Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st May 2008 12:44 UTC
Just yesterday Mozilla Europe's Tristan Nitot predicted that Adobe might open source Flash one day if competition from Microsoft's Silverlight got too fierce. It seems as if he can look into the future, as today Adobe has announced the Open Screen Project. While not exactly an open source announcement, it does open the door a little bit more.
Thread beginning with comment 312380
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: What does it mean for Open Source?
by lemur2 on Thu 1st May 2008 13:35
in reply to "RE: What does it mean for Open Source?"
Member since:2007-02-17
Well then 3 cheers for something finally happening, anyone else fedup of the amount of crashes Flash causes?
Adobe's Flash 9 binary blob crashes quite a bit when used in conjunction with Ubuntu Hardy Heron.
I believe this is due to Hardy's inclusion of PulseAudio ... apparently this is the piece that doesn't play well together with Adobe's flash 9 binary blob for Linux.
There is a library that you can get that does enable it to kinda work ... but there are still crashes.
I removed Adobe's Flash 9 blob, and installed Gnash 0.8.2-0ubuntu3 on my Ubuntu Hardy install ... I can still use Youtube, and I haven't had a crash yet (although I haven't been using it long). Certainly I can now do some actions without crashing that used to reliably crash Firefox 3beta5 viewing Youtbue using Adobe Flash 9.
RE[3]: What does it mean for Open Source?
by liamdawe on Thu 1st May 2008 13:39
in reply to "RE[2]: What does it mean for Open Source?"
Member since:2006-07-04
RE[2]: What does it mean for Open Source?
by renox on Thu 1st May 2008 16:16
in reply to "RE: What does it mean for Open Source?"
Member since:2005-07-06
Well then 3 cheers for something finally happening, anyone else fedup of the amount of crashes Flash causes?
Only if the browser architecture sucks: a plugin such as Flash should be in a different process and if the Flash process crash, this shouldn't make the browser crash, I've been told that Konqueror does it this way..
RE[3]: What does it mean for Open Source?
by Rahul on Thu 1st May 2008 17:29
in reply to "RE[2]: What does it mean for Open Source?"
Member since:2005-07-06
Fedora installs nspluginwrapper by default even on x86 system specifically to force plugins to run in a separate memory space which helps improve stability. A plugin crash won't take the whole browser down. Also running it like that helps SELinux confinement
http://danwalsh.livejournal.com/15700.html
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2006-07-04
Well then 3 cheers for something finally happening, anyone else fedup of the amount of crashes Flash causes?