Bug#467324: include gnash in desktop?
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 04:41:07PM +0100, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 03:40:05PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 02:28:08PM +0100, Alexander Sack wrote:
> > >
> > > The negative thing about installing gnash by default is that normal
> > > users won't really notice what they are running and might perceive
> > > debian in general as "being-broken" if they visit a site that has
> > > not-support flash content.
> >
> > You mean, as opposed to the site being broken? :-) I think this is a gray
> > area. If they install the non-free plugin, and the plugin crashes, they blame
> > it on the browser (I've seen this happen a gazillon of times). Etc..
> >
> > Let's face it: Adobe will keep adding features, and we'll always be behind
> > them. This needs to stop at some point. And it stops the same way we stopped
> > IE dominance with its ActiveX crap. We build and deploy an alternative. When
> > enough users have removed their dependancy on non-free flash, Adobe will lose
> > its ability to force new features down our throat. Would youtube dare to
> > break gnash compatibility if a significant part of its userbase were using
> > Gnash? I think not. That's the enduring solution to our problem.
>
> Yes, but face the truth: unfortunately, neither debian nor linux in
> total have enough market power (read: userbase) to make much of a
> difference yet. We are getting closer to that point, but that doesn't
> mean that its wise to start the battle right away.
>
> So for the time being, its looks far better to put the work into
> something that provides users with a superior user experience; for
> instance, superior by choice (like what the plugin finder improvement
> would do); grow the user base and once we are mature enough to have
> real power, throw in our weight to finally free the world.
Presenting the user with a choice they didn't ask for is hardly qualifiable
as a "superior user experience". It's simply an efficient way to delegate a
problem on the user instead of solving it. It's like "look, our free flash
player is not so good, but we give you the chance of becoming Adobe's slave
instead! isn't choice great?".
We can do much better. For one thing, we support youtube already, and we
didn't have to kneel to Adobe in order to get it working.
--
Robert Millan
<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)
Reply to: