| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Linux now an equal Flash player (Linux-Watch)Linux now an equal Flash player (Linux-Watch)Posted Oct 17, 2008 9:31 UTC (Fri) by Seegras (subscriber, #20463)Parent article: Linux now an equal Flash player (Linux-Watch)
There is a nice article from a flash-developer making sorry excuses why flash won't run on 64bit.
http://www.kaourantin.net/2005/08/porting-flash-player-to...
Very funny to read; the gist of it is "sorry, but we're incompetent".
(Log in to post comments)
Incompetent? How? Posted Oct 17, 2008 9:51 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] All fast Javascript engines are limited to few CPU architectures (and ActiveScript is Javascript look-alike). AS3 supports just IA-32, V8 supports IA-32 and ARM while TraceMonkey supports IA-32, x86-64 and ARM. Why not write them in CPU-agnostic way? Speed. All dynamic compilers are limited in this way. Sun spent few years developing x86-64 JIT for Java and it's still not as robust as IA-32 one. And this is were x86-64 is NEEDED (Java is big in Enterprise and so huge memory is not just "good to have" feature). With Flash x86-64 is NOT NEEDED. At all. You just don't write Enterprise systems in Flash. Why you are so eager to say "incompetence" where outcome can be readily explained by common sense? I'm pretty sure there are small group of developers who are porting AS3 to x86-64, but since priority of this project is close to zero... And it's easy to understand why: 64bit flash will be NEEDED 10-15 years down the road - when systems will be big enough and fash enough to process 2GB of stuff in a second... Long time, no need to rush...
Linux now an equal Flash player (Linux-Watch) Posted Oct 20, 2008 10:52 UTC (Mon) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]
Which parts of the blog entry scream "we are incompetant"? To me, it sounds like a series of very reasonable criticisms of the Linux toolchain, and the problems faced by people who want to port their multimedia code to Linux.
Linux now an equal Flash player (Linux-Watch) Posted Oct 22, 2008 14:08 UTC (Wed) by pr1268 (subscriber, #24648) [Link] I think that the "we are incompetent" idea of that blog entry is a (backhanded) criticism of the Linux toolchain. Porting proprietary apps to Linux does require a high level of competence; a lot of the MS Windows-only application support comes from vendors who are simply too lazy to figure out Linux APIs. However, the diverse API model actually helps Linux--either the vendors will have to work extra-hard to get their apps working reliably in Linux, or they may (and sometimes do) get lazy and just release the specs to the Open Source community. I have serious issues with Flash, er, the rampant overuse of Flash on Web sites, but I do admire Adobe for at least acknowledging that Linux exists and is used. That's a lot more that what most software vendors do.
|
|
||||||||||||