Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Oct 2006 19:43 UTC, submitted by Charles A Landemaine
PC-BSD After the flood of Fedora Core 6 and Ubuntu 6.10 reviews, here is a review of PC-BSD 1.3 Beta. "PC-BSD has improved quite a bit and the use of its open-source PBI packaging system is a great idea. Although it obviously means there might be a minor delay in newly released products being ported over to the PBI package system, novice users will rejoice because the wait is well worth it. PC-BSD is a well oiled machine with its quick response times, even if you don't have that much memory in your system. Its implementation of a clean interface is welcomed by me and not having a 3D enabled desktop is not something I really would worry about unless you are an eye-candy lover."
Permalink for comment 177357
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Flash & Java
by animus on Tue 31st Oct 2006 22:22 UTC
Member since:

YouTube and Google Video relies on Flash. Are their software engineers "idiots"?

Let's recap for you -- I said: "[...] only idiots make their site needlessly dependent upon it." Do you see the word 'needlessly'? If either Google Video or YouTube could have been done better (or even as good) without flash, then I'd conclude that yes, they are idiots (however, I'm thinking decisions like this are often made by management and not the Engineers).

I haven't ran Windows in about 7 years now, and my experience with Flash has been less than enjoyable (on Linux, the BSDs, etc). At many times it hasn't worked or has not been available -- certain times I've needed access to important information on various websites only to discover they were flash only. Tell me, why did my [old] ISP need a website that is entirely made with flash? I'm thinking it didn't, and that falls under the category of "needlessly" using flash. How useful is a troubleshooting website made with flash? Did they really gain anything over using basic HTML?

Try going a year or two without flash and you'll quickly discover the number of websites that are are using it for stupid reasons -- and what can you conclude about their creators? They're either idiots, ignorant, or purely negligent. 80% of the time it's not the right tool for the job and shouldn't be used just because it can be used.

Reply Score: 1