Slashdot Mirror

The SWF file format is published as an open specification, FWIW:

http://www.openswf.org/

However, that doesn't say anything about the player itself.

Quit picking on Macromedia. If they can get Flash onto every device in the known universe, more power to them: at least Flash does not try to lock you into a single operating system. The alternative to Flash is the next crop of Microsoft lockware (you think they're going to do XAML/Avalon plugins for Linux or Mac?).

I'll take Flash over the alternatives any day, thank you. And besides, the Flash format is openly documented. What more could you want?

Need I remind... SWF is an open document format. http://www.openswf.org

This "bash Flash" thread is partially earned and partially geek FUD. In specific response to ".com B4 .storm"s comments...

• You can't bookmark a specific page in Flash unless the DEVELOPER has prepared a way for you to do so. Most don't bother. Ditto with frame-based sites, or sites that use extensive DHTML/JavaScript for UI adjustment. Heck, some form-based sites can't even be bookmarked.
• Again, a drawback with the DEVELOPER, not the TECHNOLOGY. It's ridiculously easy to make a block of text selectable in a Flash movie.
• Accessibility has been a sore spot for Flash, agreed. The most recent versions of Flash provide support for MSAA (Microsoft Access Accessibility) tags for browser readers -- think of it as ALT tags for Flash objects. Of course, it only works in IE on Windows, but it's a start.
• Macromedia has published the specifications for SWF. This O'Reilly's article that points out Flash is closed but SWF is open. That's why Adobe made LiveMotion (now discontinued because it couldn't compete with Flash), or Electric Rain can make Swift3D... the SWF format is available. (I see you conveniently ignored GIF, even though it is far more widely used than PNG... but, alas, it is not an open standard.) Are PostScript and PDF bad because they are not open source? Omigod, what happens if Adobe goes out of business tomorrow? Uh... if you are seriously worried about things like that, you have a very weak grasp of the economy; companies with highly succesful products used by millions of people rarely "go under" without years of forewarning, and even then they are generally bought by others so the successful products can march on. (Flash was originally called FutureSplash, before being bought by Macromedia... Freehand was published by Aldus before Adobe bought the company for PageMaker and sold Freehand to Macromedia... hmmm...) As for the threat of royalties, neither Macromedia or Adobe are that stupid, and you know it.

Finally, of course Flash is not a replacement for HTML, XML and CSS. But those things are not replacements for Flash. None of the open standards you mentioned are even remotely capable of doing the things SWF does. You are not making a useful, level comparison. Next you'll say that DVDs are not as good as CDs because they can't be used to play music in your home stereo.

I was going to say that SWF actually is an open standard, but I can't seem to find the licensing info for it anywhere. I seem to recollect that they opened the format, but I might be wrong. Anyway, it is well documented at OpenSWF.org.

There are several packages that produce SWF output, and if none of them are as good as Macromedia's products, they probably will be eventually.

I agree totally with your other points. I think well thought out web standards (and HTML is remarkably well thought through) are important for web democracy.

Technology IS neutral is has no biases to be bloody anything. At its most fundamental, are you suggesting that rocks are evil because people can get hit over the head with them? I point out we can also build houses and grind corn with them...both offically Good TM. Doesn't this make rocks neutral? See that's why we say tools are neutral...

"Flash is a non-standard, proprietary data format" er no it isn't, flash SWF is an open STANDARD data format. Flash player is a free proprietary player for this open standard. Flash MX 2004 is a Proprietary piece of software that produces SWF files.

"*completely* contrary to every principle behind the design of the internet"

You really have no clue about this whole internet business at all do you? Who exactly do you think designed it, and for what purpose?... (I'll give you a clue, if you can fit it in a post your model is too simplistic.)

The Flash file format is open. I don't understand your point. Just because something is proprietary doesn't make it not open, or bad for that matter. There are tools out there which output Flash and are not made by Macromedia themselves. There are even open source Flash production mechanisms. Yes, Macromedia could at some point change the file format to obfuscate it, yes they could make it non-backwards-compatible, they could even decide to abandon Flash completely. That doesn't put the genie back in the bottle, and its still not making Flash a bad thing in and of itself.

neither Java nor Flash are Open Source and as such I don't care to learn them unless I specifically get paid for it.

No, but is Flash actually a standard? Erm... no. It's propietary.

FUD.

The flash format has been documented and thus "open" since 1998.

S

Disclaimer: I haven't used any of these tools, I don't know which (if any) are actually good.

http://www.openswf.org/links.html

do you know any storage medium would be large enough (or fast enough) to playback video at that resolution.

Heard of vector animation? That is, unless you mean "video" as in using a photographic recording of live action.

Believe it or not, the SWF file format actually is an open standard, but I hear you there... I will be one happy mofo when reliable SVG support comes to the major browsers.

I'm really hoping that Microsoft doesn't try to pull their patented "Our browser now supports X, but our implementation is just different enough from everyone else's as to make it more or less useless" thing with SVG.

Argh...I wasn't expecting a well-reasoned and thought out answer...

"I think you're being optimistic"

It's my father, he has a genetic predisposition to being optimistic. I tend to temper it with a healthy cynicism. The major problem with W3c ratification is that there's no requirement to build anything into a browser; given that MS have actually stated that they won't be developing IE6 further (even for compliance to W3c standards) and the general inertia of people using the things that's bundled with their OS. Expect more Microsoft HTML(tm) in the future.

Seriously, though, there isn't necessarily that much of a curve with using something with a Flash flavour if you can find the right tools, and since the opening of SWF there have been a proliferation.

Obviously you might be looking for a flat learning curve, but check out The Ming Pages and OpenSWF for a bit more information.

It's important to note that I'm not a fan of Flash, per se, but in terms of market/desktop penetration for a vector format, it's the absolute daddy.

OpenSWF.org

"OpenSWF.org is the source for information on the Flash File Format. Here you will find file format specifications, sample code, links to 3rd party tools and more.

SWF is the file format used by Macromedia Flash to deliver graphics, animation and sound over the Internet. Almost 95% of web users can view SWF content without having to install a new plug-in, and over 300 million people have downloaded the Flash player. Macromedia published the specifications for SWF in April 1998. This site has resources for programmers who want to read, write or play SWF files."

haha get a grip man, SVG has had as much impact on the developer community as VRML or MTS

oh and SWF is an Open format, sure it isnt W3C but then neither is this site, or CNN or Google or CNET or ZDnet or BBC.....

standards hahah

The SWF specification.

I'm fairly sure there's an open source viewer and some open source creation tools. I've read about some on-the-fly generated SWF like for charts and graphs. The links should on the site somewhere.

This is one of those things I'll figure I'll get around to playing with someday.

Take a look at SVG. It supports vector graphics, PNG motion/animation and sound (at least in 1.2). Looks like Flash has also been opened up so you've got quite a selection. Here are some comparisons (look a little out of date) and a resource website.

well, the player is for x86 only. PowerPC forever!

This site has the documentation to the SWF format. You can do flash programming manually, with a text editor.

Making movies with a text editor may be a bit more involved :)

Flash *is* open. Just check openswf.org.

The problem is, there are not much SWF implementations. Yes there is SWF (writing) support in PHP, and I heard about an open source flash plugin, but I do not expect it to become part of GNOME anytime (not even soon).

OpenSWF.org has the
documents.

SWF is the file format used by Macromedia Flash to deliver graphics, animation and sound over the Internet. Almost 95% of web users can view SWF content without having to install a new plug-in, and over 300 million people have downloaded the Flash player. Macromedia published the specifications for SWF in April 1998

I hope this puts flash out of bussines. It would be time for SVG to replace standard flash.

SWF, Flash's file format, IS a free and open standard.

Actually, the SWF format is a recommended standard. Well, okay, that's not exactly true, but it is an open standard. It can be annoying sometimes, true, but it's also pretty nifty.

first: take a deep breath. there ya go.

next: go here

It appears that a LOT of readers either don't have or have disabled Flash, and I'm one of them. It might be worth waiting until the website repairs their site into something standards-conforming. HTML + PNG preferred.

give me a break... you know what you are? a standards snob. is xhtml ok? will gif cut the mustard if it's lighter and looks the same? do you roll over all of the images of every site you visit and get their url to make sure they conform to your standards?

marshall mcluhan aside, the medium is not the entirety of the message. it's really pigheaded to reject content out of hand based on the delivery format.

flash is an open file format (look here and the latest version of flash has gone a long way towards meeting accessibility requirements. so suck it up, and stop spreading FUD.

