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!

x86 Linux Flash Player 9 is Final

CmdrTaco posted more than 7 years ago | from the i-still-hate-flash dept.

Linux 288

Schlaegel writes "The official Adobe Linux Flash blog has announced that Flash player for x86 Linux is now final and no longer beta. Every x86 Linux user, at least those willing to load binary software, can rejoice and no longer feel like a second rate citizen. Distribution packages are also available, for example the Macromedia Fedora repository already has the flash player marked for update."

cancel ×

288 comments

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

Finally! (5, Funny)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 7 years ago | (#17644968)

Us Linux users can now watch Zdnet's interview with Torvald about Linux kernel 2.7 [zdnet.com.au] :)

Re:Finally! (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645734)

I watched it yesterday. I've been running the Flash 9 beta for ages.

x64_86 (1)

Biggest Banana Tree (980484) | more than 7 years ago | (#17644982)

Hopefully they will create a x64_86 too - then I'll be really happy!

Re:x64_86 (5, Informative)

andersbergh (884714) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645018)

x86_64, not x64_86

Amd64 rules (sure intel 64 does as well) (2, Insightful)

pato101 (851725) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645140)

Mod me redundant if you wish, but I second this.
As an amd64 linux user since a year and about 5 months, this platform is very mature nowadays and it makes sense to be paid more attention from adobe guys: please learn from nvidia people.
I have a 32bit chroot for any disturbances like this one, but I'm using it less and less.
On the other hand, my own dirty tests show that amd64 behaves about a 15% faster when executing 64bit code than when doing 32bit, so it is not just that 64bit can address more memory: these chips shine at 64bit and deserve a 64bit OS. Sorry but I've not tested intel 64bit CPUs so far.

Re:Amd64 rules (sure intel 64 does as well) (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645456)

I think the speed up you notice is probably due to the amount of optimization that is done for the compiled executable. For the x86 code, they usually only optimize for pentium processors and above, or sometimes even just for 386, however, when they compile for x86-64, they know that there won't be anybody running it on a 368, and that all the processors support a pretty high level of optimization, so this is probably why there's such a difference.

Re:Amd64 rules (sure intel 64 does as well) (2, Informative)

archen (447353) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645624)

Using Gentoo (yes I use Gentoo) I've seen a noticeable increase as well using exactly the same apps, with only the compile arch changing. I'm not sure about 15% but I have seen a difference. My original system was compiled against an athlon-xp (-02), so most of the processor features since the i686 was introduced were in there. Going to an athlon64 (-02) basically added some sse things in the compile. Unless sse is responsible for the fair performance increase - which I doubt - then I would say just moving to 64bit and getting some features like twice as many registers gives you a decent speed upgrade.

Re:Amd64 rules (sure intel 64 does as well) (1)

pato101 (851725) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645814)

No, I am talking about my own code compiled in 32 and 64bit with the same options.

Re:Amd64 rules (sure intel 64 does as well) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17646238)

Well kinda, but not quite.
I'd say half of the benefit comes from having twice the registers and half from having up-to-date ABI. e.g. passing arguments in x87 stack makes SSE pain in the ass.

Deserves better? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645616)

BIOS System Statiscts:
CPU Temp : 42 C
CPU Fan Speed : 4326 RPM
CPU Annoyance at running 32 bit code : 98%
**WARNING MUST TO UPGRADE SOFTWARES**

Re:x64_86 (2, Funny)

suso (153703) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645146)

They started too, but it took them a while in the design phase and then they realized there aren't any 86-bit computers out there.

Re:x64_86 (4, Interesting)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645150)

You can use nspluginwrapper [beauchesne.info] to use the 32 bit Flash plug-in on AMD64 and compatibles. It works quite well.

Re:x64_86 (2, Funny)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645346)

I guess an ARM9 version waaay back of line?

That's moot for my Linux ARM9 [photobucket.com] --unless someone does a Flash to ASCII graphics version for my terminal--but I'm sure there are a number of hand-held ARM9-based devices that could use a Flash player. (/me not willing to convert my Palm TX to Linux just yet, even if browsing Flash sites is a pain.)

Re:x64_86 (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645648)

Don't forget Alpha, PPC and Arm.

Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (3, Funny)

Reverse Gear (891207) | more than 7 years ago | (#17644986)

I am not going to remove flashblock [mozilla.org] from firefox any time soon, I don't expect for flash to become any less annoying and inefficient because of this new release.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (5, Insightful)

solevita (967690) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645008)

It probably won't, but now you have some choice at least. Isn't that what Linux is all about?

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645316)

> It probably won't, but now you have some choice at least. Isn't that what Linux is all about?

What!? Are you new here? Linux is all about bitching, moral superiority, and being able to claim ignorance when our friends and family ask us to fix their windows computers.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (3, Insightful)

stubear (130454) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645368)

"...and being able to claim ignorance when our friends and family ask us to fix their windows computers."

Claim ignorance? Most Linux users ARE truly ignorant when it comes to Windows.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (1)

CantStopDancing (1036410) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646160)

being able to claim ignorance when our friends and family ask us to fix their windows computers.
..and that alone is worth the price of admission.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (1)

MartinG (52587) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645526)

A choice between freedom and non-freedom is an illusiory one.

Yep. Flash is the killer linux app (1)

gp310ad (77471) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646142)

Every on line social forum has users who offer up stuff they found on the net that's ONLY available as flash.
Try converting ANY of the forum members to linux once they learn that they will be left out of a substantial number
of discussions because they can't run the flash player.

This business of holding back linux release for half a year or more is extremely detrimental to linux on the average joe's desktop.
I would not be surprised if many converts went back to windows in order to remain relevant in their social groups.

Same here (2, Insightful)

Mr Europe (657225) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645302)

Go make a comment to that adobe site and You'll see that only positive comments are shown...

Flash Player is behaving badly on win, why would it do other on Linux ?

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (5, Insightful)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645334)

I use flashblock because I cannot concentrate with crap dancing around on the screen.
I hate that its required as an extension (but shown my support for the principle by bugfixing it...)

ClickToView functionality should be a proper configurable option within the core system for all plugin types.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (1)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645868)

Hell yeah. You don't know how esoteric something like removing the embedded windows media player can get.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (1)

jginspace (678908) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645430)

"I am not going to remove flashblock from firefox any time soon"

Hum ... I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you're relying on Flashblock (the Firefox extension?) to block Flash on any old site that means you're allowing javascript on any old site. Know what I mean? If you want to block Flash on untrusted sites then use the javascript blocker, Noscript [mozilla.org] - it has this capability, along with blocking Java as well.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (2, Informative)

kryptkpr (180196) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645978)

There is nothing inherently evil about JavaScript, get a hold of yourself.

I almost never want to see the garbage that Flash is used for, but I almost always want the functionality you get when JavaScript is enabled.

Flashblock is the appropriate balance of convenience and annoyance for the average user.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (1, Troll)

dave420 (699308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645544)

Flash is REALLY useful. I stream my music and video across the net using flash. I know that any machine (Windows/OSX/Linux) that has flash player installed can stream my media. Until there is a decent replacement that is just as light, Flash is here to stay. But nice sour grapes, though. seriously. tasty.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (4, Insightful)

EzInKy (115248) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645808)


Flash is REALLY useful. I stream my music and video across the net using flash. I know that any machine (Windows/OSX/Linux) that has flash player installed can stream my media.


Why not offer your users the option to simply download your material and let them use the player of their choosing?


Until there is a decent replacement that is just as light, Flash is here to stay.


There is no way that flash is lighter than a link to a file.

Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (4, Insightful)

tsa (15680) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646288)

Why not offer your users the option to simply download your material and let them use the player of their choosing?

Maybe because then you have to offer it in many different formats?

I like built-in players in webpages, because they (almost) always Just Work.

Why? (-1, Flamebait)

hotdiggitydawg (881316) | more than 7 years ago | (#17644990)

Flash player for x86 Linux is now final and no longer beta. Every x86 Linux user, at least those willing to load binary software, can rejoice and no longer feel like a second rate citizen.
Excuse me? I've been perfectly happy with the lack of Flash content in my Linux-based web-browsing experience to this point. Remind me why I should rejoice again?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645014)

Video.

Re:Why? (5, Funny)

sharkey (16670) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645044)

Remind me why I should rejoice again?

Because you will now have the option of punching the monkey in addition to spanking it.

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645052)

Don't. But don't think the entire world isn't interested in what you're not interested in. There's plenty of great flash content out there.

Re:Why? (1)

ade05fr (797408) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645064)

im sorry but you must admit that it's necessary to get it if you want to have the full potential for some web sites. maybe i'm not a real linux user but i think it's not a bad thing at all.

Re:Why? (4, Funny)

Ingolfke (515826) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645100)

It wouldn't impact you anyways because the flash player can't be integrated with lynx.

a little bit of aalib, anyone? (4, Funny)

kirils (1050022) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645236)

Anything can be integrated with lynx!

for the uninitiated (1)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645342)

aalib [oreilly.com] lets you play movies using ascii art. An aalib flash player would actually be pretty cool....

Re:Why? (1)

jidar (83795) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645918)

hhahhaha. Brilliant response.
hooray for shooting down the elitists.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645136)

All the kids on my lawn seem to be using this new fangled youtube thingy that apparently needs flash...

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645374)

All the kids on my lawn seem to be using this new fangled youtube thingy that apparently needs flash...


Kids these days! [freshmeat.net]

Re:Why? (0, Troll)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645444)

Well every time linux has some recognition, however insignificant for you (and for me, being it non free binary blob that my powerpc won't see anyway), is yet another nail in the coffin of the "non readiness of linux on the desktop" tale.

Re:Why? (1)

drooling-dog (189103) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646080)

Excuse me? I've been perfectly happy with the lack of Flash content in my Linux-based web-browsing experience to this point.

Um, I've been looking at Flash content (behind Flashblock, of course) for a long time. Why all the talk about this being a new thing, as if it were impossible until now? Isn't it just a version update?

Binary Software? ... (1, Insightful)

un1xl0ser (575642) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645006)

I think that you mean software that isn't free/libre/open-source...

Re:Binary Software? ... (1)

i_should_be_working (720372) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646360)

For whomever modded the above troll, here's some points of distinction. All of the code we run (well, not Python and the like) on a Linux system is in binary. That's what happens when you compile the code; you make a binary to run. So it's silly to say that open source purists don't like to load binary software. They just don't like apps that are only distributed in binary form as opposed to both binary and in source form.

This was the point of the OP.

crashing here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645016)

PClinuxOS latest firefox browser. Crashes on a youtube video after 15 seconds. Better syncing though.

rejoice (4, Funny)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645030)

Now you too can win an ipod.

Second class citizen? (3, Funny)

FrostyCoolSlug (766239) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645054)

What they failed to tell you, was that flash version 723 is being released for windows next week.

This is Great (1)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645080)

Life just wouldn't be complete without the ability to fully experience those spastic dancing silhouettes on lowermybills.com ads.

Re:This is Great (4, Informative)

Nutria (679911) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645812)

Life just wouldn't be complete without the ability to fully experience those spastic dancing silhouettes on lowermybills.com ads.

With an ad-blocker and Flash, you get the "best" of both worlds: You Tube *and* (relatively) ad-less surfing.

Brilliant!!

On a related note... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645096)

I somehow managed to remove the annoying yellow plugin prompt from firefox2. I don't know how I eventually did it, I do know that I spent hours trying to get rid of it and the values in about:config don't work.

No EULA??? (2, Informative)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645098)

I was getting ready to gripe about onerous EULA terms, so I started looking around for the actual text and found... nothing? I wasn't asked to accept a license agreement when installing the player, and I don't even see a license file anywhere.

Is it possible that Adobe actually did something really good here?

Re:No EULA??? (4, Informative)

truedfx (802492) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645294)

Here's the EULA [adobe.com] , and here's where it's linked from. [adobe.com] Complain away! :)

Re:No EULA??? (4, Interesting)

MikeBabcock (65886) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645810)

Here's a good one for people who don't read these:
3.1 Web Player Prohibited Devices. You may not Use any Web Player on any non-PC device or with any embedded or device version of any operating system. For the avoidance of doubt, and by example only, you may not use a Web Player on any (a) mobile devices, set top boxes (STB), handhelds, phones, web pads, tablets and Tablet PCs that are not running Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, game consoles, TVs, DVD players, media centers (excluding Windows XP Media Center Edition and its successors), electronic billboards or other digital signage, internet appliances or other internet-connected devices, PDAs, medical devices, ATMs, telematic devices, gaming machines, home automation systems, kiosks, remote control devices, or any other consumer electronics device, (b) operator-based mobile, cable, satellite, or television systems or (c) other closed system devices.


Re:No EULA??? (1)

Nutria (679911) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645850)

How's gnash coming along?

didn't see "can't use product to check other work" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645820)

The Flash EULA was sort of known for it's inclusion of "can't use this product to verify the working of a similar product" - meaning that you can't, say, write an open source flash player and make sure that your product renders the flash movie in the same was as the original flash player. I went over the EULA and didn't see it. Anyone spot it?

The EULA looks pretty reasonable (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645994)

I've seen some truly awful EULAs in my day. So far in this one I don't see anything shockingly bad. (See http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/2006/05/15_a 400.html#a400 [infoworld.com] )

So granted, this software isn't free as in speech, but it's also nothing that makes me too worried about installing on my box.

Re:No EULA??? (1)

arron_donaldson (943027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645764)

Is it possible that Adobe actually did something really good here?
Nope. The software is proprietary. Whatever the EULA says, you are completely subject to Adobe's whim, for all the usual reasons associated with using non-free software.

Re:No EULA??? (2, Informative)

Raphael (18701) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645846)

Rejoice, there is a restrictive EULA attached to the flash player! You can find it here: http://www.adobe.com/products/eulas/players/flash/ [adobe.com] .

Among other nice things, you will find a whole section about "Restrictions.", including this:

3.1 Web Player Prohibited Devices. You may not Use any Web Player on any non-PC device or with any embedded or device version of any operating system. For the avoidance of doubt, and by example only, you may not use a Web Player on any (a) mobile devices, set top boxes (STB), handhelds, phones, web pads, tablets and Tablet PCs that are not running Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, game consoles, TVs, DVD players, media centers (excluding Windows XP Media Center Edition and its successors), electronic billboards or other digital signage, internet appliances or other internet-connected devices, PDAs, medical devices, ATMs, telematic devices, gaming machines, home automation systems, kiosks, remote control devices, or any other consumer electronics device, (b) operator-based mobile, cable, satellite, or television systems or (c) other closed system devices.
  • You are using Linux in your media center and thinking about using Flash? Nope, this is forbidden!
  • You are using Linux in your tablet PC or web pad (e.g., Nokia N770 or N800) and thinking about using Flash? Nope, this is forbidden!
  • You are using Linux in your PDA? Again, no!
  • ...

Go on, complain! Oh, and just in case you have any doubt about what is the "Web Player", this is explained in the first paragraph of the EULA: "(collectively, the Flash, Shockwave and Authorware players, are the "Web Players")"

Re:No EULA??? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646294)

Of course on the spectrum of 'actively tracking you down and using legal pressure to stop you' to 'not supporting it', they are really close to 'not supporting it'. The nice thing about not making promises is that you don't have to keep them.

Just like Windows... (3, Insightful)

dtjohnson (102237) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645118)

Flash is a proprietary software app that uses proprietary protocols that are becoming ubiquitous on the internet. The new Linux 'Flash 9' will just help to further cement flash as the mainstream format for video content distribution. The linux support can be (and will be) easily dropped at some point in the future when Windows moves to 'flash 14' and Linux is hopelessly stuck on the obsolete 'Flash 13' standard. Seems like this is bad news for OSS, net neutrality, and protocols that are freely available for everyone to use anywhere.

Re:Just like Windows... (2, Insightful)

pato101 (851725) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645262)

Sorry, but as far as I know, flash specification is open and there exist projects that implement GPL flash plugin.

Adobe has always opened the formats (see postscript, PDF). I would not be scared if they stopped developing linux plugin, perhaps it would be better since GPL plugins would receive more developers and resources and perhaps would become even better than original adobe plugin. In the same sense that if Adobe stops releasing acrobat for linux we won't miss it so much we would have missed it some years ago.

What it would scare me, of course, would be if they closed the flash spec.

Re:Just like Windows... (5, Informative)

truedfx (802492) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645668)

The Flash specification is not open. It is freely available, but may not be used to create Flash players, only Flash creators.

