ubuntu should get behind Gnash

[drascus]

One of the most annoying issues with Gnu/Linux is good flash support. proprietary Adobe is annoying on many levels. first of all it is proprietary software that ubuntu Developers can't support and that presents a problem for people who value their freedom. Second there are some annoying issues that constantly plague it that causes firefox to crash. third newer versions of their flash player will implement a type of DRM and it would be a terrible loss to put DRM on our free systems.

I suggest that ubuntu and canonical get behind Gnash to help get them to a point where they can do all the things adobe flash can do and so that we can have a way out of the flash media trap.

[quinnten83]

Aye, Aye,...
But what would you want to use in the meantime? cause where Gnash is now, is pretty much unusable (useless seems like such a harsh word!).

[mrgnash]

It would be awesome if swfdec and gnash merged, or something along those lines, because swfdec is actually pretty awesome.

[DoctorMO]

Ubuntu is behind gnash, they put it out by default on installs.

[Polygon]

is it installed by default in hardy?

and unless it works 100%, ill still be using adobes version. I have enough problems with flash to deal with something that has bugs with actually decoding the flash video...

[Blue Heron]

first of all it is proprietary software that ubuntu Developers can't support and that presents a problem for people who value their freedom.

hypocrisy, your freedom is not endangered by certain techniques like flash, by saying everything should be open source you are stretching the freedom argument into own ideology

[Sef]

It is improving. It is beta now, but more work is needed.

[DoctorMO]

hypocrisy, your freedom is not endangered by certain techniques like flash

Yes it is, it my not be a freedom you have use for or a freedom you find all that interesting to ensure other people have... but don't forget that the best way to break into an ubuntu desktop is still through the proprietary code slapped on top.

This isn't to say that these companies aren't concerned with security and stability, it's just that they all suck at it. Most companies have programmers that write god awful code, it just has to work to pass QA. most of them would be fired if they ever had to build a bridge or something important.

Now you want to complain about a person who wants to stand up and enjoy modern society without having to put up with the shameful coding that goes on. I don't think you have the right to shut someone down for speaking their mind, nor the right to decide what is and is not freedom just because you don't happen to find it _useful_

[bruce89]

is it installed by default in hardy?


No.

[Blue Heron]

the shameful coding that goes on.

ridiculous,
there is nothing against closed source applications

Linux is made for closed source software.

[original_jamingrit]

it would be nice if Ubuntu got behind Gnash, but there's probably too many people that would prefer installing Adobe Flash to uninstalling Gnash and then installing Adobe Flash. This is not a mindset I personally agree with, but I notice that people tend to complain about anything in the road of convenience.

Gnash would be better supported from gobuntu or gNewSense, or even just a small portion of the Ubuntu community, but people for the most part , unfortunately would not care.

Although, one of the goals of Ubuntu is to use proprietary software only when no free software alternative is available by default, so if either of them would be installed by default, it would be Gnash. Which means neither would likely to be installed by default.

[bruce89]

Linux is made for closed source software.

Interesting. Mind you, the kernel's VCS used to be non-free.

[phrostbyte]

ridiculous,
there is nothing against closed source applications

Linux is made for closed source software.

Where do you get that idea from? :confused:

Interesting little sig you got by the way. Do you enjoy oppressing people?

[Blue Heron]

Where do you get that idea from? :confused:

Interesting little sig you got by the way. Do you enjoy oppressing people?

Do you know google?

Google makes big dollars with closed source software on Linux - Net income (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_income) US$4.203 billion

Maybe you should respect my freedom, to support closed source software on open source operating systems.

Any questions?

[phrostbyte]

Do you know google?

Google makes big dollars with closed source software on Linux - Net income (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_income) US$4.203 billion

Any questions?

It's not so much closed source as they do not share the software (behind their search engine) at all. But they also sponsor the development of open source products and the Google Summer of Code.



Maybe you should respect my freedom, to support closed source software on open source operating systems.

No.

[bruce89]

Maybe you should respect my freedom, to support closed source software on open source operating systems.

You should give Freespire a go then.


It's not so much closed source as they do not share the software (behind their search engine) at all. But they also sponsor the development of open source products and the Google Summer of Code.

The great thing about the GPL is that sharing modified versions of software have to have the source modifications. I think that the google mix is perfectly legit, but I'd rather not have flash anyway.

[Blue Heron]

You should give Freespire a go then.



The great thing about the GPL is that sharing modified versions of software have to have the source modifications. I think that the google mix is perfectly legit, but I'd rather not have flash anyway.

no I want to transform the ubuntu community :biggrin:

[coolglobal]

you're drawing a long bow there blue heron

100% open source is a good goal

[bruce89]

no I want to transform the ubuntu community :biggrin:

You'll have no trouble with most of them, but not me.

