Funny that you mention you wouldn't touch such a thing (Realplayer Linux) while it is the cleanest, best performing Real player on the internet which you can actually build right away from source (Helix Community).
OS X version which has been always praised is the closest thing to Realplayer Linux, it is built on Helix Code/Cocoa Frameworks such as Webkit.
The baseless "hate" against Real Player as they are clean for years gives those MS bribed officials ideas of WMP only streaming etc. They think "Oh they hate Real anyway" as someone will of course question the choice of WMP while Real is available to anything you can imagine.
Also let me be the one to say as a OS X user. Flip4Mac can't and will NEVER do WMedia DRM. If BBC chooses WMA/DRM, say bye to your Mac streaming and install Bootcamp or Parallels;)
They gave up perfectly working real/embedded for Flash/download and act like streaming. Do you know the result? My Mac Mini G4 connected to HDTV can't show BBC embedded video anymore.
International community tries so hard to fund them (really!) and yet they don't allow us to pay for their great content and have it.
It is getting way more surreal every day. I know americans who would pay to get iPlayer content right now and they are people which Hollywood couldn't sell a single byte.
BBC can actually make profit and wouldn't need tax payers money if they figure out what "putting your content to internet" means.
About ad supported streaming? Virgin of UK tried it, failed.
As a pessimist, let me be the first to guess: They will rely on a Windows only technology such as WMA, Silverlight somehow. Hopefully they will prove me wrong.
The same EMI who dared to sell copy protected CDs on certain areas of planet which they think they are likely to rip their content. Speaking about racial profiling and discrimination.
If there are people hoping it will be an international store which you may use just because it is "BBC Worldwide", don't hope too much.
I don't understand why companies try so hard to drive people to piracy.
IBM gave up perfectly working PowerPC just by not offering a portable version to Apple. I know the G5 has roots on POWER4, a mainframe processor but they could do something else. A gigantic company like IBM has power to do it. In fact they may already have it, POWER6UL which can go up to 5Ghz level. What I understand is, IBM doesn't want to get involved in anything except consoles on desktop environment.
I don't think the death of AMD will be allowed. A single , total de-facto monopoly of Intel (we forgot non x86 already!) isn't good for anyone, even governments. Intel has already become spoiled, look at the junk they force to companies (X3100 GPU(!)).
I bet it installs a horrible outsource written driver right after you plug it.
If they are more clever, they have also "hidden" it just like Sony. There you have a brand new thing creating problems and you don't have a clue if it runs or not.
All this happens on Vista which is said to be just almost stabilised on SP1.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
Sending each URL you visit to a central server instead of having a basic common sense of security or a $10 pseudo-random password generator has raised some eyebrows on FF community as far as I followed.
Google Analytics is banned from my DNS too. I don't visit sites who can't maintain a basic, open source analysis system anyway.
IE jumped to same bandwagon to use opportunity to send every single URL user visits to MS by excuse of "protecting user", I know. Is it hard to believe that, in some eyes, Google is not less evil than MS? Do I HAVE to trust them? Does having serious privacy concerns make me paranoid or entitles you to mock down my comments as saying my browsing habits are not that interesting?
You guessed my point about the reason of Google browser shipping at first place, congratulations for that reply.
AMD would lose every single Govt. and Big American company contract the day they do such deal with Chinese govt. Don't forget "AMD gets support from human rights abusers!" trolls too, millions of them, amateur or professional.
If you think the cold war is over, think again. They just changed how they fight with which instruments:)
If almost 90% of Intel Mac gaming community dynamically (online) divides their boot partition to run Windows games at highest possible compatibility and speed, games and performance really matters.
Also remember they are running/booting to some bad copy of MacOS which has several issues on Apple Mac hardware.
Don't forget HDTV, even 1080p on PCs are really taking off and it is not trivial task to decode h264/AVC, years ago, it wasn't big deal but today people expect their computer to realtime compress and enhance their video while capturing it. (Video Cam).
Quoting Apple community who got sick of FreeScale's (G4 era) non shipping announcements and watt/mhz claims say: "Lets see the actual silicon chip and measure it".
When its shipped, Freescale will be at very interesting watt powers (as they are concentrated) and Intel will be at SSE something level. Intel and AMD has a sharing agreement and MS is very close friend of Intel that has lead to "Wintel" term. Emulating the CPU? Ask Linus how well it went.
I have seen some great promises not happening at all or wasn't delivering the promise. Especially x86 market. Today's fashion is Watts and number of cores, it was Mhz way back then.
Even in real (before Gorbachov) communist era, USSR was shipping 8086 compatible chips as far as I searched.
Guess what? They care about Windows, DirectX and millions of x86 centric developers. China has always been a realistic country and even Russia couldn't dare to ship a non x86 small chip. Their mainframes were also DEC/S360 etc. clones. There is even a DEC chip saying "Steal from the best" when looked under electron microscope;)
Speaking from PowerPC 970 MP, Quad G5 Mac which has very good FSB specs and way modern compared to CISC stuff, I can easily say "No".
Once you don't support x86 instruction set, you aren't a threat to Intel at all.
It doesn't support, pass. Sorry to sound negative but it is the truth.
If Intel could be threatened by a non x86 chip, Motorola/IBM/Apple could have achieved it. You see what happened, SJobs and Apple became number 1 Intel fan.
About performance and watt usage? There is still a huge company named FreeScale you know;)
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
As I can easily guess why they release a browser at first place, its final, beta, alpha has nothing to do on my systems.
Serious, there is a total explosion of spam from China area involving open proxies especially in 2 weeks.
http://www.senderbase.org/ which isn't Symantec (e.g. won't alert for nothing to sell sw to end user) reports another virus outbreak right now. They also get the early alert from Spamcop.net which I just reported 6 spams coming in 1 day, a very unusual thing for that mailbox.
It is either Olympics or someone won a huge botnet auction.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
Look what Apple says, especially after recent iPhone web fashion
"Be browser independent. Avoid using the user agent string to check which browser is currently running. Instead, read Object Detection to learn how to determine if a browser supports a particular object, property, or method, and read Detecting WebKit with JavaScript to learn how to detect specific Web Kit versions. Also use the W3C standard way of accessing page objects--that is, use getElementByID("elementName"). Only as a last resort, use the user agent string as described in "Using the Safari on iPhone User Agent String" to detect Safari on iPhone."
If I told you there are sites which works _perfectly_ under Symbian S60 Webkit based browser and yet doesn't let them in because they are "iPhone optimised", you can imagine how effective that warning is;)
Apple even has an article named "Why browser string identification is a bad idea" and you don't see it happening at all.
They should ask screen size, CSS support, plugin etc. support and it would even work on IE. Look at how much information you can get from a browser: http://gemal.dk/browserspy/
That functionality is in browsers since first days of javascript and yet not used, at least on many sites.
Yahoo gives it free to developers without any strings attached. It is the same code running on Yahoo, that is how you don't get junk when you go to Yahoo mail with Lynx.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
As it is "standards compliant", it will be fed same content as Firefox/Seamonkey gets since sites looking for Firefox looks for "gecko".
It is a very neat and classy idea which I noticed first day I installed Safari.
If a single Govt. official voting for ISO have any kind of favour, lunch, diner or even BillG foundation help, it is not a valid process and criminal investigation should happen.
Let me give a tip: There are already too many examples in hand.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 1
Reading from other comments, one can guess they didn't want wireshark running people to start commenting about horrible privacy breaches.
Clueless Windows user who believes a fortune 500 company are "nice people" because they say "do no evil" was the target for them.
I didn't comment on first story thinking I must be too paranoid and anti google but unfortunately, by defaulting to "send experience to google" along with unique ID and not removing Google software update after uninstall has proven my suspicions.
Google has become new Microsoft for me. I can easily predict what would they dare to do and get automatically validated. It is not a good thing of course.
Does 3 sites reviewing Google browser have Google ads? How could their review would be unbiased is another question to ask. Why do we blame CNET for being too nice to Microsoft? Because it is full of MS ads. Why not Google Adwords get same treatment?
I am sure you will be really surprised. The most amazing part is, their ignorance of Apple's "Don't touch my/System! It belongs to me and kernel driver developers!" rule. All of that horrible security issue for? Some Spotlight clone.
What was Real Networks sin to get listed to "Stopbadware.org" independent, Google funded site?
They asked network about "news" to show to user, actual news, not ads. They also installed Rhapsody framework which sits there until user actually purchases something.
Wonder if Google will be listed on Stop Badware organisation for sending Unique ID to Google and make it hard for average user to disable it.
It should come DISABLED by default, just like Real Player, Windows Media Player. If it is not a big issue, I question the flames directed to Real as "Send unique ID" and "Statistics" is actually sent to SERVER owner instead of Real Networks/MS.
It is NOT easy, it is easy for you, it is not easy for average user. That is the trick and that is why it should come disabled by default.
There were 2 or more stories about VIA recently. First story was about going open source and second one was the announcement of actual open source stuff you ship. Normally you would expect praise from community but such thing didn't happen.
While there were some (minority) people praising this move, most of comments were bad mouthing VIA hardware and recently, blaming GPL "stolen" code for this decision. At one point, while never used your hardware I felt obliged to defend VIA and show possibilities with open source, especially about performance enhancements.
It is something I always wanted to ask Helix/Real Networks too. How can you stand such comments and don't they neutralise your emotions for further open source shipments?
Add Apple too. By giving "Read only" support to ODF, they put their weight behind ODF. "Text Edit.app" is a very important piece of software;)
Also my Symbian S80 Nokia 9300 can open/edit ODF documents via freeware. It is important thing since, it shows ODF is that easy to implement on anything. Symbian S80 is one of the weirdest portable OS'es you can find, even Nokia got rid of it in E90 upgrade (it is S60).
Their usual trick. Look to Java and OpenGL histories. IMHO MS should be banned from joining any "standard committee". It sounds like 3 strikes to me. Java, OpenGL and OOXML. Same stupid trick done for 3 times and funny is, Sun has fallen into it 3 times straight!
Lets not forget.NET and Silverlight. I really laugh at people sparing their SECOND to those.
Lets ignore your direct attack to Slashdot community which we sometimes see non anonymous comments of industry leader companies CEOs and people having written World standard RFCs... What about "more serious looking" Sun Microsystems and IBM which itself larger than many countries represented in ISO?
If you suggest a Windows only standard with a very suspicious voting process which even involves some dictatorships, you are irrelevant. You should be investigated and punished too if there was money involved.
Being "ISO" really doesn't make them untouchable. Same goes for Microsoft too. They should be investigated by a international court as bribery (via money or other things) is a very serious crime.
Well, if they accept OOXML as a standard, people may question if ISO A4 standard has something shadowy behind it or ISO 9001 is given to anyone with enough money.
One mistake and trust is gone. There is no "ISO Police". If there are companies who has the neat idea of ISO OOXML format usage instead of PDF, Open Office etc., God help them since MS will become a patent troll/leech company in 5 years.
What was that UN like organisation, another huge one before United Nations? It was huge and effective until invasion of Poland and start of WW2. The day WW2 broke out, it became irrelevant.
Acceptance of Windows only (shut up really, MS puppets) standard(!) could mark the end of ISO.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny that you mention you wouldn't touch such a thing (Realplayer Linux) while it is the cleanest, best performing Real player on the internet which you can actually build right away from source (Helix Community).
