Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Adobe Opens the FLV and SWF Formats

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Thu May 01, 2008 06:21 AM
from the getting-with-the-program dept.
Graphics Software Businesses GUI Technology
Wolfcat writes to tell us that Adobe announced today that they are opening the SWF and FLV formats via the Open Screen Project. "The Open Screen Project is supported by technology leaders, including Adobe, ARM, Chunghwa Telecom, Cisco, Intel, LG Electronics Inc., Marvell, Motorola, Nokia, NTT DoCoMo, Qualcomm, Samsung Electronics Co., Sony Ericsson, Toshiba and Verizon Wireless, and leading content providers, including BBC, MTV Networks, and NBC Universal, who want to deliver rich Web and video experiences, live and on-demand across a variety of devices. The Open Screen Project is working to enable a consistent runtime environment — taking advantage of Adobe Flash Player and, in the future, Adobe AIR — that will remove barriers for developers and designers as they publish content and applications across desktops and consumer devices, including phones, mobile internet devices (MIDs), and set top boxes."
+ -
story

Related Stories

Submission: Adobe opens the FLV and Swf format by Wolfcat (599595)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Adobe Opens the FLV and SWF Formats 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Great (Score:4, Informative)

    by suso (153703) * on Thursday May 01 2008, @06:23AM (#23261424) Homepage Journal
    This problem doesn't mean opening the code for the player, but still, it will help projects like Gnash, etc.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by BinaryOne (697044)
      This is good news.

      For those of use who use flash (for instructional simulations) this means (hopefully) new tools and a chance to deal with the accessibility issues flash has.

      While AS3 has improved accessibility classes, products like Articulate and Camtasia have been slow to enable them in their products.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by nahdude812 (88157) *
          They don't do this because it's a vector for non-Apple-approved applications to run on the iPhone. It's the same reason they refuse to allow Java to run on it. They want to control what people run on the phone so they can charge for services which free (speech/beer) software could enable for... well, for free (beer).
          • I find it amusing (and astounding) that apps written on Flash (minus video) seem to run at about 1% of what you could do with native programming. It's nice to see all those cute games, which are largely the kinds of things we saw on DOS about 15 years ago. It's not nice that those DOS-style games will peg a processor running at 100 times the speed of what those DOS games run on.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by debatem1 (1087307)
              Its all about developer time vs CPU time. Nobody's going to spend two thousand developer hours taking something from O(nlogn) to O(n) anymore except in very special circumstances, and this is one of those cases where *nobody cares*. Not the developers, not the consumers, not even the sites hosting them. And the few old-school (read: good) programmers are left throwing their hands up in disgust and inching that much closer to the 'get offa my lawn' guy.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by garbletext (669861)
            Because *other* people use it extensively? Parent was talking about the iPhone, which does not support flash, yet easily could.
            • The iPhone could "easily" support Flash if it either:

              - used an old version that didn't properly render modern Flash content (like the Flash used in the PlayStation 3)

              - used a Lite version of Flash that didn't render anything but a minor subset of Flash, and which will only work with basic FLA video players in its latest version (not officially out yet IIRC)

              - used a completely reengineered, yet somehow backwards compatible version of Flash that perfectly ran PC targeted Flash content that currently plays like crap on the Mac with memory leaks and other bugs, but rewritten for the iPhone's ARM architecture with major integration into Apple's Cocoa Touch software.

              So yeah, that'd be a piece of cake if Apple gave two shits about spending a year constructing a crutch to hold up Adobe's shitty platform that should go away and make way for a real reach Internet application platform such as HTML 5.

              I don't think Apple is going to do that, and if Adobe could, they might have already fixed their Mac version.

              It appears that you think is some sort of conspiracy, or that Apple has a moral obligation to devote its resources to supporting a shitty architecture that destroys the web, but only because there are a handful of useful things that could far more easily be redesigned to use standards that are already open.

              Gone in a Flash: More on Appleâ(TM)s iPhone Web Plans [roughlydrafted.com]
    • Yes, it will help a lot. Using the Open Screen Project page, I just discovered a link to the SWF file format specification, version 9 [adobe.com] is available for download without having to accept any NDA [wikipedia.org]'s.
    • Since Gnash is a GNU high-priority project, this is a big boost. It will be nice to run an absolutely stable, crash-free Firefox once Gnash is complete.
  • I guess Adobe is doing this to try to stop silverlight getting too much attention.

    Since Microsoft seems to want a new way of control of new web enabled devices with silverlight, I guess this is a good thing.
    (And obviously this way gnash can implement better compatibility more easily!)
    • I don't think Silverlight scares Adobe all that much. Microsoft has a habit of railroading themselves into their microplatforms (IIS, ASP, .NET, etc)

      But Apple likes to lock down their platforms and control them. The iPhone is a good example. And mobile is the future for many things. So by doing this, it will be hard for Apple (or anyone else) to keep Flash from being in it's future.

    • Check http://www.earthbrowser.com/ [earthbrowser.com] . An application dates back to MacOS 9 days. Matt Giger, single author of it upgraded to version 3 and it runs on both Windows and OS X without a single glitch. It was originally a C application, it was converted to Adobe AIR and the day Linux has a stable Adobe AIR (soon I think), it is also automatically shipped to Linux/FreeBSD.

      That is the opportunity Sun missed with their Webstart/Java. People and industry looks at results, not promises. You can ship a full feature co

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Tumbleweed (3706) *
          I would, but their website requires Javascript. Is this some kind of joke? What year is this?

          My friend, it seems YOU are the one confused about the year. The year is something like 10 years PAST the time you should be running with JavaScript off. Welcome to the new world, one full of interesting and (potentially) useful things like AJAX. It's time to put the Gopher client out of its misery, upgrade the 19.2kbps ZyXel modem you got at a discount for running a part-time BBS, and for God's sake, stop listening

      • who needs it (silverlight I mean)?

        Microsoft.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by nahdude812 (88157) *
            No way, they know exactly why they made it, and they do in fact need it very badly.

            Flex + Flash's ubiquity + Adobe Air = obviated operating system. It doesn't matter what OS you run if you can create a single application which runs on mobile phones, from a web browser on all major OS's, or as a desktop application on all major OS's.

            It's quick and easy to create a single application which runs just about anywhere - much simpler than creating a standard desktop application. So as a developer, as long as you

        • It just happens that you believe Adobe is better than Microsoft, but they are just the same, and will do anything at all costs to crush the opponent.

          Come on - you're kidding, right? Adobe competes in the niche market with Pdf and Flash, whereas Microsoft p0wns 85% of desktop computers in the world, and is a convicted monopolist? That is typical M$ party line, where they try to say the "enemy" is no different. They tried that in the M$OOXML scandal, rationalizing their unscrupulous tactics by saying Open

  • this is not the same as open sourcing it.

    i would guess this is more like attempting to gain market share at the same time as holding the family jewels close to the chest as it were.

    still, its a step in the right direction to be sure.
  • Does this mean we'll see a 64 bit flash plugin for Firefox?
  • Does anyone know whether "SWF and FLV/F4V specification", " Flash Cast" and "AMF" (all mentioned in the FAQ) include RTMP in some way? In other words, will these specs help us watch south park with free software?

    • In other words, will these specs help us watch south park with free software?

      I assume you have a free OS. Point firefox (MPL or GPL or LGPL) to mrtwig.net. Download the .avi torrent with rtorrent (GPL), and play it with mplayer (GPL). I mean, I've heard from a friend that this works. I've never done it myself.

      You can already watch South Park using no non-free software. Do you expect the release to let you use even less non-free software? ;)

      (that would make good material for a "Richard Stallman facts").

  • I guess there taking the meaning from Open from OpenVMS...

  • Interesting how things change (Score:3, Interesting)

    by acb (2797) on Thursday May 01 2008, @07:17AM (#23261722) Homepage
    IIRC, Macromedia's original rationale for keeping the formats secret was to prevent a certain unnamed competitor from embracing and extending them. Presumably they're counting on Microsoft being so committed to Silverlight that they're not going to turn on a dime, ditch their system (which their people believe, with some justification, to be technically superior) and replace it with a bastardisation of Flash.
    • I was just going to comment on this. Adobe is sticking it to silverlight.

      bwahahahaha, now MS will never gain market share with it.

