Comments on: Has Adobe just killed SWX?

By: David Arno

David Arno — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:53:54 +0000

Oh don’t know Laurence: I’m sure there must be at least two other people in the world that want to mix Solaris and Flash!

As to how you missed this news, the answer is obviously that you don’t subscribe to my blog…

By: Laurence

Laurence — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:32:03 +0000

How did I miss this new!? Anyhow thanks for pointing it out, David. I am officially excited about this. The only thing stopping us using Flex in our next project were the insane cost of FDS and the lack of FlashPlayer 9 for Solaris. Well, Adobe have removed both those problems and we’re saved from going the JSP/JSF/AJAX route. Life is good…

I’m guessing I might be the only person on the planet happy to see a Solaris version of FlashPlayer 9?

By: David Arno

David Arno — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:58:26 +0000

I certainly can qualify the “dubious legality” statement, though only with a degree of retraction

SWX relies on reverse engineering the SWF file format, as the SWF file format was only available to those that agreed to a license that forbade using it to generate SWFs on the fly. Now Aral’s argument is that by not referring to the specification and instead reverse engineering (or “observation for the purpose of interoperability” as he calls it) the SWF file format, then it is all legal. This is a highly dubious claim and not one I’d care to test in court with Adobe’s lawyers lined up against me!

However this looks like it could be a moot point anyway. As Aral has pointed out, the latest SWF specification license has removed the restriction on generating SWFs on the fly and so it appears that my fears over its legality are without foundation.

By: linden

linden — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:01:44 +0000

dubious legality …. care to quantify that some what miguided and sweeping statement David ?

By: Jensa

Jensa — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:06:52 +0000

Hi David,
SWF is really not a “closed proprietary format”. It’s rather a “published proprietary format”. It is open in the sense that anyone can create software that writes SWF files, but you are not allowed to make alternatives to the Flash Player. Some do exist, but these are what you refer to as “legal grey zone”.

Creating SWF files has really never been a problem: http://www.flashmagazine.com/660.htm This article is from 2004 but I seem to remember that Macromedia have published the SWF spec since Flash 4 (1999/2000)? Getting to the spec used to require a license, but anyone applying will get that. It’s more a formality.

By: No, Adobe has not just killed SWX :) at Aral Balkan

No, Adobe has not just killed SWX :) at Aral Balkan — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:14:43 +0000

[...] I’m referring to the blog post by David Arno that asks Has Adobe just killed SWX? [...]