Want Macromedia Flash Player for Pocket PC? That'll be $499!

[Darius Wey]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.macromedia.com/software/flashplayer/pocketpc/2002.html' target='_blank'>http://www.macromedia.com/software/...ketpc/2002.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"As of October 3, 2005 Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC download will no longer be available. Below are answers to some questions that you may have regarding the availability of Flash Player for Pocket PC. If you do not see answers to your questions here or in the additional resources listed below, please send your questions to [email protected]."</i><br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/web/2003/wey-20050430-Flash.jpg" /><br /><br />A few months ago, Macromedia promoted the mobile Flash space like there was no tomorrow, and now they've negated all that by announcing that the free Flash Player for Pocket PC is no longer free. In fact, it's no longer available! Instead, it has been replaced by a Standalone Flash Player that costs $499 from the <a href="http://www.macromedia.com/go/buy_fp6_ppc">Macromedia Worldwide Online store</a>. <br /><br /><b>"Why is Macromedia charging $499 for the Standalone Macromedia Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC 2003?"</b><br /><i>The Standalone Flash Player <u>gives developers the ability to create unlimited projectors (self running applications, without the need to install the Flash Player).</u> This functionality gives developers the ability to distribute unlimited projectors, to charge for their content, while providing an engaging experience for consumers.</i><br /><br />I don't know about you, but I think the world of Flash is a little bigger than just self-running applications. There are millions of web pages on the internet that make full use of Flash, and to void the average Joe of the ability to view them on a Pocket PC seems unimaginable. If Macromedia thinks that every mobile consumer will splurge $499 and/or rely on their OEM to bundle Flash with their Pocket PC, then I guess hell has frozen over.

[UnLoGiC]

I hope macromedia wakes up from their $499 dream and realizes their mistake... :(

[hockeydude]

hahahahah.......someone should tell Macromedia to get over themselves. I mean, Flash is nice, but for Windows Mobile.........it's really not that great, and it's especially not worth $499. I've tried running Flash apps before and atleast for me they had a tendency to be slow and when it comes to most games and applications I would rather just see them developted in a language more common to Windows Mobile.

[dignow96]

Have those fools lost their *#$%in' minds? $499 for a player utility? This has got to be some idiot buried under two tons of paperwork making that choice! My company's website is completely flashed based with a mobile version and we'll lose some 28% of our visitors if mobile users are cut out. This is completely unreal!

[Duncan]

Excellent news...!

Now - let's hope they follow this up by removing the free download for desktop browsers too. Then maybe the morons who insist on putting bloody flash intros on their websites will stop it and people will stop building aggravating websites using nothing but Flash.

[Sven Johannsen]

My company's website is completely flashed based with a mobile version and we'll lose some 28% of our visitors if mobile users are cut out.

Guess maybe Macromedia isn't aware that there are ways to view flash files other than with stand-alone players :roll: Guess mobile site content developers are going to have to find some other way to produce that sort of content. Is there an alternative? Or will mobile content just become less 'flashy'?

They way to become the defacto standard in content production is to make content consumption ubiquitous. Adobe figured that out. Repligo took the hint. What happened to Macromedia?

[ipaq_wannabe]

i think that the GREED got to Macromedia - now that they are one of the de-facto standards for presenting content over the web, they have taken their position in the market to get what they want (which is money)...

just my thoughts, though - but it really scares me...

[ctitanic]

Guys, do not waste your precious time posting here.

They have posted an email

[email protected]

Just sent them what you think about it. I just did it.

[wot_fan]

There is a thread on HoFo (http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=740063) that has a link where you can still download it for free.

[ctitanic]

I also posted the question in their forums to see what they are going to say...

http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/webforums/forum/categories.cfm?catid=195&amp;CFID=11825732&amp;CFTOKEN=56595ae0625da9cd-BC08A80F-AE06-5F51-AAA872462B7BA77B&amp;jsessionid=9630c4b0017069506063

[hamishmacdonald]

I just removed Flash from my Pocket PC. There's some space back, and one less web page annoyance.

Good riddance.

[nwd]

conduits has a free flash player called pocket spark
http://www.conduits.com/products.asp - bottom of page, there is a new beta on the download page also

[SteveHoward999]

Your front page comment is misleading. The standalone player purchase is for developers and has been available for years. It has never been designed as a consumer download.

I too will be chasing more information from Macromedia. As a long-term user of their development tools, I think this is rediculous!

[stevelam]

:rotfl:

*Checks watch*

*Relises the date*

Hang on this isnt April 1st. What are they doing.

*Thinks*

Hang on this is just mean. They gain market dominence and then milk it for all its worth. I will now be lobbying for unistallation of all Macromedia products that I can find. We must strike back. I'll bring the pitchforks!!!

*Growls menacingly*

[ctitanic]

conduits has a free flash player called pocket spark
http://www.conduits.com/products.asp - bottom of page, there is a new beta on the download page also

BTW, that's not compatible with WM5. It install a new PIE plugin that is not compatible with PIE at all.

[Sven Johannsen]

Your front page comment is misleading. The standalone player purchase is for developers and has been available for years. It has never been designed as a consumer download.

Not entirely. As it appears that they are withdrawing the PIE plugin as a download, if you want a flash player on your PPC you are going to have to buy the 'developer' version at $499. Even that though doesn't seem to support flash in web pages, but is rather a standalone viewer.

It does appear they are making a PIE plugin available to OEMs, and some have bundled it, but developing for mobile web pages at this point will have to be done with the realization that flash will not be universally supported, and adding the support will not be free, or maybe even possible, for the consumer.

[Darius Wey]

Your front page comment is misleading. The standalone player purchase is for developers and has been available for years. It has never been designed as a consumer download.

I know it has been available for years. My point is that without a free Flash player for consumers to download, it seems the only option left is a standalone player that costs $499 - and that in turn will provide unrestricted access to Flash on one's Pocket PC. I well and truly understand that it's a developer tool, but what's left for consumers? Diddly-squat.

To assume that all this isn't a problem because developers will package Flash as part of their self-running application is a little misguided - because there is so much other Flash content out there that will not work off this principle.

Edit: And all of what Sven said as well. ;)

[ignar]

Excellent news...!

Now - let's hope they follow this up by removing the free download for desktop browsers too. Then maybe the morons who insist on putting bloody flash intros on their websites will stop it and people will stop building aggravating websites using nothing but Flash.

:way to go: My wish exactly.

[Darius Wey]

Excellent news...!

Now - let's hope they follow this up by removing the free download for desktop browsers too. Then maybe the morons who insist on putting bloody flash intros on their websites will stop it and people will stop building aggravating websites using nothing but Flash.

:way to go: My wish exactly.

I guess if you had to "un-bookmark" a page, then this would be it then: http://www.2advanced.com/

:lol:

[SL33PYH34D]

Excellent news...!

Now - let's hope they follow this up by removing the free download for desktop browsers too. Then maybe the morons who insist on putting bloody flash intros on their websites will stop it and people will stop building aggravating websites using nothing but Flash.
Here, here... :)
Flash has its place, but it's certainly not for building complete websites or annoying intros.

[encece]

I've just decided never to use Flash on webpages again. NEVER!
I've been using an "evaluation" version and have been debating whether or not to buy the newest release. The price is waaaaay to high. I can never see how anyone spends that kind of money on an application.

