What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
96 Comments
- ArthurSucks, on 10/12/2007, -5/+63"what is really keeping Linux from the mainstream is the fact that it doesn't support the DRMed media that the world has become accustomed to."
Oh fukkin PLEASE! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+54If adobe cared about linux, we would have flash 9 in linux
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+40Yea non-DRM content is the only holding me from switching to linux. I must have restrictions!
- Simon80, on 10/12/2007, -2/+31The implication that Linux needs DRM support from these vendors is despicable. One of my reasons for not using windows is that I don't have to put up with these ill-fated attempts to peddle subpar software to me just because of format lockin.
- hockey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+29Linux is already relevant on the desktop.
I'm not trying to sprout sour grapes but all these "this may be the 'thing' to get windows users over to Linux" and "what Linux needs to do to get mass appeal" don't do much for me. I don't care that Linux is too hard for my 60 year old mom and that it doesn't have 99% market share. What matters to me is that Linux works for me. This isn't an attempt to sound elitish but the fact that Linux isn't as "easy" to use as other OS's and you need a terminal to get some things done doesn't bother me. Linux works for me and I can use the software as I see fit. That's its strength and its beauty. I use Gentoo and KDE. Someone else may use Ubuntu and Gnome, another may use Redhat and fluxbox. Don't you see? Linux works for you the way you want it too. Sure there's a learning curve but that's true for basically any piece of software that we use.
Adobe won't make Linux relevant on the desktop because in my mind Linux is already relevant.
/philosophical slightly off topic mode off - stoffe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Track the progress here: http://blogs.adobe.com/penguin.swf/
It will take time before it's out, but at least Adobe, unlike Macromedia, seems bent on making it work right. - Scott2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19"what is really keeping Linux from the mainstream is the fact that . . ."
If Linux had a user for every time that I heard / read that, It would have a larger installed base than Windows. - stoffe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Adobe can get behind Linux all they want, they are very welcome - but we don't need, nor want any stinking DRM in flash or otherwise. The right way to go about it is:
* For Adobe: opening the specifications for Flash etc completely, and possibly embracing open source where it makes sense - making Flash a relevant format EVERYWHERE.
* For any media (company): start treating customers with respect and trust, not trying to restrict and punish. - thewebguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17i feel like author misses the point when he talks about flash and drm. flash absolutely should not be used for higher quality files worth paying for (hence drm). the point of videos in flash is that it is fast, easy, and nearly platform free.
there are plenty of other solutions for high quality encoding, flash just isn't really an option. - mikedoth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16We will after AMD gets their hands on that department ; )
- Dracos, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20WTF?? Why is this article all about Flash on Linux? Flash isn't even a solution to the promlem it think it solves, much less anything related to desktop Linux.
If Adobe wanted to really embrace Linux (and FOSS in general), they would have to do several things:
-- Contribute a font rendering algorithm to the community. This is why fonts on Linux suck, not because Flash is outdated.
-- Give away their fonts collection.
-- Release PDF (all of it) to the community.
-- Develop *NIX compatible versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign (OSX versions of these will make this much easier).
Linux doesn't have DRM because the people developing Linux DON'T WANT DRM!!! These people make up the most informed slice of the population about this related issues. They don't want it for a number of reasons, which can all be summed up as "it's a bad idea, you greedy f*cks".
Flash has very little to do with what Adobe's Linux strategy should be. The author of the article is a total moron for thinking otherwise. - quine, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Hold your horses there, tiger. I believe they're working on it: http://news.com.com/2061-10795_3-6098253.html?part=rss&tag=6098253&subj=news
Hell, at the very least Adobe is making a commitment to Linux (Which is a lot more than I can say for other software vendors out there. ) - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Hell, if any company with billions of dollars to burn got behind Linux, we'd see greater Linux adoption. We all know this. So it seems kinda pointless to write "I wish" articles like this. Does the author think some exec at Adobe is going to read it, slap themselves in the forehead, and say, "Oh, why didn't we think of that?"
I wish Google would throw it's full weight behind the automotive industry. Then we could all drive around in flying cars. It'll never happen though. - somerandomnerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Have I got this stright; Linux users, who have chosen a free, open source software operating system, should embrace Adobe's proprietary Flash format to get around the side issues that arise from eschewing proprietary software?
What problem is this solving, exactly? - TonyMurray, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12While I do agree that having Adobe give some proper support to linux would be a good thing, the author is dreaming... Personally, I could care less about DRM'd media if it has DRM, I won't buy it, period.
I hear flash 9 for linux is in the works and coming along, so, keep your fingers crossed ;) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16What good is graphic/video editing software when I don't even have a useful ATI Video Driver?
- kunalthakar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I prefer a less popular Linux with no DRM rather than a DRM happy soulless Linux.
- duhblow7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11See quine's comment. ATI is to blame for that. At least nVIDIA does a good job with linux modules, so there is an alternative.
- mouthster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12"With Flash, you can build applications that give you the same type of experience you would have on a Mac"
Are you kidding me ?! - Novagenesis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Sad thing is, it's true...
The major corporations won't support somethign that won't give them their power over you.
The average user will not be able to switch to a system when the dominant system has that control-software standard.
It's a cruel cruel world when the UNDESIRED aspects of one system are what keep you from going near the next system. - thirdtenor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10When i read the title I thought the author might be advocating a creative suite bundle (which would be great)...
But flash as the big deal? c'mon. And laden with DRM no less. - somerandomnerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7FTA- "Let me be clear. If Adobe threw its full weight behind Linux, it could make the operating system relevant on the desktop. I realize the boldness of the statement, but I'm willing to explain."
It's because it's surrounded by "b" tags... - evolution360, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10The people who created 74% of the top 500 supercomputers give a big ***** about Linux
- evilTak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I hate these stupid articles about what GNU/Linux needs to do to gain more mainstream users. The great thing about Free Software is that it doesn't compromise its quality to pander to a bunch of whiny "mainstream" users that demand Application/Feature/FileFormat XYZ to be supported, not realizing nor caring that they're in the vast minority.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8In other news, if bullfrogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ass when they hit the ground.
- mobomofo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I don't understand why people keep bashing fonts in Linux. The fonts on my Linux desktop look every bit as good as they do on a Mac, and better than Windows with Cleartype. Sometimes they aren't that nice looking out of the box and require a little tweaking, but then again, look at what XP fonts looks like out of the box. Sometimes I get the feeling that some of these people who talk about the "State of the Linux Desktop" haven't actually touched a Linux Desktop for more than 5 minutes.
- skOre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Indeed, what an utterly stupid idea to start an article with.
Adobe is pretty well off with supporting the Macintosh, and it will probably stay there. They are far too much concerned with pleasing the "I act as if I am thinking different" crowd than being concerned going the route that is really concerned thinking different, which is Free Software.
GNULinux does not need Adobe as it does not need DRM. It also doesn't need to be "endorsed" by any big company, although this is already happening here and there.
And surely nobody needs DRM in Flash! What a crazy idea! Just think of the workarounds you would have to create to "make this work" (i.e. enforce the will of the publisher) on all levels. Humburg! - mikedoth, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I'm not happy.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I have something that is hard for everybody to believe, but over time you will see that it's true: Adobe is the second biggest enemy of Linux right behind Microsoft. The same way Microsoft wanted to monopolize operating systems, Adobe wants to monopolize creative content.
Adobe can play all the violins they want about how hard they're working to update Flash for Linux, so tell me, why is it that when Flash was strictly Macromedia's format, there was no problem with Flash on Linux at all?
Adobe, (and don't blame me, I didn't sell them the crack they're smoking), sees Gimp as a threat to Photoshop, Inkscape as a threat to Illustrator, Screem and nvu as a threat to Dreamweaver, Docbook and Latex as a threat to Acrobat, etc. Every product they sell, we have a free replacement for it on the Linux desktop, so how interrested do you think they actually are in helping the Linux desktop prosper?
But never mind, we have Gnash. We have Google and IBM helping us. Other companies are more than happy to eat Adobe's lunch on Linux, and we'll do fine without Adobe, thank you very much. - nkassi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4But It would be awsome if I didn't have to deal exclusively with Windows users all around me. If Linux was a even 15% desktop market share I would have an easier time using open standards and other sort of free software formats.
I just feel like we can't break free of the lockins that the Windows world puts on us. Stupid WMV files that don't work for example. While I trie to stay clear of them, sometimes they just are unavoidable. With Crossover office I can still watch them but it sucks to have to do that.
Nic - Novagenesis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Tell that to the free graphics software being voluntarily developed for linux.
Someone, and quite a lot of 'someone' gives a damn about both linux and graphics at the same time - williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The phone people don't get it either. Wait 'till you read about how Palmsource is going to make Linux "locked down" for phones.
- podperson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I have OS X versions of Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign... indeed, the last THREE releases have run under OSX.
Back when Photoshop and Illustrator were available for IRIX, they were a version or two behind. Adobe's current suite (CS2) is built on some kind of Frankenstein class library originally derived from PowerPlant (CodeWarrior's cross-platform answer to MacApp). Adobe has been working on an open source cross-platform library which includes GUI support; I don't know how far this has gotten and whether it will be used for the post CodeWarrior versions of the CS apps or whether their existing class libraries will be bludgeoned into compiling under XCode...
Another BIG problem with Linux is picking the GUI library to target. Every time it seems that one (KDE say) is gaining mindshare, something (like Ubuntu) gives another (say Gnome) a huge boost. - hootdoodie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Talking to a guy last week that has some programmers from India developing software for his company. They didn't want to have anything to do with Windows or Mac. They use Linux. If this is where the rest of the world is headed then Adobe and their buddies Mac and Microsoft have a problem.
- sembetu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@duhblow7:
That's not how you display nvidia anymore (notice all lower case)
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33676 - lilzaphod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@hosiah
"Adobe can play all the violins they want about how hard they're working to update Flash for Linux, so tell me, why is it that when Flash was strictly Macromedia's format, there was no problem with Flash on Linux at all?"
Other than the fact that Macromedia killed Linux support for Flash 8 you mean, and had no intentions of porting it over do to the costs associated with it.
Adobe decided post merger that they needed to support Linux with Flash 9, and committed the resources (read money and developers) to do the port.
Check your facts, slick. - jameshales, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What are you on about? GIMP is available for Windows[1] and Mac[2]. I've been handing copies out to Windows-using friends and they love it. There's also a version of GIMP with a redesigned UI, called GIMPshop[3], and if anyone really wanted a photoshop-like UI for GIMP, they'd just have to port the up-to-date Mac version of this to Windows and GNU/Linux.
[1]: http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/
[2]: http://gimp-app.sourceforge.net/
[3]: http://plasticbugs.com/index.php?p=241 - ActionJeans, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Cheer up Mike. I love you.
- skellener, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Adobe barely gives a ***** about the Mac these days (dragging their feet on universal binaries for OSX). What makes you think they're gonna start suporting Linux? They are in M$ pocket these days. Forget it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Dugg and AAAAAAMEN! Can you gimme Hallelujah???
Here, something I wrote a while back, anybody who appreciates the parent comment should like it:
http://penguinpetes.com/b2evo/index.php?title=what_is_linux_doing_wrong_today&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1 - evolution360, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Oh and Novell too since they just won best of show with SUSE
- Novagenesis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Umm..
I purchased two games for linux.
I purchased a SUBSCRIPTION to a piece of linux software.
Company I work for PURCHASED a linux server and PURCHASED some proprietary software suites for it...
So what's this about users refusing to use non-free content?
The only reasons linux users have such a heavy tendency towards free is because what's free out there is often pretty damn good! - inkubux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3We don't need DRM and will never need. It's a waste of time and money for both us and the enterprises. When will that understand that?
- TheTSArt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Windows is entrenched in business and those using Adobe products aren't going to get to switch.
Macs are entrenched in the minds of those using them and they aren't going to switch (of which I count myself one) no matter what is available for Linux.
I was encouraged just to give Linux a try after watching a number of DLTV episodes. After hours of work and waiting, all I ended up with was a black screen with a cursor about half the entire size of it. No one I know personally uses it, so I couldn't get help that way. I tried searching websites that supposedly offer help, but that was just a never ending loop of links that lead nowhere--and what little information I did come across was well beyond someone who was just trying Linux for the first time.
In my opinion, Linux needs a whole lot more than just Adobe, much of which, I honestly don't think it can ever achieve to make it relevant to the desktop market. A long time ago, I was an Amiga person and I kept thinking if only Aldus would bring PageMaker to it--in the long run that wouldn't have mattered for that platform either, I think. - ilikejam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ sembetu
Nope, it's still nVIDIA.
Look at the n in the logo - it's lower-case. - skOre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There is no big picture to miss. If the price for all this is restricted software (to the point of drm), then sorry, nobody is going to swallow that pill. Especially not the FOSS crowd.
I always saw Flash as this: Something to make quite nice with that looks ok. Then they got on with bigger Action Script, now its flex, flex 2. But who cares? Flash in every iteration always was just one screaming "Rich Internet" buzz maker.
I still have to be proven wrong by being shown a real application that can't be done with one of the more robust and established (and even FOSS) alternatives. And if the path they should take, in Mr Stewarts view, is to be the big company that offers a front-to-back "secure" content delivery solution, then they would be on a seriously wrong track. They would be superceeded by Free Software and try to survive with DRM. That nobody actually wants to use given an alternative. - Kruncher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why does everyone complain about Linux fonts? They look just as good, if not better than windows (by default)!
Would someone care to explain what the diffrence is that makes everyone like Windows' fonts over Linux's? Because I'm just not seeing it... - pairanoyd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Screw DRM.
And I don't care if Linux goes mainstream, I would prefer it didn't.
Why? Because being out of the spotlight has it's benefits.
Once Linux becomes the star on center stage the kiddie hackers will target it and then we'll have to live with the same constant BS that windows users live with.
Make no mistake about it, I love Linux. I use Linux and only Linux. I like that it's not your Joe Six Pack OS..
As for DRM, I don't want or need it. Don't tell me what I can or can't do with my computer. I bought DVD's at the store with money I earned and by god, I'll watch them on my Suse machine anytime I please and no one will tell me otherwise. And if I want to rip those DVD's and archive them into my roll your own HTPC, then by god, I sure will. I've got three terabytes worth of entertainment at hand in my HTPC and I watch it when and how I want to watch it, sans commercials and warnings.
I'm sick of this mad, blind rush to embrace the stupidity.. - devoinregress, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The only thing keeping me from moving to Linux is Adobe support. The second their is CS for Linux I am switching.
I am a professional designer so don't tell me about gimp and such. Great programs but they dont cut it. - isolationism, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Unlike a number of other diggers who saw "Linux" and "DRM" in the same headline and proceeded to wig out, I did read the article and I do agree that Flash is becoming a more robust application, and could conceivably be used to develop and release other applications written to run under an interpreted language.
I think the first problem is the mention of "DRM" in the article. Is DRM really the right word? DRM connotes content, not applications. You have the right to view this document, or to listen to that music, not the right to a software licence. That's called licencing, and it has been since the first one has been around. The suggestion that a software licence is equivalent to DRM suggests that the propose GPL 3 is self-contradictory and I think it's safe to say that it is not. Let's put the buzzword dictionary back on the shelf and call a spade a spade.
Second, I think Adobe would have to do more than just release a Flash application that ran under Linux (Flash-internal software licencing capability is irrelevant here, since "Flash" as a player could be bundled with commercial software itself, exactly the same way tax software distributes frozen python binaries, with registration/phoning home/whatever else written as part of the software or a wrapper on the software). Flash has become more than just an animation player over the past decade, but it is a far cry from having the horsepower to deal with the level of all but the simplest applications people expect on the desktop.
That being said, I agree with what one other poster misspoke about but had the right idea about: Flash is the solution to a problem that didn't need solving. There are already plenty of other better, more mature tools that exist right now that do a better job of executing interpreted code and are already available and working just fine on other platforms. What exactly does Flash bring to the table that these other interpreted/virtual machine applications don't? Well, it runs slower, has a far smaller library of tools, isn't supported on as many platforms, encourages the needless use of animation and sound for everything (and no big surprise there -- it's what it was invented to do before Macromedia bought the company that originally built it), isn't accessible to users with disabilities unless you run a totally Microsoft toolchain and go out of your way to develop everything to the lowest common denominator... the list goes on and on.
My point: Just because Adobe now has Flash doesn't mean they're going to start developing every piece of software they have to run under it -- just like I'm quite certain that just because they now own ColdFusion doesn't mean they're going to rewrite their entire website to run under an inferior web application product. -
Show 51 - 96 of 96 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is