|
Posted by J.O. Aho on 04/09/07 16:50
Travis Newbury wrote:
> On Apr 9, 7:12 am, "J.O. Aho" <u...@example.net> wrote:
>> Why do people think flash is a good choice from compatibility point of view...
>
> Well I think they (adobe and Flash 9) have covered a greater majority
> of OS's and browsers than any other single medium
If I don't recall it wrong, there is one for Microsoft that supports all the
x86 versions (don't work on PowerPC, Alpha nor Mips versions).
There is two for OSX, but most likely the last one for PowerPC.
For GNU/Linux there is one, but only for x86, but as you may know there are
quite many architectures supported by GNU/Linux as PowerPC, Alpha, Mips, Sparc
and so on.
Sure, if you count all service packs for microsoft as an own operating system,
then you could make the list even longer, but it won't make the binary flash
player any different. Still microsoft is supported, but only x86 version. OSX
is supported, both architectures at the moment. GNU/Linux has only a flash
player for x86. In the end it's still 3 operating systems and 2 architectures
that are supported.
> Not to mention NO other media player gives you the ability to interact
> with your media the way Flash does.
For a BSD user there is a lot more interaction to use any other media player,
as they lack a flash player, regardless of which architecture they use.
> If they did, then all the multi
> media sites would be turning to that rather than Flash. And the trend
> to move to Flash video is apparent to everyone that watches the
> industry.
Industry isn't always smart, just look what happen to BetaMax and what will
happen to BluRay.
--
//Aho
[Back to original message]
|