Slashdot Log In
Flash Developers Fear Spectre of Spyware
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Thu Mar 03, 2005 07:37 PM
from the stowaway-programs dept.
from the stowaway-programs dept.
SomeGuyNamedMike writes "I realize the thought of using Flash and Actionscript is considered beneath many Slashdotters, but here's this piece, anyway: Macromedia is receiving (and answering) a a lot of flack from several blogs over its decision to package Yahoo! Toolbar with its Flash player. Will your company develop Flash content knowing Macromedia is using its runtime as its own marketing piece?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Flash Developers Fear Spectre of Spyware
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 520 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Mirrors (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.turdhead.com.nyud.net:8090/index.php?p
http://www.hyperology.com.nyud.net:8090/?p=90 [nyud.net]
Please provide links. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.futurepower.net/)
Please provide links to good Flash websites.
I agree that there are some interesting uses of Flash, but Flash sites discourage visiting the same web site many times, because even interesting moving pictures become boring after someone has watched them maybe 3 times.
That's why Google is so successful. The company has a policy of not annoying people.
Re:Please provide links. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.nexusuk.org/)
http://www.happytreefriends.com/ [happytreefriends.com]
In all seriousness though, I believe that there is a place for Flash, but not nearly as many places as a lot of designers seem to think:
And yes, I agree entirely that Google is so successful because they don't annoy people (also why I use Google AdSense on my site) - I can only hope that one day the advertisers who insist on using Flash movies (especially the ones that play music at you while you're trying to read an article!) might finally realise this.
Re:Please provide links. (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://lotgd.sourceforge.net/)
http://www.gskinner.com/gmodeler/app/run.html [gskinner.com]
I make use of this tool extensively; it's a cross platform UML diagramer with a lot of good functionality. The gskinner.com site itself is an excellently done Flash site. It showcases their technical knowhow, with out the Flash interfering with the content.
Then there's things like the Laszlo Calendar: http://www.laszlosystems.com/lps/sample-apps/calen dar/calendar.lzo?lzt=html [laszlosystems.com]
This is a proof of concept only, it's not actually data bound, but it has the capacity to be.
Of course if I mention Laszlo Calendar, I have to mention the other Laszlo demos:
http://www.laszlosystems.com/demos/ [laszlosystems.com]
Let's not forget Laszlo Mail: http://www.laszlosystems.com/products/modules/mail
One of the best web interfaces to mail I've ever seen (sorry, they don't have an actual demo out there for you to look at, but we've met with the Laszlo guys and they've let us play with it, it's very good!)
Once upon a time, I shared the same allergy to Flash that a lot of the
You can build a series of movies (swf's) that each perform a discrete function, and use a master movie to bring them together. When you need the calendar (or any other) piece of your application, well, load it. One command and it's placed on the stage, with a loading indicator, while the user gets to continue interacting with the other pieces of the application. You could easily build an entire browser-based OS within Flash, just like a standard OS, with each piece of it being represented by its own 'process' (movie clip), and with all of it having asynchronous data binding to a server-side database. Imagine being able to log into the same OS, with access to all the same applications and data no matter where in the world you went. It's a pipe dream, but it's entirely possible within Flash, only most "serious" developers refuse to acknowledge the possibility.
Good Flash developers have been doing asynchronous applications for several years now, but have suffered an inability to get good market penetration due mostly to the pundits who call out, "What about users who don't have Flash?" referring to that 1% subset of users using, eg, Lynx. The same individuals have no problem, however, relying entirely on CSS to do their formatting, or linking to a PDF (this generalization is brought to you based on my personal experience with such users; of course I'm sure there are purists who would refuse to rely entirely on CSS for their formatting, or who would refuse to place any object on the web that is not part of HTML1.1).
People (developers) developed the allergy when Flash was immature, and have not bothered to reevaluate it as a rich web application interface since. Laszlo is FOSS whose entire purpose is built around building rich asynchronous applications for the web. It provides all of the UI components you need to build an app (and any you created that it didn't provide can be just as easily used). It even does this in a skinnable fashion, so, like Evolution, users could load their own custom skins which would be applied to all of the default elements.
I'm not saying Flash is the be-all and end-all of web goodness. I certainly realize there are pl
Re:Please provide links. (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.milksucks.com/ | Last Journal: Monday September 15 2003, @12:30PM)
I couldn't view them, is that good ?