Now the Player costs $500???!!!

Sure Flash give you almost unlimited creative ability on websites. But I never used much animation. I'm done with it. Goodbye Flash...hello HTML, JavaScript, CSS, etc! :)

[Duncan]

I guess if you had to "un-bookmark" a page, then this would be it then: http://www.2advanced.com/

:lol:

Perfect example of the work of the designers who should be tarred and feather and exiled to a desert island without a computer.

No Flash based page gets bookmarked by me. If there is a non-Flash alternative - I use that. If they insist on giving me Flash then they have nothing useful to say to me. Flash is for the lazy designer and the easily impressed client and is the worst of all internet technologies.

Someone tell me in what way we would be worse off if Flash had never been developed? Not that it can't be used for good - but it must always be an add-on not a necessity.

[ctitanic]

Wow! Duncan you are exagerating!
Macromedia is a good tool to create little animated movies! :D

[Gerard]

GIF is better for compatibility of simple animations, though lack of an audio component and interactivity are obvious drawbacks. Now that Conduits' Pocket Artist has decent animated GIF authoring I'm not much concerned whether there is ever to be Flash authoring for the PPC.

As for the PIE plugln; it's amusing, at times useful... but nothing I'd really miss. And since Í have the CAB file kicking around it's not like the situation is difficult. Seems likely anyone asking for it in a forum would get lots of responses, legal or not.

Macromedia has made lame decisions before. One of the dumbest, in my opinion, was to provide a nice standalone player/projector generator for Casio devices through MyCasio.com, for members (free registration) only. That's long-since withdrawn, and they never released an ARM version. Lame. Of course, I still have the MIPS CAB.

[Duncan]

Wow! Duncan you are exagerating!
Macromedia is a good tool to create little animated movies! :D

No - I'm really not.

Would the lack of 'little animated' Flash movies make the internet experience any the poorer? We'd still have WMV/MPEG/QT/animated GIFs etc. Menus can be animated better, faster and with more universal compatibility via JS, DHTML etc.

I'll say it again - Flash is the tool of the lazy designer and dumb client.

[Gerard]

But; lots of big studios doing animation for TV are slipping into Flash. It's easier to work with than 3D CGI stuff. My brother's been delving into it, somewhat reluctantly, after 10 years in a couple of the biggest animation companies. He points to teams 1/5 the size or less to develop feature length content, and relatively miniscule requirements equipment-wise. It's also much more readily scaleable than 3D stuff.

I thought Flash was moving towards universal presence in mobile devices. Wha' happened?

[ctitanic]

Wow! Duncan you are exagerating!
Macromedia is a good tool to create little animated movies! :D

No - I'm really not.

Would the lack of 'little animated' Flash movies make the internet experience any the poorer? We'd still have WMV/MPEG/QT/animated GIFs etc. Menus can be animated better, faster and with more universal compatibility via JS, DHTML etc.

I'll say it again - Flash is the tool of the lazy designer and dumb client.

wow, Duncan... are you calling me dumb client?! :D

[Gerard]

Whoa! I just read the Macromedia PPC FAQ and it says:

Was the Standalone Macromedia Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC 2003 available previously?
No, Macromedia has never produced a Standalone player for the Pocket PC before.

While appreciating that the 'question' references PPC2003, the 'answer' is a damned lie, as per my previous mention of the free MIPS standalone player which had/has a 'generate projector' option.

[mscdex]

No need to worry, you can still download the flash 6 player for pocketpc 2003 from their site here (http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/pocket_pc/ppc_installers/install_fp6_ppcax_en.exe). :)

[ctitanic]

Wow! Duncan you are exagerating!
Macromedia is a good tool to create little animated movies! :D

No - I'm really not.

Would the lack of 'little animated' Flash movies make the internet experience any the poorer? We'd still have WMV/MPEG/QT/animated GIFs etc. Menus can be animated better, faster and with more universal compatibility via JS, DHTML etc.

I'll say it again - Flash is the tool of the lazy designer and dumb client.

Just play this movie in your PC

{inappropriate content removed - c'mon ctitanic - you know we are a family friendly site :| } - EH.

Note: I do not develope anything in Macromedia.

[ctitanic]

No need to worry, you can still download the flash 6 player for pocketpc 2003 from their site here (http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/pocket_pc/ppc_installers/install_fp6_ppcax_en.exe). :)

the question is for how long? ;)

[mscdex]

No need to worry, you can still download the flash 6 player for pocketpc 2003 from their site here (http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/pocket_pc/ppc_installers/install_fp6_ppcax_en.exe). :)

the question is for how long? ;)

grab it while you can ;)

[allenalb]

Flash was not actually created by Macromedia. it was originally called FutureSplash Animator, and it showed tons of promise as a way to make scalable animation, offering the viewer a very interactive experience.

i remember one of the animations on the original website had a desk, and on the desk there was a coffee mug, and on the coffee mug, there was a joke. the original simpsons homepage on fox.com was done with FutureSplash, and you could zoom in on all of the buildings in the town.

it showed so much promise, that Macromedia bought it, and renamed it Flash, and then added all kinds of scripting, and audio and video features and bloat (although the audio was needed in my opinion)

i think Flash is lame on websites, and equally lame as executables, but for animation, i think it's great. infinitely scalable and resolution independent (meaning it looks better on HDTV than all those dvd's we wasted money on).


is there any open-source project out there that attempts to duplicate flash? if so, maybe we should all support that...

[Gerard]

No need to worry, you can still download the flash 6 player for pocketpc 2003 from their site here (http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/pocket_pc/ppc_installers/install_fp6_ppcax_en.exe). :)

So, have they simply neglected to delete it from their server? I found no link to that download on their site...

[Duncan]

Wow! Duncan you are exagerating!
Macromedia is a good tool to create little animated movies! :D

No - I'm really not.

Would the lack of 'little animated' Flash movies make the internet experience any the poorer? We'd still have WMV/MPEG/QT/animated GIFs etc. Menus can be animated better, faster and with more universal compatibility via JS, DHTML etc.

I'll say it again - Flash is the tool of the lazy designer and dumb client.

wow, Duncan... are you calling me dumb client?! :D

No. I'm saying that Flash is used by lazy designers and given to/asked for by dumb clients. That isn't the same as saying that everyone who uses/gets Flash is an example of either - but I would argue that they represent the majority users - and everyone who uses Flash as an integral part of their site design.

I said in a previous post that Flash can be used to do good things - and as long as Flash is a non-necessary add-on or a standalone app I'm perfectly happy with it as a nice peice of tech

[mscdex]

I found no link to that download on their site...

Google's cache can work wonders ;)

[Duncan]

Just play this movie in your PC

{inappropriate content removed - c'mon ctitanic - you know we are a family friendly site :| } - EH.

Note: I do not develope anything in Macromedia.

I should emphasise - I have no issue with Flash per se - I have a couple of Flash movie sites bookmarked. I have an issue with Flash in website design. When I say I wouldn't be sorry to see the back of Flash, and we wouldn't be the poorer for the lack of it, that is why - it is a massively abused tech. Would I miss funny Flash movies? Sure - but I would gain so much in web usability - and there will always be technology to make animated movies for web download.

