I think ( just a guess ) - they want to avoid different implementations of the flash player - with different players supporting different features... that could cause problems ( sounds like a headache to me ) ... however - if they can avoid that - it could then also be a question of revenue. i think an open source player - controlled by 'adobe' could be a great thing.
Also, one thing i have been wondering about lately, and can't think of an answer... Director shockwave was quite fast and had ok 3D ( a little out of date now ). Used to really like director... why can't do the same with the flash player today... i know historically they want to keep distributable file size low - and reach the lowest common denominator - however - i just wonder why is this not achievable now days... - k On 4 May 2010, at 00:19, Baz wrote: > I don't know much about how to answer this, so I'm not trying to take a > position or anything: purely out of curiosity, what would Adobe lose if Flash > were open sourced? Is it that competitors would more easily be able to make > competing IDEs? > > > Cheers, > Baz > >