  • More details (Score:5, Informative)

    by jaaron (551839) on Thursday May 01 2008, @08:05AM (#23262086) Homepage

    If you didn't bother to RTFA, here are a few more pertinent details. The specific actions Adobe will take include:

    • Removing restrictions on use of the SWF and FLV/F4V specifications
    • Publishing the device porting layer APIs for Adobe Flash Player
    • Publishing the Adobe Flash Cast protocol and the AMF protocol for robust data services
    • Removing licensing fees - making next major releases of Adobe Flash Player and Adobe AIR for devices free

    This is huge in that it means we can finally start porting the Flash runtime to other platforms. It's not yet completely open source, but I'm encouraged by the steps Adobe is taking. They're at least moving in the right direction.

    • Re:More details (Score:4, Informative)

      by nickull (943338) on Thursday May 01 2008, @09:38AM (#23263056) Homepage Journal
      Thank you. I work for Adobe and have been involved in more open source and open standards stuff including PDF going to ISO, The core Flash runtime VM (Tamarin) going open source to SourceForge, the Flex Compiler going open source and the data services component going open source and free (BlaseDS). Adobe really is listening to groups like Slashdot and from now on, anyone who thinks they can write a leaner Flash Player can go ahead and do it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by delt0r (999393)
        So then can you clear up the IP issues with On2 VP6 and mpeg codecs that are used in the players? Does "free" mean that we all have a unrecoverable license to use these codecs (that means all the patents that are claimed over these codecs as well) with flash? Or does free just mean Adobe part of the license fees are waived?

        Example: can I use flash (mpeg/VP6) as the movie format without paying license fees in a commercial video game? Note that no GPL code could be used of course.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ystar (898731)
        The mere idea of higher ups at a previously assumed Big Evil Company paying attention to discussions on Slashdot (with critiques here often ruthless, multifaceted, and heavily biased towards consumer interests) is pretty shocking, and heartening.

        If this signals a major shift in Adobe's operating culture, I think it's cause for celebration.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by delt0r (999393)
      As I have asked elsewhere (without reply) what about patents, and codecs. The format is all nice and stuff but IIRC flash uses the VP6 & VP7 codecs from On2. On2 is not really all that open with its IP as the ffmpeg group found out (IIRC). Its like having a open avi format but you still have to pay for the codecs that we use.

      Adobe IMO has a good reputation (ps and pdf). But there nothing about this i can find on the website. I really would like some more information about the IP issues. Without a clea

    • Re:too little, too late (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Jellybob (597204) on Thursday May 01 2008, @06:31AM (#23261476) Journal
      Let me translate that to the real world for you:

      "I'd Adobe to put the Flash player (as well as the Flash program itself) under the GPL license. However, if they don't, they'll still have > 90% browser penetration, and be used by YouTube to deliver huge quantities of crap video to people."

      Right now, in the age of streaming video, Flash is about as relevant as you can get.
      • [Flash] used by YouTube to deliver huge quantities of crap video to people

        YouTube have recently added MPEG-4 support though (done for the iphone, I beleive) :

        http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2008/04/download-youtube-videos-as-mp4-files.html [blogspot.com]

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Ilgaz (86384) *
          Actually VP6 and 7, Sorenson Spark are very high end codecs. Youtube's problem was (deliberately?) encoding video like junk with horrible settings and the original's horrible quality as it is ripped from TV (already compressed), low end DV camera without colour correction.

          The big issue was the Sorenson and On2 being big time MS Lapdogs and never offering any real solution except Windows market. Truth to be said, they are not bad quality codecs. Check their reference pages (demos etc.) to see what they actu
            • Yes, but they are archaic (Video 3). In fact, those junk codecs prevented Quicktime video to take off.

                I thought there would be Spark codec. Industry standard codecs always have at least a Quicktime Export plugin. Spark never had it.

              People moving to H264 on Flash and it doesn't even make On2 guys to ship a VPC7 encoder plugin for Quicktime too.

    • Yes, then we'd be able to fix why it uses 100% CPU time most of the time.

    • Re:too little, too late (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Viceroy Potatohead (954845) on Thursday May 01 2008, @06:49AM (#23261598) Homepage
      I don't think that's necessary. It's the same thing with hardware, or MS formats or whatever. If a complete and accurate spec is available, the open source community can make their own player/driver/reader/writer or whatever.

