Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microsoft Celebrates Feynman 50-year Anniversary

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the over-your-head dept.

Microsoft 169

Julie188 writes "A couple of years ago Microsoft acquired the rights to the famed filmed lecture series by Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman and posted them online for all to see via its Project Tuva site. As part of the 50-year anniversary of the lectures, the Project Tuva site now includes commentary from MIT physics professor Robert Jaffe. Project Tuva still requires Silverlight (alas, not HTML5), but does offer some nifty features for the aspiring physics student, such as search and the ability to take notes."

cancel ×

169 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Because it's Silverlight... (3, Insightful)

tian2992 (1690038) | more than 3 years ago | (#35895832)

It's a shame no one will get to see it...

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35895916)

Doesn't Netflix use Silverlight?

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (3, Insightful)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896118)

Yes it does, and it works just fine on my copy of firefox running on os x.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (1)

c_jonescc (528041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897216)

I can watch Netflix using Chrome, but the Project Tuva site says my browser isn't supported for Silverlight...

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (3, Insightful)

zpiro (525660) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897542)

I can watch Netflix using Chrome, but the Project Tuva site says my browser isn't supported for Silverlight...

So I went to the effort of setting up moonlight (4.0), getting it to work on chrome compiling necessary software.
Even the silverlight port of Quake worked (quakelight), albeit actually playing didn't.
However, that site denies me access because my browser isn't "officially" supported -- surprise surprise.

Where I work, there are mostly physicists, most of them use Linux and quite a few use OSX, windows users being a (very) small minority.

Physicists in practice being denied access to the lectures by one of the most inspiring physicists throughout history.

Have to give it to M$, they are consistent when it comes to coercing / luring people into using their products.

If at least it was the first of April, there would be a glimmer of hope for this cretinous hostage-taking of a truly great man. Whats wrong with the world when someone can own this, wasn't he essentially paid by the people?

Now, where is my public-access to science and the educators of the public!

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35895974)

I'll see it just fine. I don't feel the need to be a luddite.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896388)

Wow, not kowtowing to the latest in whiz-bang proprietary lock-in bullshit is being a luddite now? It amazes me that people have worked so hard to free the web from the clutches of the likes of MS (active-X) and Adobe (flash) through the efforts put into html5 and now we get the pleasure of being called a luddite. If anything, I'd say not embracing the <img> tag is being a luddite.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Grygus (1143095) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896714)

Wow, not kowtowing to the latest in whiz-bang proprietary lock-in bullshit is being a luddite now? It amazes me that people have worked so hard to free the web from the clutches of the likes of MS (active-X) and Adobe (flash) through the efforts put into html5 and now we get the pleasure of being called a luddite. If anything, I'd say not embracing the <img> tag is being a luddite.

Wow, using a free browser addon that has versions for Windows, Mac, and Linux is kowtowing to the latest in whiz-bang proprietary lock-in bullshit now? Everything more advanced than the <img> tag is somehow shameful? How fearful you must be every time you click a link. I don't think I'd enjoy your Internet very much.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (4, Insightful)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896974)

Wow, using a free browser addon that has versions for Windows, Mac, and Linux

That's interesting. Because, you see, I just went here [microsoft.com] , was told my browser was not officially supported so I should go here [go-mono.com] and install moonlight. Okay, cool, so I do it and go back to here [microsoft.com] . Guess what. No lecture. That's some support.

I don't think I'd enjoy your Internet very much.

My html5 open standards based internet is fantastic, thank you very much. Works on my iPhone, my Xoom, my Ubuntu netbook, my Ubuntu desktop, and my Droid smartphone. Have fun playing with your silverflash.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897516)

If you had a real OS you'd be able to watch the content. Now fuck off if you just want to be cool and hip with your Linux.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897784)

just want to be cool and hip

So, is that the new astroturfer meme to attack people that don't tow the windows line? Real creative.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35895976)

It's a shame no one will get to see it...

I was bummed to discover that Microsoft owns the rights to the Feynman lectures. Available in Silverlight only just rubs salt in the wound.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896102)

It's a shame no one will get to see it...

I was bummed to discover that Microsoft owns the rights to the Feynman lectures. Available in Silverlight only just rubs salt in the wound.

