×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Adobe To Donate Flex SDK To Open Source Community

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the free-bunnies-and-kittens dept.

Open Source 158

New submitter ProbablyJoe writes "InfoQ reports that Adobe is to donate its web application SDK, Flex, to an 'an established open source foundation' — suspected to either be the Open Spoon Foundation (who have been working on an open source fork of Flex), or the more established Apache Foundation. Adobe has stated on its blog that they consider HTML5 to be a better technology for the future than its own Flex platform, causing frustration among developers who have used the platform for enterprise applications. Is this a generous contribution to the open source community, or just Adobe offloading another failing technology?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

158 comments

Thanks? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060522)

This is the technological equivalent of donating AIDS infected blood.

Re:Thanks? (2)

1s44c (552956) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060878)

This is the technological equivalent of donating AIDS infected blood.

Funny. But very, very sick.

Just FYI (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 2 years ago | (#38063750)

"Flex [wikipedia.org]" is a disk operating system for 6800 microprocessors. Flex09 is Flex for the 6809 microprocessor, but was also generally just referred to as "Flex." Both were produced by Technical Systems Consultants (logo: TSC.) Flex initially ran on the SWTPC, GIMIX, SSB and similar SS-50 bus boxes; later versions ran on Radio Shack's "Color Computer", which was based on the 6809 processor. Aside from this, Flex (both versions) was also made available by TSC in a "driverless" version that let you write your own I/O routines, essentially making it wholly fit for just about any configuration imaginable.

Flex, along with CP/m, constituted one of the two original disk operating systems we had to choose from in those early days. We're not talking about a minor issue or a bit player; there were magazines dedicated to the subject, many clubs and companies involved... this is our history.

Adobe really screwed up here. There was absolutely no need to go trampling on the memories and touchstones of our craft.

Re:Thanks? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061194)

Is this what Ilya Zhitomirskiy died for?

Just another offload. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060562)

Seems to be the trend as of late.
Can't get your paid employees to fix it for you? Give it out to the internet hoping someone will fix it for free.

Re:Just another offload. (5, Insightful)

cjpa (796302) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060616)

and why shouldn't they? If they already decided that they wouldn't support the product anymore, then it makes sense to donate it to the community. Maybe some enterprising people can make it work for them. Just look at what it did for web-browser technology when Netscape opensourced their - at that time 'almost end-of-line' - product to the opensource community...

Re:Just another offload. (3, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061622)

Yes, let's look at that. AOL didn't just dump the netscape source code and walk away, they created the Mozilla Foundation and provided $2 million of initial financing. MF hit a jackpot with search bar royalties and while it's open source, virtually all development is from paid Mozilla employees.

Re:Just another offload. (1)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 2 years ago | (#38064142)

Yes, let's look at that. AOL didn't just dump the netscape source code and walk away, they created the Mozilla Foundation and provided $2 million of initial financing. MF hit a jackpot with search bar royalties and while it's open source, virtually all development is from paid Mozilla employees.

This is a slightly different situation. First of all, they probably will be offering some form of hand-off beyond "here's the latest source code on a thumb drive." It might not be $2 million dollars, but it should be something. Second, they are handing it off to an existing foundation, that doesn't need to bootstrap itself. Third, this is a developer tool, not a browser. The target audience has a higher percentage of potential contributors.

Did hell just freeze over or something? (5, Funny)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060604)

Microsoft dumps stuff in favor of HTML5.

Adobe dumps stuff in favor of HTML5.

Can somebody check the temperature in hell, please?

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (2)

cshark (673578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060738)

Pretty icy. They also discontinued flash mobile, same week. I think we're going to see a new class of development tool from adobe here in the next few months. All of this is a leadup to that, I think.

Adobe Edge (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060760)

Based on what I've read elsewhere, it's called Adobe Edge, and it's supposed to be an authoring tool for animations to be played back using JavaScript and HTML5's 2D canvas. Tim Langdell will be pissed [wikipedia.org].

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (3, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060918)

Pretty icy. They also discontinued flash mobile, same week. I think we're going to see a new class of development tool from adobe here in the next few months. All of this is a leadup to that, I think.

Not necessarily. I think it's quite feasible for them to repurpose their authoring tools so they crap out HTML 5 instead of flash content, at least in those cases where there is analogous functionality.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (3, Funny)

cshark (673578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060984)

I think it would be awesome to see an html 5/canvas/css3 animation program. Crappy as it might be. I for one welcome our new ridiculous animated logo overlords.

Need FlashBlock for HTML5 (5, Funny)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061182)

Now with HTML5 becoming the the preferred nuisance apparatus, can we create something to block them browser side?

Re:Need FlashBlock for HTML5 (3, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061386)

Sure. It's called "disable javascript" and it's already built-in all browsers worth using.

Re:Need FlashBlock for HTML5 (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061808)

I hope you're kidding. I disable JS from third party sites... but a LOT of sites use JS for menus, interaction, and layout. If you completely turn JS off, you are going to be missing a LOT of experience.

Re:Need FlashBlock for HTML5 (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38063878)

If a website requires javascript for the content, navigation or layout, it's not coded properly. There should be built-in fallbacks to regular, non-scripted HTML.

Re:Need FlashBlock for HTML5 (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061828)

This also breaks a large portion of websites, and / or website functionality.

For example, you can't use the slider on Slashdot to hide / show lower rated comments.

Re:Need FlashBlock for HTML5 (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061856)

Now with HTML5 becoming the the preferred nuisance apparatus, can we create something to block them browser side?

Yes. Block Javascript, or install an ad-blocker. Both of which are very well established technologies in the plugin world of most browsers today.

Unlike Flash, a browser is not obligated to display or render everything. So if a user purposely blocks ads, there's nothing that can be done. Flash can bypass most plugins, and display ads (e.g., the popup ones on YouTube, or the ones that play before the video).

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060762)

42 degree Fahrenheit. It's getting there

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060880)

Microsoft dumps stuff in favor of HTML5.

Adobe dumps stuff in favor of HTML5.

Can somebody check the temperature in hell, please?

Steve Jobs must have pitched his new product "iSnow" to the devil. Damn, that man is one hell of a salesman!

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (2)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061014)

Well, I think it has something to do with Android/Apple dominating the smartphone/tablet market, better for MS and Adobe to push for a HTML5 standard than letting the Android/iOS SDK become the new standard and they left out in the cold. Don't they've had a change of heart or anything.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061196)

Except that the iOS/Android SDK isn't HTML5? The whole reason that iOS has a real, native SDK us that no one wanted to use the SDK that forced you to use html/js for everything.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (3, Interesting)

datavirtue (1104259) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061514)

As a developer I don't like the thought of developing for any specific mobile platform. When I think mobile, I think web-based; as-in accessible from any device. Still though, apps will be built because of device specific functionality like sensors and cameras. Hopefully this stuff can be addressed from a web app in the future. Java Applets anyone? I guess Java was to far ahead of its time, and no one wants to play well with it (Apple) because they lose control over the user that way.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061764)

Java for mobile (J2ME) didn't work out because Sun stopped all real development of it and focused on desktop (J2SE) and server (J2EE) versions. The only real player was IBM and their J9 project and even they stopped working on the mobile version. It was stuck on JRE 1.3 forever. And it doesn't look like Oracle will do anything different.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061154)

Its been frozen over ever since the Red Sox won the World Series.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061306)

Can't. The entrance is frozen shut.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (1)

datavirtue (1104259) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061366)

They're just big scardy-cat companies. It's fun to be small, nimble, and innovative; big lumbering and always on the ropes is just downright.....well, you see the results.

Re:Did hell just freeze over or something? (0)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 2 years ago | (#38062022)

Wait for it...wait for it...

Incompatibility hell, coming to a browser near you.

There was a beauty of writing code and just having it work in 90% of browser.

NO NO NO (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060612)

HTML5 (WebM) is not better than H.264

Please buy a H.264 license if you are smart.

This HTML5 is all just misinformation and you will be better of using H.264 instead of WebM.

WebM is much inferior to H.264!!!! Even Internet Explorer supports H.264... do I really need to say more?

WebM sucks!

Please reply and like because I will need to buy some food.

Re:NO NO NO (3, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060758)

WebM is free, H.264 costs money on both the encoding and decoding end. Standards should never require payment to use.

Re:NO NO NO (2)

HarrySquatter (1698416) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060820)

H.264 only costs money if you ship more than 50000 units a year. Also it is royalty-free for non-commercial use.

Re:NO NO NO (1)

stiggle (649614) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060954)

You trust the MPEG LA to not introduce fees at some point for their patent pool?

Re:NO NO NO (1)

HarrySquatter (1698416) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061048)

Yes. Doing so would only drive people away from it which is the opposite of what they want.

Re:NO NO NO (2)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061618)

Yeah, right. And web devs can stop supporting IE too, right?

Once the market is locked-in, driving away from the standard is almost impossible, because you have to receive or send files to other people who haven't.

Re:NO NO NO (1)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061986)

That problem exists regardless of how your codec's source is published or its patents are licensed. Lock in is created by what the broser vendors agree to support, not by how something is licensed.

Re:NO NO NO (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38063004)

That's the point: we shouldn't choose technologies which are controlled by single entities, so that we won't be at their mercy when it's too entrenched to simply walk away from it.

Flash Player vs. Chrome Frame (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38064442)

And web devs can stop supporting IE too, right?

What's the difference between requiring IE users to use Adobe Flash Player and requiring IE users to use either Google Chrome Frame or the codec pack for IE 9?

Re:NO NO NO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38063302)

...and with the flash player available on just about every desktop browser out there, do you ever feel just a little bit like the group in that famous movie, the group that sit around and hurl abuse at the judeanï peoples front...? Well sorry for this, but Html5 is not the messiah, it's a very naughty hack.

people asking for websites are already getting sick of devs using html5 and then having to make a flash fallback. why should they waste the time - why not just use flash?

for them, no amount of hype is going to get HTML5 off the ground if they need video or animation. for text and pictures yes, and maybe even gmail. anything more is a costly jib.

Re:NO NO NO (1)

flohuels (1920394) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060778)

Please reply and like because I will need to buy some food.

Go look for some tasty open source recipes...

IE on PCs also supports WebM (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060828)

Even Internet Explorer supports H.264

Windows Internet Explorer on PCs also supports WebM as long as the proper codec pack [google.com] is installed.

WebM sucks!

Could you please tone it down and say why you feel WebM is inferior? Otherwise, your post is just as much misinformation as the ones you criticize. Does your skin dry out on sunny days to where it feels like rock?

Re:IE on PCs also supports WebM (1)

plover (150551) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061218)

Whoosh.

You have been trolled.

They turn to stone in sunlight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061614)

Does your skin dry out on sunny days to where it feels like rock?

You have been trolled.

Is there such thing as a double whoosh?

Re:IE on PCs also supports WebM (1)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061728)

Could you please tone it down and say why you feel WebM is inferior?

It's redundant? It's no better than H.264, it's Johnny-come-lately, and exists only because Google is trying to play 11-dimensional chess with MPEG-LA pool members.

If you want to send people a video in WebM you have to get them to install software. That alone is pretty fatal. Even if it did have a higher picture quality, picture quality isn't as important a factor for a codec as availability.

Re:IE on PCs also supports WebM (1)

DarkXale (1771414) | more than 2 years ago | (#38062024)

If you want to send people a video in WebM you have to get them to install software.

Same holds true for H.264 playback in most browsers. Opera doesn't support it. Firefox doesn't support it, and nor does Chrome. Only ones that do are IE and Safari. These three however do support immediate WebM playback, and a generic codec pack will introduce support of WebM into IE. That same pack also allows WMP (or any DirectShow player) to play it, in addition to several other formats such as OGG and FLAC soundfiles. FLAC in particular is already an effective standard for lossless audio.

Re:IE on PCs also supports WebM (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38064214)

a generic codec pack will introduce support of WebM into IE.

Is there such a codec pack for IE for Windows Phone 7.5, or just IE for PCs?

Let the chess match begin (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38064366)

it's Johnny-come-lately

As was Google Search in a market dominated by AltaVista and Yahoo!. As was the iPhone in a market dominated by Windows Mobile 6 phones. As were Android phones in a market dominated by the iPhone. As was MySpace in a market dominated by Friendster. As was Facebook in a market dominated by MySpace.

[WebM] exists only because Google is trying to play 11-dimensional chess with MPEG-LA pool members.

Then let the chess match begin. Sometimes a little tic-tac-toe [wikipedia.org] is needed to prevent global thermonuclear patent war.

If you want to send people a video in WebM you have to get them to install software.

Windows XP is still very common and still doesn't include an AVC decoder. Nor does Windows Vista Home Basic, Windows Vista Business, or Windows 7 Starter. If you want to send people a video in AVC you have to get them to install Adobe Flash Player, install QuickTime, install VLC media player (illegal in several countries), or buy a copy of Windows 7.

