Flash 9 File Format Still MIA – Flash Should Be More Open
Posted by Brooks in Flash on May 21st, 2007 | 31 commentsI am impatiently chomping at the bit for the Flash 9 file format to become available to the general public. The big problem with this is that I’ve been waiting for this for over a year – since Flash Player 8.5 officially became Flash Player 9 and was released in the wild.
IMHO its almost criminal that Adobe has dragged its feet this long and without so much as a peep about when or if to expect the spec and license. I do realize that the Adobe engineering staff has, to date, been tasked with writing and maintaining the documentation for the file format as time becomes available, but at some point someone needs to have an epiphany and realize that the current program just ain’t workin.
An even larger issue is the mixed message that emanates from Adobe HQ regarding the openness of their “de facto” web standard. If Adobe really is interested in playing the “open standard” card they need to get their shit together and walk the walk rather than just talk the talk. If you want swf / flv and Flash Player to continue to dominate then you sure as hell better start getting the file format specs and a reasonable license into the hands of developers and tool makers ASAP. In the future it would behoove Adobe to release this type of info simultaneously with the release of each new major player version. This is an extremely reasonable expectation for something you wish to call an “open standard.”
A reasonable / readable EULA should also be expected and demanded by the community. I can tell you very explicitly as a member of a software development team that the licensing and fear of litigation is a very large deterrent with any Flash output related feature. I should note that its not just the folks at TechSmith who experience this chilling effect – check out this comment from Stuart MacKay of Flagstone Software, or this rant from Jesse Ezzel of Articulate fame. Granted, Jesse seems to have drunk more .Net coolaid than Ray Ozzie can pack into a single MIX event, but the point is well taken.
While I’m at it can I mention that Adobe needs to make sure they get a new standards based video / audio codec in to Flash Player 10 which is not the IP of a company which tells Adobe customers to grab their ankles. I’m so tired of the .Net zealots in my mostly Windows shop beating me up with their “VC-1 is higher quality and its free to encode and distribute” talk. I love Flash video and on2 makes a great codec, but there is no love lost between them and your developer community–just talk to the guys on the FlashComm mailing list if you want to warm to the task. :)
Look, I’m not asking Adobe to undermine its ability to make money–I’m trying to do the opposite. The more open the spec is, the more likely Flash output is going to be generated by tool vendors like TechSmith. With more Flash content comes greater investment in Flash Player as a delivery platform. Generating more Flash output also means more Flash developers need to be hired (somebody has to create rich presentation for all of that content). The more Flash developers there are the more tool licenses Adobe will sell, because we absolutely love your tooling (I damn near catch wood when I get to use the Flash 9 IDE – god damn it’s a beautiful piece of software). I’ve sold Adobe tool licenses at every shop I’ve ever worked just because I’m so passionate about how they empower me as a deseloper–make the format truly “open” and I can continue to sell even more.
Ok, I’ve ranted enough, but you can hardly blame me–I’ve watched Flash Player 9 adoption get over the 80% hump without ever a peep concerning my frustrations. If there’s any justice in this world JD will pick this up from the wire and raise the awareness inside the mothership.
31 Responses to “ “Flash 9 File Format Still MIA – Flash Should Be More Open”
Leave a Reply
Isn’t the free Flex 2 SDK and Tamarin project enough for now? Or are you talking about the Flash Player SDK (currenlty still only at version 7) .. if you need to cover anyting, its that! :D !!
At this moment in time, anyone can make an SWF for free .. no IDE required. Not sure what the big deal is :/
Or are are you talking about 3rd party IDE’s? In that case .. meh .. im not fussed ;-P
Good point, I haven’t heard any guidance from docs on when this is expected to go live. Let me send some emails out, see if I can get more info.
(“I am impatiently chomping at the bit for the Flash 9 file format to become available to the general public….” Curious; what are you trying to accomplish?)
jd/adobe
I believe the idea is that the .swf file format is “open” insofar as you can license the information so you can create a tool that writes .swf–right? And Brooks’s point is that this isn’t available yet–right?
Alex:
At this point there’s no such thing a free Flash Player SDK and I’m not asking for one with this article. I am asking for a Flash file format specification for Flash 9. This allows developers / companies, subject to the licensing agreement, to generate Flash 9 swf files and flv files. I’m not talking about competing IDE’s, but rather tools, both client and server, that generate swf and flv files.
JD:
From a professional standpoint I’d like to see Camtasia Studio (as well as other tools) generate Flash 9 files. Until the spec and licensing agreement become available this is a no go. While we’re waiting for the Flash file format to become available lots of attention is being given to things like Silverlight. On a personal level I can’t wait to get the spec–I’ve got at least a half dozen ideas for Apollo or server-side tools that involve parsing / manipulating swf binary files. One of my favorite things to do is write some high level application functionality using ActionScript and Flash / Flex and then use a language with I/O and turn it into a generation tool by shifting some bits around.
Phillip:
Yep–you’ve nailed it on the head. Adobe loves to tout the fact that Flash and the swf format are de facto web standards and that swf is an “open” standard because the license agreement and specification are available.
“I’d like to see Camtasia Studio (as well as other tools) generate Flash 9 files.”
What difference in functionality are you hoping to see? SWF8 introduced new graphic capabilities, while SWF9 was mostly about the logic engine. What new logic abilities are you hoping the screencapture routine could take advantage of?
jd
And again why not just build tools around Flex 2 SDK? Im lost :/
Im only half way down my first coffee of the day :)
JD:
TechSmith is mostly looking to generate well formed Flash 9 files rather that we know conform to the Adobe guidelines. We have a number of Flash developers who often request Flash 9 output because of the AVM1 AVM2 security model that exists when trying to control Flash 8 swf files with AS3. Jesse Warden and others have posted recently about the problems that this imposes.
I know I’ve personally played around with my Java based swf header parsing / manipulation toolkit and just flipping the version bit of a Flash 8 swf to Flash 9 doesn’t do the trick. When I load a swf whose version bit has been changed to 9 Flash Player still appears to wrap it in an AVM1 security blanket (it’s been a while since I tried, but that’s my best recollection).
I’m sure I could reverse engineer the tag format since I’m sure the core types and bit packing mechanisms are the same, but I’m not looking to play outside the rules (it definitely wouldn’t help a corporate entity like TechSmith either). I want an endorsed specification with an official blessing before I can commit to building Flash 9 support into any application.
Alex:
I love the moves that Adobe has made with regards to the Flex SDK and the compiler. I would definitely need to take a look at the licensing more closely before I could comment on how usable this would be inside of a commercial tool, or on a for profit server driven product. If all things are good to go on that front then it definitely opens up some options for developers / tool makers, but its still only part of the equation.
However, a vendor such as TechSmith which has a killer lossless screen recording format and a swf writer application which translates that into swf bytecode still needs the swf file format spec.
Finally, I’m asking Adobe to back up their claim that the swf file format is an “open” format. I’m not trying to be a jerk or yank Adobe under since I long ago tied my career to their mast after falling for this funky little runtime / development environment called Flash. I’m just trying to make a little noise and let the peeps inside that some of us are a bit antsy with all of the waiting.
Like Brooks said, I guess it’s a security thing–but you can’t just have a F9 .swf do a loadMovie(F8.swf) and expect to control things from the F9 swf. I could see creating a movie with camtasia and–flat out–not being able to use it in a F9 project. The camtasia output needs to be F9 or it won’t work. (The workarounds using LocalConnection are not very workable.)
JD, your question about graphics capabilities is based on fact–true, that was the big deal with F8, but F9 was a little different. But… I guess my main question is: does Adobe plan to open the format for licensing? Personally, I don’t have much stake in this, however, if the new direction is to NOT publish the spec then I’m very interested as are my clients. I don’t suspect your question means “well, if you don’t have a use for it, we won’t open it”–but I do wonder. Can you clarify the roadmap in this matter?
“TechSmith is mostly looking to generate well formed Flash 9 files rather that we know conform to the Adobe guidelines. We have a number of Flash developers who often request Flash 9 output because of the AVM1 AVM2 security model that exists when trying to control Flash 8 swf files with AS3.”
ah! “Needs to make screenshows available within projects which use ActionScript 3″, is that the key issue right now?
… hmm, but it also sounds like there’s a little “i need to be able to certify my swfs as as3-compliant” as well… two different issues, getting it done, and proving to others that it has been done. Am I on the right track here?
(I put out some email last night… reply time varies with meeting load for that day… if we don’t see a reply by morning then I’ll do some face-to-face tomorrow… I’m sure you aren’t the only person seeking accurate guidance here.)
(And whoa, I didn’t pick up at first that you were with TechSmith, but phrases like “almost criminal” I’d expect from someone in the street, not in the market…?)
jd/adobe
JD:
Your efforts are much appreciated. I definitely am using “almost criminal” as emphasis rather than literally. I have an over the top personality and I like to write with a little juice to make things interesting, but I wasn’t trying to slander or malign anyones brand or character. Hell there are oodles of things that TechSmith can and should be doing much, much better.
I’m actually very appreciative of the fact that you folks at Adobe are as transparent as you are. I only know that the engineers are responsible for maintaining the spec as they have time because Tinic blogged about it. It’s very cool how progressive Adobe is.
