Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo Keeps Offering Real; Fox Now Allows Linux
Jason Shindler writes "Looks like Yahoo! is back on the "real" bandwagon -- they will continue offering Real as an option to broadcast.com customers. Slashdot earlier reported that they were switching exclusively to Windows Media Player (yuck!)" Internetnews.com story here. Another quick followup: Fox got lambasted here on Slashdot earlier this month for denying www.fox.com access to people who don't use Windows or Mac operating systems. Later they apologized and said they'd fix the problem. They have kept their word. Thanks, Fox people!
Worth a read, anyway!
It's nice to see that The Big Guys(TM) do listen to the community once in a while.
May other corporations follow this precedent!
From the internet news article: Microsoft bundles its Netshow server software for free with Windows NT, while Real charges license fees starting at $1,995 for its 60-stream RealServer Plus.
Well, they didn't mention you have to sell your soul to buy Windows NT
I'm glad that someone remembers those of us using Lynx, Palmscape, AvantGo, etc....
First post??
I am very much afraid that we live in interesting times.
Well, they managed to fix their javascript to allow Netscape for Linux get in.
One more problem. I usually leave javascript off to avoid popups, which I hate. No javascript == blank page.
I just checked in Lynx and got the same thing.
Yet again, many blind and low bandwith are locked out of a site.
I hate "web designers."
I agree.
I've been doing my best to keep all
of Real Networks crap off of my computer
since they like to scan my mp3's and
track other info of mine and steathly
send it to them.
Plus their software crashes all the time
and I'm tired of seeing ad's when I run
the player.
Now, let's all behave like the grownups we are: everyone who sent them an harrassing email after the "fox hates linux" story, send them a very nice email now thanking them for considering our suggestions.
;)
As soon as they make a decent compile for anything other than x86, I'll be happy. Unlikely for MSFT, and RealNetworks has proven w/ the DVD fiasco that they can't program worth shit either.
QT4 is great, just no content.
Work together for the Common Geek Good:
Check out Project Upper/Mute, an all-around awesome compiler fra
you're a total troll. this is not even a linux vs bsd issue. this concerns all the operating systems with browsers that happen to be different from the browsers for windows/mac. so can you please keep those off-topic comments to yourself?
--- d'oh
Visit the Campaign for a Non-Browser Specific WWW and put an end to this "best viewed with ..." or "... browser required" or requiring shockwave, java, cookies, etc.
Windows Media Player is not only for Win9x, it also runs on Mac OS...also, there are tons of popular file formats (asf, MPEG4, et. al) that only media player can understand. I dont see that kinda stuff on Linux. ~ zxc
Well, a few days ago, I visited fox.com to see if they managed to fix the problem. It appears to have been fixed for at least three or four days. It's really nice to see that Linux is actually getting attention and people are recognizing us as a driving force.
No longer can people who obviously dont know a thing about linux or have ignored it because it seemed unimportant at the time (fox webdesigners, ahem) continue to IGNORE linux.
This is just one of many signals that linux is
being accepted into the mainstream, EVEN if its
by force. It supposedly has a larged market share
than Mac, but alot of people still dont know anything about it. This is obviously changing.
We've reached critical mass people! Time to let everyone know Linux is HERE and CANT BE ignored.
This will mean simul. releases for linux and other OSes of software and hardware, and more and more support.
About time.
Math
Aren't organizations out there starting to sue web site proprietors who don't provide equal access to the blind and vision impaired?
stop with petty arguments
No longer can people who obviously dont know a thing about linux or have ignored it because it seemed unimportant at the time (fox webdesigners, ahem) continue to IGNORE linux.
Fox.com never ignored Linux - right from the start they wanted to make their site accessible by every browser and every platform - they simply needed time to get to that stage (at least that's what it says in the article).
This is just one of many signals that linux is being accepted into the mainstream, EVEN if its by force.
No it isn't - as Fox said, they wanted accessibility by everyone. Linux supporters had zero impact on fox's decision since they were already going to support Linux in the first place. Nobody forced anyone to do anything.
The reason I'm having a go at you (in a friendly way ;) is that while it is great that you are an avid Linux supporter, you sound like one with a big inferiority complex.
