[Olpc-open] Nortel LearniT animations (Seth Woodworth)
charles.merriam at gmail.com
Tue Mar 25 01:38:02 EDT 2008
I think I added all the substance from this thread into the wiki
(http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Gnash). It's late, so I would apprecate
Rob et al doing a quick read. Also, can someone add more information
about the specific gnash version/codecs being installed on which XOs
and confirm that the primary issue in developing Flash for Gnash is
picking open codecs?
Have a great day! or evening!
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Rob Savoye <rob at welcomehome.org> wrote:
> Steve Holton wrote:
> > Gnash will *never* be fully compatible with Flash because the closer
> > Gnash gets to being a viable free Flash replacement, the more
> > incentive there is for Adobe to change the Flash specification in a
> > way to break compatibility.
> They've already changed the format in a big, hence all our hard work
> to reverse engineer SWF v9. ActionScript 3 is finally ECMAScript
> future. Also all the changes in SWF v9 were performance oriented, and
> that required a new VM. Gnash now does support the SWF v9 format
> changes, that was easy. It's implementing the ActionScript class
> libraries that's much of the work left. SWF has evolved very slowly, so
> I don't feel we'll be chasing Adobe for long.
> > Two decades in the Microsoft format wars should have taught that
> > lesson to everyone by now. Look how long (and how much) it's taken ODF
> > to get where it's at.
> Yes, but as far as I can tell, OpenOffice works well enough with M$
> Office, compatibility wise, that I haven't had to use M$ Office for many
> years. Not everything converts in OO 100% all the time, but what doesn't
> work I can easily live with.
> > OTOH, the XO offers us an opportunity to create a new standard among
> > an audience which has no investment in the old. But this is a limited
> > opportunity.
> New standards still don't solve the problem of playing existing
> content (often proprietary), which is what I though we were discussing.
> Also playing SWF files in the future is not something we worry about,
> since that will only effect new content, which doesn't exist yet. :-)
> My point is that we want people to work with us. Most of the time all
> I hear is "Gnash sucks, it's not 100% compatible yet". We know that
> already... What we want to do is identify what "sucks", produce test
> cases, and then fix the problems. Bitching about the problem and dumping
> Gnash does not solve the problem, it merely ignores it. It's the easy
> way out.
> Yes, it can take some time for an end user with a problem to work with
> us till we identify what is wrong. As none of us can use the Adobe
> player due to clean room problems, it's our end users that help us work
> on testing compatibility. Many people have helped contribute to the
> development of Gnash merely by helping answer questions about what's
> wrong, and trying patches, and most of them were not professional engineers.
> All we are asking for is help beyond just griping, and patience as our
> small team pushes forward.
> - rob -
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
More information about the Olpc-open