Hacker News Reader

Comment by jimbokun | Hacker News Reader

I find this very Stallman-esque.

I recently discovered I can watch many of the games broadcast by ESPN on ESPN360. Most popular network shows are streamed free from the network sites or Hulu. I can watch academic lectures in their entirety on YouTube. All on my Mac.

As a user, I really don't care what the underlying tech is, aside from the initial annoyance of waiting for Silverlight to install itself (which I did because it was the only way to watch the Olympics broadcasts).

So "video and audio is still an issue" is an understatement. It seems to be the main justification for these technologies. Once I can watch all of this content in my HTML5 browser with no add-ins, I'll agree with you. Until then, I am perfectly happy to watch video delivered through my browser by Flash, Silverlight, or whatever other technology as long as it's not a pain to install and plays nice on my computer.

View on HN

> I recently discovered I can watch many of the games broadcast by ESPN on ESPN360.

You appear to be one of the chosen who have access. My super-huge-ISP only gets me this message:

  ESPN360.com is available at no charge to fans who receive   
  their high-speed internet connection from an ESPN360.com 
  affiliated internet service provider. ESPN360.com is also 
  available to fans that access the internet from U.S. 
  college campuses and U.S. military bases.

  Your current computer network falls outside of these 
  categories. Here’s how you can get access to ESPN360.com.

Awesome...

> aside from the initial annoyance of waiting for Silverlight to install itself (which I did because it was the only way to watch the Olympics broadcasts).

You know, I tried to do the same thing. And on both machines I tried it on, Silverlight failed to install with some cryptic, unhelpful error message. Both machines were running Windows XP and installing inside IE. I couldn't believe I was seriously having problems with Microsoft installing Silverlight correctly in its own browser.

I browse with all audio/video media disabled by default - and I dislike RMS. If there is something I absolutely must see, I open IE to view it. Fortunately for me, I hardly need Flash and never need Silverlight.

I'm curious, is your ISP a cable company? I have DSL through Verizon, and maybe they like the idea I can watch ESPN without paying Comcast for it. I wonder if they will block it if FiOS comes to my area (but I've been told that Comcast and the city of Pittsburgh have a sweetheart deal to block it).

In any case, blocking content is exactly the kind of thing we should be mad about. If I can access the content I want free or for a reasonable price on the device of my choosing (Mac in my case), I am very happy regardless of the underlying technology. But ISPs blocking content their customers want is only a feasible business strategy with a government backed monopoly and as consumers we should be upset about it.

Lastly, I am starting to suspect that the networks who create content would be perfectly happy to see cable companies reduced to common carrier status and deliver all their shows and broadcasts through Hulu or their own branded web sites. I would love to see the networks lobbying against the cable companies in Congress.

ESPN360 is usually sold to ISP's and bundled with internet service. It's not so much a matter of "blocking" as "not buying". It's a weird business model, but it was enough to switch me from Time Warner cable (which was excellent through and through) to Verizon DSL (which has no other redeeming characteristics).

> As a user, I really don't care what the underlying tech is

This applies for most users. How many Twitter users who use Tweetdeck (which I argue is the most successful Adobe Air application in terms of daily use) care that it is Adobe Air?

Or how many iPhone app users care that it is written in Objective-C + Cocoa? Or how many GMail users wonder about what it is really going on in the Google cloud? I'm starting to think most users don't care much at all about the underlying technology as long as it works reliably and performs.

Most users of the internet aren't aware of security issues. They don't know what to do and not to do. If a window pops up telling them they have to install something, they do and that might be a trojan or malware or a virus, who knows...

These types of popups requiring additional software be installed should never happen on the web. The user should have an instinct to click NO! and run away. This is a real problem for the web as a whole, not just individuals. Even if you aren't infected, you can be affected. Imagine all those zombies being used to DDOS your site or XSS attack it, that sort of thing.

They are unwitting participants in the dark cloud that looms over all of us. Over-dramatic? I don't know... I think it is a serious issue.

I've heard Air as the most common drawback for Tweetdeck - the low-quality text rendering, non-standard widgets, etc. scream "non-native app" and the install process is certainly a lot harder if you don't already have Air installed. Granted, I tend to hang out with geeks and Mac-using designers but I'm not sure that the general public is more likely to install a runtime before installing the application they wanted to try.

I regard installing AIR for the first time one uses an AIR app akin to installing Flash Player the first time you hit up, say, YouTube on a new/clean machine. Can't see all tgat much friction there...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com