Chambers wrote:
> 
> They didn't exactly wait.  They were developing their own OSS flash
> player, until Adobe noticed.  

Well yes, that's true. I do still count is as waiting ie. the original
manufacturer isn't active.

Actually it wasn't even Adobe back then, it was still Macromedia :-).

Linux in general never got Flash 8 - Macromedia decided that it's not
needed. After Flash 6 the Flash 10 has been the first Linux -version
that I haven't found a memory leak from. Version 7 leaked big time at
first (something like half an hour -> 500MB oslt, doing nothing), which
was fixed pretty quickly, but smaller leaks was left behind. Also note
that the fact that I haven't found a memory leak from Flash 10 doesn't
100% surely mean there isn't one - it's possible that it just hasn't
occured to me.

> Around 2007, Adobe promised a native 64
> bit flash player, and that kind of killed development.  In 2008, they
> again said "real soon now."  Earlier this year, they got the alpha
> version released.

Yep. And that alpha version sucked big time, but that's normal for an
alpha version. The newest version now* is much better, but it's still buggy.

*) Newest from Portage - I haven't checked if Portage is lagging behind.

> Personally, this is one thing I'd like to see an OSS version that I
> could use, since I'm trying to get as much software as possible in the
> 64bit form.

I'd like to see an OSS version of some open flash-like technology for
multiple reasons. Especially I'd like to seen open technology (somehow I
don't fully trust on Silverlight, even though MS has given big promises
about it).

> ...Chambers

-Aero

Post a reply to this message