And sorry if my english was a bit weird there, I'm a natural spanish speaker.
On 8/8/07, Freddie(r) Cristalab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is the current license preventing another > > players (like GNash)? > > > > Answer: No. It's just forcing GNash team wasting time in trivial stuff > > instead of time creating a bug-free swf player that will run on some > > platforms Adobe just don't support now. > > > > Exactly. > > I used to think like you, Zwetan. In fact, I wrote an article about why it > was a bad idea to open the player (Deleting the current problems in the SWF > specs license). But in this world, right now, it's just not true and > realistic your position. > > The best option will be to allow a open source-like process in the > development of the player. Like Tamarin. Everyone can use their skills to > give code to the player, but Adobe will retain control in the distribution > and release of new versions of the player. I really don't think alternatives > and forks to the Flash Player will rise like Firefox. Firefox is good and > widely used mainly because IE sucks so much. The player, on the other hand > is THE way to play correctly all SWFs. The support for forks of the Player > will be minimum from the developer community and, while they will surely > exist, it just can be good for Adobe (As the player will be more used [think > amd64 and ppc linux] and SWFs will be even more omnipresent) and it's not > gonna be like CSS support. > > Of course, if Microsoft decide to not include the Adobe player on Windows > 7, but their own, then Adobe *could be* screwed and we as developers will > have a rough time. But I don't think it will happen with all the antitrust > policies they are facing. > > Long story short: An open source Player whose development will be > controlled by Adobe (Like Firefox is controlled by Mozilla Fundation) will > allow SWF to be standard PDF-like, will allow the people with specific > wished for features to implement them without pain (And without a "CSS > hell", 'cause they will be the only people using the fork) and will mantain > a global platform where we can develop and design without fear of > incompatibilities. Again, because, in reality, the Flash Player from Adobe > will continue to be the most dominating one in 99%/1% proportions > > Of course, I suspect, as other folks on the community, that Adobe is > planning a "Flash Player in a chip" in the far future (In internet time, so, > 5-10 years). I don't know well how open the player will affect the plan (If > the plan is real and not crazy talk of mine, I suspect it is) but maybe in a > paranoid scenario, it will. I just think it is a good decision, not the best > or the most needed, to open the player. It will also generate A HELL of a > good PR for Adobe, so it's win/win. > > So, Zwetan, and hopefully Adobe too, let's be open-minded. There are good > things with the idea. > > -- > Freddie(r) Cristalab > http://www.cristalab.com/ -- Freddie(r) Cristalab http://www.cristalab.com/
_______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
