There's absolutely no reason to have Flash installed on machines in an office.
Slow down there, that's not really fair. Considering that not all offices in the world perform the same work, generalizing that Flash is of no use in any office is sort of counter productive. Flash may be losing its ubiquity, but I can still think of a number of practical uses that aren't cat videos and games.
Because all sex offenders prey through World of Warcraft, right guys? Can we just ban games already? Seems like the only rational way to protect children.
This. It would be a different story if there were actual options for the consumers, but there really aren't that many choices- and no choice is especially greater than the others.
I don't think anyone's arguing that you should have to pay for a service that costs money to provide- I think we're just miffed that a service that worked and was free has been altered so that it can be no longer. I think anyone would be willing to pay for a service that costs money to provide (and a lot of us geeks do, i.e, linux is free but support costs money), but when it comes down to it, A. Google isn't exactly strapped for cash, and B. As IBitOBear suggested, the cost is trivial, and Google really ought to offer an alternative means to comply without paying a third party. But that's just my two cents, take it or leave it.
I don't think anyone who firmly believes in the Mayan doomsday is going to be swayed by a little organization like NASA. You'll always have people saying "there's things they can't predict!"
No, what we need to get these people to do is to give us the code to their engines (even if under a mostly proprietary license). That way we will be able to continue enjoying what makes GNU/Linux attractive and play games as well.
That just doesn't leave enough incentive for developers to work on the platform. I'm a die hard Linux fan, but I don't think most game developers are. And keeping us happy isn't really that high on their priorities list. I think they're thinking somewhere along the lines of "take it or leave it"? Lord knows Valve can afford it.
Slashdot Mirror
There's absolutely no reason to have Flash installed on machines in an office.
Slow down there, that's not really fair. Considering that not all offices in the world perform the same work, generalizing that Flash is of no use in any office is sort of counter productive. Flash may be losing its ubiquity, but I can still think of a number of practical uses that aren't cat videos and games.
Because all sex offenders prey through World of Warcraft, right guys? Can we just ban games already? Seems like the only rational way to protect children.
This. It would be a different story if there were actual options for the consumers, but there really aren't that many choices- and no choice is especially greater than the others.
I don't think anyone's arguing that you should have to pay for a service that costs money to provide- I think we're just miffed that a service that worked and was free has been altered so that it can be no longer. I think anyone would be willing to pay for a service that costs money to provide (and a lot of us geeks do, i.e, linux is free but support costs money), but when it comes down to it, A. Google isn't exactly strapped for cash, and B. As IBitOBear suggested, the cost is trivial, and Google really ought to offer an alternative means to comply without paying a third party. But that's just my two cents, take it or leave it.
Agreed. The problem is not the levity of the price, but the existence of the price itself.
I don't think anyone who firmly believes in the Mayan doomsday is going to be swayed by a little organization like NASA. You'll always have people saying "there's things they can't predict!"
They may take our patents... but they'll never take our Kodak Moments.
Well, I was planning on selling my T.V. anyway.
But maybe if we sign enough online petitions- Right guys!? Guys?
No, what we need to get these people to do is to give us the code to their engines (even if under a mostly proprietary license). That way we will be able to continue enjoying what makes GNU/Linux attractive and play games as well.
That just doesn't leave enough incentive for developers to work on the platform. I'm a die hard Linux fan, but I don't think most game developers are. And keeping us happy isn't really that high on their priorities list. I think they're thinking somewhere along the lines of "take it or leave it"? Lord knows Valve can afford it.
We should probably start a new website devoted specifically to tech-famous people shoving drugs up their rears. Assdot?