Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Linux News

Adobe (Temporarily?) Kills 64-Bit Flash For Linux 272

Posted by Soulskill
from the how-rude dept.
An anonymous reader writes "It seems that with the release of the 10.1 security patches, Adobe has, at least temporarily, killed 64-bit Flash for Linux. The statement says: 'The Flash Player 10.1 64-bit Linux beta is closed. We remain committed to delivering 64-bit support in a future release of Flash Player. No further information is available at this time. Please feel free to continue your discussions on the Flash Player 10.1 desktop forums.' The 64-bit forum has been set to read-only."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Adobe (Temporarily?) Kills 64-Bit Flash For Linux

Comments Filter:
  • Fuck flash (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 11, 2010 @10:37AM (#32535314)

    I never had a player installed. And I'm doing just fine.

    It's just yet another proprietary lock-in. And most of the time it serves just waste.

  • by LWATCDR (28044) on Friday June 11, 2010 @10:43AM (#32535384) Homepage Journal

    Yea Flash is an Open standard....
    Let's move on to HTML5 and or even JavaFX and drop this none standard standard.

  • by 0100010001010011 (652467) on Friday June 11, 2010 @10:45AM (#32535432)

    Windows devices.

    Is it any wonder that how good Flash for OS X is, Steve banned them from the iP* devices? I don't know how Flash runs on Linux, but on my Mac more than 1-2 youpo^H^H tube videos up in tabs and my fans are maxed out.

    Someone in the Linux community needs to step up tell Adobe to shove it like Apple did and start working towards an HTML5 future.

    The enemy of my enemy is my friend?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 11, 2010 @10:46AM (#32535448)

    A "size_t" is NOT the same as an "unsigned int".

    If you think it is, you're ignorant.

  • by tepples (727027) <tepples@gmaiBLUEl.com minus berry> on Friday June 11, 2010 @10:55AM (#32535598) Homepage Journal
    Flash Player works by recompiling ActionScript into native code. What JIT compiler 1. automatically adjusts to the architecture it's compiled for and 2. was available when Flash Player 10 development started (LLVM wasn't)?
  • by Stumbles (602007) on Friday June 11, 2010 @10:56AM (#32535612)
    their head out of their ass if they used the worlds largest crane; http://www.dlog.com/fileadmin/user_upload/UEber_uns/Presse/mobil_kran_2_20cm.jpg [dlog.com]
  • by Richard_at_work (517087) <richardprice@@@gmail...com> on Friday June 11, 2010 @11:01AM (#32535694)
    Having done a fair bit with HTML5 video over the past few weeks, I can safely say that although its looking good, and I enjoyed producing HTML5 video apps, its not a flash killer yet.

    They need to sort out the HTML5 subtitle standard, and someone needs to actually support it.

    They need to sort out the cue points standard, and someone needs to support it. (No, events fired every X ms or so is not enough)

    They need to eliminate cross browser issues with overlaying html over the video stream.

    They need to enable adaptive streaming.

    They need to do a lot more work, but what has been done so far is very nice.
  • by farble1670 (803356) on Friday June 11, 2010 @11:10AM (#32535848)

    adobe is one of few major software vendors that has consistently kept their software suite going on mac, even through the bad times.

  • Poor Adobe... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gentlemen_loser (817960) on Friday June 11, 2010 @11:14AM (#32535884) Homepage
    A few days ago, there was a discussion here about how evil Apple was for trying to kill Flash. I said then, and will repeat here: Fuck you Adobe.

    They took their sweet time porting their "cross platform" plugin to Linux, and in the meantime, we were stuck with the barely functioning (although I do not fault them for the effort) GNU implementation. Cross platform to Adobe means: Windows 7, Windows Vitsa, Windows XP, and Mac OS. Personally, I pine for the day that HTML 5 is able to displace Flash, and therefore Adobe, permanently. In my opinion, they have squandered any goodwill towards the open source community. I'll be the first one in line to dance on their grave.
  • Re:Committed (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 11, 2010 @11:22AM (#32536020)

    Want to know why?
    It's because many plugins, such as Flash, don't come in 64-bit flavors.

