Slashdot Log In
x86 Linux Flash Player 9 is Final
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Jan 17, 2007 08:34 AM
from the i-still-hate-flash dept.
from the i-still-hate-flash dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
x86 Linux Flash Player 9 is Final
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 288 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Finally! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Informative)
Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (Score:3, Funny)
(http://bargheer.blogspot.com/)
Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (Score:4, Insightful)
Claim ignorance? Most Linux users ARE truly ignorant when it comes to Windows.
Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.pobox.com/~meta/ | Last Journal: Sunday February 29 2004, @09:19AM)
Somehow I doubt that. I'm reminded of studies during the 90s that showed that Windows users typically had no knowledge of Mac OS, but Mac OS users typically had moderately detailed knowledge of Windows.
I suspect that the situation is similar for Linux. I would be very surprised if any significant percentage of Linux users had not:
...and so on.
Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (Score:5, Insightful)
Rubbish. Every Linux user I know personally (ok, only a dozen or so) is required to use Windows as their primary desktop OS at their place of work. This even includes some people who are primarily Linux developers.
This daily familiarity, combined with a general technical aptitude that you can still assume from Linux users, means that very few of them are going to be "truly ignorant" of Windows. Ignorant of some internal Win32 APIs perhaps, but not ignorant in the sense that you are claiming. Most people with a passing acquaintance of computers are going to be familiar with Windows to some degree.
Re:Any vacancies in the i-still-hate-flash dept.? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.tjerkstra.org/)
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.
Binary Software? ... (Score:1, Insightful)
rejoice (Score:4, Funny)
(http://freedomsforums.com/)
Second class citizen? (Score:3, Funny)
This is Great (Score:1)
Re:This is Great (Score:5, Informative)
With an ad-blocker and Flash, you get the "best" of both worlds: You Tube *and* (relatively) ad-less surfing.
Brilliant!!
No EULA??? (Score:3, Informative)
Is it possible that Adobe actually did something really good here?
Re:No EULA??? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No EULA??? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://mikebabcock.ca/slashdot/ | Last Journal: Sunday November 05 2006, @05:55PM)
Just like Windows... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just like Windows... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Just like Windows... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://ygingras.net/)
Re:Just like Windows... (Score:4, Informative)
(http://timgray.blogspot.com/)
I am sure some flash guru's out there can do fantastic things with the new stuff but most dont need it.
comment of a real linux user (Score:4, Funny)
(http://kirils.org/)
Sweet... (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://tomcopeland.blogs.com/)
Besides, it'd be a waste of all that code I wrote for the Evolution extension [rubyforge.org]!
Alternative open source implmentation (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.thuejk.dk/)
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 (Score:1)
Exciting Multimedia Experience for Linux! (Score:2, Funny)
(Last Journal: Thursday August 30, @10:31PM)
"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!
Will it fix the synch problem? (Score:3, Interesting)
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?
Finally, ALSA support (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.smileystation.com/)
Gentoo is First (Score:2)
(http://www.tester.ca/)
Final? (Score:2)
High CPU usage (Score:2, Insightful)
Take a second look at flash (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Take a second look at flash (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday March 01 2007, @01:53PM)
- It is almost entirely client-side code, and not very efficient at that. Java applets are more portable (because Sun releases Java on more platforms simultaneously) and faster (Flash UIs are soooo sloooow) for executing client-side code. Even some JavaScript is a better choice in many cases.
- The stuff that executes server-side has to go through the "Flash gateway servlet" which won't work with anything but JRun, a horrible, unsupported, poorly documented, crash-happy piece of crap masquerading as a J2EE server. Applet-Servlet, JSP or even AJAX RPC (god forbid!) make for better server-side code.
- You can't separate the ActionScript into separate files. Every VCS that I've seen Flash developers use gets filled up with dozens of binary versions of the
.FLA source. Some even version-control the .SWF as well. Yuck. Obviously Flash developers weren't meant to use version control, which makes collaborating with them a real PITA.
Flash is useful for making animations, and only for making animations. Why the output couldn't be a standard movie file format instead, I'll never know. Adobe needs to stop trying to get into the web market and stick to PhotoShop.Slowpokers. (Score:3, Informative)
I'm inclined to believe them.
And, being a professional Flash developer who deploys all his webstuff on Linux aswell I am now going to update from Flash MX 2k4 Pro IDE to the newest. Support Flash on Linux and I'll continue using it, drop it and I'll be off to Java/Xul/Whatever before you can say "people want cross-plattform RIA". It's that simple.
Bottom line:
Nice job. Took you long enough. Be faster next time or you'll have one flasher less.
(Now all we need is a fresh batch of O'Reillys to go with ActionScript 3 and I'm set.
Opera Supported (Score:1)
(http://www.ewanhemingway.com/)
How about Firefox + Adblock? (Score:2)
Other Archs (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://inglorion.net/ | Last Journal: Thursday October 06 2005, @07:17AM)
And, as usual with binary software, users of any of the many other architectures Linux support are left in the cold.
