Subject | Re: Playbook 2.0 |
From | ed |
Date | 02/29/2012 20:08 (02/29/2012 11:08) |
Message-ID | <4465722.176.1330542502554.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjd19> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.advocacy |
Follows | KDT |
Followups | KDT (1h & 12m) > ed KDT (1h & 19m) |
KDT=A0Do
On Feb 29, 1:23=A0pm, ed <n...@atwistedweb.com>wrote:ed
On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 9:52:42 AM UTC-8, KDT wrote:So simple question. =A0Is Adobe's Flash supported on Google's latest browser for Android that they recently showed off? =A0Is that a bug? =
h on android is sunseted though.you think they will fix it?no, no, and no. =A0that, of course, has nothing to do with whether flas=
KDTadobe supporting it doesn't mean software by other companies do, nor does i= t mean other companies need to support it in order for it to not be abandon= ed by adobe. the line of reasoning that it does doesn't even begin to make= sense.
=20 So Flash not working is not a bug? You claimed that it was still being supported.=20
So how is not fixing a major show stopper like "not working" not a bug?=20surely you jest.
As a user, if I buy the Google-approved flagship phone and run Google's hyped new browser and Adobe is still supporting Flash on Android, shouldn't I expect Flash to be able to run?not if you have any sense in you - if you download a beta browser that expl= icitly says that it doesn't support plugins, including flash, expecting fla= sh to run, you are, quite frankly, a moron.
Or do I need to run two separate browsers - one for Flash and one to get all of the Google Chrome goodness?do you expect all browsers on ios to have the same capabilities? i sure do= n't, and, of course, they don't- that's why there are multiple browser opti= ons to begin with. that doesn't say anything about fragmentation.
But of course, Android isn't fragmented --- not even on the same device.....