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."
Thread beginning with comment 177192
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: still no easy drivers
by Brandybuck on Tue 31st Oct 2006 15:03 UTC in reply to "still no easy drivers"
Member since:

Don't blame the lack of Flash on BSD, blame Macromedia. They're they one's who first declared it to be illegal under BSD, then later announced they would never ever make a BSD version.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: still no easy drivers
by sbergman27 on Tue 31st Oct 2006 15:20 in reply to "RE: still no easy drivers"
sbergman27 Member since:

"""They're they one's who first declared it to be illegal under BSD,"""

Could you elaborate on that a bit? I seem to have missed that whole business. I'm used to stuff being declared illegal under GPL by various parties for their own reasons... but BSD???

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: still no easy drivers
by Doc Pain on Tue 31st Oct 2006 15:46 in reply to "RE: still no easy drivers"
Doc Pain Member since:

Macromedia doesn't like do publish a free definition of their "Flash" format. That's the problem. I think, thatt there are many developers out there who would love to implement "Flash" plugins and players - but they can't.

Let's take a look on the ports collection (remember, it can be used in PC-BSD like I mentioned before):

graphics/flashplayer - GPL standalone Flash (TM) player
graphics/libflash - GPL Flash (TM) Library
www/flashplugin - An implementation of Macromedia Flash plugin for Netscape
www/flashplugin-mozilla - A GPL standalone Flash (TM) plugin for Mozilla web browser
www/linux-flashplugin7 - Adobe Flash Player NPAPI Plugin
www/xpi-flashblock - Replaces Flash objects with a button you can click to view them (GOOD IDEA!)

So "no support" isn't correct. Complicated support would be better. :-)

Furthermore, there are some procedures to include "Flash" support in Firefox or Mozilla - these ones are in german, sorry ("mit" = with).

Title: "BSD:Firefox mit Flash-Plugin" -

Title: "FreeBSD - Mozilla mit Java- und Flashsupport" -

But... why are people so keen about "Flash"? It makes it impossible for disabled (blind) people to even enter a web page or gaining information on what the page is about. (Friendly reminder: "Flash" is no substitute for HTML, kids!) Isn't this stupid? Haven't (yet?) found a need for "Flash" for myself...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: still no easy drivers
by Joe User on Tue 31st Oct 2006 16:27 in reply to "RE[2]: still no easy drivers"
Joe User Member since:

This is not because you don't like Flash that you should ban us from it. I like watching Flash movies once in a while. Not everybody uses Flash for navigation menus. Flash used properly (for videos) is not evil at all. Blind people won't be able to watch these, but what can we do? Ban Flash as a sympathy?

Reply Parent Score: 1