Recently there have been a few mentions of an open source Flash player under development. There may be more than one group working on such a thing, but here’s one:
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/
I’m curious what the Flash developer community thinks about this. My off-the-cuff opinion is that it could wind up being a pain in the butt for Flash / Flex developers.
Now, before I have the Open Source crowd picketing outside my apartment, know that I am a huge proponent of Open Source Flash. I feel pretty confident in saying that I’ve probably given away more free ActionScript code than anyone else out there. I have a project on OSFlash.org, and Aral is my friend, so back off!
I don’t have a problem with an open source Flash player, but I do have an issue with having a different Flash player out there on the net. One of the big benefits about writing Flash or Flex applications is that you don’t have to worry too much about the end user’s configuration. There are amazingly few differences between the Mac and Windows players (other than performance), and between the Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox plugin vs. the ActiveX control. Not saying that there are no differences, but compared to the hoops you have to jump through to get a simple JavaScript program running on all those browsers and platforms, we are in a pretty sweet position.
The biggest problem we, as Flash developers, have to worry about is which version number of the Flash player the end user has installed. Flash 9? 8? 7? A lot of projects are still forced to stick to Flash 6 compatibility. There was even a time when you had to worry about whether the user had version 6.0.65.0 or whatever that magical release was.
The thing I see about a new and different Flash player is that it is somehow going to be different. I’m sure people are going to pop up and say, “No, it’s going to be completely compatible with the Adobe Flash player. It’s going to run all of your existing Flash content without a hitch. Completely compatible….only better.”
It’s that “better” part that worries me. It’s got to be better, right? I can’t imagine that people are going to go through all this trouble to make an exact clone of the existing player. No developer has that kind of discipline. They know they can add that one killer feature that the existing player doesn’t have. Or make it faster, or more efficient, or whatever.
OK, so what, as long as it doesn’t break your existing movies, what’s the problem? Well, if it has some “better” feature, people are going to start using that feature. Or if it’s faster, people are going to start coding things that take advantage of that speed. And then they are going to have to say, “Oh, this only works in the open source player.”
And the wedge gets driven in.
Anyway, it’s not the end of the world. It’s not something I’m freaking out about. And it’s not like anything anyone can say is going to stop people from building this thing. So we’ll live with it, and learn all about it, and make even more money because we’re experts on the differences between the different players out there. Just food for thought. And if I’m missing some viewpoint or aspect of the situation, I’m all ears.
Maybe the solution is for Adobe to just open source their own player. That keeps the OS crowd happy and it stays the standard. I’m sure there are all sorts of legal and corporate implications that they have to consider about such a move, but I don’t see how it would be ultimately harmful to the company.
If Adobe don’t fully support certain platforms (e.g. Linux) then there will inevitably be people with the knowledge and commitment to fix that.
I just hope we don’t all end up in a css type dilema where we loose the safety and security of having just one player per version to deal with.
I guess we’ll just have to sit this one out…
I agree on all points. I think OSFlash is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but this project leaves me scratching my head. The Flash player is already free to download; the point of open source is so that everyone can have the code *to improve upon*. This would fragment Flash player (if successful) and wreck one of its greatest benefits (cross-platform compatibility). The only way I can see this being useful is if they’re attempting to bring Flash player to platforms that Adobe isn’t.
Adobe does support Linux with a delay. Understandable, given the percentages involved. There’s a Flash 7 player for Linux. They kind of skipped over 8, as the time between 8 and 9 was something like 9 months. Supposedly, the Linux 9 player will be out relatively soon.
I can understand a third party effort to create a Linux player, which wouldn’t really impact us that much.
the open source flash players may be ‘better’, but its not like i am going to start building anything special just for them. My sites/apps/games are still only going to target adobe’s flash player…and I fell like that would be the position of at least 99% of the flash developers out there. What paying client would be ok with you targeting the XYZ SWFplayer?
I think this is exactly the reason Adobe isn’t os-ing their player, with every developer and his dog able to change, enhance and “better” the player it would become very hard to keep it standard and maintain one true platform. I think a lot of linux users aren’t very understanding of Macromedias position, they are a business and they will of course target the wider audience first. A linux player is being developed it’s just going to take a while.
Adobe doesn’t have to make the flash player code open source. They could create a cvs file that can be used by programmers outside of Adobe that sign a free license stating that all code stays with Adobe within the provided cvs. Then programmers can make branches, work on the code which would help out Adobe programmers and the linux platform. Adobe then just would need to check out the various codes summitted and use what works for the final release. I’m sure there are plenty of hackers out there that would love to help out in this area and would understand Adobe’s position of keeping things closed sourced.
Adobe could even setup a seperate forum area for all linux programmers so they can work together on code. This would even work for making the shockwave player available for linux as well.
In this way everyone wins. Adobe gets linux code help without increasing expenses very much and linux users get updates and newer versions of the players faster.
OK, I looked a bit more at Gnash. One thing I didn’t completely get at first is that it’s a linux only player. I’m not actually aware of any Windows/Mac open source player projects underway, though I know the idea has been talked up.
The really odd thing is that Gnash is a Flash 7 player! If linux users are complaining about lack of Adobe support as their reason for creating a player, why go through the trouble of creating one that is a. two versions out of date, and b. already exists??? At least work on a Flash 8 player, if not 9. By the time Gnash is done, we’ll be on Flash player 10.
The main people using this open source player will be those on unsupported low-marketshare platforms, or people who are major open source zealots. I believe that it’s safe to target the official player only. If they want to use Flash, they have to conform. Just like the new push for html web standards, the Flash player standard should be important. Extra features will probably be pushed into cool experiment land in the Flash blog world.
That said, I’m all for open source, especially if they can improve performance and make Adobe innovate. I’m also amused at how excited geeks are about an open source Flash player, when so many of the same crowd absolutely hate Flash with a passion. However, I feel for those that don’t have issues with Flash that just want the latest version on their as-of-yet unsupported platform.
The Linux player will be in beta soon. For reference, while Windows and Mac players are final, the player for Intel-based Macs just went into a public beta. It seems obvious that Adobe wants to support many platforms. They just need a little time.
A worth while project if it forces Adobe to support Linux better, competition be it opensource or otherwise can be good for inovation in the bussiness world.
Opensource players could be adapted…
Desktop frount end that integrates with compiled languages semlessly and runs fast.
Mobile phone use: Adobe must conceed with mobile phone manufactures and network provides, sometimes restrictive practices, but it is the opensource community that will force more rapid changes and freedoms and force new cost models.
However I have reservations about having to create to more than one standard and browsers wars is the reason html interests me little, on that thought I ask.. could Adobe maybe put a sell by date in the flash player like some products have?
And F* what if M$ made a player!!!
I think what many people seem to be missing is that it’s all about control. Note that Gnash is marketed as the GNU Flash player and developed by the Free Software Foundation. The FSF is all about putting control in the hands of the users of the software, and keeping it there (the last part is the essential difference between Free software and other open source software).
With Adobe’s Flash player, Adobe decides what features to integrate, what platforms to support, how much spyware goes in, when bugs get fixed, how long some version of it will be supported, etc. etc. They are in control. With an open source player, it’s not Adobe who’s in control, but anybody who cares. If I want to port the player to another platform, add or remove features, integrate it with my text editor, or whatever, I can. If you don’t like the direction the developers are taking, you can fork the project and go your own way. We are in control.
This control is the real reason why the FSF wants its own Flash player, or any of the software they produce. At least, in as far as I understand the FSF; I am not affiliated with them in any way, but I do think I have a fair understanding of their philosophy. Myself, I am in the open source camp, but not the Free software camp – I don’t mind if somebody takes my code and makes it into a proprietary product; in fact, I would be honored. Of course, this is a Free software supporter’s worst nightmare…
Well, if control is your top priority, that makes sense. Control at the expense of stability and reliability. The Flash player works virtually the same in every browser and platform it is delivered on, it is very stable software, and a huge amount of effort has gone into making it very secure. If you want to sacrafice all that for some illusion of “control”, go for it.
“The FSF is all about putting control in the hands of the users of the software”
I don’t buy that. How many “users” are actually going to contribute to the OS Flash player? None. Just a handful of developers, same as Adobe. And Macromedia/Adobe has proven to be extremely responsive to the users and community.
Kp, what’s with the anti-open source rhetoric? It’s not given that it will be “control at the expense of stability and reliability”. There are plenty of examples of open source software that’s very stable and reliable, sometimes even more so than the widely used proprietary options.
Similar for your “no users are going to contribute to this” comment. First of all, the point is not that they would, but that they could: that’s what gives you control, even if you don’t do anything with it. Secondly, users probably will be contributing – this is what happened to all the other open source projects you have heard about.
While there is no guarantee that Gnash will take off and be a big success, and it will probably take a long time before it becomes a drop-in replacement for Adobe’s player (if that ever happens at all), there’s no reason to be dismissing it so easily. You do realize that you are saying some of the exact same things that have been said about GNU/Linux, Mozilla, Apache, and generally any other high-profile open source product?
I’m totally not against open source. But as I said in the original post, I could see multiple versions of Flash players causing a problem. If an open source player were completely standard, it would be fine, but I don’t really see the point of doing it. I’m not against it, I just don’t see the point of putting the effort into duplicating something just so it will be “open”. I’m not sure what anyone gains from that, but if they want to do it, go for it.
As for user contribution, take a look at the OS Flash mailing list for this week. There was a great OS AS2 Eclipse plug in, ASDT. All the work on it was done by a single person as far as I can tell. When he got too busy to work on it, development died. Now, you would think that if anyone would contribute to that project, it would be the OS Flash community. But so fr, people have only talked about raising money to try to convince somebody to contribute to it. I think very, very, very few users would actually have the time, the skill, and the interest necessary to actually work on a new OS Flash player.
The thing which, in my opinion, gives an open-source flash player impotus is simply that adobe does not distribute binaries for platforms other than x86.
I am running gentoo compiled for amd64, and the workarounds to get adobe’s flash working are both unstable and a huge headache.
Totally all for it- Open Source software tends to be more stable in ways that developers really care about. In particular, I’ve always found AS3’s NetConnection and NetStream to be horribly buggy.
But more importantly- with the advances of WebGL and great improvements in javascript performance and browser compatibility, understand this:
**Plugins Are Going Away**
The only way Flash will be around in 5 years (and I hope it is) is for Flash Player to go OS and be included directly in browsers. When the player needs an upgrade, it will come in the standard package of upgrades to your browser. And no more swfobject.