Slashdot Mirror


New Zero-Day Flash Bug Affects Windows, OS X, and Linux Computers

An anonymous reader writes "Researchers at the Kaspersky Lab have uncovered a zero-day Adobe Flash vulnerability that affects Windows, OS X, and Linux. 'While the exploit Kaspersky observed attacked only computers running Microsoft Windows, the underlying flaw, which is formally categorized as CVE-2014-1776 and resides in a Flash component known as the Pixel Bender, is present in the Adobe application built for OS X and Linux machines as well.' Adobe has reportedly patched the bug for all platforms. Researchers first detected the bug from attacks performed on seven Syrian computers. The attacks seem to have been hosted on the Syrian Ministry of Justice website, which has led to speculation that these are state-sponsored vulnerability exploits. This speculation is further supported by evidence that one of the exploits was 'designed to target computers that have the Cisco Systems MeetingPlace Express Add-In version 5x0 installed. The app is used to view documents and images during Web conferences.'"

178 comments

  1. Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    flash is equally bad on all platforms web guys please stop using it.

    1. Re:Long story short by powerlord · · Score: 5, Funny

      flash is equally bad on all platforms web guys please stop using it.

      Hey ... look at the upside, feature parity across Windows, OSX and Linux ... even for bugs and exploits.

      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
    2. Re:Long story short by popo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      No Flash is not terrible at all.

      Name me another valid gaming platform for casual games on the web. Do sites like Kongregate use HTML5 for their games? Java? Just no.

      They use Flash because for all the talk about alternatives to Flash, it's still *** BY FAR *** the best platform their is. And there are massive problems which prevent HTML5 being a valid gaming platform.

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    3. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash is "bad" compared to what? Show me Kingdom Rush written in HTML5 and I'll begin to think you're not a troll.

    4. Re:Long story short by Lorizean · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Your argument to undermine that "flash is not terrible at all" is that other things aren't as good? That's not really an argument at all. Also, please elaborate on the massive HTML5 problems.

    5. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apart from games, and that's changing fast with better HTML5 rendering and faster javascript engines, Flash should have died at least five years ago.

    6. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again, proof that "gamers" don't care about security as long as they get their precious gaemzzzzzzzzzzzz.

    7. Re:Long story short by perpenso · · Score: 1

      Casual gaming is moving from the web to smartphone and tablet apps.

    8. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They use Flash because for all the talk about alternatives to Flash, it's still *** BY FAR *** the best platform their is.

      No, they use Flash because it's what they've used before, and because it's 'everywhere,' not because it's better.

    9. Re:Long story short by Stargoat · · Score: 1

      Compared to Windows. All comparisons to product security are inherently compared to the most commonly used piece of software in the world, MS Windows. Microsoft in recent years has created a strong security culture, deploying patches rapidly and in a consistent manner.

      Adobe, their collective soul to the devil, has not done this, despite being on many many platforms. A few years ago when the US DoHS went after Java for being having awful security, the one they should have been targeting was Adobe. Both Flash and Reader are awful and I strongly regret being forced to use them.

      --
      Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    10. Re: Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of redesigning the web inspector every release, mozilla should set more effort to implement HTML5. Of course, they are ways better than MSIE, but look at the mozilla schedule for MSE.
      HTML5 video streaming without plugins? forget it. At least now.

    11. Re:Long story short by popo · · Score: 1

      "Also, please elaborate on the massive HTML5 problems."

      The fact that you're asking why HTML5 isn't usable for games just shows that you're really not familiar with either platform.

      Please tell me you're not actually trying to make the case that HTML5 is usable for video game development.

      Nature abhors a vacuum Lorizean. HTML5 sure isn't being ignored because it hasn't been hyped enough yet. As the other poster said, "show me Kingdom Rush written in HTML5 and I'll begin to think you're not a troll".

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    12. Re:Long story short by popo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yawn... "another HTML5 is almost there" post. Technology is either here or it's vapor. .. And it's not here.

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    13. Re:Long story short by popo · · Score: 0

      Right. And the only reason that the "desktop class" A7 isn't running Flash is because it's a threat to Apple's business model.

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    14. Re:Long story short by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      So, it's the least terrible solution (which is debatable) so therefore it's good?

      Sorry, but Flash has been a giant security hole for about as long as it has existed.

      You want to play casual games in Flash, that's your choice.

      But I've been happily avoiding Flash for a decade or so, and have yet to find a single website I cared enough about to install Flash. Occasionally I need to use it for work, which means a very specific machine, running IE -- which is only used for these kinds of garbage that HR thinks I'm required to use.

      If I hit a page which gives me nothing but "You need Flash to run this site", all it's ever going to see from me is the back button.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    15. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Your argument to undermine that "flash is not terrible at all" is that other things aren't as good?"

      Well.. Yeah, that would appear to be a pretty valid argument. If it's better than everything else, then it's hard to claim it's "terrible".

    16. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you are really keen on flash. It's like fighting for Windows XP, it's installed everywhere, sure, but it's already in the past. Flash is established, and it will linger for a long time, but it's not where the action is.

    17. Re:Long story short by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      flash is equally bad on all platforms web guys please stop using it.

      Will nothing please you whiners? The Adobe Exploit Runtime offers simultaneous support across Windows, OSX, and Linux for a cutting edge vulnerability, and do we hear even a whisper of credit?

    18. Re:Long story short by perpenso · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Right. And the only reason that the "desktop class" A7 isn't running Flash is because it's a threat to Apple's business model.

      Actually it was considered a massive security hole. This article seems to validate that opinion. Yeah, I know, there was ample evidence for that opinion back in the day too.

    19. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a very ignorant comment.

      Go ahead. Name the browser based gaming platforms that are better than Flash.

    20. Re:Long story short by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Maybe only on a relative scale.

      Like politicians.

      Or actual piles of shit.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    21. Re:Long story short by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      No, in between vapor and not vapor ... we have alpha and beta builds as intermediate states.

      Of course, it can transition to either vapor or not vapor from those. I've seen a couple of alpha builds turn back into vapor in my time, and I've seen Google have stuff in beta for years.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    22. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dude is probably a flash 'developer' and doesn't wanna see his lively hood dry up.

    23. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well in that case every technology under the sun is terrible because it pales before 25th century Zazgoolian Imperial tech.

      Isn't this whole conversation about relativity to actual things?

    24. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm.. Last time I participated in Ludum Dare there was a very large percentage of browser games, made in HTML5. Among them, a few tower defense games, similar to your example Kingdom Rush, though obviously less polished in the two days allotted for the event. It is obviously technically doable, so why isn't it done more on the big portals?

    25. Re:Long story short by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      No. Software can actually be good.

      Flash isn't, never has been, and probably never will be.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    26. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're making a disingenuous comparison. Claiming that the 2 day games aren't as polished because they're just 2 day games.

      The fact is you CAN'T make an HTML5 game (at least not yet) that competes with Flash. The platform just isn't there yet.

    27. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is Adobe Co. They have zero desire to build anything proper.

    28. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I uninstalled java on all family and friends' machines over a year ago with no ill effects. Now I'm ready to do the same with flash.
      If I want games, I'll fire up a game console.

    29. Re:Long story short by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      There's definitely no argument there.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    30. Re: Long story short by Lorizean · · Score: 1

      I did actually want you to elaborate on the flaws, because I'm curious. I have no idea about HTML5, I was genuinely wondering what's holding it back. And I just pointed out a flawed argument - certainly you're not denying that flash could be (a lot) better?

    31. Re:Long story short by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One of the best things Steve Jobs ever did for the security of computing around the world is slowly crush Flash under his heel.

      It's bad.
      It's always been bad. Apparently, it will always be bad.

      Just let it die. It's a CPU and memory hog (another good reason not to use it on mobile; the CPUs these days can handle it, but it's bad for battery life) and it's a massive security hole. Why in the world should it get a pass? Someone at Adobe should've nuked it from orbit years ago.

    32. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why must games be browser based anyway? Surely there are cross-platform ways to deliver a game to a user without it running IN THE BROWSER, no?

    33. Re:Long story short by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      Sure, you could download an exe file. No security risk there.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    34. Re: Long story short by Lorizean · · Score: 1

      It's a fallacy to claim that something is good just because the alternatives are worse -http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as .

    35. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe they are paid for this. both virginia and beijing have massive interest.

    36. Re:Long story short by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Right, because Gecko and WebKit never have security vulnerabilities in them.

    37. Re:Long story short by mellon · · Score: 1

      Get real. The NSA isn't allowed to talk about this stuff. Doesn't mean it's not true.

    38. Re:Long story short by tbuddy · · Score: 1

      Sure, but when you are talking about Facebook, Yahoo, Cartoon Network, Disney, et cetera the goal is to have people stay on your website playing their stupid games. Take it out of the browser and they aren't on your site. Mobile apps still keep a strong tie with the ad/analytics network that feeds the cash cows. Free games need to maintain their product, the users' data.

    39. Re:Long story short by tepples · · Score: 1

      Surely there are cross-platform ways to deliver a game to a user without it running IN THE BROWSER, no?

      I'll take you up on this deal. What might these "cross-platform ways" happen to be?

    40. Re:Long story short by tepples · · Score: 1

      If I want games, I'll fire up a game console.

      So what do you do when you see something like this?

      • HTML5 version: Play Now
      • Console versions: We are seeking a publisher
    41. Re:Long story short by tepples · · Score: 1

      So what's a valid abstraction for video game input, graphics, and audio across Windows, GNU/Linux, and OS X?

    42. Re:Long story short by the_povinator · · Score: 1

      What I wonder is-- how did the Syrians get hold of a zero-day vulnerability in Flash? I doubt they found it themselves. Did they buy it, or did the Russians give it to them?

      --
      The .sig is dead, and I believe I had a hand in killing it.
    43. Re:Long story short by gmagill · · Score: 1

      If I want games, I'll fire up a game console.

      So what do you do when you see something like this?

      • HTML5 version: Play Now
      • Console versions: We are seeking a publisher

      I don't know because I've never seen that.

    44. Re: Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The primary is issue is how slow javascript is and how hard it is to develop in and how hard it is to make compatible w/ all browsers in use.

    45. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No Flash is not terrible at all.

      ...

      They use Flash because for all the talk about alternatives to Flash, it's still *** BY FAR *** the best platform their is.

      easier and better are not necessarily the same thing.

      simple fact of the matter is browsers already have exploits come up now and then which cause problems, by adding another executable to the mix all you're doing is adding another venue of attack for sake of convenience. One could argue that the nature of flash makes it inherently more secure since its proprietary and the same code base is used to run it across all browsers and platforms.

    46. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder, how on earth did the Adobe survive this long and how bad were the competitors. The Flash plugin and its installer are just about the worst software I have ever seen. Since many versions ago, they decided that the first thing a installer should do is to delete its executable. So when it fails for some random reason (it does at about 30-60% of my upgrades), one need to re-download the installer (and remember to uncheck the McAfee crapware it tries to bundle with it) again. And after few failed attempt without any sensible error message, one needs to do a search and destroy on Windows' registry so the install will finally succeed. Until the next critical update is released next week and the whole process starts again. Bright side is that nowadays I remember to make a copy of installer before running it.