OS X version which has been always praised is the closest thing to Realplayer Linux, it is built on Helix Code/Cocoa Frameworks such as Webkit.
The baseless "hate" against Real Player as they are clean for years gives those MS bribed officials ideas of WMP only streaming etc. They think "Oh they hate Real anyway" as someone will of course question the choice of WMP while Real is available to anything you can imagine.
Also let me be the one to say as a OS X user. Flip4Mac can't and will NEVER do WMedia DRM. If BBC chooses WMA/DRM, say bye to your Mac streaming and install Bootcamp or Parallels ;)
They gave up perfectly working real/embedded for Flash/download and act like streaming. Do you know the result? My Mac Mini G4 connected to HDTV can't show BBC embedded video anymore.
International community tries so hard to fund them (really!) and yet they don't allow us to pay for their great content and have it.
It is getting way more surreal every day. I know americans who would pay to get iPlayer content right now and they are people which Hollywood couldn't sell a single byte.
BBC can actually make profit and wouldn't need tax payers money if they figure out what "putting your content to internet" means.
About ad supported streaming? Virgin of UK tried it, failed.
As a pessimist, let me be the first to guess: They will rely on a Windows only technology such as WMA, Silverlight somehow. Hopefully they will prove me wrong.
The same EMI who dared to sell copy protected CDs on certain areas of planet which they think they are likely to rip their content. Speaking about racial profiling and discrimination.
If there are people hoping it will be an international store which you may use just because it is "BBC Worldwide", don't hope too much.
I don't understand why companies try so hard to drive people to piracy.
IBM gave up perfectly working PowerPC just by not offering a portable version to Apple. I know the G5 has roots on POWER4, a mainframe processor but they could do something else. A gigantic company like IBM has power to do it. In fact they may already have it, POWER6UL which can go up to 5Ghz level. What I understand is, IBM doesn't want to get involved in anything except consoles on desktop environment.
I don't think the death of AMD will be allowed. A single , total de-facto monopoly of Intel (we forgot non x86 already!) isn't good for anyone, even governments. Intel has already become spoiled, look at the junk they force to companies (X3100 GPU(!)).
I bet it installs a horrible outsource written driver right after you plug it.
If they are more clever, they have also "hidden" it just like Sony. There you have a brand new thing creating problems and you don't have a clue if it runs or not.
All this happens on Vista which is said to be just almost stabilised on SP1.
Sending each URL you visit to a central server instead of having a basic common sense of security or a $10 pseudo-random password generator has raised some eyebrows on FF community as far as I followed.
Google Analytics is banned from my DNS too. I don't visit sites who can't maintain a basic, open source analysis system anyway.
IE jumped to same bandwagon to use opportunity to send every single URL user visits to MS by excuse of "protecting user", I know. Is it hard to believe that, in some eyes, Google is not less evil than MS? Do I HAVE to trust them? Does having serious privacy concerns make me paranoid or entitles you to mock down my comments as saying my browsing habits are not that interesting?
You guessed my point about the reason of Google browser shipping at first place, congratulations for that reply.
AMD would lose every single Govt. and Big American company contract the day they do such deal with Chinese govt. Don't forget "AMD gets support from human rights abusers!" trolls too, millions of them, amateur or professional.
If you think the cold war is over, think again. They just changed how they fight with which instruments :)
If almost 90% of Intel Mac gaming community dynamically (online) divides their boot partition to run Windows games at highest possible compatibility and speed, games and performance really matters.
Also remember they are running/booting to some bad copy of MacOS which has several issues on Apple Mac hardware.
Don't forget HDTV, even 1080p on PCs are really taking off and it is not trivial task to decode h264/AVC, years ago, it wasn't big deal but today people expect their computer to realtime compress and enhance their video while capturing it. (Video Cam).
Quoting Apple community who got sick of FreeScale's (G4 era) non shipping announcements and watt/mhz claims say: "Lets see the actual silicon chip and measure it".
