Interview With Linux Flash Player's Lead Engineer 222
An anonymous reader writes, "Ryan Stewart of ZDNet has an interview with Mike Melanson, the lead engineer behind Adobe's upcoming Flash Player 9 for Linux. It covers what the plans are for the player, what kinds of things won't be in the Linux player that are in the other players, and ways to give Adobe input on the Linux player."
ALSA support? YAY! (Score:5, Interesting)
tell Adobe to sign you up for beta-tests (Score:2)
I went to the Adobe Wish Form http://www.adobe.com/go/wish [adobe.com] and said "please sign me up as a beta-tester for Flash 9 / Linux".
He threatens me (Score:2, Funny)
There is a core team working on porting and testing. There are various volunteers within the organization who have jumped into the effort out of general platform enthusiasm; and if we need any advice with particular areas, we bring in people from the rest of the Flash Player team as needed.
Of course, we're not making cheese sandwiches here. Throwing more programmers, any programmers, at the problem will not necessarily speed the process al
More Programmers Needed (Score:5, Funny)
It's like giving nine women the task of gestating a baby in one month.
Re: (Score:2)
Bandwidth, Latency, and Throughput for pregnancy (Score:3, Funny)
The Latency simply was nine months.
The Throughput is the twelve hours of labor it took to push the brat out.
Consider the ramifications from a Network Admin's point of view.
If you could completely eliminate the latency, then you could push a baby out twice a day. You could make millions off of welfare alone!
However, the lowest latency I've ever seen, was that big-bellied
64 bits please... (Score:5, Insightful)
Tom
Why is he a troll? (Score:2)
Adobe/Macromedia/Coke/Taco Bell: Come on, get with the program.
...i think it was this bit... (Score:3, Funny)
that aside, it's a valid point.
Re:Why is he a troll? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:64 bits please... (Score:5, Funny)
Blame Osama.
The reason why 64-bit Flash is not available yet (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You can't call 32-bit code [that is, code compiled with 32-bit pointers and registers in mind] directly from a 64-bit application. Even if you don't use 4GB of memory you still have 64-bit pointers [well 48-bit on AMD64]. Then you have registers. The ABI [application binary interface] for x86_64 specifies that you pass a certain # of arguments as registers and not on the stack, etc.
You need a "thunking" layer to call 32-bit code [like WoW
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's rarely that simple. Many people use ints where they should be using function-specific types (eg, size_t, time_t, etc). Not to mention the old standby of casting an int to a pointer or vice-versa.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:64 bits please... (Score:4, Insightful)
Solaris, for example, has been 64-bit for quite some time. However, even with a 64-bit kernel & drivers, most of the userland is still 32-bit. They provide 64-bit versions of the necessary libraries, however, so that you can build 64-bit applications when it benefits you. (and when it doesn't benefit you, its just wasteful of system resources)
Then again, SPARC isn't as braindead as classic x86, and you can build 32-bit SPARC binaries that take advantage of all the extra instructions of the sparcv9 (UltraSPARC/64-bit) architecture. x86_64 added a lot of things beyond 64-bit'ness that probably improves performance, but I wonder how much of that (i.e. like extra registers), if any of it, you could even use in 32-bit code.
you know not what you speak of (Score:3, Informative)
64-bit code does indeed run faster. The data may be bigger, but the code (.text segment) is actually smaller. There are more registers. The calling convention for 64-bit Linux can pass up to 6 integers in registers. Stack accesses are greatly reduced. This is enough to be noticable to casual observation.
A typical modern Linux has only a handful of 32-bit binaries, certainly not including the web browser. OpenOffice.org is even 64-bit now. Some systems don'
An obscure database known as MySQL (Score:5, Funny)
Why does this quote remind me so much of Data (from Star Trek, an obscure TV show):
Data: "It is from an obscure language known as French"
Picard: "Data, the French language for centuries represented civilization"
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:An obscure database known as MySQL (Score:5, Funny)
You must be new around here.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
KFG
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:An obscure database known as MySQL (Score:5, Funny)
Cubert J. Farnsworth: [into the translator's microphone] Hello.
Universal Translator: Bonjour!
Professor Hubert Farnsworth: See? Utter gibberish!
Re:An obscure database known as MySQL (Score:4, Informative)
It's a Futurama reference.
Re:An obscure database known as MySQL (Score:4, Funny)
You are so right! Actually this isn't limited to thongs, and isn't limited to mothers or even close relatives either.
I hereby state LittleBigLui's theorem linguistic underwear exclusion theorem:
I have found a proof of this, too, but it is too elaborate to fit into this comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, so you must be familiar with this one as well?
I'm sorry, it had to be done.
Allow me to rain on this parade... (Score:2, Interesting)
from one of these companies is going to contain a rootkit tailor-made for Linux.