  • Re:Fuck flash (Score:1, Insightful)

    by MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) on Friday June 11, 2010 @11:28AM (#32536104)

    I never had a player installed. And I'm doing just fine.

    It's just yet another proprietary lock-in. And most of the time it serves just waste.

    Unless we're talking about phones. Then Flash is a must-have and any (i)phone that doesn't have it is a completely useless piece of garbage.

  • by datapharmer (1099455) on Friday June 11, 2010 @11:40AM (#32536254) Homepage
    except that the standards published are always a few versions behind and in reality none of those players will play any of the most recent content reliably. Sure, they work for some simple stuff but calling them an open alternative is hardly fair. Sure, they could be if adobe published their intentions in advance but then they would lose their advantage. Same problem with PDF on the creation end. Sure, it is open, but if you want the most recent features in acrobat from a free or even paid alternative, too bad, they haven't been published yet.
  • Re:Committed (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 11, 2010 @02:21PM (#32539064)

    Given that some people claim the 32-bit address space is too limited for ASLR to be really effective, a 64 bit browser might soon make a lot of sense for security reasons (plus it is AFAIK not possible to compile 64 bit libraries that do not support NX or ASLR, thus moving to 64 bit also enforces minimum security standards - of course browsers just shouldn't load such security nightmares on 32 bit either, but that's a bit more difficult).

  • by LWATCDR (28044) on Friday June 11, 2010 @02:34PM (#32539334) Homepage Journal

    How about this.
    YouTube requires Flash 8
    Hulu requires Flash 10
    I will bet that CNN needs better than 6 but I have not tested it.
    If those don't work then you are fubar.
    Nothing wrong with asking for something to backup some bonehead statement like 90 of the web only needs Flash 5 or Flash 6!
    Even that statement doesn't really fly from the start. Does 90% of the web need Flash 6?
    Because if it works on 6 it should work on 5!

  • by d2globalinc (1831704) on Friday June 11, 2010 @05:41PM (#32542672) Homepage
    Im sick of these uninformed idiots thinking flash is all about VIDEO.. video is a small piece of the possibilities with flash... It also makes a great cross-platform application development platform, expec with AIR. Steve Jobs doesn't want flash because it would mean the end of his money train called the app store, it has nothing to do with steve's qwest for perfection.. If steve was that into performance, security, etc - he would have stopped making QUICKTIME a long time ago. Flash push'd quicktime outa the way, and thanks to youtube made it the key piece for internet video. Steve has never let that go.. Flash is a GOOD thing for all of us because it means no one OS, person, etc can force us to pay for their exclusive content when they support the flash player. This includes, video playback, apps, etc. As a developer flash enables me to write an application only once that can work online or offline, interface with the OS's native interfaces, and then have it available on Mac, Windows, Linux, Android, etc and thats a lot more potential customers than just the iphone/ipad. And a hell of a lot cheaper for me to develop my apps when I don't have to make a separate one for each platform. Plus I've got control of my application distribution then not Steve Jobs/Apple.
  • Re:Fuck flash (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rakarra (112805) on Friday June 11, 2010 @06:56PM (#32543662)

    It doesn't really matter that Flash is terrible and useless- it isn't Apple's place to tell me what I can or can't do with *my* phone. I may be an outlier but I won't be a customer as long as Apple behaves like they maintain some sort of ownership over their customer's possessions.

    Get used to it if you want to deal with Apple devices. Apple is very aggressively moving down the path towards the locked-down experience, where they decide how you use your devices and what you do with them. They say their customers don't want choices, they just want the Apple experience.

    Jobs smugly says that the PC world, where the user has a billion choices for just about every decision, is dying (just like BSD). In their mind, it is ABSOLUTELY Apple's place to tell you what you can do with Apple's phone.

    So, good for you for you for not supporting them if this is against your notion of what computing devices should be and how they should behave. I think Apple's philosophy is pretty damned dangerous to open computing.

APL is a write-only language. I can write programs in APL, but I can't read any of them. -- Roy Keir

Working...