Beta
×

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!

Macromedia: More FUD About SVG

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the incentive-examination dept.

Graphics 392

Robin Berjon writes "Macromedia recently announced that its latest version of Flash Lite (a limited Flash for mobile devices) was to support SVG Tiny 1.1, and support it fully (though no one has yet been able to verify that assertion). For a moment, the Web community wondered if they might be playing nice at last, after yielding to massive pressure from the mobile market to support W3C and 3GPP standards, or if they simply meant to use SVG as a trojan to get Flash into mobile devices. An article freshly published on Macromedia's web site clearly makes the case that they're after the latter, speading as much FUD as possible along the way. Thankfully, Antoine Quint decided to respond in a brief O'Reilly Net article in which he debunks Macromedia's marketing lies one by one, and expands on the wondrous features of SVG Tiny 1.1 and the shortly upcoming SVG Tiny 1.2 that make people drool before their mobile phones. "

cancel ×

392 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fighting dirty? of course! (-1, Flamebait)

Fire Witch (798701) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754822)

What do you expect from a company who specialises in the 2nd most obnoxious web advertisements known to man?

Bad Hat (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754913)

Red Hat, the world's largest distributor of Linux, an open source operating system for computers, said that it would restate its results for the past three years and admitted that the Securities and Exchange Commision was investigating its accounts. Red Hat's shares plunged by over 20%.

"debunks Macromedia's marketing lies" (4, Funny)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754828)

Lies filled with bunk are the worst lies of all.

Re:"debunks Macromedia's marketing lies" (1)

Fire Witch (798701) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754846)

Lies filled with bunk are the worst lies of all.
They're certainly the hardest to clean. What with all that bunk getting stuck in the corners and cracks.

Re:"debunks Macromedia's marketing lies" (1)

gwoodrow (753388) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754858)

I never knew there was such a thing as non-bunky lies.

Re:"debunks Macromedia's marketing lies" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755165)

Lies filled with bunk are the worst lies of all.

But the best lies are the truth partly told.

Cue the Flash-bashers... (1, Insightful)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754838)

Rebuttal [slashdot.org] already lined up for the 'Flash sucks' brigade. Take it away you 'Flash is a bad technology because it is abused by a few clueless web designers' merchants.

Re:Cue the Flash-bashers... (4, Interesting)

rokzy (687636) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754984)

(imo) flash is a bad technology because it fundamentally makes access to information difficult, once you have a flash based website there's no searching, selecting text, deep-linking etc.

it also wastes bandwidth and client resources.

if it weren't for Flashblock, flash would be a far greater annoyance/hinderence to me than even spam.

Re:Cue the Flash-bashers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755073)

flash is a bad technology because it fundamentally makes access to information difficult, once you have a flash based website there's no searching, selecting text, deep-linking etc

My aunt likes flash sites; she buys products
when there is pretty animation. She doesn't give a shit about searching, selecting text, or deep linking. In fact, people who use Flash understand my aunt far better than you do.

it also wastes bandwidth and client resources

like my aunt's computer's CPU cycles are worth anything... or her bandwith hasn't been paid for

Re:Cue the Flash-bashers... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755110)

I heard your aunt's a cunt. I don't give a shit about her.

Re:Cue the Flash-bashers... (1)

Moofie (22272) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755125)

If it's my bandwidth, and my client resources, why do you care?

imo flash is a good technology because it enables Homestar Runner to amuse me.

Re:Cue the Flash-bashers... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755135)

>no searching, selecting text, deep-linking etc.

Wrong on all three accounts.

-google and other search engines index flash content
-you can select text, although the designer / developer can prevent this if they want.
-there is nothing that prevents allowing users to link into flash content

Flash is not an open standard (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754997)

Flash sucks because it is not an open standard; it is a closed, proprietary standard controlled by one company. Everything else being equal, I prefer an open standard over a closed stadnard.

Linux is not an open standard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755046)

it does not have a committee like W3C stamping its approval.... what's a standard but adoption; if it is adopted, it is a standard, standard means "to compare against", it seems people are comparing SVG to Flash, therefore flash is a standard, QED

Re:Linux is not an open standard (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755074)

What part of "open" did you not get?

