doron's blaahg

there already IS something to do this!
http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/
Flash click to view ;)

Adobe don't produce the only SVG viewer, Corel's SVG viewer is in some respects better, KSVG works with Konqueror, Mozzilla's native SVG support is good, Bitflash's mobile one can be plugged into browsers I believe. There's lots of SVG viewers. All but KSVG/Mozilla run into the same EOLAS patent problem though.

Internet Explorer’s installer already offers to install Macromedia’s Flash plug-in by default. For Microsoft, if they lose, the next steps are both obvious and beneficial.

1. Microsoft negotiate an exclusive deal with Macromedia. Macromedia’s Flash-playing code is built in to Internet Explorer 7.0, not as a plug-in but as part of the layout engine. (Precedent: Roxio CD-burning software built in to Windows XP, not as a separate application but as part of Windows Explorer.) Macromedia don’t cut similar deals with Apple or with any Gecko distributors; no-one can ever prove whether this is because they can’t be bothered, or because of an undisclosed clause in their deal with Microsoft.

2. Apple, seeing the way the wind is blowing, polish up QuickTime’s Flash-playing code and integrate it into Safari. (They can do this, remember, because KHTML is LGPLed, not GPLed.)

3. Free Software hackers, having (as per bloody usual) not predicted this situation, begin struggling to produce code that can play Flash files reliably with sound. (Because without sound, Homestar Runner just isn’t the same.) Hampered firstly by repeated mailing list flamewars over whether Flash is a pox on the Web, and secondly by the complexity of Gecko, they finally produce usable code in about 2009. (Precedent: Windows NT 4.0 was released in 1996, but it was 2002 before Linux distributions began shipping with partition managers that could resize NTFS partitions.)

Winners:
* Microsoft (take that, Linux users!)
* Macromedia (100% of Windows users is more than 80% of (Windows users + Mac users + X11 users), so we’ll sell more authoring tools! whee!)

Losers:
* Adobe (because no-one uses SVG any more)
* the Mozilla Foundation
* all Linux distributors.

4. Microsoft build Windows Media Player code into Internet Explorer 7.0.

5. Apple, seeing the way the wind is blowing, build the rest of QuickTime into Safari too.

Winners:
* Microsoft (take that, Linux users! ... and Mac users!)
* Apple (you want to see those gorgeous Everest panoramas? sorry, they only work on a Mac)

Losers:
* Real Networks (Because no-one uses RealAudio/RealVideo any more)
* the Mozilla Foundation
* all Linux distributors.

Microsoft say to all other plug-in manufacturers: "Bite our shiny metal asses".

Winners:
* Microsoft (take that, Java users!)

Losers:
* Sun Microsystems.

In sum, this seems so good for Microsoft, I’m not sure why they’re appealing.

Aww, why so cynical? What if Macromedia open-sourced their player? Ever thought of that? Mmmm???

I wouldn't want to spread rumors and I don't know where things stand right now, but rest assured that things are not nearly as bad as you painted them :-)

Any certainty is a delusion.

To put my money where my mouth is, in each new article I'll build a hypothetical application that illustrates the guidelines I'm covering. Today's application is called "Paint" and will be based on the photo-illustrative icon I created in my last article. Together we will complete each step, and by the end of the project we should have a well-designed, 95%-100% Aqua-compliant application. I'll leave some room for personal preferences and the fact that Apple changes the OS every few months.

The simple fact is that, when all other factors are equal, where will consumers spend their money? I believe that in the long run, the best looking, easiest-to-use applications will also be the most successful. I think that's why Apple encourages developers to write programs that are 100 percent Aqua-compliant.