    47. Re:Long story short by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Apple for good reason does not allow Flash on any of their devices. I can still download it from Adobe for my Mac if I first change a setting in the control panel that by default prevents this. So far I have resisted the temptation. What do instead is fool the Flash infested websites, mostly videos, that I am using an iPad and then like magic the video usually works just fine. There are many YouTube videos that behave this way. I don’t play games, so Flash might as well not exist.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    48. Re:Long story short by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      More often than not you can fool most websites by telling them that you are using an iPad. That site will then happily show you the video. This works especially well on YouTube.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    49. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey ... look at the upside, feature parity across Windows, OSX and Linux ... even for bugs and exploits.

      Sadly, that's not true. If you read past TFA, you'll find that while the vuln exists on all platforms running Flash ActiveX, the exploit specifically looks for Windows versions.

      Linux users are yet again destined to be disappointed and uninfested.

    50. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. I uninstalled Flash a few months ago because I was sick and tired of seeing the Flash update notification popup seemingly every single fucking time I turned on my PC. Adobe, write the software correctly or just give up because you're obviously not qualified to be a developer. I can understand patches being pushed out, but not every fucking week.

      So far I'm not missing anything but a few videos from luddites on YouTube who still haven't moved into the 21st century and embraced HTML5.

    51. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JavaScript. You can't do Unreal Engine in Flash, but it's been done in JavaScript. Want to know what else JavaScript can do that Flash could never do? Shadertoy

      Also, every single Flash game out there sucks major ass.

    52. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. You can make fully 3D games that look as good as any standalone AAA game using HTML5. You can't do anything like that with Flash.

    53. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do this with Flash. Go ahead, I'd love to see it.

    54. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider this comment to be a challenge to your assertion. ~..

    55. Re:Long story short by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Linux users are yet again destined to be disappointed and uninfested.

      Hah You should see my wine install. It only has IE6 and it's like a bug farm in there. Whenever something doesn't work in wine, I halfway suspect it has more to due with all the windows viruses it has collected than any actual problems with wine.

    56. Re: Long story short by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "The primary is issue is how slow javascript is "

      HTML5 has absolutely nothing to do with Javascript.

      " and how hard it is to develop in and how hard it is to make compatible w/ all browsers in use."

      HTML5 is a new standard and all browsers haven't yet caught up to it, but they will. That all being said, both Flash and HTML5 are frigging stupid technologies to use for creating video games, and Flash is frigging stupid, whether you are developing video games or not.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    57. Re:Long story short by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      One of the best things Steve Jobs ever did for the security of computing around the world is slowly crush Flash under his heel.

      It's bad.
      It's always been bad. Apparently, it will always be bad.

      Just let it die. It's a CPU and memory hog (another good reason not to use it on mobile; the CPUs these days can handle it, but it's bad for battery life) and it's a massive security hole. Why in the world should it get a pass? Someone at Adobe should've nuked it from orbit years ago.

      The inefficiency seems to be getting worse with time. My 2007 PC used to be able to watch 480p Flash videos no problem. Now it studders and stalls, revving the CPU up to 100% while Flash draws in the 2D frame buffer with a crayon. And for inexplicable reasons there seems to be a memory leak: if I watch one Youtube video after another, eventually the Flash process approaches 2GB Working set, and crashes. Doesn't matter the browser.

      If I download the raw FLV file and play it in VLC, MPC-HC, etc the CPU sips power at 30%, and it displays butter smooth. So much for all the "hardware acceleration" they keep bragging about with every upgrade. I hope Flash burns in hell one of these days.

    58. Re:Long story short by styrotech · · Score: 1

      The Adobe Exploit Runtime offers simultaneous support across Windows, OSX, and Linux for a cutting edge vulnerability

      Not so fast... most of us Linux users are falling behind in our access to cutting edge vulnerabilities.

      Sure we still have plenty of the old ones to play with, so it isn't all bad.

    59. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash games that you download and run offline?

    60. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reality is your answer. Go and find me a smash-hit, multimillion play HTML5 game.

      Find me Kingdom Rush in HTML5. Better yet, tell me why Ironhide isn't using HTML5. They make an iOS version, an Android version, a PC version ... And a LINUX version.

      Clearly they are making versions of all kinds for all platforms.

      Why not HTML5? Because they can't?

      Stop with your ridiculous fanboyism and accept reality.

    61. Re: Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And every time I hear a retarded HTML5 fanboy claim that world-class games can be developed in their clunky, slow, non-IDE, no sound-standard, no protected code, no consistent frame rate, poorly accelerated platform of the future -- getting angry even when they can't produce a shred of evidence to back up their assertions, I laugh in their ignorant faces.

      Show me your crap HTML5 games that measure up. Go ahead fanboy, show us the "future" of gaming. Show me a hundred thousand independently animated objects in 3D with motion blur in HTML5.

      Show us. And then we'll see who deserves the "cunt punch" (as you said)

    62. Re:Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash is built into Chrome. Distributed by Google. And the most popular multimedia platform in the world.

      Some HTML5 fanboys here would rather compare it against something that exists only in their minds -- choosing to talk about potential rather than reality. That's fine. We developers live in the real world. It's silly to compete on some conceptual plane with futurists who don't.

      For game devs, there's no other option. HTML-5 really isn't there yet, and it's doubtful that it will be there anytime soon as there are fundamental issues like clock issues, framerate control, etc. that aren't even on the table for browser development. Not to mention protecting code. So yeah.. Flash. It sucks in a million ways. But making the argument that it's on the way out because there's better tech coming along just doesn't hold water yet. Flash is still the king of browser-based games. And every time someone comes along and tries to demo what HTML-5 can do, it ends up being a rather inadvertent justification of Flash.

    63. Re: Long story short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The millions of members of Kongregate beg to differ.

    64. Re: Long story short by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      I accept your claim that there are millions of idiots.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    65. Re:Long story short by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      But, wait, didn't Adobe develop... oh, yeah, that's awful. But what about...? No, you're right, it's a usability nightmare. But you have to admit... no, wait you don't.

      I give up. You're right. Adobe has all of the arrogance and user-hostility of Microsoft, but without the smart people that you can actually find at Microsoft.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    66. Re:Long story short by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      For too many software development companies, "alpha" now means, "Hop on board now because this is the next new hotness, and you can be one of the cool kids." "Beta" now means, "We're bored with this and have moved on to something else."

      Nobody ever finishes anything any more.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    67. Re:Long story short by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      You know it's funny, but I do take issue with the suggestion that shadertoy is written in javascript. It's not, it's written in whatever they call that shader language these days. The javascript just ships a bunch of shader code onto the graphics card, and then sits back and takes the credit. It's not even really HTML5 either, it's just a bunch of code running on your graphics card.

      If you were to attempt to write an actual game in HTML5, with things like physics and opponent AI and all the stuff we've grown to love, then the story gets a little bit different.

      Also, the Unreal Engine has been written in asm.js, which isn't HTML5 or javascript either. And is even further away from general acceptance and widespread support that HTML5 is.

    68. Re: Long story short by quickOnTheUptake · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that JS has a lot to do with writing games in HTML5.

      --
      Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
      Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
  2. WRONG by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apples cant never get no fuckin visruses! What are you stoopid!

  3. Doesn't affect... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Shumway. Sometimes it has an advantage to run a VM in a VM.

    1. Re:Doesn't affect... by sshumway · · Score: 1

      It's always weird to stumble across one's name in comments.

    2. Re:Doesn't affect... by Himmy32 · · Score: 1

      And hear I thought you weren't affected.

    3. Re:Doesn't affect... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      ...Shumway. Sometimes it has an advantage to run a VM in a VM.

      So you can game while you game?

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    4. Re:Doesn't affect... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you can post yet another 1 line gmhowell fart of a reply?

  4. A bug in Flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Might as well claim you found brown in poop.

    1. Re:A bug in Flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a big black cock in Soulskill's mom.

  5. I never installed flash ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

    I never installed flash and I rarely find web pages that require it. I've noticed a slow migration away from it as well. One or twice a year I check some websites that required flash in the past and some no longer do so. YMMV.

    It does not seem that difficult to go without flash and it is getting easier every day.

    1. Re:I never installed flash ... by jonnythan · · Score: 1

      There are a number of things that require it. For me the big ones are MLB At Bat, WatchESPN, Hulu, and HBO Go.

    2. Re:I never installed flash ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

      There are a number of things that require it. For me the big ones are MLB At Bat, WatchESPN, Hulu, and HBO Go.

      People are migrating to phones and tablets for such things.

    3. Re:I never installed flash ... by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Just for fun I tried to watch a video on Hulu with Safari and sure enough they told me I had to have Flash installed in order to watch their stuff. Then I told Safari to lie to them and tell them that I am using an iPad. Low and behold the videos worked like a charm. Why do sites like Hulu and others still require that people have this malware vector installed on their systems?

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
  6. I have it disabled. by Antony+T+Curtis · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I deliberately do not install Flash on my computers _and_ I deliberately choose to not install any of the third-party work-alikes.

    If the content owner only publishes content in a SWF, it is not worth my bother to look at it. Okay, I can't view video clips in Facebook, but if it is an embedded youtube video, usually I can view it just fine by going to youtube's website.

    --
    No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
    1. Re:I have it disabled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Granted the vast majority of flash usage on the web is superfluous advertising and media crap, but there are a number of large commercial applications still on flash.

    2. Re:I have it disabled. by PPH · · Score: 1

      large commercial applications still on flash.

      Porn.

      Just call the CEO (as a parent from some morals protection group) and ask why they are still promoting that "porn player app". It'll get ported to something else on their IT department's double emergency overtime program.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:I have it disabled. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      elite porn sites like youporn.com are already HTML5.

  7. Portable code ... by perpenso · · Score: 1

    Well on the positive side it is refreshing to see someone writing portable code. :-)

  8. flash is dead by rewindustry · · Score: 1

    - or should be - long live the open alts.

    1. Re:flash is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are the open alternatives to Flash games? That's a serious question, not a troll.
      I have never heard of one. And please don't say HTML 5. Because that's a non-starter for game developers.

    2. Re:flash is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet you are an Adobe $hill. If not, explain why HTML5 is not an alternative. I bet you cannot.

    3. Re:flash is dead by tepples · · Score: 1

      If HTML5 games are "a non-starter", then why are the vast majority of idle games (Cookie Clicker, Clicking Bad, DripStat, etc.) written in HTML5?

    4. Re:flash is dead by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      Here is a serious answer -> All iPads, iPhones and newer Macs don’t use Flash. You don’t even need a browser, but can download hundreds of games, many of them for free. Most of those free ones are far better than anything using Flash. Many of those games even work without an Internet connection, which none of the Flash-based games do.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    5. Re:flash is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you joking, what kind of crap games are those???
      Have you seen real flash games???

    6. Re:flash is dead by tepples · · Score: 1

      Your use of "real" reminds me of the no true Scotsman fallacy. What do you mean by real?