English creates compound expressions; "open standard" is like "iron wall" where open is not a modifier to "standard" (an adjunct in lunguistic terms), but a word which changes the entire noun (compliment in linguistics terms); in fact "open standard" is, linguistically, a single noun using two words.

So, yeah, flash may be a "standard", but is it an "open standard"?

(Yes, I know, teaching basic linguistics to the typical Slashdot poster is an exercise in futility),

Re:Flash is not an open standard (1)

bsd4me (759597) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755053)

The standard isn't open like SVG, but you can download it from Macromedia.

Clarification (1)

bsd4me (759597) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755130)

Oops. I should clarify this a bit. The SWF standard is available from Macromedia. I think this [macromedia.com] is the proper link. The FLA file format is proprietary.

Flash is very popular in Latin America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755109)

Flash, interestingly enough, is very popular in Latin America. Than again, so is fotolog [fotolog.net] .

Re:Cue the Flash-bashers... (1)

Kphrak (230261) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755170)

'Flash is a bad technology because it is abused by a few clueless web designers'

Really? There's another kind?

>ducks<

RIM Color Blackberry & Plazmic (1)

PogiTalonX (449644) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754849)

There's another company using SVG, caled Plazmic. Their stuff really enhances software for the blackberry. From using svg, I really hope that it becomes a standard rather than how Macromedia has dominated the field. It seems to somewhat keep up with flash. Also it makes blackberry apps look great. :>

EXTREME Goatse! (1)

ExtremeGoatse! (778447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754853)


THAT'S RIGHT FOLKS, EXTREMEGOATSE! IS BACK!!!

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_
g_______________________________________________g_ _
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o_ _
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a_ _
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t_ _
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s_ _
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e_ _
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x_ _
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*_ _
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g_ _
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o_ _
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>__|__/____a_ _
t_______/\_|___C_____)/______\_(_____>__|_/_____t_ _
s______/_/\|___C_____)_______|__(___>___/__\____s_ _
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\___e_ _
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x_ _
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*_ _
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g_ _
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o_ _
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a_ _
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t_ _
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s_ _
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e_ _
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x_ _
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_


Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Really who gives a sh1t (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754856)

A commercial company wants to screw open standards - so what else is new?

What a bunch of (1)

BillsPetMonkey (654200) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754868)

Flashturbators those Macromedia people are. We'd much rather drool before SVG on our mobile phones.

Second thoughts, euuw ...

Re:What a bunch of (1)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754882)

Yeah, even though SVG is incapable of half the stuff Flash can do and isn't really what anyone should be comparing it with.

Re:What a bunch of (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754915)

Yeah, even though SVG is incapable of half the stuff Flash can do and isn't really what anyone should be comparing it with.

Your FUD is packed with lies and bunk. I ought to remove it immediately.

Sincerely,
timothy

Re:What a bunch of (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754932)

What can Flash do that SVG can't?

Re:What a bunch of (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754979)

What can Flash do that SVG can't?

It lowers the cost of customer support. Compare

Sir, did you install the Flash plugin? No? Well, you need to install it.

to

Sir, did you install the SVG plugin? what? yes, it's Ess-Vee-Gee... Yes, Sarah-Vostok-Gargoyle... No? well you need to install it.

Re:What a bunch of (1)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755034)

The original post said that SVG does 1/2 the things that Flash does.

What else can't it do? And why can't the client just install a SVG plugin?

Re:What a bunch of (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755035)

Then all you need is to type apt-get install svg-plugin.

Oh, I forgot. You're using a primitive DOS-based OS like Windows 2000.

Re:What a bunch of (1)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755043)

Video. XML parsing (last time I checked SVG couldn't do that in its authoring tool). Show up on a decent proportion of the world's web browsers.

Re:What a bunch of (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754935)

Whoa dude. Like stop the FUD, man.

Who cares if the things aren't comparable, and nobody uses SVG. Everyone has to rally around SVG because Tim BernersLee pissed on it and Mozilla might finish implementing it in 2008.

Flash Lite (2, Insightful)

corngrower (738661) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754872)

Tell me more so I know how to keep it off my systems.

Gosh... (4, Funny)

Trillan (597339) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754874)

For a so-called debunking, there's an awful lot of "Yes, this is true, but it doesn't tell the whole story" in the article. Quint's article reads like a panic attack waiting for a problem.