Exactly. Feynman loved to teach and he loved to educate. He would not appreciate people holding his teaching behinds artificial barriers. What a shame. I'd sad to see Feynman's legacy "owned" by people who are so inferior-minded and unimportant compared to him.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (2, Funny)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896240)

What barrier, a free download barrier? Yeah, Christ - they might as well have locked them in an airtight, locked container and dropped them to the bottom of the Mariana Trench, amirite?

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (4, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896360)

What barrier, a free download barrier?

For some value of "free".

Free download, but only available for Windows and OS X. If you're on Linux, there's Mono, but that tends to lag behind -- I usually have to get some bleeding-edge version whenever I actually need some Silverlight content. And contrary to popular belief, neither Windows nor OS X is "free".

What's insulting about this, especially to Feynman's legacy, is that there's a very simple right way to do this: HTML5. And that actually is behind a free download -- Chrome, Firefox, etc, assuming you don't already have a browser capable of playing it. Or, for that matter, multiple technologies at once, if you're afraid of the codec issue -- put it in, say, H.264, then you should be able to develop Flash and Silverlight shims for browsers which don't support H.264 in HTML5.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (5, Insightful)

Covalent (1001277) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896732)

Silverlight != FOSS Therefore, this awesome piece of the legacy of Richard Feynman is currently != free. Furthermore, what is to prevent MS from making this no longer "free"? Nothing. The real tragedy, though, is that 50-year-old video of a man who is long dead is still covered by copyright.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897926)

> Furthermore, what is to prevent MS from making this no longer "free"? Nothing.

Same as ANY material that ANY private party holds the rights to. Duh.

You should be grateful they're making it available in any format at all.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896402)

Since when owning ms windows was free? As someone not having a single windows computer I find your comment rather insensitive and pedantic. Amirite?

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (2)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896424)

You know what else was a free download? IE6.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896532)

You know what else was a free download? IE6.

That's it then; the thread has been Godwindowed.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897010)

And at the time it was bar far the best browser you could get. Just because companies are still using it 10 years after release is not their fault.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897224)

circa: 2021

And at the time it was bar far the best rich content plugin you could get. Just because companies are still using it 10 years after release is not their fault.

There FTFY

Do people not learn?

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896492)

What barrier, a free download barrier? Yeah, Christ - they might as well have locked them in an airtight, locked container and dropped them to the bottom of the Mariana Trench, amirite?

Silverlight does not work under 64-bit Firefox on OSX, so its effectively just not available, download or not.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897948)

I've never been able to watch it all because Silverlight would crash every time.
At least putting it up in other formats and advertising that they "expand on the experience" would be more helpful than locking people in to a format that may or may not work.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896382)

The only barrier is your sore ass. Get over yourself.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (2)

RDW (41497) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896386)

'He would not appreciate people holding his teaching behinds artificial barriers.'

Feynman was pretty keen on unlocking things, too. Perhaps he'd have approved of unoffcial methods of viewing these lectures, like this:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=feynman+messenger+lectures [youtube.com]

Note that the MS site doesn't have the famous 'Feynman Lectures on Physics', but the much shorter series of 7 Messenger Lectures given at Cornell:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Character_of_Physical_Law [wikipedia.org]

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (3, Informative)

RDW (41497) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896900)

Incidentally, there'll be a new multimedia version of the actual 'Feynman Lectures on Physics' out this year. They've integrated the (corrected) text with Feynman's original audio, blackboard photos, and related problems:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqRp9tyDLvw [youtube.com]
http://www.basicfeynman.com/enhanced.html [basicfeynman.com]

Goddness knows what locked-down format this will be in, though.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897018)

I grabbed them ages ago via BitTorrent.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897280)

link pl0x?

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896452)

It's a shame no one will get to see it...

I was bummed to discover that Microsoft owns the rights to the Feynman lectures. Available in Silverlight only just rubs salt in the wound.

Some of you people really need to get a life.

"Microsoft ...waaa waaa waaa!"