    7. Re:flash is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love HTML5. It's the future. The problem is, it's not the Now.

      To answer your question:

      HTML5 has clock issues so framerate is inconsistent.
      HTML5 has a far slower framerate and is negatively effected to a far greater rate by what else is going on in the browser.
      HTML5 has no universal sound codec
      HTML5 does not take advantage of acceleration as well.
      HTML5 does not have a good development environment.
      HTML5 does not offer code protection or security for developers

      I could go on and on, but your assertion seems to be that HTML5 is as capable as Flash. This is absurd, frankly. The quality of HTML5 games is blocky, clunky and slow. The current gen of Flash games feature motion blur, particle systems, tens of thousands of independently moving elements, stereo sound, framerates above perception levels, true 3D, etc. Those who believe HTML5 is up to the challenge are clearly not watching Flash.

      That having been said, I will wholeheartedly abandon Flash development in a nanosecond when HTML5 offers a comparative solution.

    8. Re:flash is dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't argue with these religious zealots. They are comparing clunky HTML5 experiments to smash hit flash games generating millions in revenue, and keeping a straight face. They are ignorant. Period.

      They point to absolute crap and think they're making a genuine relative comparison. And these people call themselves technologically astute. They demonstrate that they know nothing, and then walk away proud that they have made their point.

    9. Re:flash is dead by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      Here is a serious answer -> All iPads, iPhones and newer Macs don’t use Flash. You don’t even need a browser, but can download hundreds of games, many of them for free. Most of those free ones are far better than anything using Flash. Many of those games even work without an Internet connection, which none of the Flash-based games do.

      Adobe quite writing Flash for android a few years ago, youtube works just fine, it breaks some sites but in the long run better for it.

      February 23, 2012
      "Adobe has published roadmap for its Flash Player and its desktop counterpart, Adobe AIR. Overall the company expects Flash to cater predominantly to gaming and premium video markets. And as stated before, mobile version will no longer be developed."

      Some replied to me about not being on a Win8 system as it was different somehow, the above was posted before Metro: "Less clear is the path got Windows 8, as to if and how Adobe will be integrated with the Metro interface. "

      "Mobile Support
      Adobe will discontinue support for mobile devices and 11.1 will be the last version, though bug fixes could be released."... "This means that Flash will not have any presence in the fastest growing computing segment. "

      All quotes from http://mobiletechpundit.blogsp... as posted nothing changed, I don't care for spelling lessons, but it's just badly written.

      Adobe lays out the future for Flash: a platform for the next 5-10 years - as an Adobe PDF natch
      http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www...

  9. Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by dsinc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not a Flash developer, so I'm asking very seriously: is there a compelling reason to keep using Flash in 2014? For the past several years, the only notable things associated with this technology have been major security holes.

    1. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by Kardos · · Score: 2

      It is dying. Things don't die instantly in the software world, they just decline.

    2. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it weren't for youtube it would had been dead already. Google is its main enabler. I'm wondering of their real motivation.

    3. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by PPH · · Score: 1

      I don't have Flash on my latest Linux laptop (Debian distro). And YouTube seems to work fine*. I suspect that they are already falling back to HTML5. The only people that seem to be hanging onto Flash are porn sites who want to do some digging around on your system in the background while you are fapping.

      *The occasional annoying "you need a plugin ..." message but then the video just plays.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, Flash is also being kept alive by other sites that don't want to give users real playback control because that would mean they could skip ads. Other applications like browser games have already largely switched to HTML5.

    5. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash allows the powers to have a look at something like 500 million PC harddrives. Youtube enables that.

    6. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by tbuddy · · Score: 1

      According to them it is better for their purposes.

    7. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

      Yes, 2-way HD Video Chat on Desktop Browsers and Native Apps with Adobe Air. In a couple years real time video communication will be fulfilled in Browser with WebRTC, but WebRTC is not ready and only supported on a couple browsers. Until then the only reliable method to get 2-way HD Video Conferences in both the Browser and Native Apps is with Adobe Flex streaming to a Media Server such as FMS or Wowza.

    8. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One thing I liked about flash is that I can enable one flash animation at a time... I can't do that with Javascript.

      and...
      Flash is/was efficient.. Javascript is a pig.

      as far as I understand Flash lives on as Adobe Air?

    9. Re:Seriously: why doesn't Flash just die? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Some things die so slowly it seems you have to literally wait for the actual users to die. IE6 is one of those things. Flash is another.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  10. Ahem. by peatbakke · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. Re:Ahem. by tgetzoya · · Score: 2

      I want to give you all the points.

    2. Re:Ahem. by lgw · · Score: 1

      4,294,967,296 Internets to you sir! That's all the internets!

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:Ahem. by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      4,294,967,296 Internets to you sir! That's all the internets!

      You know, with IPv6, you get 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 internets.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  11. Uninstall Flash! by chihowa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I just reinstalled my OS a few weeks ago and never reinstalled flash. Despite a profuse amount of websurfing and watching videos here and there, I haven't needed flash yet.

    Fewer annoying, moving, sound-producing site navigation controls, better battery life on my laptop when watching videos, and fewer horrible security vulnerabilities to worry about! Dumping Flash is something I should have done long ago!

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    1. Re:Uninstall Flash! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then your online banking doesn't work anymore, but who needs trivial stuff like that!

    2. Re:Uninstall Flash! by PPH · · Score: 1

      Yours might not. My bank doesn't use flash.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Uninstall Flash! by Arkh89 · · Score: 2

      If your bank is pushing the use of Flash, you *SERIOUSLY* need to consider changing from establishment.