Relax, Linux is destined to take it's place amongst the big guns of the OS marketplace - you don't do the Linux camp any favours by sounding fanatical.
Cheers.
Dude!
Chill!
Don't feed the trolls, man! They're like stray cats; If you feed them, they'll come back again. If you feed them a few times, they'll warm right up to you, personally. I'm sure you don't want to be on the Mai Ling Mak mailing list anymore than I do, so wash down another Quaalude with Skii and let 'em pass inane comments amongst their -1 brethren sans notice.
This has been a word from your sponsor....
.sig: Now legally binding!
Great. Now we're not forced into using a crappy product from the MS monopoly. Instead, we can use a crappy trojan horse from a DIFFERENT lying, contract-breaking, spamming sleazball company.
Wonderful.
As long as I've got a MS OS on any of my computers, I'll use their product. I will never let RealAnything near one of my systems again, now that they've proven to be a bunch of thieving criminals.
Anyone want to write a good, robust, multi-platform streaming audio player? I'd pay money (yes, cash!) for that.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
There are far too many "web programmers" who just graduated from a Macromedia course, just installed Frontpage 2000, or just purchased Javascript for dummies that are working on high profile sites. Sometimes I like flash and flair, but when done right it should not hinder non-graphical browsing of a site. IT CAN BE DONE - you just need to know more about text and graphic html rendering and know when to NOT add yet another spinning whirlygig and when not to use javascript or java
If the site doesn't work under lynx, there's a problem. The main page should at least properly autodetect browser type or offer different content options.
Better yet, don't use features that would require a particular browser version, or at least don't use feature that only work in the latest verison on $BROWSER with latest version of $PLUGIN
There's going to be significantly less flash, flair, and graphics on sites in the upcoming future to support mobile users using WAP on PDAs to access the internet wirelessly over low speed connections and displaying on small screens.
Render your non-portable html on that!
How to attract a whole bunch of people to your corporate web site:
;-)
1) Block Linux users, calling them "garbage".
2) Tell Slashdot you've done this.
3) Give the Slashdot readers time to stew.
4) Stop blocking Linux users.
5) Let Slashdot know of the change.
Wow! Look at all those hits!
Now it turn out that it was a Hoax designed to help yahoo reduce costs. I am so very sorry for yahoo and there high costs (HA!) but I am getting really mad they they played around with loyal listers to solve there problum. Stressing out loyal listers is not the way to solve problums. Yahoo could have solved this problum a number of way, with this being the worst.
Personaly, I hope WFMU gets a differnt stream like they were planning on when this whole "problum" broke out. I don't like dealing with anyone who throws around the "consumer" when dealing with B to B problums. Becides, if yahoo really wanted to decrese costs *and* get more listeners, they only need to switch to the FREE streaming mp3 format.
Sorry for the rant and bad spelling. It happens.
You know, they probably copied that code piece from somewhere else. The "garbage" was someone's way of saying, "the variable hasn't been set".
This has been addressed many times before, but apparently with no result.. You don't have call every Microsoft product a piece of crap just be because it has been made by that, you know, evil company. That is one the biggest reasons that makes Linux and whole OSS community look like a bunch of hippies to many people. Going open source (even if not fully GPL compliant) is huge leap of faith to companies, why make it any harder?
Get it?
Whether or not you agree with the Department of Justice, their accusations only pertain to desktop computing, not servers. There's absolutely no way that anyone could accuse Microsoft of having a server monopoly.
The hypocrisy around here about Microsoft's bundling things with NT/2000 Server is pretty astounding. One minute, Slashdotters are telling us that NT Server is a horrible value. The next minute, they bitch whenever Microsoft adds something to increase the value of NT Server. Make up your minds, please.
Just as Sun can decide to add anything they want to their operating systems, so can Microsoft with NT/2000 Server. If they want, they can make it so that it has zero compatibility with any Unix out there. If the customer or developer decides they don't like it, they can pick a different OS to use or develop for. In case anyone hasn't noticed, Microsoft has a pretty good track record of getting people to choose theirs.
Ya know, for telling everyone that GNU/Linux is going to dominate the world, an awful lot of you sure seem concerned whenever Microsoft gives away something to its customers. I guess only the holy apostles of the GNU movement are supposed to ever get anything for free.
Stop the presses and call in the DoJ!!
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail
Wasn't this the issue that was specifically resolved? Am I completely confused or is it you?
I dont know about anyone else but on fox.com i am able to get on now. i upgraded to flash4 and i got on just fine. Other people might try that and see if they get the same results as me, else my computer is just weird. I did this about 3 days agio.
As of the end of September, Linux accounted for 0.22% of all web users worldwide. (Source: Statmarket, 1999/09/29).
FOX wanted everyone to be able to view their site -- Linux users just happened to be part of "everyone." This has absolutely zilch to do with that silly critical mass thing you're talking about.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
One of the comments on the LinuxToday Story mentioned the the Dept of Education's FAFSA site has similar browser issues. For those of you that aren't US college students, FAFSA is the federal student aid form required for almost any kind of financial assistance. I'm home for winter break and don't have access to my linux box right now so could someone verify if this is still the case? If so, this is an infinitly more important cause than Fox's site.
WFMU may not be big enough to have clout, but sooner or later the content producers are going to get wise to how the folks at Yahoo! and RBN and Broadcast etc. use the format wars to jerk them around as well... With any luck, this will result in a universal client and a quality open source server than can play to it... Then, and only then, will streaming media have the universality necessary to break out bigtime.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
They too are sucking very badly, ie:
"To experience Britannica.com, you'll need a more recent version (version 4.0 or higher) of your Web browser."
And the code they use:
What *INSANE* person wrote this? Basically it says that whatever browser you have, if it reports version two or three, then it's not good enough! I'm running Opera and it works just fine, when one disables scripting or hack the executable to present itself as version '4'.
Another way around this is to query their database 'directly', something like this:
<form method="get" action="http://search.britannica.com/bcom/search/r esults/1,5843,,00.html" name="BasicSearch" onsubmit="return submitBasicSearch()"> <input type="hidden" name="chooseSearch" value="0"></input> Encyclopæda Britannica: <input type="text" name="p_query0" size="35"></input> <input type=submit value="Find"></input> </form>
Belief is the currency of delusion.
--
This seems to apply to all Fox sites, btw. www.foxnews.com is now Opera browseable too :) -- Mas
What the dork zico doesn't seem to realize is that microsoft is actively and frantically leveraging their monopoly on the desktop to get control of the server side. This empire built on a "C:\>" prompt, which they built while we all slept, has provided them with incredible wealth, and such things are actually in their grasp. Once that that happens, game's over. ms has dreamed for years of being able to "cut off" everybody's "air supply", as they put it, and they are getting closer and closer, regardless of the temporary distraction from the DOJ.
Just in case you dont notice, a lot of web stations that use the mp3 streaming or even Real streaming have changed to windows media format (asf). I dont know if this format is really mpeg4 or some proprietary format, there is only one player can "easily" decode these streams. What they are trying to do is to kill many birds with one stone. Bundle the server, bundle the player and you can actually make media clip without extra software. When more and more sites use their asf format...forcing more people to use the windows media player. Realplayer format is proprietary, but if there is a version for everybody, this company has a legitimate reason to make money. In contrast, someone that give away tools that eventually hoping to lock people into using their operating system does not. Flash contents on web page may not work on some browser, or even show you a blank page. However, if you compare that with this trend of WMF (windows media format), this is much more serious.
That was before I realised I was trapped in the past. In the past, the HTML was just a markup language and the Internet merely a big library of text documents ... sorry, documents with hyperlinks.
Most things evolve over time and that is what has happened with the Internet. Sure, non-graphical browser compatible pages have a place, but for entertainment sites (that is the business fox is in), plain non-graphic sites are about as entertaining as ... well ... as plain text documents.
So if a site doesn't render properly in a text browser - who cares?!? Times have moved on - the Internet isn't about text anymore, it is about entertainment, aesthetics, convenience and ease of use. To the common person, text is (for the most part) the exact opposite of these values.
