Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 5th Jan 2013 14:53 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 547526
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by WereCatf on Sun 6th Jan 2013 06:09
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
RE[4]: Comment by shmerl
by ze_jerkface on Sun 6th Jan 2013 20:55
in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by shmerl"
No I'm not being silly.
You can't love open source and needlessly promote Flash. It's like saying your are pro-vegan while needlessly adding meat to your restaurant's salads.
It's too contradictory to take seriously.
I'm not an open source lover and I would have ran Flash into the ground if I owned YouTube. All they had to do was require an alternative codec or plug-in to view YouTube videos when it was the only site of its kind. What did Google do? Bundle Flash with Chrome and leave it on by default.
What's silly is that so many people actually buy into the bullshit that these megacorps come up with. Actually it's just sad.
Edited 2013-01-06 21:02 UTC





Member since:
2012-06-22
Stop making excuses for them.
They claim to support open video codecs and then they bundle Flash with Chrome and leave it on by default. What is the excuse for that? That's not even a neutral position, they're encouraging the use of Flash by inflating the install base. It would be like a store stating they are against guns while handing out free bullets to every customer. I cannot believe how much of a pass Google gets just because they toss couch change at a few open source projects. They are the masters of open source p.r., basically the open source equivalent of green washing.
As I have said many times if anyone really thinks they are an open source luvin' company then write them a letter and ask them for the source to Google search or Google Docs.