On Saturday 01 November 2008 01:16:52 am Stephan Kulow wrote:
Am Samstag 01 November 2008 schrieb Cristian Rodríguez:
Alberto Passalacqua escribió:
They simply didn't ask for permission, it seems. If that's true, it's not a good move imho.
there are associated costs on **distributing** realplayer with Windows media support.. sorry, I won't comment on legal issues.. that's a topic for lawyers.. ;-)
That's right. And it's the only reason. Just because real says it's free, doesn't mean it has no costs. Just none you pay to real.
OK. So, what was the problem. Real Player is not high on my list on any platform, and it will take some time until I can notice that it is missing, but those that do, should be treated as individuals that can understand explanation. If you can't comment on legal stuff, is there any of lawyers that can do that. It is not first time that legal problems jump in the mix adversely affecting performance of distribution without remedy for end users. I don't consider software that is legal in some jurisdictions as a good solution. Fluendo way of individual license purchase and software installation is advancement, but still somewhat complicated comparing to installation of whole distribution, and more important there is no guarantee that shiny new codecs will actually work. On the other side codecs are minor quantity of software that cost is set disproportionally high, compared to boxed version of openSUSE. I skipped Linuxant drivers just because that small piece of code was priced $20.- . How much should cost whole distro with thousands of drivers and applications? The same problem I see with codecs. -- Regards, Rajko -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org