●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load 500 More Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
bysuso ( 153703 ) * writes:
See, this is something that open source accomplishes that stupid fucking arrogant businesses will never get. When something is obsolete or no longer needed, it gets ditched or replaced by something better. Don't keep it around because someone thinks that they have the right to continue being in business even though their shit is a decade out of date. Its a hard and cold life for the developer whose project gets ditched (And sometimes I feel bad for them), but in the end, the user wins big and things evolve
byionix5891 ( 1228718 ) writes:
Since when is Java a company... Oracle (previously Sun) are behind java
and why no mention of Apple? they are the ones refusing to support ogg
byDECS ( 891519 ) writes:
The mention of Apple managed to spleen together two unrelated ideas: "expressing concerns over patents despite the fact that the codec can be used royalty-free."
There is no relationship between worrying about patent submarines and Ogg being royalty free. This is simple idiot-targeted editorializing. Apple doesn't want to be the deep pocketed commercial implementation of Ogg that ends up having to pay patent trolls. That's why it is going with the ISO/MPEG standard, which pools patents together from everyone
bysirsnork ( 530512 ) writes:
You do know that almost everyone without an iPhone can still access the web in much the sme ways as people with an iPhone.....right?? They use a web browser, of which there are many. One of the most popular being Opera Mini.
bylarry bagina ( 561269 ) writes:
Opera mini isn't a web browser; it's a java-based image viewer displaying pre-rendered content from opera's caching proxies. It's designed for phones that can't handle a real web browser. Are you sure you want video with that?
If you look at actual mobile web usage [hitslink.com], iPhone/iPod touch is at 64%. Nobody else comes close, though Android (also webkit) will likely see an increased presence in the future.
Parent
twitter
facebook
bymdwh2 ( 535323 ) writes:
Opera mini isn't a web browser
Ah yes, classic. If in doubt, redefine the terms to exclude the competiton. It's like "first 64 bit PC" all over again.
Yes, Opera mini might not do video, but 3G phones have all done downloading video from the Internet for years anyway. And claiming that Apple will have a monopoly on video, when that is not the case now is just wild RDF speculation.
bymdwh2 ( 535323 ) writes:
http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-ww-daily-20080701-20090703 [statcounter.com]
shows Opera in the Number 1 position - which isn't even listed on your link, which makes it suspicious. Moreover, no browser is in a dominant position.
(Since when would most used matter, anyway? By that reasoning, we should all be using and doing what IE does...)
●rrent threshold.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...