Why Won't Macromedia Release 64-bit Flash? 104
Flashless Dancer asks: "Despite numerous online campaigns, blogs and forum postings, Macromedia has failed to release a 64 bit version of it's popular Flash Player for 64 bit architectures. Growing outcry in the Linux community recently spawned the online petition at PetitionOnline, but this seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
A recent posting to Macromedia's technotes, back in September, offers this explanation and advice to users and developers who are growing increasingly concerned that users with 64 bit architectures are unable to view online content created with Flash. It explains that users must downgrade to 32 bit browsers and use the 32 bit plugin. This simply isn't a good option for most users, in fact many Linux distributions, including FC2/3/4 install 64-bit browsers with their 64-bit distributions. This seems to breathe new life into the old GplFlash Project which is now back, after some time on the back burner. Future development of GplFlash2 promises support for Flash 6/7 but remains in development for now. Open speculation in chatrooms and web forums alleges all sorts of conspiracy theories but, what I'd like to know is: What's the real difficulty here for Macromedia?"
Developer Conference (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Developer Conference (Score:2)
No problem at all (Score:2, Insightful)
I've found browsing to be much more injoyable!
Flash: mostly crap.
Re:No problem at all (Score:1)
Please, Macromedia, put off porting to 64-bit as long as possible.
Re:No problem at all (Score:5, Insightful)
Install the flashblock extension, and you can keep from seeing any flash unless you actually want to.
That's why.
Re:No problem at all (Score:1)
Re:No problem at all (Score:1)
Re:No problem at all (Score:2)
Probably this (Score:1)
I don't have the numbers immediately at hand, but I would think that the numbers don't support it. They don't have enough users that want 64-bit support to offset the man-hour costs of porting to 64-bit.
It's really not that complicated. The pencil pushers probably killed it straight from the beginning.
Re:Probably this (Score:3, Interesting)
My bet is it would take little more then a recompile. If anything, a new branch of support is the real issue.
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
You're presuming that they did a good job of writing portable code. Like OpenOffice.org.
Oh, wait. Never mind...
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
I know I have to run a prebuilt 32 bit binary on my AMD64 box (with flashblock), but there still regularly are sites that don't work. It might be a Flash vs Macromedia player issue though... Or broken IE JavaScript, or a number of things...
But there still are lots of sites that are flash only, including some corporate ones the could be marginally useful (I tried McDonalds France recently because of a story posted here, no luck).
All in all though, I reck
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
I have had my iBook G4 for a couple months but I'm not familiar enough with the system enough with the system yet to be sure about this. Otherwise, this would mean that a 64 bit binary Flash renderer already exists.
So the 64 porting issues are a red herring.
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
The G4 is a 32-bit CPU.
Anyway, Tiger has 64-bit hooks, but is a 32-bit OS (read: 32-bit kernel with a little bit of 64-bit duct tape).
That also means that 99% of the userland is 32-bit. 32-bit browser + 32-bit Flash works fine. 64-bit browser + 32-bit Flash doesn't. THAT is the point of this thread. You can run a 32-bit browser on a 64-bit Linux, but people would rather run the 64-bit browser that takes advantage of their HW.
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
Ah well, I have trouble enough following the changes on the x86 side, especially since they change the names of the chips all the time, I guess I'm hopeless when it comes to the other makers...
Anyway I know yo
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
Re:Probably this (Score:2)
GPLFlash appears to be on hiatus (again) (Score:2, Redundant)
New code is not necessary, but I for one wouldn't mind hearing something---anything---recent.
a correction (Score:3, Informative)
And just when I think that I've done enough fact-checking...
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Flash Worthwhile? (Score:2)
Re:Flash Worthwhile? (Score:2)
Secondary advantage was that quiz content was non-obvious in the page source, the way it would be with html. Ajax and other server side things are (or were) n
Re:Flash Worthwhile? (Score:2)
I'm beginning to see sites using a Flash application to do streaming media, instead of an embedded player. Seems to work much better than the usual media players from Microsoft, Apple, and Real.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Flash Worthwhile? (Score:2)
In a perfect world, all online video would use some open standard that would easily be playable by the user's favorite software — or the software that came with the system. In the real world, online video uses proprietary formats
A better way to look at it (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:A better way to look at it (Score:2, Informative)
Re:A better way to look at it (Score:1)
I initially wrote the letter in AbiWord but since made changes with vim after dropping it onto my server; that must have been one of the words I freehanded off the top of my head.