Here's a F/OSS pacifier. *offers you your own thumb*

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (2)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896592)

Really? I need to "get a life"? I went to the site was kindly informed that my browser/os wasn't supported and given a link to the moonlight download. Just for fun, I clicked it and installed it. Then I navigated back to the feynman microsoft site. Guess what. It still doesn't work. You get a life.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897022)

Its not Microsofts fault your particular setup doesn't work, and its not Mono's fault either. Its a symptom of Linux when you use it as you all advertise it here. Its truly amazing to see people complain about things when open source fails to do what it should do (according to the glorious F/OSS utopia comments everywhere) as if its a problem with Microsoft. In reality what you're seeing is the downside of F/OSS and trying to make it a problem with everybody else. This is why I think the GPL is a virus, insisting people do what you want them to do is not free or open, its bullshit. And you can't even get a fucking video player right with all your bullshit packages. You chose Linux, mock MS for its faults, but every time Linux has a fault its Microsoft's fault too. Right. Grow up.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (1, Redundant)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897340)

Its not Microsofts fault your particular setup doesn't work

It's not a question of whose fault it is. The bottom line is this is just another internet grab from MS. We just got out from under "This website only works in internet explorer" now you expect us to get right back into an MS only web? Yeah, right.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (3, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897108)

Well, then your a short sighted moron.

The fact that any corporation can own the "rights" to a lecture series by one of the most brilliant physicists (and teachers of physics) in the last century is appalling.

These lectures were filmed by Caltech, and it's awful to have anybody "own" them. It's just the kind of thing that shouldn't be locked up in some corporations IP portfolio -- and I don't care if it's Microsoft, Sony, or Time Warner.

Really, what next ... The Einstein/Pepsi Theory of Relativity? Planck's Constant, brought to you by Staples?

My point is that no commercial entity should hold the "rights" to this. This is quite depressing.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896716)

It's part of an experiment.

They're working on a theory of Quantum Embargodynamics.

Once it's perfected they'll be able to keep you from doing anything without a license. No matter what kind of matter or energy you are, no matter where you are in the universe.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897028)

"owns" it only for another 28 years, then the copyright will expire...

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (-1, Troll)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897352)

You're right, better to not be able to see them at all than to have to swallow our pride even for a second and admit that MS has done anything less than total and complete evil. I'M SO FUCKING IRRATIONALLY MAD RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897496)

Wow, get over yourself. The fact that MS is using something as sacred as Feynman's lectures to peddle their silverlight lock-in is just scandalous. I hope you and your ilk are being paid well.

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (0)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897608)

Yes, they're so sacred that they should never, ever be seen--unless it's in the format(s) that *we* want it in!!!!! How *dare* MS use their own format instead of someone else's??? I'M SHAKING MY FIST IN THE AIR RIGHT NOW, YOU FILTHY BASTARDS!!!!

Re:Because it's Silverlight... (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897834)

Please take your meds.

Silverwhat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35895874)

Don't have it and never will. Just another failed MS-only tech. They still beating on that dead horse?

Re:Silverwhat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35895988)

Re:Silverwhat? (0)

bmo (77928) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896082)

Vaporware and patent trapware.

Never use it.

--
BMO

Re:Silverwhat? (3, Informative)

TrancePhreak (576593) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896300)

If you are seriously bothered about those things and Moonlight, you should also concern yourself with javascript, it's under the same license.

Re:Silverwhat? (-1, Troll)

smelch (1988698) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897062)

Don't you know real F/OSS advocates refuse to use javascript? What fucking hipsters they are. its so cool the way they are above it all.

Re:Silverwhat? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896192)

Moonlight doesn't support 99% of the Silverlight content out there. Every time there is something actually worth watching, they have to issue an 'emergency patch' to get it to work. I have ZERO doubt that this is an accident. And now that Novell is selling their Linux patents to Microsoft, we are seeing the true depth to which Novell and De Icaza have stabbed this community in the back.

Re:Silverwhat? (1)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896396)

But when I clicked the link to Project Tuva, I was redirected in this order:
  - Sorry, Silverlight for your browser is not supported, to see the list of supported browser click <link>. I clicked.
  - Get Microsoft Silverlight - Click to install. I clicked.
  - Moonlight for Linux, a free plug-in.

I realized that Miguel is an idiot a long time, but I didn't know Moonlight is officially supported by MS. And I still don't know why.

Re:Silverwhat? (2)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896908)

It's not. If you install moonlight from that link, then go back to the Project Tuva website, you get the same brush-off.

Microsoft isn't "supporting" Moonlight. They don't even use the word in their webpages. They just automatically redirect you if you try to install Silverlight on an unsupported platform.

Re:Silverwhat? (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897848)

But when I clicked the link to Project Tuva, I was redirected in this order:
- Sorry, Silverlight for your browser is not supported, to see the list of supported browser click <link>. I clicked.
- Get Microsoft Silverlight - Click to install. I clicked.
- Moonlight for Linux, a free plug-in.

I realized that Miguel is an idiot a long time, but I didn't know Moonlight is officially supported by MS. And I still don't know why.

And were you then able to view the Feynman videos at Microsoft's Tuva site? No? Well, nobody is surprised. I tried and still got the "blah blah browser not supported" message (result with both Firefox and Chromium on 64bit Ubuntu).

Re:Silverwhat? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896890)

Just downloaded the latest and tried it on the Project Tuva site.

No dice. The site won't serve the content. Claims my system is still unsupported and gives me the same click-through bum's rush that got me to do the latest Moonlight download.

Re:Silverwhat? (2)

sitkill (893183) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896164)

maybe not as dead as you think. I remember the last olympics was available all online...in full HD....in silverlight. First time I downloaded it, and I have to admit that it was easily the best representation of what I THINK the future of TV should be. All available online, all back events available, at a click of a mouse, including streaming of live events, all in HD. I wonder how many more ppl still have silverlight installed cause of the olympics...

Re:Silverwhat? (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896498)

And it's different from Flash how? All I know is that technically Silverlight runs on a much more capable platform. I also trust .net runtime much more than any Flash VM. And I'm no microsoft fanboy.

Not on the Internet. (4, Insightful)

bobs666 (146801) | more than 3 years ago | (#35895994)

It's only in the Microsoft net. Due to the requirement to use Silverlight.

Re:Not on the Internet. (1)

Tuan121 (1715852) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896110)

X is also not on the Internet due to the requirement of Flash.

Re:Not on the Internet. (1)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896332)

Since when does http://www.x.org/ [x.org] require Flash?

Re:Not on the Internet. (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896944)

Flash runs on (almost) everything, and is being ported to run on everything (that's more than trivially worth porting to).

Silverlight is being deliberately hoarded for use only by Windows and Macintosh machines.

Re:Not on the Internet. (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897228)

Flash runs on (almost) everything, and is being ported to run on everything (that's more than trivially worth porting to).

Silverlight is being deliberately hoarded for use only by Windows and Macintosh machines.

Considering that's probably 98% of the machines in use it's a non-issue, especially since Moonlight is there for Linux, and if it doesn't work, well you can just grab the source and fix it yourself.

As for Flash, Steve has said it sucks, so it must. Along with Blu-Ray.

Personally, I'd like them to make the lectures available cheaply on DVD or available via download; because the bigger issue, for me, is I'd like to watch them when I don't have net access, such as an 8 hour plane flight.

Re:Not on the Internet. (2)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897660)

Considering that's probably 98% of the machines in use it's a non-issue,

During version 6's heyday, IE had almost that amount of marketshare [wikimedia.org] Browser innovation by Microsoft came to a grinding halt for years. Cool progressive technologies like svg support? Fuggedaboutit. Fast javascript engine? Yeah, right. You wouldn't want to make the browser too powerful right? Might usurp some of the need for, you know, a particular desktop operating system. Fortunately, Firefox got some traction and now we have a very healthy browser market with newer and more advanced capabilities coming down the pike all the time. Why go back to the bad old days of the internet? The argument that, "well, it works on Winders and mcintosh" isn't good enough. It wasn't good enough then and it isn't now.

Moonlight is there for Linux, and if it doesn't work, well you can just grab the source and fix it yourself.

Moonlight is not Silverlight. If I want to fix Word, it isn't going to help me to get the source code for notepad. And that's about where you stand with moonlight vs silverlight.

