Less than a week after I remove Flash from all of my systems, Adobe releases Flash 10.1 which does [b]not[/b] have a 64-bit version at all. And at the same time, Adobe closed and removed the download for the 64-bit Flash alpha (read as pos).
This is where the download used to be:
[url]http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/64bit.html[/url]
But now it just says it's gone.
This is great news for me because now I can't go back to Flash even if I wanted to. Thank you Adobe.
But damn, how incompetent do you have to be to not be able to compile something in 64-bit? All you need is a 64-bit compiler. If Adobe has to actually modify their code to support 64-bit they did something wrong.
This thread is now about how much cock Adobe sucks.
My shit could write software better than Adobe.
you are really that mad over something like this? Adobe doesn't have to make flash for linux. yes, I know it's really shitty but it's better than nothing.
Gnash is almost as good (read terrible) as flash now, believe it or not.
IMDB actually uses Flash 8 for their movie trailers. I've confirmed that it works with Gnash.
For Youtube I use the HTML5 beta in Chrome which works well. But when it tries to force me to use Flash because it wants to display an ad I use [url=http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/50771]Youtube without Flash Auto[/url]
So I can still watch anything I want on Youtube and IMDB. I can live without any other video site.
An added benefit is now Flash ads no longer work on my system, which is nice because Chrome has crappy ad blocking.
This is bullshit.
Fairly sure I already explained this, but 32-bit Flash 10.1 in a 64-bit browser appears to be the fastest combination, and it is piss easy to set up.
[QUOTE=Darkimmortal;22528047]Fairly sure I already explained this, but 32-bit Flash 10.1 in a 64-bit browser appears to be the fastest combination, and it is piss easy to set up.[/QUOTE]
Flash 32-bit is already setup for me in Linux Mint 9 x64. :c00l:
...and it runs just fine. :colbert:
[QUOTE=Pixel Heart;22528645]Flash 32-bit is already setup for me in Linux Mint 9 x64. :c00l:
...and it runs just fine. :colbert:[/QUOTE]
Get your dirty hacks out of here.
I only run pure 100% 64-bit Linux.
[QUOTE=Pixel Heart;22528645]Flash 32-bit is already setup for me in Linux Mint 9 x64. :c00l:
...and it runs just fine. :colbert:[/QUOTE]
That's stupid.
[editline]03:35PM[/editline]
And I actually used to use Mint, it's shite.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22531719]Get your dirty hacks out of here.
I only run pure 100% 64-bit Linux.[/QUOTE]
:wtc:
Yea, I hate having to download lib32 crap for indy games.
If anyone got the whole game packaging thing right, it's Hemisphere Games w/ Osmos.
They should drop the 32 bit support in newer versions, instead.
[editline]02:14PM[/editline]
Or they could spend 2 more man-days and compile both versions properly.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22523579]
But damn, how incompetent do you have to be to not be able to compile something in 64-bit? All you need is a 64-bit compiler. If Adobe has to actually modify their code to support 64-bit they did something wrong.[/QUOTE]
LOOOOOL
That would be the case except in many instances, especially if the app is greater than one line of code. In Flash's case, video decoding is something that would be something that must be fixed up so that it would compile in 64-bit.
There is no need for the Flash client to be in 64-bit. It provides no advantage if it were to be 64-bit.
Why bother compiling it?
Enjoy the web without the rich media plugin, because HTML5 is currently a joke.
Also you're an idiot for being purely 64-bit.
[QUOTE=DogGunn;22554992]LOOOOOL
That would be the case except in many instances, especially if the app is greater than one line of code. In Flash's case, video decoding is something that would be something that must be fixed up so that it would compile in 64-bit.
There is no need for the Flash client to be in 64-bit. It provides no advantage if it were to be 64-bit.
Why bother compiling it?
Enjoy the web without the rich media plugin, because HTML5 is currently a joke.
Also you're an idiot for being purely 64-bit.[/QUOTE]
They already had 10 64bit. The jump between 10 and 10.1 is minor. It would still take MAXIMALLY few hours to fix for 64 IF there were any problems with it.
Problem with 32bit flash is that it cannot properly run inside 64bit browser, and browser is a major part of system.
The browser is over half of my system, even though I despise flash, some sites still require it.
By the way, YouTube works fine for me with HTML5.
I seriously hate flash as platform, but it's used a lot. I hope that HTML5 replaces it completely.
Well, I've found a youtube solution for now.
It's called minitube, and I like it a lot.
[url=http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34462]AUR link[/url].
[QUOTE=DogGunn;22554992]Also you're an idiot for being purely 64-bit.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, why did Microsoft even bother updating things like Windows Calculator and Character Map to 32-bit when Windows 95 was released? They don't need to address gigabytes of memory; leaving them 16-bit would've been fine.
The reason is that 16-bit and 32-bit code don't mix, just like 32-bit and 64-bit code don't mix. Supporting both on the same system requires extra effort, dual copies of system libraries compiled both ways, that sort of thing. It's much easier if everything's the same, even if not everything strictly needs it.
We're in a transition period right now; we can't switch everything to 64-bit overnight because there's too much existing 32-bit software out there already. But the point of a transition is to make progress toward the end state, which is everything 64-bit. Microsoft is no longer doing 32-bit builds of their operating systems: Windows Server 2008 R2 is 64-bit only, and Windows 8 will be too. Those OSes still have support for running 32-bit [i]applications[/i], but that'll eventually be dropped as well, just like 16-bit support was dropped in Vista. (And even though XP supported it, when's the last time you ran a 16-bit program in XP?)
People running 100% 64-bit are ahead of the curve. Linux systems tend to be farther ahead than Windows, since most applications are open-source so the porting work can be done by anyone, not just the original developer who may no longer be interested in supporting the product. But Flash is one of the remaining high-profile applications that's still stuck in 32-bit-land, and since it's closed source even the Linux users are stuck waiting for Adobe to stop dragging its feet and get with the times.
[QUOTE=Wyzard;22559406]there's too much existing 32-bit software out there already[/QUOTE]
not only that, but there is also too much existing 32-bit hardware out there. All the people still stuck on Pentium IV's (you would be surprised just how big this number is) would be screwed, along with all the people on VIA processors and the majority of Intel Atom users. That's just too many people to leave behind.
Really though, x86 (including x86_64) is an outdated platform. My vote goes towards research on ARM.
[QUOTE=Wyzard;22559406]when's the last time you ran a 16-bit program in XP?[/QUOTE]
DOOM on my school's computers :v:
But seriously, we could use programs like DOSbox to run them if we [i]really[/i] needed to.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;22570102]not only that, but there is also too much existing 32-bit hardware out there. All the people still stuck on Pentium IV's (you would be surprised just how big this number is) would be screwed, along with all the people on VIA processors and the majority of Intel Atom users. That's just too many people to leave behind.
Really though, x86 (including x86_64) is an outdated platform. My vote goes towards research on ARM.[/QUOTE]
I agree with this statement. ARM processors are very powerful, yet draw little power and don't get hot. They are great mobile processors, but I'd like to see more powerful adaptations for regular laptop and desktop use.
I installed 32bit flash on my 64bit system. Sometimes YouTube won't respond to ANY clicks.
This is unacceptable.
It's just normally flash. Flash should go to hell, and hello HTML5!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.