Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
> Where is 64-bit Linux support for Flash Player?
I hadn't heard of the Tamarin project until now (I knew about Adobe
opening up parts of Flash, but I didn't know the project name).
At first glance, I was going to comment that it's nice to finally see
some concrete information about exactly (and technically) /why/ Adobe
have failed to deliver 64-bit Flash (on /any/ platform), but reading the
article one might be inclined to deduce that Mozilla is somehow to blame:
"the missing piece for 64-bit support is open source"
"This IS open source!"
Seems to suggest that Free Software community is somehow responsible for
the lack of 64-bit support in Flash.
What Mr. Ward failed to clarify is that Tamarin was /contributed/ by
Adobe when they (finally) opened up /part/ of Flash. This was not some
independent work at Mozilla, who then somehow failed to get it to work.
Consumer PCs have not been deprived of 64-bit flash support for the last
five years because of /Mozilla/.
Also, I just found this (quoted in full):
64bit Flash Player on Linux - Do It Yourself
In a recent blog post, James Ward from Adobe write about where the 64bit
support for flash player on linux is. The main point in the post is,
that Adobe, by open sourcing the VM of the flashplayer in the tamarin
project, has made it possible for us to do the 64bit support for them.
He points out, that getting 64bit support is not just a simple
recompile, due to the JIT compiler in Tamarin producing 32bit code. He
then finishes the post with:
"...This IS open source! You can help get 64-bit Linux support for
Is this what we had hopen for, when Adobe started opensourcing parts of
the flashplayer? Is this really Adobe saying, that if we want 64bit
support, we should go develop it ourselves? By the way, even if someone
did (and I sure am not qualified to do so myself), that person would not
be able to produce a 64bit linux player. Because that tamarin build
would have to be integrated with the not-yet-open parts of the player.
And even if we could, would we do it? Is this the attitude and angle on
opensource, that we want from Adobe?
Both James Ward and John Dowdell from Adobe have commented.
Personally, I'm with the blogger (Polesen). This half-cocked approach to
Free Software is garbage. Why would I, or anyone else, wish to
voluntarily contribute towards something that is mostly proprietary. If
Adobe want to bump their profits with closed software, let them /pay/
engineers to do it. They're not getting /my/ time, which would be much
better spent helping /actual/ Free Software projects, like Gnash (which
already has 64-bit builds, and has done for some time).
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 220.127.116.11-63.fc8
18:26:48 up 159 days, 15:02, 5 users, load average: 0.83, 0.42, 0.23