Again, we don't have Flash 10.1 on our N900's because of Nokia, not Adobe.
Flash 10.1 was shown working on the N900 almost a year ago!
And Adobe could resolve the issue entirely themselves by releasing it! But they won't because they want big bucks for it and subscribe to the nonsense that mobile platforms are "special."
And Adobe could resolve the issue entirely themselves by releasing it! But they won't because they want big bucks for it and subscribe to the nonsense that mobile platforms are "special."
That is what I'm saying.
and as much as I hate it, I'm starting to think that Nokia is using the same tactics as Apple does to sell more devices:
Don't include/update something that would work just fine on current devices so people want to buy the next one.
Nokia is getting closer and closer to be added to my "don't buy anything from them ever again" list.
Apple and Sony are already on the list.
And Adobe could resolve the issue entirely themselves by releasing it! But they won't because they want big bucks for it and subscribe to the nonsense that mobile platforms are "special."
I think the question would be... if they did release it, who would support it? Not Nokia... and unfortunately, Adobe won't do it because they won't have the ability to support it themselves without Nokia's help.
And Nokia has basically EOL the N900. That's the dilemma I see there.
But my seriously biggest problem? Most of these flash sites are not using a damn 10.1 specific enhancement. Very few are, but most are not. The developers, the designers and the people are (in most cases) artificially forcing the need for Flash 10,0,0,0 via SWFObject and not really recompiling the *.swf or *.flv in Flash CS5 requiring any true Flash 10.x player needs.
The difficulty in porting flash from one platform to another is that flash itself needs to access to the OS and hardware directly, and it's all proprietary operation that are hidden in the binary.
That's the major reason why Steve rejected Flash in the first place, because they don't like any other application has more access right than the API they offer. He is not even approve terminal emulator (dunno now what).
That's to say, while you most of you'd believe Flash is available for maemo and it's Nokia fault for rejecting it, butI doubt Adobe was ever ready to release it for maemo.
I'm starting to think that Nokia is using the same tactics as Apple does to sell more devices:
Don't include/update something that would work just fine on current devices so people want to buy the next one.
Possibly. That or what Adobe is asking for 10.1 is completely ridiculous for an older product, and Nokia would by no means be the first (or second, or third, or fiftieth) to make that call.
I'm sticking with my original answer though: the problem is Flash and Adobe. I thought we learned the problem of such dependencies back in the bad old IE6 days?
I think the question would be... if they did release it, who would support it? Not Nokia... and unfortunately, Adobe won't do it because they won't have the ability to support it themselves without Nokia's help.
So it's just like with your desktop PC, where the support for Flash is coming from Microsoft/Dell/HP/whoever... NOT!
I really cannot se how people see this as Nokia's fault. Adobe has the software but doesn't want to release it. It is Adobe's decision and their fault.
Do you guys really think that Nokia should be paying every software company out there just to get us users free software? I don't.
The N900 is a computer, and Adobe should just release the software for it. Just like for every other computer.
