Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Adobe flash warning and tree

[Dale]

Mick wrote:
> On Friday 15 Jan 2016 03:02:07 Dale wrote:
>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>> On 15/01/16 10:15, Peter Weilbacher wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>>> I thought these are only security fixes? Version 20 is actully
>>>>> feature-complete and in-par with the Windows version 20.
>>>>>
>>>>> v11.2.202.559 might be from December, but it's based on an ancient
>>>>> version
>>>>> from many years ago feature-wise.
>>>> That may well be the case. But who cares about features in a tool that's
>>>> basically dead and only installed on 99.9% of the machines because some
>>>> stupid websites[1] need it?
>>>>
>>>>     Peter.
>>>>
>>>> [1] That work with the feature set of v11.2 -- at least I haven't heard
>>>> otherwise.
>>> You haven't visited enough porn sites then :-P
>> Well, so far that weather radar site is the only one that I have found
>> that needs flash.  If they would switch it to HTML5, flash could be
>> gone.  I wouldn't complain about that.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-)
> In the UK websites like Channel 5 will not play on Linux any more:
>
> http://www.channel5.com/demand5
>
> They said that they will not support the platform (too small a percentage of
> users) although I am not sure how android based smart TVs can stream this
> channel.


I've seen that before.  I use that user agent plugin to switch to
something it likes.  Generally, it works.  Basically, you tell the
browser to lie and tell it is a windoze machine with IE and carry on. 
So far, that has always worked for me. 

By the way, my bank, credit card company and several other sites don't
support Linux.  They still work just fine.  It's just that some still
use flash and flash is sort of sick at the moment. 

Dale

:-)  :-)