[Foster Grant]

you're drawing a long bow there blue heron

100% open source is a good goal

It's not practical. And if somebody told me I could only use open-source software I would have the same reaction as if somebody told me I could only use closed-source software.

ESR wrote an interesting essay (http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-08-17-016-20-OP-CY) on this topic several years ago.

[eragon100]

I don't think it's a good goal for some things.

I think that games for example could better be closed-source, because that old argument about originallity definitely applies there. If everyone uses each't others textures and stuff, that would definitely kill inovation :(

Not that I have ever read a single license agreement in my entire life before I installed a program :lolflag:

I install what works best, closed, open, or golden source.

[drascus]

I just think that Blue Heron is trying to annoy us. If you don't like a suggestion I make its fine but there is no reason to bash people and the moral choices they make. You don't have to agree that's fine. But I also don't want a post that I am making to generate discussion of weather or not this is a good idea to boil down in to people name calling.

[original_jamingrit]

no I want to transform the ubuntu community :biggrin:

You're a funny guy, I think I like you.

But maybe you should read this: http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy

[Blue Heron]

you're drawing a long bow there blue heron

100% open source is a good goal

There is a java version - it works, it's at no charge - where is your f*c**** problem?

My Logitech Mouse has no driver, my cannon printer driver is extremely poor - and you need 3 different java versions (two of them don't work) to feel free ?

That is ridiculous - support the Free Hardware Foundation, because all your hardware is captive

Yeah, GeFurze 9800 Free Series runs Pacman, easy to build with electronic waste

[mips]

There is also Swfdec which I prefer:
http://swfdec.freedesktop.org/wiki/
http://blogs.gnome.org/otte/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swfdec

[drascus]

Thanks for the info on swfdec I will look into it.

[DoctorMO]

There is a java version - it works, it's at no charge - where is your f*c**** problem?

Have you ever been told that your outlook is myopic and short term? You seem to forget the amount of trust you put in the hands of people who don't care at all for you.

There are plenty of people who are thankful to the linux developers for supporting their hardware for 15 years, you might be rich enough to buy a new printer every year but I don't mind telling you how wrong you are about closed drivers.

In fact as you attempt to tell others how wrong they are for supporting freedom, I shall tell you how wrong you are for supporting closed systems. protectionism comes from fear which comes from weakness, if your not strong enough to stand up by the power of a job well done then what right have you to continue as a business? closed source allows failed businesses to continue even when they should just stop.

[Blue Heron]

I shall tell you how wrong you are for supporting closed systems.

You really misquote me here.

I advocate open source operating systems.
But you open source fetishists want 100% Open Source.

counter-example:
Hundreds of software engineers working on the nVIDIA Drivers, this a really sophisticated type of software, only usable for nVIDIA poducts - it's not important for any successor-components of the computer.

There is just no need to make this driver open source - nVIDIA would effectively split their drivers sovereignty, leaving a lot of bad community drivers, that even may destroy the hardware.

[heartburnkid]

I'm not an open-source fetishist or anything, but I will argue that there are plenty of good reasons to demand open-source drivers -- and, if nothing else, the Creative/Daniel_K debacle is an excellent illustration of it.

[Tristam Green]

I advocate open source operating systems.
But you open source fetishists want 100% Open Source.


I don't see how name-calling is conducive to your points.

Maybe it's just me.

[funrider]

if not marcomedia how would we have flash and all the related tech? i love opensource but hey, if the closed source is working and is free, why not?

**i am using iceweasel and it rarely rarely (less than once a month) crashes with flash/youtube site.

[DoctorMO]

There is just no need to make this driver open source - nVIDIA would effectively split their drivers sovereignty, leaving a lot of bad community drivers, that even may destroy the hardware.

And without the nouvou project there will be:
* Installation problems (driver not installed on CD)
* Security problems (security experts can't evaluate the code)
* Present Compatibility problems (not available for other chipsets or operating systems),
* Future compatibility problems (not available to newer versions of the os)
* Discontinued support problems (cards not supported by newer drivers)

I'd rather an honest bad community driver that has the chance to get better than basing important functionality on nvidia magic beans which could lead to giant problems later on.

[Blue Heron]

And without the nouvou project there will be:
* Installation problems (driver not installed on CD)
* Security problems (security experts can't evaluate the code)
* Present Compatibility problems (not available for other chipsets or operating systems),
* Future compatibility problems (not available to newer versions of the os)
* Discontinued support problems (cards not supported by newer drivers)

I'd rather an honest bad community driver that has the chance to get better than basing important functionality on nvidia magic beans which could lead to giant problems later on.

exact nonsense!

when there were no open source fetishists there would be less problems - actually I have seen a knoppix live cd booting the official nVIDIA driver - no problem ! - 3D acceleration by booting, 2D as well

wikipedia says:

nouveau is an X.Org Foundation and Freedesktop.org project which was initially based on the obfuscated 2D-only free and open source "nv" driver, aiming to develop free software drivers for NVIDIA graphics cards, by reverse engineering NVIDIA's current proprietary drivers for Linux.

yeah the honest community drivers made by reverse engineering of the offical driver -> Bu*****
yes the crack driver will be so much secure and more compatible and performant, hello?

[qazwsx]

Open Source makes life easier. My parents have 10 year old printer still supported in Linux.


I would change my nvidia video video card to intell's chip if it was possible. I tought once nvidia made excellent drivers. I was wrong. Memory leaks and sometimes stability problems. Their open source drivers suck even more but they supposed to do so (nvidia can control it's develompment).


I want to use amd64processors fully in 64 bit not in 32 bit emulation via nspluginwrapper.

[miggols99]

I personally think that Ubuntu should get behind swfdec. Fedora has it installed by default ;) and it works with quite a few websites :)

[Blue Heron]

I was wrong. Memory leaks and sometimes stability problems.
Very hard judgment.
Model No?
which drivers you have tested?




Their open source drivers suck even more but they supposed to do so (nvidia can control it's develompment).


This is funny, two posts before I said that these drivers are made by reverse engineering, so of course they control the development of these bizarre drivers in an indirect way

[qazwsx]

Very hard judgment.
Model No?
which drivers you have tested?

Lots of them. Memory leaks in every single distro I have tried. Lots of versions. It was very horrible in openSUSE. Currently that leak eats 30 % of my 1 Gig of RAM. Just check out nvidia Linux forums. You wil see there are lots of problems. Even Nvidia admits that there are serious stability problems on certain dual core systems.



This is funny, two posts before I said that these drivers are made by reverse engineering, so of course they control the development of these bizarre drivers in an indirect way
nv is open source driver from nvidia. Nouveau is independent project.

[Blue Heron]

nv is open source driver from nvidia. Nouveau is independent project.

sorry!
I thought you meant nouveau

[PurposeOfReason]

I personally think that Ubuntu should get behind swfdec. Fedora has it installed by default ;) and it works with quite a few websites :)
I have swfdec right now with arch. The two problems I see
1) You have to click the flash for it to show more than an ugly gray screen with a play button. It makes things ugly but it also prevents unneeded flash from loading so it's love/hate.
2) Can't render youtube videos, or any videos, fast enough so that they aren't choppy. Even if buffered all the way through. Might be a 64bit thing though.

[Blue Heron]

I don't see how name-calling is conducive to your points.

Maybe it's just me.

What is wrong with the term Open-Source-Fetishist ?
Fetishist isn't negative where I come from.

In my opinion it's just honest to say my opinion about these issues - when you read my postings, you will see, that I always attacked positions, never the persons themselves.

[Tristam Green]

What is wrong with the term Open-Source-Fetishist ?
Fetishist isn't negative where I come from.

In my opinion it's just honest to say my opinion about these issues - when you read my postings, you will see, that I always attacked positions, never the persons themselves.

Then perhaps attacking "open-source-fetishism" as opposed to labeling people "open-source-fetishists" would make you sound more...respectable?

[Blue Heron]

Then perhaps attacking "open-source-fetishism" as opposed to labeling people "open-source-fetishists" would make you sound more...respectable?

There is nothing wrong about label people who say they want 100% open source as open-source-fetishists.

Ok open source is not an object, because it's immaterial - so the word open-source-fetishists has no meaning and you shouldn't care

[drascus]

Could we please take the Open source VS Closed source debate to its own thread? I would really like to keep this thread about working with flash content in a free software environment this secondary debate is really going into a rat hole and is counterproductive to the thread.

[Tristam Green]

Could we please take the Open source VS Closed source debate to its own thread? I would really like to keep this thread about working with flash content in a free software environment this secondary debate is really going into a rat hole and is counterproductive to the thread.

I am confused. The gnash vs. Flash debate *is* a closed-source vs. open-source debate, is it not?

[Blue Heron]

I am confused. The gnash vs. Flash debate *is* a closed-source vs. open-source debate, is it not?

I agree, it really is.

[DoctorMO]

exact nonsense!

You awfully dismissive, the problems I've pointed out are real problems that have happened. Even the security issue which was quite a spectacular failure on nvidia's part. Your statement is therefor False.


when there were no open source fetishists there would be less problems - actually I have seen a knoppix live cd booting the official nVIDIA driver - no problem ! - 3D acceleration by booting, 2D as well

There would be less conflict I agree, but that is because the availability of features and the ideologue of Free Software don't always marry up in the near term. Although they do in the long term, it's only ever been near sighted conservatism (it's self idealogical) which has tried to make the freedom of software less important in development practices.


by reverse engineering NVIDIA's current proprietary drivers for Linux.

Reverse Engineering is a legitimate freedom, no one would throw you in jail for opening up your tv to try and fix it or in fact if you tried to build your own tv using an existing one as a basis. Now copyright stops people from fixing nvidia drivers so we must use RE to build our own from scratch. Without it, it would be too easy to control what people do with products they've bought.

Your just upset that the people who promote freedom are right to do so for the long term but they will on occasion get in your way for near term features.

btw I do use both the nvidia proprietary driver and flash. that doesn't mean I stop supporting the efforts to replace them.

[phrostbyte]

I am confused. The gnash vs. Flash debate *is* a closed-source vs. open-source debate, is it not?

It can be constructed that way, but there are plenty of other reasons to get behind an open source Flash player, for one, the quality of the closed source one for Adobe is not so good, and secondly they offer no 64-bit support. We can wait (forever?) for Adobe to fix these problems or we can back an alternative.

[original_jamingrit]

The hardware bit's a little off-topic, and that stuff about social/business model nomenclature is as well. I don't want to see this thread go ugly.

The main point of Gnash advocacy is that Adobe isn't exactly friendly with the Linux community. We might not even have an offical Flash plugin if it weren't for Macromedia.(EDIT: I'm completely wrong here!) And as it stands now, the 'official' Flash plugin isn't exactly what I would call professional. Helping out with Gnash can help better integrate the flash stuff, and eventually surpass the official Linux plugin. I wouldn't mind sticking to Gnash, and trying to help support it, but it just doesn't quite cut it for sites like newgrounds and youtube.

But, it would be interesting to see what kind of reaction Hardy +1 would get if that had Gnash by default. How many people do you think would try to replace it with Flash?


It can be constructed that way, but there are plenty of other reasons to get behind an open source Flash player, for one, the quality of the closed source one for Adobe is not so good, and secondly they offer no 64-bit support. We can wait (forever?) for Adobe to fix these problems or we can back an alternative.

I think that sums it up pretty well.

[Tristam Green]

It can be constructed that way, but there are plenty of other reasons to get behind an open source Flash player, for one, the quality of the closed source one for Adobe is not so good, and secondly they offer no 64-bit support. We can wait (forever?) for Adobe to fix these problems or we can back an alternative.

I wasn't negating the reasons you put forth, but moreso placing that at its core, it is that kind of a debate.

With an open-source flash player, the community can recognize problems and fix accordingly. With a closed-source one, we can't.

Maybe I saw it differently?

[drascus]

I am confused. The gnash vs. Flash debate *is* a closed-source vs. open-source debate, is it not?

There are definitely technical advantages for a free flash player. One huge on is that ubuntu could support it where currently Ubuntu cannot support the closed one. Also as phrostbyte said 64 bit support is another issue we would love to resolve. One of my main issues is how it always seems to crash firefox. and currently there is no way we can resolve it.

[Blue Heron]

how it always seems to crash firefox.

firefox is also to blame

[ssadhale]

How many things do we want Ubuntu Guys to run after? Eclipse (Java IDE) is equally pathetic on Ubuntu! Firefox used to be a memory hog on Ubuntu (hopefully the situation has changed with FF3). Epiphany crashes with its all legs up every now and then. If we need something to be better - we should start contributing to it.

[Foster Grant]

It can be constructed that way, but there are plenty of other reasons to get behind an open source Flash player, for one, the quality of the closed source one for Adobe is not so good, and secondly they offer no 64-bit support. We can wait (forever?) for Adobe to fix these problems or we can back an alternative.

And in the meantime I should use the buggy GNASH? I think perhaps I will not do that until it's working properly.

Support the open-source community. At the same time, use the best tool for the job, even if it's proprietary. If it's that important to you and you know how to code, maybe you could contribute some time to the GNASH project. ;)

[DeadSuperHero]

How many things do we want Ubuntu Guys to run after? Eclipse (Java IDE) is equally pathetic on Ubuntu! Firefox used to be a memory hog on Ubuntu (hopefully the situation has changed with FF3). Epiphany crashes with its all legs up every now and then. If we need something to be better - we should start contributing to it.

Actually, Eclipse runs amazingly well on Ubuntu for me. Firefox is pretty good, but Epiphany is rock solid. So, your problems could be caused by a number of things, from hardware issues to Java problems, etc.

[Blue Heron]

issues to Java problems, etc.

sun java works fine without performance problems:

sudo gedit /etc/eclipse/java_home
sudo update-alternatives --config java

should work

[geoken]

The main point of Gnash advocacy is that Adobe isn't exactly friendly with the Linux community. We might not even have an offical Flash plugin if it weren't for Macromedia.

How so? Macromedia had nothing to do with Flash 9. It's creation and subsequent porting were all done under Adobe's watch.

How is Adobe not friendly with the Linux community? Bugs I've logged against Air and Flex Builder Linux get addressed as promptly as bugs logged under any open source project (usually faster).