Indeed (1, Troll)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754923)

A grammer error in the opening line, a photo that makes the guy look like he's smoking crack, and a writing style that makes him sound like a disgruntled MACR ex-employee. FUD from Macromedia? I think I know where the real FUD is coming from here.

Re:Indeed (1, Offtopic)

mrscorpio (265337) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754993)

It's "grammar".

Re:Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755031)

It's "its".

Re:Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755072)

Put a period inside so-called "quotation marks."

Re:Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755199)

No, it's "it's" in this context, since it's a contraction for "it is."

Re:Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755216)

No, it's "it's".

Its - Possessive. His/Hers/Its
It's - Contraction of It and is. There's/What's/It's

Who Needs Flash? (4, Insightful)

Anomalous Canard (137695) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754881)

Most Flash content I've seen is ads or novelties. I've found very few sites where Flash contributes anytihng to the site.

The last thing I want on my web enabled phone is crappy Flash content slowing my downloads even further.

I went to an online commerce site where all the merchandise was viewable only in Flash animations. I saved some money that day and the website operator lost a sale.

Re:Who Needs Flash? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754925)

Broken Saints [brokensaints.com] uses flash the way it's meant to be used.

It's an online, cinematic novel-esque story thing. The DVD is coming out in October, and looks to be truly excellent. ...Macromedia is forever evil in my books, until they come out with a plugin for Shockwave on Linux. Boo on them.

Re:Who Needs Flash? (1)

corngrower (738661) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754929)

I've managed to eliminate flash support from my version of Netscape. This was for the same reason you state. Most flash content is those very annoying ads. Flash slows the downloads as well. Tough nougies for those sites that expect my browser to support flash.

Re:Who Needs Flash? (2, Interesting)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754983)

Most javascript content I've seen is for annoying popup ads and popunders, especially from porn sites that make it almost impossible to clear your screen without quitting the browser. Scarcely a day goes by when I don't get irritated by at least one popup, and popunders are just evil. Who needs javascript?

And if it's Flash helping the content and functionality you want, go to www.broadmoor.com [broadmoor.com] and click 'reservations.' Show me a _single_ web technology that can do all of that without having to combine ten other technologies and looking the same in all browsers.

Re:Who Needs Flash? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755001)

This is exactly why I use Firefox and disable Javascript. Really, who does need it?

Re:Who Needs Flash? (5, Insightful)

Mprx (82435) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755190)

Microscopic text (zoom is worthless here, fixed size page layout) and irritating animation is supposed to be an example of good use of Flash? Web pages are not supposed to look the same in all browsers. The text also can't be copied and pasted, and individual pages within the Flash can't be bookmarked. This site only illustrates why Flash sucks so bad.

Re:Who Needs Flash? (1)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755115)

People who do usefull things [xical.org] in Flash?

Re:Who Needs Flash? (2, Interesting)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755117)

Believe it or not, I don't need flash either. I've gone on rants here before about it and I think it still sucks. In fact, I disable ALL plugins by default, and only load them when I get a pretty much blank page and I'm for some reason, interested in the java or flash that they might have.

I think that all plugins are evil for browsers. Back in the damned plugin craze of the mid to late 90's that sucked. Every site had their own cute plugin that you had to install. Ha! Remember VRML [vrmlsite.com] ? Havn't seen that in a while, and that was pretty cool as far as eye candy goes.

I especially don't like the new standards that people are working on for plugins in browsers. I see this as a possible reinvention of the plugin craze (probably the new form of spyware).

Now that I've bashed plugins and flash in general, I will have to say that flash is actually a cool multimedia toy. Its fairly easy to do really cool animations, games, etc. I'm shocked that flash has not made itself a pluginable thing via APIs as eye candy for windows apps. Instead of a silly dll animation, why not have a cooler flash one? You could have flash splash screens, etc.

But as far as the web goes, flash is unnecessary, and it (and all plugins) are in my opinion unwanted. I think that the fact that there are really only 2 plugins left that are commonly used (flash and java) says that the "market" does not want plugins. Java is hardly used anymore at all, and 99% of the time flash is used for ads. And they are the most annoying adds. They do not stop cycling like GIFs (doesn't your webbrowser stop them after 1 cycle?) They have the utter annoying feature that they sieze my keyboard input while I'm navigating a webpage via keyboard.