I, for one, will not forget why I'm using a free (Open Source) platform. It sure
as hell aint for viewing snazzier adverts. Let's also not forget alternatives like
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/ [gnu.org]
This is not an indictment of Mike, I'm sure he's a nice guy.
I'm not a zealot --I use closed video drivers, but these kinds of needless (IMO) upgrades
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
As for flash 7 performing flawlessly, try going to the above google site, and see how long it takes you to get annoyed with the out of sync audio.
Re:Allow me to rain on this parade... (Score:5, Informative)
The out-of-sync sound on Linux annoyed me to no end until I installed Ubuntu on a notebook to see what all the fuss was about. I was having problems getting Flash sound to play
Re:Allow me to rain on this parade... (Score:4, Informative)
In case anyone is interested, or just too lazy to look themselves, here's the link
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1865
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is it still that bad? I used Red Hat 5.1 for awhile, then switched to Debian Potato (man, I hated that configuration tool, dselect?), then got tired of downloading utilities only to find they were some high-school senior's CS project and only worked with a specific (obsolete) version of some common library that I couldn't install because it would conflict with the current version which I needed for everything else. So I moved
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Flash player 9 doesn't exist.
They are not trying hard enough.
I'm replacing flash player with gnash as soon as gnash plays youtube and google right, and that is not far into the future.
Allow me to rain on your parade... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Allow me to rain on this parade... (Score:5, Insightful)
I better uninstall that useless piece of junk right away!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh Great Oracle, pray tell us why Flash 7 for Linux is almost completely useless!
Re: (Score:2)
If you'd ever used it, you'd know, but I'll explain.
- The audio and video are out of sync which makes many videos unwatchable.
- It's rather unstable and can cause frequent browser crashes.
Some people have found workarounds, or their system works better with flash and doesn't crash as much, or the audio sync bug just doesn't bother them. That's the "almost". For me, it took me hours to stop it from instantly crashing
Re: (Score:2)
I've used it since soon after it was released.
- The audio and video are out of sync which makes many videos unwatchable.
The a/v have never been out of sync for me.
- It's rather unstable and can cause frequent browser crashes.
Flash 7 is incredibly stable. While Flash 6.x crashed Mozilla constantly, Flash 7 and FF are a marvel of stability.
Maybe Debian "Unstable" is just more stable than the distro you use.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Closed source flash on linux is exactly the same as firefox running on windows.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand what you mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Allow me to rain on this parade... (Score:4, Insightful)
Change the license on the Flash spec to allow it to be used players as well as generators. I don't care about their plugin, but I do care about using open formats.
Re: (Score:2)
discovery of a rootkit would be rapid, fixed and the company that did it would never get its products on Linux ever again.
To be honest I feel better about a company that is prepared to invest time and money on a linux version of thier product. Of course it's better still when they open source thier product and best of all when they open source thier product and work with the linux community.
Flash is just one of
in true slashdot style (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Open source player. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Open source player. (Score:5, Insightful)
I bet he has heard of Gnash. I also bet that one of the 2 main reasons for Adobe spending effort on a Linux Flash player is the capabilities of Open Source Flash players. It would be quite horrible for them if Gnash surpassed the current Linux offering from Adobe in functionality. Great for users, but bad for Adobe. They would stand to rapidly lose control over the Flash platform in a big way.
(I think the 2nd reason, from an executive standpoint, that they are developing this is because if they stop short of the "credo" of Flash, that Flash content can be played anywhere, they sell fewer dev kits. Also, the growing market of dedicated gadgets that run Linux, e.g., phones, which has great potential to be a big target platform.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're trying paint Adobe as evil (or at least that's my impression). I'm no fan of Adobe, but their efforts in this area should be at least acknowledged.
They are evil. They only renewed their efforts on the Linux player after Gnash got going and put egg on their face. Even so, they're still ignoring all the calls for an x86_64 version of Flash.
So yes, it'd be much better if they supported the Gnash team in
Re: (Score:2)
I believe it runs on ppc and amd64 linux, which Macromedia's flash doesn't.
Also, it's the concept of using free (as in speech) software. And hopefully, with enough work and support, gnash will be current enough and good enough that linux users can use gnash instead and won't have to wait for Adobe to not release the latest flash versions for linux.
Re:Open source player. (Score:4, Insightful)
The sound synchronization (Score:4, Informative)
Has the sound synchronization problem been fixed?
On a side note, if you don't like flash ads with screaming sound, just install Flash Block [mozdev.org].
But install Firefox first [mozilla.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A close runner-up for most requested feature is proper audio/video sync. And Linux users will get that this time around, thanks largely to the purging of the OSS audio API in favor of the Advanced Linux Sound Architecture (ALSA).