[ctitanic]

No. I'm saying that Flash is used by lazy designers and given to/asked for by dumb clients. That isn't the same as saying that everyone who uses/gets Flash is an example of either - but I would argue that they represent the majority users - and everyone who uses Flash as an integral part of their site design.

I said in a previous post that Flash can be used to do good things - and as long as Flash is a non-necessary add-on or a standalone app I'm perfectly happy with it as a nice peice of tech

"The world to be world needs to have a little bit of everything!" ;)

[Tye]

grab it while you can ;)
Well, someone at Macromedia is reading all these posts on the various forums. The link appears to be dead now.

[ctitanic]

Well, someone at Macromedia is reading all these posts on the various forums. The link appears to be dead now.

You are right! and that tell us what exactly is what they want from us: our money!

[SteveHoward999]

i think Flash is lame on websites, and equally lame as executables, but for animation, i think it's great. infinitely scalable and resolution independent (meaning it looks better on HDTV than all those dvd's we wasted money on).



Actually Flash is lame for two things in particular

"Skip Intro" and banner ads.

Flash is capable of zillions more, but the people who use it for only animation and advertising have completely missed the point of what has become a sophisticated and powerful development tool. Sadly, in the real world, most of us only see the rubbish created by kids. The real clever stuff often remains in the corporate environment where people using it neither know or care that their enterprise data solution is made with Flash.

I've been thinking about this decision by Macromedia. I am not at all happy with it, as a developer, but taken from the perspective of consumer-interest web sites we will lose nothing tragic by not being able to see "skip intro" and banner ads. And I can still serve my corporate clients with more advanced stuff.

By the way if you are interested in seeing somethng more advanced using Flash on the Pocket PC you should look at this http://www.exlib.no - download the PPC file. It's big - 16 Mb. Install it to a momory card ...

[ctitanic]

I should emphasise - I have no issue with Flash per se - I have a couple of Flash movie sites bookmarked. I have an issue with Flash in website design. When I say I wouldn't be sorry to see the back of Flash, and we wouldn't be the poorer for the lack of it, that is why - it is a massively abused tech. Would I miss funny Flash movies? Sure - but I would gain so much in web usability - and there will always be technology to make animated movies for web download.

Don't worry, I got your point. I hate too when I'm browsing the web in my PPC and I can't access some of the features because of a macromedia objet inserted in the page.

[Duncan]

"The world to be world needs to have a little bit of everything!" ;)

Except Flash in web design - which is an idiot's tool. I'm not alone in thinking this - some pretty heavyweight people in the world of web design think the same.

[Gerard]

If indeed some Macromedia functionary is following these threads, and arguably PPCT is the most influential and up-to-date PPC site, then perhaps they'd deign to offer some insight into the rationale? Explain, in one place (to which no doubt all the other forums would link in a day or two), the logic behind offering Flash embedded capability on XP and a few models for free, downloadable for all manner of other devices, but suddenly $499 for us PPC users and not even fullly functional as a plugin for PIE??? Is that too much to ask?

[timbur]

Didn't Adobe take Macromedia over a few weeks ago? Anybody willing to pay for Acrobat Reader :?

tim

[mscdex]

Well, someone at Macromedia is reading all these posts on the various forums. The link appears to be dead now.

That won't matter. If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.


http://web.archive.org/*/http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/pocket_pc/ppc_installers/install_fp6_ppcax_en.exe


Copy and paste entire above url into your browser and of course, click the latest link.

The web archive is very useful too ;) :lol:

[adamz]

is there any open-source project out there that attempts to duplicate flash? if so, maybe we should all support that...

Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) (http://svg.org/) it's an XML-like way of displaying vector graphics. Similar to Microsoft's VML. SVG is supported by most Adobe applications, but barely anyone uses it.

[steddyman]

Actually there is another big area that Flash is used for on Pocket PC's.

Animated Themes!

All animated Theme players and even our FlashDash product will become unavailable unless Macromedia licenses the ActiveX control.

The Standalone player is no good for these applications since its creates a full screen application with a fixed menu the developer has no access too.

[peterawest]

Well, maybe Microsoft's so-called 'Flash Killer' known as Sparkle will be available for Windows Mobile too.

[clevewaterman]

PocketPC Thoughts really missed the boat on this one. PPCT is guilty of creating a mass hysteria and should retract its statements. This $500 charge applies to developers only and has nothing to do with the Flash Player used in browsers. For developers though, the cost is $500 a year, not just a one time charge.

[frankenbike]

Excellent news...!

Now - let's hope they follow this up by removing the free download for desktop browsers too. Then maybe the morons who insist on putting bloody flash intros on their websites will stop it and people will stop building aggravating websites using nothing but Flash.

Don't forget all those nigh impossible to stop flash ads on every news site. I always have to turn my flash blocker on and refresh the page.

I'd be real happy if Flash just disappeared and people in my animation industry stopped using it, as well as my ISP, so I could permanently disable it from my browser.

[Duncan]

PocketPC Thoughts really missed the boat on this one. PPCT is guilty of creating a mass hysteria and should retract its statements. This $500 charge applies to developers only and has nothing to do with the Flash Player used in browsers. For developers though, the cost is $500 a year, not just a one time charge.

I quote from the Macromedia site: 'As of October 3, 2005 Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC download will no longer be available... You may still purchase a bundled device or you can go to the Macromedia Online Store to purchase Standalone Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC.'

In what way have PPCT got it wrong?

Indeed - the PPCT article is absolutely strictly accurate in every detail.

[ctmagnus]

8O And most people balk at paying $20 for an app.

[Tye]

That won't matter. If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.


http://web.archive.org/*/http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/pocket_pc/ppc_installers/install_fp6_ppcax_en.exe


Copy and paste entire above url into your browser and of course, click the latest link.

The web archive is very useful too ;) :lol:
Yeah, I know there are lots of ways to still get the app. I was just pointing out that Macromedia is paying attention (good or bad) to what's being posted. "They're out there." 8O

[Gerard]

PocketPC Thoughts really missed the boat on this one. PPCT is guilty of creating a mass hysteria and should retract its statements. This $500 charge applies to developers only and has nothing to do with the Flash Player used in browsers. For developers though, the cost is $500 a year, not just a one time charge.

How so? Macromedia has, within the past couple of hours, eliminated availability of the ActiveX plugin for Pocket IE. They instead offer a few tips, such as contacting OEMs and developers to encourage them to license the standalone player. Since the plugin is not listed on their site, and is no longer available on their server for download, the effective result is to exclude most Pocket PC users from having Flash content available when using Pocket IE or Netfront (which likewise depends upon the ActiveX plugin to display Flash content).

I had a look at that earlier-linked page, the one with the massive exercise diary and stuff. 'exlib PDA v1.4' is a 46MB download. Whoa! I might just grab a copy, but gee, it'd have to be very nice to merit that sort of SD footprint.

The link to the PIE plugin, required to use this beast, points to the now-disfunctional download page for the formerly-free plugin. I'm betting once the developer notices this they're going to flip. This policy change on Macromedia's part kills 100% of their potential future user base, it would seem, except of course those who already have the plugin. A lot of other developers are likely to be pissed off besides.

[steddyman]

As a mobile PPC developer who makes a living from Flash content I can tell you I am very pissed off.

However I have known about this for nearly an month and Macromedia are simply not interested in supporting developers.

There reasons for doing this are two-fold:
1. They want to force OEM's to license the player. This isn't going to happen with the price Macromedia charges for an OEM license (ie 1 million $ plus).
2. They aren't happy that Microsoft are no longer licensing the downloadable player for hosting on Microsoft.com. Againt they tried to hold Microsoft to ransom over this player and Microsoft wouldn't pay it.

Roll on Microsoft XAML and Expression for Mobile devices and goodbye Macromedia.

[Glint]

Thanks mscdex. Awesome site![/quote]

[Patrick Y.]

The link seems to be working still here....http://people.freenet.de/FreeCabs/FlashPlayer.zip

I'm not sure it is the same stuff though... :oops:

[Gerard]

Yup, that's the same activex which is delivered in the PC-based EXE installer. Just cuts out the middle man as it were, making it easier for PPC users to install without a PC, needing only a ZIP manager such as Resco Explorer or some other.

[Tari Akpodiete]

did any of you actually read that page in its entirety before you all wigged out and started with the hate-on?

first, let me say: it's not convenient that the freebie stand-alone player has been eliminated. and that i do some flash development for mobile devices, right up to and including today. i think it is short-sighted of them.

that said, the flash player is coming standard on many devices now. and it will be available from developers who are bundling it with their applications. as for developers not wanting to pay $500 for the license, understandable, but in many jurisdictions, it will be a tax deduction for those that do. most won't bother to pony up, and they won't need to.

no one is asking or expecting the average pocket pc user to spend $500 and to keep intimating that is hysterical and misleading. and do you REALLY think that if you have an older device that doesn't have it built in or on the accompanying cdrom that you won't be able to find the player?

[Janak Parekh]

did any of you actually read that page in its entirety before you all wigged out and started with the hate-on?
...
that said, the flash player is coming standard on many devices now.
If you look at "that page in its entirety", you'll see only about 7 Pocket PCs ship with it, several of which are long outdated. None of my Pocket PCs have ever had it. I wouldn't call that "many", and many of the new Pocket PCs are lacking it.

--janak

[Darius Wey]

and it will be available from developers who are bundling it with their applications.

And to add, it's worth remembering that self-bundled applications constitute a very small proportion of all Flash content out there. No amount of packaging from developers will help the average consumer view it all.

[Gerard]

Tari; Before you decided to get all defensive on Macromedia's behalf, did you bother to take note of the facts?

1) The ActiveXplugin for Pocket IE has been officially withdrawn. This withdrawal affects browsing with any of 50+ device models made within the past two years, and likely more than half the current lineup, as the list of those with OEM-provided Flash support is rather short (8 devices from two OEMs, I think it was, with several of them being out of date machines).

2) The EULA which they're spelling out will make it a) illegal to use the standalone player/generator for more than a year without paying $499 again, b) illegal to distribute any component except content, as spelled out explicitly in the Macromedia FAQ, and c) unlikely that the majority of newer users will be able/wanting to track down illegal downloads so that they can use Flash content.

3) As a theme developer (I think, in addition to providing other mobile content), surely you must realise the effect upon animated theme developers.... It effectively narrows the market for these $1 - $3 themes, and also the couple of plugin theme players.

Macromedia is not only being short-sighted and manipulative, they are flipping the bird to the average consumer, saying 'you run along now and play with your nice toys, and soon enough developers will begin providing standalone cartoons to make you happy again.' Well, if I want to watch a SWF on my PPCs, I use the freeware FlashBrowser to generate an HTML companion document and then launch that to view in Pocket IE. If the scale's wrong I edit the scaling. Most won't. Most users will shrug and move along, abandoning pages with un-watchable Flash content and Intro pages, and deciding (rightly) that Pocket IE as provided stock by Microsoft is rather a weak browser. Not for a great reason, but still, it reflects badly all around.

Whatever their motive for the timing of this decision, the word on the PPC 'street' will be that Macromedia sucks for abandoning us, no matter that there's a coming bright and shiny age of standalone projector content just around the corner. We'll believe it when we see it. Meantime, sure, I'll send the ActiveX CAB file to anyone who asks, by email or infrared or whatever. I'll not host it on my server, as for all I know Macromedia's lawyers might be ready to pounce upon such blatant distribution of a no-longer-free plugin, but penny ante sharing as is bound to happen among a small percentage of users is hard to track.

The earlier comparison to Adobe for PPC being something worth paying for is just as funny. Of course they've not been silly enough to do that, as Adobe's PPC Reader is almost as glitchy as HP's Mobile Printin, another freeware worth every penny. Even on devices with 624MHz processors, Flash content is often so jerky and garbled-sounding as to be too irritating to view. Ever try to play Samarost (http://www.amanitadesign.com/samorost/) on a PPC? mmmmmm.... fun. Between all the panning and zooming and the loooooooong waits it's hardly something upon which to spend one's time.

[PetiteFlower]

I guess if you had to "un-bookmark" a page, then this would be it then: http://www.2advanced.com/

OMG. If I was epileptic, I'd be having a seizure right now. They should have a warning!

[Tari Akpodiete]

actually, Gerard, i'm not a theme developer. i made some flash trivia games, 50 of them actually, and they'll be available soon as the engine which powers them is coming out of beta, but i digress...

i was not defending Macromedia as you claim. i just making note that i thought some of the comments posted here were a bit much (including the same-old same-old complaints about flash web sites - but that is a whole other topic, not that i think all flash is good, because i don't, and i have been a working web developer since 1990). anyway, if you'd read my post properly, you'd have noticed that i did not praise Macromedia. specifically, i said: "i think it is short-sighted of them". and it is.

of course, some people don't want to use flash animated themes, or play flash games. they want to access sites that may have flash content on them. like i said, it's short-sighted of Macromedia. i doubt that any of their in-house mobile flash developers - some of whom i actually know and will have to ask - told them this was a good idea.

and on the subject of the $499 Standalone Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC, that page states: "It also allows you to create distributable .exe files of your Flash content with the Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC bundled with it." pretty straightforward explanation i'd say about the how and when a developer may give out the player with the content they've created.

what this is, is an opportunity for people like Antmobile - http://www.antmobile.com - and Bryt - http://www.bryht.com - and Conduits - http://www.conduits - all currently players (heh!) in the flash player/flash player extenders in the field, not to mention others.

[Patrick Y.]

Yup, that's the same activex which is delivered in the PC-based EXE installer. Just cuts out the middle man as it were, making it easier for PPC users to install without a PC, needing only a ZIP manager such as Resco Explorer or some other.

So it's still available after all. :razzing: :wink:

[Gerard]

actually, Gerard, i'm not a theme developer. i made some flash trivia games, 50 of them actually...

Sorry. I recalled having seen themes on your RocketFX site and my (weak) memory linked them to you.


and on the subject of the $499 Standalone Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC, that page states: "It also allows you to create distributable .exe files of your Flash content with the Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC bundled with it." pretty straightforward explanation i'd say about the how and when a developer may give out the player with the content they've created.


So the direct copy/paste below means what?


