Erm... still no. Adobe handles the port - upon vendor solicitation, they had worked with ARM for processor optimization, tailors the plugin for the platform. Beta testing - view http://labs.adobe.com - is still done by Adobe, once it is "finished" it is released to the vendor/manufacturer for their approval and implementation.

Find where Adobe has stated that they've "done the work" and it's up to Nokia to distribute it. It's been listed in this thread a few times.

What you are proposing is that a 3rd party (Adobe) has the ability to distribute, approve and push into another vendor's OS or app store an application/plugin and they're the ones that certify it... that's totally incorrect. Google approved Adobe AIR, Google approved Flash Player 10.1 - that's after QA testing and the like.

You can keep repeating all you like, there was never a public for ARM. There was a public beta for Windows, Mac, Linux - you know... the operating systems where you can install things as such. How hard is that to understand? You're going at this like the ARM based OS's are not under some form of version control to avoid the diversity that's on x86 based OS's - you know... where people can add, change, modify hardware and the OS. Each and every ARM based OS on the tablets, phones, et al are under the control of somebody else, usually the vendor. And then Adobe has to play by those rules. Everybody does... care to name one plugin that breaks this observation?

Anyway, Adobe does the work, Nokia does the implementation and distribution. Ever care to ask the better question as to where Texas Instruments got their Adobe Flash from?

Which platforms support your verbiage? Don't list Mac, Windows nor Linux. Start there.

Yet on my computer, I'm already running 10.2 beta. But on the "mobile computer" you can't even install a newer version of a plugin, get an updated version of Skype, update or maintain the BME... face it, if it's closed source on Maemo, you're SOL.

TI got it from Adobe. TI has to state that they will not distribute it based on the manufacturer of the handset and OS. Until Nokia gets off their fat arse and says "It's ok to distribute", TI and Adobe can't distribute it.

As it stands, it is unoptimized, ultimately unusable as it stands. Either Nokia needs to work on its implementation better, TI needs to optimize it better for Nokia or Adobe needs to get paid to finish the work that Nokia is unwilling to do.

You've somehow applied open source logic - public betas - and desktop OS - ability to install closed source betas and updates - to this situation.

It just doesn't fit. If you think it does, please show me where this has been allowed in the past. VLC? Silverlight? Skype? Real? Give me a place where updates and/or betas have been installable that affect another piece of software that's tied to the OS - read: browser - that supports your position.