Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

Macromedia releasing source to Flash player 31

Posted by Hemos from the loook-but-don't-touch dept.
yoz writes "Macromedia says it will release the source code to the Flash player when Flash 4 comes out in June, according to this press release. However, it's unlikely to be an Open Source license. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Macromedia releasing source to Flash player More

Macromedia releasing source to Flash player

Comments Filter:
  • Have anybody ever wondered why all the big ones (except Microsoft) are now supporting Linux and (partly) open source?

    Somehow these companies seems to be among the biggest in their fields. Just mentioning id, which has supported Linux (although not Open Source completely -- they have released the source to many games, though, and I heard some rumours here on Slashdot that the Quake 1 source was going to be released) for a long, long time. What about 3dfx? And now Macromedia. Anybody seeing a relationship here?

    /* Steinar */
  • Oh MY! Do you mean to say that a software company is going open source for other than purely charitable motives? That they might just be trying to make money? The idea of "using open source to increase their market share" and "more and more developers will do the work of creating quality interfaces for them" is exactly why most companies get into open source. Trying to make money is not bad, nor is trying to do it through open source bad. If we want to promote the economic model of open source, we have to be understanding towards these companies, especially ones (like Macromedia) that have been in the market for a while and are firmly established.
  • your knowledge is a little obsolete there budy,

    flash 4 contains a new scripting host called actionscript (only 5k on the player) which allows for dynamic greaion of graphics

    check out
    http://www.flasher.net/flashpad.html
    for active discussion on flash and flash 4's new capabilities

    p
  • In any case, I'd rather go for svg [w3.org], but this is because I'm more of a programming type than a point-and-click oriented designer. If flash were opensourced, of course it would be better for developers, but isn't it important to make things compatible? By this I mean compatible with CSS, XML, XSL and all that. Also, I'm not sure but there must be benefits to having vectors and animations native rather than in a plug-in...?
  • Hmmm... _That_ is an interesting viewpoint. You may well be right -- without all-new games pushing the limits all the time, perhaps we wouldn't be where we are today.

    /* Steinar */

  • Re:Open sourcing Macromedia (Score:3)

    by K. ( 10774 ) on Tuesday May 25, 1999 @01:48AM (#1880710) Homepage Journal
    The file specification they released for Flash
    was incomplete. The parser source code they
    released was buggy. They've been promising an SDK
    forever. Basically, they've been stringing along
    the open standards-loving Web community so as to
    prevent a real open standard from getting off
    the ground, IMHO.

    That said, they may have read the writing on the
    wall. And it is a pretty decent format - if only
    it were more accessible programmatically.

    K.
    -
    How come there's an "open source" entry in the
    Jargon File [tuxedo.org], when there isn't a "free software" one?

  • Vaporware pressrooms (Score:3)

    by Chexum ( 1498 ) on Tuesday May 25, 1999 @01:56AM (#1880711) Homepage
    I for one am getting quite fed up with the current MS-y trend of announcements that "we will have it soon". Here's my advice: when it is source, even open-source, just wait quietly until it IS available. If we could wait for it, you also could wait with the announcement.

    It sounds like a good marketing stunt to get press attention two times, once for announcement, and once for release, but refuse the temptation, it's having the possibility that the announced product will be much inferior than waited for. It's also getting the style "people, get off my way, I'm coming", and stopping perfectly acceptable, and well working other projects with a similar goal.

  • You're missing a http://. Sorry, I don't mean being picky, but the error page I got said I should nag you :-)

    /* Steinar */

  • I didn't see anything in the article that made me think they were taking a stand one way or the other. I emailed them for more information, either a URL for the license or a copy of it, so I could post more information here. If I get a response I'll post it later today.


  • Geez, I just got a "user unknown" back from my email to "flashsource@macromedia.com," the address listed in the article, asking for information on the license. A sign of things to come?


  • Posted by buzzworx:

    The trend is the same as always in IT, where go the gamers, so goes the world.

  • Macromedia's hand is forced (Score:5)

    by jetson123 ( 13128 ) on Tuesday May 25, 1999 @02:01AM (#1880716)
    On balance, it's probably good that this source is becoming available (although the free Flash player for Linux works quite well already).

    But the motivation for Macromedia is clear: the W3 is developing XML-based graphics standards and executable content in the form of Java (and ActiveX, if you must) also provides better and better graphics (Java 2 has antialiasing, better fonts, and a much better imaging model than earlier versions).

    Macromedia has a big lead and advantage in authoring and server tools for Flash, and the longer they can keep Flash on the web, the more money they will make. When other formats will become more widespread, they will only be one among many vendors, with no particular lead or advantage.

    I hope the release of Flash source won't preempt the adoption of the next generation of graphics formats. The XML-based formats are much easier to use for dynamic generation of graphical content from any scripting language (no need to buy expensive tools from Macromedia), and Java 2, once it is in browsers, will allow much better interactivity.

