Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Partners with Real Networks
engineer_uhg writes to tell us that Mozilla has just entered into a multi-year agreement with Real Networks to have Firefox distributed with downloads of RealPlayer, Rhapsody, and RealArcade. The Mozilla team cited Real's estimated 2 million downloads per day as a great tool for distribution. However, many Firefox supporters question the move, complaining of questionable practices by Real.
While I certainly wish Mozilla the best of luck in ramping up the distribution of their products, I wish they'd picked a better net citizen to accomplish that goal.
We don't have to get RealPlayer or any of Reals other crap crammed down our collective throats with our FireFox downloads, i don't care what they do.
~Mozleron
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups
I keep tryi.... *buffering*.... ng to read.... *buffering*.... the story...
The reason RealPlayer has 2 million downloads per day? Because people download it, install it, use it for what they need... then get it hell off their machine! RealPlayer is worse than a virus! Mozilla, why?! That's like partnering with cocaine dealers because they distribute to 2 million people a day. Ughhh! I feel DIRTY!
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
Their questionable practices, eh? I'm not sure I see anything wrong with this. It seems like just another way to gain share. I wish there was a link to the complaints.
That understates the reaction quite a bit. Real is one of the worst things to hit the Internet since AOL, IMHO
Bundled downloads suck, especially for people with slow internet connections.
Just give me what I requested, don't add a bunch of crap to the download that I don't need or want. Does Mozilla want Firefox to become "That crappy browser that came with the music player"?
...a partnership with the government of Nigeria.
Opera will tout itself as a new standard as the preferred Acid 2 compliant browser of 419 scammers.
Its a really bad idea to tarnish the name of Firefox with an association with the malware known as realplayer. Big thumbs down.
Mozilla has just entered into a multi-year agreement with Real Networks
Look, if you plan to sell your soul, at least sell it to the devil himself, not just any ol' schmuck in goat leggings.
Like Billy G - Now he might have given you fame, power, glory, girls (hey, look at Melinda!). But no - Instead, you gave your soul to a guy named Phil who smokes too much and ends every sentence with "Trust me!".
In five years, when you all look back and wonder how you went from posing a serious threat to MSIE, to posing a sort-of-maybe threat to Opera - Remember this day.
This should make uninstalling Firefox/Mozilla a real Joy! I'd rather a nasty case of dysentery than have a "Real" product installed on my system (dysentery is much easier to get rid of...)
I'm not fat, just big boned...
IMNSHO Real Player is a plague to be avoided like syphilis. Ok, so if Mozilla will be distributed with Real software that is one thing, but I don't want to download Mozilla just to find out that Real software is in the installation package.
You can't handle the truth.
Seriously.
By why the hell don't they distribute something like VLC or MPlayer? Real loves to brag and brag about their download stats, but I imagine most of those numbers are from their install base. I practically NEVER need to view RM. Almost everything I run into is Quicktime, MPEG, Windows Media, DivX, or Flash Video.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
I already use Opera over Firefox because of, among many other things, the excessive memory footprint of Firefox. I don't think bundling it with bloated software like RealPlayer is the best way to improve that perception or problem.
Einstein, read the story again. Realplayer download will include firefox and will give users the option of installing firefox while they install realplayer. No one is embedding realplayer inside firefox.
. . . with the Release of RealOne player. Not only did they bundle in malware that changed media process control all over the OS map, it had these "helpful" internet processes that hijaked ports to download "suggestions" and "information". In the olden days, it was a lightweight media player that snapped open and actually did some network negotiation to deliver an optimal stream - download Real Player now and it takes 60 seconds to load on my dual core while it propigates its navigation with advertisements and crap from Real Network's CDN.
It's not bad because of Real. It's bad because if I'm downloading a program, then THAT'S what I want, not that extra shit. This bundling has always annoyed me - try getting Quicktime without having to download a 25-meg copy of iTunes (which, if you don't use the store, is a pain in the ass to use).
HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
At least you still CAN get firefox alone.
I can't download Itunes, unless I download Quicktime media player. I swear the only reason macs are better for video is because Apple has yet to create a GOOD version of Quicktime media player for the PC. Luckily MPC can use quicktime file formats, though I'm sure apple is mad about that one. But the fact I have to get their less than wonderful software on my system, infecting it, just so I can go use Itunes (which I enjoy), and listen to music (perhaps paying for more music)
I just hope firefox stays solo and corporately neutral, because it's the one thing that keeps Firefox high up in my book.
I understood it to mean that when you download the real player, you get firefox too. Is it the other way around also>?
...that Firefox is being bundled with Real's stuff, not the other way around.
Idiots.
Dunno how you got modded insightful. If you checked the article, you'd see that it's Firefox getting bundled with Realplayer, not the reverse.
Sure, Real is bad, horrible, evil, but if they manage to get people away from IE (perhaps with the inclusion of a subtle "[X] Check here to make Firefox your default web browser", I'd say huzzah to the lesser of two evils.
And maybe (/wishful thinking) if the Fox devs can smack some sense into Real devs during downtime, added bonus.
I can deal with that bundling since I don't download RP. If RP starts coming with Firefox, then FF will be out the window in a heartbeat!
I wonder what consequences will it have:
- when I download Firefox I will be faced with a webpage that urges me to get RealPlayer (but I still can opt-out from that)?
- when I download Firefox I will be forced to grab 20MB setup.exe only to choose to not install RealPlayer and only install Firefox which is about 5MB?
I am curious because in fact I hate RealPlayer and consider that is RealCrap. But on I don't mean Mozilla getting some money and pumping it into developement of its open source products.
So in fact it remains to be seen how they will implement this cooperation.
I was about to post a rant about how stupid this move is, until I saw that it was RealNetworks distributing FireFox, not the other way around.
As long as Mozilla doesn't distribute RealPlayer (or related products) with FireFox I have no problems.
Never again will that spawn be on my PC.
As long as Mozilla stuff doesn't ship with Real Networks crap, I'm fine with it.
No worse than selling computers with Windows on it with Mozilla installed, really.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Real Networks entered into an agreement with Mozilla Foundation to bundle Firefox into downloads of Real Network Applications.
Firefox will NOT come with any Real Network applications.
Real player is bundled by a lot of OEM manufacturers. If this extends to that also, it will be a tremendous boon to Firefox!
There: Something at a specific location.
Their: Owned by someone.
Please make sure your english compiles.
So much built in advertising for so little gain vs the alternatives. But so long as they're bundling Firefox with Real downloads, and not the other way around, I suppose there's no problem with that, unless Mozilla is paying them.
Dude
Firefox is not coming with realplayer. Its the other way round. Realplayer will come with forefox. This is no different than google desktop teaming up with sun for java downloads.
Then the user could snort coke off the disc after clicking "no thanks" 50 times in order to install Mozilla. :)
Is it really so much about so-called "business practises"... or is it just because Real stuff JUST SUCKS?
So this changes nothing for users of FF, but might be good for Real users who clearly deserve to be expunged from the gene pool by virtue of having willfully downloaded the #1 rated crapware on teh interwebs.
At least maybe, maybe they'll use FF instead of IE, which is good at least until IE7 is generally available.
[1] I hope to hell that assumption is correct.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
The funny thing about the rhapsody jukebox software is that it requires Windows media player> so that to me tells me what they think about their own product (realplayer) > i use linux so this wont effect me anyway but i think it is a bad move on behalf of the mozilla foundation :(
For the curious: Real Player's Questionable Practices. On the other hand, Some might be cheered by the fact that they Bypassed FairPlay.
As for Firefox... I'm seriously thinking of switching to Opera anyway. Heck I live in Norway these days.
Har du bra.
"No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
Now it's dirty by association.
Doesn't matter to me though. Switched to Opera when Mozilla buggered up from an updated extension.
Mozilla got so much money. But do they invest in development? I fear they don't. Just look at Sunbird, Lightening or whatever the calendar is called these days. Or NVU's son KompoZer?
Mozilla has the ressources to cross-finance development of other tools, to bootstrap open source. But it seems they don't want to.
I mean we have a successful tool called Firefox every company likes to play with, including a fanatic user community. We have a a wonderful mail client which lacks a calendar tool.
But what about other tools of the community? Chatzilla - wouldn't it be nice to get a standalone version? Or Fireftp stabdalone? A preconfigured Bugzilla server distribution. KompoZer. Better spellchecking tools and dictionaries. Tools for Internet Cafés, I think of a kind Browser-Only plugandplay Linux distribution. Brushed Theme for Thunderbird. An ODF view plugin. A usable pdf viewer. Developer Conferences coorganised by their mozilla-hungry AJAX-fanatic bigbusiness friends.
Real Networks, oh well.
mine contains no spyware, but then I'm using a Linux version, so maybe there's a difference for each OS.
From what I read, it comes bundled with downloads of realplayer, but realplayer is not bundles with downloads of firefox.
In other words: Firefox=Firefox, Realplayer=Realplayer+Firefox
Still not the nicest company to bundle with in terms of reputation, but at least it doesn't seem that you're getting stuck with Real when installed firefox.
Yet.
Firefox
Real Alternative
All of the functionality of this debacle without the spyware.
Although any connection with Real makes me feel slightly soiled, I think it's important to resolve some ambiguity in the story write-up.
As I understand it this deal means that you will get Firefox when you download RealPlayer, etc.
It does not appear to mean that you will get RealPlayer when you download Firefox.
The former is slightly scummy. The second would seriously taint Firefox in many people's eyes.
I REPEAT, THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT MOZILLA NOW PACKAGES REAL SOFTWARE WITH ITS PRODUCTS. IT IS THE OPPOSITE, REAL WILL NOW PACKAGE FIREFOX WITH THEIR PRODUCTS.
Can we call off the Calvary now?
Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
...I'm not seeing anywhere where it says that RealPlayer will come bundled with future versions of Firefox, only that Firefox will come with Real Products.
Of course, if it DOES come to pass I give it two days before someone comes out with a Firefox Extension called "RealRemover"
(From the Laws of Japanese Animation) Law of Inherent Combustibility -- Everything explodes. Everything.
Big mistake IMHO. Real appears to suck just as badly today as they did when I swore I'd never use their player again, what, 7-8 years ago? But I guess money talks. I sure don't have much to throw Mozilla's way, so...
Knee-jerk now, read the article later.
Realplayer pissed me off way back... when they started with their systray crap. EUREKA - I think they may have been the pioneer of annoying, increadibly usesless system tray icons! Ya feel me? Apple and Quicktime, yes, you are also idiots. What a waste of space! I don't need or want extra, pointless icons and software that adds itself to startup only to waste memory & time. The fact that Firefox comes with Realplayer and not the other way around is the only good thing about this move. Here's to the sites that force folks to get deal with Realplayer in the first place - you're idiots too. Wow, I've wanted to vent on that for a long time.
Do or do not. There is no try. --Yoda
If memory serves, this technique worked really well for Netscape.
If you must... http://www.free-codecs.com/download/K_Lite_Codec_P ack.htm and download K-Lite... which includes RealAlternative, and a Quicktime Alternative (another usless program that takes over your associations)
Where's The Ban Firefox/Mozilla petition at?
I'm fighting The War on Drugs!
There is No Excuse for Real to still be around. There is no excuse for anyone to associate with Real.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
I agree that it is great that Firefox is added to Real Player and not the other way around. However people are still going to see an opportunity to download Firefox and not see the opportunity to do it seperately from Real Player. This happened to me when I downloaded Firefox as a bundle with the Google Toolbar. Now I know better and I could have gone to the official website but most people are just going to be lazy and download both together.
Plus my post was in more of a humorous tone then an insightful one so I agree that I don't know how I got modded that way. Oh well I can't complain.
Fire fox is just being bundled with their some of their downloads. It has nothing to do with firefox and video players. If the VLC or MPlayer people wanted to bundle firefox likely they could go ahead and do so quite easily.
Looking at your post though it seems like your asking why real isn't bundling vlc and mplayer though.
members are seeing something, your seeing an ad
I despise Realplayer. It does nothing for me, and when it gets installed, it's harder to get rid of than spyware.
I believe things have changed for the better, but IIRC, RealPlayer didn't cause any problems provided you took the time to configure it, not unlike installing Windows for the first time and needing to spend a good amount of time unchecking and disabling all the "features." Most people didn't, of course, and hence the outcries of "spyware."
That said, the RealAlternative codec works fine, and when used with mplayerc (for Windows users), the playback problems are gone. No need for RealPlayer.
Try the Linux version. It's quite minimal, opens fast, and does it's job. The Mac version is also decent (doesn't force you to subscribe or try to run all the time). IMHO, it's much better than the crippled Quicktime. For Windows, though, that's where "Real Alternative" is an excellent choice.
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
First BBC, now Mozilla?
I was under the impression many things on BBC can be used with Windows Media Player Granted you're probably thinking which is the lesser of two evils, but you do have a choice.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
real player is a necessity when you want to listen to audio clips from sites such as http://www.npr.org/, but i don't hear any complaints about that one.
RP is not really that big of an issue provided you babysit the installation and only install what is needed to run rm streams. it's definitely not as big an issue as it was a number of years ago. the most annoying thing i find about it is when websites make you pick a specific media player, because variety IS the spice of life, but i can understand a group's choosing one format to avoid the cost of encoding across multiple formats.
now i just have to figure out if any of the 130 New Critical Objects Ad-Aware found on this computer were caused by Real Networks software so that I can make sure my foot isn't anywhere near my mouth...
Calling me a fucktard over a technacality is uncalled for. The truth is that a lot of people are going to download them as a bundle because they don't know any better and Real Player will forever be associated with Firefox and vice versa.
What was that saying? If you lie down with dogs you get fleas?
:)
If people download RealPlayer and realise it's crap, won't they also regard the progs that were bundled with it as crap also?
Besides. RealPlayer is a dead end format used by dusty old porn sites.
Or so I'm er.. told
The beloved Google also distributes real in its Google pack. There seems to be some google-mozilla-real alliance, which is a shame that Real is in that equation, cause it really is quite crap. Money talks I guess. And its the only "decent" (I use that term very loosely) commercial media player that isn't owned by Microsoft or Apple.
I.O.U One Sig.
Are the Mozilla guys this out of touch with the net community? Even Joe Schmoe knows Realplayer is a pain in the ass, let alone the community of developers who generally respect Mozilla. While it's good that Realplayer users can get access to better software, it's still a dodgy association; Real embody most of the things the Mozilla group are meant to represent the solution to.
Regardless of how good or bad real player is. There is a version out for linux. At least there is media player a company that thinks there is a value for linux based products. Apple aviods linux as plague. I wont even talk about MS.
Real might have lost it's lusture, but I am still rooting for it just because it has a linux version. And for all the foss franatics dont reply to this email if you have macromedia flash or sun java or adobe reader installed.
Any company that releases software for linux platform is in my good books, be it real or nero.
The problem here is that you'd think Mozilla was above this terrible "bundling" practice now, and especially with crap. It makes me like the developers quite a bit less, and I'm sure will do absolutely nothing to help them. I and almost everyone I know avoid realmedia files like the plague. If nothing else is available, I simply choose not to view at all. And this comes at a time when Opera is no longer adware, and MSIE is kinda making a little effort to not suck so much. Bad move Firefox.
Tesla, read the comment again. He never said anything about *embedding*. Just that *bundling* Firefox with bloatware might not help some people's idea that Firefox is also bloatware. Not that I've ever thought that about FF. Mozilla suite perhaps, but not FF.
coming from this cooperation, many things like integrated ads and other deeds that have been done by real may be seeped into FF.... its not good imo
"The reverse side also has a reverse side." - Japanese Proverb
Did you even read the article? Firefox will be offered with every RealPlayer, Rhapsody and RealArcade download, NOT the other way around. You will still be able to download Firefox on its own, just as you have always been able to. This will only affect people downloading Real's products, and may convert a whole bunch of them into Firefox users. Where's the problem?
It is labeled insightful because people are idiots and they jump to conclusions. Real is not going to be bundled with Firefox... its the other way around.
You are all a bunch of idots.
I'd say huzzah to the lesser of two evils.
hmm..lesser of two evils, Real vs. IE. That's a tough one.
Real supported GNU/Linux before there was even a stable browser. Realplayer was one of the first commercial apps that actually worked on GNU/Linux (Stallman, I love you, but you give me finger cramps. And, yeah, you hate Real, too, I'm sure. :) ).
I never clip my fingernails for fear of dangling symbolic links.
This is why grammar nazis exist -- you replied like an ass to a message that didn't say what you think it said.
..." doesn't necessarily mean bundling RealPlayer with Firefox, it means bundling Firefox with RealPlayer.
"... bundling it with bloated software like RealPlayer
Its Firefox that's being bundled with (or into or alongside) Real Player, not the other way around.
Insightful. Yeah.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
As far as I can tell, this is something Real is initiating, and not something Mozilla searched out. Don't blame Mozilla for that. I can see that if Mozilla was approached by Real with a deal to bundle the browser with Real, it would be like free advertisement and would be a great potential boost for exposure. I can only see this as a good thing for Mozilla.
This signature is far too complex to have been created by chance.
I have a windows version of RealPlayer installed which comes with no spyware, no annoying crap in the system tray and it only pops up when I try and play a RealPlayer clip.
If you people cant set it up to do the same please stop posting on a discussion board for geeks as you are obviously an idiot.
I would tell you what I did to get to this state, but the steps involved were so trivial I did not commit them to memory.
On another note, isnt RealPlayer (Helixplayer) now partly open source developed with only the latest Real codecs being proprietary.
Have a look round this site to learn more -
http://helixcommunity.org/
I dont read
Most of the people I know who hate real have not used it since version 8.
Yes..there was a time when Real was an EVIL company. BUT..they have done many things since then (ever heard of helix player..you CAN download it for free you know). They've done quite a lot in the open source world as well.
Come on, it's legit to dump on a company for a bad product. But it's been YEARS since the worst of their products that had stuff bundled you didnt want was distributed.
Personally, I don't use real, but their stuff hasn't been horribly bad since the days when they were trying to trick you into installing stuff (which now they don't do).
Hating real has become de-facto religion for some.
Ahh, gotcha. That parent post was worded oddly. I thought the Real software would start showing up in FireFox downloads from mozilla.org.... but it's the other way around. Moreover, from the looks of it, I'm not the only one who thought that.
So, really, this isn't very "ewww" after all.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
There are a plethora of other choices for browsers out there, not just Opera or Firefox or what have you. My apologies that I can't think of any particular ones offhand (but if you know of or use a little-known alternative browser, please post links in reply).
If Firefox screws this one up (read: gets screwed in the fine print by RealNetworks) and ends up bundling the software together, then g33ky people such as us will simply do to it what we did to IE. And don't think the people at Mozilla don't know that. Don't sweat - you the user will win out in the end.
Putting the 33k in G33k.
Sure, you can continue to get Firefox the normal way. But them including themselves with RealPlayer (Which is one of the most horrendous apps known to man for installing things superfluous to the user's needs) is therefore agreeing with Real's horrible install process, which is as close to spyware and malware as is possible while not 'quite' actually being so.
It's a case of 'a means to an end'... well, it's not ok to align yourselves with a horrible product that installs in an invasive manner just so you can get a few more installs of Firefox out there, you're just going to be having their bad name rub off on you.
Bad move Mozilla... bad, bad move.
I especially like the first comment...
So you give your opinion about a current product based on your experience with a 3 year old version of the same product?!
I wonder since when Real Player got so bloated that whole FireFox can be neatly tucked into distribution without users noticing it :)
Hyperom.com
Because if there are enough people using browsers other than Microsoft's, developers of large web sites have an incentive to develop to published standards rather than to IE's quirks and proprietary technologies. Diversity is the end, and Firefox is the means.
Firefox, about your new girlfriend? Bad News, dude, Bad News.
Partnering up with retards like real is not worth the extra distrabution at all.
I don't know about you, but I don't subscribe to either of these.
I consider myself part of the Open Source community because I both use Open Source, and from time to time I've also written and released my own Open Source. I don't particularly care about spreading the philosophy (although I'm happy to explain it to people), and I don't feel the need to make people use it (although I'm happy to help them if they want to, within reason).
Personally I like and use Open Source software because in the ways that I like using software, I find it to be of superior quality and better suited to my needs for a variety of reasons. Running campaigns and trying to convert people to new philosophies has nothing to do with it.
Individual people or organisations within the open source community might have goals, but I don't think it's a serious problem if different groups disagree. I'm also not sure if it's meaningful to claim that people should be aiming for a goal just because they're involved in open source. If anything, perhaps one issue that could be addressed is how to better identify different interest groups without trying to bundle them all into the "Open Source Software Community" basket.
I installed realplayer once, probably back in 93 or 94.. I didn't think anything of it until one day, when I dialed my local ISP, and before ICQ could even connect, Zonealarm popped up an incoming request from Realnetworks. INCOMING! I didn't have the player or the retarded agent running, as far as I could tell, nothing should have alerted them to my net presence. Immediately, I uninstalled (and soon formatted) and fired off an angry email. I've since used RealAlternative, and with media player classic, it's Way more functional than anything Real offers.
Whether it's one or it's the other, Real is not a nice company. They may be on a path to change their ways, or they may not--I recently installed RP, and it spewed unnecessary cruft all over the place, but no actual spyware. Either way, they have lost the geek trust, for a long time. Firefox wants to form a partnership with them. With the devil, as far as most of us are concerned.
It doesn't matter much who's packaging whom--this is an ugly move for the Mozilla leadership to try to make, and I hope they rethink it, fast.
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
Can you read?
FIREFOX WILL NOT COME WITH REALPLAYER, IT'S REALPLAYER THAT WILL HAVE FIREFOX BUNDLED AS A BONUS
And if one day Mozilla makes a bundling deal with DELL, it won't mean that you will receive a DELL desktop if you download Firefox, it will mean that DELL buyers will have Firefox preinstalled with Windows.
