"Haven't stopped typing since 1886!"
Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Later pages »

3/4/2005

Gee, that sure escalated quickly… (Flash player “bundling” gets Slashdotted)

Filed under: by VeryVito at 1:42 am — [Tag on del.icio.us]

Apparently, the debate over whether Macromedia should bundle third-party software with its free Flash Player has broken the confines of the Flash blogs this evening, and found its way over to Slashdot.

While this means a lot of extra typing for bloggers and Macromedia staff (particularly John Dowdell), I think it's a good indication of how much suspicion is raised at the mere thought of bundling such "bonus material" with something many feel is a "basic necessity" for rich internet application development. I've heard from people who still want to love Macromedia, and from others who already think Flash is evil, and from still others who just feel confused by the whole issue.

If you haven't already, feel free to let us know what you think, too. I honestly do believe Macromedia is listening.

And thanks again to all our new visitors from Slashdot! Hope you enjoy your stay!

– Vito

[Edit: With some help from others, I hope, I'll try to clarify/address more of the issues/concerns/misstatements/questions presented in the comments later, but I'll wait for the dust to settle first. I can only speak from a developer's point of view, though, and there's no sense fielding questions while the shouting match is still in full swing. ;) ]

[Edit 2: Macromedia has, at least in my book, proven itself to be considerate of the needs of developers and the Web community at large: The company has since redesigned the download page in question, making the Toolbar choice a little clearer and offering an option for developers who want to show their clients no part of it. Thanks, Macromedia.]

Print this article Print this article


3/2/2005

The issue of Flash Player bundling: A matter of trust

It's great to know that Macromedia monitors these humble blog sites, and it's even better to know that they're concerned about what we have to say. I just received a comment from John Dowdell of Macromedia Support asking me to help clarify my recent post regarding Macromedia's packaging of the Yahoo! Toolbar with the Flash player for certain Web visitors.

After responding to his post, I realized others may not quite understand my position, either (It was classified under "rant" after all), so I figured I'd post his message and my response here. So here we go:

Hi, I'd like to be able to clearly present your concern to my partners, could you check me here, please? How would you rank the following concerns which I could synthesize out of your post?
– Don't like Yahoo
– Gives Java or C++ arguments some ammo
– Not clear of future scope of ways to shift Flash costs from authoring tools to corporations
– Not sure of spyware/malware risks or implications
– Other

(The FAQ on the site advises that the only people who see this must (a) surf IE/Win (b) must click "GetFlash" link instead of the normal ActiveX (c) must not already have Yahoo Toolbar installed. Web search term of "site:macromedia.com yahoo toolbar" brings up more.)

Could you help me to relay your core concerns most effectively? Thanks!

Regards,
John Dowdell
Macromedia Support

And my response, which still may or may not be coherent:

Thanks for the comment, John! It's great to see Macromedia is monitoring the blogs and fielding our questions. In return, I'll do my best to answer yours, too. Hopefully, I'll speak sensibly on each of your points:


How would you rank the following concerns which I could synthesize out of your post?

Don't like Yahoo

This is not an issue at all. In fact, I feel rather sorry for Yahoo in this; I truly wish them no harm, and in fact, I use and enjoy many of their services.

I do wish them good luck with their toolbar, but I hope they'll find better ways of marketing it than packaging it with other company's software. In my mind at least, such arrangements always seem to cheapen my view of both party's wares, as if neither could stand on it's own.

Gives Java or C++ arguments some ammo

It rather does, don't you think? If I can download the Java Virtual Machine WITHOUT the fear of installing "something extra," then, as a business, I'd rather search for Web apps built on THAT technology than attempt to find ones built on something that now seems to be a marketing ploy.

It's the proverbial "slippery slope:" First, the flash player comes bundled with something I'm not interested in otherwise. Why should I not expect the next version to have even more "marketing potential" built in? Will Flash Player 8 feature content-sensitive ad delivery built in?

And no I'm not saying this is the inevitable outcome, but I think you might understand the reason for suspicion. Just about everybody on the Web has faced unwanted advertising, and anything we can do to nip it in the bud is welcome. Once I've paid for Flash MX 2004 Studio Professional and spent time and money developing an application it it, I don't want my potential clients to see MY work as being associated with third-party advertisers.

Not clear of future scope of ways to shift Flash costs from authoring tools to corporations

I'm not sure I understand this, but I think I may have addressed it above. In short, I see the Flash player as the means to deliver new software to the public: a Runtime or Virtual Machine, to be specific. If the runtime itself is being used for marketing purposes, I'll look for one that doesn't.

Not sure of spyware/malware risks or implications

This is probably the main reason for my concern, but it's also the CAUSE of the other concerns listed here.

It's not so much the existence of spyware, but the POTENTIAL of spyware that is raised by this packaging. Until now, I never even entertained the idea that Macromedia would do such a thing. This was naive perhaps, but now I have a hard time imagining that the company WOULDN'T entertain the idea if a "partner" with deep enough pockets came knocking.

In essence, it's a matter of trust between Macromedia, the developers who create apps with its products, and the companies who will rely on both.

