[TAG] .SWF files (Flash)
Benjamin A. Okopnik
ben at linuxgazette.net
Sat Feb 11 00:27:21 MSK 2006
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 11:01:56PM -0800, Mike Orr wrote:
> On 2/9/06, Benjamin A. Okopnik <ben at linuxgazette.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 04:22:04PM -0800, Mike Orr wrote:
> > > On 2/9/06, Kapil Hari Paranjape <kapil at imsc.res.in> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As far as I know the latter is an open format,
> > >
> > > Is the format actually published?
> > Given that GNU is developing a viewer based on the SWF specification, I
> > have a sneaking suspicion that it is, yes.
> > http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/
> > > Do the free players work with all
> > > Flash content? Do we know that Macromedia won't add proprietary
> > > extensions to discourage the use of other players and composers?
> > And what if they did? Mike, that's a red herring and you know it -
> > that's a "what-if" that you can play with many projects. The answer is
> > that we'd use the currently-available versions - or switch to another
> > format whenever it suits us. Where's the problem?
> *We* can put files with only compatible features in LG and switch
> formats whenever we want.
So can anyone else. That's exactly the point.
> I'm talking about Flash in general.
Why? What makes it so important? It's useful for _today;_ if it doesn't
suit tomorrow, it'll be discarded in favor of something that does.
That's how technology *works*.
> Macromedia does add stuff to it, we (free software types) will be
> playing catch-up all the time like we do with Samba and Word and used
> to do with PDF and Postscript.
Anyone that feels like playing catch-up is welcome to do that. Those of
us who don't, won't. I've never felt like I was playing catch-up with
either PDF or PostScript; I got exactly what I wanted out of them, in
the case of both creating and displaying them.
> Better to just boycott the format.
You're welcome to do that. I'd say that you're going to lose out on the
content that the rest of us are going to have access to, but it's your
Look, Mike. You're making all kinds of unsubstantiated claims about
Flash, and at this point are calling for a boycott against it - *still*
based on nothing more than those vague claims that you yourself have
generated. I don't see that there's anything useful to be had out of
further discussion about it - at least pending additional facts. Let's
just let it go until then, 'K?
* Ben Okopnik * Editor-in-Chief, Linux Gazette * http://linuxgazette.net *
More information about the TAG