ZDNet.co.uk is reporting that at the Internet World Conference in London, Nitot warned that companies like Adobe and Microsoft might have an agenda with their Flash and Silverlight technologies. Even though at the moment these technologies are free to download, this might change in the future. "But maybe they have an agenda," Nitot said, "they're not here for the glory; they're here for the money." He also warns for the dangers of these companies withholding products from certain markets. As examples, he mentions Internet Explorer for the Mac/UNIX, and Adobe's refusal to provide up-to-date binaries of Flash.
While the current generation of browsers and SAAS applications offers plenty of choice but some security concerns, the next generation could turn this on its head, providing greater security but less choice. That's because we are quickly moving to a type of Web application that will no longer be delivered to a general-purpose Web browser but will instead be deployed to something dedicated to that specific SAAS application.
This is the world of single-site browsers and rich Internet applications.
In this world, users don't open a Web browser and then use a bookmark or link to access their important Web applications. Instead, these Web applications are installed and deployed almost as if they were desktop applications. Users launch them from their Start menu or desktop, and the SAAS application runs in its own single-purpose browser window.
Sony Ericsson is planning to offer developers the opportunity to embed Flash Lite applications inside J2ME midlets, in the hope that two mobile phone application platforms will prove better than one.
“Microsoft literally paid a government department millions of dollars to abandon Web standards and exclude Microsoft's competitors.”"If I were to take a wild guess I would think that it is to draw attention away from several other things like attacking KDE 4 from the inside, spreading silverfish infestations, and touring the governments again in prep for the summer.
"Looks like a lot of illegal or at least questionable deals are going on to get silverfish infestations in as many places as possible"
Look back at the Library of Congress story, which we have already mentioned in [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. Microsoft literally paid a government department millions of dollars to abandon Web standards and exclude Microsoft's competitors.
Another reader points out that "refusing OGG/Vorbis/Theora as HTML5 standard was a real shame. (Thank you for nothing, Nokia)." Remember that the guy from Nokia who was partly responsible for this is actually a former Microsoft employee.
"And yet another demonstration that software/business models/pure idea patents are a really bad idea," concludes this reader. ⬆
Comments
Hassan Ibraheem
2008-05-01 07:58:53
Roy Schestowitz
2008-05-01 08:06:05
akf
2008-05-01 08:19:19
For short: ffmpeg2theora can do it now.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-05-01 08:38:47
akf
2008-05-01 10:09:37
I used an e-mail address, which I found on your private homepage... after long searching. And I encrypted it with the gpg-key I found there. It was on 14. Apr. Shall I try to send it again?
akf
2008-05-01 10:30:08
You can download it with the service on: http://www.downloadyoutubevideos.com/
Then, at least on a current debian lenny system you can convert it like this: ffmpeg2theora -p preview --sync file.flv
You can try other settings, but you need the --sync option.
see http://www.v2v.cc/~j/ffmpeg2theora/
Roy Schestowitz
2008-05-01 11:31:39
I have the feeling that I got your E-mail and replied, but I can't find it in my archives. I'll take a look and see if I can manage quick Ogg conversion, with the goal of making more Oggs available where copying is permitted.
Thanks again.
LinuxIsFun
2008-05-01 11:39:30
what i can understand is previously adobe allowed to write put not play SWF/FLV/F4V files. Now they are allowing to write and play without any license restriction. Great job adobe !
http://www.adobe.com/openscreenproject/faq/index.html
The SWF specification has been published since 1998. Until today, the specification had a license agreement associated with it, which said that developers could write software to output SWF but could not make software that would “play” SWF files. These license terms were initially included to prevent fragmentation, which most client technologies have experienced. These terms have worked well for Flash Player over the past decade as it now reaches over 98% of PCs on the Web with a consistent runtime, enabling things such as the video revolution we see today across the Web. With this announcement, Adobe is removing this restriction from the SWF specification, as we have established a consistent runtime and we want to ensure the industry can confidently continue to support the SWF format. This will permit the development of applications that “play” SWF files. Adobe will of course remain focused on making the best, most reliable and consistently distributed implementation across desktops and devices.
LinuxIsFun
2008-05-01 11:40:08
what i can understand is previously adobe allowed to write put not play SWF/FLV/F4V files. Now they are allowing to write and play without any license restriction. Great job adobe !
http://www.adobe.com/openscreenproject/faq/index.html
The SWF specification has been published since 1998. Until today, the specification had a license agreement associated with it, which said that developers could write software to output SWF but could not make software that would “play” SWF files. These license terms were initially included to prevent fragmentation, which most client technologies have experienced. These terms have worked well for Flash Player over the past decade as it now reaches over 98% of PCs on the Web with a consistent runtime, enabling things such as the video revolution we see today across the Web. With this announcement, Adobe is removing this restriction from the SWF specification, as we have established a consistent runtime and we want to ensure the industry can confidently continue to support the SWF format. This will permit the development of applications that “play” SWF files. Adobe will of course remain focused on making the best, most reliable and consistently distributed implementation across desktops and devices.
LinuxIsFun
2008-05-01 11:40:41
http://www.adobe.com/openscreenproject/faq/index.html
The SWF specification has been published since 1998. Until today, the specification had a license agreement associated with it, which said that developers could write software to output SWF but could not make software that would “play” SWF files. These license terms were initially included to prevent fragmentation, which most client technologies have experienced. These terms have worked well for Flash Player over the past decade as it now reaches over 98% of PCs on the Web with a consistent runtime, enabling things such as the video revolution we see today across the Web. With this announcement, Adobe is removing this restriction from the SWF specification, as we have established a consistent runtime and we want to ensure the industry can confidently continue to support the SWF format. This will permit the development of applications that “play” SWF files. Adobe will of course remain focused on making the best, most reliable and consistently distributed implementation across desktops and devices.
Hassan Ibraheem
2008-05-01 12:08:44
Roy Schestowitz
2008-05-01 12:14:49
Thanks to akf I got the whole pipeline working very quickly, so I'll produce Oggs and host them here in the future if it's legally possible. Here's a corny one that I'll add later:
All those videos that accumulate inside the home directory slow down my backups, but more Oggs on the Web can have a positive effect.
akf
2008-05-01 16:44:26
But better leave the "-p preview" away...
P.S.: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZNVLzdKDeyQ
Roy Schestowitz
2008-05-01 16:54:51