Still vapourware until *something* gets released.. (Score:5, Interesting)
I find it amazing that "obvious" steps haven't been taken by the Linux Flash team, namely:
* Some sort of release schedule announcement - don't care if it slips by a few weeks here and there.
* A set of pre-releases (heck, have them time-bomb out if you don't want them being used in the long-term) coming out to showcase its current alpha/beta/RC status. Note here - Windows gets beta releases, why can't Linux?! It's utterly shameful there is no pre-release version for Linux, especially since the latest Linux Flash blog entries brag how stable the player now is at all the major sites it's been tested on!
* A definitive statement on whether they'll support 64-bit (i.e. "it'll be released at the same time as the 32-bit version" or "it'll be released X months after the 32-bit version" or "it'll never be released"). Sadly, Adobe are somewhat pig-ignorant w.r.t. the 64-bit platform and don't even have a 64-bit version for XP!
* Explain the exact differences between, say, Windows Flash 9 and Linux Flash 9 - there's some woolly stuff on this in the article really. After all this time in incubation, you'd have thought that the two platforms would have identical version 9 players, but I wouldn't it past Adobe to release a half-baked Linux Flash 9 player, since they have not yet demonstrated to anyone at all that they take Linux seriously (does the word "vapourware" mean anything to Adobe? That's exactly what Flash 8/9 on Linux currently are).
* Start a merge of the Linux development environment and the Windows one, so that ultimately they work from the same codebase to avoid the ridiculous delays in platform releases we've seen in the past. It's not clear to me if the Linux effort is fragmented - have we been told how much code is common on all platforms and how much is specific to Linux (and how they keep the specific code to a minimum)?
* Open Source the player! If Adobe have coded the entire player in-house (which I believe they have), then why not Open Source it...it's a free download after all! Even if they've patented some methods used in the source code, they own the patents and the copyright on the source code, so that shouldn't stop them open-sourcing it surely? Just exactly what is Adobe's objection to open sourcing the player? Sheer bloody-mindedness?
Re:Still vapourware until *something* gets release (Score:3, Insightful)
They've made [adobe.com] their position [kaourantin.net] on 64-bit support pretty clear.
Ignoring the 64-bit world seems shortsighted to me. Sure, most users are 32 bit at the moment, but are new 32 bit machines even
Re:Still vapourware until *something* gets release (Score:2)
You seem to forget most civilisations don't recognise software patents.
Re:Still vapourware until *something* gets release (Score:2)
The Flash Player is mostly core code. They *are* working from the same codebase on all platforms. The whole point of Flash Player is to have a runtime environment which is virtually identical on all platforms.
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that the comments in Mike's blog often consist of "please release an alpha, even if it's incomplete and buggy", while now we get "I wouldn't it past Adobe
Keyboard (Score:3, Informative)
don't mess too much with it... (Score:2)
Seriously, folks... (Score:2, Insightful)
The other players can play movies, and the Linux player...can't!
All comments may be directed to /dev/null. We'll respond as quickly as we can!
Oh, alright, I'm only kidding. Kind of. I actually read (present tense) the Linux Flash developer blogs and at minimum what we'll be getting is a player that is vastly better than anything we've ever had before. I am just a little irked abou
Forget ALSA; Go JACK-IT (Score:2)
All quality sound players (MythTV, Audacity, Gxine, Xine, XMMS), sound servers (alsasound, Gnome, KDE) and sound device (ALSA, ALSA-OSS) support JACK, (recursive for Jack Audio Connection Kit).
Even the professional musicians touts their superior audio latency, excellent patch panel, hundreds of audio filters (not that any normal user would want them, but its crispy and never choppy).
I'm getting tired of switching audio server JUST to use Flash/Mozilla/Linux
Why macromedia wont let you build players (Score:5, Interesting)
Firstly, just like with Sun and Java but much more so, flash truely is "develop once, run anywhere". Any web browser on any platform running the relavent version of the flash player plugin for that platform can play any shockwave flash file out there. (which is probobly why web designers love it so much...)
And, just like Sun and Java, if Macromedia goes open source or open specs, how can they be sure that "GnuFlash" can play ALL the flash files the same as how the Macromedia player can.
The other reason is the mobile devices space (PDAs, cellphones, smartphones etc). Right now, Macromedia is pushing heavily into the mobile space and trying to convince mobile device manufacturers to ship "flash for mobile devices". I dont know details but I imagine mobile device makers have to pay Macromedia to ship "flash for mobile devices" in their device (especially when a source code licence is required and its not just a binary provided by Macromedia). If the specs or code were open, the mobile device manufacturers wouldnt need to pay macromedia.
Mike Melanson? (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I started doing some homework and began contributing to, and occasionally leading, various multimedia-related open source projects and efforts, such as xine, FFmpeg, and MPlayer.