FWIW, No one at TechSmith put me up to this. I’m operating as an advocate of the Flash platform based on internal observations, talking to users (some of whom are Flash devs themselves), my personal selfish desires as a Flash dev and commentary in the blogoshphere. I hope I didn’t mislead anyone since I made every effort to be transparent.
Oh and yes JD I want to be able to deliver Flash 9 content and I also want to make very certain that what I create is as was intended. It’s not a good thing to have to read the tea leaves based on guesses you’re making from reverse engineering. So you’re definitely on the right track!
“I have an over the top personality…”
Okay, I can deal with that. :)
(I haven’t gotten an email reply yet, and suspect I’ll have to do some cube-hopping to find the owner on this. I’ve been working at home a lot lately, nursing a quadriceps strain, and there’s a 60% chance I’ll be able to get into the office on Wednesday to run this down; otherwise, Thursday.)
tx, jd/adobe
Hi,
Sorry about the SWF9 spec — it is partly my fault that I didn’t push it along faster. But, well, you know … there are always lots of balls in the air over here ;-)
The engineers did their job, but then we needed to update the EULA language with the Adobe wording and I also wanted to clean up some of the poorly worded terms. The basic structure is the same — the spec is for figuring out how to output SWFs. We are very very very close to getting it posted for you. Last steps are approval of the new license and getting through the web publication process.
cheers,
Emmy
Product Manager, Adobe Flash Player
Awesome Emmy – that’s good news to hear. I appreciate the guidance and I’ll be looking forward to the spec notification.
[...] some very loud complaining, I’m happy to announce that it appears the release of the Flash 9 file format specification / [...]
What a rant….”over the top personality”…might be an understatement:)
I don’t think it’s an inappropriate rant. In fact, you can say it’s a squeaky wheel. Though, I think also, that you can see the value JD offers all of us! I’m impressed.
@emmy:
great news, would the release of the SWF9 spec will be in sync with a release for the abc format (actionscript bytecode) used in the Tamarin project ?
Hello,
I maintain an open source library that helps writing SWF files. It is great to know that the new spec is going to be released soon, and I think there are a lot of people in the open source arena waiting for it.
Didn’t we get the same exact run around with Flash 8 with JD saying he would look into it and Emmy apologizing for the delay. Same story different version. Not that I don’t appreciate you guys trying to get it out, JD and Emmy, but it’s pretty lame that at least a draft of the spec isn’t released when the betas or at least the official version of the player comes out.
Brooks, in the mean time, the best version of the spec outside of Macromedia is here:
http://sswf.sourceforge.net/SWFalexref.html
It documents some things the Macromedia docs leave out and helps fill in some gaps. Also, for the security stuff for AS3, might try to set the SWF file attributes to allow AS3:
http://sswf.sourceforge.net/SWFalexref.html#tag_fileattributes
PS: That cool-aid sure is tasty ;)
Jesse:
Thanks for the links–I’ll be rifling through those in a few moments.
As far as the cool-aid–I attend MAX every year and get my fair share from the Adobe drip line…sometimes it back fires on ‘em and turns into whine though. :)
We’re in total agreement that Adobe needs to get their act together as far as roadmap guidance on the spec and an actual release that coincides with Player releases.
@emmy:
any news by spec?
Yep…any ETA on the Flash-9 file format spec from Adobe ?
I checked with Emmy on delivery schedules, and the changes to the file-format specification have made it through review and publishing and legal, and are now waiting for the next web-push, scheduled for the final week of the month.
http://www.adobe.com/licensing/developer/
(In previous releases I’ve seen people like David Mendels agree that bi-directional scripting w/o system dependencies in the tiny Player were a desired item, but it wasn’t until Emmy’s comment that I saw an actual commitment within a certain release cycle.
http://weblogs.macromedia.com/jd/archives/2007/05/swf9_docs_bi-di.cfm )
jd/adobe
[...] JD left a comment today on an a previous post indicating that the Adobe Flash 9 SWF Specification will be pushed live the last week of July [...]
[...] Be More Open” 01 … and I also want to make very certain that what I create is as was intended. …http://www.brooksandrus.com/blog/2007/05/21/flash-9-file-format-still-mia-flash-should-be-more-open/AII POW-MIA – FaxNetwork… published a poster including only the letters "POW/MIA" and that [...]
[...] been critical of Adobe in the past with regard to their tardy format documentation and restrictive licensing of the SWF [...]
Adobe people proved again to be total morons when they decided to remove the flash sdk from their website.
If you want us to use your stuff, why dont you make your tools available, like MS or Apple did.
http://realswfreader.sourceforge.net/ SWF Reader :) please check