This is true, and good for them for reaching an agreement, although I'm curious to know what the hooks are in the agreement since Real would probably have been able to take and re-package Firefox regardless given its licensing. The main thing that I'm wondering about this is how much and in what ways Real might plan to modify Firefox for their own packaged version.
Will people with the Real build of Firefox get selective popup advertising from Real.Com? Will automatic upgrades come from the official Firefox distribution site, or from Real.Com? Will people easily be able to revert their installation to a generic Firefox? Given Real's reputation and past actions, it wouldn't surprise me too much if this became an issue.
one more anonymous coward jumping in the ant-mozilla FUD bandwagon...
If Real Networks wanted to bundle Firefox with RealPlayer (just to spite Microsoft due to past disagreements), the Mozilla Foundation couldn't really prevent them from doing so, since Firefox is open source. So perhaps it doesn't really make any difference whether this deal is called a "partnership" or not.
Back to using IE on Windows, then. Firefox as it is isn't exactly light-speed (ever compared it to Safari on OS X? It's a dog...), but with the recent improvements in IE7 and the nice spyware bundle with Firefox... looks like MS wins the browser wars, again.
I think the first thing that comes to mind is what people will start to think about Firefox. Sure, its userbase might be strengthened, but we are living in an age of browser spamming.
What do I mean by "browser spamming"? For example, let's say you install a popular piece of software like AOL. I have a laptop running Windows XP, and I also do not have any commercial antivirus of my own, so I installed AOL because my dad has an accoutn with them and from that I am able to get free McAfee service. AOL came bundled with "AOL browser." It's merely an IE frontend with a shinier interface and tabs. Also, try installing Realplayer for Windows--you can hardly load the damn thing without their little media browser coming up, loading all sorts of Real sponsored web pages. Is it possible for me to go anywhere or do anything without escaping some kind of little browser getting in my business?
Soon people will download Realplayer, an ad-supported shareware package, and they'll have Firefox. They'll begin to regard Firefox as the same sort of strings-attached freeware junk that Real is. Don't get me wrong--I think Realplayer is actually a very nice media player, but my beef against it is all the peripheral crap that comes with it and the intentionally-limited features.
It's important that people understand what Firefox truly is--Free software with a capital "F". They also need to understand that it comes from the Mozilla Foundation, not Real Networks. :-/
I do not like this association, I understand it from reals point of view, most people who know, loath real
these same people are fond of firefox and recomend it.
now those people we recommend firefox to will think real is good because we say firefox is good.
its shitty to do this, it's kinda like the people that you got to know through a friend and now keeps turning up although you wish they wouldn't.
yeah I know this post is kinda redundant but maybe the firefox devs will get the message this is an association which is good for real, all its done for mozilla is drag the mozilla foundations reputation down. mozilla is like an old friend who's just puked on my carpet. I will let it go once make it a habit and its bye bye time.
what makes this worse is there has been no discussion about this, surely there would have been a story posted on slashdot if this was being discussed on the mozilla forums. Someone would have leaked this if it wasn't being confined to a small group of people. who knew about this and did the deal. Did the lead developers know about this plan?
maybe slashdot should just do a poll and just let us show how many of us here approve or disapprove of this association.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
Realplayer is a load of ad filled crap....
Wanting to download iTunes without Quicktime is like wanting to download just the WinAmp interface without any of the MP3 or other media decoders.
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
Guess it's time to give Opera a try. While I understand that Realplayer isn't going to bundled with Mozilla, rather the other way around, it still bugs me. And, while I understand that it gets Mozilla to more people, I think they have enough of a "presence" on its own to not warrant a partnership with a company that uses questionable practices.
I'd be one to petition Mozilla, as RealPlayer is a piece of software that I refuse to be associated with. Also, I refuse to be associated with the following turds:
MS Passport SDK
Anything made or distributed by Rational (other than Rose)
Anything that was ever bundled in CA's Unicenter TNG
Windows ME
Microsoft MOM
Openair (the web site)
Windows versions of WordPerfect (other than in law offices)
ATM PVC and LANE configuration
Microsoft SMS
Seagate "WinInstall"
And many many more! I've even passed on job offers because something like Rational Clearcase was involved (Does IBM own Rational now?).
BBH
Agreed, on my system with 2GB of RAM, I used to get a bit disturbed if in-use memory rose above about 600MB at one time with ~60 processes running (AIM clients, bluetooth manager, cell phone toolkit, webcam tray icon, tv-tuner scheduler and processor, ATI driver processes, a dozen Windows dealies, etc. Having realized, however, that even while playing 3D games and watching television at the same time as Winamp is playing, I peak out at about 1600MB, I don't have any problems letting whatever needs to run, run.
Dual-Core and 2GB of RAM lets me make my PC as configurable as I want it to be, without worrying about every megabyte of memory usage.
Under Linux, your favourate player will handle it. Under windows, you can use Real Alternative and QT Alternative to avoid the malware.
Personally I don't use products from Real (I haven't even looked at them for several years), however, they are popular.
People keep saying "Real sucks", well a hell of a lot of people use it/download it, so there are a lot more people out there who like Real. And all these people are now going to have a chance to try out Firefox.
Why does Firefox need to push its market share? More market share means more money for one (through the sponsored search), and more money *hopefully* translates into a better product, and more adverting/deals like this.
Right now, a lot of websites simply *arn't* Firefox friendly, if market share hit 35%, could these websites afford to ignore Firefox any more? As a Firefox user this is important to me...
