Slashdot Mirror
Macromedia Looking at Opening Flash Player
duder writes "Well, it appears that Macromedia is going to open source their Flash player. There is a article at benews which contains an purported e-mail from Macromedia's Flash Player Manager. " From what the e-mail says they will be "releasing the Flash Player Source Code SDK & Flash
File Format (SWF) SDK, in mid January."Update: 01/07 02:39 by H :A very big thank you to David Michie who helped bring me up to speed-looks like SWF has been open for quite some time, and Macromedia had announced the opening of the source back in May. Check out OpenSWF.org for more information.
I can't help but wonder if all this OpenSourcing is really a good thing. Wonder if this means a 100% compatible flash type product from Mickeysoft in the very near future. Embrace and extend is very easy under these circumstances.
Man, I would love that. I finally converted myself over to The GIMP for most of my formerly Photoshop needs but I still use DW for a lot of initial page design.
On a semi-related note: Can anybody recommend a good web editor for Linux? Pico has been my tool of choice for a long time but I need something more full-featured (visual table design, DHTML would be nice, etc) so I can stop rebooting to Windows.
Even though opening some of Flash is great, why doesn't shockwave get the same type treatment?
r nates/, they have flash players for a few unices (Sun, Linux, IRIX), and seems to be keeping these up to date.
Look at http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/alte
Why haven't they ported shockwave yet, anybody know?
On the other hand, it's really nice that a standard that is becoming very popular on the net is going to be available like this. If you use it on the net, it should be publically available, free and open.
--
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
I don't want to sound too 'monopolistic paranoid'. In, this news appears to be just confirmation of earlier promises that Macromedia has made. I just want to present another perspective.
SVG would be a real advance in web graphics. Instead of paying for authoring tools basic graphics and even animation can be done by hand scripting in a text editor. IBM's alphaworks has an excellent java SVG viewer and some example files, I'd suggest everyone with an interest in Flash and web graphics have a look at what the possibilities are.
Bleh!
The plugin for Netscape under Linux is available,
I've got it installed at work and at home. And I'm actually very impressed with the Shockwave format:
Compact vector animations which download quickly over a modem. Okay, it can be overused, but then so can DHTML.
Chris Wareham
But the truth is that the SWF format is never going to be a usable Web format until it comes out from under Macromedia's control. As it stands, they can just change the format slightly any time competing development packages are released (hence no-one really has tried releasing a competing application to Flash). The Flash 4 plugin has been around for ages. Why hasn't the revised file format already been released?
One link of interest if you're looking into generating Flash under Linux is Paul Haeberli's library at http://reality.sgi.com/grafica/flash . Bear in mind that it doesn't come with source and it only outputs version 3 SWF.
K.
-
-- Proud descendant of semi-nomadic cattle-herders.
The page for MSWordview has links to the MSOffice binary file formats. It's at http://www.csn.ul.ie/~caolan/docs/mswordview.html.
For anyone who's into open source Flash stuff, check out http://www.openswf.org.
There's a bunch of good info there.
While I think it's great that they're making it open source, I think it's important to consider what license it will be under. Will it be Free Software? If so, great!
(see This page at the Free Software Foundation to find out the difference between open source software and free software.)
Normally I would agree with you. But this situation is a little different. Macromedia has been trying to push Flash for some time now. The fact that they are opening up the Flash file format is not new news either.
_ flash4_print.fhtml:
r d.html
from http:// www.macromedia.com/macromedia/proom/pr/2000/index
"Macromedia published its Flash file format as an open Web standard in 1998, allowing other companies to both export the Flash file format or playback Flash content within their applications. Macromedia also makes the Flash Player source code available at zero cost to platform and device developers, further extending Flash's broad reach."
or if you want to read the press release from 1998 go here:
http://www.ma cromedia.com/macromedia/proom/pr/1998/flashstanda
Also this was not presented as fact, but as a rumor. Thats why words like "appears" and "purported" are used. There is also no reason why Slashdot should contact Macromedia. They themselves are not a news organization nor are they the source of this information.
I think the fact that this was a rumor was adequately explained. If you are not interested in reading industry rumors then don't. I'm also tired of anybody who complains about the articles being posted getting an automatic mark up from the moderators.
---- sonoffreak
Whether or not this is true, I have a question.
Is any one working on creating GUI's that are as cool/neat/whatever as those that Flash sites have? Are there any design principles that can enhance productivity, either on the desktop or in a handheld interface to a real world system?
Maybe I watch SciFi too much, but their interstitial interface eye-candy is really appealing. (And I don't mean themes, damnit!)
Here is a link on macromedia's web site to the flash file format - which is already open.
http://www.macromedia.com/softw are/flash/open/spec/
I can't spell or type, but that doesn't mean I'm unusually stupid.
Offtopic, but back on radar. +1 is good for something.
.sig: Now legally binding!
I don't really like Flash and it gives me the creeps to see something like this being seen as a cool move. Ok, licensing it this way is the best they could probably do, but think about it: Do you really like all those Flash-Sites? REALLY?
It would be interesting to see what justifications are being used within companies to get the go-ahead for O/S releases. It's still a difficult business model to sell to conservative minds.
Andy Armstrong
The Flash File Format (SWF) has been "open" since April 1998, but the spec was (is) very buggy and poorly supported.
Macromedia announced they would release the source code for the Flash Player in May 1999, but the have been very slow in delivering.
