Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Flash 8.0, no 8.5, no make that 9.0 for Linux

  • Subject: Re: Flash 8.0, no 8.5, no make that 9.0 for Linux
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:24:05 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / MCC / Manchester University
  • References: <SOydnZWp3onGjAXZnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d@speakeasy.net> <104627054.N59C86dsak@schestowitz.com> <3grlm3-opl.ln1@sky.matrix>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ [H]omer ] on Tuesday 20 June 2006 19:30 \__

> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> __/ [ John Bailo ] on Tuesday 20 June 2006 16:16 \__
>> 
>>> What's up with Flash 8.0 for Linux?
> 
>> http://weblogs.macromedia.com/emmy/archives/2006/05/yes_virginia_th.cfm
>> 
>> Title: Yes, Bailo, there will be a Flash Player 9 for Linux
> 
> Oh and PS: Emmy Huang, can you *try* to support 64 bit architectures
> this time.
> 
> Love,
> 
> --
> K.

I have heard these rants before. *smile* One more deterrent for 64-bit O/Sen,
which is the fault of a *binary*-form software supplier... Windows is rarely
an exception. 64-bit in XP and Vista should be perceived as 'proof of
concept' rather than something practical. Drivers don't work, software is
not supported, and I am skeptic about performance gains as well.

Best wishes,

Roy

-- 
Roy S. Schestowitz      | #FFFFFFF4 ADD &R1, "9999999", &BankAccount
http://Schestowitz.com  |    SuSE Linux     ¦     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
 10:20am  up 54 days 15:34,  13 users,  load average: 0.19, 0.25, 0.50
      http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index