[wutbrodo]

> Silverlight and flash both work on Linux.

> Welcome to the new world where depending on the number of users your system has, some websites will work and others won't. If its worth for the company to develop to your platform, you might be worthy the time. If not, well, thought luck, go out and buy a platform which is supported.

If you're implying that the world wasn't like this before, you're simply wrong. I was unable to give good faith recommendations of Linux systems to people for _years_ because Netflix wouldn't run on them, at a time when Netflix access was important to pretty much everyone I knew. This only really changed after mobile devices became ubiquitous and thus more or less obsoleted the complaint.

Holding up silverlight as an example of a closed source plug-in that works on Linux is a terrible one, given how long it took for that to be the case.

[belorn]

The websites that are platform depended are so few that we know the names of them, and it is currently very expensive to make platform exclusive sites. Is the case of Netflix the reason why we want more of them?

Linux has flash, it has silverlight, it has java. In the beginning they worked terrible, but thanks to the effort of open source developers, sooner or later it they got ported. When each publisher has their own DRM platform, copying the business model of the console market and earning money on the concept of exclusivity, how many open source ports do you expect to see?