When its shipped, Freescale will be at very interesting watt powers (as they are concentrated) and Intel will be at SSE something level. Intel and AMD has a sharing agreement and MS is very close friend of Intel that has lead to "Wintel" term. Emulating the CPU? Ask Linus how well it went.
I have seen some great promises not happening at all or wasn't delivering the promise. Especially x86 market. Today's fashion is Watts and number of cores, it was Mhz way back then.
Take a look at a 9 years old story:
http://slashdot.org/articles/99/02/19/1543222.shtml
Even in real (before Gorbachov) communist era, USSR was shipping 8086 compatible chips as far as I searched.
Guess what? They care about Windows, DirectX and millions of x86 centric developers. China has always been a realistic country and even Russia couldn't dare to ship a non x86 small chip. Their mainframes were also DEC/S360 etc. clones. There is even a DEC chip saying "Steal from the best" when looked under electron microscope ;)
Speaking from PowerPC 970 MP, Quad G5 Mac which has very good FSB specs and way modern compared to CISC stuff, I can easily say "No".
Once you don't support x86 instruction set, you aren't a threat to Intel at all.
It doesn't support, pass. Sorry to sound negative but it is the truth.
If Intel could be threatened by a non x86 chip, Motorola/IBM/Apple could have achieved it. You see what happened, SJobs and Apple became number 1 Intel fan.
About performance and watt usage? There is still a huge company named FreeScale you know ;)
As I can easily guess why they release a browser at first place, its final, beta, alpha has nothing to do on my systems.
Olympics?
Serious, there is a total explosion of spam from China area involving open proxies especially in 2 weeks.
http://www.senderbase.org/ which isn't Symantec (e.g. won't alert for nothing to sell sw to end user) reports another virus outbreak right now. They also get the early alert from Spamcop.net which I just reported 6 spams coming in 1 day, a very unusual thing for that mailbox.
It is either Olympics or someone won a huge botnet auction.
Look what Apple says, especially after recent iPhone web fashion
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/AppleApplications/Reference/SafariWebContent/CreatingContentforSafarioniPhone/chapter_2_section_3.html
"Be browser independent.
Avoid using the user agent string to check which browser is currently running. Instead, read Object Detection to learn how to determine if a browser supports a particular object, property, or method, and read Detecting WebKit with JavaScript to learn how to detect specific Web Kit versions. Also use the W3C standard way of accessing page objects--that is, use getElementByID("elementName"). Only as a last resort, use the user agent string as described in "Using the Safari on iPhone User Agent String" to detect Safari on iPhone."
If I told you there are sites which works _perfectly_ under Symbian S60 Webkit based browser and yet doesn't let them in because they are "iPhone optimised", you can imagine how effective that warning is ;)
Apple even has an article named "Why browser string identification is a bad idea" and you don't see it happening at all.
They should ask screen size, CSS support, plugin etc. support and it would even work on IE. Look at how much information you can get from a browser:
http://gemal.dk/browserspy/
That functionality is in browsers since first days of javascript and yet not used, at least on many sites.
Also have a look at this one, it will surprise you:
http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/
Yahoo gives it free to developers without any strings attached. It is the same code running on Yahoo, that is how you don't get junk when you go to Yahoo mail with Lynx.
As it is "standards compliant", it will be fed same content as Firefox/Seamonkey gets since sites looking for Firefox looks for "gecko".
It is a very neat and classy idea which I noticed first day I installed Safari.
If a single Govt. official voting for ISO have any kind of favour, lunch, diner or even BillG foundation help, it is not a valid process and criminal investigation should happen.
Let me give a tip: There are already too many examples in hand.
Reading from other comments, one can guess they didn't want wireshark running people to start commenting about horrible privacy breaches.
Clueless Windows user who believes a fortune 500 company are "nice people" because they say "do no evil" was the target for them.