I also disagree with your point about WAP on PDA's. They will be no less flash or flair when WAP takes off (and it will take off). I predict that most sites will optimise certain sections of their sites for WAP and leave the rest with all the gee-wiz graphic/Javascript stuff.
For example, a movie site will have a sections which contains the movie sessions times and is optimised for WAP. The rest of the site with movie trailers, reviews etc. will be the same as it is now.
Let's take a reality check: If I wanted to watch Seinfeld, I wouldn't choose to watch it on a small portable handheld TV if I could watch it on a 20" TV. Similary, most people would prefer to surf the Net on a computer/TV screen rather than a 3" by 4" Palm V screen - people will choose the most appropriate tool for the application.
Anyway, to get to the end of my long-winded spiel, my point is that to design a purely 'flash and flair' site is no crime. It is simply catering to what the markets wants and making use of the technology in it's current evolved state.
Those that complain that sites should be viewable in a text browser all the time simply show that they haven't understood the transformation that the Internet has undergone since it first went 'public' (and I mean that in the nicest possible way :)!
Cheers.
I'll say that RealNetworks dodged a major bullet over this one.
If Yahoo! Broadcast.com had dropped RealPlayer support, that could have been a deadly blow against Real. That's because by far, it is the most popular site for streaming media on the Internet, and losing the support of Broadcast.com would have dramatically reduced the demand for Real's products.
Why do I have this feeling that RealNetworks cut a very sweetheart deal for streaming media servers that supports the Real G2 format?
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
Please turn off the so-called MS ?smart quotes?. They?re very annoying to read, if you get my drift.
..if you wrote a letter asking Fox to support Linux/Unix browsing remember to write and say thank you. Even if you didn't I suggest you do so to try and show the depth of suupport there is for Linux out there
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
I wanted to open account at Citibank's citifi but they wont let me in using linux. Too bad because it actually looks like they offer some really cool services. Their setup looks a little harder to bypass than just disabling javascript. If anyone has any luck getting through please post it here.
I checked the page source, found the URL it was supposed to have sent me to, and entered it by hand. It gave me the page, and opened yet another window for the site's navigation bar. Then the main window puked: Not Found. Apparently the Nav Ticker calls on some command URL: http://www.fox.com/uni_nav/FSComman d:check_time that gives the retrieval error. I'm not up on Javascript. Anybody know what this is supposed to be doing?
For the record, I'm using Netscape 4.61 on a Mandrake 6.1 installation.
Believe nothing, not even if I say it, if it violates your sense of reason -- Buddha
Subj says all...
Back before most people had even heard of the Internet (and before the web was widely known) I was doing a lot more than text on it. Such as playing chess in real time, and playing a (now defunct) Mac game called bolo.
Of course there was a huge text focus, think Usenet, but it has not been strictly text for a very long time.
Regards,
Ben
My usual seat in the cluetrain is at A HREF="http://pub4.ezboard.com/biwethey.ht
Besides the all the errors with thinking the web is the internet, you also forgot that someone who is blind or uses some kind of audio "reader" to browse web pages needs a certin amount of text in the page.
Here is another news flash, a page can contain all the flashy, tastless, macromedia crap you want, and still have text support.
And you are wrong on the point about FOX catering to the needs of their customers. Appearently they recieved enough complaints that they decided to change the accessibility of their site so that everyone can view it. Same rational you gave, with the opposite result.
Finkployd
Television an addictive drug that's done more for reducing this country's literacy rate and increasing its obsesity rate over the last couple decades than everything else put together. TV is a mind-control tool of those who want to control you with pictures and quick sound bytes instead of letting your reasoning ever come into play. It is the mouthpiece for conspicuous consumerism going horribly wrong. TV is abusive, intrusive, and habit-forming.
KILL YOUR TELEVISION!
The truth is both formats suck. They're both proprietary, and Slashdotters especially should recognize the problems associated with proprietary formats.
If we're going to use the slashdot-effect to change Yahoo/Broadcast.com, then let's change them to streaming MP3.
