Robert Millan wrote: > Looking into that link, there seem to be two reasons Benjamin gives that speak > in favour of Gnash: > > "Swfdec has not had a lot of exposure yet" > > (Gnash is having huge deployments as part of the OLPC laptop distribution)
Hmm, I'd not consider it huge. If it is huge it's huge with a lot of users who are unlikely to file bug reports. > "Another issue coupled with the above is that the Swfdec plugin runs > in-process > in the browser. [1] This of course means that when Swfdec crashes, your > browser > is gone, too." > > (Gnash runs as a standalone process) That's a very nice feature. For more than crash recovery too; it's nice to see that some flash video is killing your cpu in top. It's nice to be able to kill -9 it. Or to download the swf and run it by hand. > I think the "click before run" feature in a way makes stability a hidden > factor. It'd be trivial to implement the same feature in Gnash, if desired, > but I think the result is that it makes Swfdec look more stable in comparison, > which could be somewhat deceitful. I like it because it avoids flash ads and flash crap, which is at least 50% of the flash I see. -- see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
