Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Adobe Drops Linux Desktop Support For AIR

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    It almost sounds like they just don't consider desktop systems in general "hot" anymore, and would drop Windows and Mac OS if they thought they could get away with it.
    It's not that there's no money to be found in desktops; there is. The "problem" is that there's such stupendous growth (read: sales volume, consumer spending, new customers) in the smartphone market that everyone wants to be a part of it. Obviously, some director or VP at Adobe has their sights set on making money from the ballooning smartphone market. It's a great market to be in, because not only are existing customers spending more money (upgrading from "dumb" cellphones to smartphones), but you have brand new customers -- billions of them -- springing up worldwide, chipping in for their first cellphone purchase. And they want an Android or iOS or WP7 smartphone right off the bat.

    Adobe might be focusing a little too much on the mobile / smartphone market, to the point of sacrificing or re-allocating developer resources away from the desktops and targeting smartphones instead. They have a massive installed base on desktops and they service a large and steady market in the enterprise sector with Photoshop and the Flash content creation platform (and AIR). If they are going to remove support from the free applications that the content creators depend on to run their content, this will hurt the content creators, because they get fewer users / customers.

    If anyone should be upset about this move, it's not the casual user who doesn't pay anything for Adobe AIR. It should be the people who shelled out literally thousands of dollars to buy the expensive content creation software that lets you write AIR apps. Because a piece of their market share just evaporated. And maybe it's not that case that all AIR apps have the same market share as the overall AIR downloads: perhaps certain apps are extremely popular on non-Windows platforms. I wonder how many Pandora Plus users run Linux? I'd bet you that out of all the Pandora Plus (AIR app) users, it's significantly more than 5% running Linux, just because of the nature of the software.

    Hypothetically, if Phoronix had their own AIR app, you'd see some 50% or more of its users running Linux, BSD, or Mac. For a general purpose platform like AIR, the overall download statistics mean nothing about the user-base composition of each individual application running on the platform. So it's very possible that Adobe just screwed over some app developers who depend on a significant Linux user base (even if, indeed, their total user count is small). That would make me legitimately angry after spending so much money on their content creation tools.

    Comment


    • #47
      Oh no, this means I can no longer run...


      ...come to think of it, everything I use is either coded/scripted in C, C++, BASH, or Perl and there's probably some Python running somewhere on my system, too.

      Hell, I don't think I've encountered any Air apps on Windows, either.

      Comment


      • #48
        I think it's time to seriously look at getting Android applications running on popular Linux distros. If desktop Linux can run any Android app, we've pretty much solved the chicken-egg problem for the desktop Linux issue.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by phoronix View Post
          Phoronix: Adobe Drops Linux Desktop Support For AIR

          Adobe doesn't see "the year of the Linux desktop" happening, so they've decided to kill off the Linux desktop client for their AIR run-time. Adobe AIR 2.7 was recently released for creating rich Internet applications, but the Linux desktop client wasn't updated. This wasn't an oversight or delay in development, but Adobe is dropping the Linux desktop client so they can focus on mobile platforms such as Android and Apple iOS...

          http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTU3MA
          I did not know that they had a Linux Desktop Client for AIR. It occupies a niche market smaller than the Linux desktop market, so I am not surprised that Linux users were not interested in it. I know if I had known, I would not have installed it.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Remco View Post
            I think it's time to seriously look at getting Android applications running on popular Linux distros. If desktop Linux can run any Android app, we've pretty much solved the chicken-egg problem for the desktop Linux issue.
            That will be difficult. They are made using Google Specific APIs that are not designed for desktop operating systems and they are not designed for larger screen resolutions. Getting them to run would be cool, but there are technical issues that would likely require support from Google in the form of increasing the burden on developers already dealing with Android fragmentation.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Shining Arcanine View Post
              That will be difficult. They are made using Google Specific APIs that are not designed for desktop operating systems and they are not designed for larger screen resolutions. Getting them to run would be cool, but there are technical issues that would likely require support from Google in the form of increasing the burden on developers already dealing with Android fragmentation.
              Google is already working to make Android more resolution/size/input-independent for tablets and Google TV. Aren't standard Android GUIs specified in XML rather than drawn by app code anyway? I think the harder bit to support would be apps that use native ARM code (not impossible, just a lot of work). As for technical support from Google, I don't see why Google would need to support such a project any more than Microsoft supports Wine or ReactOS.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
                Google is already working to make Android more resolution/size/input-independent for tablets and Google TV. Aren't standard Android GUIs specified in XML rather than drawn by app code anyway? I think the harder bit to support would be apps that use native ARM code (not impossible, just a lot of work). As for technical support from Google, I don't see why Google would need to support such a project any more than Microsoft supports Wine or ReactOS.
                the last project i used that involved running code for one arch-type on top of another architecture was Darwine (PPC mac running wine with x86 emulation). it was slow and didn't work very well. development was difficult from what i remember talking with one of the contributors, and there were lots of limitations...

                i see running Android apps on a non-arm architecture pretty much the same. - whether Google would help out or not. it seems very unlikely to pan out. so, while not impossible - i think you under-estimate the work involved - and there is still the BIG problem of emulation - which never runs like native code...

                i don't see how we could get around that, unless every app developer also worked on x86/x86_64 versions as well.... or maybe if we had some magical compiler that could instantly convert Arm code into x86 code - automagically!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Adobe AIR on ubuntu partner repository

                  Adobe air is in Ubuntu partner repository. I install that from there some time ago. Did they have that statistics? Recently after a reinstall I don't install that because 1st I don't see much(if any) app which I needed using Air and 2nd It was depending libhal. I wanted a completely hal free desktop. May be it could be a cause that hal is deprecated from Modern linuxes and AIR is depending on HAL. Changing the code would take some effort and may be they don't think that is financially reasonable. Anyway loosing a option is always bad but we could hope soft developer would focus on standardized things like HTML5 and web rather then proprietary platform.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by ninez View Post
                    .... or maybe if we had some magical compiler that could instantly convert Arm code into x86 code - automagically!
                    http://buildroot.uclibc.org/

                    These guys seem to have a semi-working solution, but I've not dug into it very deeply yet. What do the real code wizards here think? At the very least they seem to have solved the translation of codebases between x86 and ARM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Shining Arcanine View Post
                      That will be difficult. They are made using Google Specific APIs that are not designed for desktop operating systems and they are not designed for larger screen resolutions. Getting them to run would be cool, but there are technical issues that would likely require support from Google in the form of increasing the burden on developers already dealing with Android fragmentation.
                      Android is already running on screens from 320x240 to 1024x600, and several devices support outputting 1080p signals. Android X86 runs on commodity hardware, and YouWave is essentially running Android on Windows (via some VirtualBox emulation running Android X86).

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Only flash player provided, with major bugs and ignoring x64 platform for HUGE time. Check.
                        Flash EDITOR not ported. Check.
                        ANY productive tool ported? No. Check.
                        Their AIR required outdated technology and was not updated. Check.

                        Adobe, its not linux fail, its YOUR fail. You just IGNORED linux letting it be no more than a display kiosk and put high hopes in it. But you "plan" to support android which IS linux in essence. You're just pervert rednecks yelling about absence of own brains.

                        Keep up nice support!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by ninez View Post
                          i don't see how we could get around that, unless every app developer also worked on x86/x86_64 versions as well.... or maybe if we had some magical compiler that could instantly convert Arm code into x86 code - automagically!
                          Wasn't that the original purpose of Java -- to deliver platform independence?

                          I'd actually like to see the reverse myself: x86 apps ported to ARM. ARM represents the best opportunity to break free from the Wintel monopoly, both on the desktop and the server. But the mass of already-existing x86 applications pretty much extinguishes that opportunity. The pessimist in me sees Intel developing their Atom processor to the point of crushing ARM-style chips, and then in turn, with Microsoft, crushing Android.

                          The lack of platform independence in software is what keeps the consumer stuck with the establishment.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by crazycheese View Post
                            Only flash player provided, with major bugs and ignoring x64 platform for HUGE time. Check.
                            I really wish the OCD "bit purity" crowd would explain why they need access to greater than 4G of RAM to watch video.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                              I really wish the OCD "bit purity" crowd would explain why they need access to greater than 4G of RAM to watch video.
                              , because everyone knows that Flash is only used for video.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Remco View Post
                                , because everyone knows that Flash is only used for video.
                                It's the only thing I use it for. In fact, my Flash plugin is so heavily wrapped in Apparmor that I doubt it can do much other than play video.

                                If I go to a website and I just see a big box saying NoScript has blocked a flash script then I say 'ugh, they built their entire website in Flash?' and go elsewhere.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X