|
Description
Ubuntu has this wonderful UbuFox integration that prompts you to install missing plugins via the package manager when you visit a webpage that requires Flash.
But YouTube (and some other sites) will tell you you're missing Flash and then link you to the Adobe Flash download webpage, which has a .tar.gz and an .rpm but no .deb download.
Since we already have .deb files for flashplugin-nonfree in the repositories, would it be difficult for Ubuntu/Canonical to convince Adobe to host it alongside the other download options?
Tags:
(none)
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
holizz wrote on the 29 Apr 08 at 20:52
| |
-1 Convince them to show people how to install it instead.
|
|
madjr wrote on the 29 Apr 08 at 21:15
|
+1 great idea
-1 to holizz idea
|
|
sf_007 wrote on the 29 Apr 08 at 23:30
| |
yeah, sure it would be nice. +10
|
|
Auzy wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 02:26
|
+0
You cant expect them to do it. Because then they also need to host a tar.gz still too, rpm's, recipes (gobo), etc.
We need to unify our package management techniques before we can expect big companies to support us
|
|
hardyn wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 06:33
|
They used to offer this, around the dapper/feisty days.
They have chosen to pull the deb.
|
|
DAC1138 wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 06:36
|
This brainstorm isnt for ideas about "convincing" people. It's for developing new ideas. I'm sure this has been thought of before, and Adobe cannot just be "convinced" unless convinced == $$$.
What's in it for Adobe? Why should they fork over money for more servers and bandwidth to host .debs for us ubuntu users? This isn't an Ubuntu issue, it's an Adobe thing.
|
|
glibik wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 07:38
|
Must admit I have no desire to be subjected to CPU & bandwidth wasting nature of 'flash' web sites, so have no desire to see my nice Ubuntu system poisoned by that particular abomination.
That said, for those who really want that rubbish there is a tool called alien that can deal with rpm packages. I would imagine the tar.gz file comes with instructions for how to deal with it.
|
|
PeterKraus wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 09:41
| |
See, the idea of pressure on Adobe is good, but I would really like to see x86_64 plugin for Linux first...
|
|
Wouter.de.Groot wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 11:02
| |
In your own post you indicate the proper package is in the repository... why do you need it on their website, too?
|
|
octathlon wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 18:53
|
"Ubuntu has this wonderful UbuFox integration that prompts you to install missing plugins via the package manager when you visit a webpage that requires Flash."
Then maybe it should also detect when you are at the Adobe Flash download page and prompt you in that case as well.
|
|
aysiu wrote on the 30 Apr 08 at 22:32
|
If people ignored the prompt the first time, why would they see it the second time?
By the way, no one is asking you to "poison" your own system with Flash. Not every idea has to apply to your particular situation. Develop some empathy. Seriously.
And if Brainstorms aren't for convincing, then I'd really like to see some guidelines for creating Brainstorms and see those guidelines enforced.
This an actual idea that has practical value, unlike most of the junk I've seen on here.
Finally, if Adobe is willing to host, yum, .rpm, and .tar.gz, I don't really see how it makes their lives so difficult to host a .deb, too. If they didn't want to be bothered with it, they could host only the .tar.gz or not bother hosting at all. Do people even think before they comment?
Lastly, if you believe people should read complicated instructions to install something as simple as a Flash plugin, perhaps you haven't really read Bug #1 or any of Ubuntu's philosophy statements.
|
|
aysiu wrote on the 1 May 08 at 00:51
| |
Just realized I said "finally" and then "lastly."
|
|
livio wrote on the 3 May 08 at 13:15
| |
I like the idea, but I think that is better to promote autopackage for third party and proprietary softwares, but for now, I will vote +1
|
|
Madlax wrote on the 3 May 08 at 14:39
|
Ubuntu cant succeed without the support and backing of major 3rd party software makers.
Even if Ubuntu's philosophy is mainly to support and promote free-software, there will always be some propeiatory software that some users need. it is necessary then for ubuntu's success to provide these needs to those users so as to kill any bullet point that windows offer.
Adobe and others must see that there is a significant demand from the Linux community to realize that they are missing opportunities by not supporting it.
I,m with this idea, there should be more talks with 3rd parties like Adobe, if they cant host a debian package then why did they bother with a tar.gz one ?
|
|
tgape wrote on the 6 May 08 at 03:16
|
In my experience, about 90% of Flash use on the web is to abuse the user's processor to show them content that they probably don't want. A number of these interfere with my keyboard shortcuts as well - I find myself stuck on a page until I can bring myself to touch the rodent.
When it's not used for annoying ads on otherwise more reasonable pages, it's frequently used to convert an entire page into CPU suck mode. These pages generally have so much effort spent on making them look nice beyond all else that they function very poorly. In general, I find I get information about what I'm looking for faster by avoiding the Flash and Shockwave sites, even when they are the sites that have the primary data - simply because navigating through them is much more of a chore than googling up another website that has since started talking about whatever it is on the flash/shockwave infested horror. To this end, I find not having Flash and Shockwave support to provide me with a better end-user experience.
This is not to say that the technologies don't have a lot of potential - but given the amount of abuse of the technologies, I don't feel it's worth it to put up with that for the few meager instances where someone actually makes good use of them.
|
|
Paul Kishimoto wrote on the 10 May 08 at 13:09
|
I made this comment on another idea, but here it is again:
Adobe doesn't have to be convinced to host anything; they only need to add an apt-URL link: apt://flashplugin-nonfree
|
|
probono wrote on the 14 May 08 at 21:35
|
Why does the Firefox-integrated Flash plugin installation assistant always fail?
And why can't Canonical get permission from Adobe to bundle flash, like Apple does?
|
|
hackel wrote on the 17 May 08 at 09:45
|
No, no, NO! Even if Adobe DID release their own DEB package, I'm sure neither Debian nor Ubuntu would use it. Like *every* other package, it is created and maintained independently of the original software author. This is done to enforce Debian policy and ensure that the package lives up to the high standards we have come to expect from Debian and its derivatives. I certainly would not trust a proprietary software company like Adobe to do this!
If anything, Adobe should simply stop releasing RPM packages so that all those Debian users don't feel envious. It is so trivial to uninstall flashplugin-nonfree and extract Adobe's tar.gz into your mozilla plugins directory, if you *must* have the newest, latest version before Ubuntu has it.
|
|
probono wrote on the 31 May 08 at 12:46
|
hackel, that is a matter of taste: I, for example, would like it if I could use the original upstream author's packages of each software. I already do it with Firefox and OpenOffice, and would like to see more open source projects go into that direction.
Two reasons:
1.) the author knows the intended behavior of his program best
2.) the author has always the latest version, without a delay
There should be a program in which original authors can have their debs reviewed, but that should be about it.
|
Post your comment
|