  • Funnily enough I was looking at this last night.
    I'd have to say that for me the first on the
    todo list would be morphing. Its absence makes up
    lot of the animations out there unwatchable.

    K.

    How come there's an "open source" entry in the
    Jargon File [tuxedo.org], when there isn't a "free software" one?

  • Re: corrected email (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Typo. Try flash_source@macromedia.com, I believe.
  • From my viewpoint, open-sourcing something is the exact opposite of forcing you to use proprietary tools. Look at ICQ for instance -- it hasn't even been open-sourced by Mirabilis, yet we have several good ICQ clones. If/when Macromedia releases the source to their player _and_ their file format, I guess several good `clone' editors will pop up. I'm not saying that I'm for Flash at all (I've never even used it), but open-sourcing is seldom a bad thing. Perhaps they're forced, but releasing the source to their player can't be all that bad.

    /* Steinar */

  • when will we get Director ? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I am very grateful to Macromedia for the Flash player plug-in, but many great sites I (would) like to visit like futurefarmers.com require Director as well for some or all content.

    Anyone out there know of a future Director release for Linux or a petition for the same?

  • ssia. it's not exactly been easy to find.

  • There is already a GOOD open source flash player (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 25, 1999 @02:50AM (#1880725)
    As the subject says... Macromedia opened up their specs a long time ago, and has even provided support to the guy who wrote it. It is also written in a VERY portable manner, with the result that it has even been ported to the Amiga, and other almost dead platforms. It runs great under Netscape on Linux.
  • How does SVG (Scaleble Vector Graphics) compare too MM's Flash? I know the W3C describes SVG a _non_ binary format, and Flash does. But in how far, is it to be expected, that SVG will replace Flash?
  • After MM released their (buggy) specs for the Flash file format (ooh: alliteration), some people got together to get the OpenSWF project going. (Slightly) More info at http://www.openswf.org/ [openswf.org]

    ÐÆ
  • Yea, I agree completely. This seems to be a marketing stunt that's being passed around from marketing department to marketing department at conferences or something. I guess if Flash does get ported, it would be worth using, as long as it was an open standard. I guess it'll be the duel of not-quite open Java with almost-open Flash. Why can't the computing industry develop open standards any more? Hopefully people won't bow to an inferior technology that isn't truly platform independent.

    I just hope that, as you said, W3 doesn't adopt this for a standard if it's not open. That'd be almost as bad as when they (W3C) went with a proprietary key exchange for SSL (Diffie-Helman) thus making it an unopen standard.

    And, as said below, I hope that they open up some of their other products, like Director, since they're required to view a lot of pages.

    Bah, who cares about any of this anyway, I still browse with Lynx. :)

  • Good for you! Why not just use Lynx and have done with it?

    The point of Flash is not functionality, it's the interactive experience (and whatever other buzzwords you wish to add). Look at the Star Trek: Insurrection [startrek.com] web site for a perfect example of Flash being used to enhance the basic site. If you just wanted to grab a picture and leave, great. Go to the straight HTML version. But using the Flashed site, you get an interface that looks and sounds like a real TNG computer. It's also fairly quick loading, and I imagine that the vast majority of web users (read: the great unwashed) couldn't give a pair of dingoes kidneys for the fact that it doesn't actually impart any extra information.

    Flash is made for fun, not practicality. And isn't that what you're on the net for, really?
    ÐÆ
  • Here's the best flash site I've ever seen.

    http://www.megacar.com

    Now what do you have to say???
  • Hey guys,

    Give me some time to make it better ! Actually someone else is working on it and he's doing a great job. I'm working on the Morphing feature.
    I'm likely to change the license policy to OpenSource.
    Flash 4 features will also be added next.

    Regards

    -Olivier
  • Well maybe if you had read the article before you posted, you'd understand how Macromedia actually stands on the open souce issue. It seems to me that the company is simply using open source to increase their market share. By releasing their source code, they know that more and more developers will do the work of creating quality interfaces for them...
  • I mostly agree with you, but I happen to like black backgrounds. My eyes have always preferred the black backgrounds common in command-line OSs (DOS, BSD, Linux, etc.) to the white backgrounds common in windowing environments (Windows, X, MacOS, etc.).
  • Anybody know how Macromedia actually stands on the open source issue? Seeing as how they are a big imaging player, I think it would be a big victory to get them to open source something...
  • when it is source, even open-source, just wait quietly until it IS available.

    That doesn't sound like a bad idea, on the surface. However, look at Apple: they *did* "wait quietly", working with people in the background, and when they announced, the source was there.

    And a lot of people were upset with this.

    If Macromedia makes an announcement now, before the source is released (and more significantly, before their *license*), then interested parties can step forward and say under what the best terms are for the release.

    It would be nice if this was an explicit intention of the announcing party: "Macromedia will relase the source on (enter date here) and anyone interested should send comments to (insert name of organizer here)."

Slashdot Top Deals

I don't want to be young again, I just don't want to get any older.

Close