Finally, the more market share Firefox takes, the better MS will have to make IE, and in turn the better Firefox will become.. Why release a product for something like web browsing if you only want a small market share?... Firefox isn't "A tool for geeks", it's something to make the web expierence better - and it certainly does (I know no mention of Opera and others in this post, they have their place, especially Opera, but Firefox is in the best position to gain market share right now it seems)
Bad move, Mozilla. Bad move.
A) Real has gotten much better than they used to be. The OS X version is actually pretty good.
B) It will force more web developers to make standards compliant websites. Think of all the blind people who will be able to surf websites that were once inaccessible once Firefox market share gets into the 25% range.
Most people think this is some sort of violation of ethics, but frankly I see it more as Real giving back to the Internet community for some unethical things they've done in the past.
Actually Real plays it clean with the Linux version of the software - they don't sneak spyware in with the product, they don't try to take over your configuration, they don't hide checked items down in the out-of-site areas of picklists where all the visible items are checked. Why? Because they know that Linux users generally have at least half a clue WILL NOT tolerate that sneaky crap.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
The latest QuickTime formats are H.264/MPEG-4 AVC for video and AAC for audio. Open source decoders exist for both. In fact, last year, ffmpeg was bragging that they could play QuickTime 7 videos on Windows before QuickTime could.
The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.
--Aristotle
I just downloaded and installed opera, because you just said the memory footprint was soooo much better. I've never had memory problems with Firefox but I gave it a go. Currently, with firefox I have 7 tabs open, and have been using it for an hour and a half. Current memory usage is 49 megs. I also have a couple big extensions installed such as Web Developer. This gives me a lot of stuff you can't get with Opera. Opera has the same 7 tabs open, but with no history, because it's only been open for 5 minutes. There's also no extensions. Current memory usage is 44 megs. While this is less than firefox, it isn't a significant difference, and certainly isn't enough to have be lose all my precious extensions. Perhaps firefox had memory issues at one time, but lately, I haven't noticed any problems.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
This is totally a great business move on Mozi
[Comment Buffering - 67% Complete]
Real software manages to find 2 million people gullible enough to download it.
Every day, though? That seems to be a high estimate, considering their bad press.
VOTE!
sentences between the subject header and the message body. Way to communicate effectively!
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
All I have to say is... "Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny." -Master Yoda
@Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
"Firefox will come with RealNetwork applications" is the more logical construct (since it's Firefox that's being bundled, not the RealNetwork Applications!) I think what you meant to say is: "RealNetwork applications will NOT come bundled with Firefox downloads from mozilla.com)
1 3674
Incidentally, you can read more about the deal (including some Slashdot bashing) at mozillaZine:
http://www.mozillazine.org/talkback.html?article=
I was actually shocked after installing when, after restarting... I din't get some sort of sneaky update scheduler running.
Not obscure. /non-story
'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
Well, its a good thing they got involved with real netowrks rather than all those fake ones you hear about.
Where is the reference for this claim: "However, many Firefox supporters question the move complaining of questionable practices by Real. ? The article referenced did not support this claim at all.
I wish this partnership would have the side effect to enhance Mozilla's compability with Real streams. A lot of html embedded streaming videos are not working proprely in Firefox right now. This is probably the results of piss-poor site designs, but it is still a shame.
If they want to bundle it with the Mozilla browser, fine. Let all the AOLers get it.
If they're going to bundle it with Firefox, they better either give the option for a Real-free download or an install-time opt-out.
If they force this on users, they're going to watch their market share completely fucking evaporate.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
This addresses longstanding concerns that Firefox can't compete with IE for spyware.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
One of the reasons I use 'fox is because I trust the browser. Commercial pressures encourage Microsoft to leave open a number of avenues of attack simply because they are potentially useful for commercial purposes. Firefox, up until recently at least, has felt none of thsose pressures, and has been a better program as a result. IMO, obviously.
Now I don't know how many of Firefox' users share my criteria when selecting a browser, but time they do a deal like this, it weakens that trust. The google search box, when combined with prefetching, worried a lot of people, but they got away with that one, mainly because Google have this nice-guy rep. People are inclined to trust Google, so Firefox wasn't really tarnished by associate. I doubt that will be the case with Real.
Sez who? Wwho says Mozilla is in the business of anything? The only remotely commercial part of the operation is the Mozilla Corporation, and (if memory serves) that's a non-profit. If Mozilla are in the business of anything, it should be managing one of the worlds flagship open-source projects. Anything else opens the door to a conflict of interest, and that brings us back to questions of trust.
They don't need to win the browser wars. There's no shareholders to answer to here. The usual shallow excuses for shady corporate behaviour do not apply in this case.
They don't need to win the browser wars, and frankly - they were doing just fine without Real.
I really wonder if they've thought this one all the way through.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Yeah, mod me down as a troll. Everyone loves Real and Realplayer...I'm the bad guy here. How silly of me.
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
I have to admit I dont use Helix at all. But I am very grateful to the developers as until the helix project came of age the Real Player for Linux was crap and not updated very often. Maybe if you think it could be improved you should join the project and help out? Isnt that what open source is all about?
On the subject of vlc why does everyone keep carping on about this load of crap. I seem to remember installing it ages ago and found it a buggy peice of crap which didnt even have a gui interface.
If anyone actually wants a decent player which can be made to playback anything except the latest RM clips use Xine. And I would have said this even before someone posted a comment here saying it can now play back sorenson QT clips too (I havent tried this yet though).
