Slashdot Mirror
Council of the EU Says "We Cannot Support Linux"
An anonymous reader writes "The Council of the EU has a streaming service so that we can watch its meetings — but the service can only be accessed by Mac or MS Windows users. This is because they employ WMV format for the videos. In the FAQ they express a really strange opinion about this: 'The live streaming media service of the Council of the European Union can be viewed on Microsoft Windows and Macintosh platforms. We cannot support Linux in a legal way. So the answer is: No support for Linux.' An online petition has been set up to create pressure to convince the EU council to change its service to one that is platform independent."
Ogg Theora?
And even if you think it is illegal to watch MPEG on Linux in the EU, the crime would be committed by the veiwer, not the broadcaster.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
First off, they didn't hire an interpreter (come on, you going to tell me there isn't a properly-qualified English-language interpreter to fix that garbage? Second, whichever Microsoft zealot wrote that page really needs to expatiate on his reasoning. From where I sit, it looks like a blatant lie to cover up for laziness.
political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
"We cannot support Linux in a legal way."
What's so illegal about a Flash-based streaming player?
I would guess they can't support GNU/Linux in a legal way because they can't offer the codecs. Only parties that have an agreement of sorts or have paid M$ royalties can use it. GNU/Linux doesn't, though distributions like that one that used to be known as Lindows (can't remember the name) comes with closed-source ones.
The petition to urge them to use a platform-independent format is a good answer.
WMV3 has been opened. MPlayer / FFMPEG support it natively now. Google Summer of Code had a project to make an optimized player for it.
Yes I think it still has patent issues or something but in Europe I don't think that matters.
Or should I say Eutube!
*ducks*
That should be "We're too ignorant to support Linux in a legal way."
thegodmovie.com - watch it
yes yes, i know. Put the burning torches down :) - Still if the BBC can offer their video services in both WMV and Realmedia formats, why cant the EU?
Its certainly supported on linux after all
The "legal way" thing probably refers to the inability to provide a legal WMV player for Linux, not that it isn't legal for the EU to stream in another format. I don't think anyone there is trying to say that it's illegal to stream in a different format. Rather, they are saying that since WMV is what they use (for whatever reason - political, economic, or simply fiat), Linux users can't be supported.
We don't support the EU either.
perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
"The live streaming media service of the Council of the European Union supports Internet Explorer 5 and higher, Netscape Navigator 6 and higher. If you encounter problems with a lower version of your browser, the browser should be updated to facilitate the live streaming media service. Firefox and Opera will be supported with a minimal of functionalities."
This is the market share for browsers as of Nov 2006:
Microsoft Internet Explorer, 80.56%
Firefox, 13.50%
Safari, 4.03%
Netscape, 0.83%
Opera, 0.67%
This is the market share for Operating Systems as of Nov 2006:
Windows XP, 84.95%
Windows 2000, 5.46%
Mac OS, 4.10%
Windows 98, 1.90%
MacIntel, 1.29%
Windows ME, 0.91%
Windows NT, 0.76%
Linux, 0.37%
You could argue for better firefox support, but as much as we love linux, I suppose they have no obligation to make it work for something that is that small minority among desktop users.
Slashdot is powered by your submission.
From where I sit, it looks like a blatant lie to cover up for laziness.
<complete_nonsense>
You don't know the EU very well do you? You see this has nothing to do with laziness. If the EU replaces it's WMV streaming systems with a competing product it will result in 68 shirt and tie wearing MCSEs with nice conservative Bill Gates haircuts being replaced by a couple of hairy bucktoothed nerds with a nasty armpit malodor problem and the fashions sense of a Portuguese donkey wrangler. So this whole mess is really all about French objections because of the effect such a change would have on the already low fashion standards of EU employees and all the other EU member countries fears that it might make the unemployment situation in the European MCSE community any worse since the job security of the European MCSE community is already badly threatened by the way Linux looks set to exterminate Windows from the EU's desktop computer market.
</complete_nonsense>
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Obvoiusly soneone has wanted to point this out, if it's explicitly written on the EU site. At the risk of sounding trollish:
We will not have our legislation locked down in ways that force EU citicens to buy software from one specific vendor. FUCK YOU.
We like to think we're better than the US. Apperarently our legislators are also bought off. If you as an elected politician get your salary from Microsoft Corporation or Apple Computer inc, please report directly to me for your ticket to Baghdad and the Saddam Hussein rope massage. Thank you for your incompetent attempt at running a democracy, please don't come again.
It's morally illegal.
When people recommend half-assed or not ready OSS solutions, it hurts the OSS cause. Theora isn't ready to go, it's not even remotely ready. There's a reason why it's still an alpha whereas Vorbis is a full release. It is in no way shape or form a ready competitor to WMV at this time.
It's much better to admit there's nothing that works out there that's OSS than to recommend a poor OSS solution. The reason is that the number one justification against OSS is shoddy quality. You talk to J. Random PHB and the reason they don't want to use OSS is because it's poor quality/not supported. Well, advocating things that are, in fact, poor quality just provides them with ammo for their argument.
Also it can hurt a format to get lots of exposure before it's ready. If everyone's first exposure to Theora is when it's buggy, that idea will form in their minds and later when it's stable, they will still associate Theora = buggy and thus give it a pass.
At this point, we just need to wait on Theora. Vorbis is great, I've no doubt in time Theroa will be its match, however it's not the kind of thing that will happen in a day.
The really funny part of this story is you also can't watch those videos if you've got the version of Windows Vista with media player ripped out due to the EU's antitrust rulings (unless you download media player or some other WMV-capable player, of course). Hah hah.
First they (the EU) force MS to marked a version of Windows without media-player... and then they release content that needs that very media player...
Going straight Theora+Vorbis wouldn't work that well, since the user would have the install the codecs first and Vorbis/Theora support is severely lacking on OS X.
Quoting the site:
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
From the linked site. It has been relatively easy to get .wmv, .mov, etc. working in Linux for quite some time now. Check out the MPlayer plugin for Firefox. For K/X/Ubuntu or other Debian-based distro users, "apt-get install mozilla-mplayer".
I do agree, however, that all government websites should make their content available platform-independent. But then, that would require common-sense, now wouldn't it?
"We may face a scorched and lifeless earth, but they're accountable to their shareholders first."
I guess we're supposed to ignore all the people who have been using Ogg Vorbis+Theora feeds for years (many listed on the Ogg Theora website and instead give in to an argument based on a version name and vague goals of "readiness", or for another overmoderated post in this thread, market presence built on violating the law. We're not supposed to advocate for people using unencumbered FLOSS software to do this job across platforms in a non-discriminatory way. Even according to the open source argument which dismisses social solidarity out of hand (something governments ought not do), discouraging use seems particularly unwise.
Digital Citizen
Many people are throwing around OS usage statistics, like from www.w3schools.com. These statistics are worldwide, and do not reflect the [potential] visitors to this geographically-specific site.
Nevertheless, the number of people using Linux--and probably MacOS as well--pales in comparison to those who do not have a computer at all. (or hispeed internet, or a fast enough machine, etc.)
Assuming the CotEU is required to provide streaing video for those without Windows or MacOS, then who's to say they shouldn't have to make it available to those without a computer at all?
In my city (Ottawa, Canada), City Council meetings are open to the public. Anyone can go. Can't participate, but you can watch. You can also watch Council meetings on the local Cable channel (which means you have to purchase cable from Rogers--and this has been the case for decades without public outcry) You can also watch online. I think they use a RealMedia format.
If you don't have a computer (or cable TV) at home, there are computer terminals at all the public library branches and at many community centres. Assuming the City has a right to make these meetings available for live viewing to all citizens (which, really, is covered by letting any citizen attend meetings in person) then they have done so by making these computer terminals available at local libraries. Not incidentally, this would also cover off the Linux-using population in the case of the CotEU.
If your computer cannot access the stream (because it can't run on Linux, or is too old, or your internet connection isn't fast enough), then you can go to one of these places to view it. Or, if you want equality, the Council can stop streaming online, and everyone will be unable to watch it.
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
While I agree with your comments re: the suckiness of English (I speak five modern languages, including a couple of the "hard" ones), my comment in this regard wasn't that English should be forced upon anyone - if that page were in Dutch, French, or German, I'd shrug and figure that's where the website is, so the choice of language makes sense. But the fact that these conferences are streamed in wmv-only format and then the entire website is in broken English - that just looks bad. Really, unprofessionally, and given the number of interpreters/translators available to the EU, inexcusably bad. Moral of the story is: if you can't find a good translator for your webpage, write it in your native tongue.
political_news.c: warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type