Summary: tech good, tech in browser bad

ummm who cares? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754890)

I skimmed both macromedia's article, and the rebuttal.. All I can say is, who cares? So macromedia says they're better than SVG and Quint finds faults in what they say. Big deal. Am I missing something here?

Re:ummm who cares? (1)

optikshell (786466) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754911)

Nope, you're not missing anything. Just a filler.

Re:ummm who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755095)

Redundant, yet the first one to state it. Good job, mods.

NIV (4, Interesting)

Queer Boy (451309) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754894)

Macromedia has an EXTREME case of non-invented-here that they have been fighting for YEARS. They are desperately trying to be Microsoft by locking people into their file formats, when they are late to market on abilities. Problem as I see it is that they don't realise their tools are wonderful and that's the reason to use Macromedia. Everything Director does can be done in QuickTime and was done in QuickTime BEFORE Director came out, it's just that the Director tool is so good.

If they would just realise people would use their products to create QuickTime/SVG over Director/Shockwave, they would be OK.

Macromedia has never been a first to market company, they just create great tools.

Re:NIV (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754966)

So, people should use products that have inferior tools. Thanks for your input.

Director tool is so good? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755018)

The anonymous poster above speaks the truth -- you are bashing for the sake of bashing.

Re:NIV (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755120)

Use open standards.

Even if the tools aren't good now, there's a community of developers who'll make good tools. In fact, you should stop being so selfish and contribute to the community.

WTF with your trailer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755111)

Karma is an angry black woman in a beat up Plymouth Reliant with two flat tires that only turns left.

What a racist piece of shit comment.

Re:NIV (0, Troll)

Monkelectric (546685) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755157)

Obviously you know next to dick about flash. Flash is the worst designed mass marketed program *EVER*. I would shoot every macromedia developer with a gun if I had half a chance. They have made improvements in flash 5 and MX, but its still a disaster.

Re:NIV (1)

Queer Boy (451309) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755206)

Flash is the worst designed mass marketed program *EVER*

I guess that's why it's used so much. I've never know anyone to say "X is such a uselsss program" to have any use for it. So you have acknowledged you're not good at using it.

Re:NIV (1)

jdbo (35629) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755212)

Despite the fact that you're obviously trolling, it's quite obvious that you've never used Lotus Notes.

If you had, then you'd swap "shoot... with a gun" to "force to use Lotus Notes".

Macromedia's great asset (2, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754895)

Nothing beats a great product naming scheme for grabbing mindshare. Today they launch Flash Lite, but they still have the following absolutely smashing names at their disposal:

- Flash Flood
- Flash Gordon
- Flash Card ...

Re:Macromedia's great asset (1)

Neil Blender (555885) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754921)

Nothing beats a great product naming scheme for grabbing mindshare. Today they launch Flash Lite, but they still have the following absolutely smashing names at their disposal:

- Flash Flood
- Flash Gordon
- Flash Card ...


And hopefully: Flash in the Pan

Re:Macromedia's great asset (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754978)

And hopefully: Flash in the Pan

With an installed base of 500 million players? Please.

Re:Macromedia's great asset (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754965)

You forgot a couple:

Flash ME and Flash IE (Indecent Exposure)

Flash Forms - not just obnoxious animations (1)

crystall (123636) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754937)

Quint seems under the impression that all Flash involves splashy, obnoxous animations. That was the first use of Flash, but things are changing. Flash forms provide a form-like presentation that can do client-side actions without Javascript. Given the number of folks who surf with JS turned off, why is this a "bad thing."

Please understand what Flash is today, not what it was 3 years ago,

Re:Flash Forms - not just obnoxious animations (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754999)

You can make great things [prince-of-persia.com] with Flash.

Unfortunately, you're right, most people use it to create annoying crap.

Re:Flash Forms - not just obnoxious animations (2, Informative)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755012)

You're wasting your time, mate. Have a look in my journal and see the ignorance that abounds on /. about Flash. Of course it has moved on, hell I can't even remember the last time I saw a flash splashscreen on a website, but most people here just don't want to know. As far as they're concerned, it's not open source therefore it must be evil. (Unless it's Apple of course.)

Re:Flash Forms - not just obnoxious animations (1)

crystall (123636) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755092)

That is a very well argued entry in your journal. Wish I was as eloquent in defense of Flash. And no, I'm not a Flash developer. I use Cold Fusion, but my team has been considering going to Flash for forms.