Alternative architecture or leading edge hardware? (Score:2)
It's not just about Linux and alternative OS/architecture combinations, it's about running on leading-edge (or perhaps bleeding-edge) hardware, regardless of OS.
At least, I don't recall seeing that a 64-bit version of Flash was available for Windows. Certainly TFA only refers to "64-bit operating systems." But if
Re:Alternative architecture or leading edge hardwa (Score:3, Informative)
It's not all that hard to buy an AMD64 machine with Windows XP 32-bit Edition. This of course renders most 64-bit goodness moot. I have yet to see a machine in any of the major high street and online shops (read: where most people still get their PC's from) that ships with XP x64, I guess because it's only available in it's 'Professional' flavour - not the shockingly different 'Home' flavour.
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition [microsoft.com].
Don't expect the
Re:Alternative architecture or leading edge hardwa (Score:2)
As for the Pentium 4's 64-bit capability, a quick Google search turned up a couple of sources and dates. The first Pentium 4 processors with EM64T support -- Intel's version of AMD64 (because there's no way they'd actually use a name with AMD in it!) -- came out in March, and apparently the "majority" of the Pentium 4 line has been 64-bit since June. Maybe PR is keeping quiet because the average user will be using XP Home?
January: The Pentium 4 a [quepublishing.com]
Simple economics (Score:3, Insightful)
Flash player users on 64-bit platforms are a vanishingly small percentage of Flash player users.
If Flash is not 64-bit clean, then it will probably be reasonably expensive for Macromedia to clean it up.
What can Macromedia expect for a return on this investment? Well, zero times 0.005 is still zero.
Re:Simple economics (Score:2)
Good arguments, but it falls right there. 64 bit use isn't vanishing at all. With Dell and other manufactures pushing their 64 bit systems for workstations more and more people have 64 bit systems. Hell the newest of our office computers are 64 bit though they are all still running 32 bit operating system. That doesn't mean the demand to switch isn't there, just that we can wait.
Re:Vanishingly (Score:2)
Re:Vanishingly (Score:1)
To answer your question, it doesn't have to. "So as to disappear" can be parsed as "really really really small, so small you won't even notice it."
Back to the original argument, I'd be shocked if 64-bit linux users were 1% of the market. Probably closer to 1/100 of 1%. maybe as much as 1/10 of 1%.
Re:Vanishingly (Score:2)
Re:Simple economics (Score:1, Troll)
2. It takes more than a 64-bit CPU to make a 64-bit platform.
Re:Simple economics (Score:1)
vanishingly
adv : so as to disappear or approach zero
vanishing vanishing
adj : quickly going away and passing out of sight
I'm sorry, did you have a point?
Re:Simple economics (Score:1)
Re:Simple economics (Score:2)
Re:Simple economics (Score:1, Troll)
Yes, and you just clarified it nicely. Thanks.
Re:Simple economics (Score:1)
You offer no evidence to support this but you still proclaim it to be factual. The point the poster was making is that what you're saying is untrue as the number of 64-bit systems is increasing.
The larger point to be made is that while Macromedia doesn't make money from the Flash
Re:Simple economics (Score:2)
Yes, I think they should.
Re:Simple economics (Score:2)
You're still thinking vanishing, not vanishingly. A vanishing small amount is a group that is small and decreasing. I'm not stupid, I know that 64-bit is a growing percentage ov the market.
A vanishingly small percentage is a percentage that is so low as to be negligible. Really, who out there has gone 64-bit? Well, people who use x86-64 CPUs and are running 64-bit linux, which is probably a
Re:Simple economics (Score:1)
I didn't post anything of the sort; I got swept up in reading you try to bulldoze your way over sense and decided to chime in the one time I have thus far.
Second,
vanishingly
adv : so as to disappear or approach zero
If you're using the damned word "vanishingly" then that's what you're saying: that the number of 64-bit platfor
Re:Simple economics (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Simple economics (Score:1)
i can't imagine how their coprorate people justify not doing so. though i can imagine the programmers would be ready to make it happen with precious little effort.
Side request (Score:2)
I cannot find any windows NLE video editing apps 'designed' and working well under 64-bit.. some will sorta work..
Amazingly enough, video editing is one of the 'major fields' touted at microsoft, but it seems no app uses 64 bit.
Re:Side request (Score:2)
VirtualDub is a video capture/processing utility for 32-bit Windows platforms
(that I know does have a 64 bit port)
BUT I WANT TO EDIT VIDEO, thanks.....
Re:Side request (Score:1)
They can lock competing technologies out (Score:3, Interesting)
Somewhere along the line, they seem to have lost the plot to that particular story, else a Linux port of Shockwave would have been here two years ago.
Locking competitors out is important because it sells Macromedia's expensive (AUD$760+GST for Dreamweaver 2004) developm
Re:Simple economics (Score:3, Insightful)
And they have a 32-bit version for Solaris on Intel.
I'm positive there are more Linux 64-bit users than 32-bit Intel Solaris users. Seriously. So, I don't get it.
Probably the usual difficulty (Score:5, Interesting)
This is the same difficulty that's kept Mozilla bug 156493, "Browser should tolerate plug-in (plugin) malfunctions, like with a separate (own) process", unfixed for the past three years. I'm reminded of this in particular, because starting plugins as separate processes (which was requested to prevent buggy plugins from crashing the entire Firefox/Mozilla process) would simultaneously have made it much easier for 64-bit browsers to support 32-bit plugins.
So it is true that Macromedia is lagging behind the leading edge of technology... but do you have to sound so self-righteous about it? If our browsers used interprocess communication instead of cooperative multitasking (a concept far more outdated than 32 bit binaries) then this wouldn't be a practical problem.
Re:Probably the usual difficulty (Score:2)
Re:Probably the usual difficulty (Score:2)
I agree with what I think roystgnr was trying to say, but...
"You keep usinging that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." The conditions under which a context switch may be initiated is an orthogonal issue to the number of OS-level processes/tasks used to achieve a goal.
In pretty much any OS apart from MS D
I'm conflating two problems (Score:2)
I do understand that the kernel can context switch between processes and kernel-level threads without any application support for that capability, but tha
Considering their reticence to release Shockwave (Score:2)
(For the clueless
The real difficulty for Macromedia... (Score:4, Insightful)
That oughtta force them to move the core of the player to opensource so people would do most of the porting jobs for new OSes, while they just build on that code to make it a 'professional' version for selling.
Flash doesn't work on 64b procs!? (Score:5, Funny)
-Rick
wasn't clear (Score:1)
Re:wasn't clear (Score:2)
On the other hand, many people commenting here seem to be treating it as a Linux issue. Maybe it's because 64-bit Windows ships with both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of IE, and Firefox and Opera only seem to be providing 32-bit binaries so far. The only situation in which you're likely to
Re:wasn't clear (Score:2)
Re:wasn't clear (Score:2)
Re:wasn't clear (Score:2, Informative)
"Downgrade" to 32 bit browsers?! (Score:2, Insightful)
Anyways, the question is moot as there are few HOME desktop based 64bit only solutions out there, really. None actually. All have a 32bit support mode. Why cater to a small market of 64 bit only powerhouse enterprise servers, people using these systems are not interested in browsing websites, just serving them to millions.
If 64bit web servers were unab
Re:"Downgrade" to 32 bit browsers?! (Score:1)
They're hiring (Score:2)
What bothers me more is that there is no director player for Linux. While it isn't used often, it is quite annoying when someone links me a new director game I can't play.
Re:They're hiring (Score:5, Informative)
and it pretty much explains that there won't be a 64 bits version as long as they don't find a guru that will rewrite this beast. Not portable.
Flash 64 for Solaris? (Score:2)
market demand? (Score:2)
But 32 bit flash works on my 64 bit box (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Just go to getfirefox.org, run the automatic installation of that
2) Download the official macromedia flash tarball
3) Untar it and follow the manual install instructions in
4) Restart firefox.
Is tihs really that hard? Is there some mystical advantage to running 64 bit flash on my 64 opteron bit box when the 32 bit version works just fine?
Re:But 32 bit flash works on my 64 bit box (Score:4, Informative)
*ahem* (Score:2)
Yeah, when I try to visit homestar runner on my 64-bit PowerMac G5, I... oh, wait--it works.
Re:*ahem* (Score:2, Informative)
That's probably because OSX is still almost entirely 32bit.
I'm sure that once Apple catch up you'll experience the same issue.
Re:*ahem* (Score:1)
Do online petitions... (Score:1)
Difficulty? No... (Score:2, Insightful)
I know this is hard to understand.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Konqueror works 64bit with 32bit plugin (Score:1)
I'm buying an Opteron now then! (Score:2, Funny)
Makes FlashBlock a little redundant now though....
Konqueror (Score:2)
Re:The problem is... (Score:2)
Re:The problem is... (Score:1)
ITYM unpaid beta tester. HTH.