Slashdot Mirror
Flash Developers Fear Spectre of Spyware
SomeGuyNamedMike writes "I realize the thought of using Flash and Actionscript is considered beneath many Slashdotters, but here's this piece, anyway: Macromedia is receiving (and answering) a a lot of flack from several blogs over its decision to package Yahoo! Toolbar with its Flash player. Will your company develop Flash content knowing Macromedia is using its runtime as its own marketing piece?"
But what will replace it? My little boy likes to play flash games all the time. In theory Java is better all around, but in practice it doesn't seem to run as well.
Hopefully this will allow more open technologies, like SVG to get a better hold.
flash is a big player in elearning, and there aren't a lot of tools that can be used at the skillset that many content developers have. We'll just continue, and have our clients use a specific non-ad based version. Macromedia has done a lot to extend the web for a lot of good reasons. They've had some tough times lately, and I think that they really must have struggled with this before selling out.
Flash is successful. There is no real need for Macromedia to bundle the Yahoo toolbar with it, at least not from a technical viewpoint.
Probably some Macromedia executives don't like that they just give Flash away for free. When approached by Yahoo executives who would like their toolbar installed on more computers, these Macromedia executives were happy to learn that they could generate extra revenue from Yahoo by bundling the toolbar.
Unfortunately the executives of neither company had enough insight to predict that the whole thing would blow up in their faces.
Flash is really annoying, but there are times I don't mind it. Most band sites I visit are in Flash, and usually the site's style corresponds closely to the band's most recent album's style which is kinda cool. Green Day's site is a good example of Flash I don't hate.
But Flash ads? Flash nav-bars? Entirely Flash-based sites for products and companies? I don't think I'm alone when I say the web should stay HYPERTEXT based because that's what it is designed for. The web can be as dynamic as it wants to, and languages like php and asp are one of the best examples of the direction the web should be heading, but they're also a good example of where the web should not be heading: flashing lights, obnoxious sounds that play when you visit a site, dynamic and processor-intense media which displays over the page you want to view. So Flash is kind of on thin ice with me right now...
And now they're pulling this stunt? Sorry, but no. Good thing I never paid Macromedia for my copy of Dreamweaver...Hopefully Mozilla doesn't make me eat my words, though. I gave them money (donated) and now they're getting awfully touchy feely with Google...
www.kiwilyrics.com - a wiki for lyrics
The one thing that makes this palatable is you don't actually have to install the Y! toolbar -- you're given an option and can decline the toolbar install. Problem solved.
Macromedia's been doing this for a while with the Shockwave plug-in, and while developers HATE it (including me), the revenue from yahoo's been a godsend for the Director team. (No, Director's not dead, despite what the Flash team at MACR wants you to think...)
Still, I think most of Macromedia's top-level management are pinheads, and this is more proof of it...
IIRC the DivX player has included the Google toolbar for a while - and last time I used it (instead of using the K-lite codecs which include the DivX codecs), it didn't ask me whether or not to install the toolbar - although now it claims to be optional on their web site (or at least doesn't install if IE is not your default browser).
It did let me uninstall it, and I know that the Google toolbar isn't spyware, but it just irritated me that DivX ASSUMED that I wanted a piece of completely unrelated piece of software onto my system without consulting me.
Linux Wireless Hardware in the UK
Man one of our doze admins just about blew a blood vessel yesteday when he installed flash on a machine and it installed that thing...He went in and immediately banned the site so yes it is gonna cause problems and it already has.
Got Code?
I dislike flash for the reasons you pointed out.
A) not open source. open source is good for me, so closed is worse
B) platform support. Flash will NOT reach the entire world, simply because you must have the flash player, which is unavailable on most platforms (all but the most popular)
C) standardization. There is none. it's proprietary vendor lock in. There's no competeing development environments, no competing players
D) breakage of the web. Flash is not the web. therefore, you can't bookmark it, index it, search it. You can't look at the code, or make the text bigger, or have your text reader read it because you are blind
Basically, flash is okay for silly games or homestarrunner, but so bad in other ways it's generally frowned upon by those who are not confused by colors and animation.
This isn't spyware at all... The Yahoo! toolbar doesn't do any spying or hijacking, and Flash doesn't require you to install it. You might install it by mistake if you're clicking through the install menu, but then you can just uninstall it right away.
If it were spyware, installing it would be mandatory, Flash might not disclose that it exists, it would interfere with your use of the browser and you couldn't just go to add/remove programs and take it off.
Embarrassing is perhaps not quite the correct word to use. If Macromedia provided up to date, accurate specs of the file format, that would help.
Actually, the following has just occured to me: the kind of people who want to use Flash tend to be the kind of people who have a bog standard i386 machine, and so can just use Macromedia's own player.
I would reserve those comments until Flash 8 comes out sometime this year. Macromedia is serious about getting away from the "scripting" moniker and on to something more robust. I can't say much more than that except that the linguistic differences between Java and Flash are going to be much smaller.
Now read the license for the Flash file format specification:
Plus there's the usual bullshit I'd expect in clauses 3 and 5.
What I didn't find was a clause that basically said "If our implementation differs from the spec, our implementation is correct, the spec is wrong and you are screwed". I seem to remember that being there in the past, but I might be wrong.
If they embedded the current flash player in the Yahoo toolbar, I don't think there would be a problem. Heck, they could even make the Yahoo toolbar a fancy flash app.
Strong Mad - 2008: "I PRESIDENT!"
Man, I didn't expect all the positive reaction to my Dreamweaver comment! Sadly, I don't code commericially or for fun in Dreamweaver...I code in vim and kate. Linux, of course. I haven't paid for ANY software in a long time, with the exception of all the default bundled stuff like WindowsXP Dell sells you with a new PC. I work for an open source-based company and try to keep my entire computing experience as open source/free software-based as possible. And about that Windows I paid for...I dual boot that particular machine, as it's handy to now and then load up Windows and see what the industry buzz is about. Dreamweaver was one such industry buzz, and it didn't really grab me. Seems to be focused more towards web designers than coders, so I'll stick with my free open source tools. Thanks, though.
www.kiwilyrics.com - a wiki for lyrics
What site should your firewall block to prevent a drive-by Yahoo toolbar install?
I find it strange that /.ers aren't clamoring more for SVG growth and development. I understand that SVG is under the radar because development tools are rare. I can't see how we can tout standards in many other aspects of the internet but not this.
Linux at home
You "should read every single EULA" only if you believe that clicking on a big onscreen button market "I AGREE" constitutes a valid form of acceptance for a contract.
And even if you did believe such nonsense, what if someone else uses your machine and agrees to the EULA without your knowlege. Are you still bound?
These clever little lawyers have constructed this very large, very elaborate system designed to preserve ludicrous amounts of power on the publisher's side of the table. But the system is legally very grey in terms of legitimacy. I mean please: Mom and Pop end users with no legal knowlege "agreeing" with a "mouse click" to pages of complex contractual jargon?
Hah! I have always called BS on this and will continue to do so.
A defense could be as simple as:
"I have a habit of clicking on whatever buttons appear on my screen. Was there some writing there? I don't know. I don't care. Its my computer, and the ActiveX control began downloading without my consent. Pthpth. And I don't understand any of this technical stuff anyway. What's software exactly? What's a Eula? It wasn't explained clearly enough."
Can you imagine if everything came with a nine page contract?
Running to legal-last-ditch resorts in an effort to preserve illogical business models is a losing game. What's incredible is how many losing games there are right now.
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )