Andrei, please read my post above. Even if all Linux users at once used some application built for Flash runtime, that wouldn't make a significant difference from Adobe perspective as a company that provides the runtime, simply, because there aren't enough of them, and they aren't of the kind that pays for this kind of applications.
However, there is a significant amount of Linux users who _write_ applications for various platforms. This is entirely different thing, and, if you look at how many developers are on different kinds of operating systems, surprisingly, there may be equal number of programmers using Mac OS, for example, and Linux. I wouldn't be surprised if there were actually more programmers on Linux, then on Mac OS (hey, it's harder to convince a programmer to buy a cat in the sac, especially if there are vial free alternatives). So, targeting a commercial OS with possibly equal or less number of programmers using it is a "strange" move from Adobe... Especially so since it's also a Unix system, so, things shouldn't be "that" different (yeah, I know gdm and all that - we've talked about it before). This "strange" move might've been an historical tradition - Adobe just as Macromedia before, positioned Flash and development tools as targeting graphic artists for the most, and only marginally - programmers. It's not true any more, because the programmers sector grew, because the language and the runtime matured. Now, it would be only reasonable to admit the change in the situation, and start supporting the other kind of customers, but for reason that come unexplained, Adobe is devoted to support Flash Builder for Macs, regardless of the hardship of keeping up with all kinds of unexpected updates and secrecy policies Apple imposes on them, and totally disregards the opensource alternative, which, for once, isn't hiding anything form them and isn't putting any ultimatums of that kind... I find this weird, by, ya'know, that's the executes' decision anyway. Best. wvxvw
