Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 65

Thread: Adobe Announces Plans To Abandon Flash On Linux

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Am I the only one needing Flash for other stuff than Youtube?

    Let's hypothesize.

    1. Assume, for the sake of the argument, that the upcoming versions of Flash will contain a critical feature that our dead-but-maintained version won't have, making ours essentially useless. Even now most of all rich web content can be done with a combination of javascript, html5 and other established protocols like rtsp -- but do you think the people providing rich web services will care a single whit if Flash is no longer available on some "obscure" non-OSX non-iOS non-Windows platform? It's usually a better business decision short-term to stick with what you know rather than move to the new, and with Flash you can pretty much do anything. Long-term it's obviously better to distance yourself from a vendor lock-in, but technically-aware developers rarely get to make the decisions.
    2. As for skipping Flash completely, what about services like streaming (TV, game tournaments, stuff like justin.tv)? Flash games and animations? Video-on-demand? Conference solutions like Adobe Connect? Random menu elements implemented in Flash? Poorly-designed websites written *entirely* in Flash?


    It's easy to say "just avoid all that then", but that's handicapping yourself considerably and certainly not something that will attract new users nor keep old ones. Some University classes are conducted entirely in Adobe Connect (certain courses at the Luleň University of Technology, for one). Perhaps your job necessitates being able to hold voice/video conferences with shared whiteboard/presentation slides. There's a limit to the lengths I want to go to stick to Linux, and having to change employment or quit my studies certainly cross that. I'm knowledgeable enough to install Windows on a virtual machine, but for that I need a legal copy. The cheapest W7 Home Premium I can find here in Sweden is priced at $150, which isn't just pocket/leisure money amounts to everyone. By this point most people will already have said "fsck that, I knew Linux was just a toy OS, why didn't I listen to ${VENDOR}'s propaganda" and reformatted, or simply bought a new computer if they don't have the expertise.

    I don't like it anymore than you do but Flash is too ubiquitous and widely adopted for me to rationally opt out from installing it, even if I ideologically want to. The current (amd64) Linux Flash works very well and I'd hate to see it just go downhill from here.

    Hopefully smarter minds than mine will share this itch and scratch it for me.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Even if Gnash was feature complete vs Flash, its not something distros can ship as a usable alternative because most distros cant ship the patented codecs (due to risk of being sued for patent violations) or support for the encrypted streaming (because of the risk of being sued for DMCA violations)

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jonwil View Post
    Even if Gnash was feature complete vs Flash, its not something distros can ship as a usable alternative because most distros cant ship the patented codecs (due to risk of being sued for patent violations) or support for the encrypted streaming (because of the risk of being sued for DMCA violations)
    Then those codecs would have to be provided as external libraries much like libdvdcss was and not included on live/install cd's. Also I am sure that someone could come up with a Pepper plugin wrapper much like the nspluginwrapper used for 32 bit plugins on 64 bit browsers to handle the Pepper API based Flash plugin

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeepDayze View Post
    Then those codecs would have to be provided as external libraries much like libdvdcss was and not included on live/install cd's.
    They already are! The codecs are packaged by themselves under "FFMPEG-ugly". There's nothing stopping distros from having GNASH and FFMPEG installed by default, and prompting users to install "FFMPEG-ugly" themselves.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Beyond caring, flash just always blew up in my face anyway, exactly what bugs they fixed every update was beyond me.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    830

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zorael View Post
    Am I the only one needing Flash for other stuff than Youtube?
    I pointed out the exact same thing on page #4. So, no - you're not the only one who needs flash Youtube is just one site, but most of us probably visit MANY websites in a single day that require Adobe Flash. It is incredibly short-sided for people to think because youtube supports HTML5 that the flash problem is magically solved.

    The rest of your comment, i agree completely with.

    It's unfortunate that so many businesses, schools and the like have become dependent on Adobe's technology. Not only Flash, but things like Photoshop (or Creative suite, in general) ~ but IMO that was the idea in the first place, get their products pushed into the schools, business, etc and make everyone completely dependent on Adobe for not only their web-experience, but also make it so professionals have almost ZERO choice but to buy and use Adobe's products.

    business as usual. :\

  7. #57
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zorael View Post
    Am I the only one needing Flash for other stuff than Youtube?

    Let's hypothesize.

    1. Assume, for the sake of the argument, that the upcoming versions of Flash will contain a critical feature that our dead-but-maintained version won't have, making ours essentially useless. Even now most of all rich web content can be done with a combination of javascript, html5 and other established protocols like rtsp -- but do you think the people providing rich web services will care a single whit if Flash is no longer available on some "obscure" non-OSX non-iOS non-Windows platform? It's usually a better business decision short-term to stick with what you know rather than move to the new, and with Flash you can pretty much do anything. Long-term it's obviously better to distance yourself from a vendor lock-in, but technically-aware developers rarely get to make the decisions.
    2. As for skipping Flash completely, what about services like streaming (TV, game tournaments, stuff like justin.tv)? Flash games and animations? Video-on-demand? Conference solutions like Adobe Connect? Random menu elements implemented in Flash? Poorly-designed websites written *entirely* in Flash?