Re:Not on the Internet. (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897962)

Considering that's probably 98% of the machines in use it's a non-issue,

During version 6's heyday, IE had almost that amount of marketshare [wikimedia.org] Browser innovation by Microsoft came to a grinding halt for years. Cool progressive technologies like svg support? Fuggedaboutit. Fast javascript engine? Yeah, right. You wouldn't want to make the browser too powerful right? Might usurp some of the need for, you know, a particular desktop operating system. Fortunately, Firefox got some traction and now we have a very healthy browser market with newer and more advanced capabilities coming down the pike all the time. Why go back to the bad old days of the internet? The argument that, "well, it works on Winders and mcintosh" isn't good enough. It wasn't good enough then and it isn't now.

I think you are confusing the platform with the technology. Ensuring your technology (Silverlight) runs on the two platforms (Win/OSX) that dominate the desktop means virtually everyone will have access to your technology; they few who don't us either platform simply are not worth expending resources to reach. Once a platform reaches critical mass (such tablet OS's) the technology will move to them as well (well, unless the Steve dictates is sucks). While the platform can limit the technologies performance (due to speed, storage, etc) it does not limit innovation, just as having a Linux/Solaris/Chrome/Whatever version ensures a product will be innovative.

The argument that, "well, it works on Winders and mcintosh" is actually good enough because that is where innovative products gain traction and success (on the desktop); and without such a large base products such as Firefox would never gain traction beyond being a neat toy for a small fraction of the user base. Sure, IE6 had the lion share of the market - but as others saw the potential they moved in with more innovative products forcing MS to move forward - and did so in MS' turf, not on some backwater. So, as a result, "well, it works on Winders and mcintosh" is really more than justt good enough; in fact it is sufficient.

Re:Not on the Internet. (1)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 3 years ago | (#35898024)

I'm a consultant ... gibberish ...

Wow, no kidding.

Re:Silverlight (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896128)

Actually I'm saying thanks to the submitter because I completely missed this part of the copyright problem.

If the only "authorized copy" of some Grade AA Must-Have item is buried it that cabinet with the Beware of Leopard sign, that could instantly flash us to IE6 2.0 problems for hundreds of proprietary blobs!

Re:Silverlight (1)

jesseane (2044838) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896252)

While Silverlight loaded the above Tuva link in IE, I watched "Richard Feynman - The Relation of Mathematics & Physics. Part 1" on YouTube in Firefox. And uh yeah, it's still loading. Thanks Microsoft.

Heheheh surely you are joking, Mr. Ballmer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896036)

Silverlight only?

Silverlight? BULLSHIT. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896142)

Anyone have a torrent link?

Re:Silverlight? BULLSHIT. (1)

kvvbassboy (2010962) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896232)

I don't know about torrent but Richard Feynmann Physics Lectures [feynmanphy...ctures.com] has some lectures in flash. I don't know how comprehensive it is, but you still get to see his lectures.

Of course, torrents would be appreciated. :)

Christ, put out a DVD set. (1)

olsmeister (1488789) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896246)

Charge a few bucks to cover costs.

And heeeeere come the MS shills... (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896298)

Please, tell us how Silverlight is awesome, blah blah blah.

Man, I cannot wait for HTML5 to end this bullshit. For the record, I also hate Flash, and download YouTube videos to desktop to view them.

Re:And heeeeere come the MS shills... (0)

smelch (1988698) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897114)

Wow you're so cool. Tell me, what's it like living in a world so inconvenient? Have any of your apocolyptic corporate take-over scenarios happened yet? No? Didn't think so. Quit bitching.

Cry much? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896304)

Holy shit with the Silverlight bashing. I can see that content just fine, as one commenter said previously; I also use Netflix (Win7 w/IE9).

What does FOSS have for a web framework that is a viable alternative to Silverlight or Flash?

I run FreeBSD on an older P4 box, and I consider nspluginwrapper + Flash + Linux emulation to be pretty much equivalent to Flash in Windows. However, I think that only works for Flash, and you all hate Flash too.

Seems to me that competition is good, and having competing (albeit commercial) frameworks to choose from is a Good Thing[TM] IMHO. Where's the FOSS alternative, and which major site's require me to use it for the best experience? Find me something worthwhile that forces me to use it, whatever it is, and I'll use it.

Re:Cry much? (1)

kvvbassboy (2010962) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896354)

Flamebait much?

Re:Cry much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896440)

Flamebait much?

Is it flamebait because it's true?

I also have no loyalty to a framework. I use whatever is required to access my chosen content.

Which major site requires the use of a FOSS framework to access its content? What is the name of that framework?

Re:Cry much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896494)

How about HTML? Durp durp. HTML5 will have the almost all the same capabilities as Flash/Silverlight.

Your actions are selfish. It's ok - I'm selfish too. But that's what they are. You don't care about the long term effects, and how it impacts society, and only want your immediate needs satisfied. I hear you bro.

Re:Cry much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896618)

How about HTML? Durp durp. HTML5 will have the almost all the same capabilities as Flash/Silverlight.

How about today; right now? Durp durp. I don't care about what might be available at some point in the future.

What the hell are the long term effects of not having a viable alternative right now? Durp durp.

Re:Cry much? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896796)

Durp durp? Oh... [urbandictionary.com] Nevermind.

Re:Cry much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897042)

All the latest modern browsers support HTML5 capabilities. Today.

Most sites are migrating to HTML5 to get out from under proprietary technologies (mostly Flash). The only reason you don't see it today is because not everyone has the latest browsers, so web developers are waiting for people to upgrade their browsers. But it's coming soon*.

Like I said, it's cool that you're selfish, I get it. And FOSS is getting closer and closer to serving your selfish wants. And doing so in a way that looks out for you in ways you don't understand. Like being able to play a video on multiple devices. Good luck playing Silverlight on your Android/iOS phone.

* http://www.informationweek.com/articles/229401976?cid=RSSfeed_IWK_All

Re:Cry much? (1)

smelch (1988698) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897246)

More to the point Flash has been around for.... EVER. If not for Flash being adopted would HTML5 have even been started (then abandoned)? Fuck no. Seriously the F/OSSies are getting out of control. "WE ARE THE BEST AT INNOVATION! HURBLEGARGALA!" they chant with shit running out of their mouths as they have complained about Flash forever and still have nothing to offer. Tell me, none of you could sack up and fill the niche? Doesn't that really throw all of the open source "I can just do it myself" attitude right out the window? Its the most hated of all things on the internet and NOBODY came up with something. It seems by demonstration you can't do it yourself quite like commercial software can. The only thing that makes sense is the goal of F/OSS is to completely destroy proprietary software, make it so it can't be proprietary. This is clearly shown in the GPL license they love so much. In which case we never would have had any of the progress of the last 10 years on the internet.

F/OSS should just accept that their job is to go in after things are created and make the free version that everybody standardizes on 5 to 10 years down the road. And that has value, absolutely. But this warfare is ridiculous and they're losing while making themselves look like complete asswipes. I can't believe I'm not posting this anonymously.

Re:Cry much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35897314)

using HTML5 would limit it to a smaller subset of viewers than Silverlight.

Besides, HTML5 is not anywhere near feature parity with Flash or Silverlight, and will not replace either of those (although Silverlight will probably slowly die off).

Re:Cry much? (4, Informative)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896602)

What does FOSS have for a web framework that is a viable alternative to Silverlight or Flash?

What about HTML5 isn't viable?

More than that, how about not making it streaming-only? While I'd prefer a free codec, I can play pretty much anything in mplayer or VLC, if you give me a download URL (or a torrent). And these are things I'd want to keep around.

...that only works for Flash, and you all hate Flash too.

Well, it's tricky. In theory, I like Silverlight better than Flash, because Moonlight seems to be much more stable and complete than Gnash. But in practice, there actually is a native Flash player for Linux, and the nspluginwrapper crap isn't really worse than Flash in a 32-bit browser, which is all you get on Windows anyway -- whereas both Moonlight and Gnash only work on a ridiculously small subset of the Silverlight and Flash content out there.

Add to this the fact that the DRM in Silverlight does not work on Moonlight, so while this particular site might work, Netflix, for example, will not. So even if Moonlight was flawless, you'd still have content that requires the official Silverlight.