Open doesn't mean good, mind you, but it's unfair to say it's not an open and published standard when it is.

Open doesn't mean good, mind you, but it's unfair to say it's not an open and published standard when it is.

"Web browsers don't support" is not an excuse anymore

As you correctly point out, that's true for non-animated images. However, what do you propose for simple animations? What if animated .gif is the only way I can get advertisers to buy space on my site? Is there a way to hold off Unisys for the last nine months of the life of U.S. Patent 4,558,302? Mozilla (and Netscape 7) is the only popular browser to support Multiple-image Network Graphics, the animated extension to PNG and free alternative to animated GIF images. Excluding IE users is not an option. Or should I try to find (or write) a tool to convert animated .gif to .swf?

unless you have alpha (specifically multiple levels of transparency), which some of the older browsers didn't handle so well.

Even IE 6 doesn't handle alpha very well. (Mozilla does.) However, any PNG image converted from a still GIF image will work fine.

What I think is really needed is an HTTP-friendly "remote GUI" protocol for writing client-side GUI's.

We have it. It's called SWF. However, it's primarily designed for graphical GUIs, not the character-cell GUIs preferred by blind people and shell users.

Here. Have a free clue before you did youself any deeper of a hole. OpenSWF: Here you can download code, the specs, etc. You can write your own player if you want. Other people have.

(Yadda, yadda, closed source, I know, I know. Trouble is, there is no alternative to Flash at this time.)

And what's more amazing is that someone modded it up. (Note. In the course of this essay, someone got smart and correct that little bit of insanity. Thanks.)

Macromedia has, for quite a long time, been much more open with it's technology than other companies. Any other group has been able to download the specs, sample code, and write programs that either display or create swf files.

Various Source Code files for playing, reading, or writing flash files.

SWF Format Specification

Meanwhile Macromedia has been supporting Linux for awhile now. You can get a Flash 5 player for Linux (they're currently working on the Flash 6 player) and ColfFusion for Linux, Heck they even have a link to Slashdot.

Are they SourceForge or FreshMeat or some other part of ODSN? Heck no. They're a company. just like any other, but while they may not meet the various acid tests everyone here is proposing, what they are doing is trying to do the Right Thing (tm). They are becoming more open. They're starting to embrace the philosophy. They're taking the risk.

And for that, they should be rewarded, not punished, lest we drive everyone else away as well.

And what's more amazing is that someone modded it up. (Note. In the course of this essay, someone got smart and correct that little bit of insanity. Thanks.)

Macromedia has, for quite a long time, been much more open with it's technology than other companies. Any other group has been able to download the specs, sample code, and write programs that either display or create swf files.

Various Source Code files for playing, reading, or writing flash files.

SWF Format Specification

Meanwhile Macromedia has been supporting Linux for awhile now. You can get a Flash 5 player for Linux (they're currently working on the Flash 6 player) and ColfFusion for Linux, Heck they even have a link to Slashdot.

Are they SourceForge or FreshMeat or some other part of ODSN? Heck no. They're a company. just like any other, but while they may not meet the various acid tests everyone here is proposing, what they are doing is trying to do the Right Thing (tm). They are becoming more open. They're starting to embrace the philosophy. They're taking the risk.

And for that, they should be rewarded, not punished, lest we drive everyone else away as well.

The EFF, a foundation created to defend the technological freedoms and rights of individuals around the world, is promoting the use of Macromedia Flash, the success of which will fill the coffers of a pro-DMCA company at the expense of open W3C [w3.org] standards. The irony is sweet and poignant.


Please point me to the place on the W3C site where it talks about an open standard for what flash does. Are you going to try to refer me to SVG? I don't think that will fit the bill. Don't see anything about sound or interactivity.

Perhaps you could stop your whining and generate your Flash from PHP, or you could head over here and read the spec for Flash, published by Macromedia in 1998.

Really? Someone should let these guys know about it

For example, Macromedia have been supplying a Linux Flash client for years, yet it has failed to validify the Flash format as an open standard.

By "Flash format," I assume you mean SWF (not FLA). SWF version 4 has a publicly available specification. (Read More...) Do you consider a format not "valid[...] as an open standard" because it hasn't been submitted to an international standards body?