    4. Re:Uninstall Flash! by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Or just set it to "click to run", that way a redirect to a malicious website will do nothing, a compromised banner ad will do nothing so they'd have to compromise actual flash content on a site you use. For bonus points you don't see flash ads. And if it gets too annoying to do a single click extra, you can always set up an exception for that site.

      Personally what I miss the most these days is a setting to really block everything from opening up a new tab/window, no matter what link I clicked. Despite having popup-protection the scummy sites always find a way to open a new tab/window when you click a link, I'd like to just disable it. Either right-click, open in new tab/window or create a new tab (Ctrl-T/Ctrl-N) should be the absolutely only way. The rest you can block like a popup.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  12. SFW or NSFW? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm scared of that site...

    1. Re:SFW or NSFW? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      SFW, as long as you aren't drinking anything you wouldn't want to spit up on your keyboard when you're reading it, otherwise your employer's IT department might not be happy about having to deal with the results of your spit-take.

  13. If it's patched, is it still a zero-day bug? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Sure, it might have been exploited while it was a zero-day bug but by the time it made it to /., it was an EX-zero-day bug.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:If it's patched, is it still a zero-day bug? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      'Zero-day' no longer carries any meaning.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    2. Re:If it's patched, is it still a zero-day bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gmhowell posts another 1 line fart reply!

  14. bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://bombermine.clay.io/

    1. Re:bull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh god. LOL. What was that link? Seriously?

      I really can't tell what side of the argument you're on. Was that "pro" or "anti" Flash?

  15. Parent SHOULD NOT be modded flamebait by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Informative

    As unpopular as it is to say here on HTML-5-worshiping Slashdot, it's true. Flash can still do a lot of things that are either impossible on other platforms, or which suck on other platforms. Try implementing the average Flash game in HTML 5 (can't do it at all) or Java (can do it, but it will bring your system to a crawl) sometime.

    Don't shoot the messenger just because you wish the message weren't true.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Parent SHOULD NOT be modded flamebait by paskie · · Score: 2

      I just, like many others, wish someone would actually fucking *elaborate* on *concrete* *technical* hurdles of HTML5. We are not denying there are none, but just saying "you are clueless if you need to ask" is not going to help your position. We don't want to argue with you but we want you to actually explain yourselves. Gee, this thread is so frustrating.

      --
      It's not the fall that kills you. It's the sudden stop at the end. -Douglas Adams
    2. Re:Parent SHOULD NOT be modded flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I guess it is simply a matter of transferring Flash graphics skills to the HTML5 world. Google Docs have already demonstrated what is possible. Google has directly and indirectly probably spent 500 million dollars into almost insane attempts (all their runtime type inferencing in FF and Chrome and so on) to speed up JS. And that money has had some serious results.

      http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=v8&lang2=gpp&data=u32

    3. Re:Parent SHOULD NOT be modded flamebait by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      There is nothing that Flash can do on the millions of iPads, iPhones and modern Macs, because it won’t run on any of them. On the rest of the devices out there, such as Android and Windows, Flash can be and often has been a fabulous way for malware writers to infiltrate your device.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    4. Re:Parent SHOULD NOT be modded flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are things which should not be happening in a browser. Heck, most of what HTML5 supports should not be happening in a browser. Browsers should be doing what they can do *securely*, and no more.

    5. Re:Parent SHOULD NOT be modded flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and one of those things it can do is make my CPU and GPU fans spin like the laptop is going to take off. It's a PoS and always has been.

    6. Re:Parent SHOULD NOT be modded flamebait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unreal Engine 3 has been implemented with HTML5 and asm.js. You have no excuse.

  16. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  17. linux is bad too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    I have lots of 0days for that operating system

    everyone please stop using linux

    1. Re:linux is bad too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh i'm sure you have gigs upon gigs of 0days for the operating system Linux -.-
      (name: Mike_Theory [i believe] too lazy to sign in)

      Captcha: Observe

  18. Cookie Clicker by tepples · · Score: 2

    Cookie Clicker is perfectly playable with Flash Player turned off.

    1. Re:Cookie Clicker by mythosaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What sort of monster links people to Cookie Clicker without so much as a warning!

      [I have 2M HC's.]

    2. Re:Cookie Clicker by maliqua · · Score: 1

      curse you for reminding me that exists i'm going to be wrangle gramas for weeks now

      i've seen quite a few html5 games over the years, lemmings was one of them i can't really think of any else off hand, hell i remember seeing decent games back when it was called dhtml and the celeron 300A was around

      anyway got hooked on fricken cookie clicker again before i even finished making this post so again curse you

    3. Re:Cookie Clicker by tepples · · Score: 1

      The sort of monster who is porting it to a retro video game platform despite having only 77K heavenly chips.

    4. Re:Cookie Clicker by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      Good lord you're a maniac.

  19. My Little Flash Pony by tepples · · Score: 0

    So why are the animated series My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, The Amazing World of Gumball, Peep and the Big Wide World, and several others made in Flash?

    1. Re:My Little Flash Pony by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      The output we see isn't in flash, it's just video.

      Flash should be relegated to "production tool only" status.

    2. Re:My Little Flash Pony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *tips fedora*

  20. You are the one playing games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for all the talk about alternatives to Flash, it's still *** BY FAR *** the best platform their is.

    I know who is playing games: you. By saying a completely stupid sentence but putting it into a context where it's believable. The context being:

    Name me another valid gaming platform for casual games on the web.

    Very cool setup: "Name me a better way you would rather be tortured to death." Then you conclude with "death of a thousand cuts is the most pleasant experience a human can have."

    Fine, but let's be clear: Flash is basically worthless as a platform. It's only when you make up ridiculous situations that nobody wants to have anything to do with, that it starts to become worth talking about. Yet you will NEVER, as a user, want to be in that situation, because it's gauranteed to totally suck and there was never a time when it didn't suck.

    What is the best way to fuck our visitors? Flash! You're right: it's true.

  21. SWF: 20 fps; SVG: 5 fps by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    I just, like many others, wish someone would actually fucking *elaborate* on *concrete* *technical* hurdles of HTML5.

    HTML5 has no guaranteed audio or video codec. Some browsers support only free codecs from Xiph and On2, others only patented codecs from Dolby and MPEG-LA. HTML5 implementations in use provide no consistent way for the application to request access to the camera and microphone. Neither IE nor Safari implements the Stream API at all, and Firefox and Chrome implement prefixed (that is, proprietary) versions of it. And on my laptop in Firefox 28, this particle system runs at 20 fps in Flash, 9 fps in HTML5 Canvas, and 5 fps in SVG. Unlike HTML5 JavaScript, ActionScript has static typing and class-style inheritance, and some developers prefer those. Finally, copies of old versions of Flash for making vector animations are sold on the secondary market; Edge Animate is available only on a rental basis through Creative Cloud. I'd be interested to see what workarounds you recommend for these.

    1. Re:SWF: 20 fps; SVG: 5 fps by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Uh... what the hell is wrong with your laptop? That test is from 2010. I got 50FPS in HTML, 121 in Canvas, and 81 in SVG (rough averages, neither the highs nor the lows). I suppose I could try it in Flash but that would require enabling Flash, so no.

      2-year-old Lenovo Thinkpad laptop, 1920x1080 display, Core i7 @ 2.5GHz, Windows 7, IE11.
      Is your computer from a decade ago or something?MS has put a lot of effort into IE performance, but it's not supposed to be a factor of 12x-16x better than Firefox!

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    2. Re:SWF: 20 fps; SVG: 5 fps by tepples · · Score: 1

      Uh... what the hell is wrong with your laptop?

      Other than that it has an Atom N450 CPU?

      Is your computer from a decade ago or something?

      I bought it new in March 2010. The only laptops they had back then with a 10.1" screen had Atom CPUs.

      Thinking Firefox 28 is at fault, I tried it in Chromium on the same laptop. HTML clocked in at 5-6 fps, Canvas at 18-22 fps, and SVG at 15 fps. Perhaps Firefox is a slow piece of you know what.

      Thinking my machine is at fault, I went and tried it again in Chrome on a newer machine, a first-generation Nexus 7 tablet from mid-2012. Canvas and SVG tied at 16-20 fps, and HTML reported the same number in the corner but appeared to be lying because it looked far jerkier.

    3. Re:SWF: 20 fps; SVG: 5 fps by baffled · · Score: 1

      150-160 HTML, 120 canvas, 200-ish SVG.

      1920x1080, Pentium G3420 $70 CPU, Ubuntu 14.04, Chrome. I am surprised how much better my numbers are.

    4. Re:SWF: 20 fps; SVG: 5 fps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SWF gives me 40, SVG 50, HTML5 Canvas 80+ in either FF or IE

      On either Firefox 29 or IE11 Flash is the slowest. The machine actually goes from nice smooth operation to grindy slowness whenever a flash element is allowed to load.

      And don't give me this crap about desktop vs laptop CPU. My laptop with a ULV Celeron 847 still benchmarks HTML5>>SVG>Flash.

    5. Re:SWF: 20 fps; SVG: 5 fps by tepples · · Score: 1

      When I bought my laptop in 2010, subnotebooks used Atom CPUs. I think this was for two reasons: cost, and the CPUs designed for bigger laptops used too much power at idle.

  22. Wow, where do you bank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always ask about the technology needed to drive the online banking and I've found that most banks are usable without any flash/java/silverlight/et cetera (Yes, I'm a geek. You're on Slashdot). If the person opening your account doesn't know (likely), they at least will helpfully point out that you can cancel and close your account within the first week or so.

    The only bank account I've ever had that has required flash for online access was with KEB (Korea Exchange Bank). In this case, you're right, it was very much something trivial and unneeded.

  23. Video is inefficient by tepples · · Score: 1

    The output we see isn't in flash, it's just video.

    And in an era of bandwidth caps not keeping up with advances in monitor resolutions, this transmission as video is an order of magnitude inefficient in bitrate. Why is it beneficial in the long run to just accept this gross inefficiency?

    1. Re:Video is inefficient by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Unless you can force all the companies who manufacture video decoding ICs to also add Flash rendering capabilities to their chips, your argument is pointless.

  24. Read your own link by raymorris · · Score: 1

    The link you posted says it's fallacious to point out that SOMETHING is worse, that the thing under discussion isn't the WORST choice. That's a mistake because we should be looking for the BEST choice, not merely avoiding the worst one.

    GP is arguing that Flash is the BEST choice in some scenarios, that ALL options are worse. That's fundamentally different from arguing that SOME options are worse. GP's argument is perfectly logical. Whether or not all of the alternatives actually ARE worse is another question, of course.

    I CAN program in Flash, but I've never CHOSEN Flash when the choice was mine.

  25. Charging extra for mobile by tepples · · Score: 1

    And websites offering video are charging extra for access from phones and tablets. Hulu requires a subscription for mobile access, as does video on The Escapist.

  26. Vector animations by tepples · · Score: 1

    If the content owner only publishes content in a SWF, it is not worth my bother to look at it.

    Animutations and other vector animations are usually much smaller in their original SWF than they are when transcoded to MPEG-4 or WebM video. In this era of monthly caps, rendering to pixels can't always compete with the bandwidth efficiency of vectors. You're not going to get, say, "We Drink Ritalin" by Robinson Wilburn (parody fan video for the song "Hot Limit" by John Desire, which incidentally introduced me to DDR) as small in MP4 as it is in SWF, probably not even with H.266 when it does exist.

    Okay, I can't view video clips in Facebook, but if it is an embedded youtube video, usually I can view it just fine by going to youtube's website.

    If the video has ads or claims, you'll likely get "Please install Adobe Flash Player to watch this video" with a desktop UA or "The content owner has not made this video available on mobile" with a mobile UA.

    1. Re:Vector animations by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

      You do realize HTML5 supports vector animation?

    2. Re:Vector animations by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

      Forgot a link...just some examples: http://creativedroplets.com/ht...

      DIE FLASH DIE!!!

    3. Re:Vector animations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not to mention the fact that html5 player plain doesn't work for some people (read:Me) and youtube is the majority thing i do on the internet. DO i wish i could use just HTML5 and no flash? Of course! can I? Of course not!

      captcha:Giggles

  27. 2012 was, when most new CPUs ran Linux by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Starting in April 2012, most new systems had Linux pre-installed. Not coincidentally, that same year most new systems were pocket sized.

  28. How better than WebM? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Do common video decoding ICs even support WebM yet? Transmit as WebM or transmit as SWF, either way the CPU will be involved in decoding it.

    1. Re:How better than WebM? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Thanks; I wasn't aware that those existed. But among mass-market smartphones and tablets shipped in the past three years, how common are the SOCs with "Yes" in the "VP8 Decode" column? And what would keep a third-party SWF player from using OpenGL ES acceleration to render the vectors of an SWF?

  29. Re:And this is why (rant) by cbhacking · · Score: 1

    Right, because there's never critical vulnerabilities in widely-used open source software. I mean, anything as sensitive as, say, an SSL library would obviously be thoroughly tested and code reviewed to prevent any kind of trivially exploitable error that looks like something a CS freshman student might make. Thank goodness neither OpenSSL nor GnuTLS are required by any common free software, for example...

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  30. If you can get the Flash plugin running on Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    within Mozilla, you are a better man than I.

    I'm safe on this one.

  31. Edge Animate expires by tepples · · Score: 1

    HTML5 vector animation has three drawbacks: Speed The Flash version of this Flash vs. SVG benchmark runs at 22-23 fps on a laptop with an Atom N450 CPU, which is nearly four times the speed of SVG (6 fps) in Firefox 29 on the same laptop. Set quality to low and it shoots up to 31-32 fps. Tools The page you linked on creativedroplets.com mentions Edge Animate. But second-hand copies of old versions of Flash are widely available, while Edge Animate is available only by subscription. Content A lot of authors of existing SWF vector animations, such as popular videos on Newgrounds, Dagobah, and Albino Blacksheep, either are no longer contactable or lack the time, tools, and inclination to convert their old productions to HTML5.

    1. Re:Edge Animate expires by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

      I suggest you get a new laptop. I get 120fps on the 1000 object version at full quality. The argument that there are more tools for an old technology than a new one is missing the point. The tools will come and there are many ways to create SVG.

    2. Re:Edge Animate expires by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

      At 4000 objects Flash topped out at 30fps. I get over 60 for SVG and canvas.

  32. abobe crapware or gnash by dltaylor · · Score: 1

    The summary doesn't say.

  33. Wrong CVE number? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot summary says it is CVE-2014-1776 which is the IE 0-day. The Kaspersky article says it is CVE-2014-0515 for the Flash 0-day. Come on editors. I guess you can blame the Ars article but I'd expect the editors to at least read the source article.

  34. Because nothing does a good job replacing it yet by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

    There is a non-trivial demand for highly interactive stuff on the web. You may not be interested in that, but many people are and thus many developers are. Well, only Flash really does anything approaching a competent job of that. If you want to make something like a game, that runs on all the major browsers and all the major platforms, Flash can do that. Anything else, it is a crap shoot.

    For example I remember when the HTML5 Angry Birds came out. Ok, interesting, I'd like to see that. In Chrome, it works more or less flawlessly, since that's what it was made for. It did seem to randomly 'asplode a couple times though. Firefox was nice and stable and everything seemed to work, but slow. The framerate was noticeably jerky. IE worked solid and was smooth as could be... but had no sound.

    This is all on Windows, never mind how things would be on OS-X. Not precisely something that gives a lot of confidence in HTML5.

    Also there is the simple matter of time. You might be able to make an HTML5 game work as well as a Flash one, if you spent enough time making a port for each browser on each platform. Thing is, that takes a lot of developer time and thus money. You target Flash just once, and it works.

    Also the tools for Flash can make development, particularly the graphics and animation part, quite easy.

    So if something comes along that does a good job replacing it, something that is well supported by browsers and you really can do easy development in, then sure I expect people will start using it.

  35. Ship now by tepples · · Score: 1

    I suggest you get a new laptop.

    Except for the Surface Pro, other 10" products I've seen are also Atom based. Or has Atom improved dramatically in the past four years?

    The tools will come

    That doesn't help if you want to deliver something now, not years later after the tools have come.

  36. Bigger PC by tepples · · Score: 1

    Your quote of a dollar amount for the processor alone implies it's a home-built desktop PC. My numbers would probably be much better too on a full-size desktop PC as opposed to a subnotebook or tablet.

  37. Why am I not surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two words:
    1) Adobe
    2) Flash
    The market should have killed both clowns long, long ago. They should be SUED into oblivion in a world-wide class action by every computer-savvy person willing to sign up.

  38. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion