What is Digg?185 Comments
- Spr0k3t, on 05/16/2008, -16/+166At least it's not some silverlight crap. It would be good to see flash in 64bit though.
- TheRealToma, on 05/16/2008, -16/+68Is there LINUX support too?
/sarcasm - MavRevMatt, on 05/16/2008, -1/+37About ***** time Adobe. Now add support for LINUX to CS3.
- Kelmon, on 05/16/2008, -0/+32Personally, I'm against Silverlight because the development tools are Windows-only. We've seen this crap from Microsoft before. Release multi-platform versions of their applications, let them get entrenched, and then kill support for the non-Windows versions. At least with Adobe they seem to be platform agnostic so I trust them much more than Microsoft. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Silverlight plug-in become either Windows-only, or provide features that only work on Windows, and that's why I'm having nothing to do with it.
- Culyt, on 05/16/2008, -2/+29"simply because it's from Microsoft?"
Do you really need another reason? Microsoft have been trying to gain control of protocols since before Windows3.1 when they had their own version of TCP/IP.
Supporting openness only to yank out that support a few years later isn't exactly new to Microsoft.
This is a company that while claiming to be opensource friendly makes claims about 240+ patent infringments, but then won't tell anyone what they actually are because of administration costs, instead preferring to goto the big fortune 500 companies and demand licenses for Linux installs.
A company that signs a deal with Novell that they won't sue each other, agrees to buy millions of $ of SuSe licenses from Novell only to have 2 employees including an intellectual property expert 'quit' Microsoft a month in advance (well a week for the ip expert) and join a puppet patent troll company that then turns around and sues both Novell and Redhat.
Where convicted of being an abusive monopoly by a US court, donated $30 million to the Clinton campaign and got a presidential pardon. Keeps getting antitrust after antitruct case brought against them in the EU and got fined in the billions.
So forgive me if I don't want to embrace a future where Microsoft are controlling the standards that run the internet. - peterjmag, on 05/16/2008, -11/+38I dugg you up. Then I dugg you down, and then back up again.
- trakie, on 05/16/2008, -0/+26i just use compiz to zoom in on flash videos, works great for me.
- geoken, on 05/16/2008, -0/+24Although I agree with the point you're trying to make, I think you need to read the sub-heading to understand why it specifically mentions Ubuntu.
In the past adobe only had packages for SuSE and Fedora, but now they've anounced that they'll provide Ubuntu versions as well. - WayOfTheIronPaw, on 05/16/2008, -4/+27I digg you right round baby right round,
like a record baby, right round round round. - sq377, on 05/16/2008, -2/+25What about decent scaling for video? I still can't watch fullscreen videos without unbearable skipping.
http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?ext ...
I'll watch this new version, but my hope is still with swfdec. - incd, on 05/16/2008, -1/+22Still no Linux x86_64..? *Wonders*
- priegog, on 05/16/2008, -0/+18Wow finally a little more attention this way; but probably just to be ignored for another number of months.
On a serious note, does anyone know if this one finally support capturing video from V4L2 devices? Supporting only V4L was a stupid move and we've been alienated long enough from this feature. - Adys, on 05/16/2008, -0/+18Arguing about whether it's Linux or GNU/Linux makes you look retarded.
- inactive, on 05/16/2008, -0/+17Cool, will it not be so CPU intensive? Maybe make it so my fans on my Macbook Pro don't spin up to 6000RPM when watching a flash video?
- geoken, on 05/16/2008, -0/+16Looking over the docs I noticed another cool feature; File Reference runtime access.
Basically what this means is that the player can work with local data. In the past, a Flash based web-app would need to upload files to a server before it could do anything with them. For example, an online photo-editing app would require any pic to be first uploaded to the server before it could be interacted with.
