On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 16:15:44 +0100, Pete/Pcb21
<pete_pcb21_wpmail(a)pcbartlett.com> wrote:
snip
The question is: Is forcing them to do this a big
deal? You appear to
say no it isn't. I would disagree and say yes it IS a big deal. Many,
many web users CAN NOT update software on their computer (virtually
anyone on a locally managed network: school, library, office, cybercafe
etc) because they do not have the rights to do so. Only home users would.
No the question is, do we inconvenience Windows users to download a
legal and free plugin, or do we force FOSS users get illegal/pay
software?
Note: we bend over backwards to support all major
browsers (minimizing
JavaScript etc) because most people cannot change their browser. Yet
when we come to sound, we are changing tack.
Do we force people to pay for content or have them view it illegally
(well maybe we do when it comes to fair use, but that's a different
argument)?
Whether this consideration is sufficiently strong in
order for us to
consider allowing other formats, I'm not sure. But it is worth bearing
in mind before going GNUng-ho into going ogg-only.
We're not GNUng-ho for the sake of being GNUng-ho, there actually are
some sound reasons behind it (like the whole GFDL concept vs
copyrighting everything ala Britannica). Do we want to impose a
DVD/CSS style hassle on our users?
--
[[en:User:Dori]]