Forums | MacLife

Bat · 2008-05-02 6:18 am

"The Open Screen Project is supported by technology leaders, including Adobe, ARM, Chunghwa Telecom, Cisco, Intel, LG Electronics Inc., Marvell, Motorola, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Qualcomm, Samsung Electronics Co., Sony Ericsson, Toshiba and Verizon Wireless, and leading content providers, including BBC, MTV Networks, and NBC Universal, who want to deliver rich Web and video experiences, live and on-demand across a variety of devices. The Open Screen Project is working to enable a consistent runtime environment — taking advantage of Adobe Flash Player and, in the future, Adobe AIR — that will remove barriers for developers and designers as they publish content and applications across desktops and consumer devices, including phones, mobile internet devices (MIDs), and set top boxes."

Adobe feeling heat from Silverlight?

Thanks Slashdot.

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid … 01/0628254

thumbprint · 2008-05-13 4:56 pm

SWF will finally be an open format? 'Bout time.

Fried Chicken · 2008-05-28 1:05 am

So, what does that mean for the tech world?

pottymouth · 2008-05-28 6:39 am

Adobe is really dying for AIR to take off. Right now, it's just kinda blah. "Woo. Another weather widget." But Adobe sees this as a REAL cross platform programming solution. Not just for Mac & windows, but for EVERYTHING.

Could happen.

But it has to be open for anybody to be interested. There's money to be made if it takes off but not for now they just want you to look and talk about it.

Jasoco · 2008-05-28 3:40 pm

Fried Chicken wrote:
So, what does that mean for the tech world?

Yeah, explain. What does this mean exactly?

ukimalefu · 2008-05-28 3:54 pm

Jasoco wrote:
Fried Chicken wrote:
So, what does that mean for the tech world?
Yeah, explain. What does this mean exactly?

More annoying all Flash sites!

Aqua OS X · 2008-05-28 11:39 pm

Really though, it means the proliferation of Flex apps.

SamGuy · 2008-05-28 11:55 pm

Aqua OS X wrote:
Really though, it means the proliferation of Flex apps.

And what does that mean for the tech world?

Daniel · 2008-05-29 12:45 am

pottymouth wrote:
Adobe is really dying for AIR to take off. Right now, it's just kinda blah. "Woo. Another weather widget." But Adobe sees this as a REAL cross platform programming solution. Not just for Mac & windows, but for EVERYTHING.

Could happen.

But it has to be open for anybody to be interested. There's money to be made if it takes off but not for now they just want you to look and talk about it.

They managed, somehow, to pull it off with PDF.

Pariah · 2008-05-29 5:47 am

Oh goodie, More "rich content".
Meaning even more crap flash smurf all over.
Flash: Makes animated gifs seem classy..

Macskeeball · 2008-05-30 5:08 pm

This would seem to be a big deal for Linux. Due to licensing issues (non-GPL compliance), Flash can't be legally bundled with Linux distros. Also, the Adobe-provided version of the Flash plugin for Linux has problems with 64-bit versions of Linux.

There's been a F/OSS implementation of the Flash player for a while now called Gnash, but it's been based on reverse-engineering and hasn't worked very well. Perhaps this will help Gnash and in turn Linux on the desktop.

Bat · 2008-11-17 7:35 pm

Adobe throws 64 bit flash player open

AT THE REQUEST of open-sorcerers, Adobe is releasing an alpha version of its Flash Player 10 technology for 64-bit Linux users at its Max Conference in San Francisco today.

Because Linux is well ahead of Windows and Mac OS X in 64-bit processor support, Adobe has decided to re-affirm its “commitment to the Linux community”, ensuring they no longer have to use a 32-bit Flash plug-in on the 32-bit version of Firefox.

Other Operating Systems will get 64-bit support when they catch up, said Adobe, which noted Linux groupies had been noisily clamouring for it for ages now.

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/ … ash-player

resedit · 2008-11-18 1:09 am

Macskeeball wrote:
This would seem to be a big deal for Linux. Due to licensing issues (non-GPL compliance), Flash can't be legally bundled with Linux distros. Also, the Adobe-provided version of the Flash plugin for Linux has problems with 64-bit versions of Linux.

There's been a F/OSS implementation of the Flash player for a while now called Gnash, but it's been based on reverse-engineering and hasn't worked very well. Perhaps this will help Gnash and in turn Linux on the desktop.

The 32-bit flash player works just fine in 64 bit firefox with nspluginwrapper.
Never had a problem.

Bat · 2008-11-18 1:25 am

resedit wrote:
Macskeeball wrote:
This would seem to be a big deal for Linux. Due to licensing issues (non-GPL compliance), Flash can't be legally bundled with Linux distros. Also, the Adobe-provided version of the Flash plugin for Linux has problems with 64-bit versions of Linux.

There's been a F/OSS implementation of the Flash player for a while now called Gnash, but it's been based on reverse-engineering and hasn't worked very well. Perhaps this will help Gnash and in turn Linux on the desktop.
The 32-bit flash player works just fine in 64 bit firefox with nspluginwrapper.
Never had a problem.

Flash 9 or 10?

ScifiterX · 2008-11-18 8:09 am

I suspect Flash 9. Flash 10 has issues that tends to break a number of sites.

Macskeeball · 2008-11-18 11:14 am

resedit wrote:
Macskeeball wrote:
This would seem to be a big deal for Linux. Due to licensing issues (non-GPL compliance), Flash can't be legally bundled with Linux distros. Also, the Adobe-provided version of the Flash plugin for Linux has problems with 64-bit versions of Linux.

There's been a F/OSS implementation of the Flash player for a while now called Gnash, but it's been based on reverse-engineering and hasn't worked very well. Perhaps this will help Gnash and in turn Linux on the desktop.
The 32-bit flash player works just fine in 64 bit firefox with nspluginwrapper.
Never had a problem.

Just yesterday I was reading a bunch of comments (on Digg, I think) from several people who have had numerous problems with nspluginwrapper.

resedit · 2008-11-18 8:43 pm

Bat wrote:
resedit wrote:
Macskeeball wrote:
This would seem to be a big deal for Linux. Due to licensing issues (non-GPL compliance), Flash can't be legally bundled with Linux distros. Also, the Adobe-provided version of the Flash plugin for Linux has problems with 64-bit versions of Linux.

There's been a F/OSS implementation of the Flash player for a while now called Gnash, but it's been based on reverse-engineering and hasn't worked very well. Perhaps this will help Gnash and in turn Linux on the desktop.
The 32-bit flash player works just fine in 64 bit firefox with nspluginwrapper.
Never had a problem.
Flash 9 or 10?

flash-plugin-9.0.124.0-release.i386

firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos.x86_64
firefox-3.0.2-3.el5.centos.i386

You have to have the i386 version of firefox installed, but you run the 64-bit.
nspluginwrapper then uses the i386 firefox to run the plugin.

resedit · 2008-11-18 8:46 pm

Macskeeball wrote:
resedit wrote:
Macskeeball wrote:
This would seem to be a big deal for Linux. Due to licensing issues (non-GPL compliance), Flash can't be legally bundled with Linux distros. Also, the Adobe-provided version of the Flash plugin for Linux has problems with 64-bit versions of Linux.

There's been a F/OSS implementation of the Flash player for a while now called Gnash, but it's been based on reverse-engineering and hasn't worked very well. Perhaps this will help Gnash and in turn Linux on the desktop.
The 32-bit flash player works just fine in 64 bit firefox with nspluginwrapper.
Never had a problem.
Just yesterday I was reading a bunch of comments (on Digg, I think) from several people who have had numerous problems with nspluginwrapper.

Most of those problems are due to incorrect installation.
After installing a plugin, you have to run a script that properly sets up a dummy plugin in the x86_64 plugin directory.

Fedora/RHEL is really good with respect to multilib - some installs of Linux do not properly set up firefox for multilib. Those are distribution specific packaging issues, not issues with nspluginwrapper.

Aqua OS X · 2008-11-18 9:03 pm

SamGuy wrote:
Aqua OS X wrote:
Really though, it means the proliferation of Flex apps.
And what does that mean for the tech world?

It means that business have another software development solution that persists across the web, desktop, and devices. Hypothetically speaking, lets say Flash / Flex is an appropriate medium for an application that places old timey mustaches on your favorites photos. And let's also pretend there is some sort of consumer desire for mustache editing software that persists across desktop, web, and device environments.

With Flash we could take various mustache editing tool, and with a little modification, apply them to an apps specifically designed for the desktop, web, and devices. :shurg: Save us time and money.

Although, we'd also need to see if our install base a) commonly had Flash installed, and or b) was willing to install Flash.

Moreover, Flash / Flex offers some interesting tools for interaction designers. They're not quite at the level of MS Expression, but they're attractive.

ukimalefu · 2008-11-19 10:38 am

Flash for iPhone...?

Aqua OS X · 2008-11-19 11:25 pm

Probably not until Apple is forced to.

Justin1111 · 2008-11-21 1:15 am

hope it will be good for adobe users.let's wait and see
===================================
justin
maryland drug rehab

Last edited by Justin1111 (2008-11-21 1:17 am)

Forums | MacLife

#1 2008-05-02 6:18 am

Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#2 2008-05-13 4:56 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#3 2008-05-28 1:05 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#4 2008-05-28 6:39 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#5 2008-05-28 3:40 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

Fried Chicken wrote:

#6 2008-05-28 3:54 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

Jasoco wrote:

Fried Chicken wrote:

#7 2008-05-28 11:39 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#8 2008-05-28 11:55 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

Aqua OS X wrote:

#9 2008-05-29 12:45 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

pottymouth wrote:

#10 2008-05-29 5:47 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#11 2008-05-30 5:08 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#12 2008-11-17 7:35 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#13 2008-11-18 1:09 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

Macskeeball wrote:

#14 2008-11-18 1:25 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

resedit wrote:

Macskeeball wrote:

#15 2008-11-18 8:09 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#16 2008-11-18 11:14 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

resedit wrote:

Macskeeball wrote:

#17 2008-11-18 8:43 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

Bat wrote:

resedit wrote:

Macskeeball wrote:

#18 2008-11-18 8:46 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

Macskeeball wrote:

resedit wrote:

Macskeeball wrote:

#19 2008-11-18 9:03 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

SamGuy wrote:

Aqua OS X wrote:

#20 2008-11-19 10:38 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#21 2008-11-19 11:25 pm

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

#22 2008-11-21 1:15 am

Re: Adobe opening SWF and FLV formats

Board footer