    It's easy to say "just avoid all that then", but that's handicapping yourself considerably and certainly not something that will attract new users nor keep old ones. Some University classes are conducted entirely in Adobe Connect (certain courses at the Luleň University of Technology, for one). Perhaps your job necessitates being able to hold voice/video conferences with shared whiteboard/presentation slides. There's a limit to the lengths I want to go to stick to Linux, and having to change employment or quit my studies certainly cross that. I'm knowledgeable enough to install Windows on a virtual machine, but for that I need a legal copy. The cheapest W7 Home Premium I can find here in Sweden is priced at $150, which isn't just pocket/leisure money amounts to everyone. By this point most people will already have said "fsck that, I knew Linux was just a toy OS, why didn't I listen to ${VENDOR}'s propaganda" and reformatted, or simply bought a new computer if they don't have the expertise.

    I don't like it anymore than you do but Flash is too ubiquitous and widely adopted for me to rationally opt out from installing it, even if I ideologically want to. The current (amd64) Linux Flash works very well and I'd hate to see it just go downhill from here.

    Hopefully smarter minds than mine will share this itch and scratch it for me.
    I see what you're saying there, but it seems that you're reacting to Michael's spin on Adobe's announcement, rather than Adobe's announcement itself.

    What we're looking at here is Adobe working with Google to provide a new plugin context for Flash which will be available in Chrome. Whether or not Mozilla or any other browser chooses to implement the same context is completely up to them, it seems. It looks like the specs and APIs will be open so what's stopping Mozilla from using this PPAPI?

    Yes, there will no longer be a direct download available on Linux. Instead, it will automatically be packaged in with Chrome. Isn't this far easier for the end-user?

    Again, compare with the Engadget article: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/g...yer-for-linux/

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    830

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    What we're looking at here is Adobe working with Google to provide a new plugin context for Flash which will be available in Chrome. Whether or not Mozilla or any other browser chooses to implement the same context is completely up to them, it seems. It looks like the specs and APIs will be open so what's stopping Mozilla from using this PPAPI?
    Knowing a little history about Mozilla helps. Generally speaking, Mozilla isn't a fan of closed-web standards, and in many ways over the years have helped ensure the web stays an open place. So while nothing is 'stopping them' ~ it does sort of go against their ideals. I think it is good they feel this way, as flash isn't really needed anymore -> in the sense that everything it offers *could* be done using open-standards, instead ...and the Web would be a better place for it.

    I for one, am not a fan of Google teaming up with Adobe ~ this is just another example of how Google seems to intend on having control of everything on the web (and beyond).

    Both the EU and the US need to step up and take legal action against Google (in the form of an Antitrust lawsuit, yes i know a complaint has been filed in the EU, or so i read). Google to a very large extent already have a monopoly, and this will just add to their portfolio... In fact, i wouldn't be surprised at all, if Adobe and Google add some new stuff to Flash to help allow them collect even more data from our 'online avatars'...

    Quote Originally Posted by johnc View Post
    Yes, there will no longer be a direct download available on Linux. Instead, it will automatically be packaged in with Chrome. Isn't this far easier for the end-user?
    Make it easier, how exactly?? By having google *encourage* people to use their browser, or have every other browser become even more dependent on Google, then they already are??? (by encourage, i mean try to 'force') Furthermore, what is the difference between downloading flash or having to install Chrome? - think of it this way, if Chrome contains Flash it can't be shipped as a default browser, so you will have to install it anyway....Now, think of if you are like me ~ and DONT use Chrome, nor do i have it installed -> so what, now i have to install Chrome in order to have flash?! that is just silly.

    it sounds to me Google is using a Microsoft type of tactic.
    Last edited by ninez; 02-23-2012 at 02:30 PM.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allquixotic View Post
    ...Okay; so all we have to do is convince the Mozilla developers to support the Pepper API, and they SHOULD be able to get the Flash-plugin-for-Chrome code to work with Firefox -- right? Then someone can write a script that downloads Chrome and extracts Flash and sticks it in the Firefox plugins dir. Done.

    Then, any other webkit browsers that also want to support Flash will have to tag along and support Pepper, and then in the long term, everything will continue to work with Flash as before. It's more like "Adobe Abandons NPAPI Support On Linux".

    Pepper API may in fact be a superior solution anyway. NPAPI was designed a VERY long time ago (90s) and I don't think it meets the needs of modern browser architectures and plugins. In fact, supporting NPAPI with such advanced browsers as Chrome requires a LOT of ugly hacks because of the design of NPAPI.
    Thad'd probably make about as much sense as using Wine to embed the Windows version of Flash, to be honest. PPAPI has a whole bunch of APIs for stuff like file access, rendering, OpenGL, webcam acceleration, etc that Mozilla would need to implement with bug-for-bug compatibility, and at that point you may as well just give up and use Wine and the Windows plugin - sure, the Windows APIs aren't as clean, but there's already a decent standalone implementation of them!


    Quote Originally Posted by Alejandro Nova View Post
    I see Adobe hasn't defined how it's going to distribute the plugin, and that's because nothing but Chrome supports PPAPI.
    Except that Chromium also supports it. Right now Chromium users don't have any way of getting hold of the version of the plugin that's bundled with Google Chrome, and it doesn't look like this is changing. Flash really is becoming a Chrome-only feature on Linux.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Munich
    Posts
    7

    Default

    At least, Flash 11.2 seems to become the best working Flash version on Linux so far. I tried the beta 5 and it did vdpau video rendering and also accelerated video decoding for me. The CPU usage was notably lower than with 11.0 or 11.1. It still crashes a lot though.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •