4 ms·

What are we to do about all the useful tools, pages and games that were either written in or utilized Flash? I realize some of this stuff will be rewritten in H

What are we to do about all the useful tools, pages and games that were either written in or utilized Flash? I realize some of this stuff will be rewritten in HTML5, but what about the things that are not? How will we preserve all those classic flash games that we wasted our time playing in the early 2000s?

shadowgovt 6y ago
shrug Never build a towering edifice on a closed-source, closed-protocol, single-company-owned engine and infrastructure ever again, because there is no solution to this problem?
- DannyB2 6y ago
  Absolutely. And that was a bit obvious in the late 80's. Somewhat obvious in the 90's. Very obvious in the early 2000's.
- Wowfunhappy 6y ago
  You're right, we should all write software exclusively for Linux, and then only on RISC-V CPUs! :)
  - acdha 6y ago
    A better way of looking at this is from the perspective of where they make money: targeting Windows makes sense because it's core to Microsoft's business, their reputation is heavily linked to it via all of those enterprise contracts, and their revenue scales directly with the number of people using Windows. In contrast, Flash was an Adobe acquisition which they never had a clear vision for and the model of selling tools but giving away the runtime for free meant that your app being popular didn't make more money for them. Anything security-exposed like this needs substantial amounts of ongoing maintenance funding but from Adobe's perspective that was mostly overhead or something Google would subsidize for them.
  - RandomGuyDTB 6y ago
    This but unironically. I can get C code from the 70s to compile in GCC but I can't get Windows programs released twenty or so years ago to run in Win10. Open software will always be easier to support and always be more stable than proprietary software, because one invites a free community of maintainers and the other one tells them that they aren't welcome. In the short-term, writing for proprietary systems is fine, but if you want your application to be use-able after you die you should probably open-source your stuff and make it compatible with free platforms.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
    I mean, you joke, but that would make you immune to this kind of problem.
    - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
      Right, and that's why I phrased it as I did. I agree with the great grandparent, kind of—if you have the ability to use 100% open technologies, you absolutely should, and power to you! But at the same time, proprietary technologies rules much of our world, back then, now, and likely in the future.
      - shadowgovt 6y ago
        The difference between SWF and code written for RISC archtiectures is options. The "single-company-owned" part is what killed SWF. If there had been multiple SWF engines out there, to a common interpreter protocol, SWF content might have had a better chance of outliving the death of Adobe Flash.
        yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
        That's a fair point. I suppose it's not even guaranteed with FOSS, but open source makes it much easier to not have one company totally control the software/ecosystem, if nothing else because it keeps forking as an option.
- jakogut 6y ago
  Not necessarily, WebAssembly is a potential viable host for implementing/emulating Flash. See here: https://medium.com/leaningtech/preserving-flash-content-with-webassembly-done-right-eb6838b7e36f https://medium.com/leaningtech/preserving-flash-content-with...
- buboard 6y ago
  millions of app stores developers cover their ears
sosborn 6y ago
> How will we preserve all those classic flash games that we wasted our time playing in the early 2000s? I assume the same way we preserve long dead consoles. Emulation. It isn't difficult to set up a VM with older copies of windows.
CM30 6y ago
Well, for the games and animations this exists: https://bluemaxima.org/flashpoint/ https://bluemaxima.org/flashpoint/ Got mentioned on this site a few times too.
SamuelAdams 6y ago
Why should they be preserved? Why should it stick around forever? The "useful tools" have been replaced with better tools available today. It's the same reason why most people don't use a rock and chisel to build a house - better tools exist and older tools have been abandoned or mentioned in history books. Plenty of games, musical bands, and artwork over the last century have been lost to time and forgotten. There's plenty of Jazz music in the 1930's and 40's that was never recorded to paper or vinyl. And that's OK. People moved on to other forms of art.
- arexxbifs 6y ago
  If you bought a board game in the 1930:s, chances are you can still play it if you've been careful when handling it. If you bought a cast iron skillet in the 1940:s, chances are you can still cook with it if you've treated it right. If your favorite game is a Flash game bought in 2010, you will not be able to play it anymore. Is it because software is not as tangible that we accept just how fleeting its permanence is?
  - dehrmann 6y ago
    > If you bought a board game in the 1930:s, chances are you can still play it if you've been careful when handling it. You can play a game of Monopoly, but it's not going to make you any friends.
    - arexxbifs 6y ago
      I'd sell a 1930s Monopoly, but I'd keep a 1930s Chess set.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  This isn't about losing the copies of the art itself. Imagine if all chisels in the world stopped working. That would not be okay. But I think you can use the standalone flash player?
- mahoho 6y ago
  I think most people would agree that it's worthwhile (for various reasons) to preserve art if there are reasonable means to do so. Obviously there is a lot of artwork we've managed to preserve for centuries or millennia. There's no reason we need to wistfully resign ourselves to "the way of the world" here.

shadowgovt 6y ago

shrug Never build a towering edifice on a closed-source, closed-protocol, single-company-owned engine and infrastructure ever again, because there is no solution to this problem?

