Maybe - maybe not. In my experience, latency under severe load is a win to FreeBSD. So although your throughput might not increase under FreeBSD, your responsiveness probably will.
Whether raw throughput or responsiveness is important depends on your application.
Plug ins are not necessarily any less secure than having the codec(s) built into the browser. In fact if designed and implemented properly, it could well be more secure - there is NO reason for a rendering plugin to have write access to disk, for example. Plug in vs no plug in, makes no difference. Except maybe its easier to disable an exploitable plugin without killing your whole browser.... which is a good thing.
Ford/GM were bleeding cash like stuck pigs LONG before the GFC. It's because (with a few exceptions that are not mass market) they make bad cars in an inefficient manner.
Once they lose the GM stigma, sales are bound to increase. GM went broke for a reason, and its not due to lack of government bail-outs. It's because (for the most part) they make shitty cars, when measured against any reasonable international yard-stick.
Well, if the design of the device allows itself to brick due to a failed download, then perhaps HTC or google SHOULD wear the cost. Totally different issue to requiring the firmware update - your issue is that the android update process on your HTC phone is broken.
i'd rather have a remote update, than end up with a phone that doesn't make/receive phone calls and fulfil the operational requirements sold to me on the spec sheet.
It would be "1 more" transcode that makes no business sense.
Look, ditching h.264 is simply not going to happen. there are way too many hardware devices out there that do h.264 and no ogg. All I'm hearing is bitching from the firefox camp about how they're not going to support it for reason X rather than looking for a solution to the problem.
Simply not supporting h.264 is an option, sure. I just don't think its going to end well for firefox.
AS to host code not being exposed to the web... run it with least privilege in a sandbox. My bet is that any copy of theora embedded into the browser is exactly the same reference code as used else where in any case (and if its, not, then its not as well tested...), so that point is pretty moot.
Or firefox could have.... a plugin architecture for whatever codec the user likes, preventing us from being stuck with some shitty 2010 codec technology 5 years from now.
Google has no incentive to go theora either, as it means transcoding all their stuff - and they clearly already have a h.264 license anyway.
The authoring tools for.ogg are not there either.
So really, open source people can whine all they want, it will make no difference - Firefox can buy a license, or they can become irrelevant. Or maybe start their own video hosting to compete, but my bet is that will be more expensive than a h.264 license.
Or hell, they can just use whatever codecs are available on the host platform.... and get back to what they should be worried about - writing a web browser, rather than getting involved in a codec war they have no chance winning
Whilst I'm a mac user/fanboi and agree with most of your post - I'm sure there must be some vulnerabilities being exploited for MacOS out there somewhere. It ships with Apache, and a heap of BSD userland tools ffs. I'd say there are no commonly encountered viruses on MacOS... not necessarily NONE.
Welcome to marketing spin. At least in apple's case, they have real world usage stats to back it up. Microsoft's "most secure windows ever" bullshit is generally spouted on OS release, with no historical evidence.
Note that end users don't particularly care if "in theory" an OS is less secure, so long as THEY don't end up getting owned, they don't really care about the theory of it all.
try playing.ogg on your PS3, PSP, Xbox360, iphone, DVD player, etc. Ability to encode stuff for free is pretty much useless if you can't play it anywhere. And before someone says "use open source for device X" - you're missing the point. Open source consoles, smart phones, and dvd players are not generally available, whereas devices that play other common (proprietary) formats are.
Slashdot Mirror
Because for some inexplicable reason (read: unwillingness to learn), many Linux users seem inextricably bound to the shitty GNU userland tools.
Whether raw throughput or responsiveness is important depends on your application.
Plug ins are not necessarily any less secure than having the codec(s) built into the browser. In fact if designed and implemented properly, it could well be more secure - there is NO reason for a rendering plugin to have write access to disk, for example. Plug in vs no plug in, makes no difference. Except maybe its easier to disable an exploitable plugin without killing your whole browser.... which is a good thing.
Ford/GM were bleeding cash like stuck pigs LONG before the GFC. It's because (with a few exceptions that are not mass market) they make bad cars in an inefficient manner.
Once they lose the GM stigma, sales are bound to increase. GM went broke for a reason, and its not due to lack of government bail-outs. It's because (for the most part) they make shitty cars, when measured against any reasonable international yard-stick.
Well, if the design of the device allows itself to brick due to a failed download, then perhaps HTC or google SHOULD wear the cost. Totally different issue to requiring the firmware update - your issue is that the android update process on your HTC phone is broken.
i'd rather have a remote update, than end up with a phone that doesn't make/receive phone calls and fulfil the operational requirements sold to me on the spec sheet.
Wait... what?
... saab arises as new competitor to GM...GM loses. Again.
APNIC is also australia. As an aussie, I'm getting more spam from the US than anywhere else....
Look, ditching h.264 is simply not going to happen. there are way too many hardware devices out there that do h.264 and no ogg. All I'm hearing is bitching from the firefox camp about how they're not going to support it for reason X rather than looking for a solution to the problem.
Simply not supporting h.264 is an option, sure. I just don't think its going to end well for firefox.
AS to host code not being exposed to the web... run it with least privilege in a sandbox. My bet is that any copy of theora embedded into the browser is exactly the same reference code as used else where in any case (and if its, not, then its not as well tested...), so that point is pretty moot.
If you'd last run windows update a month ago, less than that.
Rightly or wrongly, disabling IE for many industries is not an option.
How about a plug-in architecture? That way we aren't stuck with shitty 2010 video formats in the www of 2015, either.
Or firefox could have.... a plugin architecture for whatever codec the user likes, preventing us from being stuck with some shitty 2010 codec technology 5 years from now.
The authoring tools for .ogg are not there either.
So really, open source people can whine all they want, it will make no difference - Firefox can buy a license, or they can become irrelevant. Or maybe start their own video hosting to compete, but my bet is that will be more expensive than a h.264 license.
Or hell, they can just use whatever codecs are available on the host platform.... and get back to what they should be worried about - writing a web browser, rather than getting involved in a codec war they have no chance winning
If firefox do not support H.264, they're going to become irrelevant as far as video goes.
I say this as someone who has had a Linux box r00ted in the past...
That sort of complacency is exactly what makes you more likely be get owned - regardless of OS selection.
You must be new here.
Whilst I'm a mac user/fanboi and agree with most of your post - I'm sure there must be some vulnerabilities being exploited for MacOS out there somewhere. It ships with Apache, and a heap of BSD userland tools ffs. I'd say there are no commonly encountered viruses on MacOS... not necessarily NONE.
Note that end users don't particularly care if "in theory" an OS is less secure, so long as THEY don't end up getting owned, they don't really care about the theory of it all.
try playing .ogg on your PS3, PSP, Xbox360, iphone, DVD player, etc. Ability to encode stuff for free is pretty much useless if you can't play it anywhere. And before someone says "use open source for device X" - you're missing the point. Open source consoles, smart phones, and dvd players are not generally available, whereas devices that play other common (proprietary) formats are.
Incoming data exploits IE, owns machine, turns firewall off.
THEN starts opening connections to the internet.
Next.
Because there are never any 0-days for Linux. *rolls eyes*