Active Topics

 


Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 436 | Thanked: 406 times | Joined on Jan 2010
#1021
Besides the above post, there is also the option of making a petition to nokia so they may bring flash 10 to n900.
 
Posts: 455 | Thanked: 278 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Oregon, USA
#1022
Originally Posted by SavageD View Post
Besides the above post, there is also the option of making a petition to nokia so they may bring flash 10 to n900.
What does Nokia care? You've already bought the device, so they've already made their money. And there's still a huge customer base that is still frothing at the mouth to buy the next Nokia product.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to craftyguy For This Useful Post:
Guest | Posts: n/a | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on
#1023
Let's see... HTC Desire, EVO 4G, Motorola Droid, and quite a few others have Flash Player 10.1 now. Still no word from Nokia is... downright unacceptable.
 

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to For This Useful Post:
Posts: 122 | Thanked: 121 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#1024



What's the excuse for this?
 

The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to SD. For This Useful Post:
crown77's Avatar
Posts: 218 | Thanked: 56 times | Joined on Nov 2009 @ Germany , Thüringen
#1025
I guess Nokia decided that they never will get there hands on the N900 maemo5 System again. I wouldnt wonder if they dont may speak about it on the Nokia HQ couse its banned.

This is ironic but the sad truth. Did we see anything from Nokia for our N900 devices since PR1.2? Anything?
 
Guest | Posts: n/a | Thanked: 0 times | Joined on
#1026
Many will argue that new builds of the OS exist now. Many will argue that Flash 10.1 isn't needed or wanted. Many will argue... a lot of things.

But what's not arguable? Froyo is being released on more than just the Nexus One, thus Flash 10.1 is showing up on quite a few handsets that were previously only speculation. And ultimately, the N900 has no concrete date of when this is going to happen for Maemo 5.

Those are the facts.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to For This Useful Post:
Posts: 3,319 | Thanked: 5,610 times | Joined on Aug 2008 @ Finland
#1027
Originally Posted by crown77 View Post
This is ironic but the sad truth. Did we see anything from Nokia for our N900 devices since PR1.2? Anything?
For the record - we did. The first release of the Web Runtime, an update to QtMobility and a low-level camera API no other platform has. All this while most of Nokia was on vacation. The problem is that users have firmware blindness - no service or upgrade is noticed unless it is part of a firmware. Which is bad, because at some point some manager will say 'hey, why release this, let's wait and run it through the firmware process, if that makes people happy'.

That said, I wouldn't hold my breath for Flash 10. By now it is clear that the Open Screen Project does not work, and that vendors do not wish bear the cost Adobe is trying shift to them. Currently, this means Flash ports are done by 3rd parties (like Movial doing Flash for MeeGo and Android), which in turn means an almost guaranteed bad support cycle. I'm not too optimistic on the future of Flash on mobile platforms, the youngest crop of Android devices got 10.1, but every next upgrade will be fight even for them.
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to attila77 For This Useful Post:
Posts: 122 | Thanked: 121 times | Joined on Mar 2010
#1028
Originally Posted by gerbick View Post
Many will argue that Flash 10.1 isn't needed or wanted. Many will argue... a lot of things.
Flash 10.1 will cut back on video hosting costs in two ways and I think a lot of major hosts will want to switch to using these new delivery methods as soon as possible, when most people on the web have Flash 10.1 installed and not 10.0 or earlier.

Traditionally the Flash Player has had to download an entire video over http at once, even parts the viewer doesn't watch. If someone doesn't watch the entire video then it's a waste of bandwidth for the host. Some sites have deliberately slowed video downloads so viewers who click off early aren't as likely to download the entire file, but it still happens.

With http dynamic streaming the video is sent only in chunks and stitched together by the player(NetStream.AppendBytes()). So if someone watches part of a video they will only download part of the video, guaranteed. The host doesn't have to use bandwidth throttling and it's even an improvement over RTMP streams because of the ability to have a larger buffer. RTMP streams can annoyingly skip if the viewer's download speed is too slow.

Flash 10.1 also makes it possible to have a "zero cost" video site with P2P file sharing. Here's a proof of concept posted last week:

http://www.flashrealtime.com/video-o...t-replication/
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SD. For This Useful Post:
Posts: 1,258 | Thanked: 672 times | Joined on Mar 2009
#1029
Funny that, http has supported byte range requests for files since forever..

Coincidentally, the youtube http server lies and says it doesn't support resume, but actually does..

MPlayer can stream and seek inside .avi without downloading the entire file, over http, when the http server supports resume.. So it sounds to me like they're first sabotaging regular resume, and then fixing it by reinventing something new they can sell or patent..
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to shadowjk For This Useful Post:
Posts: 320 | Thanked: 137 times | Joined on Apr 2010
#1030
I hate that I cant stream music from http://www.deezer.com/en/ and it's a shame. I know there are alternatives like last.fm etc but thats not the point. Deezer has various mobile options as well including Android, Iphone, Blackberry etc but nothing for Maemo heart broken!
 
Reply

Tags
adobe, adobe flash, blahblah, flash, flash 10, flash 10.1, fremantle, future, idiotic thread, maemo, maemo 5, nokia, nokia fails, update


 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:54.