I didn't comment on first story thinking I must be too paranoid and anti google but unfortunately, by defaulting to "send experience to google" along with unique ID and not removing Google software update after uninstall has proven my suspicions.
Google has become new Microsoft for me. I can easily predict what would they dare to do and get automatically validated. It is not a good thing of course.
Does 3 sites reviewing Google browser have Google ads? How could their review would be unbiased is another question to ask. Why do we blame CNET for being too nice to Microsoft? Because it is full of MS ads. Why not Google Adwords get same treatment?
If you are interested in how things work, this would give clue about Google developers and their "don't do evil" motto.
http://daringfireball.net/2007/04/google_desktop_installer
I am sure you will be really surprised. The most amazing part is, their ignorance of Apple's "Don't touch my /System! It belongs to me and kernel driver developers!" rule. All of that horrible security issue for? Some Spotlight clone.
What was Real Networks sin to get listed to "Stopbadware.org" independent, Google funded site?
They asked network about "news" to show to user, actual news, not ads. They also installed Rhapsody framework which sits there until user actually purchases something.
Wonder if Google will be listed on Stop Badware organisation for sending Unique ID to Google and make it hard for average user to disable it.
It should come DISABLED by default, just like Real Player, Windows Media Player. If it is not a big issue, I question the flames directed to Real as "Send unique ID" and "Statistics" is actually sent to SERVER owner instead of Real Networks/MS.
It is NOT easy, it is easy for you, it is not easy for average user. That is the trick and that is why it should come disabled by default.
There were 2 or more stories about VIA recently. First story was about going open source and second one was the announcement of actual open source stuff you ship. Normally you would expect praise from community but such thing didn't happen.
While there were some (minority) people praising this move, most of comments were bad mouthing VIA hardware and recently, blaming GPL "stolen" code for this decision. At one point, while never used your hardware I felt obliged to defend VIA and show possibilities with open source, especially about performance enhancements.
It is something I always wanted to ask Helix/Real Networks too. How can you stand such comments and don't they neutralise your emotions for further open source shipments?
Add Apple too. By giving "Read only" support to ODF, they put their weight behind ODF. "Text Edit.app" is a very important piece of software ;)
Also my Symbian S80 Nokia 9300 can open/edit ODF documents via freeware. It is important thing since, it shows ODF is that easy to implement on anything. Symbian S80 is one of the weirdest portable OS'es you can find, even Nokia got rid of it in E90 upgrade (it is S60).
Their usual trick. Look to Java and OpenGL histories. IMHO MS should be banned from joining any "standard committee". It sounds like 3 strikes to me. Java, OpenGL and OOXML. Same stupid trick done for 3 times and funny is, Sun has fallen into it 3 times straight!
Lets not forget .NET and Silverlight. I really laugh at people sparing their SECOND to those.
"pseudo-technical community"
Lets ignore your direct attack to Slashdot community which we sometimes see non anonymous comments of industry leader companies CEOs and people having written World standard RFCs... What about "more serious looking" Sun Microsystems and IBM which itself larger than many countries represented in ISO?
If you suggest a Windows only standard with a very suspicious voting process which even involves some dictatorships, you are irrelevant. You should be investigated and punished too if there was money involved.
Being "ISO" really doesn't make them untouchable. Same goes for Microsoft too. They should be investigated by a international court as bribery (via money or other things) is a very serious crime.
Well, if they accept OOXML as a standard, people may question if ISO A4 standard has something shadowy behind it or ISO 9001 is given to anyone with enough money.
One mistake and trust is gone. There is no "ISO Police". If there are companies who has the neat idea of ISO OOXML format usage instead of PDF, Open Office etc., God help them since MS will become a patent troll/leech company in 5 years.
What was that UN like organisation, another huge one before United Nations? It was huge and effective until invasion of Poland and start of WW2. The day WW2 broke out, it became irrelevant.
Acceptance of Windows only (shut up really, MS puppets) standard(!) could mark the end of ISO.