Other

As you can see, the problem I have is not with Yahoo or the idea that Macromedia needs to make money, too. But when I develop an application for a client and tell him he'll need to download the latest Flash player from your Web site, I don't want to feel like I'm sending him to FreeIpods.com or some other "GET YOUR FREE GIFT FOR FILLING OUT THIS SURVEY" site. Macromedia is better than that, and I hope it'll stay that way. (Promote Yahoo Toolbar like crazy all over the Macromedia site if you need to, but just don't make my clients feel like they're being asked to download something they wouldn't otherwise.)

Hope this helps, John, and again, thanks for asking!

(VeryVito)
abuse@turdhead.com

Hope this helps others, too!

Print this article Print this article


Field recordings offer a one-minute vacation of the mind

Filed under: by VeryVito at 12:53 pm — [Tag on del.icio.us]

Found this link on the Web today, and figured it was worth sharing. As explained on the Web site:

Take a one-minute vacation from the life you are living.

One-minute vacations are unedited recordings of somewhere, somewhen. Sixty seconds of something else. Sixty seconds to be someone else.

There are also plenty of field recordings throughout the site, and the person who put it together has done a nice job organizing it. Give it a listen. (CDs are available for sale, too).

Print this article Print this article


3/1/2005

Internet Explorer ranking continues to take a beating

Filed under: by VeryVito at 12:09 pm — [Tag on del.icio.us]

Microsoft announced plans to release Version 7 of its security hole (er, I mean browser) last month, but from the looks of the Turdhead.com log files, they've got a lot of ground to make up if they want to stay competitive with the more-popular-than-ever alternative browsers out there.

February's logs revealed a huge leap in "normal" viewers using the new Firefox browser (which just updated to 1.01) over Microsoft Internet Explorer.

I say "normal," because back in August 2004, we reached a record high of 40.3 percent "Mozilla," but this was the same month we were mentioned on Slashdot,

a known haven for Microsoft haters, so I wouldn't call this a valid sample population. By the next month, we were back down to 16.9 percent (which was still about 10 points higher than in pre-Slashdot months).

Things had stayed at or below this level pretty much ever since, but February brought a significant change: MS IE users made up only 62.1 percent of our readers last month, while Firefox accounted for 23.6 percent.

Perhaps people are finally waking up to the idea that popup ads, single-tabbed browsers and spyware don't have to be part of the Web experience (although to be fair, I have noticed a few pop-ups slipping through on Firefox lately; I trust the open-source community can get those holes fixed quickly??).

Can't wait to see what happens next.

Print this article Print this article


Please Macromedia, don’t do it!

Filed under: by VeryVito at 2:12 am — [Tag on del.icio.us]

Say it ain't so, Macromedia!

You've built a great development platform (Macromedia Flash MX 2004) with amazing market penetration, and I (along with hundreds of other Flash and ActionScript programmers, bloggers and fans) have been singing your praises, doing my best to add "legitimacy" to the role of the ActionScript programmer/Flash developer in a world of Java, C++ and other uber-geeks who scowl at the thought of Flash being considered "serious business." In the last two years, you've made great strides in changing the business world's view of Flash from that of a "banner ad maker" to that of a true Rich Internet Application (RIA) development platform.

And now this.

Some idiot (I'd like to be more forgiving, but I believe this decision had to have been made by an idiot) at Macromedia has decided to allow the "packaging" of the company's free Flash player — the building block on which the company's (and my) RIA dreams are built — with third-party tools of dubious value (no offense to Yahoo, who owns the particular tools in question, but

this just smacks of the start of worse things to come). In other words, at a time when people are running to cover and doing their best to avoid spyware, viruses and unnecessary background processes, Macromedia has apparently decided it's a good idea to start pushing irrelevant and unwanted downloads to its growing corporate customer base. What's next? Cydoor and Gator wallet?

Right now the offer to "get more than you bargained for" only seems to affect people using Windows and Internet Explorer (I know, shock!), but it stills doesn't bode well. Www.rhjr.net has more information on the disaster in progress, feel free to read up on it there, and then be sure to head over to Macromedia's Web site and let them know what you think of the idea, too.

Meanwhile, I'm gonna brush up on my SVG and Processing skills…

– VeryVito

[Edit: A followup to this article was later posted here.]

Print this article Print this article


 

Shameless begging, panhandling and soul-sucking indignity

Want to show your appreciation for Turdhead.com, its products or services? Although it's certainly not necessary, we'd be pleased as punch if you felt like donating any amount you'd like, or even if you just wanted to give us a nod on Digg.com. Honestly, we have no pride whatsoever (the name of the site is Turdhead.com, after all), and we'll take any recognition we can get for our efforts here.

 


Later pages »

 

Search

Or use Blingo! to search and win prizes.



Get Chitika eMiniMalls

Design and Sell Merchandise Online for Free

Copyright © 2004-2008 by Turdhead.com. All rights reserved. So there. Questions? Write us!
But first, get a load of these cryptic yet official looking numbers:
[ 1608042v | 176p | 855c | s | 12.29.05d ]