Re:NO NO NO (4, Informative)

Merk42 (1906718) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060914)

You do realize HTML5 is far far more than just a video player right? Even so "HTML5 Video" doesn't inherently mean WebM nor H.264 as the format isn't part of the standard.

Re:NO NO NO (1)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061068)

I was going to ask what the above article had to do with video, since this is likely going to be a precursor to Adobes Canvas editor, rather than any kind of Video focused tool. For that they have Premiere.

FOSS attitude fail. (5, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060632)

Right, so when a company end of lines a product they're criticised for not open sourcing it.

Now when a company open sources an end of lined product, they're "offloading another failing technology".

This is why companies don't give a fuck what the FOSS community thinks, because with the FOSS community you can never do anything right. See all the whinging about Android's open source initiatives for another fine example.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (4, Insightful)

bjourne (1034822) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060754)

Sorry, but that is not the attitude of the FOSS community - just some random commentator setting up a false dilemma. He does not represent the view of "the community". Neither does I ofcourse, but I think it is awesome that Adobe will finally open source Flex.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (1)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060854)

I agree it's not the view of the whole community but it's also not a lone comment on the topic, I see that sort of setiment expressed all the time from the FOSS community and it makes them their own worst enemy.

You see it in other areas as well, more than once I've seen people bitch in one thread about Linux not being taken up on the desktop because companies are "dumb" and that sort of sentiment, then in another thread go on to show a complete lack of understanding as to why end users need a decent user interface with comments about how CLIs are faster and that users should just learn to use them instead.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061138)

"Some" US Americans are racist and it makes US Americans their own worst enemy.
See what I did there? It's the same over-generalization based on pre-existing stereotypes. Having heard the stereotype before simply over-inflates the perceived number for simple minds. Otherwise, for the real number invovled, it wouldn't even be something worth talking about at all.

And your talk about "decent end user interfaces" and FOSS is no better. Even if many people like and recommend the CLI there also are plenty of GUI, even for FOSS and Linux. By all means, feel free to use these. But be aware that advice given is generally honest, if someone experienced told you the CLI is best and fastest (be it on Windows, Linux or OSX), this is not to confuse you with something as evil as *gasp* text, but in fact generally a fast and a really astonishingly simple way to tell a computer how to get a certain thing done.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (2)

Alistair Hutton (889794) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061176)

Flex has been open source for years.

They change here is that project leadership will now be shared between Adobe and an Open Source foundation.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061232)

It's not just one guy, it's most of Slashdot that are complete morons.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (2)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060830)

Since when did a single Slashdot submitter speak for the whole of the FOSS community?

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (1, Insightful)

Tim C (15259) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061022)

When his comments are posted on the front page of arguably the single biggest, most-influential FOSS website, that's when.

If you post something as-is, expect people to associate you with whatever it is that you posted.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061148)

Since when did a single Slashdot submitter speak for the whole of the FOSS community?

Since the FOSS community decided to embrace the entire "leaderless mob" philosophy whole-hog. They forgot that they can't force the public's perception of them by words and technicalities alone*, and since the public, the media, and corporate culture doesn't really want to keep track of "a few million entirely-'independent' self-important assholes involved in eternal infighting with each other", they're going to find some way to lump them all together into a group. And if nobody else is going to step up to "represent" the FOSS community, the public/the media/corporate culture will choose the loudest asshole and dismiss the entire movement based on him/her.

They'll do this whether the rest of the community likes it or not.

*: I like to call this the "Real Life Is Not A Dating Sim" theory.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (1)

Imbrondir (2367812) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061152)

Well in the Android submissions, there are usually several comments about how Android is not really open source. Some of them often has a +5 insightful to boot.

Questions vs. Statements, and value of open source (2)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061300)

Since when did a single Slashdot submitter speak for the whole of the FOSS community?

Its worse that that: the submitter didn't even say what is being attributed to the whole community. TFS ends with the question -- an invitation to comment in the attached comment thread -- "Is this a generous contribution to the open source community, or just Adobe offloading another failing technology?"

Some people have interpreted this as if it were a statement that "Adobe [is just] offloading another failing technology", but that's not what it says. It poses a question.

And the answer to the question of "is it A or B?" is that it is A and also B. Look, Adobe clearly sees Flex as, from its business perspective, a failing technology. The developers that are upset about it being abandoned in favor of HTML5 clearly see it as valuable. One of the benefits of open source is that it allows technologies to continue to be used and developed by others even when they no longer serve as a profit center for the original developer.

So, yeah, Adobe is offloading what it sees as a failing technology. On the other hand, it could just as easily kill it dead rather than handing it off to an open source foundation. By doing the latter, it is generously providing a way for someone else to maintain what has been an Adobe proprietary technology so that developers can keep using it.

Tax write off (2)

DogDude (805747) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061354)

No, companies don't care what the "FOSS Community" says. They're donating it. That means that they say that this incredible thingy is worth $100 billion, and write it off as a charitable donation. It's a smart way to end a software product. Sure, maybe they're glad they get a bit of "geek cred", but that isn't worth nearly the amount that they can write off of their books because of their "donation". Also, they get to dump all of the ongoing support costs for the software much quicker than if they were to let it wind down slowly on it's own. It's purely a financial decision, and probably a smart one at that.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061472)

This is completely sidestepping the issue. What the FOSS philosophy demands is directly incompatible with existing business models. While I agree that "offloading" is an ungrateful term to use for an obligation-free gift, to hand over a valuable and promising asset to the FOSS community is incomprehensible to a vast majority of companies. So yes, you can't do anything right with the FOSS community if you refuse to do the exact thing they're asking (whatever your reasons).

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (1)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061806)

Open Source doesn't need more code, it needs more coders and users. If they were going to run the thing, champion it and market it, sell support for it and guide its development, that'd be one thing. When Google bought Android they went to the trouble of setting up the OHA, starting a business, doing big deals and making sure the project would actually work for real-world users and developers. They continue to shepherd its development and its now probably the most widely-installed open-source OS on earth

Adobe is just pulling the abort handle here. It's nice that the code will be out there, but it's just of academic interest at this point.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (5, Informative)

pebs (654334) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061906)

Flex was already open source.. They are just pushing the responsibility of maintaining it to the community. Now if they were open sourcing the Flash Player, I would commend them for that as it could ease the pain a little of those stuck relying on this legacy technology.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (2)

lkcl (517947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38062492)

Right, so when a company end of lines a product they're criticised for not open sourcing it.

Now when a company open sources an end of lined product, they're "offloading another failing technology".

This is why companies don't give a fuck what the FOSS community thinks, because with the FOSS community you can never do anything right. See all the whinging about Android's open source initiatives for another fine example.

right. what, the ones where, just like trolltech and oracle doing qt4 and mysql doing a one-way push where you cannot truly contribute except as a paid-up slave^H^H^H^H^Hemployee, the product cannot truly be considered to be either "Open" or "Free"? have you actually looked at the number of lines of code involved? do you even understand that "Libre" is not just about the "Releasing Of Some Code" it is about developing and fostering an open, exciting and above-all *inclusive* community attitude?

do you understand that without a group of actual independent contributors or a means and a clear path by which random contributors can actually like... y'know... contribute - do you actually understand that without this absolutely critical critical means for people to actually contribute there *is* no "Software Libre", and no amount of renaming exercises as "Open" will ever change a proprietary product into a "Software Libre" one without also having a vibrant community around it.

i don't understand why people don't understand this. look at FreeDCE for example, or ISODE. have you even heard of ISODE 8.0? it's a full-on X500 Directory Services server, released _decades_ ago under a BSD-compatible license. it was free software way before anyone understood free software. but everyone rejected X500 in favour of "LDAP". then, of course, they went "shit - this LDAP stuff is shit! i know, let's extend it, that'll make it better, won't it?" and they've spent a good decade+ reimplementing X500 _back_ into LDAP, thus no longer making it "light"!

the point of mentioning FreeDCE and ISODE is that even releasing technically superior code as Free Software *doesn't* mean it's going to magically end up with a vibrant community based around it - hence the reason why adobe's hunting for victims to take FLEX off their hands. the problem is that they should have done this over 10 years ago, when FLEX was actually relevant.

now, if they released the source code of flash player as Free Software (so that gnash and swfdec could incorporate some missing features) now *that* would be interesting, and worthwhile: they still have a limited window of opportunity in which to do that. but, i believe it's far more likely that they'll just fail to take advantage of the opportunity until it's too late, there, too.

overall i'm looking at a company that's on its way out. by embracing HTML5 they have entered - late - a market they really don't understand, and do not have a big differentiator from absolutely anyone else in the HTML5 market. nobody buys PDF readers. nobody buys Flash Servers because you can get red5, rtmpy and others. time to die, Adobe. cut the losses, and shut up shop.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38062560)

And I don't really care about what these companies think, as long as they don't interfere with me getting useful things done.

Even if Adobe open sources the SDK, it still doesn't mean that the run-time will be open. The open run-times have all trailed behind what most web sites expect, and it used to be that they stood a good chance of hanging either your browser or your entire graphics system. This won't be of any help to that.

Is open sourcing program X better than not open sourcing program X? Yes. Is open sourcing program X while program X is relevant better than open sourcing program X when open-technology Y has relegated program X to a lower relevance? Yes.

You can certainly do things "right" by the community. You can also do things "wrong" by the various people that make-up the community.

Re:FOSS attitude fail. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38062760)

Funny thing here is that when New Atlanta open sourced BlueDragon, a ColdFusion alternative, an Adobe employee blogged that this meant New Atlanta was dumping BlueDragon and right on cue the fanboys dove in snapping their necks in agreement. Now, the story's changed of course.

You can't have it both ways, Adobe fanboys. You either think that open sourcing something means a company is dumping it or it doesn't, but saying one thing when it's someone else doing it and another when Adobe's doing it is hypocritical.

Not to mention anyone who's neck deep in the Adobe ecosystem has no room whatsoever to talk about open source anyway since not a one of them understands a goddamn thing about what open source truly means.

Player? (5, Interesting)

lavaforge (245529) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060652)

Will this include player components? As it stands, the span of usefulness for the SDK is going to be limited if there isn't a player to run the output.

Re:Player? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061776)

No. Really, the only difference is that before it was open-sourced with Adobe managing the official release process. Now someone else will manage it. As of 3.0 (i believe) you could always view the sdk's source. There are a number of classes that flashPlayer has built-in, but the flex code base never saw, just used.

As a flex developer, my biggest annoyance is the fact that there really isn't anything as elegant as flex. I could go back to javascript + html, but MAN I hated those days... flex code is so pretty. Hopefully something fills the 'enjoyable to develop in' void... grails maybe?... we shall see.

Rhetorical question? (2)

Guidii (686867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060694)

Is this a generous contribution to the open source community, or just Adobe offloading another failing technology?"

Both, obviously!

Trash The Flash, Keep The Flex (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060764)

I've used the Flex SDK and FlexBuilder IDE. While the underlying Flash runtime is notoriously bad, the declarative XML structure, ActionScript language and matching IDE are actually quite pleasant to work with. I'd love to see someone replace the dreadful Flash runtime with a native HTML5 runtime but keep the decent bits.

Anybody know what this means for Adobe's AIR platform?

Re:Trash The Flash, Keep The Flex (3, Informative)

wonkavader (605434) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061000)

Agreed. Flex really isn't bad.

I did a real business app in it. It was not my choice, but once the choice was made, Flex turned out to be not terrible.

Not a bad language. Not too bad a development environment. But it needed some growing up, needed some changes to the event model, needed a little more coherency. But it worked, and it was pleasant to write in.

Re:Trash The Flash, Keep The Flex (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38063392)

Quit posting on here with rational and thoughtful reflections based on actual experience. I prefer ignorant flaming of Adobe development platforms from people who have never written an Adobe based application in their life and wouldn't know where to start.

What's next? Hummmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060794)

So what's next? Adobe Coldfusion seems a likely candidate. New Atlanta - the other supplier of Coldfusion server (Blue Dragon) has already open sourced much of it's product, can Adobe be far behind?

Re:What's next? Hummmmm (1)

Aeros (668253) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060844)

I doubt it, at least not for some time. They are about to release their newest version 10 (Zeus) that they have been putting a lot into. From what I understand, they are still doing pretty well with the CF products.

Re:What's next? Hummmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060982)

Well, you can also count RAILO as another CF engine, there is more than one. I can't see Adobe open sourcing CF.

Useless (-1, Troll)

dev453 (2508442) | more than 2 years ago | (#38060814)

I used many web development tools, and I must say that Flex really sucks big time.
It really no wonder why it failed when it cant't even render fonts [evenweb.com] properly.

Flex SDK ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38060904)

Who want it ? Everybody goes for HTML5 :)

Giving a dead horse is not a gift.

Re:Flex SDK ? (1)

plover (150551) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061314)

Anybody maintaining old flex apps may want to keep their old stuff viable until they can justify the effort to port to HTML5. For some organizations, this might be really expensive.

Suprising (2)

bigsexyjoe (581721) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061106)

While I agree that HTML5 is better than Flash, it is pretty surprising that they are going down without a fight, and doing so early in the process. I would think they would drum it up as long as possible so they could sell off their stocks. After all plenty of businesses use Flex, and they aren't going to re-factor anytime soon. Likewise, old browsers with bad HTML5 support are not going away soon?

Do they perhaps think that Flash/Flex can out compete HTML5 if they open source it? Do they think Flex development will be a good gateway to AIR development? I guess I just don't get the strategy.

Re:Suprising (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061248)

You do realize they aren't dropping desktop Flash, right?

Re:Suprising (2)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061444)

If you have to develop in HTML5 for the mobile platforms and HTML5 is also supported on the desktop, why would you waste time making something in Flash?

Re:Suprising (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061746)

You've got it backwards.

If you've already got something developed in Flash, why would you waste time developing a mobile version regardless of the technology. That's the real problem. The choice of technology is no so much the big barrier.

The desktop version isn't going to work well on a mobile device regardless.

Re:Suprising (1)

shar303 (944843) | more than 2 years ago | (#38064350)

You've got it backwards.

As a fellow ipad user, I resent the suggestion that we wouldn't be able to hold one the right way around (screen towards.) I can only speak for myself, but it took less than half an hour to work that one out, you insensitive clod!

Re:Suprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38063124)

It might be more the case that Adobe don't think that HTML5 can get anywhere in most of the areas where Flash is useful; HTML5 is likely to involve taking the user back to the days of "this website is best viewed with [insert browser here]" and they realize that this just won't wash with a majority of devs.

As soon as a dev wants to do anything complex such as render/capture video or generate 3D using the gpu, then they will find that HTML5 as a viable solution is several years away, and probably always will be. You can ask youtube or any one of the millions that play flash games every day.

When HTML5 was first suggested, Flash was at version 2 (it's now 11). Forget the hype and do the math.

ColdFusion (1)

PerfectionLost (1004287) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061108)

I am waiting with baited breath for them to off-load ColdFusion to the open source world.

Re:ColdFusion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38061228)

Baited breath? Have you been eating nightcrawlers?

Re:ColdFusion (1)

plover (150551) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061352)

What are you using for bait? Herring? Garlic? Garlic infused herring?

Oh, you meant bated breath. Never mind.

Re:ColdFusion (1)

smbarbour (893880) | more than 2 years ago | (#38061696)

That won't happen. It is specifically a cash cow for them. It's only used by web developers who don't know better. It is on the same tier as FrontPage (or perhaps even lower).

Re:ColdFusion (1)

PerfectionLost (1004287) | more than 2 years ago | (#38064144)

ColdFusion is a programming language, on the same tier as .NET or PHP. People have been abandoning it because of licensing--but if Adobe wants to sell editors, not server software, they may conceivably ditch the license in order to sell more editors.

Corporate Sponsor (1)

awjr (1248008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38062728)

Flex was getting recognized as a way to deliver enterprise level solutions across businesses that were unable/unwilling to change, particularly financial institutions (where IE 7 can be the defacto standard). Technologies like this need a corporate sponsor to get buy in and when the Adobe makes this type of statement: "In the long-term, we believe HTML5 will be the best technology for enterprise application development." [adobe.com] you really really really have to get very concerned. The whole reason people used Flex is because offered a platform agnostic solution that was not dependent upon the current version of your browser and provided a good feature set.

Flex will carry on, but without the corporate sponsor, it's not going to continue as a 'enterprise solution'.

They'll be dropping AIR next.

What's ahead? (1)

StripedCow (776465) | more than 2 years ago | (#38063788)

Now that everybody seems to be targeting HTML5 and javascript in the back-end, perhaps finally W3C will make HTML and js more developer friendly.

Right now, the HTML and js combo seems to be targeted at novice users, who don't use it anyway, in any direct form.

With a more developer-friendly environment, we could start making our own scripting languages and run them on the web. Heck, we could even write our own rendering systems and send them along with our code. Doing something like that with the current W3C specs seems just plain silly.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...