flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Left Right <olegsivo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [MENTORS] Handling Adobe Binaries
Date Fri, 27 Apr 2012 13:23:02 GMT

I don't understand why is it illegal to write an alternative
playerglobal.swc. This does not reproduce what Adobe has done, this is just
a program that serves the same purpose, which, as a consequence, exhibits
similar behavior. It is easy to show that you don't need to reverse
anything in order to write such a program - because the documentation is
published and available to everyone.

On the other hand, it's probably me wishing that there be least possible
connections to Adobe and any other outside dependencies, too. I also
mentioned that this library is not a product distributed by Adobe before in
a less formal sense. I.e. there is no way to tell if the computer that is
going to have SDK installed might already have this library - same thing as
with flash player, for example. This is kind of a sloppy tradition of
proprietary soft to put their programs in random locations never
advertising the location, so I'd rather rely on something distributed in a
normal way, then hope that Adobe will ever comprehend the importance of
transparency of their installations. I mean, Flash player is one of the
most widely distributed programs for PCs, and there is no certain way to
tell if it is installed on a PC - I wouldn't want this kind of policy to
plunder SDK installations too.



  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message