Can developers re-distribute the Macromedia Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC 2003?
No. The version of Macromedia Flash Player available from Microsoft, and Pocket PC licensees is for testing and development purposes and may not be redistributed, as per the End User License Agreement (http://www.macromedia.com/software/flashplayer_pocketpc/eula/) referenced online.

I couldn't find your exact quote - not to suggest it isn't somewhere, as Macromedia's site is rather complex. I did find this, which is close, but clearly states that the standalone projectors, in EXE format, are the distributable content - NOT the $499 product capable (among other things) of viewing other SWF content.


In addition developers can license the standalone Macromedia Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC 2003, for creating projectors to redistribute on Pocket PC.

If I go to the (alleged) licensing form link, I find instead a bunch of links. No form. Must be because I'm using Pocket IE. :)

[Pony99CA]

like i said, it's short-sighted of Macromedia. i doubt that any of their in-house mobile flash developers - some of whom i actually know and will have to ask - told them this was a good idea.
At the 2003 Fall CTIA press event, I spoke with the Macromedia rep and said that they should make the standalone player available for free so people could play Flash content on their Pocket PCs without having to hack together Web pages to embed the content in. Sadly, I guess Macromedia didn't listen. :-(

and on the subject of the $499 Standalone Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC, that page states: "It also allows you to create distributable .exe files of your Flash content with the Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC bundled with it." pretty straightforward explanation i'd say about the how and when a developer may give out the player with the content they've created.
I wonder if we could pitch in $5 apiece and develop a small Flash application that we distribute for free which also includes an Open men item. :twisted:

what this is, is an opportunity for people like Antmobile - http://www.antmobile.com - and Bryt - http://www.bryht.com - and Conduits - http://www.conduits - all currently players (heh!) in the flash player/flash player extenders in the field, not to mention others.
I suggested Antmobile and Bryht in another forum, but those both require the Macromedia Flash Plug-In, I believe. I'm not sure about the Conduits player, but their Web site said that worked with Flash 3.

Steve

[Gerard]

Conduits' Flash player 'PocketSpark' has not had a new version release since about 4 years ago. It is/was a standalone player, not needing a Macromedia plugin. It also crashed a lot.

I've still seen no one else address the fact that Macromedia through Casio USA made a Flash 5 standalone player available. Am I the only one who used it? It had an 'Open' option, could be associated with SWF files (though not internally), and could generate projectors for other MIPS users without Flash installed. It was free, before Casio left the building. What has changed to merit a $499 price tag? Compilation for ARM, apparently.

[Tari Akpodiete]

Gerrard - that $499 price is NOT for the free flash player itself. as a matter of fact, that $499 price tag for that license for developers is not a new thing.

i think that you're confusing something that was free which was aimed at the general user and now has been removed with something that is for use by developers that also includes the right to distribute the free player with an application that is developed under the license.

and that quote i used which you couldn't find is about 1/2 way down the page, but maybe you using a ppc are possibly being served a different page.

so as someone who has been working on a flash game for a few years know, will i run out and pay 500 bucks just in case someone doesn't have the flash player to play my game? probably not, especially cause i know that they will be able to find it quite easily. trust me, no one who needs a version (4/5/6) of the freebie flash player is going to have any trouble finding it elsewhere. it's going to be come a hot item, and Macromedia will look silly/sillier.

it's one thing to decide not to update the freebie player, but to take it away completely? especially when you've been singing the praises of flash on mobile devices. of course, there is still flash lite, but that's for mobile phones. so the question becomes, just what are they abandoning, and why, and then what else shortly.

i suspect what they are up to, is not an abandonment of a platform, or platforms, but a maneuver to force hardware OEMs for both phones and pdas - and possibly software OEMs (all 2 of them, 3 if you count Symbianm although that may be covered by flash lite) - to license the player. let's see how that works out for them.

you know, a legit aka non-pirate version of Flash development software already costs a bundle (U$300 to 700, i think, depending on configuration). why make developers pay even more? and why make it potentially difficult for their customers to view their content? and that's not counting people who just go to flash sites and don't use flash applications on their devices.

it reminds me of the stupidity of these people - http://ereader.com/products/ebookstudio/licensing - wanna make .pdb ebooks for sale? then pay us extra for each one made, even though you bought our software for actually making the ebooks.

[ oh yeah, those are regular themes on my site, not animated themes, never really got into those, although some of them are neat ]

[steddyman]

Gerrard - that $499 price is NOT for the free flash player itself. as a matter of fact, that $499 price tag for that license for developers is not a new thing.

i think that you're confusing something that was free which was aimed at the general user and now has been removed with something that is for use by developers that also includes the right to distribute the free player with an application that is developed under the license.
[ oh yeah, those are regular themes on my site, not animated themes, never really got into those, although some of them are neat ]

I think you are missing the point entirely Tari.

The ActiveX control is NOT available to license from Macromedia except by OEM's and only HP can afford to pay the license fees. Developers CANNOT license the control.

The only thing available for license is the Projector. This is a severly constrained standalone executable which cannot be customized by a developer. The Projector Flash player that CANNOT be embedded into a developers application. It is only of use to a pure Flash developer, not a Pocket PC developer.

[Sven Johannsen]

At the 2003 Fall CTIA press event, I spoke with the Macromedia rep and said that they should make the standalone player available for free so people could play Flash content on their Pocket PCs without having to hack together Web pages to embed the content in. Sadly, I guess Macromedia didn't listen. :-(

Maybe they misunderstood you. They seem to have solved the problem of people having to hack together web pages to embed content in.

[Tari Akpodiete]

Gerrard - that $499 price is NOT for the free flash player itself. as a matter of fact, that $499 price tag for that license for developers is not a new thing.

i think that you're confusing something that was free which was aimed at the general user and now has been removed with something that is for use by developers that also includes the right to distribute the free player with an application that is developed under the license.
[ oh yeah, those are regular themes on my site, not animated themes, never really got into those, although some of them are neat ]

I think you are missing the point entirely Tari.

The ActiveX control is NOT available to license from Macromedia except by OEM's and only HP can afford to pay the license fees. Developers CANNOT license the control.

The only thing available for license is the Projector. This is a severly constrained standalone executable which cannot be customized by a developer. The Projector Flash player that CANNOT be embedded into a developers application. It is only of use to a pure Flash developer, not a Pocket PC developer.

no, i'm NOT missing the point. in fact, i have been stating the situation very clearly. and, did i say it was a good idea for Macromedia to go in this direction? no i didn't, just the opposite.

[Gerard]

But Tari, you've persisted in saying that Macromedia is continuing to allow free distribution of a player of some kind, have you not? Your quote a couple of postings ago seemed to point that way, in your interpretation. And yet the withdrawal of the ActiveX plugin for legal download and the clear statement from Macromedia that the player is NOT available for re-distribution contradicts any such interpretation.

To suggest, as you have, that illegal sharing of Macromedia's software easily overcomes this difficulty may be true, at least for more knowledgable users... but it does nothing in terms of making Macromedia look less stupid, and that is what we have been complaining about.

Their official position is now that those users without OEM-licensed Flash players/plugins just don't get Flash, unless they download particular free or paid-for content distributed as projectors by Flash developers. Since the workaround is illegal, it becomes a matter for individual ethical choice.

Your statements that you think this is not a bright move on Macromedia's part seem in contradiction to your suggestions that everything is more or less okay. That's the only reason for my arguments to the contrary. A tempest in a teapot to be sure, as Flash is only minimally important for most of us, but it is the subject of this discussion and I'm taking it seriously, as it will have repurcussions for many in web devopment and others besides.

[dlangton]

If I were a new PocketPC user, I certainly would forget about using flash on my device.

BTW, for those of us with the Flash installers saved for future use, are we legal?

[Tari Akpodiete]

But Tari, you've persisted in saying that Macromedia is continuing to allow free distribution of a player of some kind, have you not? Your quote a couple of postings ago seemed to point that way, in your interpretation. And yet the withdrawal of the ActiveX plugin for legal download and the clear statement from Macromedia that the player is NOT available for re-distribution contradicts any such interpretation.

To suggest, as you have, that illegal sharing of Macromedia's software easily overcomes this difficulty may be true, at least for more knowledgable users... but it does nothing in terms of making Macromedia look less stupid, and that is what we have been complaining about.

Their official position is now that those users without OEM-licensed Flash players/plugins just don't get Flash, unless they download particular free or paid-for content distributed as projectors by Flash developers. Since the workaround is illegal, it becomes a matter for individual ethical choice.

Your statements that you think this is not a bright move on Macromedia's part seem in contradiction to your suggestions that everything is more or less okay. That's the only reason for my arguments to the contrary. A tempest in a teapot to be sure, as Flash is only minimally important for most of us, but it is the subject of this discussion and I'm taking it seriously, as it will have repurcussions for many in web devopment and others besides.

1. well, it's not my 'interpretation', as i i was quoting directly from their page (but you'd noted earlier that you didn't see what i was referring to) - http://www.macromedia.com/software/flashplayer/pocketpc/2002.html - "The Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC was a free download that was a browser plug-in for Pocket IE that enabled you to view Flash content embedded in HTML pages. The Standalone Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC is an application that you install on your Pocket PC which allows you to view Flash content full screen without being embedded in an HTML page. It also allows you to create distributable .exe files of your Flash content with the Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC bundled with it."

2. i've never once actually used the term 'activex plug-in', i always spoke of the .exe file, specifically: "Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC".

3. i didn't tell anyone to pirate anything, but i did discuss the REALITY of what will happen. people who want/need it, WILL acquire it, just like anything else.

[mscdex]

:roll:

[Gerard]

The reality of what might happen, ie; illicit sharing/downloading of formerly free software, is not the point of the criticisms aimed at Macromedia in this thread. That's a little like saying it's okay that the US federal government's indecision and apparent disregard for hungry, homeless people after hurricane Katrina was okay... because there's always looting to take care of hunger. It's a whole different scale, but basically a similar situation. Macromedia has made unavailable the tool which had enabled at least semi-functional browsing of Flash content in Pocket IE. The fact that they now offer a $499 standalone player is not relevant, not in the least helpful for those who need (for one example) to tap on a Flash component to get into a banking site. If it's not there because PIE doesn't support it, this withdrawal effectively locks such a user out of their account while away from their PC.

The quote you make is not from the FAQ page, that's why I hadn't noticed it before. It uses phrases like "was a free download," "was a browser plug-in," and "enabled you to view Flash content." All past tense. When they write "It also allows you to create distributable .exe files of your Flash content with the Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC bundled with it" this rather plainly means - and please correct me if you can show otherwise - that the Flash 6 player is embedded in the distributable content. Not as a standalone player which the user may then re-use to view other Flash content, but an embeded player component which will reside inside every projector. That's the nature of Flash projectors; every such media file contains the basic player, enabling it to run on an otherwise non-supporting device.

I am well aware that you never said the ActiveX plugin was still offered by Macromedia. No one has suggested that you said it was. I have been, for the past few posts here, questioning your somewhat beligerent attitude regarding our criticisms. You said:


did any of you actually read that page in its entirety before you all wigged out and started with the hate-on?

My answer is yes, I did read the entire available material on Macromedia's site - though I did forget the brief page which your quote references, something I read once before going on to read the much more comprehensive FAQ page. The language and stance you chose seemed out of place, and frankly over the top. Macromedia's decision effectively blocks legitimate browsing of Flash content for all but owners of a few supporting devices, and all other uses of Flash (including Bryht's player) for anyone without an available $499 per year to hand over. The model they leave us allows for free or more likely paid-for media content distributed as projectors, not as SWF files. This is effectively (barring illegal download of the ActiveX installer) the same as saying 'users can no longer view JPEG images in Pocket IE, but that's okay, as they may still contact the site hosts and ask for such images.' It's lame.

[Pony99CA]

BTW, for those of us with the Flash installers saved for future use, are we legal?
Unless Macromedia also terminated the licenses of previously downloaded copies, the current license should still be in effect. Even if they did terminate those licenses, there's not much they could do unless you somehow tell Macromedia you're still using the old player.

Steve

[Pony99CA]

The reality of what might happen, ie; illicit sharing/downloading of formerly free software, is not the point of the criticisms aimed at Macromedia in this thread. That's a little like saying it's okay that the US federal government's indecision and apparent disregard for hungry, homeless people after hurricane Katrina was okay... because there's always looting to take care of hunger.
That seems like an unnecessary political analogy -- unless you want to end up in the HoF&amp;S. :roll:

Steve

[mscdex]

Well, anyway, there's not much Macromedia can do to stop people from getting the Flash Player 6 for PPC from their site (using the Web Archive). They should just allow the player itself for free download like before, and then make the package to CREATE the self-contained flash projector exe files, non-free.

[Pony99CA]

They should just allow the player itself for free download like before, and then make the package to CREATE the self-contained flash projector exe files, non-free.
That's a great idea. Unfortunately, as I mentioned previously, I suggested at least the first half to a Macromedia representative about a year ago.

Steve

[Janak Parekh]

Well, anyway, there's not much Macromedia can do to stop people from getting the Flash Player 6 for PPC from their site (using the Web Archive).
Actually, I think they can request to have it removed from web archives... :|

--janak

[Gerard]

Ah, googling came up with a locked serial # request thread here on PPCT, consigned to the 'Hall of Flame and Shame' - otherwise I'd have no idea what you were talking about with "HoF&amp;S." I guess it was a bit of a bait-ish comparison, if accurate. Isn't the fed's lax attitude pretty much common knowledge down in the USA? Flying AF1 around the place a few times in the following weeks doesn't really cover for the sense of abandonment. But yes, that's OT, sorry.

Macromedia being owned by Adobe now; is that fact? If so, perhaps it makes a bit of sense, this rash change of tactics. Adobe's products are notoriously bloated and over-priced, except of course for their ever-more-bloated free reader. I wonder how long it'll take before the PPC version of Reader costs as much as Ansyr's Primer... Come to think of it, it's been over 6 months since I last used the Reader on my Dell. Haven't used it lately on the PC either. Time to free up 7.2MB of SD space.

[Tari Akpodiete]

did any of you actually read that page in its entirety before you all wigged out and started with the hate-on?

My answer is yes, I did read the entire available material on Macromedia's site - though I did forget the brief page which your quote references, something I read once before going on to read the much more comprehensive FAQ page. The language and stance you chose seemed out of place, and frankly over the top. Macromedia's decision effectively blocks legitimate browsing of Flash content for all but owners of a few supporting devices, and all other uses of Flash (including Bryht's player) for anyone without an available $499 per year to hand over. The model they leave us allows for free or more likely paid-for media content distributed as projectors, not as SWF files. This is effectively (barring illegal download of the ActiveX installer) the same as saying 'users can no longer view JPEG images in Pocket IE, but that's okay, as they may still contact the site hosts and ask for such images.' It's lame.

well, you're entitled to your opinion about my tone. and you know, you're not really one to lecture on that topic. i still haven't forgot all the really rude and aggressive emails you've personally sent me in the past about my site, ones which i tried to respond to nicely. but i'm not going to bother with you anymore or rise to your self-admitted attempt here at baiting.

[Tari Akpodiete]

and it will be available from developers who are bundling it with their applications.

And to add, it's worth remembering that self-bundled applications constitute a very small proportion of all Flash content out there. No amount of packaging from developers will help the average consumer view it all.

very true, as i also noted previously. Macromedia is getting some bad advice from somewhere.

[Gerard]

"All" the emails?? I sent you 2, back in 2001 I think. They addressed the ways in which your media site blocked access to Pocket PC browsing and downloading. I questioned that a PPC-focused site providing trailers and other short video for PPC users might be better received if it were actually usable with a PPC browser. I was not referring to page layout, but to links which didn't work in Pocket IE and other similar problems. If my tone was unsavory, well, consider the incredibly heated response you offered to my first missive.

Tari, this has gone way off topic, but since you insist on making it personal by bringing up this past email nonsense I feel compelled to defend my positions overall. You can close your ears and sing 'I'm not listening' if you like.

I admitted no such thing as baiting. I referenced the earlier comment comparing two different things as being readable as bait-ish, which is no admission of guilt, only one of the potential for such an interpretation. My intention was to find an analogy which worked, and that one came to mind, plain and simple.

It seems as though you are diverting attention from your comments, which suggested that we here were unfairly attacking Macromedia for something you suggest we did not understand, owing perhaps to not having read the documentation. That was unfair and incorrect. The thread-starter indicated that the editor who wrote it understood the situation regarding Flash playability, both embedded in PIE and as standalone content. Most of the ensuing comments indicated, to me at least, that the posters have for the most part read the fine print. I'd venture to suggest that it might be yourself who had not, at the time of that finger pointing comment, read the entire Macromedia PPC FAQ, wherein they clearly state in at least two places that the player shall not be re-distributable.

Their position may be defensible from a business perspective; time will tell. From an end-user's perspective - similarly to one who attempted on several occassions to view content on your own site - the new order according to Macromedia is an unpleasant one to say the least. I see no arguments being possible which might work around the issue that browser-embedded Flash elements (games, video presentations, programs, radio buttons, menus, whatever) will not be supported for at least the near future on the vast majority of our devices.

The fact of the illegal availability of Macromedia's IP is not an acceptable answer, no matter how many times or ways you reiterate it. Kind of ironic, actually, considering that you find my mild political reference offensive... and yet you have a couple of times in this thread offered the appearance of condoning theft of intellectual property. While your statement that people will get what they want, legal or not, may be true, it does not reflect the official position Macromedia has taken. They may tempt many into criminal actions by this move, mild though they be. Is that a desirable situation? Has Macromedia done the community a service? I couldn't care a lot less about their success as a business; frankly I'd rather see the web maintained in simpler fashion with quality and accessibility of content reigning over more proprietary formats. But so long as so many web developerss insist on using Flash for web page functions the case can be made that all connected devices will need Flash viewing/interacting capability. Taking this away from users is a bad thing for users. Excuses and nonsense about promoting OEM licensing for universal implementation in devices is pie in the sky, for now.

[mscdex]

Wow, I can see where this thread is headed 8O

[Jason Dunn]

I've edited out what I said because this thread already has enough flame-bait and I don't want to put more fuel on the fire. Suffice it to say that Duncan and I disagree on the existence of Flash.

[Gerard]

Hm. I sort of agree with Jason here. That's a bit harsh. I know, pot calling the kettle black and all... but really, some sorts of content just seem to beg for flash. Provided there's a low-bandwidth intro page with options that work, or at least a warning to 'lesser' browsers, there is nothing wrong with using decently made Flash content on a website.

[netwasp]

Netwasp produce a suite of products called 'FlashThemes'. These are your typical animated themes that look lovely on the Today Screen of your PocketPC. Todate there are several compaanies offering this sort of solution:

Animated Today
FlashThemes
FlashDash
FlashThemesPro
FlashMates

To name a few. The user base for these applications must be well over a million users worldwide. These applications all use the Macromedia Flash Player ActiveX control to host and play the animations. Overnight these companies will cease to trade.

It is entirely irresponsible of Macromedia to feed a market with a plugin for several years and then simply remove it. Even if they have another plugin up their sleeve the damage done to business and consumer confidence in making this decision will be irrevocable. If Macromedia does not have a replacement the they will, in the long run, also suffer very badly. As everyone points out, there are a huge number of mobile sites that utilize Flash. It could well be that Maromedia simply don't see the MS PDA market as large enough to warrant supporting and developing a player for any longer. Very strange decision.

Jim Hunt
Netwasp

[Pony99CA]

If Macromedia does not have a replacement the they will, in the long run, also suffer very badly. As everyone points out, there are a huge number of mobile sites that utilize Flash. It could well be that Maromedia simply don't see the MS PDA market as large enough to warrant supporting and developing a player for any longer. Very strange decision.
It's not strange if you look at it as Macromedia's attempt to strongarm OEMs into licensing the plug-in.

As for not developing and supporting the player because they no longer view the Windows Mobile space as large enough, that's fine. However, the player has already been developed and I assume many people are already using it. Why couldn't they have just said it will no longer be supported, but keep the download available as an unsupported, as-is product? See paragraph one. :roll:

Steve

[Gerard]

Was there ever any 'support' for ActiveX on Pocket PCs? Aside from the scant documentation on use, I mean. Macromedia never bothered to offer so much as a link to FlashBrowser (http://members.cox.net/nnsysdev/), for example. That one link alone would have helped an ignorant majority of users of the plugin to find more autonomy in terms of viewing/using Flash in Pocket IE. Generating custom HTML to help display Flash content is easy with a freeware such as this.

But it appears that supporting PPC users is the least of their concerns. We mere end users don't pay for the plugin, so we don't get to use it. Simple math.

[Pony99CA]

Was there ever any 'support' for ActiveX on Pocket PCs? Aside from the scant documentation on use, I mean. Macromedia never bothered to offer so much as a link to FlashBrowser (http://members.cox.net/nnsysdev/), for example.
That link seems to be broken. Is the site gone now?

Steve

[Gerard]

Oh dear. More Flash-related freeware, gone. Last I'd checked was about 4 months ago, and it was still live then. Let's see what Google can find...

nothing. Seems from my cursory search at least that all links point to members.cox.net/nnsysdev/ - which is now defunct. Sooooo... here's a copy of the CAB in a ZIP archive, on my server (http://www.luthier.ca/other/forum/flashbrowser.zip). I'll leave it there a while, but make no promises. Limited, expensive space. It's 283KB packed, 700 or so installed. But tap 'No' to the replace DLL requestors. It's in eVB, so you know, lame. But it works.

[gt24]

Macromedia has one huge problem with this new approach to the mobile market... it has been kinda talked about, but not directly.

The player can be removed from user download... OEMs can be asked to buy licenses... blah blah blah... but, ultimately, it was the developers of Flash content that got kicked in the teeth. As mentioned before, a ton of companies that make animated Today screens just were told "Gee, thanks for relying on Macromedia products... but, we are making you go bankrupt now... perhaps you should have made your own display engine!". In general, some content creators (programmers, etc) for Pocket PC decided to trust Macromedia to provide the ability to make their dreams come alive and to make their business succeed. Macromedia has shown on the other hand that they cannot be trusted... that they can kill your business at any time.

Since Macromedia is now associated with Adobe... this can really backfire on them. For a company that makes standards (Flash, PDF, etc etc), it isn't the brightest idea to remind the users that they can control access to those formats. As users get more paranoid (what if they remove access... etc) then they are more likely to want to fill that nitch (Say... perhaps I can make a new format that will be more reliable than Adobe/Macromedia formats).

Eitherways, until that happens, developers/consumers shall be going through a slightly rough time. I say slightly rough because I think I can make do without flash. :) I feel sorry for those companies that practically rely on it though.

[Pony99CA]

I thought I'd let you know that you can download the Macromedia Flash Player for free from Microsoft. See this MS Mobiles thread (http://msmobiles.com/f/viewtopic.php?t=9861) for details. I tried it and it seems to work just fine.

Steve

[dlangton]

Macromedia has one huge problem with this new approach to the mobile market

you can download the Macromedia Flash Player for free from Microsoft


I think Macromedia's problems just became huger.

[davea0511]

I guess if you had to "un-bookmark" a page, then this would be it then: http://www.2advanced.com/

:lol:

Perfect example of the work of the designers who should be tarred and feather and exiled to a desert island without a computer.

What? The internet should not be allowed as an artistic medium? Those who try "should be tarred and feathered and exited to a desert island without a computer"? You hate eye-candy? Poetry is for idiots? Art for fools? Music for schmucks? Ambience for worthless pieces of human flesh?

Dude, you must be seriously depressing to hang around with. You've just insulted the rest of the human race. Perhaps you'd be happier as a borg. While you try to mandate your hardcore productivity / efficiency philosophies, or whatever you want to call them, I WILL NOT BE ASSIMILATED.

It's people like you that inspire websites like www.2advanced.com. Just to give you a rash.

[ipaqgeek]

As a mobile PPC developer who makes a living from Flash content I can tell you I am very pissed off.

However I have known about this for nearly an month and Macromedia are simply not interested in supporting developers.

There reasons for doing this are two-fold:
1. They want to force OEM's to license the player. This isn't going to happen with the price Macromedia charges for an OEM license (ie 1 million $ plus).
2. They aren't happy that Microsoft are no longer licensing the downloadable player for hosting on Microsoft.com. Againt they tried to hold Microsoft to ransom over this player and Microsoft wouldn't pay it.

Roll on Microsoft XAML and Expression for Mobile devices and goodbye Macromedia.
Wholey smokes! For a small fraction of that, any OEM should have no problem getting the developer of GPL Flash to upgrade it and port it to the PPC so we wouldn't have to use Macromedia's plug-in.

Seems like a no-brainier. I'd even donate to that cause.

[davea0511]

Just some thoughts...

This really is no different than if all the TV networks suddenly decided without warning that they would all stop broadcasting over the air, so that the only way people could get reception was through a wire (Cable or other means), whereas the networks would then soak the cable companies for an outrageous fee.

Like TV networks, Macromedia is profitable, and has been making good money on their existing revenue model. This move was motivated by pure-selfish greed.

People: Start making donations to an Open Source Flash project (with your time, thoughts, money, or just encouragement)...
http://www.osflash.org/doku.php?id=open_source_flash_projects#open_source_flash_projects

Pick the one that fits your needs the best. If Macromedia won't be a good steward of the widest Scalable Vector format, after pretending that it would, let us find someone who will.

We trusted them when we bought and used their tools. Web designers trusted them when they bought and used their tools. Users everywhere trusted them when they became dependent on websites that used their tools. They violated that trust.

How does one file a complaint with the FTC?

[ctitanic]

A guy from Macromedia has replied

http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/webforums/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=195&amp;threadid=1060889&amp;STARTPAGE=2&amp;FTVAR_FORUMVIEWTMP=Linear

Of course they keep talking about the developers tool failing to see that users care about the PIE Add-in.

Here is his full article (including his picture) ;):

http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/devices/articles/fp6_pocketpc_removal.html

[Mobile Mike]

Someone from Macromedia just sent me this:

http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/devices/development_kits.html#ppc

&lt;EDIT>
I have no idea why he sent this, I just checked it, and it not the player.

[ctitanic]

Someone from Macromedia just sent me this:

http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/devices/development_kits.html#ppc

&lt;EDIT>
I have no idea why he sent this, I just checked it, and it not the player.

exactly, just pdf files and some info... nothing good at all.

[Magallanes]

Macromedia has one huge problem with this new approach to the mobile market... it has been kinda talked about, but not directly.

The player can be removed from user download... OEMs can be asked to buy licenses... blah blah blah... but, ultimately, it was the developers of Flash content that got kicked in the teeth.


---
Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC Distribution Kit enables developers and publishers to quickly and easily deploy Macromedia Flash content and Rich Internet Applications for Pocket PC devices. Developers can also deploy standalone Macromedia Flash applications using the Flash Player 6 for Pocket PC Distribution Kit
---

COST $499 for kit.

So, you can still continue in the business.. just you must buy this "quite cheap" kit.

[Gerard]

For some content providers, sure, this projector authoring option is viable. However, for end users who would like to access functionality in web pages which is presented as Flash components, this is simply crippling.

As has already been discussed, those who already possess the downloaded free ActiveX plugin will have no problems. The difficulty arises with new purchasers of PPC devices, most of whom will simply discover a lack of Flash functionality when online and who will not be very likely to discover illegal download sites (if any even exist yet).

I wrote to Macromedia's Bill Perry about this, and his response was as nebulous and silly as what he posted on the official site. Essentilly they are telling us that they are listening, but that the plugin is only available on a select few devices for which it was licensed. Hardly a solution, for now. Maybe in a year or two all WM devices will have Flash support in ROM... but for now only 7 do, and only a couple of those are not end-of-life models.

I'd recommend that anyone needing Flash support for access to some sites consider purchasing NetFront, which apparently supports Flash without the plugin.

[ctitanic]

Bill Perry said in his article that the main reason was incompatibility with WM5 but when I said in Macromedia forum that the plug-in was tested by me in WM5 and it was ok, he replied in that same forum that he never had tested the plug-in in WM5. :|

[ctitanic]

Macromedia player is back online guys!

http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/webforums/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=195&amp;threadid=1065110&amp;enterthread=y

[Gerard]

Interesting indeed. Seems Macromedia was actually willing to listen and change their decision, and the common sense prevailed. Congratulations are in order, both to the PPC using community and to developers. And also to Macromedia, for being a responsive and hence responsible corporate citizen. I wish them well in further tweaking their business model and products.