of programming. This produces bad programmers. :-) > I'm not using FreeBSD on the desktop for just this kind o reasons. I'm using FreeBSD *exclusively* on the desktop since version 4.0. I never had issues with Java - it always worked. I admit that it wasn't very easy in the first years due to Sun's licensing politics (again, politics are the enemy of every educated technical consi- deration), but it worked. Both in Opera (my main browser) and Firefox, among many "testing bed" browsers I had to use in the past. Since "Flash" works on FreeBSD, I also tried this out. After one week, I removed it. Reason: No need for it. You are right that Java is still needed in some places on the web, but it's far more easy to deal with Java problems than with "Flash" problems, I think. > So either one takes the time to implement what people _need_ in > addition to what you would prefer them to need, or the desktop > can as well be ditched and focus moved to improving FreeBSD for > servers, where it already excels. First of all, please see the big difference between "what people need" and "what people want", and who those people are. I'm sure I don't have to elaborate on this. :-) Second, FreeBSD is an excellent MULTI-purpose operating system that can be used on terminals, workstations, servers, and on all kinds of mixed forms. I would be sad to lose only one of those functionalities. For a more desktop-centric FreeBSD that has all the stuff "what people need", refer to PC-BSD. > Some sites make accessing them difficult without Flash, but I > consider that their problem and move on. Yes, same here. > FreeBSD isn't just good for servers. As I said. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...