ARGHHH!
Sorry, had to do that ;).
Flash is a binary, proprietary, closed (mostly), non-free format with
the only player that generally works being non-free software. About
half the Linux world cannot (easily) install Flash (including me).
There are no guarantees that Flash players will be easily available in
the future. Flash is not accessible to persons with disabilities (the
open alternative, SVG, is). Flash is susceptible to several very nasty
exploits, and there's no effective way to filter those out without
removing all Flash (SVG is readable by scanners, so exploits could be
filtered without eliminating all content, and the code is viewable, so
it's hard to hide what's being done). If you want "pretty" and
interactive sites, you'll have to deal with Flash for now, but let the
site owners know that you would much prefer SVG content, and cheer on
the Mozilla developers working to bring SVG to Firefox 1.1.
I agree that Quicktime, Real, and WMV formats are problems. But the
better solution is to demand open formats (like OGG containers and
Vorbis sound with Theora video), not ask for a different proprietary format.
The flash file extension is .SWF for "ShockWave Flash", Flash was
originally a faster, lighter, simpler ShockWave format that ended up
replacing it's "parent" (as Don states below).
There are several other options for multimedia on Linux besides MPlayer,
they just don't handle proprietary formats. Again, the better solution
is to let the website operators know that they are alienating just over
30% of the global population by using these formats, and they should
look into open formats as a means to grow their base market. Pointing
out that the open formats work better on the new Firefox browser they
keep hearing about won't hurt either.
Just my little rant about multimedia on the net.
==Joseph++
Don Calfa wrote:
> Flash is authored with Macromedia Flash
> Shockwave is authored with Macromedia Director.
> Director and Authorware is authored with Macromedia Director and
> Authorware.
>
> Director hasn't had a new player in about 4-5 years.
> Most of what makes Shockwave different from Flash has been
> incorporated into the more recent Flash releases since the flash
> player is so light weight.
> Flash 7 is more like Shockwave than Flash 5.
>
> The older shockwave files aren't backwards compatible with the newer
> flash players unless the original content provider does an upgrade
> which is highly unlikely
>
> I wish:
>
> Apple would release a 'certified' Quicktime player/plugin for Linux
> Flash become the de-facto standard for streaming media.
>
> Although _we_ can get mplayer to work, all it is is really a hack and
> it'll never make it mainstream because of licensing.
> Flash and Real are the only alternatives for mainstream multimedia for
> Linux at the moment and Flash is pretty consistent.
>
> Glitch wrote:
>
>> Well just for my two cents when I click on the file using Firefox 1.0
>> under win2k it says that it is a shockwave flash Object and wants to
>> use a shockwave player to access it... But I don't know if that makes
>> it a shockwave file or not.
>>
>> On 4/19/05, Bryan.ONeal@asu.edu <Bryan.ONeal@asu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Well, at least I was not the only one who was thinking shockwave
>>> when I saw
>>> .swf Though it makes me wounder more why the did not work on my
>>> FC2 box but
>>> some flash sites did...
>>>
>>> Sigh, it is times like this I am glad to say, what do I know I'm
>>> just an
>>> accountant ;)
>>>
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)