News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Adobe's response to Flash Crash by bigiain on Sunday February 07, 2010 @01:47AM (#1107374)
So in http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2358815,00.asp the Adobe CTO says:

"Regarding crashing, I can tell you that we don't ship Flash with any known crash bugs"

and here the Flash Product Manager says:

"The team is actively reviewing all unresolved crash bugs in JIRA and will reach out to the submitter if we need their help."

That gives me a _great_ deal of confidence they're not lying to me...

Re:Adobe's response to Flash Crash by chronomex on Sunday February 07, 2010 @03:55AM (#1107466)
That says to me that "We have several outstanding issues we need to resolve before we next ship". It doesn't say that they're leftover from previous versions.

And so I find myself defending Flash. Strange things are afoot.

Re:Adobe's response to Flash Crash by Lazlo_Nibble on Sunday February 07, 2010 @04:04PM (#1108251)
Yes, except "ship" to most people in most contexts means "make available", not "cut a point release". Say there was an egregious typo in an O'Reilly manual—if their spokesman said "we don't ship books with typos," would that imply to you "we're not selling another copy of this book until we fix it" or "we're going to keep selling the version with the typo until we get around to publishing the next edition?"
Re:Adobe's response to Flash Crash by chronomex on Monday February 08, 2010 @06:07AM (#1109492)
That's a different situation, as pulping and reprinting books represents a significant outlay. I would interpret that as "we'll give the publisher a new PDF and instruct them to print with that instead, effective immediately".
Re:Adobe's response to Flash Crash by simonw on Sunday February 07, 2010 @04:58AM (#1107509)
Wow, good spot.