No subject

Tue Nov 27 09:44:25 UTC 2007

"Vaporware is a software or hardware product which is announced by a developer
well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge, either
with or without a
protracted development cycle. The term implies unwarranted optimism, or
sometimes even deception; that is, it may imply that the announcer knows that
product development is in too early a stage to support responsible statements
about its completion date, feature set, or even feasibility."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vaporware&oldid=185186415

Secondly, I don't really pay attention to whether people agree with me. Unlike
some who post to this list, I don't get an ego boost when everyone agrees with
me. I honestly don't care enough about that. I just have my opinions and I wish
to share them.

Chad

On Jan 20, 2008 3:07 PM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Nobody is saying that we should use it now. Everybody says that the
> situation with Flash is not good. Nobody holds their breath until Adobe
> releases its patents. But this whole situation is out of proportion, it is
> not what open source is about. When people wanted file server support they
> started the Samba <http://us3.samba.org/samba/> project.
>
> When you ask yourself why the WMF asks for people interested to cooperate,
> there are a cluster of reasons to be considered. A tool like this has
> educational merit. Wikieduacator, an organisation we are associated with,
> shows an interest. It does not cost us anything, but it has the potential of
> providing improved tooling.
>
> When you ask yourself why would YOU collaborate or not collaborate it makes
> sense to ask if you consider it worth your time. You can discuss it on the
> mailing list and if the arguments are good for you by all means they are
> good enough to make up your mind.
>
> All the technical reasons why you might want to lend a hand have NO bearing
> on why the WMF informs you about this opportunity. They do it for their own
> reasons. In essence, it has nothing to do with you. When the comparison was
> made with religion, you have to appreciate that those who believe are
> ferociously against those who do not hold the true faith. This behaviour is
> what I observe and from my point of view it is not pretty. This has led to
> diminished value of this, the foundation-l, because Mike decided that the
> tone of voice was too much even unacceptable. As a consequence we all suffer
> a loss because the distance between the foundation and the people of the
> community has grown wider.
>
> So, you are doing good in adding "vaporware" to what is already insulting as
> it is. When you consider this freedom of speech, you may wonder why some
> people are not willing to communicate with you or do not consider your
> opinions.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
> On Jan 20, 2008 7:05 PM, Chad <innocentkiller at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > No, I think he's pointing out the issues with this that state why we
> > shouldn't use it now;
> > this has agreement, I believe. Not to mention, until Adobe releases
> > those patents or
> > makes Flash an open standard, there will never be a 100% (that's
> > gratis AND libre)
> > implementation of it, ever, as Ben said.
> >
> > However, the question still remains: why is it the WMF's job to
> > provide a PR boost
> > for a (seemingly) startup? Wouldn't we get further by helping Gnash
> > directly?
> >
> > Somebody knows somebody, that much appears clear to me now.
> >
> > Chad
> >
> > On Jan 20, 2008 12:47 PM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hoi,
> > > Nice but what is your point and how does it relate to what is the issue?
> > The
> > > issue is that a framework is being developed. It needs open source
> > > components to make it work and gnash has been mentioned as one component
> > in
> > > all this that needs work. What you describe is exactly the reason why
> > work
> > > needs to be done to make this type of content work well on Linux
> > >
> > > So you describe that things do not work well. You provide the exact
> > > arguments why something needs to be done ... So you are in favour of the
> > > proposed collabaration... GREAT
> > > Thanks,
> > >      GerardM
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jan 20, 2008 6:32 PM, Ben McIlwain <cydeweys at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > > Hash: SHA1
> > > >
> > > > Brion Vibber wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In many cases that'll cover the same ground as non-free formats; the
> > > > > main exceptions are for patent-encumbered standards (eg, the MPEG
> > family
> > > > > - MP3, AAC, H.264, etc) and widely-deployed proprietary formats that
> > > > > have been reverse-engineered by FOSS developers (eg, Flash).
> > > >
> > > > On the subject of Flash, I think it might help to relate my
> > experiences
> > > > so that everyone on this list knows how deficient it is on free
> > software
> > > > platforms.  (This isn't directed to you Brion, as that'd just be
> > > > preaching to the choir :-P )
> > > >
> > > > I run GNU/Linux on my laptop.  Pretty much everything works and I'm
> > able
> > > > to do everything I do in Windows, except Flash.  First of all, the
> > free
> > > > software Flash alternatives simply aren't there yet.  They aren't good
> > > > enough for everyday use.  And even if they were, they still wouldn't
> > be
> > > > free, because they're infringing on various patents that Adobe no
> > doubt
> > > > holds.  And the free software stuff isn't good enough to create Flash
> > > > either, so you still need to pay the tax in the form of the creator
> > > > program (which as far as I know doesn't run on GNU/Linux).  You can
> > see
> > > > why this is unacceptable.
> > > >
> > > > Even the official Adobe Flash player plugin for Mozilla Firefox on
> > > > GNU/Linux is deficient.  It's treated like a third-rate product by
> > > > Adobe, sometimes seeing major version updates many months after the
> > > > Windows plugin is released.  In the mean time, new Flash content that
> > > > depends on the new features simply won't work.  And the plugin itself
> > is
> > > > just bad.  It frequently crashes Firefox, some of its functionality
> > > > plain old doesn't work, etc.  And nevermind that it's not free in any
> > > > sense of the word except gratis; it's all binary, the source isn't
> > > > available, so it's all entirely anti-libre.
> > > >
> > > > - From where I stand, Flash isn't even an option to be considered in
> > > > fulfilling the Foundation's mission statement of "developing
> > educational
> > > > content under a free license or in the public domain".  It won't even
> > > > run on a completely free system, and it will only run poorly on a
> > > > partially free system (giving in and installing their binary-only
> > > > plugin).  It is, simply, not what we are looking for.
> > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
> > > >
> > > > iD8DBQFHk4XEvCEYTv+mBWcRAhAaAJwJ3/jBdQoArYbvbwnBlOV1iOIzfgCgmUJX
> > > > JIigTnt4RQql8fr+opFaofI=
> > > > =EQRC
> > > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>