(#2006-2236) - Topics this issue: 1) Digest (07/06/2006 09:01) (#2006-2234), 2) Digest (07/06/2006 09:01) (#2006-2234), 3) Digest (07/06/2006 09:01) (#2006-2234), 4) Digest (07/05/2006 15:01) (#2006-2231), 5) Digest (07/05/2006 15:01) (#2006-2231), 6) Digest (07/05/2006 15:01) (#2006-2231), 7) i'm bored, 8) BarryGibbTV problems, 9) BarryGibbTV problems, 10) BarryGibbTV problems, 11) A Kick in the Head introspective dream, 12) i'm bored, 13) Barry's Chat, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 20:37:41 +0100 From: "Julian Glass" Subject: RE: Digest (07/06/2006 09:01) (#2006-2234) What utter rubbish. To blame a user for not installing software a specific way is passing the buck. Every computer on the planet has a unique configuration and, guess what, 99.99999% of websites work ok with them. When they don't the webmaster has fouled Julian "I would also say that most of the time, it's the user computer that is the problem. - The most frequent user problem is people saying that they do past the "chatroom help" tests (on the BarryGibb.com page) when in fact they don't. - Second most frequent problem is people saying that they don't past tests but "it should still work because I know my Java/Quicktime is well installed". Well, sorry, but no. - Third most frequent problem is people having way too old computers or operating system. Microsoft will stop in a few days to support Windows 98 and Windows Me. There's a reason for this. Same thing for MacOS 9." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 21:43:58 +0200 From: Christophe Bouthier Subject: Re: Digest (07/06/2006 09:01) (#2006-2234) I would really like to know your list of "99.99999% of websites" that =20= have audio and video streaming like BarryGibb.com and that works with =20= "Every computer on the planet". C. Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 21:37, Julian Glass a =E9crit : > What utter rubbish. To blame a user for not installing software a =20 > specific way is passing the buck. Every computer on the planet has =20 > a unique configuration and, guess what, 99.99999% of websites work =20 > ok with them. When they don't the webmaster has fouled up and fixes =20= > it. That's what Barry's guy should be doing. > > Julian > "I would also say that most of the time, it's the user computer =20 > that is > the problem. > - The most frequent user problem is people saying that they do past =20= > the > "chatroom help" tests (on the BarryGibb.com page) when in fact they =20= > don't. > - Second most frequent problem is people saying that they don't past > tests but "it should still work because I know my Java/Quicktime is =20= > well > installed". Well, sorry, but no. > - Third most frequent problem is people having way too old =20 > computers or > operating system. Microsoft will stop in a few days to support Windows > 98 and Windows Me. There's a reason for this. Same thing for MacOS 9." > > > > > > > > "Words & Music", Fans Of The Brothers Gibb ( Bee Gees ) > http://www.brothersgibb.com > > To change any of your list options, > please go to website listed above. > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 22:02:54 +0200 From: Christophe Bouthier Subject: Re: Digest (07/06/2006 09:01) (#2006-2234) More seriously, there is no standard technology for streaming audio =20 and video included with all web browsers on all platforms. So, one =20 way or the other, if your web site is streaming audio or video, and =20 you want to access not even "every computer on the planet" but just =20 as many as possible, some users will _have to_ install some piece of =20 software on their computer, be it Java, Quicktime, Windows Media =20 Player, Flash player, Shockwave player, Real player, or any other =20 similar technology. Even Flash player is not installed with all web =20 browsers, and last version of Flash Player is only available and =20 working for recent computers (not even talking about the current =20 Flash player privacy problem). I personally don't know any other way of doing it. But please prove =20 me wrong, I'm sure would be really happy to know that you can stream =20 audio and video without any more piece of software on the client =20 side, and I'm also really sure that I won't be the only one ! By the way, this question of "which technology to stream content" is =20 a very old problem, I still have some old computer magazine that =20 contains a comparison of (then) available technology for streaming. =20 It was back in 1998, and almost all techno has since disappeared (who =20= remembers VDOLive or CineWeb ?). Still, the main question at this =20 time was already: "which techno to use, which browser plug-ins your =20 users will have to download and install ?". C. Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 21:43, Christophe Bouthier a =E9crit : > I would really like to know your list of "99.99999% of websites" =20 > that have audio and video streaming like BarryGibb.com and that =20 > works with "Every computer on the planet". > > C. > > > Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 21:37, Julian Glass a =E9crit : > >> What utter rubbish. To blame a user for not installing software a =20 >> specific way is passing the buck. Every computer on the planet has =20= >> a unique configuration and, guess what, 99.99999% of websites work =20= >> ok with them. When they don't the webmaster has fouled up and =20 >> fixes it. That's what Barry's guy should be doing. >> >> Julian >> "I would also say that most of the time, it's the user computer =20 >> that is >> the problem. >> - The most frequent user problem is people saying that they do =20 >> past the >> "chatroom help" tests (on the BarryGibb.com page) when in fact =20 >> they don't. >> - Second most frequent problem is people saying that they don't past >> tests but "it should still work because I know my Java/Quicktime =20 >> is well >> installed". Well, sorry, but no. >> - Third most frequent problem is people having way too old =20 >> computers or >> operating system. Microsoft will stop in a few days to support =20 >> Windows >> 98 and Windows Me. There's a reason for this. Same thing for MacOS =20= >> 9." >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Words & Music", Fans Of The Brothers Gibb ( Bee Gees ) >> http://www.brothersgibb.com >> >> To change any of your list options, >> please go to website listed above. >> > > > > "Words & Music", Fans Of The Brothers Gibb ( Bee Gees ) > http://www.brothersgibb.com > > To change any of your list options, > please go to website listed above. > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 16:06:54 -0400 From: Joseph Brennan Subject: Re: Digest (07/05/2006 15:01) (#2006-2231) Working only for some is pretty much the definition of broken software. That means it has not been adequately tested and debugged. I have no patience at all for something like this (unless I'm being asked to test out a development version of something). My Mac OS X Tiger desktop passes the tests, and the radio won't play. The dance of Java and Quicktime uninstall and reinstall only adds to my belief that the developer is depending on something that happened to work on his PC. If it's supported and intended to work I don't see why this should be necessary. Very hard to found a streaming > technology that is available on all platform and still enought performant > to have good quality for low bandwidth. They decided for Quicktime. No, they decided on some unholy union of Java and Quicktime. I can play Quicktime streams without any trouble. Christophe, it is very nice that you are trying to help people and you should be thanked for it. You care about fans. The problem is that this half-baked system needs so much support. But you work with Windows users, so this situation seems normal to you :-) Joe Brennan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 22:46:45 +0200 From: Christophe Bouthier Subject: Re: Digest (07/05/2006 15:01) (#2006-2231) Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 22:06, Joseph Brennan a =E9crit : > My Mac OS X Tiger desktop passes the tests, and the radio won't play. That's pretty strange, you're the first person I ear of that have =20 problem with Mac OS X Tiger to access the radio. > The dance of Java and Quicktime uninstall and reinstall only adds to > my belief that the developer is depending on something that =20 > happened to > work on his PC. If it's supported and intended to work I don't see =20= > why > this should be necessary. This is in fact not always necessary, but it's the easiest way to be =20 sure the configuration is clean when you don't have a physical access =20= to the computer. When you're trying to help remotely, the person in =20 front of the computer is your eyes and your hands. When the person is =20= not really comfortable with computers, easiest way is to start back =20 from what you know is a valid configuration. As I have said, lots of problems came from the fact that too often =20 the user configuration is not valid. For example, you can install a =20 new version of Java without uninstalling the old one. But then, which =20= version will your web browser (or worse, your webS browserS) will =20 use ? It totally depends of the web browser itself, the operating =20 system version and of course the way, the version and the order of =20 Java installation. It's a pain, but unfortunately that's the way it =20 is with Java and Windows. So if you don't uninstall all versions of =20 Java before installing the new one, you can really have your web =20 browser still using the old java. Very hard to diagnostic, because =20 the user did follow _almost_ all of the steps. I don't want specifically to defend the BG Radio developers, but I =20 don't see how they could be responsible for this. As soon