Now, that same web-app can open the jpeg, do whatever it wants to it, then save it back locally without ever uploading a byte of data to the server. This could lower the 'cost of entry' for small startups trying to create bandwidth intensive online apps (ie. an online video editor) because the user doesn't have to upload the video to the server, save it onto the server when there done then re-download it. - mooninite, on 05/16/2008, -1/+16Yes, you can use a 32-bit flash plugin with 64-bit Firefox - with nspluginwrapper, which is crashy, buggy, and slow.
Why not have a native 64-bit plugin? Are you saying no one ever needs more than 640k RAM? *facepalm* - KhaaL, on 05/16/2008, -1/+14yeah, but how long haven't the 64-bit crowd been howling to get adobes attention regarding flash? I'd be very suprised if they'd release a 64-bit version.
- arjie, on 05/16/2008, -1/+14Because we have more money to spend. Ha ha!
- doyoulikeworms, on 05/16/2008, -1/+13What does this ***** mean? I know there are some folks out there like you that are part of the whole "free" software movement, which is cool. I'm typing this from my Ubuntu box right now.
But people use linux because it's great, not because it's free. I've spent much more time tweaking, installing, and generally ***** around with my linux box(es) than the cost of a proprietary OS. - netneutrality, on 05/16/2008, -4/+16I dugg you down. Then I dugg you up, and then back down again.
- euvirtual, on 05/16/2008, -1/+12You know, Ubuntu support would usually mean a .deb file is available. And yet adobe has tar.gz, rpm and yum available.
How is that Ubuntu support? How hard is it to make a deb? Come on, it only has 1 file. - Basjohn, on 05/16/2008, -0/+11No 64bit support? Adobe and Sun are absolutely killing 64bit browsers by not developing 64bit versions of their software and it's depressing when minefield (firefox 3 beta 5 64bit) runs absolutely superbly but can't display what is increasingly becoming an essential part of the internet (flash that is). It's enough to make me weep hysterically (in a very MANly way of course).
- geoken, on 05/16/2008, -0/+11Here's an updated Flex SDK allowing us to write code targeting the new features.
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/T ... - idiotwithastick, on 05/16/2008, -3/+13I'm actually happy that there's Silverlight giving Adobe at least some competition. This way we'll keep getting updates and higher quality versions of Flash, not the slow POS that versions 7 and 8 were.
- Megatog615, on 05/16/2008, -0/+10By "Ubuntu Support," they probably mean a .deb package or an official repository.
Buried for Gentoo elitism. - ileftfark, on 05/16/2008, -0/+9Download the beta and help developers by reporting bugs --> http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html
- hipnerd, on 05/16/2008, -1/+10"I have 0 objections to have a native 64-bit plugin, and in fact would like to see one" --weizbox
Hey weizbox. Your post from less than a minute earlier called. It wants to know: "Why would you want 64bit Flash?" - geoken, on 05/16/2008, -0/+9Yeah, it must be Silverlight pressure since Adobe's initial plan was to stop producing the Flash player after ver. 9
- Kelmon, on 05/16/2008, -1/+10I hate to be pedantic, but what the hell is "Mac OS/X"? Where'd the slash in the OS name come from? Or is this some whacky version of OS/2 Warp?
- TexMurphy, on 05/16/2008, -0/+9Im on Ubuntu 8.04 and using firefox 3.0b5. Move flash 10 libflashplayer.so to "/usr/lib/flashplugin-nonfree/libflashplayer.so". Remember to backup the old one. By the way use "sudo nautilus &" to move around as root. Restart firefox when done.
- timfidler, on 05/16/2008, -0/+9We've been asking for 64bit flash for years. Have Macromedia/ Adobe ever explained why they won't provide it?
They must be some reason. - mooninite, on 05/16/2008, -0/+8Vampire, go to http://www.stickam.com for "why would u use flash and webcamz?? LOL"
V4L2 is still not supported. Adobe is only working on the bare minimum with Linux support. Even ATI is doing better with their video driver, and that's just sad. - oobuntu, on 05/16/2008, -1/+9i hate it because they are forcing you to install it in order to use certain basic stuff on their website.
at least with flash you can get by if you don't have a machine with it installed (obviously i'm not talking about wanting to watch a youtube video...) - chrysalis, on 05/16/2008, -3/+11Still no OpenBSD version ? *Wonders*
- stoanhart, on 05/16/2008, -1/+9But what about those of us who don't like compiz? yes, we exist :)
- AncientPC, on 05/16/2008, -0/+7I found it here: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html
Just installed it on my Ubuntu v8.04 system over Adobe Flash 9. I have a crap processor (Pentium M 1.6Ghz) with a high resolution (WUXGA 1920x1200) so full screen YouTube videos have been impossible for me in the past, but with Flash 10 beta I see a significant framerate improvement in full screen mode. - zekica, on 05/16/2008, -0/+7yes, but it is an annoyance
- TexMurphy, on 05/16/2008, -3/+10Im on Ubuntu, flash used to take 80 % CPU. Just installed Flash 10, my CPU usage was cut to 40 %. This version rocks on Ubuntu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- terrorpin, on 05/16/2008, -0/+6I use Linux because I prefer it to other OSes, not just because I don't have to pay for it. However I still use Windows because some software for it outclasses any equivalents available on Linux by miles. Photoshop and Lightroom and much of the CS apps are clear examples. I'd happily ditch Windows altogether once I could get those apps.
- hipnerd, on 05/16/2008, -0/+6Mooninite answered your question right out of the gate "Yes, you can use a 32-bit flash plugin with 64-bit Firefox - with nspluginwrapper, which is crashy, buggy, and slow." Instead of acknowledging that, you keep attributing the weaker, ridiculous argument to everyone: that we think we need 64bit computing power to run Flash files. We don't.
It's not "being 64bit for the sake of being 64bit." It's being 64bit for the sake of compatibility with the browser and operating system. I don't want or expect a performance boost, I want stability and the ability to easily install without jumping through hoops.
And I love how restating your comments has morphed into "spinning." You said you would like to see a 64bit Flash plugin, yet attack others who make the exact same observation. Why do you want a 64bit plugin? - TexMurphy, on 05/16/2008, -1/+7Im on Ubuntu 8.04 and using firefox 3.0b5. Move flash 10 libflashplayer.so to "/usr/lib/flashplugin-nonfree/libflashplayer.so". Remember to backup the old one. By the way use "sudo nautilus &" to move around as root. Restart firefox when done.
.
Flash CPU usage is cut by 1/2. - Xanium4332, on 05/16/2008, -0/+6Dancing in the moonlight!
/subtle - WayOfTheIronPaw, on 05/16/2008, -0/+6"what this means is that the player can work with local data"
Uh, oh. How does their security work? Do they ask permission from the user before accessing files? Do they have whitelists and blacklists for file locations. What about execute permission on files? Given that most users on Windows run with full Administrator privileges, Adobe had better get that right. - GrammarNazi3000, on 05/16/2008, -0/+6Is there any site besides Microsoft's that uses Silverlight? I'm all up for competition as long as its worth my time.
- DrDabbles, on 05/16/2008, -0/+6I've downloaded the beta from Adobe. STILL no x86_64 support! I'd really like the GNASH project to grab up the open specs and create a truly cross-platform, open-source flash player.
- arjie, on 05/16/2008, -0/+5You can do that too. When using 64-bit Ubuntu, I used to simply download the videos to watch them later. Much better considering my connection speed isn't high enough to stream in peace.
- lava, on 05/16/2008, -0/+5They better include transparency in this one.
Oh yeah, when are they coming out with the IDE for Linux? - tonaros, on 05/16/2008, -2/+7I just dugg you down.
- yetAnotherCroc, on 05/16/2008, -0/+5So maybe I'm blind or something, but I cant find the blasted .deb file. They have the usual .tar.gz and .rpm files on the list but no .deb. Any one want to help?
- WhiteUnit, on 05/16/2008, -0/+5Errr.. Flash 7 and 8 were both made by Macromedia.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 189 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is