OSNews

Dude ease up. yes the article's author was mistaken. Konq can read plugins straight from the mozilla plugins directory with no problems, but "The article lies!" is a bit of a stretch. You're also pushing it with the filth/contamination comments. For god's sake calm down, smoke a cigarette, get laid or something.

"""that article is lying, one can use the plugin in konqueror (not that one would wish to contaminate ones system with that filth)"""

While Konqueror is not my preferred browser, I would hardly call it "filth".

While Konqueror is not my preferred browser, I would hardly call it "filth".

I believe the poster was referring to flash as filth, not konq.

As far as I know it is not native 64bit but can be run with nspluginwrapper.

PowerPC support?
Come on Adobe, free up the source so we can port it ourselves.

Right on!

Short answer: no. Long answer: Nope. More luck with Flash 10

Hopefully Flash 10 will support Linux on PPC as well.

Hey, I just thought, maybe a proliferation of Linux on the PS3 will help that effort along.

If you're using KDE, Konqueror 64-bit will support 32-bit plugins, so no particular issues there. Works just fine on Suse 10.2 x86_64, anyways.

If it won't run native 64 bit linux it's crap!

Do you really need a 64bit web browser tbh? I think i'm happy allowing firefox stay as a 32bit app on my x86_64 installs.

a 32bit app on my x86_64 installs

The thought of hobbling my new workstation makes me want to self immolate, rather go without. Surprising yes, but there is actually life without flash. I think it's a sad state of affairs when what started out as the universal access to information got bottled up in some lame proprietary format with such miserable support.

>>The thought of hobbling my new workstation makes me want to self immolate<<

How is running a 32bit app on a 64bit workstation going to hobble it? If anything the 32bit app would run faster then it's 64bit equivalent as it's binary is actually smaller.

What is the main benefit of 64bitness? The ability of a process to use over 4GB of ram mainly. I don't see why I'd need a web-browser that can do that, do you?

Now if it was a Oracele database we were talking about then yeah, but come on. Likewise what magic advantage does a 64bit "ls" grant you? other then fact that the 64bit "ls" binary is larger the 32bit one.

"What is the main benefit of 64bitness? The ability of a process to use over 4GB of ram mainly. I don't see why I'd need a web-browser that can do that, do you? "

you probably don't browse the web that often I guess

Unfortunately not.However you could make a 32-bit chroot as explained in the following tutorial:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=24575

No.
If it makes you feel better Adobe doesn't support 64bit Windows either.
While Adobe is supposed to be working on 64bit flash (for both Windows and Linux), somehow I don't see it happening any time soon.

In short, Gnash.

- Gilboa

An easy method for OpenSUSE or SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) users is to update through YAST or ZMD Updater.

I kinda like the lazy man's method.

1. Go to youtube.com.
2. Click the "Install missing plugin" button
3. Watch as everything magically works.

Hmmm that might work....if

1) I were running Windows.
2) If Firefox were pulling it from anywhere besides straight from Adobe.

It works with gentoo, though it's ugly to bypass portage that way :p

Why is it ugly? It doesn't mess with your system whatsoever. It just drops the lib in ~/.firefox/plugins.

Because gentoo already has a package for the flash-plugin, that's why. Not to mention that this kind of installing plugins makes it more difficult to tracks changes to my system. I really don't like that

It works with gentoo, though it's ugly to bypass portage that way :p

No need to do that. This release was available yesterday in portage.

In unstable, yes

what a cabbage

Yeah, but then you'll have to delete your old Flash player first. Besides, it'll only work in Firefox AFAIK.

That's strange, it works fine with Firefox 2.0.0.1 here. What distro are you running?

Flash player has been working on Linux for years, it's just been an old version... for years ;-)

That only means that it's been running, not necessarily working, which is something common for Adobe software.

Or You can just add ~/.mozilla/plugins path (or whatever path is used in Your setup) to ~/.opera/pluginpath.ini file (it works fine here, but i use only flash plugin, so i can't be sure if all mozilla plugins work ok in Opera too).

Thanks to Macromedia/Adobe for porting flash to Linux. Now if only they could port it to BeOS/Haiku, Syllable, SkyOS, and other small systems... .

That is unfair....

The internet is fine, however, it is these muppets that design Flash websites that annoy me.

I wish I could round them up in a big room, get a big stick with nails in it. Then beat them all sensless with it.

No, wait.

I would need to dip the nails in dog shit first. So they get blood poisoning too.

Edited 2007-01-18 03:13

not really so unfair, if some morons had not invented flash, people wouldnt be using it. the fault is on the user and adobe(/macromedia)

Flash can be useful in a lot of contexts, a lot of people abuse it, I agree, but your entire stance is just hate for hate's sake. If you don't like flash, avoid flash sites, it's that easy. For the rest of the world that wants to use flash, this is a good thing

If you're boycotting sites that use Flash, why are you posting on this site? Or do you only mean non-advertising uses?

Edited 2007-01-18 06:30

I just installed it on Ubuntu Dapper from the tar.gz

Doesn't Ubuntu have the same flashplugin-nonfree package as Debian?

On my Debian unstable it already fetched the Beta a couple of weeks ago during an upgrade

Doesn't Ubuntu have the same flashplugin-nonfree package as Debian?

On my Debian unstable it already fetched the Beta a couple of weeks ago during an upgrade

Yes but I installed the 9 Beta from tar.gz before it was available on the Ubuntu updates. Again I have installed the new release using the tar.gz before update has the deb packgage for it.

In fact I installed two different versions of of the Beta, the first release was broken for some streaming audio so I switched back to 7. A later build of 9 Beta worked OK when I tried it and I think it is this build that was released for Debian and Ubuntu.

It probably felt that way because it wasn't finished, that's why it is called a beta

"""
"While Konqueror is not my preferred browser, I would hardly call it "filth"."

ehm, you might want to reconsider what you think i was talking about. hint: it comes from adobe.
"""

Now *that's* a dirty rotten lie. I happen to know that Konqueror comes from the KDE project and *not* Adobe.

Actually... I was just funnin' ya. :-)

I hate flash as much as anyone. The advertising abuse alone makes me want to vomit.

Actually, though, it's probably the best format for embedded media playing in Linux. I've always found that the available plugins for other formats have problems on mainstream sites. You click and nothing happens, or you get a blank screen, or the video doesn't play in the right place, or whatever.

With Flash, it tends to work, albeit it with frightening processor usage.

The real problem is the ads. I (greatly) dislike having flash installed because of them. And Firefox's facility for turning off flash in preferences never works.

This is great news on one end, but I am not a fan of Adobe. What exactly is gained by downloading a new major version of Flash or Reader every few months?

Evince works fine for everything I need so I don't have Reader installed on my system. I try to keep stuff that's not "free as in freedom" off my system but I am pragmatic enough to install it if I need its functionality.

So I have Adobe Flash 9 installed because I need it to view content and I need 9 over 7 as firstly it cures the sound sync problem and secondly there is some content out their that has a Flash 8 minimum requirement. When Gnash can handle all that I won't keep the Adobe Flashplayer plugin anymore.

It works here. It could be a version mismatch, I had a similar problem when I first installed the previous beta. You should check if about:plugins reports both Flash 7 and Flash 9; in this case, close firefox, go to ~/.mozilla/firefox/ and remove pluginreg.dat (make a backup copy of the file before), then restart firefox.

It reports "Shockwave Flash 9.0 r31". Every other site that requires Flash 8 sees it as Fash 9. Maybe they have a different detection in this site and they're confused by the "r31". This is a package from Archlinux repository, I'll try to install the original and see if that works.

Thanks.

##EDIT##
I have just tried it but it's still the same. The original also reports itself as "Shockwave Flash 9.0 r31" and the site tells me I need Flash 8 or higher. Are you sure it works for you in Linux? Right now there are no matches, so no live scores, but if you click in the "IBM Summary Scoreboard" where it says "Launch PointTracker" it has the same effect here.

Edited 2007-01-18 15:16

I guess author of that webpage is just lame. He probably used following condition:

If Flash!=8 Then Error ;-)

So that will fail for anything than version eight.

Ok, it was a problem with the user agent. Now that it detects it correctly as Firefox it tells me I need Shockwave 10.1 player !

"Next time somebody says IE crashes while Mozilla rocks! I am going to laugh :-))"
you do realize that just becuase opera may not crash, while mozilla does, doesent mean its a bug or problem in mozilla? in case you did not know, then you do now.
it is obviously adobes ludacrisly bad plugin that is causing this, and its not surprising, hell, these people are putting out "we must dlopen libasound.so.2 instead of libasound.so" as a major reason of why flash 9 was so late for linux, and this was their MAIN linux dev guy that wrote this, this really gives one confidence in their abilities.

im certainly not going to run their blob on any of my systems, that i have ANY wish to keep intact.

Redeeman,

I have been using Adobe Flash windows plugin 9.0.28 for a while and it has not created any problems till now. about:plugins in FF2.0.1 in my WinXP gives

Shockwave Flash

File name: NPSWF32.dll
Shockwave Flash 9.0 r28

MIME Type Description Suffixes Enabled
application/x-shockwave-flash Adobe Flash movie swf Yes
application/futuresplash FutureSplash movie spl Yes

So it is either a mozilla issue in Linux or Adobe Flash in Linux. Whatever it is, it is important that the application is crashing. So much for Firefox/Mozilla stability.

As a user discovering Linux on Desktop and being impressed with various features vis-a-vis Windows, I am slowly discovering that applications in Linux can crash as good as we assume in Windows.

I have experienced BSODs 3 times in Windows.
First time for unknown reason in Win2K (incidentally it was after I d/w a spoof of a Mac "Switch" ad which I showed to my boss who had a PowerMac at his home)
The other 2 times it was bcos of a HD issues.

I have had not that many -ve experience with XP/2K so far that many ppl. describe here and various forums and I really wanted to beleive that Linux is uberstable. Now as I discover more and more, Linux is behavin too much like Windows :-(

Rgds..

Uh, any browser should be able to handle misbehaving plugins, if Mozilla browsers are crashing while Opera stays running, that says to me that Opera is more robust.

Next time somebody says IE crashes while Mozilla rocks! I am going to laugh :-))

Speaking of flash, I was trying to watch a long flash video a few months ago, and Firefox 1.5 kept crashing about every ten minutes. So eventually I gave up and decided to try IE6 - bad mistake. About 30 seconds in it crashes and the windows shell gets killed. Undeterred, I restart explorer.exe and try one more time. This time, after about 10 seconds the whole OS blue-screens on me. I restart and thank mozilla for only crashing itself every 10 mins.

How about if they release (for those who do want it) and you simply not use it? Fair compromise?

It's there, it just has a dependency on QEMU. ;-)

Edited 2007-01-19 01:16