I dont read
Yes, real format is falling out of niche, and but i really don't like bundled stuff like that. For godsake, if i want real, let me have it, why ff should tag along.I already have it on system.But i guess, they will give option to choose the install type, without ff or with ff. If they don't give this option, then it would be really bad. And all this shit will eventually help, turning out all those folks who are passionate about firefox. And it would certainly piss some people off. I already hate, when with Adobe reader Yahoo toolbars come bundled.
Everyone is asking "why are Mozilla getting involved with Real?"
I'm wondering the opposite. Why on earth do Real think it's a good idea to bundle a browser with a media player. Here's a hint - they probably already have a browser if they're downloading RealPlayer, and they will probably keep right on using the same one.
And so Firefox goes in the basket with all the rest of the crapware that you don't actually need in order to run the core product.
I don't care about Real's "bad reputation", I just don't like having to make sure to uncheck the "Install this super app!" checkboxes whenever downloading software. If I had occasion to download Real Player, I don't want to have to make sure to uncheck the "Download Firefox" checkbox. And the same goes for all other bundled software. It's bad enough that Google Toolbar comes bundled with everything alread (as an opt-out checkbox); I don't like Google Toolbar, have no need for it, and don't like having it shoved down my throat. I wouldn't like Firefox shoved down my throat either.
(btw, I use Opera, FF, and IE7 interchangably, just whatever I feel like using at the time; I don't care about the browser war stuff.)
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
Enough of your stupid advertisment for Real. They suck and their crap is wors...
.rm is total crap, and nobody needs it.
BUFFERING
e than a lot of spyware. I use real alternative for all my needs because real...
BUFFERING
sucks that much. Honestly
It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
100% agreed. I use Real Alternative, and there has never been a time where I liked Real (even back when I used RealPlayer a long time ago). Buffering is exactly what I remember, and it was gay, and slow as fuck. And the stupid update reminder. It's so retarded that I went to a museum once, and they were projecting something onto a screen for an audience and the update reminder interrupted the entire fucking thing (had fullscreen movie playing, and the fucking thing intruded!).
The new RealOne player they had was also a big RAM hog, just as bad as WiMP. Nowadays, if something is only available in Real, I won't even bother. I just say something like "Fuck them, if they want me to watch (or listen to) it, they better put it in a format that's decent." No content is worth a dime in Real, and I know I'm gonna get flamebait for tihs one.
I wipe my ass with printed copies of the source code for Firefox.
yeah sure, boycotting the only opensource software in the world that has a bit of success (with Openoffice) is the way to go ! Let's all promote Opera ! Let's make sure that the web becomes what it used to be ! A windows only place with more and more sites that are unaccessible to othe OSes. Lets shoot ourselves in the foot !
With this logic, Firefox shouldn't even be available for Windows, Microsoft is no better than Real about the end-user privacy and rights...
Firefox is as much bloatware as Real player.
Plan 9 from Bell Labs.
"Techie" is a broad term. Just because I'm an EE and work as a programmer, it doesn't mean that I continuously track the changes in each revision of every single shitty program on the planet.
And RealPlayer in particular is one thing I don't give a fuck about anymore anyway. It's not only that it's annoyed me too much with their shitty spyware back then, it's that I don't really have an incentive to bother with it anymore anyway. Did it change its ways? I dunno. Do I give enough of a fuck to check out? Nope. The vast majority of the media files on the net these days are in DivX, WMV and QuickTime format. In that order.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
...the moment we do have to accept Real* rubbish with a Firefox download, I'm switching browsers to whatever does not force me to. Sorry, but my privacy and control over what gets installed on my machine is more important than a browser war. Please do not make that mistake Firefox. I like you a lot, but not more than my privacy and freedom of choice.
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
Good god, is it April 1 already again?
Next up: Microsoft elected chair of OASIS OpenDocument Technical Committee
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
I'm surprised I got all the way through the summary without buffering.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
Exactly what kind of popularity are we talking about? It's a format that rose to prominence just on the back of some deals with porn sites, and which in the last years has steadily been dumped by everyone _including_ those porn sites. Other than a couple of minor older sites, have you even _seen_ a .rm file on the net lately? Almost everything these days is WMV, DivX and QT.
.rm files. Not when it's a fringe heading steadily towards extinction.
So, really, what popularity? I'll call a format or player popular when it's the format you run into on every other site. When youtube, google, and even a neighbour's vacation videos are
Or, oh, you mean the "2 million downloads a day" boast? Note that they don't say 2 million _RealPlayer_ downloads a day. They most likely include everything else downloaded from their servers, including music from their subscription service, short video clips that noone wants and everyone makes their player download automatically at startup, patches, updates, programs like Firefox, etc. I'd be thoroughly surprised if even 1/10 of those were actually RealPlayer downloads.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Real has forever set itself in my mind is "bad". Nothing they can do can change that. It's like releasing a serial killer and then invite him for some coffee and to play with the dog and the children. It is a bad idea.
So I really hope I can still download clean installs of firefox, because the second it includes even a single bit from Real, I will utterly refuse to use it. I won't recommend anyone I know to use it. I will make sure noone I help out gets it installed.
Since it is OSS and all I hope someone builds Real free releases as well, or if push comes to shove forks the whole thing. But Real? I think that even Microsoft would have gone down better...
Is Mozilla losing touch with their base? 90% of the Firefox supporters I know purposefully use Real Alternative to get around the general pushiness of RealPlayer. Real is a great format, and an absolutely CRAPTACULAR media client. It's you-need-it marketing that's gotten way, way out of control, and that's specificly why people don't like using it.
Hopefully, garbage-free versions of Firefox will still be available for people who want to manage their own plugins. Because the day I can't get Firefox as a pure, junk-free standalone is the day I stop upgrading to the newest version.
Last time I checked, Mozilla hadn't made marketing arrangements to climb into bed with Microsoft. Further, apparently you fail to grasp the basic definition and purpose of boycotts: it's a TEMPORARY action, intended to send a message and elicit desired behavior, just as when your parents sent you to your room without dinner. Are you still trapped in there, or did they let you out when your behavior improved?
Isn't it interesting to see that all the opera fanboys spreading FUD here never do it publicly but post anonymously?
Of course they either show :
Case 1/ They are total illeterates and can't read since they don't understand the article (a 10 year old kid would understand it, slashdot articles aren't Shakespeare text, I am not even a native English speaker and it is cristal clear to me...)
Case 2/ They would do anything to convince people to use Opera, top 1 technique is blatatnly lieing of course
Opera is a great browser, it deserves better users than the idiots posting FUD here.
It's quite amusing to see someone who cannot spell ILLITERATE correctly accusing others of being stupid or unable to use language. I think psychologists call that "transferrance".
Boycott :
To engage in a concerted refusal to have dealings with (as a person, store, or organization) usually to express disapproval or to force acceptance of certain conditions. (Merriam Webster)
To abstain from or act together in abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with as an expression of protest or disfavor or as a means of coercion. (American Heritage)
If you think that a boycott is a temporary action, then you don't know your own language which makes your initial post even more idiotic.
"... or to force acceptance of ceretain conditions."
"... or as a means of coercion."
Would you like to try again? Not a terribly convincing counter-argument, when it actually winds up supporting what I said....
Firefox 2 contains an optional phishing filter which would provide so much information to Google that it's worse than phishing itself. And now this deal with Real... I am disappointed.
Time to switch back to a different Gecko-based browser, such as Seamonkey. Or better yet, Opera 9. Now that's a good browser, albeit unfortunately not open.
Apparently you ARE still trapped in your bedroom going hungry... and I can't say that I blame your parents for keeping you there.
You can twist words as much as you can, a boycott isn't temporary by definition (plus in this case it is completely stupid). Of course, you can still try to convince a Vegetarian that his boycotting of meat is temporary, it won't make them eat meat in the end.
Whatever you want to believe is fine. MY "boycott" of Firefox will last only as long as it takes Mozilla to comprehend the stupidity of their choice. Whether that becomes permanent or not is up to Mozilla. I don't particularly like Opera, but I dislike Real Networks even more, and any group that would partner with it will quickly find itself on my personal blacklist until they disentangle themselves.
The end (promoting Firefox) does not justify the means (allying with a known unethical company). What's next for Mozilla, then... partnering with Doubleclick or Zango because it suits their short-term goals?
I wholeheartedly agree. Many in the "Open Source" movement don't care about the freedoms that are guaranteed by licenses like the General Public License. What they care about is that software is free/gratis, and that the work is done quickly and by "somebody else". For an example of this line of thinking, read Eric S. Raymond's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar". In that book, he gloats that he did a minimal amount of the work involved in writing fetchmail, yet he is still able to claim fame for authoring it. Not once does he mention anything about freedom or the immorality of proprietary software.
The open source debate is one of a finanical nature. It's a convenience. A business model. A marketing tool. It's an equal alternative to "closed source" software, where both are acceptable methods of software development. There's hardly any "philosophy" involved here.
The free/libre debate is one of pragmatism, philosophy, ethics, ideals, and, of course, freedom. It is not an accessory or a commodity, because it is founded on a single-faced sincerity.
If we would just stop using the terms "open source software" and "closed source software" and called them by their real and rightful terms, which are respectively "free software" and "proprietary software", then I think people's mindsets on the realities of both would be clearer.
Have you driven a fnord... lately?
You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later.
They still don't allow you to transcode Real content into other formats. Their codecs are still proprietary one-way black holes, distributed only as binaries, with a restrictive EULA.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Maybe its just a bad encode, but i got an hour long asian tv show that is done in RMVB, and its 180MB's, and its horrid! Its choppy and blurry and yucky looking. Seriously an xvid at half the size would look/play much smoother and better. If this is a valid example of Real codeds, they just need to go out of business. I am just glad xvid exists. Thats my codec of choice.
I have a few questions regarding this: 1) So they are packages together, but do they have options where I can choose not to install Real? 2) Does Real still put all that stuff on at windows startup and does it still bother me with Real Messages?
Enough with all the bitching about how Real is an awful software company (they are) and how horrible their windows product is (it is) and how their Mac program looks all goofy in OS X (it does).
The fact remains that if I want to listen to a web stream, and the content provider is hellbent on using a proprietary encoding mechanism for that distribution -- which they usually are -- if I'm running any Linux distro, the only option I have, other than using the contraband w32codecs package, is to use RealPlayer.
And for as bad as people want to make their software out to be, I think the criticisms that can be directed at the GTK+ based package for Linux are really few and far between. They've released their decoder to Linux, and as a Linux user, I can take full advantage of their offerings. This is something that neither Microsoft nor Apple seem to have on their to-do list, and so, as a user of all three (Win / Mac / Linux) systems, I say "fuck it". I listen to RealPlayer streams only anymore, because it's the only system through which I can legally do it on every computer I use.
I agree, they've done some crappy stuff in their past; their Windows client is a wreck and the Mac one isn't much better; and sure, the ridiculous amount of extra software they want you to install is unacceptable. But this misses a key point which should be of primary concern to many in the Slashdot community, among others -- I can legally use it in Linux.
I'm pretty disappointed that this wasn't modded up.
Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
Yeah, so am I. I thought I had a +5 funny on my hands when I thought up the concept. But, I got nada!
It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.