Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Adobe (Temporarily?) Kills 64-Bit Flash For Linux

Posted by Soulskill on from the how-rude dept.

An anonymous reader writes "It seems that with the release of the 10.1 security patches, Adobe has, at least temporarily, killed 64-bit Flash for Linux. The statement says: 'The Flash Player 10.1 64-bit Linux beta is closed. We remain committed to delivering 64-bit support in a future release of Flash Player. No further information is available at this time. Please feel free to continue your discussions on the Flash Player 10.1 desktop forums.' The 64-bit forum has been set to read-only."

6 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. Fuck flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I never had a player installed. And I'm doing just fine.

    It's just yet another proprietary lock-in. And most of the time it serves just waste.

  2. This is why Flash must die. by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yea Flash is an Open standard....
    Let's move on to HTML5 and or even JavaFX and drop this none standard standard.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:This is why Flash must die. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having done a fair bit with HTML5 video over the past few weeks, I can safely say that although its looking good, and I enjoyed producing HTML5 video apps, its not a flash killer yet.

      They need to sort out the HTML5 subtitle standard, and someone needs to actually support it.

      They need to sort out the cue points standard, and someone needs to support it. (No, events fired every X ms or so is not enough)

      They need to eliminate cross browser issues with overlaying html over the video stream.

      They need to enable adaptive streaming.

      They need to do a lot more work, but what has been done so far is very nice.

    2. Re:This is why Flash must die. by d2globalinc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Im sick of these uninformed idiots thinking flash is all about VIDEO.. video is a small piece of the possibilities with flash... It also makes a great cross-platform application development platform, expec with AIR. Steve Jobs doesn't want flash because it would mean the end of his money train called the app store, it has nothing to do with steve's qwest for perfection.. If steve was that into performance, security, etc - he would have stopped making QUICKTIME a long time ago. Flash push'd quicktime outa the way, and thanks to youtube made it the key piece for internet video. Steve has never let that go.. Flash is a GOOD thing for all of us because it means no one OS, person, etc can force us to pay for their exclusive content when they support the flash player. This includes, video playback, apps, etc. As a developer flash enables me to write an application only once that can work online or offline, interface with the OS's native interfaces, and then have it available on Mac, Windows, Linux, Android, etc and thats a lot more potential customers than just the iphone/ipad. And a hell of a lot cheaper for me to develop my apps when I don't have to make a separate one for each platform. Plus I've got control of my application distribution then not Steve Jobs/Apple.

  3. Poor Adobe... by gentlemen_loser · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A few days ago, there was a discussion here about how evil Apple was for trying to kill Flash. I said then, and will repeat here: Fuck you Adobe.

    They took their sweet time porting their "cross platform" plugin to Linux, and in the meantime, we were stuck with the barely functioning (although I do not fault them for the effort) GNU implementation. Cross platform to Adobe means: Windows 7, Windows Vitsa, Windows XP, and Mac OS. Personally, I pine for the day that HTML 5 is able to displace Flash, and therefore Adobe, permanently. In my opinion, they have squandered any goodwill towards the open source community. I'll be the first one in line to dance on their grave.

  4. Re:Got an Education? by datapharmer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    except that the standards published are always a few versions behind and in reality none of those players will play any of the most recent content reliably. Sure, they work for some simple stuff but calling them an open alternative is hardly fair. Sure, they could be if adobe published their intentions in advance but then they would lose their advantage. Same problem with PDF on the creation end. Sure, it is open, but if you want the most recent features in acrobat from a free or even paid alternative, too bad, they haven't been published yet.

    --
    Get a web developer