as you're =20 relying on some recent version of Java, you will have this problem =20 with some (but not all, of course, it would be too simple) users. Same thing for Quicktime. As soon as you rely on Quicktime For Java, =20 you need to have Quicktime installed _after_ Java. Not the =20 developer's decision, just a fact about Quicktime For Java. > No, they decided on some unholy union of Java and Quicktime. "unholy" ? Why ? Quicktime For Java is developed, proposed and =20 maintained by Apple, just as Quicktime itself. So Quicktime For Java =20 is as "unholy" as Quicktime if you go this way. There's even an =20 active mailing list I think about it (it just happens that I'm also a =20= kind of Mac OS X developer, but more on the Cocoa side). > Christophe, it is very nice that you are trying to help people and you > should be thanked for it. Thanks. > The problem is that > this half-baked system needs so much support. Well, I still don't know of a software that would install and works =20 fine for all directly. There's just so many ways someone can manage =20 and configure its computer, even on mac, that it's just plain =20 impossible. Now, is it normal that it's a fan like me that does such a kind of =20 support ? That's another question. > But you work with Windows users, so this situation seems normal to =20 > you :-) lol :) Yes, it's true, I'm working with Windows users. :) But I'm also a long time mac user (and somehow developer too) :) More seriously: it's really strange that you have problem with Mac OS =20= X Tiger. I have 2 Mac computers in front of me every night, and I =20 never had any problem access either the radio or TV. And from my =20 chatroom experience, I have never seen a mac os X Tiger user that =20 wasn't able to get it working. In fact, I have seen only 2 people =20 that had problem. The first one was on Panther (10.3), so wasn't able =20= to get Java 1.5 (the Java 1.5 update is available for Tiger only). =20 The second one has never used the "software update", so wasn't using =20 Java 1.5 either. Can you describe me more precisely your problem ? What exactly =20 happens ? Does a windows opened when you click on the "launch radio" =20 button ? Does the User Interface (red radio) launch ? What is the =20 message written in yellow ? May I ask you if you did your "software =20 update" recently ? You are on 10.4.7, right ? You're using Safari ? =20 What is the line you get as the result of the first test (it should =20 tell you the exact version of Java your web browser is using). I'm totally sure it will work on mac. No way it can't, Mac OS X is =20 such a good OS :) C. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 23:01:30 +0200 From: Christophe Bouthier Subject: Re: Digest (07/05/2006 15:01) (#2006-2231) Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 22:46, Christophe Bouthier a =E9crit : > Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 22:06, Joseph Brennan a =E9crit : >> The dance of Java and Quicktime uninstall and reinstall only adds to >> my belief that the developer is depending on something that =20 >> happened to >> work on his PC. If it's supported and intended to work I don't =20 >> see why >> this should be necessary. > > This is in fact not always necessary, but it's the easiest way to =20 > be sure the configuration is clean when you don't have a physical =20 > access to the computer. When you're trying to help remotely, the =20 > person in front of the computer is your eyes and your hands. When =20 > the person is not really comfortable with computers, easiest way is =20= > to start back from what you know is a valid configuration. I almost forgot: DON'T DO THIS ON MAC OS X. No need to uninstall anything on Mac OS X, as the OS is already =20 taking care of everything. The last version of Quicktime is always =20 used (part of the OS directly), and you have an utility (in /=20 Application/Utilities/Java/J2SE 5.0) to choose which version of Java =20 to use, if you have more than one. Pretty OS :) C. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 14:26:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Marty Hogan Subject: i'm bored i'm bored, so i thought i'd ask if that is Maurice singing lead on "I Laugh in Your Face". Marty From SF ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 22:40:27 +0100 From: "G.R.Gooch" Subject: Re: BarryGibbTV problems Julian wrote :- >> To blame a user for not installing software a specific way is >> passing the buck. Every computer on the planet has a unique >> configuration and, guess what, 99.99999% of web sites work >> ok with them. When they don't the webmaster has fouled up >> and fixes it. That's what Barry's guy should be doing. Christophe replied :- > I would really like to know your list of "99.99999% of websites" > that have audio and video streaming like BarryGibb.com and that > works with "Every computer on the planet". Over at Rhino Records www.rhino.com they have a video player which gives users a simple menu of either QuickTime, RealAudio or WindowsMedia - all with three choices of streaming rates - to sample the DVDs and videos they have for sale. The Rhino streamer, on the fastest setting, even works on my 'antique' Windows ME pc - the same pc on which I can hear, but cannot view, BGTV (which insists on using the very latest QuickTime v7 to view it). Yet the BarryGibbRadio works fine. I know it's only one example, but Barry's guy should have been familiar with the Rhino website prior to the BGs albums reissues. Graham in Manchester, UK. PS. My thanks go to Christophe for his technical explanations. --- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 00:28:18 +0200 From: Christophe Bouthier Subject: Re: BarryGibbTV problems Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 23:40, G.R.Gooch a =E9crit : > Over at Rhino Records www.rhino.com they have a video player > which gives users a simple menu of either QuickTime, RealAudio > or WindowsMedia - all with three choices of streaming rates - to > sample the DVDs and videos they have for sale. > > The Rhino streamer, on the fastest setting, even works on my > 'antique' Windows ME pc - the same pc on which I can hear, > but cannot view, BGTV (which insists on using the very latest > QuickTime v7 to view it). Yet the BarryGibbRadio works fine. Yes, they are using the Sorenson video codec, which is available in =20 Quicktime 6 (and so on Windows Me). BG TV is using, I think, the H264 video codec, which is more recent =20 and gives better video results for less bandwidth. Unfortunately, this really recent codec, similar to the new MPEG4 =20 video codec, is only available in Quicktime 7. Now, does the better video quality is a good enough argument to let =20 out windows 98 and Me users ? That's not for me to answer. But my point of view is that if the very maker of the OS is not =20 supporting it anymore, there should be a reason for it. Moreover, as a private advice, I would recommend you NOT to use your =20 windows Me PC to get on the net anymore. A serious security flaw has =20 been discovered in Windows 98 and Me, and it won't be patched by =20 Microsoft because those systems won't be supported anymore. http://www.betanews.com/article/=20 No_Fix_for_Critical_Windows_98_Me_Flaw/1149873723 It means that while this PC is on the net, almost anyone can take =20 control of it and do whatever he wants with it and its data, and you =20 have no way to stop this. Maybe it's data are not important, but you =20 can be held responsible if your PC and your IP address is used to do =20 reprehensible things... For the point at hand, it's true that by proposing the main 3 ways of =20= streaming (Quicktime, Real and WMP), rhino has more chance to have at =20= least one working on the user's computer. It's also true that by =20 using Quicktime directly instead of Quicktime for Java, they have =20 also more chance to have it working on the user's computer. But this =20 come with a (small) price, I think: no custom interface (is it a bad =20 or a good thing ? :)), no way to get full screen, and easier to =20 record the stream (I don't say it's impossible on BG TV, just that =20 it's more difficult). Do those "functionnalities" are worth the price ? Again, not for me =20 to answer. But I would bet that if one of the "requirement" was "make the stream =20= as hard as possible to record", then... I would also bet that, for live video chat (as Barry has already done =20= in the recent past), it would be impossible to have a live stream =20 directly in the 3 techno (quicktime, real, wmp) at the same time. But this is just my 2 cent opinion here :) > PS. My thanks go to Christophe for his technical explanations. Thanks, you're welcome :) C. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 00:43:23 +0200 From: Christophe Bouthier Subject: Re: BarryGibbTV problems Another thing I just though of: On the Rhino site, you see one =20 streaming video, the one you asked for. On BG TV and BG Radio, you =20 can see and ear a continuous stream of audio or video, 24/7. I'm not =20 sure it's the same technology, and that it involve the same things... But again, I'm not an expert of streaming, so just my 2 cents =20 guessing here. C. Le 7 juil. 06 =E0 00:28, Christophe Bouthier a =E9crit : > Le 6 juil. 06 =E0 23:40, G.R.Gooch a =E9crit : >> Over at Rhino Records www.rhino.com they have a video player >> which gives users a simple menu of either QuickTime, RealAudio >> or WindowsMedia - all with three choices of streaming rates - to >> sample the DVDs and videos they have for sale. >> >> The Rhino streamer, on the fastest setting, even works on my >> 'antique' Windows ME pc - the same pc on which I can hear, >> but cannot view, BGTV (which insists on using the very latest >> QuickTime v7 to view it). Yet the