That's great, but... (Score:2, Funny)
flash 9 (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Saturday May 28 2005, @07:55PM)
Now I'm watching the linus interview on zdnet
I also have the realplayer installed 'cause goddamn npr uses real.
ripping dvd's is simple using dvdrip.
linux rocks!
My Tribute to Flash 9 on Linux: Wobbly Windows (Score:2)
(http://www.jamesward.org/)
only took 3 tries, but, hey, finally (Score:1)
(http://molvray.com/acid-test/)
That nag screen ordering a nonexistent upgrade got real old. And Macromedia _still_ can't seem to get its act together enough to point out that the rpm doesn't work on Core3. (Long story, but I have to run Core 3 for various reasons.)
The thing that really struck me was the little notice saying Actionscript is going to be open-sourced. That got past me when everybody else here probably noticed it. But if Adobe/Macromedia is open sourcing ANYTHING, I'm floored. They used to keep developers in locked cages (I exaggerate only slightly) to make sure no secrets escaped. The next time someone says open source is taking over the world, I'm going to believe them.
oh yeah, i want flash, i want ads.... (Score:1)
why i should upgrade to their new ****, that will only display MORE ADS?
I'm still staying on x86...why? to have ads on my screen...
That's called 'progress'
nice work, guys
Just played two Corrs videos on Youtube to test it (Score:2)
Maybe this one will work in my Kubuntu! The beta sucked.
the i-still-hate-flash dept. (Score:1)
2nd rate? (Score:1)
(http://www.culmination.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday September 11 2003, @10:19AM)
crashes (Score:2)
(http://www.lightandmatter.com/)
I don't know about other people, but the release version of the player is crashing on my Ubuntu machine, just like the beta did. If you're thinking of upgrading from flash 7 to flash 9, make sure to save the version 7 files libflashplayer.so and flashplayer.xpt, because if you go to the adobe web page, they don't seem to give you any option to download version 7 anymore.
Flash is potentially an interesting application platform. It's very appealing to be able to create a program that will run on any OS, with zero install. However, the proprietary nature of the beast is really frustrating. People are doing some very cool stuff with flash-related OSS (see osflash.org). There's a good, solid OSS actionscript 2 compiler (mtasc), which is faster than Adobe's compiler. I'd been wanting to try doing open-source flash apps for a long time, and recently I studied up and messed around, and got the impression that things had really gotten to the point where it was practical to do. But in reality, there were a lot of roadblocks. One was that I couldn't get Flash 9 to work on Linux (and still can't). Another was that Adobe's GUI component library is proprietary, so you have to use alternative libraries (e.g., actionstep), and that means there's no source-code-level compatibility between OSS flash tools and adobe's toolchain. Flash also only supports proprietary audio and video codecs. The long and the short of it seems to be that at this point, flash is still a crippled platform for anyone operating in the OSS/Linux world, and although people like Nicolas Cannasse are working hard and accomplishing an amazing amount with the OSS toolchain, it's just not clear to me that they'll ever catch up to this constantly changing language.
Not sure if this been mentioned yet, but... (Score:1)
This is "final" (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Thursday November 08, @08:02PM)
Your architecture, \'x86_64\', is not supported (Score:1)
ERROR: Your architecture, \'x86_64\', is not supported by the
Adobe Flash Player installer.
guess i'll be waiting for gnuflash
All I have to say about this is: (Score:2)
(http://kim.biyn.com/)
Now, can you please get to work on releasing CS2 (or CS3) for Linux? Please?
Re:x64_86 (Score:5, Informative)
(http://andersman.org/)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Funny)
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? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Saturday January 13 2007, @02:19AM)
a little bit of aalib, anyone? (Score:4, Funny)
(http://kirils.org/)
Amd64 rules (sure intel 64 does as well) (Score:2, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday June 27 2006, @03:46AM)
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:x64_86 (Score:3, Funny)
(http://suso.suso.org/ | Last Journal: Tuesday March 09 2004, @12:03AM)
Re:x64_86 (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.google.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday December 12 2006, @06:04PM)
Re:Yeah, so, what. (Score:1, Informative)
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:x64_86 (Score:2, Funny)
(http://home.primus.ca/~ronsharp/tororg.html)
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 (Score:1)
Re:Yeah, so, what. (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:2)
(http://www.cobios.org/john/gallery/)
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?
Re:Why? (Score:1)
Do i need to say more?
Re:Why? (Score:1)
(http://slashback.org/blog/ | Last Journal: Monday May 15 2006, @10:37PM)
You mean you weren't keeping up with the new transformers movie [transformersthemovie.com] that's coming out soon (a site which until recently required flash 8)?
Re:x64_86 (Score:2)
(http://www.crfh.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 14 2006, @02:47PM)