Adobe kills AIR for Linux. Seriously guys, who cares?

It's a non issue.

It won't affect my systems' usability. But it is one more demonstration of how proprietary software companies hold users and developers at their mercy (or lack of same).

But it is one more demonstration of how proprietary software companies hold users and developers at their mercy (or lack of same).

This is great advertising for Free Software. XFree86 went rogue and X.org picked up the pieces. GCC emerged stronger after the remerge with fork EGCS. KDE "killed off" KDE3 and Trinity was born. Oracle dropped the ball on OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice saved the day. Etc. And so forth.

Free Software never leaves you up the creek without source or recourse.

Indeed, who cares?

Chrome.angrybirds.com runs great on Firefox on Linux, and it was not made with AIR as far as I can tell.

And since AngryBirds is the official SI-unit of measurement this days, indeed, theres' no need for AIR.

Hmm, ok, there's some use to AIR maybe. I can listen via Youtube and using flash, to Bach's AIR while playing AngryBirds!

Quoting:But it is one more demonstration of how proprietary software companies hold users and developers at their mercy (or lack of same).

The problem is, the "typical consumer" doesn't care -- they've been well-conditioned to generally treat these corporate screw-overs as a necessary -- or at least unavoidable -- part of "doing business", and that either corporations "have no choice" about these things, or that there's little to be done about it.

Even worse, it appears that many developers still accept this line of thinking.

Quoting:Chrome.angrybirds.com runs great on Firefox on Linux, and it was not made with AIR as far as I can tell.

And since AngryBirds is the official SI-unit of measurement this days, indeed, theres' no need for AIR.

And if AngryBirds didn't run, it would just be proof that Linux doesn't measure up as a real operating system -- or at least as a pragmatic choice for real. ordinary users.

The measure of "who's to blame" appears to be based on who's bigger, better known/longer established, and has a bigger marketing budget.

It appears that the saying "The world's not fair" has transitioned from an explanation, to a justification, to a moral standard.