Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33

Thread: Adobe To Use TransGaming's SwiftShader; Remember Cedega?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,429

    Default Adobe To Use TransGaming's SwiftShader; Remember Cedega?

    Phoronix: Adobe To Use TransGaming's SwiftShader; Remember Cedega?

    TransGaming, the company behind the Cedega program for running Windows games on Linux (as an alternative to using Wine or CodeWeaver's CrossOver Games) and Cider as the Mac equivalent, has just announced that Adobe is now licensing its SwiftShader Technology for the Adobe Flash Player and Adobe AIR...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODcyNQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    69

    Default

    You know, I wish you'd stop shoving in that D3D State Tracker into every possible article. Unless Wine adopts it (unlikely in the near future) it's really not worth talking about.

    You even mentioned it in the ReactOS release article where it has barely any relevance, as ReactOS aren't planning on implementing Gallium3D for a long time, if at all.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    So Adobe controls or at least leads PDF and SWF format changes/enhancements. Each new format they make is immediately adopted by their own software, and thus all those who use their software. The art they make with those new formats can then only be viewable by those with programs able to render them. The 3rd party open source programs perpetually lag behind the quickly implemented new Adobe software. This endless treadmill will thus always push users to using Adobe's software, and only Adobe's software, much like .NET vs. Mono, and Silverlight vs. Moonlight. Sure, they claim open standards, but they are the ones behind the wheel.

    So, how do you deal with standards advancement situations gracefully so that you get real standards? First off, removing control from a software company with an interest in getting users on its own platform is step number one, if they are going to make changes just to break functionality to cause dependence on their own software. Secondly, you have the "main" implementation be open source, so that all software can adopt the new engine/codec/libraries. Nether of those things Adobe wants to do, because Adobe is interested in getting users onto their own software and nothing more.

    Until that changes, where are the open source equivalent SVG animation formats? Do any exist at all? Several formats support animations, and several support SVG, but I have yet to find one that supports both and thus could be a true open Flash replacement.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    69

    Default

    I think the moment that Gnash/Lightspark reach *near* feature parity with Adobe's Flash then browsers like Chrome and Firefox will implement it as a built-in plugin. When/if that happens Adobe could quickly find themselves no-longer in control of their own standard. That would be interesting to watch.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,138

    Default

    Adobe really needs to rethink their operating model....
    What do they gain by having users use their plugin vs an open source implementation of that plugin? The answer is NOTHING. In fact, it HURTS them since it means that those unable or unwilling to use their blob plugin simply won't have access to content made under their format.

    Now if, on the other hand, adobe were to drop their blob (or open source it 100%) and focus EXCLUSIVELY on developing the plugin as OPEN SOURCE, then you give off a warm and fuzzy feeling while potentially being able to REDUCE THE DEVELOPER WORKLOAD AND EXPENSE by gaining community assistance for a piece of software, which by itself, doesn't gain you any revenue to begin with!

    Their revenue comes 100% from selling their content CREATION software. Not the CONSUMPTION software, so make life easier on yourself and get some community help!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kazade View Post
    You know, I wish you'd stop shoving in that D3D State Tracker into every possible article. Unless Wine adopts it (unlikely in the near future) it's really not worth talking about.
    Please! Sometimes I have the feeling you desperatly try to link as many phoronix articles as possible in, no matter how relevant they are or not.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,162

    Default

    Flash sucks and I wish it would simply die.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    270

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by d2kx View Post
    Flash sucks and I wish it would simply die.
    Amen. If someone would buy Photoshop from them I wouldn't miss Adobe either.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Linuxhippy View Post
    Please! Sometimes I have the feeling you desperatly try to link as many phoronix articles as possible in, no matter how relevant they are or not.
    I half wonder if it's his form of SEO.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaestroMaus View Post
    Amen. If someone would buy Photoshop from them I wouldn't miss Adobe either.
    Maybe Oracle is up for another acquisition.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •