Adobe Opens Up Flash Specifications

[deanjo]

But then consider the (mildly related) HTML/XHTML or CSS, for example. Mostly, these standards have been developed without one specific vendor's interference.

It's definitely true that Adobe wants to make money, and that's most probably why they're opening this up. I don't doubt Sun opened Java for the exact same reasons - people are moving to open source software instead, so proprietary products have to go through this transformation to stay relevant.

The problem, in my eyes, is that Flash is going to stay proprietary, even though the spec is open. Sure, Adobe will listen to the developers when they request features, I don't doubt that, but Adobe is still the only vendor with the ability to change Flash. What they decide, that's what goes.

Your comparison to BitTorrent isn't entirely fair, I think. Think of my examples above - XHTML, for instance, has a single standard "vein", you could say, although it's subject to the implementation's handling. But the main point is that XHTML, as such, doesn't suffer from 6 incompatible offshoots the way BitTorrent does. It has been developed by interested parties that all have a horse in the race, and same could be the case for SVG/SMIL, for instance.

But okay, I guess I'm being a bit idealistic. Think of PDF, for instance: Developed by Adobe, but now it's pretty much the most portable document format around, and tons of non-Adobe implementations have been developed. If the same happens to Flash, at least Adobe will be happy with the situation, and the users (and developers) as well, most likely.

My point was that any poorly managed standard, no matter if it is open or not, will suffer because of egos and lack of a unified direction. For every well managed opensource project there is a poorly managed one. That happens in closed source too. Ultimately the lead devels and maintainers say what makes the cut and what doesn't. openGL for example is another open standard that has recently because of poor management become stagnent. A standard being open, in no way guarantees or even increases the chances of successfully adopted. Just take a look at how many opensource browsers STILL fail the ACID tests. The two browsers that happened to achieve 100% compatibilty were closed sourced.

[Mithrandir]

The two browsers that happened to achieve 100% compatibility were closed sourced.

So you are saying that Epiphany is closed source ? And I have seen how this browser achieves 100/100.

[Thetargos]

Has hell froze over? If Adobe is releasing at least as much documentation and specs as they have for PDF, that means that even the tools to create the content can be produced in an open manner, like OOo does PDFs, but Acrobat can read and edit PDFs, so Adobe still makes money off Acrobat. But that also means that we can have very good tools to view the content such as open source players, just like there are Open applications for PDF (Evince, XPDF, etc)

[Thetargos]

So you are saying that Epiphany is closed source ? And I have seen how this browser achieves 100/100.

Epiphany achieved this until recently, so did Konqueror. But when the first browser achieved 100% on ACID 2, it was Opera (and Safari, IIRC) and none other browser did.

By the way, Epiphany in my machine fails. Since it still uses the Gecko rendering engine, it is obvious that Epiphany, Firefox and Galeon all render it exactly the same. Epiphany 2.22 with the WebKit renderer does pass it. But the point of firefox not passing the test, being it the most prominent open source browser, is ridiculous.

[deanjo]

Epiphany achieved this until recently, so did Konqueror. But when the first browser achieved 100% on ACID 2, it was Opera (and Safari, IIRC) and none other browser did.

By the way, Epiphany in my machine fails. Since it still uses the Gecko rendering engine, it is obvious that Epiphany, Firefox and Galeon all render it exactly the same. Epiphany 2.22 with the WebKit renderer does pass it. But the point of firefox not passing the test, being it the most prominent open source browser, is ridiculous.

Yes your right Thetargos, those were the first two to pass the ACID 2 test, they are also the first to pass the ACID 3 tests as well.

[Redeeman]

Epiphany achieved this until recently, so did Konqueror. But when the first browser achieved 100% on ACID 2, it was Opera (and Safari, IIRC) and none other browser did.

By the way, Epiphany in my machine fails. Since it still uses the Gecko rendering engine, it is obvious that Epiphany, Firefox and Galeon all render it exactly the same. Epiphany 2.22 with the WebKit renderer does pass it. But the point of firefox not passing the test, being it the most prominent open source browser, is ridiculous.

yeah except it was a beta in opera, konqueror were first to have stable release out doing it..

[deanjo]

yeah except it was a beta in opera, konqueror were first to have stable release out doing it..

Actually, your wrong, Safari 2.0.2 in October of 2005 was the first, Konq didn't pass until March of 2006.