Re: Slashdot Article - Why Won't Macromedia Release 64-bit Flash?
As a PowerPC user who recently purchased an AMD64 desktop, I've
been having such problems for many years. For too many vendors
"Linux" means "i386".
I only hope that new Web standards (SVG?) and improved GPLflash
will change the situation.
By the way, while looking around, I noticed that the GPLflash
project is having an IRC meeting on the 29th of October:
http://gplflash.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/IRCMeeting
mathieu
Le 2005-10-19, à 21:50:56 -0400, Jeffrey Hahn (jmhahn@gmail.com) écrit:
> It may be of interest to those on this list that there is a slashdot
> thread<http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/19/1959200><
> http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/19/1959200> started this
> afternoon on the topic of Macromedia's refusal to develop a solution for
> Flash on 64-bit Linux. Since it is simply an Ask Slashdot, there is no news
> per se, but the comments may be interesting nonetheless.
>
> For those of you who do not feel like browsing through the comments, I would
> like to humbly point out mine
> <http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=165807&cid=13830331><http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=165807&cid=13830331>
> in particular. In it I reference a generic letter which I have created to
> send to websites who require Flash, which, of course, those of us running in
> a pure64 environment cannot use. At the risk of being redundant to those who
> may have already seen it, I'd like to provide a link to that
> letter<http://arctangent.net/%7Eformatc/amd64flash.html><
> http://arctangent.net/~formatc/amd64flash.html<http://arctangent.net/%7Eformatc/amd64flash.html>>
> for those of you interested in having something on-hand to send to the
> websites that choose to stop you in your Flash-less tracks.
>
> It may never prove to be a large enough campaign to solicit a turnabout from
> any webmasters, but it could at least make the issue heard.
--
Mathieu Lutfy <mathieu@bidon.ca> http://www.bidon.ca
GPG 0x5F5BCEB4 0D3B 1AEE EF9B FB34 2FE7 80EC 8E8D F00A 5F5B CEB4
Reply to: