Flash viewer for FBSD
freebsd at edvax.de
Sat Mar 6 11:19:12 UTC 2010
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:07:25 +0100, "C. P. Ghost" <cpghost at cordula.ws> wrote:
> That's true. I love youtube-dl too, as it helps me keep a local
> .flv copy, even for videos that have been removed for one reason
> or another.
A very useful feature, especially for offline operations.
> However, there are other video sites like dailymotion. What
> downloader do you use for these?
None, because I don't know / "need" other sites that steal
my time by providing useless videos. :-)
> And remember, youtube-dl is a hack. It can break anytime
> YT changes its embedding.
That's what "make update" is used for. :-)
> I wished YouTube would switch
> to HTML5, or at least added this as an option.
This may happen in the future. YT is one of the main promoters
for "Flash" as a means to provide video contents.
> I've talked with the IT department of a company recently who
> had to switch from perfectly usable barrier-less HTML to Flash.
The IT department? Shouldn't this be the responsibility of
the department providing the content to be published on
> Actually, the IT guys didn't want to, but their management was
Oh yeah, management. Market share. All new. Revolutionary.
Leverage. I could go on for hours. :-)
> The main reason wasn't buttons or little animations,
> but something much more mundane: the graphics design
> company they hired to create their new corporate identity
> insisted that the only way to get a 100% pixel-precise layout
> was with Flash... and management fell for it.
If I hear "pixel precise"... Why don't they provide the
content COMPLETELY as PNG images without compression? That
would be really 1:1.
> Basically, they
> wanted to duplicate their glossy brochures 1:1, and didn't care
> about reduced usability and accessibility.
In this case, my opinion would be: If they don't care, than
I don't care supporting them by investing attention on them.
They don't deserve it.
> Incredibly silly move,
> but their company, their decision.
Their right. If they want to lose customers (idea: the more
people you exclude from the content, the more potential
customers you lose).
But I agree: Absolutely idiotic. Let's see how much fun they
will have when Adobe changes something in their "Flash"
format - then everything needs to be re-done. :-)
> HTML 5 isn't the problem, that will be easy to implement. It's about
> picking the right video codec. There's no high quality codec available
> that is both ubiquitous in hardware, and unencumbered by patents.
That's true. I didn't want to hide that. A free, open and
standardized video codec, capable of carrying video and
audio information and providing streaming the content,
while being compatible with HTML, and being able to be
used in every country, would be a good solution. It HAS
to be supported out of the box, at least in terms of
web browsers (like the "thing" inside the browser that
displays JPG images, to follow my example).
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
More information about the freebsd-questions