Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39

Thread: Adobe Flash Player 10.3 Linux Beta Released

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,124

    Default

    Both Flash 10.3 and 11.0 pre-releases not only have a browser-native control panel now, but also add KDE4-Systemsettings integration.

    That doesn't change the fact that diegocg is absolutely right.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    526

    Default

    To be fair, supposedly crystalhd support is also in there, in addition to vdpau.

    But yeah, adobe really doesn't seem to get the concept of releasing both 32 and 64 bits flash plugin. Hint: develop on both arches, keep it always building, and do not accept new features that are not ready for both...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    343

    Default

    i dont care about 32.. 32 should die 5 years ago...

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by [Knuckles] View Post
    But yeah, adobe really doesn't seem to get the concept of releasing both 32 and 64 bits flash plugin. Hint: develop on both arches, keep it always building, and do not accept new features that are not ready for both...
    It's a beta, not a final version. Adobe's priorities are getting new features in the wild and getting them tested, not to provide cross platform support for every bleeding edge beta that comes out.

    I'd be more critical if it was a final release.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    It's a beta, not a final version. Adobe's priorities are getting new features in the wild and getting them tested,
    That should include beta testing x86-64 build as well if they are planning a final version of it as what may work in 32-bit does not always work in 64-bit. Beta testing should always be done on the platforms you plan to support to look for platform specific gotchas.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    What about....

    Quote Originally Posted by d2kx View Post
    Before anyone asks: no 64-bit support. Business as usual for Adobe.
    Oh... ok. What about not crashing every 10 seconds?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NomadDemon View Post
    i dont care about 32.. 32 should die 5 years ago...
    And the reason it still hasn't would be Adobe Flash and Intel Atom.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    That should include beta testing x86-64 build as well if they are planning a final version of it as what may work in 32-bit does not always work in 64-bit. Beta testing should always be done on the platforms you plan to support to look for platform specific gotchas.
    I agree. But if the same dev (group) is doing the feature and finishes 32 bit first, why not push it out and get a head start on testing while they work on the 64 bit version? I think it's pretty apparent that they do not have multiple dev teams and a huge pool of resources dedicated to the Linux port, and I wouldn't be surprised if the same team is doing both versions.

    I know, I'm being a devil's advocate here, but until it's the official release I'm not going to fault for the disparity yet.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Torrington, Ct. USA
    Posts
    166

    Default

    Supposedly 64-bit is coming with Flash 11 across all OSes (Linux, OSX, Windows) according to Adobe. Again supposedly.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by locovaca View Post
    I agree. But if the same dev (group) is doing the feature and finishes 32 bit first, why not push it out and get a head start on testing while they work on the 64 bit version? I think it's pretty apparent that they do not have multiple dev teams and a huge pool of resources dedicated to the Linux port, and I wouldn't be surprised if the same team is doing both versions.

    I know, I'm being a devil's advocate here, but until it's the official release I'm not going to fault for the disparity yet.
    It is testing methods like that however that leads to being released for only one arch. They get to a point where "Hey the 32-bit version is good enough to release, let's release it and we will get to 64-bit with the next point release.". The unfortunate part is they rarely, if ever, get around to it. The other issue is that it gets to a point where they may have to start "undoing" code they just developed because it works in 32-bit but not in 64-bit leading to wasted development time and resources.

    Just picture what the kernel would look like for example if they did all the 32-bit code first and then once that was completed started the 64-bit code.

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
  •