BarryGibbRadio works fine. > > Yes, they are using the Sorenson video codec, which is available in =20= > Quicktime 6 (and so on Windows Me). > BG TV is using, I think, the H264 video codec, which is more recent =20= > and gives better video results for less bandwidth. > Unfortunately, this really recent codec, similar to the new MPEG4 =20 > video codec, is only available in Quicktime 7. > > Now, does the better video quality is a good enough argument to let =20= > out windows 98 and Me users ? That's not for me to answer. > But my point of view is that if the very maker of the OS is not =20 > supporting it anymore, there should be a reason for it. > > > Moreover, as a private advice, I would recommend you NOT to use =20 > your windows Me PC to get on the net anymore. A serious security =20 > flaw has been discovered in Windows 98 and Me, and it won't be =20 > patched by Microsoft because those systems won't be supported anymore. > > http://www.betanews.com/article/=20 > No_Fix_for_Critical_Windows_98_Me_Flaw/1149873723 > > It means that while this PC is on the net, almost anyone can take =20 > control of it and do whatever he wants with it and its data, and =20 > you have no way to stop this. Maybe it's data are not important, =20 > but you can be held responsible if your PC and your IP address is =20 > used to do reprehensible things... > > > For the point at hand, it's true that by proposing the main 3 ways =20 > of streaming (Quicktime, Real and WMP), rhino has more chance to =20 > have at least one working on the user's computer. It's also true =20 > that by using Quicktime directly instead of Quicktime for Java, =20 > they have also more chance to have it working on the user's =20 > computer. But this come with a (small) price, I think: no custom =20 > interface (is it a bad or a good thing ? :)), no way to get full =20 > screen, and easier to record the stream (I don't say it's =20 > impossible on BG TV, just that it's more difficult). > > Do those "functionnalities" are worth the price ? Again, not for me =20= > to answer. > But I would bet that if one of the "requirement" was "make the =20 > stream as hard as possible to record", then... > > I would also bet that, for live video chat (as Barry has already =20 > done in the recent past), it would be impossible to have a live =20 > stream directly in the 3 techno (quicktime, real, wmp) at the same =20 > time. > > > But this is just my 2 cent opinion here :) > > >> PS. My thanks go to Christophe for his technical explanations. > > Thanks, you're welcome :) > > > C. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 19:37:30 EDT From: Compoccias@aol.com Subject: Re: A Kick in the Head introspective dream In a message dated 7/6/2006 1:02:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, Mark.Crohan@dhs.vic.gov.au writes: >but the fact the Bee Gees were doing an Antiwar track may have brought >some attention in my view. So different to waht was generally known of >their material. Mark Yes, I agree. It stands out in their catalogue for that reason. "Dear Mr. Kissenger" has to be the most direct political statement they have ever made in a song. They were a little late, though. But, then again, perhaps they had written it earlier? Sal Sal ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 20:35:38 EDT From: Compoccias@aol.com Subject: Re: i'm bored In a message dated 7/6/2006 5:28:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, martyhogan@sbcglobal.net writes: i'm bored, so i thought i'd ask if that is Maurice singing lead on "I Laugh in Your Face". Marty From SF Which verse? I have always assumed it was Barry on Verse 1, Robin on Verse 2, and Barry again on the shortened repeat of Verse 1. With some very good harmony on the choruses. One of my favorite tracks from Odessa. Sal ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 01:54:33 +0100 From: "melissagibson" Subject: Barry's Chat I had nothing better to do, so I got onto Barry's chat -and am using the username John_McEnroe. Although, the real John McEnroe doesn't like the Bee Gees' music. But, he's still great. I think this will be my next piece of dialogue on Barry's chat: "You CANNOT be SERIOUS! That ball was on the line! Chalk flew up! It was CLEARLY in! How could you POSSIBLY call that out? How many are you going to MISS?...Everyone knows it's in, in the whole STADIUM - and you call it out? Explain that to me, explain that to me." Ah yes...you've got to love Mac. I found a list of his Top 10 outbursts a short while back; if no one minds, I might post them to the list as an "off topic" post. Michelle > > > "Words & Music", Fans Of The Brothers Gibb ( Bee Gees ) > http://www.brothersgibb.com > > To change any of your list options, > please go to website listed above. ------------------------------ End words@brothersgibb.com Digest [07/06/2006 21:01] ----------------------------------------------------