http://www.paulofierro.com/ Comments on paulofierro.com en Copyright 2006, Paulo Fierro Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:48:27 +0200 Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:48:27 +0200 paulo@paulofierro.com paulo@paulofierro.com http://www.paulofierro.com/images/rss_logo.jpg http://www.paulofierro.com/ http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/560/ this is awesome! thank you! http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/560/#comments http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/560/#comment-1 http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/561/ The day Adobe starts charging for the player Flash is dead. They make their money selling the tools you use to develop for the platform, and one of the most compelling arguments to develop for the Flash Platform is its ubiquity. Charging for the player would definitely change that. http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/561/#comments http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/561/#comment-1 http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/561/ The reason for this is, frankly, that Adobe is getting paid for the additional installs, and the install ratio is probably a lot higher if the checkbox is activated by default rather than deactivated. Don't forget that they are offering the Flash Player for free although it implies huge developer efforts. I agree that in an ideal world it would be better to not have those extra installs, but then I don't really mind that much. Consider a possible different approach: offering a free Flash Player version infested with ads and a "Premium", ad-free version you have to pay for. Quite a common road, but, fortunaltely, not one Adobe would travel. There could just as well be ads on the download page, and compared to that I consider the solution described in your post quite unintrusive. Not as much as if it were opt-in, but still… ;-) Best regards C. http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/561/#comments http://www.paulofierro.com/archives/561/#comment-2