Re: macromedia new windows version problem
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 01:19:57PM -0500, Jacob S wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:32:49 -0400
> Stephen <stephen.d.allen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 09:49:12AM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson
> > wrote:
> > > On Monday 21 August 2006 08:01, Stephen wrote:
> >
> > > > If it were closed source, then implementations of it wouldn't be
> > > > allowed to exist such as MING, the various open source players,
> > > > and editors.
> >
> > > The "standard" itself is closed, so the best you can hope for is
> > > broken compatibility in the long term.
> >
> > It is NOT a closed standard.
>
> Please present proof of this. As in Adobe's documentation of the
> format. Any lack of prosecution by Adobe does not mean it is an open
> standard, as we witnessed with gif images in recent history.
In fact, the standard is not open.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWF#Licensing.
In any case, "Flash" (which is a program) is not open-source, any more than
Acrobat is just because PDF is, in fact, open.
--
Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com
Read my blog at nitpickingblog.blogspot.com. Reviews! Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!
Reply to: