3 ms·

Again, you're talking about one side of things here. I'm sure I don't disagree with you on most if not all of the technical issues. You can't just look at this

Again, you're talking about one side of things here. I'm sure I don't disagree with you on most if not all of the technical issues. You can't just look at this from that angle alone though, you have to also appreciate what it enabled for people who weren't overly technical and had zero usable tools with which to build things. You also have to appreciate that things changed a bit after Adobe bought Macromedia. As far as them being int it "for the money"... whatever, I have no problem with that. If there were better, more open tools available no one would have used Flash. There weren't, and I don't expect companies to always be altruistic in their endeavors.

bigbugbag 9y ago
I disagree with you and reality tends to confirm that having open tools available does not prevent closed tools usage. And there are a few reasons: as you mentioned non technical people may not care about open/closed or at least do not have this high on their priorities, then open tools often are worse than closed equivalent. I don't mind companies being in it for making a profit, what I mind is the building of a closed web vs an open web. The closed version is doomed to fail and takes away power from the people while the open one is empowering people and gives us a chance at democracy and freedom. Sadly this is a fight that we lost and I tend to agree with Peter Sunde, now it is a matter of damage control.