Adobe releases runtime code to Linux developers (TIS) [LWN.net]

Adobe releases runtime binary for Linux

Posted Apr 3, 2008 17:00 UTC (Thu) by AJWM (guest, #15888) [Link]

The original title is _very_ misleading.  I know, that's what's on the linked site.   But it
implies that Adobe released source code and that it's of some use to developers of Linux,
whereas all they release was a runtime binary that runs on Linux for those AIR developers that
may want that.

Since LWN already covered this a couple of days ago, I'm not sure that it should bother giving
"The Industry Standard" (who can't even get a headline right) the link -- unless somebody
wants to gripe about it on their site.  (I couldn't be bothered registering to do so.)

Adobe releases runtime binary for Linux

Posted Apr 3, 2008 17:30 UTC (Thu) by larryn (guest, #3457) [Link]

Since when runtime == source code? I did not get the impression by reading it, especially
something from Adobe.

Not sure what's going on with LWN readers lately. Yesterday, Volantis released Mobility
Server, someone cried about that you have to register for it, etc. 

Come on guys, just chill out! I guess next time any company open source something, they need
to go ahead and deliver the CD to your front door?

Adobe releases runtime binary for Linux

Posted Apr 3, 2008 18:17 UTC (Thu) by pr1268 (subscriber, #24648) [Link]

Not sure what's going on with LWN readers lately. Yesterday, Volantis released Mobility Server, someone cried about that you have to register for it, etc.

The philosophies of Open Source run deep amongst the readers here at LWN; the open availability of software released under the (L)GPL being blocked by a form requiring users to divulge personal information smacks of some ulterior motive by Volantis--especially seeing how they're issuing a bragging press release to the effect of LGPL'ing their server code.

Personally, I am irritated at having to fill out forms online just to get at one thing... But I do understand it's the nature of business these days.

Since when runtime == source code? I did not get the impression by reading it, especially something from Adobe.

I admit to having an initial reaction that this was indeed a source code release. Point taken.

Come on guys, just chill out!

Never! LWN readers are a discriminating bunch when it comes to reading Open-Source and Linux-related news. And besides, LWN readers are already a relatively tame group. Why not go recommend Slashdotters do the same?

Adobe releases runtime binary for Linux

Posted Apr 3, 2008 18:29 UTC (Thu) by undefined (guest, #40876) [Link]

"Since when runtime == source code?"

quoting the article's title, "runtime code" is (by common usage of the english language) "code
associated with a runtime".  this is similar to how a "car tire" is a "tire associated with a
car" (and not a bicycle or truck).

"code", at least on lwn, commonly refers to "source code" (as compared to 
"binary code" which is commonly abbreviated as "binary" not "code").

and the only single use of the word "code" in the article (ie "write additional
platform-specific code") is refering to "source code" because i don't know too many developers
that write "binary code" (and i thought writing assembly was impressive ;-).

so this would probably be one of those times where "Adobe releases runtime code [sic] for
Linux" would be most approriate (by virtue of lwn's audience, and by the article's own further
use of the word "code").

Adobe releases runtime code to Linux developers (TIS)

Posted Apr 3, 2008 20:24 UTC (Thu) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link]

Considering that AIR provides basically the same sort of things that Mozilla Prism, XULrunner,
Google Gears and GWT, and other such free frameworks for "rich internet applications", I would
say AIR is useless to the free software community regardless of its portability.

Adobe releases runtime code to Linux developers (TIS)

Posted Apr 5, 2008 14:40 UTC (Sat) by alecs1 (subscriber, #46699) [Link]

It's only now that I realise Adobe is trying to remain a relevant software producer. Microsoft
is pushing .Net and its other technologies that get competitors out of the game and other
software platforms ofer more and more integration: Qt now has Phonon, SVG, XML, OpenGL widgets
and some SQL functionality, Mozilla foundation also offers a rich internet framework.

Adobe releases runtime code to Linux developers (TIS)

Posted Apr 3, 2008 23:46 UTC (Thu) by chromatic (guest, #26207) [Link]

I complained about the useless processor description under system requirements yesterday, and
someone at Adobe updated the requirements.  Sadly, it appears that our fears (32-bit x86 only)
are correct.

Adobe releases runtime code to Linux developers (TIS)

Posted Apr 4, 2008 2:23 UTC (Fri) by midg3t (guest, #30998) [Link]

I guess no-one has told them how popular amd64/x86-64 is these days.

This only affects some distros

Posted Apr 6, 2008 3:15 UTC (Sun) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link]

Red Hat and Fedora (and, AFAIK SUSE as well) support both 32-bit and 64-bit code on their 64-bit distributions, and provide nspluginwrapper to allow 32-bit plugins to run in a 64-bit Firefox.

It's harder to run 32-bit executables on x86-64 in a Debian-derived distro. On Fedora they just work.

Adobe releases runtime code to Linux developers (TIS)

Posted May 5, 2008 2:24 UTC (Mon) by jtiisto (guest, #51899) [Link]

Hey,

I know I'm quite late commenting on this one but here goes anyway.

Knowing Adobe this is definitely a binary-only release.

However, I would like to make two points:

1. Adobe is actually Open Source friendly
Before you send the flame response - yes, Adobe is mostly about closed source applications and
technologies. However, they have started to open up many of the technologies and protocols to
developers. They are doing this openly and without court orders or anything. They will not
open everything but I think that they way they operate is one of the most open ones within the
biggest software companies. Search for "Open Screen Adobe" or "Open Source Adobe" initiatives,
for example.

I know that Adobe isn't exactly to model for Open Source development - but that said, I do
think what they are doing they do genuinely. The new licenses for the source code or protocol
specifications do not have any strings attached... Oh, and now you are allowed to create a
Flash clone player using the Flash file specification as well.

2. Adobe's technology is not completely unique - but developer base is
When Adobe releases anything around Flash/PDF/other runtimes Open Source community (which I'm
part of too!) cries that all this is possible with all kinds of other technologies. But that
is NOT true. Adobe's technologies have the developer base (millions of Flash developers,
really), cross-platform support (Linux now as well, aye!), cross-browser support (!), and the
runtime is self-contained.

Ask ANY web development agency what are the other viable options for Rich Internet
Applications and they say that AJAX but that's too limited today. For the rest, it's fine as
soon as all the nice Firefox/Mozilla/Gecko technologies work in IE. Or as soon as Qt works in
a self-contained enviroment. Or any of these have a few million developers that can do web
design.

My apologies for a wall of text (maybe I should go to Slashdot :P ) - but I think what Adobe
is doing here is very good. Not perfect but very good. They would not need to do any of this
if you just look at the market share of Linux on the desktop (i.e. their designer community
would not get mad if they wouldn't support Linux - they've lived with it before).

Anyway, my 2 cents.

// Jack