DannyB2 6y ago
Absolutely. And that was a bit obvious in the late 80's. Somewhat obvious in the 90's. Very obvious in the early 2000's.
Wowfunhappy 6y ago
You're right, we should all write software exclusively for Linux, and then only on RISC-V CPUs! :)
- acdha 6y ago
  A better way of looking at this is from the perspective of where they make money: targeting Windows makes sense because it's core to Microsoft's business, their reputation is heavily linked to it via all of those enterprise contracts, and their revenue scales directly with the number of people using Windows. In contrast, Flash was an Adobe acquisition which they never had a clear vision for and the model of selling tools but giving away the runtime for free meant that your app being popular didn't make more money for them. Anything security-exposed like this needs substantial amounts of ongoing maintenance funding but from Adobe's perspective that was mostly overhead or something Google would subsidize for them.
- RandomGuyDTB 6y ago
  This but unironically. I can get C code from the 70s to compile in GCC but I can't get Windows programs released twenty or so years ago to run in Win10. Open software will always be easier to support and always be more stable than proprietary software, because one invites a free community of maintainers and the other one tells them that they aren't welcome. In the short-term, writing for proprietary systems is fine, but if you want your application to be use-able after you die you should probably open-source your stuff and make it compatible with free platforms.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
  I mean, you joke, but that would make you immune to this kind of problem.
  - Wowfunhappy 6y ago
    Right, and that's why I phrased it as I did. I agree with the great grandparent, kind of—if you have the ability to use 100% open technologies, you absolutely should, and power to you! But at the same time, proprietary technologies rules much of our world, back then, now, and likely in the future.
    - shadowgovt 6y ago
      The difference between SWF and code written for RISC archtiectures is options. The "single-company-owned" part is what killed SWF. If there had been multiple SWF engines out there, to a common interpreter protocol, SWF content might have had a better chance of outliving the death of Adobe Flash.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
        That's a fair point. I suppose it's not even guaranteed with FOSS, but open source makes it much easier to not have one company totally control the software/ecosystem, if nothing else because it keeps forking as an option.
jakogut 6y ago
Not necessarily, WebAssembly is a potential viable host for implementing/emulating Flash. See here: https://medium.com/leaningtech/preserving-flash-content-with-webassembly-done-right-eb6838b7e36f https://medium.com/leaningtech/preserving-flash-content-with...
buboard 6y ago
millions of app stores developers cover their ears

sosborn 6y ago

> How will we preserve all those classic flash games that we wasted our time playing in the early 2000s? I assume the same way we preserve long dead consoles. Emulation. It isn't difficult to set up a VM with older copies of windows.

CM30 6y ago

Well, for the games and animations this exists: https://bluemaxima.org/flashpoint/ https://bluemaxima.org/flashpoint/ Got mentioned on this site a few times too.

SamuelAdams 6y ago

Why should they be preserved? Why should it stick around forever? The "useful tools" have been replaced with better tools available today. It's the same reason why most people don't use a rock and chisel to build a house - better tools exist and older tools have been abandoned or mentioned in history books. Plenty of games, musical bands, and artwork over the last century have been lost to time and forgotten. There's plenty of Jazz music in the 1930's and 40's that was never recorded to paper or vinyl. And that's OK. People moved on to other forms of art.

arexxbifs 6y ago
If you bought a board game in the 1930:s, chances are you can still play it if you've been careful when handling it. If you bought a cast iron skillet in the 1940:s, chances are you can still cook with it if you've treated it right. If your favorite game is a Flash game bought in 2010, you will not be able to play it anymore. Is it because software is not as tangible that we accept just how fleeting its permanence is?
- dehrmann 6y ago
  > If you bought a board game in the 1930:s, chances are you can still play it if you've been careful when handling it. You can play a game of Monopoly, but it's not going to make you any friends.
  - arexxbifs 6y ago
    I'd sell a 1930s Monopoly, but I'd keep a 1930s Chess set.
Dylan16807 6y ago
This isn't about losing the copies of the art itself. Imagine if all chisels in the world stopped working. That would not be okay. But I think you can use the standalone flash player?
mahoho 6y ago
I think most people would agree that it's worthwhile (for various reasons) to preserve art if there are reasonable means to do so. Obviously there is a lot of artwork we've managed to preserve for centuries or millennia. There's no reason we need to wistfully resign ourselves to "the way of the world" here.