What is Digg?100 Comments
- seventoes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+42YES!
As you were. - jaems, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27I should also mention that many people may have believed that the Linux version was scrapped, due to a Digg poster who created a story that summarized Mike M's blog by saying that there was "no hope" and that a Flash release for Linux was "unlikely."
Thankfully, intelligent Digg users were able to label that story inaccurate. - Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -5/+26Thank Xenu.
- ZaNkY, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25Adobe buying Macromedia was such a bad move...
I'm almost positive that Macromedia would have already released Flash 9 or at least 8 for Linux by now. - arachnist, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Make the damn thing opensource, people would port it for free to more OS's, not only linux.
That said, i am against using flash on any website. - nerditup, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16More companies should focus on getting their programs to work for the major three OS's, Windows, OSX, and Linux. That way, companies and users won't be stuck with using one OS, there would be no excuses. Nice job Adobe.
- thecheat1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17I can't wait to be able to switch over to Linux entirely.
I need to format soon and I'm really looking forward to formatting and installing Ubuntu rather than XP :-) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -10/+22Actually I'd prefer that we break away from flash. We never needed IE, why do we need flash? There has got to be another alternative out there. As long as we stick with flash we'll have to wait on Adobe. Of course the web won't adopt something without mass adoption, so perhaps a new technology included in FF that can replace flash.
- Justathought, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Actually, I think Adobe is beginning to realize that it is in their best interest to support Linux at least as strongly as it does Windows. It only makes sense. Wouldn't Adobe want to support an OS that gives them a level playing field? Why wait until Microsoft bundles tools into the OS that erodes their market? Besides, I am sure that they are not blind to what is going on. The growth of desktop Linux is happening so fast and it is such an unstoppable trend that they better get on board and ride the wave or else they risk being left behind. I think they finally have realized that Linux is not going away, it cannot go broke, and it will only keep getting better and better.
- Hindu_Wardrobe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12It's not Firefox's fault Adobe's plugin makes the browser unstable.
- negativefx, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16"Of course the web won't adopt something without mass adoption, so perhaps a new technology included in FF that can replace flash."
Yes, of course! FF has already adopted by the masses! Oh wait, it hasn't :(
I'm a FF user, IE hater, but you can't start making ridiculous statements like new technologies in FF are going to serve the masses. What's IE's market share in comparison to FF? - xaeropain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11But it doesnt mention anything about a 64-bit version... When is that going to happen?
- Agret, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9People can already make free flash creators, there are extensions for PHP and Perl and heaps of other langs to generate flash files... You can get for-pay unoffical third party flash creating apps for windows too...
- Dracker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Don't digg him down, architecture compatibility is a very important part of linux software. A lot of well-written code can just be passed through gcc with a different -march flag and work on the specified arch.
Though I question how portably written Flash is considering that we're just now possibly getting it, I run x86_64 as well, albeit with a 32-bit firefox for plugins like this to work. If things like Java and Flash suddenly started being easily portable I may not have to run a 32-bit browser... - rushfan, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15How about we just get sites to stop using flash? Besides the fact that its misused 99% of the time, it makes Firefox unstable.
- pupeno, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I still won't install Flash (unless they release it as free software) and continue to wait for Gnash (http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/).
Go Gnash Go! - Hindu_Wardrobe, on 10/12/2007, -9/+15This makes me want to dance around outside naked.
YES!!! - TheSeeker11, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Do it, you won't regret it ;)
- intangible, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6That would only be true if people actually paid for Photoshop; How many people extol its virtues constantly and bag on the Gimp but are using a cracked/pirated version of PS?
- Loonacy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5If you dig around on their blog, they mention that they have no plans on working on a 64 bit version, but that they might (though not likely) later after they get the 32 bit done.
- jbus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7It's good that Adobe has started to realize that assisting Microsoft by holding back Linux versions of their software is not in Adobe's best interest. I wish it hadn't taken them so long to level the playing field. Who knows how much market share Linux would have right now If companies like Adobe would have quit pandering to Microsoft long ago, but at this late stage it's progress nonetheless. I also think that it's important for the Linux community to keep the pressure on Adobe to ensure they follow through.
We also need to pressure other companies to follow suit with their software. Adding in some commercial software offerings would really round Linux it out very well. - mdowney, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6RESUMED? WE NEVER STOPPED...
The Linux version of Flash Player has been in development for many months now. In fact, it's been ramped up within the last few months. We didn't release Flash Player 8 for Linux because Flash Player 9 (June '06) had followed Flash Player 8 (Sept '05) so closely and we thought our time would be better spent starting early on a Linux version of Player 9.
Production on the Linux version has not stopped and there are no plans to stop it in the future - no matter what you read on Digg.
Thanks,
MD
-
Mike Downey | Sr. Product Manager, Flash | Adobe Systems - grok, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Someone fond of referring to himself in the third person?
I dugg him up. He's got a point. - shakin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The Flash plugin is two binary files. They don't need anything other than to be copied to the plugins directory. Forget rpm and deb and tgz... a simple bin executable will work. Statically compile the binaries and they'll work in any distro.
- jdgiotta, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@Dracker: Please check out Osflash.org.
Open source tools ARE available to make SWF content. The problem I foresee with open sourcing the player is development lag and forking. Its evident in Javascript and CSS, too great languages that just get screwed on the compatibility. I think its relatively a smart idea to hold their cards until (maybe) they can create a standard compliance groundwork. - Dracker, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Unfortunately this can never happen. Adobe is *selling* programs that *create* Flash. Opening the source would allow for a free flash creator, some reward for Adobe for opening up the source!
For proprietary software on Linux, I just ask developers to do a thorough job writing portable code - installs for all major architectures (x86_64, guilty as charged!) and keep the program as up to date - in line with the same ease and capabilities as its counterparts on other OSs. Honestly, these demands are not as unreasonable as you might think. - jdgiotta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Absolutely not. Version 9 is a complete rebuild of the previous vm, plus it introduces actionscript 3.0 a very robust api.
- scratched, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@jdgiotta
The flash player is free as in beer. What he means is free as in speech. - bobbybobington, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5He need saving from scientology
- fiveoaks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3youtube is the only reason why I care that Flash is updated for linux. Otherwise I would hardly ever boot into Windows. Sad, really.
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3umm.. please don't...
but yes, this is excellent news.. perhaps high-five-worthy... but definitely not go-streaking-worthy - KWhat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I have been listening to this for the last 2 years.... its comming.... this christmas we promise!
- clevershark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Does Adobe currently have any software for Linux besides Adobe reader?
- Survivor303, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3that what we need is Macromedia/Adobe Shockwave plugin for Linux or least a fully compatible OpenSource plugin.. even that OpenSource Flash plugin isn't compatible and almost always crash browser..
- MrPhelps, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This is just another move to delay the development of an open source alternative. They made the same promise when 8 came out, and I bet we'll have the exact same situation when 10 comes out, then 11, etc ... It worked quite well until now.
- grillmiester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3FTA
"A Novell survey found that Linux users believe Adobe Photoshop is the most important missing desktop application."
I don't do alot of photo editing, but what does Photoshop do that is not in GIMP? - schmichael, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@jaems:
Oops... sorry about that. If it makes you feel any better I marked my own post as inaccurate... - starsky51, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7who the fúck is STDOUBT?
- inkubux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2^^
Yeah but there is not only the big Install base factor. The reputation is also a good one.
If I were Adobe I would prefer to be liked by the Linux/BDS guys than to be seen as Evil.
Google seems to manage this very well altough they have not released all their softwares on linux - suldar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"We expect to make a pre-release version available on Adobe Labs for early feedback and testing before the end of the year, with the full release expected in early 2007."
I thought there was supposed to be something available sooner than this. I really don't like the using Wine option but I'm gonna have to figure something out today. I broke down and rebooted into Windows XP to try the new Digg tools. Can't get by using Flash 7 anymore. Damn you Digg Labs! - Dracker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4What's your point? If you want to support all distros, offer your installer as an .rpm a .deb and a .tgz, with simple install documentation, and leave it to the distros to integrate those into their package management.
Debian, Gentoo, MEPIS, Damn Small ... not as small as you might think! All are in the top 10 with Slackware following at #11 according to http://distrowatch.com/ - stmiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2GIMP is limited to only handling 8bit images. This is the big downside. Not features. But the ability to handle high quality images is what is holding it back.
- macewan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2just rss his short bird blog to keep up with events
He seems very condescending towards the Linux crowd if you ask me. Maybe I just reading too much into his comments on the blog. - matgorb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The majority of people who pirate Photoshop are people who shouldn't even use it at the first place. People who NEED Photoshop usually buy it. One exception would be students, but usually they use it at school or get a discounted version they can continue to use after graduation anyway.
The Photoshop/GIMP debate is nothing like the IE/Firefox debate, get a clue. - mrtrick, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Exactly, this has been "coming" for a long time now. This entry is over a month old...
- bobzibub, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They using alsa yet?
realplayer too.
-b - inkubux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What plan they need? It's just a matter of re-compiling GodDammit.
- cwill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I hope they don't ruin it by filling it with a bunch a crap like Acrobat reader 7.
- Buelldozer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Don't forget the AMD64 / EMT64 Archs that many of us need!
- redpaw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sigh.. now if only they would bother to make a linux 64 bit browser version as well... alll would be well.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 100 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is