On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Herbert Graf wrote: > Depending on the situation that solution might make it much more > difficult, it depends on the target audience. > > For example, MANY corporations disallow the installation of any > software. Users have to use the browser as it is set up by IT. The > thought of getting IT to install a different browser or a plugin is > tantamount to moving a mountain. > > What about OS's? Many people out there don't use Win7 with firefox, many > still use XP with IE6. Some organizations use Mac OSX with Safari. The > effort required to develop a software solution for all these users > starts becoming very big. What about Linux? > > You are right, if installing a small piece of software on the user > computer is possible then that is BY FAR the easier route to take, but > in my experience it's often best to plan on delivering to the browser > only what it can natively accept, anything more and it becomes a support > nightmare. You're right, but usually installing a plugin isn't a big problem. Also, a Java applet would work VERY well in this case. Java is well supported and it's cross platform/cross browser. It can access the network on the host side and stream the sound out of the browser. It can also access USB if that's the route you want to take. It doesn't even have to be an applet (although that would be the simplest for the host user), it can be a deskto= p program which shouldn't require any special privileges. Java should be able to execute the jar/classes without special execution privileges. No installation required easier. If you decide to use the applet, updates and support would be seamless. This all saves the hassle of optimizing something which may or may not be possible for the PIC to do, but can be very easily done on a desktop computer. --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .