Yes, Virginia, there will be a Flash Player 9 for Linux

It has been a while since the last update about Linux, so here we go…

Yes, Adobe is actively working on the Linux version of Flash Player 9. We expect to make a pre-release version available on Adobe Labs for early feedback and testing before the end of the year, with the full release expected in early 2007*. As delivering consistency across platforms is a core value of Flash Player, performance is one of the main goals of the Linux release.

I’m also happy to introduce a new Adobe blogger to you — Mike M. is an engineer on the Flash Player team working on the Linux player. He just started up his blog, Penguin.SWF, and is excited to begin interacting with the community as we work towards this release. Not that I don’t love the passionate comments from the community on all my posts. 😉

* legal sez: this is the expected release timing and dates may change if Adobe finds it necessary.

*** 7.5.2006 ***I’m closing comments on this entry because people are posting here without reading the other available info, or more recent posts. It’s a bit hard to keep up with comments on old entries, but I think most of the addressable questions have been answered.A quick summary:* There is no Flash Player 8.5. It was renamed Flash Player 9 between Beta 2 and Beta 3.* Flash Player 9 for Linux is under development and a beta will be made available soon. If you would like to follow along, one of our devs started his own blogs on the topic.* When will it be released? Early 2007 is all that we have said publicly at this time.I do encourage constructive feedback, and hope you visit Penguin.SWF to provide your input on the development of the Linux player.Thanks!

126 Responses to Yes, Virginia, there will be a Flash Player 9 for Linux

  1. JesterXL says:

    Who is this Virginia you speak of, and is she hot?

  2. emmy says:

    lol!It’s a reference to the book titled “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.” Go look on Amazon for the “classic” edition. ;-)best,e

  3. darron says:

    Thanks for the update Emmy. With FC64 being on digg – – this is great timing to give the Linux community an update. Much appreciated!

  4. Mark Pinto says:

    This is music to my ears. Given that the actual release date is quite a while from now (2007), I hope the beta makes its way to testers relatively soon. Thank God for this…Flash 7 has not been sufficient, as it seems that most web developers don’t realize that the vast majority of people dont have Flash 8 installed.

  5. Mike Downey says:

    “as it seems that most web developers don’t realize that the vast majority of people dont have Flash 8 installed.”Not true:

  6. Mike Kelp says:

    Thank you, thank you, thank you…That is all

  7. John says:

    Funny, I thought you posted a few months back that there would be a Linux version of Flashplayer 8.5? So we’ve been bumped another version? If so, what assurance do we have that we won’t get bumped again? Or is this simply 8.5 re-named?John.

  8. Stacy Young says:

    It’s renamed.

  9. Sander says:

    “pre-release version before the end of the year”……….

  10. Anonymous says:

    Is there a 64 bit version planned ? it cant be *that* hard.

  11. teroedni says:

    Yea Please Release a 64 bit Flash PlayerFor the moment i cant watch Flash at all, and i wisit sites that dont use flash instead.But i would wish that i could see flash graphics since its a great Technology.Please dont shut us out of this technology!!!

  12. Jeff says:

    This is why Flex will never matter. If you have to rely on a client on your system, then it will ultimately fail.

  13. Mike Rankin says:

    Jeff,You mean the Web is doomed to failure becuase we have to rely on a browser being installed on the client? Are you implying that all of those client/server applications we built to run our businesses are doomed to failure?Please keep thinking that Flex will never matter. The rest of us will enjoy the competitive advantage you are giving us.

  14. Matt says:

    Emmy,Thanks heaps for the update. I’m glad a Linux version of Flash Player 9 is still on the cards, and will go bug Mike instead ;-)I still think the openness of the specification is something that should be reconsidered. I certainly dare not touch it in its present form, in case sometime in the future I might have to work on a player. As Tinic Uro alludes to in his blog, PDF is a good example of a format pioneered by Adobe that has been openly documented and this has worked very well. I imagine that Adobe’s value proposition lies in development tools and not the (free) player. In my opinion it’s counterproductive to try and restrict the specification to prevent other players benefiting from it, this will just result in increased compatibility problems.Just my 2c.Cheers,MattP.S. Jeff: Does this mean HTML is doomed, since you need a client on your system? Or maybe JavaScript is doomed since there’s browsers that don’t support it? Or PDF? Where there’s a technology gap to fill there’ll be formats to fill that need, and they will inevitably need a certain client, whether or not that’s part of the browser. The real question is whether these formats can be standardised in such a way as to avoid the user needing several different clients, some of which aren’t available on their platform.

  15. Let’s see how far we’ll be gone with gnash by “early” 2007…

  16. me says:

    You’re kidding right??Next year?!!Sigh…How can you think you’ll be taken seriously if your strongest opposition is treated as a second-class citizen?

  17. Brian says:

    At least this gives some indication of how long to wait before upgrading Flash when the next version comes out. It looks like about 2 years.

  18. Chris Spejcher says:

    Sweet news. I’ll look forward to beta testing something for Ubuntu later on in the year. It’ll be a lot better than Flash 7.

  19. Andrew says:

    Please release a 64-bit for Linux!!

  20. Frenchy says:

    This is great news 🙂 ! My Ubuntu will be very happy 🙂 Thanks !

  21. alfons says:

    Concerning the 64-bit linux version. What strikes me as odd is that there’s already a SPARC version (with the same revision number as the linux 32-bit) out, but not a 64-bit linux version.

  22. alphaomega says:

    In 2007, Windoes and Macs will have flash player 10 and us Linux users will still be left in the dust.

  23. Brandon Black says:

    “As delivering consistency across platforms is a core value of Flash Player, performance is one of the main goals of the Linux release.”Perhaps the best thing you could do to immediately improve your consistency across platforms would be to release whatever you’ve got for important platforms you don’t support at all at the moment – like a v8+ player for Linux, and any kind of player at all for 64-bit Linux.If you can’t make a decent quality release of either of these yet, then just give up and open source the player and let the community do it for you. You give the player away to make money on the authoring anyways, so it really makes more financial sense to do this anyways.

  24. Mikal Krogstad says:

    Typical reasons for not liberating the code would be either use of licensed 3rd party code, or fear of forks. I really wish it would happen, though.

  25. yct says:

    64-bit or get eaten by Microsoft!

  26. Lee Revell says:

    2007 is a long way away. Is there any chance at all of releasing an updated Flash 7 with the AV sync bug fixed? I really don’t want to wait 6-12 months to be able to use YouTube and Google Video.

  27. Gomek says:

    Awesome. Thanks for the update. Please consider developing a 64 bit version for Linux, as well!

  28. omz says:

    thanks for take account of linux users… please consider release earlier the 9 flash player linux port; microsoft is moving on (,1895,1914903,00.asp 😉

  29. antistress says:

    I don’t understand why you don’t liberate Flash.Sun is about to do it with Java.Adobe made pdf specs public for its benefit.Whereas Flash is still secret.You will have to cope with flash alternatives soon if you don’t liberate flash, don’t you think ?

  30. Marc says:

    Hey, this is great. However, please remember that not everyone uses Intel or AMD chips! There are plenty of us out there who have transformed our too-old Apple laptops into linux machines — that means we are now members of the PowerPC Linux Ghetto. People tend to equate Linux with x86 — not the case!I really want to be able to watch my Strong Bad Emails!Thanks, guys!

  31. James Susanka says:

    Please Please Please Please make a 64 bit version and a ppc version -with apple going to intel there will be a lot of older ppc computers that people put linux on for their kids and we want to use sites like and it uses nothing but please create a ppc version and a 64 bit version of flash for linuxpretty please with sugar on it. I am down on one knee here please make a ppc version and 64bit version.

  32. Jay says:

    An AMD64 version would be great! Please.

  33. Bob Dole says:

    Adobe/Macromedia has been taking GNU/Linux for granted for a long time now. I’d rather program on gnash or donate money or pay a developer to work on gnash(free libre open source software) for GNU/Linux. hope Adobe’s swf/flash format fades away because they didn’t make it an open standard. No one wants to have a master. I look at these comments and it makes me sick…people are begging to have their systems supported. They are pleading with Adobe. This is why “free software” is so great, because you don’t have to get on your knees and plead to your master to get things done or get support. You can get some friends together and pool your money and pay _any_ developer you want. You can shop around for a good developer and have them do the *simple* work for you. Or you can do it yourself if you know how. because you don’t have a master. There is no monopoly on support like there is with proprietary software. Most software in GNU/Linux is free software. The proprietary crap adobe gives you(only on x86 architectures) is not free software. If Adobe doesn’t make any money off of flash seems silly not to make it an open standard so more people would adopt it. You could make it open source and still hold the trademark for Flash and get royalties from that. And enforce the standard if people want to use the trademark.I for one will never develop in flash because if I do what happens when my master decides flash isn’t making them any money. So they start charging $50 USD for it…and then all the work I did goes down the tubes because people stop using flash and a new standard(probably and open standard) appears and is widely accepted. Then I have to redo all the work I did. If(when) a new standard comes…and Adobe’s standard dies, You think they’re just going to open it up. I don’t. All your work you do is for your master. Have fun being a slave.Regards,BobP.S. Gnash ( ) is still being heavily developed on and is not complete. So if you try it(and it compiles) all features might not work. But a lot do. And it compiles on _many_(all?) different architectures. Including Powerppc / AMD64 and many others.

  34. Mike says:

    i agree bob!It\’s only a matter of time before a new better(OPEN!) standard is out there. I\’m sick of waiting for adobe/macromedia. I\’m a developer and honestly the work isn\’t that hard. If you released flash under the gpl I bet working versions would exist in less then two months…for AMD64 and PowerPC(And the developers would work for free) … Do you guys even know what you\’re doing with the development…What is taking so long. You obviously have your priorities straight…make sure flash works great for the windows users…get paid by microsoft…get paid by advertisers to add features to flash. And ignore GNU/Linux because you aren\’t going to make any money from that place. Well Fuck you Adobe…I can\’t wait for a new standard to make flash obsolete…It\’s only a matter of time.mike

  35. mark says:

    First, I’m a Linux user – and what I say, I say for the good of all Linux users.We are not top on the list for software developers that aren’t targetting Linux specifically. Linux as a desktop OS is just not prevelant enough. Get used to it – and instead of coming here and complaining because a company isn’t supporting Linux as quickly as you think they should, get out into the real world and promote Linux on the desktop. We won’t get to the top of the list by whining like 5 year olds with temper tantrums.I, for one, am glad that adobe even acknowledges Linux on the desktop. They could be like many other software vendors and ignore the very existence of our wonderful, open OS of choice.

  36. [H]omer says:

    Just to add my vote:Please, please, *please* release 64bit versions of Flashplayer for Windows and Linux.

  37. Deus says:

    Why did Macromedia ever release such crap in the first place, that’s what I’d like to know. Site’s that are made entirely in flash bring many problems such as lack of bookmarking and incompatibility with screen readers. It has it’s place but only for online games and cartoons. Flash sites bring nothing new, just mostly help confuse things when it comes to navigation.The real problem here is not the anti-linux stance Adobe has, but the fact that developers build entirely flash sites. I don’t care if flash is embedded in a site so long as the flash dosen’t contain any content other than a picture or video. All text should be HTML and accessible to all!

  38. Francis says:

    This is awesome news, thank you.

  39. whetu says:

    Hi Emmy,all arguments for opening up Flash aside, are you aware of the requests to re-legitimise Flash for use on BSD? I understand that Adobe is not required to sink resources into porting to BSD, I wonder if Adobe realises that it doesnt have to – BSD users can (and used to) easily use the Linux binaries. It’s hardly ideal, being in a wrapper and all, but it works. Unfortunately, due to this: users can no longer legitimately use Flash, and it has subsequently been removed from PORTS: can still use Flash, sure, but it’s a bit more involved to set up, and not entirely legit. Ultimately, Adobe is alienating another userbase with no good reason, and at an especially bad time too – BSD is beginning to make inroads to the desktop with the likes of DesktopBSD and PC-BSD.As I said, I don’t expect Adobe to sink resources into pandering to the BSD community, however one extra line in the EULA adding BSD to the list of Authorized Operating Systems is all it will take to regain a lot of lost users, and cater for any future BSD users.Relegitimise for BSD and the BSD community can go back to using the Linux binaries – from Adobe’s point of view, it’s two birds with one stone.Have a think about it…

  40. Keith says:

    The Linux version of Flash 9 has better come fast. There are so added features in the latest release such that most web sites are conforming to require Flash 9.In Linux, those sites are inaccessible, so be quick, please 🙂

  41. Wayne says:

    We really need to have a 64bit linux version of flash…There is nothing more fustrating when I cannot use a 64bit browser to its full extent when Adobe has abandoned those who would like to view flash enabled pages in true 64bit

  42. Chris Eagan says:

    Count my vote for AMD64 support!

  43. Lee Revell says:

    Before you go and develop a 64 bit version to placate an extremely vocal minority of users, please give us a working 32 bit version! The AV sync bug makes Flash 7 unusable on any system, 32 or 64 bit.

  44. TerryP says:

    I’d really love to see Flash support for BSD done right. It’d make it less trouble for people to get there desktops up and working and only have to screw around getting around that little problemo that Francis posted!

  45. DanH says:

    2007? You’ve gotta be kidding…Then at least assign some resources to fix the crap-fest that is Flash 7 for Linux.

  46. Oriol says:

    Actually flash 7 for linux doesn’t support alsa, it’s slow, and doesn’t run well with Xcomposite… Then it is unusable on my system… bcause, no sound, no video… Please, make a fix release adapting the player to the new linux arch

  47. Onkar Shinde says:

    They haven’t updated Flash 7 for linux in a while.They haven’t released Flash 8 for linux.They were going to release Flash 8.5 for linux.And now they are talking about Flash 9 for linux which will be released in 2007.I am hoping that gnash gets good enough by end of the year so that it can be shipped with Linux distros.

  48. Ken Yee says:

    Ditto on needing there to be a 64-bit version on Linux. Unlike Windows, people *are* actually using 64-bit versions of Linux for their desktops. 64-bit Windows is relegated to the server world according to MS’ broken thinking 😉

  49. sam says:

    When can we expect a Flash player for 64-bit Linux?

  50. brewin says:

    Add an another vote for Flash for 64-bit Linux. I hate having to use the 32-bit Firefox binary in Gentoo…

  51. z says:

    This is idiotic.At least 1/2 of the Flash pages out there now are starting to *require* Flash 8 or simply won’t work at all.You know, I’m probably going to hear some kinda “take what you can get” argument from the apologists out there that talk about how Linux isn’t viable at all for commercial software. You know what? I’m sick of this shit. Flash 7.x for Linux was total crap. It was enough of a player just to keep the opensource community from getting too interested in making their own player! MacroDobe knows that it needs to at least keep the Linux user biting for scraps, or risk development of something free!Richard Stallman may be a madman at times, but I’m frankly sick of this shit from MacroDobe. seriously need to stop tolerating this hald-assed effort and start putting some real work into a a *free* player instead of dealing with this idiocy. Telling me that I’ll be waiting until 2007 to view sites that already don’t work just totally fuels this fire.And you know what? Why do we need *Flash* itself in the end? The community will develop an OPEN and FREE standard that worsk on *EVERY* platform out there, and eventually puts an end to this nonsense.The community needs to SET THE STANDARDS instead of sitting on the streetcorner, like beggars, waiting for MacroDobe to finally get their thumbs out of their asses! And for all of you pussies that sit back and praise MacroDobe for promising you a Flash player by next year, *fuck off*!

  52. Bryan says:

    And here’s one more vote for a 64 bit release; not that my vote should matter.

  53. Johnny Mneumonic says:

    Given that all open source platforms (BSD, Linux, etc) are now, and will always be, treated like crap from companies like Adobe, people here really should be doing what they can to discourage the use of their proprietary products designed to lock you in. A good place to start is with the great flash blocker Firefox plugin.

  54. Christian says:

    Taken with my (the authors 🙂 ) permission from s / Macromedia s wrong decision on FlashI have just read the blog entry of Tinic Uro, a developer for Adobe/Macromedia’s Flash player. He explains why Flash 8.0 will not come for Linux and why they are directly going to 8.5 for Linux instead.I can understand the business background for this decision – of course you have to concentrate your work force to the currently dominating platform (Windows). What I do not understand is Adobe’s decision (Adobe bought Macromedia some time ago) not to disclose the Flash specification to the public (actually, the Flash specifications are being published but under a very restrictive license that basically forbids usage of it).In my humble decision, this decision is bad and wrong in every aspect. The simple truth is:If you want to sell more of your content creating software such as Flash Professional or Flash Basic, you need to spread the client. At all cost. Period.You will not be able to compete against a Microsoft solution that might come. You learned your lession when Microsoft introduced their own PDF competitor. VMWare is currently learning its lesson (they are now spreading so vcalled VM-Players on magazine CDs at least here in Germany) after they got competition from XEN and Microsoft.Bill Gates himself teaches us that you have to make people use your software – even illegally. Sooner or later, many of them will buy it.If your counsels fear that those long-haired Linux nerds could develop a player that is not sticking to the specification, you have your trade mark as a tool to prevent just this from happening! As with PDF, a Flash-Player can only be called a Flash-Player when it sticks 100% to your specs. It works not only in theory – you can see this every day with all these PDF readers and creators around! Take your PDF specification license and ACT NOW! Give the community the ability to develop independent Flash players – you will gain from it!From an article in the December BusinessWeek regarding Sun and its attitude towards Open Source and its hesitation to open source Java:Several experts expect that Sun might finally capitulate in 2006. “It took them a long time to realize if you don’t open-source and you’re not a market leader, you’re dead,” says Peter Yared, CEO of open-source startup Active Grid and a former Sun executive.So revise your wrong decision and open up at least the Flash specifications. Do your company, your stockholders and all the non-Windows users around a favor.

  55. lun4tic says:

    I hope the flashplayer for Linux will soon be out. I hope there will be a 64-Bit Version asap.

  56. thomson says:

    finally! What can I say more than Linux is a very good OS and why shouldn’t they have flash too?

  57. allan says:

    i’m not sure but doesn’t linux have more users than mac? Maybe not as much dekstop users – still have a close look at ubuntuz the UP-COMING Desktop-Linux Distro!

  58. How about the shockwave plugin. Any news of it?

  59. Joe Cooper says:

    Not that I wanna sound hippy or anything but access to the source code would be sooo awesome for us niche users like people with Linux\MIPS, FreeBSD and IRIX users and so on. If the source code was available there’d already be an x86_64 version available.Even a more restrictive source license would allow that sort of thing.

  60. JanOs says:

    Ya estaba bueno, era un deber tener una versión actualizada para nuestros GNU/Linux

  61. John M. Craft says:

    Why do only one thing when we can both beg for a 64-bit player and at the same time develop our own?So, please make a 64-bit player for Linux!

  62. Josh says:

    Adobe/Macromedia is living in the 90’s. I hope they wake up else the competitors will eat their shares before A/M realises it.Linux is treated like crap! I can’t believe guys running A/M have no clue as to what users want?It’s been years 64bit linux has been out there and no flash yet? Pity ..

  63. Jaroslav says:

    This is both good news and bad news. I’ve seen a few flash 8 sites that prevented me to browse them. And this delay will hurt linux desktop users badly. I wish there were a 8.x linux version before the 9.x release.

  64. Bill says:

    Great news I hope it comes sooner than later so I can check out the sites before next year. I guess the true victims are the web sites that lose the potential traffic ($$$$$$). I don’t boot into MS unless it absolutely necessary. It to much of a security head ache.

  65. mh says:

    Good news !My SUSE Linux 10.1 and SUSE Linux Enterprise desktops will be happy.But end of this year is still relatively a long way off. 🙁

  66. Jim says:

    We need an 64 bit Linux version. I cannot easily install Flash. Please get that out. Thanks.

  67. One of Many Non-MS Users says:

    Super. Great. All that stuff. Thanks for thinking of us so late. At least the Linux crowd is in better shape with a crashy Flash 7 than the BeOS crowd is with Flash 4 right? And where is multiplatform Director support, eh? When can we play .dcr files without using Windows?Adobe/Macromedia/whatever your name is these days, you’d better light a fire under your collective asses with a quickness because you’re pissing off a lot of people who are gearing up to shrug you off like an insect – and once the Linux crowd does that Windows will follow. If you intend to remain a big name you’d better get out and do some research and then get moving before you’re so far behind that your best bet is to quit the race.

  68. iggy says:

    next YEAR? that is very lame. at least try to make sure the next version doesn’t have that horrible audio lag, causing the a/v to be annoyingly out of sync (as seen on, google video, and others).

  69. Steph says:

    Next year?? Hahahaaa..Maybe you can persuade people who don’t need Flash8 to stop publishing as such? I come across so many sites that could be using Flash6, but because they use the latest development tools, end up with Flash8 player being required.. this is so dumb, as it prevents us seeing sites that would work fine if they exported as an earlier version of SWF.Maybe your development tools should ‘suggest’ to users that they export as Flash7 / 6 if they are not using any of the Flash 8 features?Don’t worry guys. I hate MS, but they are releasing a ‘Flash Killer’ application, a new way of creating rich media interfaces (it’s all part of Vista).The good thing is, they have stated (and I guess we have to see if they keep their word) that they will be relying on the O/S community to develop players for other platforms (Mac / Linux etc).If this realy happens, they will have a massive advantage over Adobe / Macromedia, and Flash will slowly slip into being a much less dominant format.

  70. Xavez says:

    That’s great news for us webdevelopers as well, this way, we can finally use all of the AS2 classes and use flash 8 to the fullest extent possible!

  71. Xavez says:

    Oh by the way, @ Steph: Right, like MS was going to release their PDF-killer in Office 7 for sure… And like the GIMP should be a photoshop replacement..Get real :). flash only started getting really good from MX 2004 and Microsoft is going to make 8 development milestones disappear with a new product? Wake up man 🙂

  72. Fox says:

    We’ve never had a 8.5 version of the linux flash player, I don’t see why we would have the 9 version…

  73. Habib says:

    Fuck off cunt. How ’bout a development enviornment for linux? Don’t piss on my back and tell me it’s raining.

  74. Simcha says:

    The amount of whining in this thread is indeed very disappointing. I agree with Mark’s (May 27, 2006 11:50 PM) – like it or not, the market share of Linux is going to drive interest and support from proprietary companies. Expecting anything else is unrealistic.As for the 64 bit: I thought that the 64 bit browsers allowed 32 bit plugins? If that is indeed the case, is it realistic to ask for something when you can get by with the 32 bit version? Especially if by doing so you are making Linux look like even more of a “pain” than it already is?Lets not behave in such a way as to discourage them from wanting to support Linux at all.

  75. Adam says:

    I’ve set up an open source flash development environment in Linux. If you’re interested, you can check out my blog at

  76. Ed Wiget says:

    I also agree with the request for flash 64 bit for linux. The sooner the better. However, in the meantime, I have a few choices….gnash is working fine on most up-to-flash 7 web pages, and f4l (flash 4 linux) is working fine for teaching the open source software classes I teach for web development. A lot of colleges are moving to open source software, I know because I am training system admins & teachers and migrating entire labs and backends

  77. red devil says:

    something for freebsd would be nice, but i won’t hold my breath…being a flash developer working with actionscript for the past 5 years or so ( no not an animator ), i’m quite sickened by macromedia’s approach to documentation, its been an exercise in patience to say the least. dealing with undocumented quirks, some real shifty logic, and shrugging my shoulders at some of the extremely short sighted solutions imposed in actionscript. i’ve seen an exodus of talented programmers leave to other technologies, as flash ‘evolved’ over the years.At this point i’m convinced the reason you won’t see swf specification ‘published’ is that the open source community will tear into it and reveal how poorly swf and flash is implemented. plus i’m quite sure it would inevitably result in daily ‘updates’ as security holes are revealed.this is an unfortunate truth when you have hungry shareholders, and marketting types dictate ‘when a product is good and ready’.i’ve now gone to discouraging clientelle from asking for flash functionality in their sites, ajax has very quickly given us RIA’s that mesh nicely with tried and true concepts like ‘bookmarks, browser navigation, accessability, etc’. for streaming video and audio there are other solutions.. unfortunately not so for vector animation.that being said, flash has put its foot in the door, and any web experience isn’t complete without a functional and ‘up to date’ flash player.being a dependant consumer is great for the product/service provider, but death for the consumer.

  78. Drew says:

    I am finding myself frequently thwarted from seeing sites on my work computer, which is desktop linux under Fedora Core 5. Flash 7 just isn’t good enough, because webmasters are requiring at least Flash Player 8.

  79. Please get us an alpha or beta of Flash 9 as soon as you can… So many sites are starting to require Flash 8, and not only is it frustrating to current users, but it makes us look bad when we are trying to pesuade new users to give Linux a shot.This will be especially true come later this year when Micrsoft releases Vista, so please, at the very least get us something before then…

  80. Phill says:

    My son rang me at work and asked if I could sign him up for Starwars Galaxies online. I couldn’t do it because you can’t even enter their site without flash 8. The best way to tackle this is to make the owners of the web sites (not the web developers) aware that their choice of software is limiting their audience. Money talks.

  81. Tony says:

    Yes, a 64bit version for linux really is necessary. Many sites are either made totally in flash or some of its services are flash based. In the meantime I hope someone comes up with their own player for linux and firefox plugin! Whicheve comes first!!

  82. Steve says:

    Why do I feel that even WHEN flash 9 is available for linux, that 9.5 will be available for M$/Apple and we will still have to put up with ‘please update to the current version of flash’ crap!?!

  83. Fox says:

    > Why do I feel that even WHEN flash 9 is available for linux, that 9.5 will be available for M$/Apple and we will still have to put up with ‘please update to the current version of flash’ crap!?!That’s why flash 9 won’t even be available for linux 🙂

  84. Jay says:

    The real question is: Will anyone at Macromedia/Adobe/Whatever do anything about this situation before we all grow old and die?This is what you get when you put your faith in propritary formats. This is EXACTLY what RMS has been talking about, and while some of his ideas are way out there, he saw this coming, didn’t he?Stop using Flash and Shockwave and PDF’s on websites. They are OWNED by someone who wants to keep the control for themselves.Take it Back!

  85. astelix says:

    to put it simple: how about to make OPEN that darn flash source code so the Linux OS community will take care by himself to release flash updates in time and maybe better coded that those from Adomedia/Macrodobe???

  86. Graig Smith says:

    I need flash player 8. /begin rant [if anyone cares] .Adobe just shouldn’t have released flash player 8. If they couldn’t make a linux version, they should have just made flash 8, a internal development version only. i mean really, the only thing flash 8 did was piss people off and break compatibility. No one upgraded it and said, wow it’s so much better. What were the oh so important features that couldn’t wait for a linux version? oh i know, the feature was incompatibility. end rant.Adobe should open source the player. or someone should make an open source flash alternative.

  87. Jay says:

    Yes, please, release a 64-bit version of flash player! Neither of the two main operating systems I run on my system (Windows XP Pro x64 and Fedora Core 5 Linux) is able to view flash. It’s really a pain and makes me ask people not to use it on their sites. Thanks

  88. Martin B says:

    I call B-U-L-L-S-*-I-T. With the release of the beta 9 Flash for OSX and Windows, but no sign of any beta release for Linux 32bit or 64bit? Please. has been nothing but rhetoric from Macromedia for almost THREE YEARS now. In this amount of time, you’d think that there would be at least a beta-quality product for 32 and 64 bit.

  89. Tim says:

    bad:- buying a new macbook and then finding out that no adobe software works properly yet (partly my fault for partial research). answer? wait till 2007 for a universal release of macromedia studio & creative suite- not having either a naitive flash player for intel macs or a modern/updated flash player for linuxgood:- discovering linux again- gnash, this guy does everything we need to port our existing product from windows+flash to linux+gnash. sweet.moral of story:- go with the community, go with the comunity…

  90. This seems to be as much online petition as blog post so I may as well add my name to the growing list of people who would dearly like:1. For Adobe to treat Linux as an OS that is at least equal to Windows.2. For Adobe to open the source of Flash player.3. For Adobe to realise that Microsoft is not their friend (look at the products they’re releasing: Expression Web Designer, Acrylic etc.)Come to Linux, open the source of your player, you know it makes sense (and we’ll get the Linux version done bloomin quickly too!)Overall am not impressed with 2007 for the version 8 release. Everyone else will be on 9 by then.Have you considered making the core of your application platform independent? Then all you need is a thin veneer of platform-specific code to make it work on Windows, Linux, Mac et al.

  91. Targa says:

    stop dreaming…for Linux : Flash8 = Flash 8.5 = Flash 9(comical adobe)

  92. Richard Hendershot says:

    2007 – You’re earning not a friend here.Major media web portals are already unreachable with linux’ flash7; TV Guide, ABC, NBC, etc. etc.Weekly I hit upon yet another major site that has moved to Flash 8 and I’m unable to use it. While that must surely be considered their decision, it was Macromedia (Adobe since they now inherit all good and all bad) though that set the stage.Adobe, you *could* step up the pace and bring us a useable beta much more quickly than ‘end of the year’.Know that every time I hit another blocked experience due to lack of flash8/9 support, I’m building a resentment towards anything Flash/Flex.FWIW,-rsh

  93. mehul trivedi says:

    Hello Emmy,We are developing few RIAs using flex 2 beta 3. Now when our testing team installed flash player 9 and access our URL to test the application they can not see the flash movie. They just see a blank portion on the screen…Can u please guide..txm

  94. Joe says:

    So sick and tired of Flash.It is used by web kiddies, ruins web usability (BLANK PAGES!) and is ruining the reputation of large corporations who know nothing about technology and usability until their profits fall.I’m so sick of visiting a company’s web site to view some product information only to be blasted with the demand “INSTALL FLASH OR WE WONT SHARE OUR PRODUCT INFORMATION WITH YOU!”. (Toyota you fools!)The web is an informational medium, not a video game system.And NO! I will NOT install a proprietary, closed-sourced, security hole, system-resource-hog, ad-serving, God-knows-what-spyware-lurks-inside plugin like Flash.Contact those sites that use flash in place of simple markup and COMPLAIN. I complained to and they changed their site very quickly.

  95. amd-linux says:

    Emmy,here is a brand new article that describes the challenges that VMware faces in their competition with Microsoft. THEY decided to open up at least their specifications to everybody in order to gain an advantage over MS. When does Adobe wake up and see the need to do the same? Your current situation is the same – but there are virtually no efforts to allow platform independency of your Flash products. (Mike is certainly a good guy and talented programmer, but one person for a Linux port? That is not enough – Linux growth is much higher than the growth of any other plattform, would be a wise investment to have some more manpower here)Go and kick the lower back of your counsels to change at least the licensing requirements of the Flash specifications, as you (well, your new Adobe collegues) very successfully did with PDF.More here: be great to read from you here from time to time – I know that you have a lot of time consuming meetings and stuff, but the folks here and in the software communities are your potential customers – and, at least in some cases, decision makers in their companies. I am sure many people of the open source community would be very happy to assist if they just knew how they could help.

  96. jayKayEss says:

    Personally, when I first started using Linux five years ago, I was *extremely* grateful to find a Linux version of the Flash plugin, even if it was imperfect. And I’m even more grateful to see Adobe treat the Linux version as a serious product, even if it means I need to wait a little while longer…

  97. sam k says:

    I am going to have to agree with all the FOSS zealots here.This is getting ridiculous.Adobe is clearly unable and unwilling to keep a current version of Flash, let alone Shockwave or Director, for anything other than Windows and OS X.If Adobe won’t do it, they should either release the specifications and source code so the community can build its own player, or they will have to face the consequences of losing market share as web designers move away from a platform that loses potential viewers.

  98. unhappy says:

    seems like they really don’t care about our opinion … making a brand new version without 64bit support … makes me sick

  99. Gary says:

    I agree with the posters who mentioned the loss of potential business to consumers who cannot use a website due to proprietary program requirements. I have terminated my business with two large corporations already, because they required me to use Internet Explorer to purchase their product or service. I am more than willing to make the same decision for business portals using Flash 8+ while I browse with Firefox in my Linux distribution of choice.

  100. webwalker says:

    Flash Player 9 released today. Windows Version. Mac Version.Linux version? No where in sight.Adobe, this is why your credibility is in freefall with the Open Systems community.

  101. desktopbsd says:

    hi is flash player for *bsd legal and out there?

  102. paix says:

    I’m really pissed of by adobe, is its beaviour acceptable?- I want a 64 bit linux flash player NOW- I want a flash 8 player NOWWait until 2007 for next update?Are you kidding?

  103. brugy says:

    So long, but better than never.

  104. threadi says:

    64bit Flash for Linux pleeeeeeeeeeease. Can’t be so hard.Greetings from Germany.

  105. Bub says:

    Where can I download the RPM for Flash Player 9 for Linux?

  106. some guy says:

    Man talk about pulling the wool over the sheeps eyes. I doubt I’ll ever purchase an adobe product again. Seems to me that adobe lied about Flash 8 and 8.5 for Linux. I wouldn’t want to have anything to do with a such a company. Seriouly you can’t produce one single beta, alpha or any public release in 3 years of hard work. I doubt they have even typed a single line of code for the linux player and for all those saying please and thank you, shame on you. As the saying goes fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. They’re lying to keep you around till they can think up something new, at this rate linux will always be two versions behind mac and windows. I think adobe realy believes they have corner on the market but I know many developers that are walking away since too many people can’t view it anymore and many IT admins are starting to open and mix environments… adobe either needs to get infront of the linux desktop wave or be pummled by it

  107. Davide says:

    To all us web developers: simply stop using Flash!There are open web standards better than it: SVG for one! And Opera and Firefox have native support for it.

  108. rashid says:

    hi i am rashid i a,m pakistani

  109. Bub says:

    You can request version of flash player for linux here: more who request the higher the likelyhood. Vote!

  110. Randy says:

    If I remember right, awhile back, and not that long ago, it was stated that version 8 and 8.5 for the linux was being skipped and work on version 9 was being done so when version 9 was released it would be done for all platforms at the same time.Now they say version 9 for linux will be 6+ months behind. Not good.

  111. chris says:

    Flash 8 locks up constantly in Firefox It got so bad that I had to uninstall it. Glad I did, but so long youtube 🙁

  112. chris says:

    I regards to above post, I meant Flash 7. Oops…Anyhow, please release a new version soon. I miss youtube greatly. When you do release a new Linux version, please make it halfway decent. Fix the sync issues and lockups!!!

  113. Jethro Zappa says:

    Hey Emmy,When y’all gonna be able to compile us up a Beta for Linux? C’mon and cough up a tarball for us friends of Pingu…I mean Tux.Warmest Regards,Jethro

  114. bebe says:

    Please, we need a linux flashplayer upgrade soon,like yesterday. And now I read we have to wait until 2007 for next update? Even Comcast news page is using version 8 and and those of us on linux can’t use *The Fan* for news videos and such. Yes, I know we can complain to webmasters, but lets be serious here, they aren’t going to roll back. Open the source of Flash player, and get some help, this only makes sense to myself and others. Thanks for listening, linux geek girl for ever !!!!

  115. Jethro Zappa says:

    Bebe, I’ve never done this on a blog before, but will you marry me?

  116. Michael says:

    What happened to Flash 8.5? Flash 8 was released back in March and we thought it would only be a few months before we saw Flash 8.5. Now you’ve bumped it to 9.0, released it for Windows, and are saying it will be another 6 months at least before we see something for Linux. This is a pain, and definitely not a great business decision. Stop slacking and get busy!

  117. macewan says:

    Linux users. Remember how Adobe treats you now. When they come knocking on the Open Source doors don’t forget that we were second class to them with Flash.

  118. Ron says:

    Everyone justifies non-support for linux by saying the market penetration on the desktop is minimal. These people have never left North America. The developing markets, China in particular are Linux. Their volumes will dwarf the current market. Any company who fails to treat Linux as an equal platform is locking themself out of the future.

  119. t reezy says:

    what iz it

  120. cucu says:

    Quick Flash Player is a stand-alone flash player that enables Flash Users to quickly browse the Macromedia Flash SWF files.

  121. AB says:

    Agreed….$1,000 (from me) for the first person to develop a SVG program that does the same stuff as Flash and release it as FOSS. If Adobe can’t create a Flash player within at least one whole major release of the other OS’s then they don’t deserve business at all. As it has been pointed out, SVG is already supported by worthwhile major browsers that are freely available without any lousy plugins/licenses/etc.

  122. LA says:

    Pushing back major releases to 2007…..sounds a bit like everybody’s favorite evil empire. Is that the smell of deah for Adobe too? It’ll be a strange, though I’m sure not terrible, world without microsoft and adobe, though I wouldn’t mind if Adobe stayed around……this seems ominous for their technology. PDF is open, Flash can be done with SVG, That covers everything they do well (okay, Photoshop is still good along with Premiere, but their duplicates can be made in time).So long Adobe. Death stinks but it’s bound to happen.

  123. hawk says:

    This is just ridiculous!Seriously? Another 6 months? Talk about it being on the absolute bottom of Adobe’s priority list.I don’t like flash much, it’s mostly just abused to no end in advertising.There are, however a handful sites that are useful or entertaining that do use it.Still, Adobe clearly doesn’t give a rats ass (just look at this preliminary timeline if you were considering to claim otherwise).So maybe everyone would be better off if we simply forgot about Flash altogether. Let’s face it, if Adobe isn’t interested in providing it, no one is ever going to be happy.It as a proprietary format with reasonable amount of change going on, after all, so keeping a free implementation up to spec doesn’t sound like much fun.So maybe we should just leave Adobe alone and send our complaints about Flash to the (few) sites we actually care about. It would probably be easier to get those to consider more sustainable technologies than it is to get Adobe to care.

  124. Martin Bishop says:

    Will this mean support for BSD? I use NetBSD, will the Linux port “Just Work”, or will I need to use Linux compat, or…?

  125. hawk says:

    I think you can be pretty confident that the Linux port will not just work on any other OS.It’ll “for sure” stay Linux/x86 only.I guess it works with the linux-compat stuff, from what I read above, however apparently using that is a violation of the flash player EULA.Really, do try to convince people to use less problematic technology whenever you can.