      Adobe may not be providing an open source player here, but they are giving the information needed for us to make one ourselves. Isn't that basically what we've been wanting from hardware manufacturers?

      Also, this makes a Linux Flash writer possible. oOFlash? I really don't see anything to complain about here.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by mjbkinx (800231)

        Also, this makes a Linux Flash writer possible. oOFlash? I really don't see anything to complain about here.

        I've been making SWFs on Linux for years. Swfmill [swfmill.org] is quite capable (the svn version has very good SVG support and works well with Inkscape), there is a fine language and compiler called haXe [haxe.org] that can even compile for other targets as well (the Neko [neko-vm.org] and generated Javascript, with PHP support [weblob.net] in the works), among other tools.

        Also, the Flex SDK is already open [adobe.com] and works on Linux (it's Java). Finally, their (proprietary) Flexbuilder for Linux is currently a public alpha [adobe.com].

    • If the specs are open you can just write your own. At that point, why does it really matter what license their implementation has?
    • Relevancy isn't determined by your personal taste.
      It's determined by the fact that most browsers on this earth have it installed.
      Flash already is relevant and there doesn't seem to be any realistic reason for it to become less relevant any time soon.
    • I think you better check real World. I am telling as a person who had to convert (keeping originals) hundreds of Quicktime Mov files to Flash to give option to people who refuses to install anything to view videos. Of course I keep the original Quicktime Mpeg4 files on site.

      Multimedia vendors need to make sure their application/plugin supports Flash (FLV) giving more performance, quality and additional options than original Flash player to stay relevant. It seems only Real Networks figured this fact with th

    • Say NO to Closed Source software.
      Say no to zealotry.

    • Say NO to Closed Source software.
      In all seriousness, doesn't this mean the same thing as saying NO to capitalism? Or am I missing the open source bandwag...errr boat and is there money to be made for Adobe to go open source?

    • Say NO to Closed Source software.

      Right, but also say YES to good quality open specs (I don't know if the ones in question are good quality). In the long run, a good open spec for a file format is a much more useful to developers than an open source program that uses an otherwise undocumented file format. Having to look up magic numbers and offsets in other peoples' code all the time just plain sucks. The best you can do is writing up a spec based on examination of the code, and use that for your own develo

      • Do you have the sourcecode for you machines BIOS?

        Some people do [wikipedia.org].

        The firmware in the RAID controller of your servers?

        With software RAID 10, the firmware that performs the striping and mirroring is in the operating system's kernel, which is Free if you're using *BSD or *Linux. With hardware RAID 10, yes, you're usually limited to a single source of replacement controllers.

    • Does this mean the Nintendo Wii will be able to work with all flash sites?

      No. Even if Gnash uses these specs to become fully compatible with recent Flash, the Wii platform uses code signing with a fixed root CA to ensure that only executables approved by Nintendo can run.*

      *Yes, Wii homebrew exists. But at this stage of the scene, how many end users would be willing to try the Twilight Hack to run a third-party web browser, especially once Nintendo applies a patch to defeat the Twilight Hack in all new copies of the LoZ: Twilight Princess Game Disc, as happened with MechAssau

    • Only if Nintendo/Opera is willing to write their own SWF player to these specs.
    • Adobe is pretty interesting. Not that I know a lot about them, but they seem to open up the file formats, and compete on the tools.

      Agreed, and to me this is a Good Thing(tm). There are lots of tools for reading and creating PDF - tools that have nothing to do with Adobe beyond implementing a format they originated. Do the same for the Flash ecosystem and we'll see open source tools, alternative proprietary tools and the continuation of Adobe proprietary tools also.

      In other words, proper competition an

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Gavagai80 (1275204)
      Somehow I don't think SWF would be very useful to, say, KDE4. Or to just about any scenario where you want a static image that scales to any resolution. I've yet to see flash used for static images anywhere, for good reason. The reports of the demise of SVG are highly exaggerated.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by snuf23 (182335)
      Well that's what happens when you take an application designed for making non-interactive 2D animations and turn it into a development platform.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.