On Monday 21 August 2006 10:32, Stephen 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 op
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 02:47:12PM -0400 or thereabouts, Carl Fink wrote:
>
> 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.
A
* Jacob S ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:32:49 -0400
> Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 09:49:12AM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson
> > wrote:
> > > On Monday 21 August 2006 08:01, Stephen w
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 01:19:57PM -0500 or thereabouts, Jacob S wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:32:49 -0400
> Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 09:49:12AM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 01:19:57PM -0500, Jacob S wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:32:49 -0400
> Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 cl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:32:49 -0400
Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 implement
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" itse
On Monday 21 August 2006 08:01, Stephen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 10:04:13AM -0400 or thereabouts, Carl Fink wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 08:43:04AM -0400, Stephen wrote:
> > > On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 05:29:33PM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson
wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 20 August 200
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 04:27:06PM +0100 or thereabouts, George Borisov wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
> >
> > Adobe Flash Player is closed source, but there are other Flash Players.
> > The specification is open source.
>
> True, but none of these players (AFAIK) support Flash 8/9
> formats. (BTW, if t
Stephen wrote:
>
> We should be rejoicing in the fact, that Adobe is now going to
> be supporting Linux actively in terms of Flash, and Flex.
Erm... woot? *waves a little flag*
--
George Borisov
DXSolutions Ltd
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Stephen wrote:
>
> Adobe Flash Player is closed source, but there are other Flash Players.
> The specification is open source.
True, but none of these players (AFAIK) support Flash 8/9
formats. (BTW, if they do then please let me know, as I am
getting fed up of the, increasingly more common, "upg
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 10:04:13AM -0400 or thereabouts, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 08:43:04AM -0400, Stephen wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 05:29:33PM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > On Sunday 20 August 2006 14:44, Derek wrote:
> > > > If more people complain,ma
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 03:27:52PM +0100 or thereabouts, George Borisov wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
> >
> > Paul, Flash is not closed source.
>
> While some of Paul's post was unnecessarily harsh, he was quite
> correct on this point.
>
> Adobe Flash Player _is_ closed source, as far as I know.
Ado
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 02:44:07PM -0700 or thereabouts, Derek wrote:
> If more people complain,maybe they will release it sooner.
No they won't -- It's actively being worked on NOW. Some things just
take time. We should be rejoicing in the fact, that Adobe is now going to
be supporting Linux acti
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 10:04:13AM -0400 or thereabouts, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 08:43:04AM -0400, Stephen wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 05:29:33PM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > On Sunday 20 August 2006 14:44, Derek wrote:
> > > > If more people complain,ma
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 08:43:04AM -0400, Stephen wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 05:29:33PM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 August 2006 14:44, Derek wrote:
> > > If more people complain,maybe they will release it sooner.
> >
> > I doubt it, but if you really want promo
Stephen wrote:
>
> Paul, Flash is not closed source.
While some of Paul's post was unnecessarily harsh, he was quite
correct on this point.
Adobe Flash Player _is_ closed source, as far as I know.
Best regards,
--
George Borisov
DXSolutions Ltd
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 05:29:33PM -0700 or thereabouts, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sunday 20 August 2006 14:44, Derek wrote:
> > If more people complain,maybe they will release it sooner.
>
> I doubt it, but if you really want promote closed source software, go ahead
> and keep whining. :o)
Paul
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 05:29:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sunday 20 August 2006 14:44, Derek wrote:
> > If more people complain,maybe they will release it sooner.
>
> I doubt it, but if you really want promote closed source software, go ahead
> and keep whining. :o)
Does anyone know wh
What is your problem paul?I am not promoting it,or whining.Quit being a assOn 8/20/06, Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:On Sunday 20 August 2006 14:44, Derek wrote:> If more people complain,maybe they will release it sooner.
I doubt it, but if you really want promote closed source software,
On Sunday 20 August 2006 14:44, Derek wrote:
> If more people complain,maybe they will release it sooner.
I doubt it, but if you really want promote closed source software, go ahead
and keep whining. :o)
--
Paul Johnson
Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpyko5MVk2B6.pgp
If more people complain,maybe they will release it sooner.
On Sunday 20 August 2006 08:18, gustavo halperin wrote:
> Carl Fink wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 01:46:05AM +0300, gustavo halperin wrote:
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> It's not new that windows do every think in order to make harder our
> >> life, do you know something about a new version of Macromed
On Saturday 19 August 2006 15:46, gustavo halperin wrote:
> Hello
>
> It's not new that windows do every think in order to make harder our
> life, do you know something about a new version of Macromedia only for
> windows??
Adobe tends to release on Windows first and play catchup with other platf
Carl Fink wrote:
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 01:46:05AM +0300, gustavo halperin wrote:
Hello
It's not new that windows do every think in order to make harder our
life, do you know something about a new version of Macromedia only for
windows??
Macromedia was a company that doesn't exist
On 08/19/2006, gustavo halperin wrote:
> I currently have a latest version of Macromedia but in the page
> "www.metacafe.com" I can't see the videos, the page say that I need
> download the latest version of Macromedia, but I have it. Did you
> know this problem? Can you see videos from "www.metaca
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 01:46:05AM +0300, gustavo halperin wrote:
> Hello
>
> It's not new that windows do every think in order to make harder our
> life, do you know something about a new version of Macromedia only for
> windows??
Macromedia was a company that doesn't exist any more. (Bought
Hello
It's not new that windows do every think in order to make harder our
life, do you know something about a new version of Macromedia only for
windows??
I currently have a latest version of Macromedia but in the page
"www.metacafe.com" I can't see the videos, the page say that I need
do
28 matches
Mail list logo