Re:Just like Windows... (1)

pato101 (851725) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645870)

Oh, I see. I was wrong then. Thanks to your comment (and those two below as well). This changes my opinion of Adobe dramatically :-((

Re:Just like Windows... (2, Insightful)

ObligatoryUserName (126027) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646108)

It is freely available, but may not be used to create Flash players, only Flash creators.

Which is why Microsoft hasn't embraced and extended Flash.

Being completly open makes you vulnerable to things like that when there's a monoploy in the house. Please reference Microsoft's treatment of Java, HTML,and Javascript.

The flash specification is NOT open (1)

frogstar_robot (926792) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645740)

You can indeed download the Flash specification but the EULA specifically disallows using the information to create a player. The GPL projects implementing Flash are having to reverse engineer everything because of this.

Re:Just like Windows... (5, Informative)

YGingras (605709) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645768)

Sorry, but as far as I know, flash specification is open
You are wrong, the licence [adobe.com] of the spec explicitly deny you the right to reimplement it:
3)a. You may not use the Specification in any way to create or develop a runtime, client, player, executable or other program that reads or renders .swf files.

Re:Just like Windows... (1)

cortana (588495) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645832)

Sorry, but as far as I know, flash specification is open
Not correct. The spec is not available for those who would use it to write an alternative Flash player.

Re:Just like Windows... (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645878)

Sorry, but as far as I know, flash specification is open and there exist projects that implement GPL flash plugin.
There are a lot of definitions of 'open' when it comes to specifications. There is 'open' meaning 'you can use this if you pay us a license fee, but we don't discriminate on who can pay us,' and 'open' meaning 'anyone can implement this for free,' for example. There is also 'open' as in 'the specification is controlled by a standards body and proposed extensions are accepted from anybody.' In the case of Flash, the specification is 'open' as in 'anyone can download it if they agree only to use it to write Flash files. Using the specification to write software that reads them is a violation of the license. If you want to create your own flash player then you must reverse engineer it.' The Gnash project is reverse engineering Flash.

Adobe has always opened the formats (see postscript, PDF).
Postscript and PDF are 'open' as in 'anyone can download the specification and implement it.' This is a much better definition of 'open' from the point of view of the developer community.

I would not be scared if they stopped developing linux plugin, perhaps it would be better since GPL plugins would receive more developers and resources and perhaps would become even better than original adobe plugin ... What it would scare me, of course, would be if they closed the flash spec.
Since the specification can't be used for writing a plugin, they couldn't really close it any more than they have already, from the perspective of plugin authors.

Re:Just like Windows... (3, Informative)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645290)

Fun part. Most of the crap done with flash can be done with the really old flash 5 or 6. I only dabble in flash but the added features in the newer flash engines are outweighed by the "pain in the ass" factor to the viewing person and the incompatabilities that can exist.

I am sure some flash guru's out there can do fantastic things with the new stuff but most dont need it.

Re:Just like Windows... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17646136)

So you dabbled in flash, and now you can make authoritative decisions about the underlying engine?

Let's take it further - after taking CS 101: Intro Java, would you be in a position to intelligently compare and contrast the underlying JVM engine(s)? No, you certainly wouldn't. Even a CS graduate isn't able to do so, either, unless he or she had focused on that particular aspect, since you're all the sudden talking about more than just the engine, but how the engine is coded, optimized, linked, built, integerated, its design strat, hardware/software trade offs, algos objects and even a certain degree of philosophy.

But wait... you dabbled in flash, so you can tell us all.

Now I happen to work with flash and actionscript for advanced modelling and simulation - I devel deep, admittedly. If you want to know the differences, two, one programmatic and one graphic, which readily come to mind between Flash 5 and Flash 8 (I won't even begin to discuss ActionScript 1.0 vs. 3.0):

1 - Typing. Yah, that's trivial, right Lumpy?
2 - Antialias for readability. No one really care how fonts look on VT100 terms, though!

But oh yah, I forgot, you dabbled - so you knew that. Forget single-frame flash/actionscript applications, how about all those leet movieclip-based tweens I bet you did in the tutorials?

Even they are drastically improved.

But I forgot - you dabble, ergo, you know.

Re:Just like Windows... (1)

sigzero (914876) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645486)

And that attitude is why Linux will NEVER be mainstream.

Re:Just like Windows... (1)

msormune (808119) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645562)

It's all about the choice. And people choose the option that works.

Re:Just like Windows... (1)

tcopeland (32225) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645572)

> Flash is a proprietary software app that uses
> proprietary protocols that are becoming ubiquitous on the internet.

But it's slowly opening up, and there are some good frameworks out there for it, like ActionStep [actionstep.org] . ActionStep is good enough to support building a desktop application [getindi.com] . And MTASC [mtasc.org] is a great open source Flash compiler.

Re:Just like Windows... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645744)

I'm so mad it's hard to see straight - people and posts like yours do nothing but sully the name of F/OSS and *weaken* arguments for net neutrality by confusing the issue:

"Net neutrality? We don't need that in law, see Adobe gave them Linux guys a Linux player."

God damn it - and you got modded +5 Interesting. Moderators, you are equally complicit and culpable by not only allowing, but promoting this sort of idiocy.

Re:Just like Windows... (2, Funny)

Krommenaas (726204) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645966)

The new Linux 'Flash 9' will just help to further cement flash as the mainstream format for video content distribution.

Yeah now that there's a flash player for the <1% of internet users who run Linux, flash finally has a chance to hit the big time!

Re:Just like Windows... (1)

numberthre (1044498) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646376)

Holy crap. Somebody on Slashdot that actually gets it. I had to read it twice to make sure. The Internet flourished on freed(dom), open standards. It will stagnate if anyone (e.g. Adobe) manages to become a de facto gatekeeper. If you need permission, or need to rely on, Adobe (or anyone else) to create an device X that runs on some new processor Y to access a large fraction of web pages, something is seriously wrong. It's not good for anybody (except Adobe). That is the situation we are in now and it needs to stop.

comment of a real linux user (4, Funny)

kirils (1050022) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645156)

so, wait, tell me again - how do I compile it?

Re:comment of a real linux user (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17646316)

It's really easy. Just use cat.

Yeah, so, what. (0, Troll)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645160)

Between running Deerpark alphas (Firefox 3.0a1, a2) , multiple OS kernel and lib recompilations, and then an abortive attempt to upgrade from Mandriva 2006 --> 2007 that broke ACPI, Java and (most vital for me) PPTPConfig -- so no VPN == no working from home -- I've ended up without a working Flash plug-in. Oh, the horror. I tried installing it on the new installation but it killed Firefox stone dead every time, so I removed it. You know how much I miss it? Not at all. Every time I see a grey square with the dreaded "click here to download the plug-in" label, I smile and the thought that it's just another annoying advert I am happy not to see. What the hell else is it used for? YouT00b? Pfffft, I hardly watch any TV anyway, why would I want to see a bunch of home-video crap that was turned down by the lamest of camcorder clip programmes?

Let me know when someone does something actually useful in Flash, that wouldn't be better done in plain ol' HTML and images.

PS Adobe suck fat donkey's cock anyway -- how long is it that the universal cross-site-scripting issue was supposedly fixed? (months) and where's the advisory? Still no sign of it. So we don't know which versions are safe and which aren't. I'm grabbing every excuse possible to show colleagues at work that look, I can read PDFs on my Linux machine without tainting it with a 100Mb (yes 100Mb!!!) binary, when Xpdf can do it with 2Mb.

Re:Yeah, so, what. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645270)

1. Not having a plugin installed in FF displays a yellow bar and not a grey box.
2. You can download and extract videos wrapped in flash and play them using mplayer, VLC or Xine.
3. Acrobat reader is bloated but Foxit make a great PDF reader for windows or you could use gsview.

I can't stand flash but why are you beating on Adobe? They're a company like any other and the tamarin project and Adobe source libraries show that some engineers and managers "get it". Glad to see you modded troll.

Re:Yeah, so, what. (1)

themelv (1000816) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645722)

I am not a fan of Adobe either, an mp3 stream can open in winamp, as i like it, why can't a video stream open in media player classic, as i like it. If you do need to see something on youtube, most popular vids are available on Google video, and from there you can use the Fast Video Download plugin for firefox to get the AVI.

creators' planet/populaton rescue in final stages (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645206)

all you need is love, ya ta da da da...

from previous post: many demand corepirate nazi execrable stop abusing US

we the peepoles?

how is it allowed? just like corn passing through a bird's butt eye gas.

all they (the felonious nazi execrable) want is... everything. at what cost to US?

for many of US, the only way out is up.

don't forget, for each of the creators' innocents harmed (in any way) there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/US as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile will not be available after the big flash occurs.

'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi life0cidal glowbull warmongering execrable.

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the corepirate nazi life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

Sweet... (2, Interesting)

tcopeland (32225) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645388)

...now I can get back to work on the Linux port of indi [getindi.com] . It's one of the few Flash desktop apps out there, and it's a shame not to have it on Linux.

Besides, it'd be a waste of all that code I wrote for the Evolution extension [rubyforge.org] !

can rejoice and no longer feel like a second rate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645446)

Now I feel like a third rate citizen

Alternative open source implmentation (4, Interesting)

thue (121682) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645450)

The Free Software Foundation is working on an open source implementation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash [wikipedia.org]

I think it came installed by default in Firefox last time I installed Ubuntu. Currently doesn't seem to work very well, but the effort is worthwhile, and hopefully the software will improve.

All my CPU belong to advertisers (0)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645458)

I hate flash, with a passion. It's truly a triumph of style over content. Typically used by sites which sell $1.50 tat with 10,000% markup and call it fashion.

frist Pstop (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17645488)

was afterj a long yor a public club, I type this. 4.1BSD product, Quarreled on

Exciting Multimedia Experience for Linux! (2, Funny)

BillGatesLoveChild (1046184) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645756)

"The official Adobe Linux Flash blog has announced ... rejoice and no longer feel like a second rate citizen."

Congratulations, my Linux bretheren, and welcome to the exciting world of Flash! Take a look at the exciting new multimedia experience before you. Note how the banners and advertisments blink for your attention. Wow! It's just like being at Las Vegas!

Now, head to http://flashblock.mozdev.org/index.html [mozdev.org] and get Flashblock. Soon, it'll all seem like it was just a bad dream!

Re:Exciting Multimedia Experience for Linux! (1)

Nutria (679911) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645956)

Now, head to http://flashblock.mozdev.org/index.html [mozdev.org] and get Flashblock. Soon, it'll all seem like it was just a bad dream!

Amen, brother!! Flashblock is a wonderful bit of software which allows me to view only those few Flash videos I want to watch.

Will it fix the synch problem? (2, Interesting)

Progman3K (515744) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645836)

Whenever I watch a YouTube video, sound and image are not synchronized.

If I run VMWare, boot Windows in it and play the videos inside a browser in Windows, the sound IS synchronized...

I always attributed the problem to the GPL flash player I use.

Can anyone else attest to whether or not this will change things?

Re:Will it fix the synch problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17646206)

It does!

Re:Will it fix the synch problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17646306)

I had similar problems in Flash 7. After I got the 9 beta, the sync is perfect again. Haven't tried with the final version yet.

Re:Will it fix the synch problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17646322)

Yes, in v9, the sync problem is gone.

Finally, ALSA support (4, Informative)

massysett (910130) | more than 7 years ago | (#17645982)

Flash Player 7 for Linux used OSS. This required loading the ALSA-OSS compatibility modules, or or using aoss. Both methods had occasional quirks. I'll be glad to get rid of my last OSS application.

Re:Finally, ALSA support (1)

soccerisgod (585710) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646172)

Flash Player 7 for Linux used OSS. This required loading the ALSA-OSS compatibility modules, or or using aoss. Both methods had occasional quirks. I'll be glad to get rid of my last OSS application.
Good for you, bad for me. It now works with ALSA excusively, which means I no longer get any sound. I'd have switched to ALSA, but after trying it out, it seemed to me that the mixer controls made absolutely no sense with my soundcard, so I switched back to OSS. Now I guess I'll just have to downgrade again.

Gentoo is First (1)

Tester (591) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646026)

And as always, Gentoo is the first to bring it to its users !

Final? (1)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646110)

Hopefully then they've fixed the regression in the betas where sound just didn't work at all.

High CPU usage (2, Insightful)

numberthre (1044498) | more than 7 years ago | (#17646250)

There's no excuse for Flash taking 40-50% CPU time of a 1.8 GHz to decode a damn video when traditional video decoders can do it in a fraction of that. Even non-video Flash sometimes makes my laptop step up to the highest frequency, resulting in all the noisy fans ramping up. Ridiculous.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>