3 ms·

Surely you have had the experience of being in a class or lecture with someone who used Q&A time to preen or push an obviously inappropriate agenda. Discourse,

Surely you have had the experience of being in a class or lecture with someone who used Q&A time to preen or push an obviously inappropriate agenda. Discourse, like everything social, requires a certain amount of good faith, or it stops being useful.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
bradleyland 16y ago
What part of his line of questions would you deem "obviously inappropriate" or lacking "good faith"? I can understand Google wanting to push open standards, but there are some very glaring hypocrisies on display here. Everyone questions Apple's agenda when they leave Flash out of iOS, but somehow Google gets a pass? Gruber is biased? Heh.
- drivebyacct2 16y ago
  Google isn't keeping anyone from writing an H.264 plugin for Chrome, they're choosing not to support it. Apple has the luxury of those being the same thing (not supporting = not allowing) on iOS. Are you implying that Gruber isn't biased? It's really neither here nor there, but I've been on HN enough to simply see the headlines with (daringfireball) next to it to roll my eyes at that notion. (Note, I think John brings up some great questions. I think almost all the complaints about WebM, voiced here on HN, are ignorant of browser compatibility and Flash's support for WebM (though I still think the hardware decoding points that have been brought up are very valid), but the questions of timing and consistency across Google's product intrigue me)
  - bradleyland 16y ago
    If it's implied it's not intentional. I'll state forthright that Gruber's bias is worn on his sleeve. You'd have to be a fool to argue otherwise. But even someone with bias can ask straight forward questions. While Google and Apple may be engaged in some perceived "battle to the death", it doesn't mean that someone with an Apple bias can't ask valid questions about Google's decisions. The OP accused Gruber of having an inappropriate agenda and not acting in good faith. I didn't read that between the lines in Gruber's post, so I'm curious why he/she did.
- jasonlotito 16y ago
  > Everyone questions Apple's agenda when they leave Flash out of iOS, , but somehow Google gets a pass? One is not like the other. Apple didn't let other people provide Flash support for iOS. Google is merely choosing not to support something internally. No one expected Apple to write a Flash plugin and officially support it. As for hypocrisy... > Chrome currently bundles an embedded version of Adobe’s closed source and proprietary Flash Player plugin. And I'm sure if Google had to implement Flash, they wouldn't. > Android currently supports H.264. Will this support be removed from Android? If not, why not? Different environments. The web is based on open standards. It's like asking why Android is written in C instead of HTML5 and JS. He then goes on to ask other stupid questions equally baseless. Essentially, he's demanding that Apple support Flash by building their own Flash player for their devices. > Who is happy about this? Anyone who cares about open standards and protocols. > What part of his line of questions would you deem "obviously inappropriate" or lacking "good faith"? Listen, I'm not anti-Gruber. I read his stuff and take it for what it's worth. But it's fairly clear his line of questioning isn't genuine. They are constructed to make a point: that a vendor should be required to support plugins even if they don't want to, except for Apple of course.
yason 16y ago
It's the other way around. You gain credibility by asking good questions and lose it by asking stupid questions.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

bradleyland 16y ago

What part of his line of questions would you deem "obviously inappropriate" or lacking "good faith"? I can understand Google wanting to push open standards, but there are some very glaring hypocrisies on display here. Everyone questions Apple's agenda when they leave Flash out of iOS, but somehow Google gets a pass? Gruber is biased? Heh.

drivebyacct2 16y ago
Google isn't keeping anyone from writing an H.264 plugin for Chrome, they're choosing not to support it. Apple has the luxury of those being the same thing (not supporting = not allowing) on iOS. Are you implying that Gruber isn't biased? It's really neither here nor there, but I've been on HN enough to simply see the headlines with (daringfireball) next to it to roll my eyes at that notion. (Note, I think John brings up some great questions. I think almost all the complaints about WebM, voiced here on HN, are ignorant of browser compatibility and Flash's support for WebM (though I still think the hardware decoding points that have been brought up are very valid), but the questions of timing and consistency across Google's product intrigue me)
- bradleyland 16y ago
  If it's implied it's not intentional. I'll state forthright that Gruber's bias is worn on his sleeve. You'd have to be a fool to argue otherwise. But even someone with bias can ask straight forward questions. While Google and Apple may be engaged in some perceived "battle to the death", it doesn't mean that someone with an Apple bias can't ask valid questions about Google's decisions. The OP accused Gruber of having an inappropriate agenda and not acting in good faith. I didn't read that between the lines in Gruber's post, so I'm curious why he/she did.
jasonlotito 16y ago
> Everyone questions Apple's agenda when they leave Flash out of iOS, , but somehow Google gets a pass? One is not like the other. Apple didn't let other people provide Flash support for iOS. Google is merely choosing not to support something internally. No one expected Apple to write a Flash plugin and officially support it. As for hypocrisy... > Chrome currently bundles an embedded version of Adobe’s closed source and proprietary Flash Player plugin. And I'm sure if Google had to implement Flash, they wouldn't. > Android currently supports H.264. Will this support be removed from Android? If not, why not? Different environments. The web is based on open standards. It's like asking why Android is written in C instead of HTML5 and JS. He then goes on to ask other stupid questions equally baseless. Essentially, he's demanding that Apple support Flash by building their own Flash player for their devices. > Who is happy about this? Anyone who cares about open standards and protocols. > What part of his line of questions would you deem "obviously inappropriate" or lacking "good faith"? Listen, I'm not anti-Gruber. I read his stuff and take it for what it's worth. But it's fairly clear his line of questioning isn't genuine. They are constructed to make a point: that a vendor should be required to support plugins even if they don't want to, except for Apple of course.

yason 16y ago

It's the other way around. You gain credibility by asking good questions and lose it by asking stupid questions.