Five shortcomings in the first Flash link: (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.futurepower.net/)
I very much like the graphic design in the first link: http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/index.asp [fordvehicles.com]
However, there were five shortcomings:
On my high-speed DSL connection, I got only the word "loading..." for only a few seconds, but it seemed like a long time. Ford must be very arrogant indeed to believe that this does not annoy people with dial-up connections.
Second, you get the option "Low Speed Non-Flash" only after you have loaded the Flash page. That makes me realize why I don't like the average Flash enthusiasts web designer. They aren't very intelligent, and they assume I'm not very intelligent.
Third, Flash breaks tabbled browsers!!! When I right click on a Flash ad, I don't get the normal menu. My normal way of shopping is to load several pages and flip between them on demand. Macromedia thinks I should not be able to do this.
Fourth, the site uses blind links. I don't know what will happen until I click.
Fifth, after something is clicked on the main page, the connection is kept alive, as is shown by the message "Transferring data from www.fordvehicles.com..." which remains there forever and can't be made to go away by hitting the Escape key.
If there is something that cannot be done in standard HTML, standard HTML should be improved. Flash has had perhaps 38 serious security vulnerabilities. It is not good to introduce an entirely new, essentially proprietary technology.
Re:Five shortcomings in the first Flash link: (Score:4, Informative)
Sixth, some advertisers abuse flash. I removed flash when mousing over a flash banner ad (to reach the URL bar) poped up a new window. No click needed. The same advertiser did the same thing on the right side of the page so I would get new windows if I tried to use the scroll bar. Flash completely lacks end user controls. It has no stop button unless the content provider is nice enough to include one. There is enough abuse of this to keep flash off my machine entirely.
Re:Mirrors (Score:4, Informative)
I can't agree with you more, it should be an installer for a player, nothing more. Since Yahoo was packaged with the recent Adobe Suite and especially these flash players -- I find it appalling that something I DON'T WANT is forced on me (shovelware mentioned later on Slashdot in a few
If Yahoo is persuing ideas like those of all the ad-bots , spyware demons -- is there nothing left sacred ?
With every application I install will I need to fevrently check all consistencies and read every last word of the EULA to check and make SURE that I'm not being raped? It certainly leaves a bad taste in one's mouth.
I've been really pissed that software I BOUGHT installed the F#$@#$ toolbar too (notice it's in the Adobe Acrobat Professional 7 as a "helper" toolbar -- jump in the f*cking creek !!!!!)
Yahoo is getting slimy and bringing down once more respectable companies IMHO.
EarthLink will be doing Flash webmail... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://aqfl.net/ | Last Journal: Wednesday July 09 2003, @01:16AM)
Google (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.mariokart64.com/mkdd)
Re:Google (Score:5, Informative)
(Last Journal: Monday November 28 2005, @12:21PM)
Re:Same as anything else.. (Score:5, Funny)
>
> sure you can: DRM
Anything not nailed down is yours.
Anything I can pry loose is not nailed down.
If at first you can't crack it, get a bigger hammer.
Corollaries:
If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
If the only tool you have is an axe, every problem looks like hours of hacking fun.
If the only tool you have is a shotgun, every problem looks for the nearest exit.
SVG (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://portal2portal.com/ | Last Journal: Monday June 04, @08:46PM)
Open Source Flash Player? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone know of any?
http://www.diaperdevil.com/ [diaperdevil.com]
Re:Open Source Flash Player? (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.thelonelyneuron.net/lasindi)
Anyone know of any?
GPLFlash [sourceforge.net] is a project to develop just such a player.
lasindi
Re:Open Source Flash Player? (Score:5, Informative)
http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/flash_fil e_format_specification.pdf [macromedia.com]
Re:Open Source Flash Player? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://robots.org.uk/)
Now read the license for the Flash file format specification [macromedia.com]:
Plus there's the usual bullshit I'd expect in clauses 3 and 5.
What I didn't find was a clause that basically said "If our implementation differs from the spec, our implementation is correct, the spec is wrong and you are screwed". I seem to remember that being there in the past, but I might be wrong.
we'll continue with the prior player (Score:5, Interesting)
Probably Yahoo pay Macromedia for it (Score:4, Interesting)
Flash is successful. There is no real need for Macromedia to bundle the Yahoo toolbar with it, at least not from a technical viewpoint.
Probably some Macromedia executives don't like that they just give Flash away for free. When approached by Yahoo executives who would like their toolbar installed on more computers, these Macromedia executives were happy to learn that they could generate extra revenue from Yahoo by bundling the toolbar.
Unfortunately the executives of neither company had enough insight to predict that the whole thing would blow up in their faces.
This appears to be a paranoid rant (Score:5, Insightful)
Yahoo toolbar isn't a spyware application. I don't like it, but it's just an add-on app from a respectable company to help fix Microsoft's broken browser.
Spyware is a very specific word. It means software that reports back to the author with data about you.
I think a more appropriate term here would be "shovelware"... software you may not care about that gets installed just for kicks. It used to mean software that was shoveled onto a CD along with the main package, just because CDs had so much space free.
The problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
Part of convincing your users to download that platform is being able to let them feel like there's no ill effects. This is why web plugins have essentially disappeared, people are afraid or too lazy to install all that shit.
Now Macromedia is selling the ability to get your app bundled with their platform. And if you're a developer for their platform, you now run the risk of getting upset emails from people who don't quite understand what a software installation process entails and just hitting "ok" over and over while installing going "I INSTALLED THE FLASHY THINGY YOU WANTED AND NOW THERE'S THIS WIERD TOOLBAR THING ON MY BROWSER!! WHAT DID YOU DO TO MY COMPUTER??"
This is not so good from the developer's perspective, and it raises valid questions about the future reliability of Macromedia; if they're bundling Yahoo now, what will they be bundling in 4 years?
Anyone else remember when the Flash player was so tiny that it could fit in a java applet, and if you loaded most Flash pages without having the plugin installed, it did?
Not really spyware, but still... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.funwithheadlines.net/)
What's going on here? Clearly Yahoo paid a bunch of cash to Macromedia. What's the matter, Yahoo? Can't get enough people to install your software on its own merits? Have to resort to tricking people into installing your software? That's the mark of a bad product. A good product people will seek out. A bad product has to be foisted upon an unsuspecting public.
Meanwhile... (Score:3, Funny)
(http://slashdot.org/)
I make sure to leave a note to all websites that use flash heavily for ads, that they did not even have a chance at getting any money due to my visit.
Um... (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Thursday May 24, @01:08AM)
I don't care that Mozilla includes various related links with the browser, nor do I care that Macromedia includes other stuff either. If there's a business case for using Flash, my company will use it. Man, if people objected because of co-marketing deals, then nobody would ever develop for Windows based upon the desktop shortcuts that come with it.
As a pro Flash developer... (Score:4, Informative)
- Flex [macromedia.com] -- Enterprise Flash based on XML
- Central [macromedia.com] -- A way for them to use Flash to develop consumer apps
- Classic Flash
Classic Flash is completely hamstrung to prevent it from doing things like writing to your HD, communicating outside the basic arena of your own web site, etc. They are really paranoid about it becoming used for *other people's* spyware/malware.
Now, as far as Flash being spyware itself, they will go as far as the market lets them. If they, like any company, can make money through software add-ons like Yahoo!! toolbar, they will. But it seems unlikely that they will damage their reputation by overstepping, especially when the big money is potentially in Flex, etc.
Re:Unexplained problem (Score:4, Insightful)
One Minor Detail... (Score:5, Interesting)
Macromedia's been doing this for a while with the Shockwave plug-in, and while developers HATE it (including me), the revenue from yahoo's been a godsend for the Director team. (No, Director's not dead, despite what the Flash team at MACR wants you to think...)
Still, I think most of Macromedia's top-level management are pinheads, and this is more proof of it...
I seen a admin just about blow a blood vessel (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.codepunk.com/)
Firefox toolbar too? (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.psyon.org/)
So that's where that toolbar came from! (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.earlymiser.com/)
How do I know? (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.codepunk.com/)
anything else on the system. It does not matter much we banned macromedia's web site at the company as soon as we noticed it started installing yahoo toolbar. 100% loss of all trust, they just got placed in the same ranks as Real and Kazzaa
It's OPTIONAL (Score:5, Informative)
Paranoia.
Re:It's OPTIONAL (Score:5, Informative)
Not Spyware At All (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.cashcrate.com/199261)
If it were spyware, installing it would be mandatory, Flash might not disclose that it exists, it would interfere with your use of the browser and you couldn't just go to add/remove programs and take it off.
Flash not ADA compliant (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://austinskatenotes.org/ | Last Journal: Sunday September 30, @12:27AM)
I work for a US government agency. We will not use flash under any circumstances because it is not ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliant. No big whoop, you might think, until you start to imagine what it really would be like to be blind. As a blind person, the internet holds great potential to expand the information blind people can expose themselves to, but everytime their parsers hit crazy crap like a flash site, it's basically a brick wall.
So, for their sake, let's abandon Flash, once and for all. If not, let's use intelligent coding that routes blind people's browsers around Flash and to the ASCII content they seek.
Re:Flash not ADA compliant (Score:4, Informative)
No, really.
http://www.macromedia.com/macromedia/accessibil
http://www.macromedia.c
Education (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://heather.shamusyoung.com/)
I am disappointed to find that Macromedia is taking this route now that they have become a big name. I prefer to download only what I request without having to deal with "extras", spyware or not. I personally won't mind as long as they tell you before hand and give an chance to opt out.
My other concern is that this may make my job harder when it comes to cleaning up other people's computers. Its bad enough trying to convince people that they shouldn't go downloading every free screensaver they like but to have to explain to them where even more random bits of software come from, sigh.
In the end I don't hold it against Macromedia, they do have the right to make their money somewhere (yes, I realize that the prices for the developement software is pretty high.) I just wish they would be more straight forward about things, advertising it on their site like Download.com does instead of just bundling it with their software.
I think they cut the deal backwards. (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.anodyne.com/)
What site do you block to stop the Yahoo toolbar? (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://www.animats.com)
Don't get it (Score:3, Informative)
Recently Macromedia actually experimented with the player, to see what effect increasing the size of the plugin would have on downloads. They found that once it got past a certain size (which wasn't revealed), downloads dropped off dramatically.
So I'm really surprised that they're bundling other software in the download now. I've no doubt that the total size is still below that threshold they found. But there's always a constant battle at MM to add features to Flash whilst keeping the player small. This ain't gonna make that easier and any bundling that alienates the user base is pretty self defeating IMHO.
Re:Flack? You've gotta be kidding.... (Score:5, Insightful)
A popular American dictionary [reference.com] allows the variant spelling; a superior British dictionary [oed.com] exposes your ignorance by explaining what a flack is. In case you don't have a subsscription to the latter (you could do with one):
A blow, slap, or stroke.
Historical use:
1823 MOOR Suffolk Words, Flack, a blow. a1825 FORBY Voc. E. Anglia, Flack, a blow, particularly with something loose and pliant.
Furthermore I agree with the other reply - 'receiving flak' (and the more British 'coming in for [a lot of] flak') is not leetspeak, it's a phrase used often in the British media.
Absolutely unacceptable. (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://www.amphetameme.org/ | Last Journal: Friday March 04 2005, @03:20AM)
As developers and corporate end-users, we can not accept something integrated with a web site to suddenly acquire an unnecessary UI element to join the browser screen, especially in something where the UI was supposed to be clean and clear. You will have single handedly broken a look, feel and usability factor that was designed for a client, and the client might just well come to me asking why it's broken. I'll have to spend time and money to fix it. In my mind and possibly reality Macromedia's going to get the bill for any hours of work I spend doing that, as well as the time spend calming down my client.
This opens up the door for advertising to be sent, interrupting or preceding what is supposed to be a design, presentation, logo or splash...Why? Simply because I (or my client) was told to trust something Macromedia decided to add on for those unsuspecting souls who download the new player.
The moment a board member of an organization I'm helping decides to call me in a rage over the Yahoo toolbar showing up in something that's NOT supposed to have any other UI add-ons, I will heavily consider finding a way to sue Macromedia for damages. This is a 'design and programming environment', not Macromedia's or Yahoo's excuse (or their advertising clients excuse) for a billboard. I don't want Yahoo's garbage interrupting my work, or putting it at risk in any way, which is a huge possibility considering a newly-downloaded component of the previously installed toolbar (even it it doesnt contain anything harmful right away) could contain yet another add-on from yet another company I didn't expect to have to deal with before.
They need to change this path before this gets exponentially worse. Take the Yahoo toolbar out permanently, and let Yahoo develop an alternative Flash player if they want one of their own with a toolbar in it so badly.
Flash and Actionscript beneath slashdot readers? (Score:3, Informative)
Mod me down, do what you will, but I had to rant.
Re:Good (Score:3, Interesting)
But what will replace it? My little boy likes to play flash games all the time. In theory Java is better all around, but in practice it doesn't seem to run as well.
Java vs. Flash (Score:5, Insightful)
With flash you can rapidly develop graphics and then plug in a small amount of code to make it do "clever things". This means a designer (of the graphic type) can build games etc.
On the flip side with Java you have to actually know how to code, so most applets are made by coders not designers.
What does this lead to? Well most of the stuff flash is used for is pretty with not too much coding, like most of the Web. While the Java stuff may have lots of features, but is kinda ugly.
Basically Java could replace Flash, but it would need someone to build an IDE for designers to use before it was popular and started to generate content to match that of Flashes.
As it stands Flash is a graphics format with scripting, while Java is a fully fledged programming language with the ability to do graphics in a web browser. If someone came up with the JavaFlash graphic tool / ide then we would be onto a winner.
Re:Flash blows.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Look, I work for Macromedia, so I'm hardly a disinterested observer, but saying "Flash blows" (or "technology X blows", for that matter) is hardly what I'd call a useful contribution to this discussion.
Dislike Flash because it's not open-source and thus is unacceptable to your personal philosophy? Fine, that's a point you should make.
Dislike Flash because it isn't available for your platform of choice (eg, 64-bit Linux)? Fine, that's a point you should make.
Dislike Flash because it (like every other web technology) can be misused to make really annoying ads? Fine, that's a point you should make.
Dislike Flash because of some other, specific reason? Fine, that's a point you should make.
But for all the folks out there who simply have juvenile comments on the order of "Flash sucks"... well, I guess I just don't understand what you think you're contributing to the topic.
(For the record: yeah, I have AdBlock installed in Firefox, to block annoying ads of all sorts.)
Re:Flash blows.. (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://nanotree.sourceforge.net/)
I'm the owner of a company developing a (sucessful) product to manage content on a website (A CMS). - This product is heavy on JavaScript usage, and laso uses ActiveX for several things. - We've been thinking a lot about several things who would be easier and faster to develop in Flash rather than DHTML, but how can I professionally tell people to download a RUNTIME for viewing content, when it comes bundled with third party software, that I myself disapprove of, and find annoying? - The answer is; I can't.
I use Windows, and I have Flash installed myself - This is not enough for me to uninstall it, but this just seem like shady business practice, and depending on the reaction from Macromedia on this issue I can't see myself upgrading it, or recommend others to upgrade it.
Re:Flash blows.. (Score:5, Interesting)
A) not open source. open source is good for me, so closed is worse
B) platform support. Flash will NOT reach the entire world, simply because you must have the flash player, which is unavailable on most platforms (all but the most popular)
C) standardization. There is none. it's proprietary vendor lock in. There's no competeing development environments, no competing players
D) breakage of the web. Flash is not the web. therefore, you can't bookmark it, index it, search it. You can't look at the code, or make the text bigger, or have your text reader read it because you are blind
Basically, flash is okay for silly games or homestarrunner, but so bad in other ways it's generally frowned upon by those who are not confused by colors and animation.
Re:Flash blows.. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://2130706433/)
There might be good uses for it, but I've hardly ever seen that (ok, I'll give you badger badger
So along with adblock (if not even BEFORE it) I load flashblock.
Oh, and be sure I'm not going to use this (flash) instead of XForms (or whatever else) either.
Re:Flash blows.. (Score:5, Funny)
It's like this. When you describe dogshit, you don't say "I don't like the smell, although it is a very pretty shade of brown." and you don't say "I don't like the way it sticks to my shoes, although it is very good for growing plants" . You just say "Dammit, I fucking hate dogshit. This sucks."
Now I may be wrong, but it seeems to me that what he was saying wasn't "I don't like Flash because it's not open source and can be used to create really annoying ads, but it's great for stupid cartoons" and it wasn't "I don't like Flash because it isn't available for 64 bit linux"
Again, I may be wrong, but it appears to me that he was saying something more along the lines of "Flash is a lot like dogshit. It sucks and I hate it."
Hope I was able to clear that up for ya!
Oh, b.t.w... VB sucks too!
Re:Flash blows.. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://gaper.net/grID3 | Last Journal: Wednesday November 10 2004, @02:00PM)
But the idea that it would come bundled with other software is hideous, and the reasons should be obvious. This is the deal breaker for me and many others, I'm sure. It doesn't matter what software is bundled with Flash, the bundling itself is just wrong, in principle. And the timing of this decision couldn't possibly be worse. Google, for example, is showing more and more that rich [google.com], interactive [google.com] sites can be developed without Flash. Turning Flash into mere packaging for third-party software will shift people in droves to javascript/XML alternatives (and whatever else comes along).
I remember the days when RealPlayer used to be really cool... Look at it now -- it's nothing more than packaging for advertisements. It's bad business, plain and simple.