Although jpg compression is definitely helpful, the article forgets to mention that two image formats are supported by all browsers. GIF being the second.

In addition, 4.0 and newer browsers support Portable Network Graphics (PNG).

GIFs should be used for vector based graphics

No they shouldn't. Use PNG for still images. Use SWF (now an open format) or MNG (not much browser support yet but works in Mozilla and Konqueror) for animations.

and provides a better overall quality/size advantage when done right.

PNG can be 10% smaller than GIF when crushed properly.

So... much as I dislike flash 'intros' as much as the next man, what do you suggest for web-based interactive graphics? I don't know of anything as widespread and well-supported as Flash.

Anyway, the Flash file format is open: http://www.openswf.org/ (Well, in that it is openly documented, anyway...)

Pocket Animator is an open source Flash animation tool built for the Pocket PC in MFC (It shouldn't be too hard to port it to desktop Windows)

http://sourceforge.net/projects/animator/

Check OpenSWF for more Flash projects
http://www.openswf.org/

Or there's SVG...
Beez is an open source SVG animator written in Delphi
http://sourceforge.net/projects/beez/

found at http://www.openswf.org

If Macromedia want everyone to use Flash, they should make sure everyone can.

That's why they OPEN-SOURCED the player !!

www.openswf.org

No ! Why everybody keeps thinking that SWF is a non-open format ?!

Would you guys ever inform yourself before making stupid and false remarks : SWF is an open format !

check openswf.org.

The intermediate *.FLA files are closed formats, but you don't need them to generate Flash content.

Now how long will it take before I get modded down for making a correct statement...

Flash actually is open, in that it is documented and reimplementible. Check out openswf.org, for example.

What I wish for is a nice W3C supported static vector image format with widespread support.

The Flash SDK is not the source for a good, open specification on Flash. For that, go here. There's also some related source code and programs. All without the Nazi license agreements.

I guess you've never heard of OpenSWF.ORG.

Flash is an open standard, and it has been since early 2000. In fact, many companies (including Adobe) have released products that write .SWF files.

I had a client that was a realestate developer. They wanted a feature on their web site that would allow potential home buyers to browse the client's developments on a dynamic map, and get pop-up information about the houses. The original contractor on the job used javascript(javascript that was created by adobe dreamweaver) to create the dynamic map. Where the javascript solution came up short, was that the client wanted to make frequent changes to the map and the information it would display. The client also wanted this administrative feature to be completely "drag-and-drog" user-friendly. So I recreated the map in Flash, using ActionScript to pull housing information out of a MySQL database. I also created the admin system with Flash/ActionScript, that would let the realestate agent drag new homes onto a map, associate that home with information in the database, and click a "save" button in the flash movie. They loved it. Now they didn't have to bug me, the contractor, every time they wanted to update this map on there web site.

The Flash scripting language ActionScript is really nice. It has an XML parser to import XML data, and also has simpler methods that will let you pass information back and forth to a server side language such as PHP. I really had fun on that project. For a good book on Flash's ActionScript, I'd check out "ActionScript: The Definitive Guide" published by O'Reilly press. Furthmore, dynamic Flash such as the realestate map described here, doesn't only have to be generated by Macromedia's ActionScript. SWF is an open standard, and there are open scripting languages you can try. Visit www.openswf.org for more info on what free option you have. Flash is great, but a lot of people use it for needless bells-and-whistles stuff, when it can be used to create dynamic user-friedly software interfaces.

No, Flash is a very open format. See: http://www.openswf.org/.

Sorry, there's no IDE for linux. You'll just have to emulate or switch back and forth. Maybe you'll have better luck once OS X versions of the Flash and Adobe LiveMotion authoring tools are released. It might become cost effective for them to port to linux once they've developed an OS X app.

For a good summary of the situation, check out OpenSWF.

The Flash format (SWF) IS an open standard.

The article wouldn't be complete without mention of openswf.org. This is where Perl::Flash gets it's backend from. There are also a number of useful Flash tools here as well.

You mean an open standard like Macromedia's Shockwave Flash format, complete with an open implementation. It's not a W3C standard, and hence sites shouldn't use it exclusively (there should always be a non-flash option), but the specs and a reference implementation are freely available. Ideally, the W3C would adopt it as an official standard, but it would need work on accessibility issues first (e.g., for those using text-only, or braille or voice browsers).