Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:26:50 -0600 From: Gordon devel <user0@tkgeomap.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: what happened to linuxflashplugin? Message-ID: <20080212022650.GA25334@localhost.ok.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <47B0CDA1.9060801@student.utwente.nl> References: <47AFC80B.8090303@gmail.com> <20080211211052.X5691@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <47B0AF73.6030901@chuckr.org> <200802112304.09906.jonathan%2Bfreebsd-questions@hst.org.za> <20080211211428.GA50577@aleph.cepheid.org> <20080211223155.C6199@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <47B0CDA1.9060801@student.utwente.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 10:35:13PM +0000, Alphons Fonz van Werven wrote: > Wojciech Puchar cut a corner: > > I'm afraid it's not that simple. Counterexample: > > When I was shopping for a new parachute rig, one of the manufacturers I was > interested in turned out to have a Flash-only website. I could of course > have decided not to buy there because their website sucks, but when it > comes to equipment that's supposed to be going to save my life hundreds of > times I'd much rather base the decision on the quality of the product than > on the technical soundness of a website, thank you :-) > > I don't mean to ridicule your principles, I merely mean to point out that > in my opinion it's not always as black and white as you make it seem. > Tell the vendor. I wanted to shop at a web site (wickers.com), but it was useless without Flash. I sent an email saying I wanted to place an order, but I could not view their site. It was fixed enough to be functional the next day, and I placed an order. They "re-launched" the site several weeks later. It still recommends, but does not demand, Flash. I do not know if the changes were a response to complaints, but I think complaining was worthwhile. Cheers, Gordon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080212022650.GA25334>