Real was founded by an ex-Microsoft employee, and it shows in how they conduct business. Don't support RealNetworks just because they toss you scraps of compatability. Don't sell your soul to fill your stomach.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am at work right now, where I run on Alpha hardware with Tru64 Unix 5.0. I run Netscape Communicator 4.7 and it crashes every time I bring up the Fox page.
I never said that all text should be removed from a web page - I was merely commenting that the argument that web pages should be just as accessible for text browsers is bunk.
A balance is needed in everything and a site purely composed of "Macromedia crap" as you put would indeed be just that ... crap.
But just like a blind person may listen to the TV and glean some information from the shows, they still miss the whole experience. Yet no-one complains that all TV shows should be fully 'backward' compatible so that blind people don't miss out.
And you are wrong on the point about FOX catering to the needs of their customers. Appearently they recieved enough complaints that they decided to change the accessibility of their site so that everyone can view it.
If you read the article, Fox.com always intended to make their site accessible by any browser on any platform. It was simply that they had time constraints and so released the site initially with only IE and Netscape support. So fox.com changed nothing as a result of the complaints.
Cheers.
If you have the bandwith it does look a lot better than the real crap on broadcast.com
BTW isnt ASF an open standard? (check http://www.microsoft.com/asf/specs.htm) Or did they close it up? If it is I dont see any reason the villify it, more reason to pray/call for an open source ASF and mpeg4 player!
Oh yeah, oops ... my terminology starts getting loose after a day at the office - be grateful I didn't start referring to it as 'the thingy', or 'you know, that thing' ;)
M$ sells Windows not linux, its the responsibility for Linux users/developers to provide Linux support. The most you can reasonably expect is for the specs to be open... AFAICS the ASF spec is open, I think the mpeg4 codec is proprietary but that might have something to do with the spec not having stabilized the mpeg1/2 ones are compliant AFAIK.
If you read the article, Fox.com always intended to make their site accessible by any browser on any platform. It was simply that they had time constraints and so released the site initially with only IE and Netscape support. So fox.com changed nothing as a result of the complaints.
Sure, I'd say that too if I just pissed off a huge customer base. We'll never know if that's the case or not. Either way, an improvement was brought about, whether it would have been anyway is anyone's guess.
A balance IS needed. Simply including alt tags on pictures and (if necessary) making sure there is a "low bandwith" or even plain text version available is not difficult at all.
Finkployd
It seems in a temporary laps of sanity ASF was an open specification... did they leave that path or are those specs still relevant to the present day ASF?
Here's a hint: don't put up with their colors. Make your browser ignore their colors and fonts, using only yours. If that's not good enough, there are proxies that will edit these out.
And now for something completely different...
When are Encyclopædia Britannica and the Oxford English Dictionary going to make their data available to those of us who run Unix variants? Right now, you can only use their CDs if you're running some kind of crippled PC O/S from Microsoft or Apple. This is incredibly frustrating. I imagine the OED would be easier to write your own software to view, but I wouldn't want to handle the Britannica. And even the OED probably has IPA fonts that could prove a challenge.
Does anyone know whether these two products are accessible under emulation? Has anyone sent them a letter (preferably by post) about this? Did you get an answer? Was it favorable?
It works on Netscape for Solaris also... =)
If linux had anything to do with this, it would be nice if the players knew.
We could at least get a stable real player out of the deal, or maybe even an updated windows media player for linux. (windows media player is a very good media client app, despite anyone's hatred of Micro$oft. I'd happily use it under linux if it was available)
I'm not advocating this; it's just something people need to think about, because it's starting to happen. Lynx compliance is the wave of the future. You can still do your fancy stuff; but you had better supply "equivalent" content that can be viewed in lynx.
I'm having a similar problem right now with Wells Fargo online banking (I'm actually a Norwest customer). What's really irritating is that they used to let me view my account history in Netscape for Linux, and now they don't. It's not that complicated - 40 bit encryption and a big old table with 4 columns (date, description, amount and running balance) - I fail to see why they are validating the browser at all.
--
E_NOSIG
1. They didn't allow us into the site.
/. community" and other such things.
2. We complained.
3. They promised a fix.
4. A fix was mad.
5. People are complaining about this being a wa to "use the
This last part sucks big time. Sure it's probably true but you need to be responsible. If you make a threat of force with accompanying demands then once those demands are met the argument has essentially ended.
