Adobe To Use TransGaming's SwiftShader; Remember Cedega?
Phoronix: Adobe To Use TransGaming's SwiftShader; Remember Cedega?
TransGaming, the company behind the Cedega program for running Windows games on Linux (as an alternative to using Wine or CodeWeaver's CrossOver Games) and Cider as the Mac equivalent, has just announced that Adobe is now licensing its SwiftShader Technology for the Adobe Flash Player and Adobe AIR...
You know, I wish you'd stop shoving in that D3D State Tracker into every possible article. Unless Wine adopts it (unlikely in the near future) it's really not worth talking about.
You even mentioned it in the ReactOS release article where it has barely any relevance, as ReactOS aren't planning on implementing Gallium3D for a long time, if at all.
Please! Sometimes I have the feeling you desperatly try to link as many phoronix articles as possible in, no matter how relevant they are or not.
Originally Posted by Kazade
I half wonder if it's his form of SEO.
Originally Posted by Linuxhippy
It's incredibly unlikely to happen, what about OSX? Android? They have Flash implementations too, Adobe would be frankly off their head to expose the D3D API directly. The case in point is that even in this article it's an extremely obscure reference, and I wish Michael would stop plugging it as if it's a cure all for every situation. It's not, it's just a state tracker.
Originally Posted by jntesteves
So Adobe controls or at least leads PDF and SWF format changes/enhancements. Each new format they make is immediately adopted by their own software, and thus all those who use their software. The art they make with those new formats can then only be viewable by those with programs able to render them. The 3rd party open source programs perpetually lag behind the quickly implemented new Adobe software. This endless treadmill will thus always push users to using Adobe's software, and only Adobe's software, much like .NET vs. Mono, and Silverlight vs. Moonlight. Sure, they claim open standards, but they are the ones behind the wheel.
So, how do you deal with standards advancement situations gracefully so that you get real standards? First off, removing control from a software company with an interest in getting users on its own platform is step number one, if they are going to make changes just to break functionality to cause dependence on their own software. Secondly, you have the "main" implementation be open source, so that all software can adopt the new engine/codec/libraries. Nether of those things Adobe wants to do, because Adobe is interested in getting users onto their own software and nothing more.
Until that changes, where are the open source equivalent SVG animation formats? Do any exist at all? Several formats support animations, and several support SVG, but I have yet to find one that supports both and thus could be a true open Flash replacement.
I think the moment that Gnash/Lightspark reach *near* feature parity with Adobe's Flash then browsers like Chrome and Firefox will implement it as a built-in plugin. When/if that happens Adobe could quickly find themselves no-longer in control of their own standard. That would be interesting to watch.
Adobe really needs to rethink their operating model....
What do they gain by having users use their plugin vs an open source implementation of that plugin? The answer is NOTHING. In fact, it HURTS them since it means that those unable or unwilling to use their blob plugin simply won't have access to content made under their format.
Now if, on the other hand, adobe were to drop their blob (or open source it 100%) and focus EXCLUSIVELY on developing the plugin as OPEN SOURCE, then you give off a warm and fuzzy feeling while potentially being able to REDUCE THE DEVELOPER WORKLOAD AND EXPENSE by gaining community assistance for a piece of software, which by itself, doesn't gain you any revenue to begin with!
Their revenue comes 100% from selling their content CREATION software. Not the CONSUMPTION software, so make life easier on yourself and get some community help!
The millions of windows/mac users don't care lol. This has nothing to do with Linux. Saying that they should adopt something open source doesn't apply because it's not linux/bsd/etc. Besides open source stuff that changes often (Open source really has become synonymous with change these days...I had to edit this post because I was using them interchangeably).
Originally Posted by droidhacker
A lot of products take years to develop. So, if it's relying on an API that changes, it's just not viable. I can't think of anything that doesn't change/break things regularly.
That said, again, who cares. HTML5 will ruin Flash, PDF..well, they're not in as much use as they were before. Until there's a REASONABLE API that a company can rely on for cross-platform development (on a per-product basis) you people need to stop bashing on every company because they didn't use some sub-quality open-source equivalent.
With the above said, of course that doesn't apply to their complaining about lack of video APIs because they ARE there, they just don't want to rely on something that they'll have to pay someone to fix whenever it's updated.
That's what makes some of the older systems like BeOS (or Haiku these days), Amiga, etc interesting is because they had their APIs, they didn't have thousands of potential APIs that in the long run didn't end up getting the job done.
Tags for this Thread