Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-18 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves
On 18-Dec-06, at 4:27 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: >> isnt there a java thingie for making flash sites - forgot the name, >> but nirav mehta used it in last years foss.in >> > > If I was the designer, I wouldn't be interested in spending > additional amount of > money in learning "the java thin

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-18 Thread Ritesh Raj Sarraf
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > isnt there a java thingie for making flash sites - forgot the name, > but nirav mehta used it in last years foss.in > If I was the designer, I wouldn't be interested in spending additional amount of money in learning "the java thing" given that I'd already spent money

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-18 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves
On 18-Dec-06, at 1:30 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > If for example, there's no _Free_ Flash player/designer, doesn't > mean you should > quit designing in it. isnt there a java thingie for making flash sites - forgot the name, but nirav mehta used it in last years foss.in -- regards Ken

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-18 Thread Ritesh Raj Sarraf
Kenneth Gonsalves wrote: > > On 17-Dec-06, at 3:44 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > >> Looks like anything which doesn't open up in OSS Browsers is being >> termed a HOS >> candidate. :-( > > isnt that the definition of HOS candidate? > If it is, it isn't correct, IMO. If for example, there's no

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-16 Thread Kenneth Gonsalves
On 17-Dec-06, at 3:44 AM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > Looks like anything which doesn't open up in OSS Browsers is being > termed a HOS > candidate. :-( isnt that the definition of HOS candidate? -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate, NRC-FOSS [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://nrcfosshelpline.in/we

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-16 Thread Ritesh Raj Sarraf
G Karunakar wrote: > the trouble being it says the plugin version installed is not > supported, it needs  a new version (probably 8.x ), & while the latest > adobe has for linux is.. 7.0 r69! So what do you want from the webmaster ? * Drop his site * Go, buy Flash 7 even though he's bought Flash

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-16 Thread mehul
On 12/16/06, G Karunakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > the trouble being it says the plugin version installed is not > supported, it needs a new version (probably 8.x ), & while the latest > adobe has for linux is.. 7.0 r69! > > Karunakar > Flash 9 beta does exist for linux and I surely have it i

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-16 Thread G Karunakar
On 12/16/06, Sudev Barar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 16/12/06, G Karunakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do flash only sites qualify for HOS ? > IMHO Not really. As long as they do work with OSS alterates like > firefox et.al. plugins need to be enabled. > the trouble being it says the plug

Re: [ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-15 Thread Sudev Barar
On 16/12/06, G Karunakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do flash only sites qualify for HOS ? IMHO Not really. As long as they do work with OSS alterates like firefox et.al. plugins need to be enabled. -- Regards, Sudev Barar ___ ilugd mailinglist -- i

[ilugd] flash only sites in Hall of Shame?

2006-12-15 Thread G Karunakar
Hi, Do flash only sites qualify for HOS ? like this one - http://www.adlabscinemas.com .. which says it wouldnt work with my current flash plugin ( 7.0 r25 ), i guess maybe wanting v 8.0 .. & it doesnt have any alternate html only option..! Karunakar ___