Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on June 06, 2004 02:42 AM
This might be unfortunate for you: Your answer sucks even if mixed in pure stupidity.
Companies like Macromedia aren't really pay attention to EULA-s for free software they produce. This kind of software is more annoyance than productive in their eyes.
Almost every company makes this mistake for the first time. Linux grounds are different and so are things regarding license. I never new anyone that would read it on Windows. Linux is just a bit more tricky *PARTNER* in this matter and companies like Macromedia aren't used to that fact. But always these matters are RESOLVED and they are resolved AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE. If they wouldn't get resolved, well company would only suffer and not gain anything. *Free* Flash player is just *THE* only reason why to take on Macromedia Flash (commercial version for development). And less there are people with Flash installed, less there is reason to take on these tools.
For example: Borland made the same mistake with Kylix Open Edition. It was resolved in two weeks. Kylix didn't suffer anything. These matters always get resolved in a week or two (but only) as soon as someone points them out.
btw. Well, Kylix suffered a lot but the reason wasn't license. Product was buggy, poorly maintained and outdated. Version 1 that had license problems actualy was succesfull. Ver.3, well to put it blindly: IT SUCKED, someone would hope that ver.3 IDE would be native, but IDE was still built on Wine, crashy and still using qt2 (while the rest of the world used wt3 for a long time then).
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Macromedia Flash Player EULA
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on June 06, 2004 02:42 AMCompanies like Macromedia aren't really pay attention to EULA-s for free software they produce. This kind of software is more annoyance than productive in their eyes.
Almost every company makes this mistake for the first time. Linux grounds are different and so are things regarding license. I never new anyone that would read it on Windows. Linux is just a bit more tricky *PARTNER* in this matter and companies like Macromedia aren't used to that fact. But always these matters are RESOLVED and they are resolved AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE. If they wouldn't get resolved, well company would only suffer and not gain anything. *Free* Flash player is just *THE* only reason why to take on Macromedia Flash (commercial version for development). And less there are people with Flash installed, less there is reason to take on these tools.
For example:
Borland made the same mistake with Kylix Open Edition. It was resolved in two weeks. Kylix didn't suffer anything. These matters always get resolved in a week or two (but only) as soon as someone points them out.
btw. Well, Kylix suffered a lot but the reason wasn't license. Product was buggy, poorly maintained and outdated. Version 1 that had license problems actualy was succesfull. Ver.3, well to put it blindly: IT SUCKED, someone would hope that ver.3 IDE would be native, but IDE was still built on Wine, crashy and still using qt2 (while the rest of the world used wt3 for a long time then).
#