4 ms·

Open-sourcing would open so many doors. Apple could modify Flash until it worked on iOS properly, Google could modify until it worked on Android. If Adobe has

by sethg 16y ago

Open-sourcing would open so many doors. Apple could modify Flash until it worked on iOS properly, Google could modify until it worked on Android. If Adobe has spent years growing the Flash player code on the principle “make it work well on Windows, and then hack it as necessary to make it work tolerably on other platforms”, then even after it is open-sourced, developing a Linux- or iOS-compatible Flash player may be more than just a Simple Matter Of Programming. Remember the long gap between Netscape open-sourcing its browser and Mozilla becoming a usable platform.

commandar 16y ago
>Remember the long gap between Netscape open-sourcing its browser and Mozilla becoming a usable platform. Not sure this is the best comparison. Netscape open sourced Communicator 4.0, yes, but what we know as Mozilla was a total rewrite after they decided to scrap 5.0. EDIT: Unless your point is that the Flash codebase may be similarly bloated. :)
- sethg 16y ago
  Unless your point is that the Flash codebase may be similarly bloated. Yeah, that was kind of what I had in mind.
cookiecaper 16y ago
It's not necessarily that it'd be a simple matter or wouldn't require major architectural changes or whatever, it's just that it'd be much, much more _possible_. And I fully believe that there are many, many improvements that could be made that are just a simple matter of programming, even if running on mobile devices isn't among them. Not to mention a fully open-source Flash Player would make a great reference for aspiring free Flash players like Lightspark. If Adobe stays on the path it's on, HTML5 will continue to mature faster and faster as the desperation for a legit Flash replacement grows. Adobe could stay in the loop without having to reinvent the wheel and reacquire a distrusting and skeptical customer base if they would just open Flash while they're ahead; people would continue to buy the Flash IDE in droves, but when HTML5 takes over, that installed base is not likely to wait on Adobe and they'll move on to a competing IDE. I believe that HTML5 is still young enough that it could be basically deposed by a truly open Flash.

by sethg 16y ago

commandar 16y ago

>Remember the long gap between Netscape open-sourcing its browser and Mozilla becoming a usable platform. Not sure this is the best comparison. Netscape open sourced Communicator 4.0, yes, but what we know as Mozilla was a total rewrite after they decided to scrap 5.0. EDIT: Unless your point is that the Flash codebase may be similarly bloated. :)

sethg 16y ago
Unless your point is that the Flash codebase may be similarly bloated. Yeah, that was kind of what I had in mind.

cookiecaper 16y ago

It's not necessarily that it'd be a simple matter or wouldn't require major architectural changes or whatever, it's just that it'd be much, much more _possible_. And I fully believe that there are many, many improvements that could be made that are just a simple matter of programming, even if running on mobile devices isn't among them. Not to mention a fully open-source Flash Player would make a great reference for aspiring free Flash players like Lightspark. If Adobe stays on the path it's on, HTML5 will continue to mature faster and faster as the desperation for a legit Flash replacement grows. Adobe could stay in the loop without having to reinvent the wheel and reacquire a distrusting and skeptical customer base if they would just open Flash while they're ahead; people would continue to buy the Flash IDE in droves, but when HTML5 takes over, that installed base is not likely to wait on Adobe and they'll move on to a competing IDE. I believe that HTML5 is still young enough that it could be basically deposed by a truly open Flash.