64bit browsers

[candle_86]

any good in these yet, i know last year they still had problems, any changes yet in flash ect, or do i still need to use 32bit for flash ect

[nekrosoft13]

blame adobe for flash issues, they still haven't released 64bit flash

[candle_86]

that the only problem left? I found a 64bit build of firefox 3.5 i was gonna try out

[ViN86]

I still can't believe they haven't released 64-bit flash yet. It's ridiculous :|

[Eliminator]

same goes for mobile OS like iphone or windows mobile... still no flash for those yet

[candle_86]

someone reverse engineer flash and do it lol

[Rakeesh]

IMO people should just stop using flash and move on to HTML5. You can do everything flash does and some with HTML5. The only thing is you break IE compatibility since it doesn't support that, but google recently came out with some javascript code that makes HTML5 render correctly in IE.

[a12ctic]

same goes for mobile OS like iphone or windows mobile... still no flash for those yet

I have full flash support on my e63 through the native browser and skyfire. You should have something similar on winmo, but any other phone won't be able to do it.

[crainger]

Yeah, that's right, any phone that can run Skyfire can have flash, which is almost every WM and Symbian device.

I actually in Nokia's browser the best to use, especially for online banking.

[ViN86]

Adobe has a (beta?) flash player for 64-bit Linux out. I am using it on my Slackware64 install and it's working well.

(on bottom)
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html

[crainger]

That's been out for awhile now ViN. We need to only care about Windows kthnx.

[Rakeesh]

Honestly I hate flash with a passion, it's really stupid that what is supposed to be platform independent by design (by that I mean the web in general) is very reliant on that crap because various websites insist on its use.

Not only that but anytime you pull up a webpage in over a VNC session that has a flash object in it, it instantly bogs your connection because of how flash objects are rendered.

AJAX and/or HTML5 ftw, can't wait til they eventually replace flash completely and it dies just like activex did.

[Badboy_12345]

This is what happens when a format becomes a standard. They can do almost WTF they want without consequence. They never ever ever have to release a 64bit flash if there isnt something that comes out that threatens their hold.

[seeker]

From what I read, it sounds as though that there is the usual struggle between developers to gain and/or hold a "king on the mountain" position for their particular protocols. Here is something cited from Wikipedia:


HTML 5 is the proposed next standard for both HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0, as development on the next version of the latter has stopped. HTML 5 was initially said to become a game-changer in Web application development, making obsolete such plug-in-based rich Internet application (RIA) technologies as Adobe Flash, Microsoft Silverlight, and Sun JavaFX.[2] Such applications would be made obsolete by specifying a standard video codec for all browsers to use. However, in December 2007, the editor of the burgeoning draft specification dropped the recommendation of the free software Theora and Vorbis codecs, after opposition from Apple and Nokia. This means HTML 5 does not currently specify a common video codec for Web development.

For me, the primary use of Flash is to view Hulu, because even though Opera maintains the lead in HTML5, it still requires it to display it's programs. It appears that this program is used to prevent capturing of the films, so a common standardized HTML video codec would probably effect the availability of online movies and programs.

I doubt that they will put the time and effort into a x64 Flash, until they believe that Flash won't be obsoleted.

[shteve]

so a common standardized HTML video codec would probably effect the availability of online movies and programs.


Do you mean affect as in change the availability, or effect as in create availabilty?

[seeker]

Do you mean affect as in change the availability, or effect as in create availabilty?
Depending on your perspective, either spelling might work, but in this instance perhaps effect is best.