Is there a Flash editor/creator yet? (3, Interesting)

Eberlin (570874) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754939)

Is there a Flash Animation editor for Linux yet? I don't mean stuff that'll save to SWF like the drawing tool for OpenOffice or sodipodi. I'm talking about stuff that'll make animations, deal with actionscripting, and support embedded sounds.

It seems a natural progression from the projects that are creating libraries to be able to do such things. Is it ming? I don't remember.

I know the whole "Flash Sucks" thing and the "Macromedia is evil" thing but there are uses for it in one form or another..especially for artsy/multimedia-based projects. Are there any Open Source projects out there that can substitute for Flash MX or will WINE still be the only way to get through?

Option to disable (1)

powerpuffgirls (758362) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754942)

What I don't like about Flash is its inability to easily and quickly be turned off (or on). This plugin really plugged in and it's difficult to pull out.

Flash might have its use in mobile device, like those little Flash games. However I would rather see Flash as a console-type application, that one can turn on and run games with it, instead of an invisible and annoying plug-in that appears everywhere.

Re:Option to disable (1)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754988)

I find that "rm -f" removes it quite nicely.

Re:Option to disable (1)

powerpuffgirls (758362) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755030)

Wow thanks for the advice, it did the job. I never know -f removes all flash-related stuffs. I'll use rm -i to remove Internet Explorer now.

Re:Option to disable (1)

Seth Finklestein (582901) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755107)

I wrote the popular Flashblock plugin for Mozilla Firefox. Every web page that you open prompts you whether you want to play the Flash movies therein.

For more information, send $39.95 to the address shown.

Re:Option to disable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755155)

This is Slashdot, where people are not smart enough to use a simple search engine. Here is a link [mozdev.org] for the average Slashdot user.

Ah Yes (4, Informative)

cubicledrone (681598) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754949)

Summary:

"Macromedia must be lying because they make Flash and we all hate Flash because someone used it for a banner ad."

No matter what play on words and rewrite of definitions Macromedia folks can come up with, Flash Lite is not standard.

Macromedia Flash is standard, whether "Flash Lite" is or isn't. There are thousands of Flash developers and hundreds of millions of Flash player installations. Flash MX managed to accomplish what no other platform has: cross-platform web multimedia with a WORKING AUTHORING APPLICATION and a WORKING PLAYER at the SAME TIME.

Just because Macromedia is making money doesn't make everything they say FUD. They make the best web development tools in the business, period. They don't have to support open standards, but they are supporting SVG, and Fireworks+Flash have the best commercial support for PNG on the market. These are good things(tm). The anti-Macromedia-because-they-make-Flash thing is getting REALLY old.

Re:Ah Yes (3, Interesting)

rzbx (236929) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755091)

"They make the best web development tools in the business, period."

They have the best known throughout most of the world tools for their purpose, but that does not make them the best necessarily. Btw, who is to say they will continue making such "great" software? A business has no interest in progress unless they have no choice. Business-wise, they are what Microsoft is. They sell software. The internet is leaning the business world toward services, not sale of software. Any company that resists this is going to be up against a lot of pressure. This pressure exists everywhere, from end users that don't want to pay over and over to "upgrade" their product, to the large corporations that wish to lower their TCO. One can argue all they want about software as a "shrink wrapped" product all they want, but it doesn't change what is happening. Macromedia is going to be up against some very stiff competition. What keeps them alive is interesting in a way. They have a large user base for starters. They offered what people wanted at the time and quickly took control over a nice piece of the market. They exist because just like the MS Windows OS, people are stuck with it. There are many flash sites. They are not exactly a standard, they are simply popular. When people say standard, they generally talk about a technology that is NOT controlled by one company. A standard is agreed upon and used througout the world by many. Flash is simply a "popular" (depends on how you define popular too) technology being used by many, in many cases forcefully(not physically, etc. don't twist what I say please).

SVG is great (1)

Frobozz0 (247160) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754952)

SVG really is a great standard, and is incorporated into so many good standards-based products.

I'm not against Macromedia by any stretch of the imagination, but SVG really is a breakthrough. I look forward to a day when bitmap graphics are only needed for photographic representations on web sites.

SVG is bloated icky technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754994)

it is verbose and largly full of logical flaws

Re:SVG is bloated icky technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755207)

Here, "logical flaws" = geekspeak for "things I don't like".

Using the word "logical" when you aren't, doesn't make you rational. It just makes you sound stupid.

Honestly, I just don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754963)

I just want Macromedia to support their products on linux. I care about nothing else. Their tools are awesome.

If they natively supported linux, I'm sure I could begin transitioning many of my web-designer friends to linux...

Also, I'm not sure if this really classifies as FUD; it's just markedroid speak. All companies do this. Does anyone take what marketing spews seriously from any company?

Re:Honestly, I just don't care (1)

jdwest (760759) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755181)

I really don't see what Macromedia has to lose here. Does it cower to MS? If so, then shouldn't Macromedia be just a little more than worried about "Sparkle?" [microsoft-watch.com]

Sounds like Antonine Quint is an arrogant ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754972)

He quotes from his own blog instead of writing
new content for O'Reilly. What a power trip.

SVG is so good how now? (1, Insightful)

Com2Kid (142006) | more than 10 years ago | (#9754973)

Hmm, let me see:

Flash: Widely supported, good tool set, easy to use, looks good, performance varies but is generally acceptable if the artist didn't go massivly nuts.

SVG: Slow as hell no matter how fast your machine is, poor support, I /GUESS/ there is a tool set out there, but who in their right mind would want to use it?

Honestly, I think the SVG toolset is larger than the Flash toolset, but Flash, umm, well, works.

And there is the difference folks. Flash and Shockwave are easy to install, frequently updated (albiet with slower and slower versions each time, heh, but Flash HAS gotten much more powerful over the years), and it actually shows moving image thingies at a speed faster than a crawl.

And no, don't link to Adobe's laughable SVG plugin.

We block ALL Flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9754995)

... light or heavy, so we don't care. Web is a better place without Flash.

Well, of COURSE it's a trojan... so? (5, Insightful)

mad.frog (525085) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755019)

Yeah, it's a "trojan", but you say that like it's a bad thing.

Look, a lot of phone makers want SVG-Tiny support on their phone. Macromedia wants to put Flash Lite on a lot of phones. This is an obvious way to make that happen.

But geez, there's no big conspiracy to get proprietary stuff on phones just to Stick It To You Open Source guys... we just have a technical solution that we happen to think is pretty damn good, that will suit the mobile market well. So what if it's proprietary? I defy you to show be ONE SINGLE PHONE in existence that runs on Open Source software; phone makers seem to be pretty happy with using whatever will get the job done, without getting all religious about this.

Honestly, I read Slashdot daily, but I'll never understand the peculiar Flash-Is-Evil bias. Yes, there are annoying ads that use it. There are also annoying ads that use animated GIF, and even HTML. It's just a tool, folks, and like the song says, every tool is a weapon if you hold it right.

And for the expected flood of responses saying, "You can do this with SVG+DHTML+SMIL+etc,etc"... bollocks. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's practical.

Look: 98% of interesting interactive animated stuff on the Web is done using Flash rather than that something else. I submit to you that this is not a coincidence! Artists aren't stupid, and they sure as hell aren't going to spend hundreds of dollars on Flash if there really was a superior (or even comparable) solution available for free.

I'll tell you what: why don't you go off and write a nice, free authoring tool for SVG that is good enough for the Homestar guys to completely replace all those Strong Bad Emails with. (I will, of course, expect the final result needs to be just as bandwidth- and processor-efficient as Flash.) Until then, please, give it a rest.

(Disclaimer: I work for Macromedia (though not related to the Flash Lite effort in any way), so I expect to be ignored or dramatically modded down...)

Re:Well, of COURSE it's a trojan... so? (4, Insightful)

boomgopher (627124) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755150)

Honestly, I read Slashdot daily, but I'll never understand the peculiar Flash-Is-Evil bias. Yes, there are annoying ads that use it. There are also annoying ads that use animated GIF, and even HTML

It's not the ads I bitch about, that's actually an appropriate application IMHO. It's lame ass sites like Ray-Ban's [rayban.com] where Flash is used as a replacement for HTML.
Especially when there's very little here that needed Flash, as in this case. Site-as-snazzy applet-thing should die a painful death.

More on Macromedia + SVG (1)

Rahga (13479) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755026)

Found this entry on a blog at svg.org, a nice look at the shortcomings of Macromedia Flex's SVG coverage [svg.org] . Odd timing (Posted July 1), but it fits.

wait, i'm confused (1)

Triumph The Insult C (586706) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755051)

i thought cell phones were for making goddamn phone calls, not surfing the web

don't want flash on your cell phone? the choice is easy. don't buy a cell phone with flash on it (or that is compatible with running Flash-Lite or whatever)

Uh... when will OSS support SVG for real? (2, Interesting)

CajunArson (465943) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755054)

OK, so Macromedia makes a viewer for SVG but they have a preference for their own technololgy. That's like attacking OpenOffice for making a system that can read MS Word documents while encouraging its own document format. Right now Macromedia appears to have done a hell of a lot more to support SVG by making a viewer for it than all of OSS who talks about SVG all day long but I have yet to see a single OSS utility to employ SVG beyond a couple of gimmicky static images. So should we say that open source developers are trying to kill SVG??

Re:Uh... when will OSS support SVG for real? (1)

smclean (521851) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755217)

But, OpenOffice supporting MS Word is backwards in terms of licensing. In that case, the OSS software is supporting the use of proprietary file formats. The movement encouraged by the support is towards free software, not away from it.

This is slashdot. You should expect animosity towards vendors of non-free software by now. Reading Macromedia's PR stuff, you can certainly see a bit of spin towards their products. On Slashdot, that's FUD, Q.E.D. You know that :)

That's it... no more Flash for me (0, Troll)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755064)

Dammit! Flash was one of those apps that has kept me from switching to Linux completely. But thanks to this kind of FUD, I'm dropping them completely. I'll build crap using Inkscape or something until they can play nice with others.

That's nice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755082)

The truth is that Flash is total garbage to begin with. If they don't like SVG, then maybe that's a blessing in disguise. Perhaps SVG will see more use in actual web/desktop content instead of really annoying banner ads and braindead web pages that Flash is used for. If there's one plugin I go out of my way to avoid installing on my pc, it's Flashplayer. I wish mozilla would block all that crap, just like cookies and popups.

Ok, quit the stupid Flash bashing allready. (2, Insightful)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755089)

No doubt, MM is a marketing driven company. And one of the rare profitable ones in the pure software business. And Macromedias Flash IDE sucks. It's near unusable for professional large scale developement of flash apps. Like almost every IDE they offer.
But nevertheless Flash is the most widespread professional rich media plattform. And it's a good one too.
The recent release of flash's PL ActionScript (V 2) has even has stepped on to a professional level with solid oop and error handling very simular to Java.
There are even serious OSS projects developing on it. Xical [xical.org] comes to mind as one.
So quit the flash bashing. There are flash sites that suck a lot. That's because every Idiot can grab a ripped Flash IDE and start clicking some crap together. Ok, I get that. But that doesn't mean Flash is bad. Just like bad Java apps won't make a bad java platform. Keep that in mind before you start ranting on what you don't know whoot about.

Flash (or SWF) is open! (1)

pjmidnight (712441) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755116)

Need I remind... SWF is an open document format. http://www.openswf.org [openswf.org]

ahhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755139)

Great idea. Let's get rid of all the phsyical material that people can read so that in the future, when robots take over, they can easily deny us the digital information as nothing phsyical will exist to worry about. Good idea.

robots.

forget flash, and svg sucks too (2, Interesting)

DNAspark99 (218197) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755158)

Anyone who has been checking out the latest developments by rasterman (enlightenment) may be aware of the upcoming 'edje' library, which appears to be quite promising for desktop, as well as embedded applications, phones, wonderapps and such.

http://www.enlightenment.org/pages/systems.html

"Edje is one of the more unique parts of EFL, combining many things that Shockwave / FLASH can do with some things it can't, but instead of being designed as a player, it is designed as a slave library to be used by an application to enhance the applications content and display via external compressed data files. It is being expanded continuously, and thanks to its clean design is easy to improve."

Something to keep an eye on for sure!

Gimme a break (2, Insightful)

DamnYankee (18417) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755173)

Since when have Slashdot articles become flamebait? Come on guys - show some editorial restraint!

I am not a fan of Macromedia one way or the other but gimme a break. Flash has not taken over anything. It is just one of many gimmicks used to make web sites (and now mobile sites) "flashier".

Perhaps Slashdot's ire might better be spent on ActiveX controls or those who coopt Javascript? Flash is a tempest in a teapot (though the headline is definitely an attention getter :-) ).

Macromedia must be really evil... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755174)

...if the normal XML whiner crowd around here doesn't complain about SVG being XML. :)

For the Acronym Impaired (2, Informative)

GreenHairedDave (544276) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755186)

From the Jargon Dictionary: "FUD /fuhd/ n. Defined by Gene Amdahl after he left IBM to found his own company: "FUD is the fear, uncertainty, and doubt that IBM sales people instill in the minds of potential customers who might be considering [Amdahl] products." The idea, of course, was to persuade them to go with safe IBM gear rather than with competitors' equipment. This implicit coercion was traditionally accomplished by promising that Good Things would happen to people who stuck with IBM, but Dark Shadows loomed over the future of competitors' equipment or software. See IBM [astrian.net] . After 1990 the term FUD was associated increasingly frequently with Microsoft [astrian.net] , and has become generalized to refer to any kind of disinformation used as a competitive weapon."

I just thought I'd share, since when I read the article I thought WTF is FUD?

Apple is dying: sell stock now. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755196)

Apple Computer, Inc. (AAPL), beset by angry creditors and faced with severe G5 production problems, is on the verge of bankruptcy and total collapse. Apple continues to nosedive into oblivion, as confirmed by industry watchers, investors, and, most painfully, by customers themselves.

As a recent study by Bank of America Securities puts it, Apple ekes out its existence by peddling new hardware to its existing customers; once those customers are satisfied, Apple will run out of steam [forbes.com] . If these disastrous financial forecasts aren't enough, one need only look to Netcraft for confirmation that Apple's market share among Web servers is slowly dwindling down to zero. The market share of Mac OS X is now eclipsed even by that of FreeBSD, another OS that is deeply imperiled.

But the abysmal server presence of OS X is the least of Apple's worries. Apple's most recent quarterly report indicates a death spiral of cash loss. Indeed, Apple has hemorrhaged some $276 million in the last quarter, while racking up a dizzying $2.4 billion in debt. Revenue from sales of the iPod, the portable music player that is barely keeping Apple afloat in this shipwreck of fiscal woe, declined dramatically, threatening to shrink further an already miniscule lifeline.

Likewise, sales of the eMac, iMac and Power Macintosh G5 lines continue to skid. Apple is unable to secure G5 processors in sufficient nubmers to supply its customers with Power Macintosh G5 and iMac computers, as Steve Jobs himself recently admitted. The staggering decline in sales numbers confirms it: there is no doubt that one-time Apple customers, dismayed with the floundering ineptitude of their favorite company, have begun turning away in droves, seeking cheaper, faster hardware from manufacturers such as Dell.

Apple teeters on the precipice of doom, one step away from plummeting to its ultimate nadir of bankruptcy, chaos, and implosion. Wise investors will quickly dump AAPL stock and abandon the doomed company, now less than one year away from complete disintegration.

It's time to move to a new platform: Apple is dead.

who cares about flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9755197)

i mean maybe people who like annoying crap like it but i think most dont

It's about time.... (2, Interesting)

gtshafted (580114) | more than 10 years ago | (#9755201)

... that Flash is on the front page of Slashdot again

lately I've been hearing alot about this horrible upcoming MS thing called XAML [xaml.net] - and (quoting a nameless slashdotter) how it's akin to VB crack for its power and ease of use.

I could be wrong, but I think many people have overlooked that the kind of pervasive scary crap is already here, and it has been here for awhile now.
While I love Java and use it heavily, I admit that Flash is more ubiquitious it runs on almost every major OS and browser. Delivers more on the write once run anywhere.
-Flash is extremely fast and easy to install. it's literally point and click. I don't even think the player is even a 1mb...
-Flash is extremely easy to learn and use: my female, graphic designer cousin who hates anything "technical and dorky" makes flash apps all the time; hell most of flash dev is visual drag and drop
-Flash is getting more powerful by the minute: http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/flashpro/ development/ [macromedia.com]
http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/flashpro/ video/ [macromedia.com]
http://www.macromedia.com/software/central/ [macromedia.com]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?