Everything you ever wanted to know about Flash is here: OpenSWF.org
But as the lead engineer for the team that created the SDK's I'd like to contribute a few things:
I hope those of you who can use them, enjoy them!
lee
This is clearly an attempt by Macromedia to kill truly free implementations of the Flash format. Should another implementation of the Flash format become the de-facto standard, Macromedia would lose a lot of their strength and control of this market.
I suspect, in particular, that this may be related to the next release of Netscape this year: it will almost certainly need to include some kind of Flash player, and if they didn't make some kind of source code available, it would be the free implementation, giving an alternative implementation of the Flash format an instant big market share.
I think Macromedia's meddling and their implementation are best disregarded. If vector graphics is to become a web standard, we need truly free implementations, not the proprietary "free source" mess that Macromedia is offering.
Does this indicate Macromedia is shedding some enthusiasm for the SVG format? Flash is already the de facto vector graphics standard. I understand and appreciate the fact that the W3C (with reps from Macromedia as members of the working group) is working on a standard for vector graphics, but I don't think it will ever take off, especially if Macromedia does open-source the Flash format.
I understand there are philsophical differences between SVG and Flash, but I just can't find any benefits to using SVG. Flash is small, comes with the browser, and very powerful.
Thanks W3C for all your work, but if this article is true then it will all have been in vain. Maybe the Flash format will change in the future to incorporate the XML DOM so that it will be more in line with what the W3C is shooting for, but who knows?
Ok, Macromedia actually has FAQs on their websites about this. For those that are interested:
Macromedia FAQs
.technomancer
A good place to look for some accurate information would be macromedia's website: http://www.macromedia.com/software/flash/open/
They state quite clearly that they aren't releasing it as 'open source'. Instead the Flash SDK will be released under a royalty free license. You will not be able to distribute the source with any derived products.
However, the Flash file format IS genuinely Open. So you can write your own Flash player from the ground up.
Flash has several advantages over SVG (http://www.w3c.org/Graphics/SVG/). SVG is XML based, so will not be small. From my understanding, achieving Flash style animation in SVG will involve a lot more work.
However, SVG may have its place. A single renderer should be able to handle SVG and Flash formats, so the standards needn't compete. SVG will be hand craftable, so simple objects (can we say bullet-point spheres and horizontal rules?) won't be difficult to create.
What ever happened to Xara's incredibly tiny Flare vector format?
-- Andrem
There has been a major scientific break-in
Do flash sites have to support different OS'? I was at the "flash site of the day": disney's toy story 2 and after clicking " Yes, I have Flash already -- take me to the Flashed site. " I got an error page saying that I basically had to install windows or get a mac.
this is similar to the fox fiasco of a few weeks ago (although they prevent the viewing of the entire web site) and i'm shure there are plenty of other sites that do the same thing. I guess my question is: is this the result of web site designer's ignorance or does the linux version of flash have some "bugs" which requires the redesigning of the flash site?
does anybody know?
Dan
Well, frankly, the flash player they have out now for Linux isn't really all that bad. I'm not real sure what the limitations are on the thing, but at least now maybe we'll have a fully functional player that's in line with newer players. I know currently that some sites still don't recognize the current Linux flash player including www.shockrave.com. (At least mine doesn't that I d/led from Macromedia) My thing is when are they going to put together a player for Shockwave stuff? The director plugin's need to happen fairly soon along with a GLIBC port of the RealPlayer G2. This libc5 stuff just don't cut it under RH, and I've not been able to find the newest versions/fixes of libc5 lately to upgrade RH's 5.2.18 (or something like that).
.doc, .xls, etc. (If they have, please someone point me in that direction! I could really use them to work on some other projects at the moment!)
Still, it's just one more step towards better software! I just wish M$ would Open up their file formats for
-What have you contributed lately?
Moderator - Too late to kill this story, but maybe someone could amend the article with a link, (if any still around ) that points to the old ancient press releases from Macromedia that clearly stated the intention of releasing source code to flash, flash spec, and a player (besides the flash player source in java they already leaked).
This news/rumor is lame because it is yet ANOTHER example of slashdot making a news announcement out of something generally known to flash oriented people and especially all those programmers that ceased reverse engineering Flash specifically because of the original news release to release source to flash rasterizer interpreter.
Macromedia only went Open source to heed off Public Domain style BSD source code efforts that competitors could use in proprietary products.
Basically its a shameful and transparent move of theirs.
Kind of like 3dfx hiring a guy who got the first glidelib stuff done for voodoo and taking his source and coercing the guy to shut down his 3dfx reverse engineering efforts.
I hate this. I wish theyed hurry up. Its not like flash 3 and 4.0 are that good for animation anyway (frozen frame count, cpu affected, no velocity based animation paths, etc etc)
Hopefully releasing this to Open Source will prompt many more developers, both from a multimedia standpoint, and OS developers, who will port and extend the functionality.
Though based around and on the web, the Flash file format is an incredibly efficient and versatile format - the Flash Player, for those not familiar with it, is the desktop standalone player for Flash files.
To those who think this is simply a marketing ploy, this is simply part of a progression - the Flash file format was Open Sourced about a year ago, to allow exporting in other packages to Flash format, for instance.
Hopefully this will both catalyse the use of Flash as one of the most extensible and versatile multimedia formats available, and act as another "toe in the water" for one of the biggest multimedia companies entering the Linux waters. Let's welcome them aboard.
Fross
This is a rumour. It may be true, but one email some random person supposedly recieved, posted on a website is not enough to be put up as truth. I have not heard of any press releases by Macromedia regarding this, have they been contacted by Slashdot? Its a great thing if it is true, if not this story is a waste of bandwith. Clearly stating it is a rumour would be ok, but presenting it as fact is wrong.