Moshe, Goldfarb. wrote:
> On Wed, 28 May 2008 02:44:51 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>
>> Where is 64-bit Linux support for Flash Player?
>
> When Linux commands 0.6 percent of the desktop market, the typical target
> audience for Flash Player, developing for Linux is way down on the
> priority list.
>
Given this logic and given that there is a 32-bit Linux flash player, this
would tend to indicate that Linux has more than 0.6% desktop share.
> I would guess 64 bit Linux support for Flash Player will come around at
> about the time 128 bit Windows support is announced.....
>
> Linux is all about doing without.
>
You're right. It is about doing without spyware, viruses, trojans and other
malware. It is about doing without crashes, freezeups and BSOD. It is about
not having to do a reinstall on a regular basis because the OS has become
completely b0rk3d and there is no other choice. It is about not having to
buy a virus scanner and a whole bunch of tools to keep the OS running and
then spending hours per month cleaning the cruft off. It is about not
losing a good percentage of the computing power, which is needed for the
virus scanner. It about doing without being treated like a criminal by your
software vendor.
Linux IS about just getting the job done. This is why it is my desktop of
choice.
Given that you have already declared that you are only here for the money. I
suggest that you improve your trolling. It is pretty bloody lame.
If you keep up as you are going, your bosses will have to look for someone
else to troll for them. OTOH, if you could come up with some real
deficiencies in Linux, it would give the community a chance to fix them.
Ian
|
|
