On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 16:15:44 +0100, Pete/Pcb21 pete_pcb21_wpmail@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?