As for Open Source alternatives, last I checked the 2 main open source SVG apps (inkscape and Karbon) have trouble opening each others files with perfect accuracy. I don't think things like that are going to give Adobe to much confidence in the Open Source community given that their main objection to an Open Source flash player is their fear of conceding the 'renders identically across all platforms' title.

[original_jamingrit]

How so? Macromedia had nothing to do with Flash 9. It's creation and subsequent porting were all done under Adobe's watch...

Um... wow, thanks for pointing that out, after a little research I've realized that you're right, there. For some reason I had thought that Macromedia Flash 7 plugin had been ported to Linux, which was when the Gnash project was started. I'm a little red in the face. :oops: There goes my main point!

Although, it's also interesting to note that (complete, future) Gnash is planned to have additional features. Although since it isn't Macromedia's implementation, they'd have no reason to worry about losing their title.

[rocknrolf77]

Lots of resources used for gnash development would be good. Adobe is keeping a lot of people off 64-bit. They are much to blame for people not moving on to 64-bit OS'es. Closed software can't compete at all. Free software can adopt much better for any platform or any architecture.

[master5o1]

The real question is how special is flash?

For most uses using AJAX style coding and I suppose eventually SVG (when browser support in browsers is better) can do the image effects. You don't get the whole flash interface when coding and that doesn't have support for sounds in the same way but action script is an emca script just like javascript.

Personally I think now that silverlight is coming out, it would be in adobe's interests to open source the flash format, not necessarily the program though (for creating flash). That would get the open source community behind it and possibly help it fight against silverlight.

[coolglobal]

where is your f*c**** problem?

What does this term translate to Blue Heron?

standard english is better

You could say perhaps, "Where the heck is your problem?"

[bruce89]

/me then goes on about Silverlight. YAICPOUB (Yet Another Incompatible Piece of Useless Bling)

[cardinals_fan]

Maybe I'm an Adobe-sponsored traitor to all that is open, but I'm perfectly happy with the proprietary Flash player...

[23meg]

I'm perfectly happy with the proprietary Flash player

You must have a liquid nitrogen cooled 4000mhz eight-core processor, and never need to view more than a single 300x300 Flash scene per page.

Anyway, I wish the "there's nothing wrong with proprietary software and if you disagree you're a zealot" people woke up to the very real (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=756253), concrete (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/173890), technical (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/compiz/+bug/194851) problems (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24/+bug/186382) that arise due to trying to fit proprietary blobs into a free software ecosystem (that they're very likely experiencing themselves, directly or indirectly, with or without knowing). As pragmatists and demanders of "software that just works and I don't care about the rest", one would expect that they'd be the first to go against any blocker that ruins the end user experience, but that unfortunately is not the case. Why not?

Mako (http://mako.cc/) summarizes the reason better than I can, in a different context (http://mako.cc/copyrighteous/20071107-00) (emphasis mine):


Geeks support groups like the FSF and EFF because, as people who understand technology, they understand just how powerful technology is. Geeks know that control of our communication technologies is control over what we can say, who we can say it to, and how and when we can say it. In an increasingly technologically mediated age, control over technology is not only the power to control our actions; it is the power to limit our possible actions. Our freedom to our technology is our freedom, full stop.

This message fails to resonate with non-geeks but it does not fail because non-geeks are happy to hand over their freedom. It fails to resonate simply because the vast majority of people do not understand that technology, and control over it, is powerful enough to impact their freedom. Most people fail to see the power because, quite simply, most people fail to see technology. While we all see the effects of technologies, the technologies themselves are frequently hidden. We see emails but not mail transport agents. We see text messages but not the mobile phone network. Before one can argue that such systems must be free, one must reveal their existence. Technologists are keenly aware of the existence of these systems. To everyone else, they are completely invisible.

[cardinals_fan]

@23meg: I would agree with you 100% if Flash Player gave me any trouble - but it doesn't. Maybe I'm just lucky. Regardless, my attitude about open source vs. proprietary software is simple: I think that open source is a more sensible development model that encourages participation. I prefer open software - that's part of why I use Linux. But that doesn't make proprietary software evil. Those who wish to use Gnash may certainly do so, but until I find that it will function better than Adobe Flash, I won't use it. In the case of Evince vs. Adobe Reader, I certainly prefer Evince; it is faster and more sensibly designed. Gnash just isn't there yet.

The links you provided are interesting. The first two link to various issues regarding the proprietary player which I have never experienced. If I had, my attitude might be very different. The other two link to complaints about the proprietary Nvidia driver - which has always worked flawlessly for me. This stuff really seems to like my machine ;)


You must have a liquid nitrogen cooled 4000mhz eight-core processor
I wish :)

[coolglobal]

Google makes big dollars with closed source software on Linux - Net income (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_income) US$4.203 billion

When you start going down the path of using the amount money an entity makes as an argument for correctness you enter shaky ground.

For example, can you justify the goodness of asbestos based on the net worth of the company James Hardie?

[starcannon]

I don't have a problem myself with closed source. I would use gnash if it were even as good as the broken adobe flash; however, gnash is not even close to being ready to use, its got a lot more time in the oven before its a viable alternative to the commercial solution.

I actually hope to see more commercial apps coming to linux, I'd love to have my cake and eat it to, commercial; games, multimedia, documents, etc...; mind you, I am linux exclusive, I have a dual boot box here, but I can't remember the last time I actually booted xp, I just don't need to, but there are a lot of stuff that while not on the *need* list, are on the *fun* list.

Anyway, my ideal vision of the future would include commercial and open source working together. Theres room for everyone.

[Mateo]

Adobe Flash has many problems in linux. For one, pages that use flash and also have javascript-based menus will not render properly. Go to a site like tvguide.com and the menus will appear behind the page's flash, making them unusable.

With that being said, it's about 50x better than gnash. I'll switch when gnash comes even close to Adobe. I'll even sacrifice the new flash features like full screen, if gnash could just render at a decent speed and fix some of those quirks (like the javascript bugs i mentioned) that adobe has.

[Mateo]

When you start going down the path of using the amount money an entity makes as an argument for correctness you enter shaky ground.

For example, can you justify the goodness of asbestos based on the net worth of the company James Hardie?

you don't need to justify the goodness of google based on money made. Google.com is the best search engine ever created, and there really isn't a close 2nd. Today's 2nd and 3rd best engines aren't even as good as google was 10 years ago.

[coolglobal]

I can agree with that.

[arman.haghi]

One of the most annoying issues with Gnu/Linux is good flash support. proprietary Adobe is annoying on many levels. first of all it is proprietary software that ubuntu Developers can't support and that presents a problem for people who value their freedom. Second there are some annoying issues that constantly plague it that causes firefox to crash. third newer versions of their flash player will implement a type of DRM and it would be a terrible loss to put DRM on our free systems.

I suggest that ubuntu and canonical get behind Gnash to help get them to a point where they can do all the things adobe flash can do and so that we can have a way out of the flash media trap.

Getting back to the original issue:

I'm with the original poster: Yes, Ubuntu should use its weight to back OSS alternatives in any area e.g. Gnash. And if you think there's a few projects that should merge, well that's the beauty of them being 'free', so be like Stallman and be a do-er. ie do something about it; After all, when we say 'Ubuntu should do something about it', let's not forget that Ubuntu isn't an organization or piece of software, its a community (including us in this forum).

I also think its important that people can run any software on Linux, e.g. Propriety Flash, there's an advantage to this as the technologies first enter the use of the FS communities and then alternatives are then developed.

And I agree that if Flash is to implement DRM features, well... well... that's an issue. See: http://defectivebydesign.org/

My Two Cents,

Arman.

PS here's a star: :KS

[23meg]

The links you provided are interesting.

They're related to the case I was making, which was: trying to fit proprietary blobs into a free software ecosystem is like trying to fit cars with square wheels. It can work if the car is strong enough, but it makes just that much sense from an engineering standpoint. Note that this is completely disregarding any ideological implications, which withstand regardless, and is an entirely technical argument.

Bug #173890 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/flashplugin-nonfree/+bug/173890) occurred when Adobe published a new version of the non-free, non-distributable Flash player. Because it can't be distributed (this may have changed with the very new latest release), the flashplayer-nonfree package has to manually download the binary from Adobe's website every time it's installed, and when Adobe, as the only entity in control of the software, changed the binary, the package became uninstallable due to an md5 sum mismatch. Updating the package would be the obvious fix, except that it would break Konqueror for everyone (https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2007-December/024877.html).

The goal of packaging the plugin and providing means of easy installation is to deliver it to the user who wants things to "just work, and I don't care if it's proprietary". The point is: it fails. And it fails not because proprietary software is inherently evil, or because free software is inherently the moral high ground; it fails because as participants in the free software ecosystem we lack the means to control it, fix it and adopt it to our purposes.

Similarly, bug #186382 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-restricted-modules-2.6.24/+bug/186382) is mysteriously reported to be reproducible only with the distribution packages of the proprietary NVIDIA driver, and not with the driver as NVIDIA ships it. Due to the closed nature of the driver, it's been impossible to pinpoint the underlying cause, which is probably extremely simple.

Had these components been free, such bugs wouldn't have occurred in the first place. Today, Gnash and Swfdec do not do the fundamentals as well as Adobe's Flash player, which is no surprise given that they have no access to the format specification for implementing an alternative player. Given the amount of commitment from Adobe (zero? probably), the growth of these projects depends on free software users testing them and contributing to them.

Whether you have to use certain proprietary software for the time being, whether you prefer certain proprietary software to its free counterparts, or whether you should be free to run proprietary software alongside free software for your own purposes are beside the point.


so be like Stallman and be a do-er. ie do something about it; After all, when we say 'Ubuntu should do something about it', let's not forget that Ubuntu isn't an organization or piece of software, its a community (including us in this forum).

Quoted for emphasis.

[drascus]

Wow thanks everyone you are giving me great things to think about. I am currently testing Gnash 0.8.2 which is the latest release on Hardy Beta. I am happy to report that it can just about render every page with flash content that I have been able to throw at it. It plays youube videos with no problem at all. It even comes close to rendering one of the flash pages that I have been using Adobe for because Gnash wouldn't work. So I will check out some of the other alternatives people have been suggesting. I think again it would be cool if some have suggested maybe the devlelopers from some of these other communites working on the flash problem could get together. after all there is no use in having several free flash players that don't totally work. Maybe one of them has figured something out the other haven't. Maybe just the fact of more eyes and minds looking at the same code somethign might turn out quicker. I am going to try and get in touch with developers to see what help they might need and if our community might be able to help them achieve their goals in anyway. This could be up to and including giving them donations to keep them working on it. Or helping them find more people to help them code. Does that sound good to you guys or do you think that might be going to far??? would anyone else be willing to donate or help code should they need it? do you think this is a big enough issue that the community would want to work for it?

PS: I will ignor any flaming that is just trying annoy people instead of further progress or understanding of the issues.

[bruce89]

All I'd want a Free Flash player to do is Potlatch (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Potlatch) (OpenStreetMap's online editor). The rest is just adverts.

[geoken]

So do any of you think Flash would loose popularity if the main reason it had become popular (seamless, identicall experience across supported platforms) was gone?

People used Flash because it could display, animate and even dynamically generate pixel perfect, advanced vector graphics. The competing Open Source HTML engines can't even perfectly render CSS, which itself contains only a tiny subset of the graphical options that Flash has, nevermind the advanced animation and interactive aspects of Flash.

[drascus]

Geoken:

Why would we worry about this? you are saying that if there is a Free Flash player then cross platform support would go away? that's just silly. They could perfectly fine use the Free Player or use the proprietary one without changing anything. Firefox has come closer to rendering web pages then just about every browser so I don't understand that argument either.

Have you even used Gnash. I have noticed no difference between the way Gnash renders youtube videos and the way that Adobe renders them. So it is a seemless identical experiance we are after.

[billgoldberg]

Forget about getting behind gnash. Gnash will never be as good as flash player.

Canonical (and the other bigger linux players) should try to pressure Adobe to release a decent linux flash player.

[derekr44]

Oh... GNASH!

I thought you meant Steve Nash... :popcorn:

[drascus]

Bill Goldberg:

I agree that it might be a good strategy to try and convince Adobe to release thier code under a free licnese. After all this strategy as seemed to work for Java for instance. I don't however think that we should put to much faith in that strategy and should try to push forward with out own Free Software alternative until we get concrete results. I can't say wether or not Gnash will be as technically able as Adobe's player. It's hard to say, if we were at least given the specs that would allow us to make our own player there would be no problem. Until then I don't think to just say that it won't work or that it can't be done is a little counterproductive.

[geoken]

Geoken:

Why would we worry about this? you are saying that if there is a Free Flash player then cross platform support would go away? that's just silly. They could perfectly fine use the Free Player or use the proprietary one without changing anything. Firefox has come closer to rendering web pages then just about every browser so I don't understand that argument either.

Have you even used Gnash. I have noticed no difference between the way Gnash renders youtube videos and the way that Adobe renders them. So it is a seemless identical experiance we are after.

I think you mis-understood me. I was saying that perhaps Adobe beleives many companies who choose to deploy using Flash/Flex may look for alternatives if they can't get the uniform cross platform experience flash is known for.

The fact that you say Firefox comes close is exactly my argument. HTML/CSS is orders of magnitude less complex (from a purely graphical perspective) than Flash. The fact that they haven't perfected there ability to accurately render solid colored, rectangular objects doesn't inspire a lot of hope in their ability to render complex vectors with multiple point bezier curves, multy color RGBA gradients and perspective transformation matrices.

While I applaud their ability to play you tube videos, the video playback aspect is perhaps one of the simplest aspects of flash rendering. Flash isn't even doing anything to the video, as long as you have the facility to decode the codec in question you can basically pull the entire video stream, completely in tact, out of the swf (the same goes for mp3's).

[drascus]

Geoken:

I think I am still missunderstanding your position.


he fact that you say Firefox comes close is exactly my argument. HTML/CSS is orders of magnitude less complex (from a purely graphical perspective) than Flash.

Now does that mean that Free Software does not do a good job? Or that it does a good Job? because I am implying that Firefox does a better job of rendering then proprietary IE 7 for instance. It sounds to me like you are saying they can't do HTML/CSS so they couldn't do flash. Which is a completely different issue and really has no relevence to the argument but I am trying to understand your position.


While I applaud their ability to play you tube videos, the video playback aspect is perhaps one of the simplest aspects of flash rendering. Flash isn't even doing anything to the video, as long as you have the facility to decode the codec in question you can basically pull the entire video stream, completely in tact, out of the swf (the same goes for mp3's).

Well maybe you are right. But I have also commented in a previous post that I have been able to just about render all flash content on most sites. So it goes beyond youtube. I focus on youtube because that is what the average user thinks when they think of Flash.

You are right in one sense I hope that companies will look for a way to implement flash that is more cross platform. That way Adobe won't have such a monopoly on the flash player market of things. but I don't know how we are going to get there if everyones attitude is "we won't care unless they have it finished yet". If people dont' start using the alternative there will be no demand to improve it and actually get it finished.

[zmjjmz]

I think we should get behind swfdec instead; it's farther ahead and already backed by Fedora.

[drascus]

Zmjjmz:

I haven't tried swfdec but I could equally make the argument that Gnash collaborates with swfdec and is backed by both the FSF and the Open Media Now foundation. I am sure both players have limitations and strengths though. It is always hard to tell just where to place your chips.

[PurposeOfReason]

Now with the poll I voted for adobe to release it's code. I see it as redundant to have three projects (adobe, gnash, sfwdec) all trying to do the same thing. It is a waste of resources.

Now if we could just not have flash . . .

[geoken]

Geoken:

I think I am still missunderstanding your position.



Now does that mean that Free Software does not do a good job? Or that it does a good Job? because I am implying that Firefox does a better job of rendering then proprietary IE 7 for instance. It sounds to me like you are saying they can't do HTML/CSS so they couldn't do flash. Which is a completely different issue and really has no relevence to the argument but I am trying to understand your position.



What I'm trying to say isn't directed at Free software in general. I'm trying to address examples where there are multiple projects with the goal interpreting a complex spec.

My point is this; if we see rendering differences between WebKit and Gecko in CSS rendering wouldn't it be fair for a company like Adobe to assume there would be similar rendering differences between different implementations of Flash players? IMO, this is one of their greatest fears because they believe cross platform consistency is on of their greatest strengths.

[Foster Grant]

Release the source codec. It's worked before (Java, Star/OpenOffice) and would make the most sense in this case.

Adobe can still make its Flash conversion and editing software, while the community has the opportunity to work the bugs out of the player and codec.

[bruce89]

I wonder if proper SVG animation support and HTML5's <video> tag (using Dirac of course) would make this kind of rubbish (Silverlight too) obselete.

[geoken]

Adobe can still make its Flash conversion and editing software, while the community has the opportunity to work the bugs out of the player and codec.

What if working out the bugs, as a byproduct, introduces cross-platform rendering inconsistencies? That's what I think Adobe's fear is.

[Foster Grant]

What if working out the bugs, as a byproduct, introduces cross-platform rendering inconsistencies? That's what I think Adobe's fear is.

All it has to do is play the file format specified by Adobe.

Look at it this way: QuarkXPress 7 for Mac OS X and QuarkXPress 7 for Windows have different code bases (a lot of the keyboard shortcuts are different between platforms, too :mad: ), but they look the same, do the same tasks and open/save the same *.QXD file format.

Same deal. So long as 1) it does the same thing the same way across all supported platforms and 2) Adobe signs off on it, then it's still Adobe Flash player.

[Gargamella]

Aye, Aye,...
But what would you want to use in the meantime? cause where Gnash is now, is pretty much unusable (useless seems like such a harsh word!).

completely agree

[geoken]

All it has to do is play the file format specified by Adobe.

Look at it this way: QuarkXPress 7 for Mac OS X and QuarkXPress 7 for Windows have different code bases (a lot of the keyboard shortcuts are different between platforms, too :mad: ), but they look the same, do the same tasks and open/save the same *.QXD file format.

Same deal. So long as 1) it does the same thing the same way across all supported platforms and 2) Adobe signs off on it, then it's still Adobe Flash player.

The quark example is just like Flash, one company producing the product on multiple platforms and ensuring a consistent look. I don't see how that addresses the concern of having rendering differences when multiple companies/teams are developing their own apps to view the format in question?

If adobe opened the flash player your #2 suggestion would never happen because the player would be forked immidiately. What would make Adobe think that a IceWeasel and SwiftFox equivalents of the flash player wouldn't be released?

[qazwsx]

If you ask me gnash 0.8.2 is lot better than previous version. Pretty cpu intensive though. Swfdec was better than previous version of gnash but not anymore IMHO. It is less CPU intensive than gnash.