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
It would seem from my experience, when I connected through the link in the last cited article that there are many more problems than lack of support for a limited set of platforms and browser versions .
/. in the history list resulted in one of those 'forbidden' actions by your software messages. Choosing the wrong response (I just hate hitting the [OK] button when it's definitely NOT ok!) I was in the C++ debugger and the browser was gone.
Upon seeing the graphics, I was convinced that this was not a site that I could be interested in, however, simply backing up to my previous link failed. Then trying to move back directly by picking
Good going Fox - rest assured that will be my last visit.
Is Linux 50% of the market? Of course not, but it is positively absurd to try to claim that it is less than a quarter percent.
Just thought it was funny that Linux/Unix is an everyone else. I would think that the difference between the number computers out there with Linux/Unix than Macs is lil to none. just my 2 cents // windows if (n.indexOf("win") != -1) { ...} // mac else if (n.indexOf("mac") != -1) { ...} //everyone else else if (a.indexOf("microsoft") != -1) { ...}
Probably not, as fox.com doesn't allow lynx users. I don't think it ever has.
We bitched and got our way. It would be a very positive gesture from the community if were now to thank Fox for their attention to this issue, and to commend them for making their site accessable to more [even if it is far from perfect].
:)
I have had a quick look at their website, and the only relevant address I can seem to find is askfox@fox.com... send a quick, polite email to this address, and you will go far.
nord! nord nord
It's too bad Microsoft stopped updating their Media Player for Linux. It's the best streamer I've ever tried.
Real has always SUCKED on each of my Linux systems. It makes Art Bell sound like Aquaman broadcasting live from a bowl of Jello.
--
#19845
I think it's funny that the 'flash and flair' stuff is somehow interpreted as being more modern "technology" than HTML.
All this plugin stuff is really just a web programmer's way of executing code on your machine. Of course, no one really wants to download and execute binaries, so there's pressure to settle on a relatively small number on binary libraries (plugins), and higher-level ways of calling them, like scripting languages. (And then there's the Microsoft camp with ActiveX who actually does want to just send you binary code.) But what it comes down to is that they want to run a "demo" type program on your computer.
That isn't "technology in it's current evolved state" -- it's retro! You could (and people did) do that back in the 80s BBS scene. Just zmodem the program down to your machine and run it. If Fox wanted to do their current "web site" with 1988-level technology, they easily could (except for bandwidth issues). Just tell people the Fox BBS phone number instead of the URL, and then have them download specialized binaries that play X-Files animations or whatever.
The technological breakthrough was that someone realized that we didn't need to do things like that anymore. Users just need one binary that can serve as a viewer for content that is stored in a universal and standardized form. The power and benefits of this approach (performance, security, platform independence, etc) turned out to be immense.
I see the stereotypical Macromedia "web programmers" as luddites who have rejected this level of technology, because they just couldn't figure out a way to make it work for them. They think back to how cool the Amiga "EuroDemoes" of the 80s were, and want to recreate the phenomenon. Their web sites are actually quite sparse and boring places, whose purpose is really just to give people a place to download their demo from.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
But just like a blind person may listen to the TV and glean some information from the shows, they still miss the whole experience. Yet no-one complains that all TV shows should be fully 'backward' compatible so that blind people don't miss out.
TVs render both video and audio (even text, if you have closed captioning on). But text-based browsers rely nearly exclusively on the text that you seem so fond to throw out in favor of more "advancced" methods of presentation. So you can't exactly have some "glearning" of information if the site doesn't include some sort of textual content. Ergo, text is necessary and as long as you have some on your page, you might as well go to the trouble of making your site look purty to everything.
http://www.fox.com supports not only linux, but Irix too!
It would have been a damn shame if all of us Irix users had been blocked out just because we don't run Linux... I mean how else would I have gotten all of the "hot" and late breaking information about such hits as Worlds Wildest Police Videos?
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. -- Oscar Wilde
Plus, RealPlayer works well under NATs, which WMP could hardly stream @28.8Kbps on Cable.
Not true, both run great behind my Linux IP Masq box with cable modem. Best of all no changes are required in either program
Lastly, the Windows Media Player Features page doesn't mention anything about MPEG-4, either.
I've been playing MPEG4 video for a while with WMP. At first with a hack (DL the codec and manually adjust registry), now MS includes MPEG4 with the lastest version. And they do mention MPEG4 he re.
I don't see why the Linux community can't code their WMP, I believe MS has released their specs.
If you can't design a web site that doesn't require javascript, then you really are a poor excuse for a "web page designer".
I think we should stop complaining and code. Amazingly MS has released the specs.
http://www.microsoft.com/asf/standards.h tm
What many people are forgetting to realize is what POWER the linux community is putting over the internet. Slashdot has been very prominent in this as well. I'm sure many of you readers E-Mailed fox and yahoo just like I did. And it worked!
We should keep this trend up, and keep mentioning sites where this community is being hurt. Slashdot will cause an uproar and we WILL get our way becuase *nix owns the internet!
- Mike Roberto
-- roberto@apk.net
--- AOL IM: MicroBerto
Berto
I've gotten no responses from them, despite the fact that I've written them, and even suggested what the problem may be (non-conformat HTML).
Seems to be that they should get their ducks in a row before lambasting someone else :-)
As it is now, I have to ssh over to my wife's Linux box to read it...
I would like a little more than you just saying that, without explaining yourself, to believe the specification for ASF is no longer valid for their media files...
Well, all I can say is that I'm not getting in, even when I let my browsers spoof as mozilla4.5 for windows. It might be they are checking for flash plugin as well? I also have that, but it might very well be that my browsers dont answer "correctly" on that request.
Sorry, far too busy complaining about Microsoft's version to code an opensource replacement. Microsoft sucks!
I just shake my head at comments like this. MS's ASF specs are in the open and instead of coding people complain.
MS has released the specs for their ASF format. Several people have posted the URL elsewhere on this page.
No matter how shitty a web site is, if your web browser crashes, it is your web browser's fault. Did their web site execute code on your machine? No. Did it corrupt Netscape's pointers? Nope. Did lazy Netscape programmers forget to do sanity-checking on input that comes from other machines? Yes.
Get a decent web browser that doesn't crash. Then when you flame a shitty web site, you won't undermine your own comments' credibility so much.
So, 99.5% of the world uses US Secure Netscape Version 4.7?
No, javascript changes so much between browser revisions that you couldn't even necessarialy trust 4.7 Non-Secure to work with the same code, never mind 4.5...
In other words, you don't even have 1/2% of a life.
At the bottom the page of the operation system check there is a link to there privacy statement click on it and you'll see your in the site. It's just that one script you have to bypass.I was able to surf the whole site with no problems.
They'd always planned to have their site accessible to all browsers & platforms, they just hadn't finished the entrance page yet.
I don't know why people think that Fox gave in to the 'pressure' from the community, unless, maybe, people haven't been reading the articles.
The other bit about realplayer/windows media might be another case, but having not read those articles I know I'm not in a position to comment.
--Parity
--Parity
'Card carrying' member of the EFF.
i disagree. we design to meet specific goals.
the purpose of a corporate website is to serve and expand the corporation's clientele, ultimately contributing to its bottom line. i don't imaging that .22% of a potential market population (assuming that the proportion of linux-using webbies being tossed about is correct) represents a return on investment large enough to justify paying for the difference between a website built and maintained by a FrontPage jockey and one built by someone you or i would consider a real web designer. (unless, perhaps, one already owned 99.78% of the market...)
a second point on meeting specific goals. a corporation might reasonably believe that a homogenous web community is easier/cheaper to deal with in the long run. they might also reasonably believe that they can promote that homogeneity by refusing to acknowledge small and fringe elements. in which case, a decision to walk a micro$oft / mac path is defensible as rational, forward-looking and self-interested.
the decision to support broad cross-platform compatibility serves an ideology common to us in the linux community, but not necessarily held by a sizable portion of computer users or online businesses. it also serves site-owners whose target audience specifically includes the non-MS using community, but that is also a very specific goal-oriented decision.