Whose fault is it?

25 comments ↓

#1 Stefan Stuhr on 05.10.10 at 00:56

Maybe people are simply more likely to defend things for which they have paid.

#2 Daeng Bo on 05.10.10 at 01:13

Linux users believe in choice?

#3 Peter on 05.10.10 at 03:18

Linux does play flash.

#4 Khaled on 05.10.10 at 03:53

Apple fans are brainless Jobs worshippers?

#5 btmorex on 05.10.10 at 04:07

I’m fairly sure linux fans (rightly) blame adobe. At least I do.

#6 ethana2 on 05.10.10 at 04:10

Linux is a kernel, cramming Flash into would make it worse than /Windows/.

My Ubuntu Dell and Droid Incredible play Flash just fine.

#7 Jess Sightler on 05.10.10 at 04:33

Back when Flash was not well-developed for Linux, I blamed Adobe. Now that the plugin is relatively mature and stable, I blame distros (if they fail to include it… but under Ubuntu it actually works rather well… so I blame noone).

#8 Chris jones on 05.10.10 at 05:16

I realise this probably isn’t a serious blog post, but the answer seems fairly obvious…

Apple reject the concept of flash, so its users cry for alternatives, but Linux is so desparate to have flash we have at least 3 different plugins, none of which work well, so we cry for them to be fixed ;)

#9 someone on 05.10.10 at 05:50

It is Ubuntu’s fault for popularising Linux and bringing lots of clueless idiots who don’t give a shit about free software.

#10 Anonymous on 05.10.10 at 06:08

Inferiority complex on part of the Linux fans. We all have this nagging feeling that we could just go back to Windows if we really wanted to use things like Flash. It won’t go away until Linux stop sucking and start killing big time.

#11 Lubomir Rintel on 05.10.10 at 06:34

A fault? What fault? Is it a fault to drop support for legacy video format that never really worked? I’m positive this counts as a feature. Well done, Apple.

What’s wrong on iPad is not letting users install their software there. Apple’s fault.

Despite that, last time I checked Flash worked on Linux. Sure, it was crappy. Whom can you blame for crappiness of the closed tool if not its writers? If it’s anyone’s fault, it’s Adobe’s.

Am I a good Linux fanboy now?

#12 nicu on 05.10.10 at 07:58

Those are not real Linux fans, but freeloaders who want a cheaper Windows. Technically Flash can run on Linux but ideologically can’t be included out of the box.

#13 Felipe on 05.10.10 at 09:13

Lolzorz, this is quite funny.

I’ve always blamed both Adobe and flash-heavy sites. Adobe is at fault for producing a damn faulty and cpu-hogging piece middleware, while flash-heavy sites are to blame for using flash for things that would be much better done with AJAX, or even just using JS (is it really necessary to use flash for pop-up menus?) .

But, of course, Apple fanboys are quite extreme in their fanatism, so it’s always the fault of the other guy. Many linux users (coughubuntuuserscough) blame linux for not having good flash support, but I think anyone who can work out a logical explanation of things should not be of this opinion.

#14 oliver on 05.10.10 at 09:49

Maybe Linux users have higher expectations and can’t be talked out of it that easily?

It’s nice if the Ipad accelerates the switch from Flash to HTML5 video; thanks a lot. But saying that “having no Flash is actually a blessing because I spent too much time on Farmville anyway” sounds very much like sour grapes. I, as Linux user, want HTML5 video _and_ working Flash :-)

#15 Andreas Nilsson on 05.10.10 at 09:52

This have been on my mind for quite a while too. :)

#16 Fri13 on 05.10.10 at 10:45

The Japanese have a saying, “Fix the problem, not the blame.” Find out what’s fucked up and fix it. Nobody gets blamed. We’re [Americans] always after who fucked up. Their way is better.

#17 valentin on 05.10.10 at 11:10

Maybe because linux users would like to see a opensource alternative to flash live moonlight for silverlight? but working

#18 steve on 05.10.10 at 12:13

Hehe very good =] Like the more likely to defend something paid for comment

#19 Andreas on 05.10.10 at 15:29

I dislike both websites that use Flash (for using nonstandard/closed technology) and Adobe (for providing crappy Flash on Linux). Quite logical, isn’t it?

#20 Meck on 05.10.10 at 16:04

What does this mean?

There is a Flash plug in for Linux and has been for years. it works fine.

You can say ‘Windows doesn’t play Flash’ and be equally accurate because yes, for each platform, you must download and install the plug in.

#21 Tim M. on 05.10.10 at 17:37

Clearly it’s *your* fault ;-)

#22 Mike on 05.10.10 at 17:40

Linux does play flash, just not very well. We know we can improve. (And Adobe could help)

#23 Dan Nicholson on 05.10.10 at 21:19

I find it humorous that many of the commentors are informing a guy who develops a flash decoder[1] about the state of flash on linux.

1. http://swfdec.freedesktop.org/wiki/DevelopersList

#24 gucci on 05.12.10 at 08:38

Windows doesn’t play Flash’ and be equally accurate because yes, for each platform, you must download and install the plug in.

#25 someone on 05.13.10 at 01:54

Dan Nicholson: for some value of “develops”, swfdec looks dead upstream to me.