

Adobe Releases Last Linux Version Of Flash Player - wyclif
http://www.ubuntuvibes.com/2012/03/adobe-releases-last-linux-version-of.html

======
rdtsc
They in a bit of a difficult situation. Since there are so many mobile devices
and so many of them are iPhones, anyone building websites will try to steer
away from using Flash. So Flash is dying, fast.

The best they could have done is to completely open source it. Open source the
spec fully, the players and the server. But even then, frankly it is too late.
There are standards worked on that will completely replace it: Websockets,
WebGL, WebRTC and so on.

It was interesting how in the WebRTC discussion they were absent. Google was
there, Ericsson, but not them. They could have clearly provided some input or
helped out with insight since they had a similar product for so many years.

They thought they would build a web platform and rule the world, but I think
they failed in that.

What can they do? Well, I think they can make (and they probably already have
it) a snazzy editor/creator to generate HTML5, javascript that would work with
WebRTC, WebGL, etc.

~~~
stcredzero
_Since there are so many mobile devices and so many of them are iPhones,
anyone building websites will try to steer away from using Flash. So Flash is
dying, fast._

I'll call out Steve Jobs on this one. Another good one!

 _The best they could have done is to completely open source it...frankly it
is too late. There are standards worked on that will completely replace it:
Websockets, WebGL, WebRTC and so on._

"Incumbent" is a temporary state. "Leader" is a decoration that is assigned
dynamically. You stay a leader by siphoning potential energy off of the
commoditization of your current golden goose, to set up your next one.

Oh, and open standards trump proprietary defacto standards in the end. Ask
Microsoft about that one. (And Apple: pay attention!)

~~~
tiles
I don't think Steve Jobs necessarily is responsible for this, but that he was
aware that it was going to happen. If the iPhone had shipped with a poor
implementation of Flash, which was all Adobe was capable of delivering, Flash
would still eventually die off. Jobs was just aware that it was worth the
sacrifice of political capital to do away with Flash, since in a few years it
would be a moot feature.

~~~
jiggy2011
Apple had a big hand in this, Whilst there was plenty of negative sentiment
towards flash before the iPhone etc I don't remember too many people talking
about killing it.

Indeed many website owners liked having flash content on their site, it is
only in the last few years that developers can point to a growing and
lucrative demographic or users/devices that can't consume flash content.

------
shad0wfax
I cannot see how they can be serious about Flash if they are going to ignore
Linux.

It makes sense from Adobe's point of view, because the adoption on Linux is
minimal, but for someone creating content on flash (for example - for video,
games, or even some old school websites), this is just making it harder. Now
these content creators have to worry about their clients on Linux platform.

Adobe might as well say that Flash is done on all platforms.

Note: I am not taking sides, if Flash is good/bad but just trying to argue
that if Adobe wants their Flash platform to be taken seriously on Windows/Mac,
they really cannot ignore Linux this way.

~~~
snissn
Flash on linux has always been bugging and CPU inefficient..

~~~
shad0wfax
Yes, but if this is an admit of defeat by Adobe's engineering (like how to
some extent you can say it was on Tablet/phone platform), it just is a bad
sign for them.

What as a consumer of flash platform I need form Adobe is clarity and
commitment. Today I see it has gone another step backward. Just reinforces the
public opinion of wanting to move away from Flash even more.

~~~
snissn
Big picture they are trying to kill flash! I just don't think that this
particular story is that big of a deal because it really only affects linux
firefox users. So it's sort of a neat way to for them to re-prioritize on
maintaining a product that they anticipate deprecating in the long run.

~~~
djeikyb
How does it only affect linux firefox users? I think you're right about
Adobe's motives, but it certainly affects any linux browser that could use
libflashplayer, no? Ie Chrom*, Opera..

~~~
BlackAura
They're dropping the NPAPI (Netscape Plugin API) version on Linux.

Chrome currently ships with both an NPAPI version of Flash, and a PPAPI
(Pepper - basically a replacement plugin API developed by Google, as an
offshoot of NaCl) version. The PPAPI version will still be updated, so when
the next version of Flash comes out, Chrome will just use the PPAPI version.

But the PPAPI version will only be shipped with Chrome, and only Chrome /
Chromium support PPAPI plugins. Any Linux users using any browser other than
Chrome will basically be out of luck.

------
infinitivium
Adobe fails to make any headlines that indicate they have any clue at all

~~~
batista
Well, on the positive side all the reviews for the new Photoshop CS6 have been
quite glowing. A major new version, indeed.

Lightroom 4 was also a very good update.

Oh, and Premiere is in the right track.

Killing Flash is best for Adobe in the long term. That, more refinement for
their CS suite, and some new HTML5 tools like Edge will keep them afloat for
many years to come.

~~~
viraptor
With every new edition of Adobe products we get more posts on
<http://adobegripes.tumblr.com/> to enjoy :)

~~~
fruchtose
It's remarkable to me that people seem to think that Adobe Photoshop is an
amazing product. I'm sure that the engineers working on it are great, but the
infamous rant against PSD (responded to here:
[http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/05/some_thoughts_about_the...](http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/05/some_thoughts_about_the_psd_format.html))
underlines the fact that Adobe isn't exactly a shining beacon of software
engineering, and the user-facing problems are indicative of what is probably a
large, underlying code complexity issue. If the document format evolves
"organically", what does that say about the code that reads the document? Just
think--how would you like it if JSON were "organic"? Structured code is good,
organic not so much.

~~~
batista
> _It's remarkable to me that people seem to think that Adobe Photoshop is an
> amazing product._

It doesn't have to be perfect _inside_ to be an amazing product. People could
care less about how PSD is structured or if the code is a spaghetti mess. The
organic growth is also inevitable when you have something that evolved over
20+ years and want to keep backward compatibility as much as you can
--including with tons of external third party tools. It's not like they are
idiots and can't get it right if they are given the chance to do it from
scratch.

The thing it: it works, it works great, and nothing compares to it in it's
field.

For the actual graphic designers, photographers, illustrators, etc that use
it, there is no alternative that is as capable. There is also no alternative
that can be integrated with a full ecosystem of products, from TV/Cinema work
(Premiere) to print work (InDesign/Acrobat), to Web (Flash/Edge/Fireworks), to
Vector (Illustrator), with all being leaders (or almost) in their particular
field.

I'm talking for professional workflows. For just getting some pics up to a
webpage, without any chance of it be used in other contexts, YMMV.

Compared to GIMP for example, there are tons of stuff that make it better for
a professional workflow. From better text support, to a complete RAW file
import/edit support, to a complete (and working for years before Gimp got any)
CMYK support with gamut warnings and the whole kitchen sync, to Smart Objects,
to vector support, etc.

Though, latest releases and transitions (like to 64bit Win/Mac, to Cocoa, to
the new UI etc), seem to have given Adobe also chances to rework parts of the
code.

~~~
benkant
> People could care less

I love to be that guy, and I think you mean "couldn't care less".

~~~
batista
Absolutely.

------
astine
On the plus side, this move will push more people to replace Flash with other
technologies and I may never have to use it again. It's been consistently the
buggiest piece of software on my computer for years. I won't be sad to see it
go.

------
streptomycin
I hope the bitrot doesn't happen as fast this time as it did the last time
they dropped support for the Flash version of Linux. The last time they did
this, it was right before everyone starting using ALSA, so we were stuck using
Flash with horribly broken audio for a long time.

------
bni
I have uninstalled flash player on all my machines. If its flash and has no
h264 fallback its probably not a video worth seeing anyway.

Just Do It.

------
nnnnni
Good riddance?

------
jiggy2011
So, what does flash actually run on these days?

Windows desktop PCs & laptops, on Mac desktops & laptops (for how much
longer?) and that's about it.

Well , looks like everyone should sharpen up those JS skills.

~~~
icebraining
You do realize that those clients represent ~89% of all web usage, right?

~~~
njharman
Really, all smartphones, all tablets, all Linux is only 11%? I'm very doubtful
and won't believe it without citation.

~~~
icebraining
The number is from StatCounter: [http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_vs_desktop-
ww-monthly-2011...](http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_vs_desktop-ww-
monthly-201102-201202)

~~~
jiggy2011
That does seem surprisingly low, but let's assume it is that correct.

According to stat counter , mobile usage in Jan 2010 was 1.56%, by Dec 2010 it
was 4.1%. By Feb 2012 8.53%.

That's an astonishing growth to have roughly doubled in a year. Although the
growth proportionally is less than in 2010 which might suggest that there is
_some_ slow down.

Big companies like adobe need to plan for the long term, even if "mobile"
peaks at 30% + all the people running Windows 8 using Metro + all the Linux
users.

That's certainly a big enough base of non-flashers for any web developer to
seriously think twice about using it for anything.

------
joeyh
Would have been more appropriate to release it tomorrow.

------
j45
Would be interesting if they could release the player as OS

------
batista
You know, it just occurred to me.

One benefit of Adobe abandoning Flash in the medium-term, will be a push for
improvements on the functionality and speed of SVG.

Google (Chrome) seems to mostly care about the canvas, re acceleration and
all, whereas Adobe has much more interest in SVG because it needs it as a
vector replacement for Flash.

Case in point, this just came in today:
[http://blogs.adobe.com/webplatform/2012/03/30/svg-
animations...](http://blogs.adobe.com/webplatform/2012/03/30/svg-animations-
css-animations-css-transitions/)

------
ktizo
Been working in flash since version 2 and years ago I wrote a 3d engine in
flash mx by duplicating and scaling right angled triangles to draw all the
polygons. Professionally, I am often the person who recommends what
technologies get used when a site gets made.

And I very much doubt with this recent news from adobe that I will bother to
use flash for a commercial project ever again. Especially given what you can
get canvas tags to do these days.

~~~
jlarocco
That's nice of you, but honestly I doubt this will have a very big impact.

Flash support has been poor on Linux for a very long time. For example, 64-bit
Linux desktops have been popular for most of the last decade, and I'm not sure
there's ever been an official 64-bit release. Sure, it's been possible to get
it working, but it's a hassle. The poor Linux support is one of the main
reasons so many Linux users dislike Flash and are always saying how it needs
an open source alternative version.

Since Linux support has never been a big deal for people choosing Flash in the
past, I can't see this having a big impact on their decisions now.

~~~
dfc
FYI: Flash for 64bit linux has existed for a while now. The first release was
sometime around the financial crisi, I think october of 2008.

~~~
jlarocco
Yeah, I know it exists. And before it existed you could hack up the 32-bit
Flash to work in 64-bit browsers.

The point is, it being a PITA to use Flash on Linux never stopped many
developers from creating pages that required it, so it's unlikely to stop them
from creating Flash pages now.

~~~
dfc
You said _"I'm not sure there's ever been an official 64-bit release"_ when
there has been an official release for a while now. So you can understand why
I might have thought you did not know an official release existed?

It has not been a pain in the ass on amd64 since the fall of 2008.

------
dsolomon
Thats a huge F __* Y __to a large customer base.

~~~
batista
How are Linux desktop users a "customer" base?

For one, they are a very small niche. All "web stats" reports (the most
accurate way of measuring such things) put them somewhere around 1%.

Plus, they are not paying for Flash. Flash, the paid-for tool, doesn't even
run on Linux.

~~~
el_presidente
1% = millions of users. Out of that 1% comes a significant portion of the
people who run the sites that serve flash content.

~~~
batista
Those sites serve Flash content to non-Linux desktops over Linux ones by a
huge margin, like 99% to 1%.

And merely serving Flash doesn't mean you are an Adobe customer. The guy that
writes the Flash content in Adobe Flash (in a Mac or a Windows PC) is their
customer.

------
snissn
They're dropping support for firefox for linux it seems and will maintain
support for chrome through their pepper api. Also they will maintain the
latest binary release of flash for linux by pushing security patches. If
anything they're dropping support for firefox and derivatives for linux and
keeping support for chrome. But who uses firefox these days anyways?

~~~
astine
"But who uses firefox these days anyways?"

I am writing this reply from within Firefox.

~~~
snissn
Okay thanks for the downvote, astine. I was making a general point about its
market share [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/01/chrome-vs-
firefox-g...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/01/chrome-vs-firefox-
google-mozilla_n_1123168.html)

~~~
astine
I didn't downvote you. But you should be aware that Firefox is still a
substantial platform and it's market-share isn't shrinking very rapidly.

~~~
snissn
Ok. Sorry.

