Slashdot Mirror


MS Silverlight To Stream Obama Inauguration Events

Ilgaz writes in to let us know that we will have to install MS Silverlight 2 to watch the US President's inauguration online. Everyone running Mac PPC, Linux, and FreeBSD has been left out, as there are no working Silverlight 2-capable alternatives on these systems. Here is Microsoft's press release announcing the selection of Silverlight yesterday. Streaming of various events around the inauguration begins today at the Presidential Inaugural Committee site, which touts its "inclusive and accessible" coverage.

34 of 589 comments (clear)

  1. So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by retech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That certainly didn't take long to have the rhetoric fail and the reality take charge.

    1. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by Joe+Jay+Bee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      From these events, it is obvious that the new administration either does not know about or does not care about the passion this community has for free ideals.

      A very tiny community, compared to the overwhelming majority who a) don't give a toss about "free ideals" and b) have seen this story for the bullshit it is, in that only one website requires Silverlight to watch the inauguration, whereas YouTube and many others will be showing it in Flash video.

    2. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Any chance of WikiMedia or someone else hosting an OGG for Firefox 3.1 and Opera users to enjoy the tag?

    3. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by Thinboy00 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm sure that they meant open as in open access. Assuming that they meant open software is a bit of a stretch.

      It isn't open access. I'm running Linux and I can't use it. Therefore it is excluding me based on OS usage. I'd gladly use Adobe Flash (they make it for Linux)

      Oh! the injustice. Having to load a browser plug-in! You think Adobe would handle a monopoly in any market differently than Microsoft? You must not use their products, then.

      Adobe isn't Microsoft. M$ does this because Windows is competing with other OSs and M$ doesn't want Silverlight to work there. If Silverlight didn't exist Flash would still work on Linux. It's just that then we wouldn't have any compatibility issues since everyone would be using Flash. Finally, I'd gladly install the closed-source Silverlight plugin, but M$ won't let me.

      If you are from the US and voted for Obama because you thought his platform was somehow anti-Microsoft, then, frankly, you're an idiot. This is it though...*this* is what lifted the veil and caused you to see the world for what it is. Silverlight. When there are lots of other options available, no less (maybe that's what they meant by "most open"?) Your trolling needs work.

      If I had been old enough to vote and I had voted for him, it would have been because I expected him to take a sterner line against blatantly anticompetitive measures such as Silverlight. And about the "other options": What if e.g. Congress decided its website would only work on Windows? Certainly people using Linux/Mac/whatever can get the information via news sources etc. right? The problem is that it becomes impossible to get the information straight from the horse's mouth (Why should I have to rely on The New York Times when their photojournalism is blatantly biases?).

      --
      $ make available
    4. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am sure you have this backwards - Micro$oft probably made campaign contributions to Obama and Obama owed M$ the favor....

    5. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People who spell that company's name "Micro$oft" give me flashbacks to 1997. Firstly because they need to grow up, and secondly because they haven't moved on since then.

      On the other hand ... neither has Microsoft.

    6. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by Q-Hack! · · Score: 5, Informative

      I did find this. The senate claims that you only need Flash to view the ceremony.

      --
      Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    7. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 4, Funny

      you know if Bill Gates had a penny for every bug in a Microsoft product he'd be a Billionaire...

    8. Re:So much for a tech savvy Whitehouse. by pur1ty · · Score: 5, Funny

      yep. that's why I like MICROS~1 spelling better.

  2. Or alternatively by jonbryce · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can watch it using flash video here

    1. Re:Or alternatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    2. Re:Or alternatively by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's another alternative, too. It turns out that streaming coverage will also be available using a wireless, thin client protocol.

      I've set up my wireless client gear, and it's pretty sweet. For only a few hundred bucks, I got a 34-inch diagonal screen, WXGA resolution, and stereo sound. It streams video over a new protocol called "ATSC" in the ~500MHz band. And it all works for free without needing a subscription!

      This event in particular will be delivered by multiple, simultaneous video streams that they call "channels". I encourage anyone who's not familiar with this technology to check it out.

    3. Re:Or alternatively by oracleguy01 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hulu will also be airing the actual inauguration and they use flash: http://www.hulu.com/spotlight/obamapresidency

  3. Huh? What? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Informative
    Boy, talk about cherry picking a slanted conclusion...

    The actual copy from the references story is...

    Microsoft's Silverlight technology has been chosen to stream U.S. President-elect Barack Obama's swearing-in ceremony live on the Presidential Inaugural Committee's Web site...

    Nowhere does it say that all the networks will be using Silverlight exclusively.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Huh? What? by sjames · · Score: 4, Informative

      To enlarge upon your point, that would be a committee that Obama is NOT heading up. He probably won't be personally supervising the mowing of the White House lawn either. I suppose people will be blaming Obama if the D.C. dept of Sanitation doesn't provide enough waste baskets as well.

  4. WRONG! by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Informative
    Typical garbage from KDawson.

    The story *DOES NOT* say that Silver light will be used exclusivly accross all channels. It says:

    Microsoft's Silverlight technology has been chosen to stream U.S. President-elect Barack Obama's swearing-in ceremony live on the Presidential Inaugural Committee's Web site

    ...on the Presidential Inaugural Committee's Web site...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:WRONG! by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Especially since Silverlight is a brand new technology with small market share(flash is around 94% last I checked). This is much different than complaining about having to use popular, longer-lasting MS software such as Word or Visual Studio.

    2. Re:WRONG! by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Are computers 3 years old outdated? Even back in 1998, sites could provide 3 alternatives (Qt, Real, Wmedia) on same page. What happened to that magnificent technology? Is such a historical event suited for another DRM framework install advertisement? I am not for flash too. It is giving user (citizen) the choice. It is possible, even basic pages on shared hosts can do it. Apple, Real, VLC and Adobe guys will happily install their servers too.

      Linux Moonlight PRE ALPHA is not Silverlight 2. I was always wondering if anyone would fall into that trick and there we go. Microsoft doesn't support YOU, your OS. It supports Developers to make a clone of the real Silverlight. Just like Windows Media Codecs for Quicktime, even while excellently coded, can't replace a full feature Windows Media Player. E.g. it can't do DRM streams/music store. You know why they exist? So they can claim unofficial support when a media companies IT guy asks about "What about multi platform support? Mobile support?"

  5. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  6. Moonlight ? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 4, Informative

    Oddly enough Jan 20th is the official release date for Moonlight 1.0 The Linux implementation of silverlight. But only of the silverlight 1.0 spec. I wonder if 2.0 is really required.

    moonlight roadmap

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  7. Re:Humm... by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many of the people held there are simply too dangerous to let go. Many of the others who aren't have no where to go

    The US Department of Defense operates many military prisons. They can all easily be transfered to a military prison within the US. They were only held offshore to avoid jurisdiction, and that point's been rendered moot.

  8. Re:Stupid submitter by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Informative

    I did very well. Mac PPC means Macintosh PowerPC. You know, not everyone switched to Intel and MS left out PPC users on release of Silverlight 2.0 without any kind of explanation. Mono Silverlight 2.0 support is in pre-alpha stages and there is no guarantee it will do a trick like that (live streaming).

    There should be another way of doing it and if I was Mr. Obama, I would really check that committee's ties with that convicted monopolist as this is not the first time they do this trick. It doesn't really give a good image. Even MS themselves offer Flash or at least WMedia alternatives on their own site.

  9. The story is crap, but by melted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think Silverlight is one of the few things Microsoft got right. I've been using Silverlight quite extensively on my Mac since Netflix switched to it, and it's rock solid. This kind of got me interested into looking into the programming aspects of it, and it's pretty darn easy if you know .NET Framework and WPF already, and if you don't, the learning curve is not that bad. I wanted to write a multi-file uploader for one of my apps, and I was able to do so in just a couple of hours, end to end.

    1. Re:The story is crap, but by WiiVault · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I refuse to support Silverlight for the same reason I won't support the Xbox. I simply do not want MS to dominate any more markets. We all should know by now that when that happens, things get bad.

  10. Re:Humm... by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't that sort of the point of closing gitmo? To try them in a court of law, as opposed to hold them illegally and indefinitely without trial?

  11. Joost is advertising that they will stream it live by Tran · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since I watch Joost shows sometimes on the Mac without having silverlight installed, I assume that it is not a requirement there either.

  12. Re:Hulu? Youtube? by msuarezalvarez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Don't you think that the very point is that this is the *official* site we are talking about?

  13. May I respectfully suggest the damn TV? by slightly99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh my God, turn on the damn TV, it'll be on every frakking channel. I am so sick of techies having hissy attacks because every damn thing isn't instantly streamed to their iPhone or twittered to their PSP.

  14. Re:Okay by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually the most likely reality is someone really cheap (as in how much he was paid by the political party versus how much he was paid by 'er' someone else) came in to do that part of web site and made some choices that where motivated less by their loyalty to the future administration and more by their loyatly to silverfish. A political web site is a political web site, everything about it is part of the message not just the content.

    So the Obama camp is already starting to learn some lessons of how it can be manipulated to promote greed based corporate ideals. Of how it's message can be hijacked to promote some deceitful corporations agenda.

    It is a major flub, a demonstration of being exploited by corporate intrests right at the very beginning of their term, a painful lesson to be learned but one they need to remember. Not all of their staff, will in reality be their staff and many of them will be their to serve other peoples interests and not the interests of the government they claim to be serving.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  15. Re:MOD PARENT UP by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are misleading as well. The Obama team has been heavily focused on using the Internet, and their choice Internet deliver methods is very important. The choice to use Silverlight 2, and offer no alternative for users who cannot use that platform (PowerPC users, people with out of date computers, etc.), and to offer no non-streaming alternative (for people without reliable Internet connections, or who want a copy on their hard drive without worrying about copyright issues), indicates something about their "tech savvy campaign." The outsourced their content deliver to some company that sounds like the 2009 equivalent of a dot-com, and gave no consideration to any tech issues beyond what the latest buzzword is (hint: web enabled streaming media).

    Yes, the TV option is still available, but this team has not given it much attention. This team is setting a precedent in streaming the proceedings, and future presidents will follow this example. My biggest concern is that, over the next decade, the ability to record a TV program will only be available to those who pay for "DVR service," likely locked down to prevent users from keeping copies without paying, and that if that happens, and these proceedings are streamed by websites like YouTube, people will lose their ability to keep personal copies of government proceedings. Most people will just shrug, but for some activists, the ability to record the government is important and should not be lost because of misguided efforts to be "tech savvy."

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  16. Re:Anti-competitive my rear. by Macthorpe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's anticompetitive because it doesn't run on Mac PPC, Linux and FreeBSD? RFTS.

    Firstly, Apple don't support Mac PPC anymore, why the fuck should anybody else?

    Secondly, Linux and FreeBSD account for less than a single percentage point of the desktop market. Even so, you have people working on it.

    Thirdly and finally, you don't have to watch at the official site. There's probably a hundred places online you could watch it. If you don't want to use Silverlight - don't.

    --
    "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
  17. Re:By that definition by coryking · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sorry to inform you, but your definition of "open" isn't in line with the RMS/FSF party line. Pretty much MPEG* has all kinds of patents that would exclude it from use. Theora and Vorbis are the only video/audio codecs that would most likely pass the RMS/FSF smell test.

    You still need a way to either offer a second stream or embed the Vorbis/Theora stream into a browser. And you would have to require Windows and most likely Mac users to install both codecs.

  18. Re:Anti-competitive my rear. by Wovel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    80% of /. never heard of the presidential inaguaration comittee web site.
    90% of the remaining 20% will not watch any of it over the Internet (Perhaps TV!!).
    90% of the remaining 10% of 20% will watch a stream from a major media outlet (CNN, CSPAN, MSNBC, FOX, ABC, CBS...)
    99.9% of the remaining 10% of 10% of 20% will be using Windows or OSX (Intel-Mac)
    The President elect would like to extend his heart felt apologies to Chuck in Ohio.

  19. Kids these days... by coryking · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Look, you choose to use an operating system built by essentially hobbyists in their spare time. Not everything is gonna work--that is a feature not a bug. And while I hate to say it, if you dont like that, perhaps you could dedicate some of your time to Moonlight so that you *can* use Silverlight stuff. Don't expect people to use their non-free time to develop software for a free operating system.

    And yes, I do contribute to the free operating system I use in production environments--FreeBSD. I've contributed many ports to build and install CPAN modules. If something isn't in the ports tree and I need it, I don't just expect somebody else to put it there nor do I bitch, moan or cry--I take the time out of my day and write the damn port myself. That is how open source works--you give back to it and everybody benefits. If I didn't give back, I'd be a leech. That is also one of the biggest flaws in open source, you have to have the skills *to* give back, and not everybody does.

    Silverlight exists, it is an amazing platform, and soon enough it will become widely adopted. Accept it as fact, and either either get used to being left out or get started working on Moonlight or something like it. Calling me a "Microsoft fanboy douche" will not result in the open source faeries giving you Silverlight support. You have to make it work!

    Getting shit to work is what Linux is all about (or at least was all about). Back in the day, your only reward was the pride you got by getting $IMPOSSIBLE_DEVICE to work on Linux! Now I guess Linux is all about the politics of getting something for nothing. Sad. ...Now get the hell off my lawn!