And if that wasn't enough, with the few videos I've watched, Moonlight didn't do anti-aliasing. I think Silverlight did, but I'm not sure. Flash does, and you better believe mplayer does.

having competing (albeit commercial) frameworks to choose from is a Good Thing[TM] IMHO.

Nope. Having multiple competing implementations is a Good Thing. Having multiple competing standards is a problem, especially when several of them are proprietary. I have no problem that IE exists, so long as we can develop to web standards and, with minimal hackery, have our websites work on all major browsers, including IE. I did have a problem when IE was the defacto standard.

Where's the FOSS alternative, and which major site's require me to use it for the best experience?

Erm, since when did we judge standards based on which ones we're forced to use? WTF makes you think that's a good criterion?

By that logic, the fact that so many apps force you to use Windows means Windows should be the standard, and people should stop bashing it, and nobody should complain if these Feynman lectures -- or, for that matter, our tax forms -- are Windows-only. (Right now, they're Flash-only, which is an improvement, but still retarded.)

Re:Cry much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896878)

Erm, since when did we judge standards based on which ones we're forced to use? WTF makes you think that's a good criterion?

I have no control over what/how Corporation X chooses to serve up its content. I wouldn't even use HTML if everyone still used Gopher. It's a good criteria because the cost of implementing many more than one framework is most likely prohibitive. I use HTML because it's too expensive to also maintain a Gopher version; just as I use Silverlight to access my Netflix account. Netflix chose Silverlight for me. I don't really care that they made this choice for me; just as I don't care other sites made me install Flash. It. Just. Works.

That's why. Right now there is competition between forcing me what to use. I have no real choice other than to choose to access the content or not. I'm sorry you don't, or didn't seem to understand that.

Framework market share. Whichever has the most is obviously the best at something.

Re:Cry much? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896708)

Sod off. There is no need for Silverlight in this case. The content should be on youtube for all to view.

Silverlight (0)

Andy Smith (55346) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896358)

"Project Tuva still requires Silverlight"

They'd be better sending it out on 5.25" floppies, more people would see it.

Re:Silverlight (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896748)

Sure.. its not like the millions of people that watch the insanely popular netflix streaming service, using up more than 20% of north american bandwidth (even surpassing youtube), are using silverlight...

5.25" floppies, eh?

Re:Silverlight (1)

jonescb (1888008) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897112)

Netflix can be viewed on all major video game consoles, and there are other devices like the Roku. I'm fairly sure these don't run Silverlight, the Wii and PS3 particularly. I don't have any statistics on which device people use to watch Netflix. But I think there is a larger audience of people who want to watch the movies on their TV rather than their computer screen and don't know how to set up an HTPC.

Feynmann Held Hostage By Winblows (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896428)

Holy HELL, how the bleeping bleep does our society allow this gem to fall into the hands of this corporate BLEEPING BLEEP to distribute only to users of Winblows / IE. We suck, as a species we have failed.

What's the fuss? (1)

lfp98 (740073) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896550)

We used Feynman's intro physics book back when I was in college, and though I got an A in every physics course I ever took, I found that book completely baffling. Instead of being logical and straightforward, it was full of mathematical sleight-of-hand, bringing new variables from nowhere, because "we can call this anything we want!", and magically proceeding the final equation. Entertaining, maybe, but as far as understanding the material it was completely useless. He's just one more celeb I can do without.

Re:What's the fuss? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35896994)

The fuss is for the layman (or the slightly more educated but not THAT educated layman), those that are 'interested' but never 'took' physics.

He really did help to make some very complicated concepts understandable to folk like me. I couldn't care less about the maths, I wish Roger Penrose was as eloquent as Feynman, and while he is not perfect I never saw people standing up and criticising him for that sleight of hand you say he did (you may be right but I'd assume that it wasn't important to getting his concept across).

Happy Easter

Re:What's the fuss? (2)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897828)

We used Feynman's intro physics book back when I was in college, and though I got an A in every physics course I ever took, I found that book completely baffling. Instead of being logical and straightforward, it was full of mathematical sleight-of-hand, bringing new variables from nowhere, because "we can call this anything we want!", and magically proceeding the final equation.

It's kind of always been my impression that was exactly how physicists did math.

Not trolling, but I've been told by physics majors that the stuff they do with math would make a mathematician apoplectic.

I gather Feyman was just a lot more gleeful about it. :-P

What, NOTHING about the CONTENT? (2)

GuruBuckaroo (833982) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896912)

Jesus Christ on stick, you people disgust me. Not a single comment about the content of these lectures, the life and theories of the man, it's all about how Microsoft pooped in your pool by putting this up in the same format Netflix uses. Seriously.

Re:What, NOTHING about the CONTENT? (3, Insightful)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35896970)

In order to comment on the content, you have to see the content.

I'm guessing we're finding out how many /. users use /. on Windows boxes this time of day.

Re:What, NOTHING about the CONTENT? (1)

The Creator (4611) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897504)

In order to comment on the content, you have to see the content.

So it's different from articles?

Re:What, NOTHING about the CONTENT? (1)

jesseane (2044838) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897044)

Maybe that's because Feynman's awesomeness goes without saying?

Re:What, NOTHING about the CONTENT? (2)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 3 years ago | (#35898254)

Feynman has talked a lot about the importance of openness in science. For example, at the end of "What do you care what other people think?" there is a praise of the scientific method that resonates well with Open Source. Therefore, putting Feynman's work behind the bars of Microsoft is particularly blasphemous.

Re:What, NOTHING about the CONTENT? (4, Insightful)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897410)

Marshall McLuhan (I think?) would be proud that the Medium is the Message. If you wanted to talk about Feynman's Awesomeness, you/someone would have posted a story like "It's the 50th anniversary of Feynman's Lectures. How has Feynman contributed to what you do today?"

This story is "Microsoft bought the rights to SomeCoolContent. However, they couldn't have picked any of three generic video formats, but once again made an excuse to follow their Proprietary Only strategy."

2002 called. They want their "Sites work only in IE" back.

Re:What, NOTHING about the CONTENT? (1)

Bucc5062 (856482) | more than 3 years ago | (#35898158)

I have to agree with you on this rant. Way to many moons ago I walked into my freshman physics class with high hopes of being a physicist. I am not sure such an engaging lecturer as Dr. Feynman would have saved me from the pit of hell that was calculus (thus sparking my career in computer science), but listening to him today shook the dust off my love for physics.

I followed along, took notes like I was in class and felt that at the end of the lecture that I had learned something new, even from a1964 film. Perhaps I will continue to view the other series, just for continuity and tacit interest. I am a Linux fan and support FOSS, but instead of bitching about the negatives I found a way to see the positives and enjoy my day a little more through this presentation.

I hope, in 2025... (0)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897106)

...we will celebrate 50-year annivesary of Microsoft -- by removing Windows support from the last piece of still-maintained software.

Favorite Feynman Piece (1)

Oriumpor (446718) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897634)

And I call it a piece of art because the man was a damn artist when it came to explaining physics.

The universe in a glass of wine.

Searching for it returns nothing.

I know you can look it up by the section of the class, but come on natural language search is the new pink.

I'll stick to the bad recordings passed around by CIT students for the past quarter century.

Article logo (0)

ugen (93902) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897734)

It's been years since Bill Gates did anything of value at MS, and it's been years since MS was anything like "the Borg". I wonder if slashdot will ever grow up enough to get rid of the idiotic icon they use to tag Microsoft stories. Google is the real "Borg" now yet they get away with a shiny green robot.

Please, slashdot - we are not the "radical" teenagers anymore (well, some of us) and it'd be great if you guys became a bit more adult. You are looking a bit ridiculous this way.

Re:Article logo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35898036)

What, and lose the only real identity /. has left??!

Re:Article logo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35898216)

Really? This shit again? Waaaa waaaa Billy Gates icon waaaa waaaa. Shut the fuck up.

"anniversary" IMPLIES "year"! (1)

beanyk (230597) | more than 3 years ago | (#35897964)

"50-year anniversary" is as redundant as ATM machine, PIN number, etc.

And while I'm off-topic, they're not celebrating 50 years (or "50 year-years", if you're the headline writer) of Feynman; they're celebrating 50 years of his Lectures.

[Off to mow the lawn with my lawn-lawnmower.]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>