So I'll say yes (at least for FFmpeg)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
The distro question (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is that each distribution of Linux has to be so ideosyncratic that a body cannot produce a binary installation that "just works"? Why should that even be a question? Isn't this a stumbling block in terms of mainstream, desktop adoption of Linux? Sure, if you can
Compatible with RedHat Linux, SuSE, Slackware, Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake, Ubuntu,SlackHat Redbian, Mandrux, Unbonux, Seus, ZuSE, Debware, Mandhat, Slackdrake, Jesux, Paulux, Vitamin-C, and Bean Crock Enterprise
Even though you can really categorize most into a few base types, what is to gurantee that my Rhinestone Pantux will run something as easily as my Blue Sude Linux even though they are both based on RedHat?
Re: (Score:2)
And the answer is: because they can. If I decide to put together my own distribution tomorrow, with all the startup scripts in /bin/registry and users' areas in /wherestuffis/username, then I can. And if you object...well, tough! I didn't ask your permission.
Sorry you had to wait 10 years to find this out. Seriously though, couldn't you work th
Why won't they support Gstreamer? (Score:3, Informative)
The current (but outdated) Flash player 7 for Linux has big problems with audio/video synchronization. They are hoping to solve this by getting rid of OSS support and using ALSA exclusively. This is a good move. But I also see that they do not plan to support the current version of Video For Linux (V4L2), although the older V4L is being phased out of the kernel. And in that engineer's blog, I saw a brief statement about the fact that the Flash player will not use Gstreamer. This is bad.
Why don't they use Gstreamer? This would solve the synchronization issues (the current gstreamer-0.10 is very good at keeping everything in sync, unlike other multimedia frameworks) and it would also provide good support for both V4L and V4L2. In addition, it would provide a good cross-desktop integration, because Gstreamer will be supported in KDE4 (through Phonon) and in GNOME.
Currently, Gstreamer allows me to configure multiple sound cards correctly and decide in one place which one is the default one. If the new Linux Flash player ignores Gstreamer and codes for ALSA and V4L directly, then I bet that it will have problems picking the right sound card automatically. And it will probably ignore my gstreamer filters as well, which is a pity. Not to mention that it would force me to keep the obsolete V4L code in my kernel instead of using V4L2 (gstreamer would do the switch transparently), just like Flash Player 7 forces me to keep the OSS API (alsa-oss) while all other programs have moved to a more mature interface (ALSA).
By the way, I have read some comments in the blog saying that Gstreamer should not be used because its API or ABI is not stable. I say: bullshit. There were some incompatibilities while moving from gstreamer-0.8 to gstreamer-0.10, but this was a long time ago and the interfaces have been stable since then. If I remember correctly, the Gstreamer developers stated that they intend to keep the interfaces stable now. So those who reject Gstreamer for that reason are just spreading FUD.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why are they fleeing gstreamer like plague? I see at least three reasons:
wish (Score:5, Funny)
Just keep hounding Adobe (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just keep hounding Adobe with requests for Linux versions of all of their products. They will eventually realize it's wise to cater to a growing market.
Umm, is this the same Adobe that cancelled the Linux, Mac, and Solaris versions of Framemaker a few years after they bought it, abandoning more than half of their install base?
If they continue to ignore Linux, they risk being rendered irrelevant, especially with Xara, Inkscape, krita, and the gimp all quickly maturing.
Those are great projects, but Lin
Moo (Score:2)
Except of course, that MySQL isn't a database.
Re:no hard questions asked.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:no hard questions asked.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:no hard questions asked.... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As a friend of mine explained, the computer world is much differrent now, there isn't umpteen different OSs that companies have to deal with, in fact, they could (and do) get away with only supporting one. The percentage of Windows users is so high as to make everything else not
Re: (Score:2)
Re:no hard questions asked.... (Score:4, Interesting)
There are plenty of sources already (Score:2)
That's just to
Re:no hard questions asked.... (Score:4, Insightful)
There *isn't* a flash 9 for linux, sucky or not. It doesn't exist. That's what the dude is working on.
When are you going to release a fixed version that actually works right or at least comperable to the mac or windows versions?
TFA said "early 2007." That's what he's working on right now!
Sheesh.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How the hell did drivel like this get modded +4, Insighful?
There is no Flash 9, and Linux Flash 7 is a hell of a lot stabler than 6.x ever was.
Re: (Score:2)
Most websites still use Flash 7. There's very few websites that have 8 or 9, but they're there, and you'll get a message to upgrade your flash when you find them. What's probably happened is you just haven't found any 8 or 9 sites, and you're just assuming that the site has upgraded its flash when it hasn't.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
100's? 1000's? Maybe even 10000's?
(Linux PPC only, please... Mac PPC already has a perfectly good Flash Player)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you are not familiar with Firefox's Adblock extension?
Re: (Score:2)