Adobe digital edition 1.8 and linux - Page 2

morana69 · 08-04-2011, 04:45 PM

I think it might be worthwhile beginning to lobby Adobe's customers: the booksellers; explaining that Adobe not supporting Linux is cutting their potential customer base.

Only when the people who pay Adobe start to asking for Linux support will it get onto their roadmap.

- John

SleepyBob · 08-04-2011, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

Not at all. Windows 3.1 and DOS are hardly used anymore. That's not the case for Linux. They should provide Linux support.

And lots of people use Macs. That doesn't mean that companies who choose to develop for Windows only should feel any obligation to test their software on Macs running Windows emulators, even if one version of their software happened to run properly in that scenario. Same thing.

Personally, I'd rather have them focus on making the Windows version more reliable, though they probably don't have any need to cater to my desires, either.

ETA: Saying they should provide Linux support is, IMO, a totally separate statement from saying they should test their software in Wine under Linux and only release software that runs properly in that configuration.

Hellmark · 08-04-2011, 10:44 PM

Yeah, having it run under Wine is merely a backup option when they do not support linux. If they supported linux, we'd have no need for it to run under Wine.

I mean, at least at one point, they had a linux version developed and used in house, they just never released it to the public.

EowynCarter · 08-05-2011, 03:27 AM

Quote:

And lots of people use Macs. That doesn't mean that companies who choose to develop for Windows only should feel any obligation to test their software on Macs running Windows emulators, even if one version of their software happened to run properly in that scenario.

Of course they should ! Or provide a native MacOS version. Obviously, ADE not running on wine wouldn't be a problem if we had a native linux version...
If they don't want to bother making a proper port, they should at least make sure of wine compatibility.

HarryT · 08-05-2011, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

If they don't want to bother making a proper port, they should at least make sure of wine compatibility.

I really have to disagree with you. Adobe are writing a Windows program, not a Linux one. You may not like the fact that Adobe have made the commercial decision not to support Linux, but that choice is theirs to make. They are under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to ensure that it runs under an emulator in an operating system that they don't support.

EowynCarter · 08-05-2011, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

I really have to disagree with you. Adobe are writing a Windows program, not a Linux one. You may not like the fact that Adobe have made the commercial decision not to support Linux, but that choice is theirs to make. They are under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to ensure that it runs under an emulator in an operating system that they don't support.

Fact is, they should support Linux, just like they support windows or MacOS. It's not that complicated.

Hopefully adept will bite the dust someday...

ATimson · 08-05-2011, 09:25 AM

Silly question: since it's using only .NET 2, shouldn't Mono be an option?

DiapDealer · 08-05-2011, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Silly question: since it's using only .NET 2, shouldn't Mono be an option?

Possibly, but you'd just have to try it and see. Not all .net 2 applications work with Mono (although it's getting better at supporting more applications all the time)

SleepyBob · 08-05-2011, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

Of course they should ! Or provide a native MacOS version. Obviously, ADE not running on wine wouldn't be a problem if we had a native linux version...
If they don't want to bother making a proper port, they should at least make sure of wine compatibility.

I say, Wine should at least make sure of .Net3 compatability.

JSWolf · 08-05-2011, 02:12 PM

Blame Wine for not being .net compatible. Don't blame Adobe for using .net.

kjk · 08-05-2011, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sherman

From memory, ADE is one of those programs that force you to upgrade to the latest version, otherwise it will stop working (at least that's what has happened in the past).

Yes, I believe so. I'm not a big user of ADE, but I know that whenever I've tried to open a file with it, I get a "you cannot open this file until you upgrade" requestor. Not a big fan of that

EowynCarter · 08-05-2011, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SleepyBob

I say, Wine should at least make sure of .Net3 compatability.

Yeah, piece of cake with proprietary, close source crap...

We wouldn’t need wine if developer weren't too lazy to get a proper Linux version. Lots of open source project manage that, and not adobe ?

Quote:

Blame Wine for not being .net compatible. Don't blame Adobe for using .net.

i DO blame adobe for chosing .NET. It's not as if they were unaware of the consequences... They just didn't gave a damm, and that sucks !

ATimson · 08-05-2011, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

We wouldn’t need wine if developer weren't too lazy to get a proper Linux version. Lots of open source project manage that, and not adobe ?

It's not Adobe's fault that Linux doesn't have a stable ABI.

EowynCarter · 08-05-2011, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATimson

It's not Adobe's fault that Linux doesn't have a stable ABI.

What the hell are you talking about ?

ATimson · 08-05-2011, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

What the hell are you talking about ?

Linux doesn't have a stable application binary interface, meaning that Adobe can't just compile a Linux program and expect it to work on much anything but that one very specific distribution/kernel.

Open source programs can just distribute, well, the source, and make users responsible for compiling it for themselves. But that's not an option for ADE (since the DRM relies on security by obscurity). So Adobe would need to offer dozens if not hundreds of versions of the software if they wanted users to be able to use it.

That's why they can't manage it. There's no one simple target like Windows or Mac OS X.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Adobe Digital Editions - LINUX	lahnschnitzer	PocketBook	1	04-05-2011 04:25 AM
Adobe digital Editions and Linux	NicolasR	Reading and Management	0	06-21-2010 11:56 AM
PRS-600 adobe digital edition	tbov	Sony Reader	21	04-22-2010 11:42 PM
Adobe epub or Adobe Digital Edition?	Davimee	Astak EZReader	11	01-17-2010 08:15 PM
Adobe Digital Edition	Kimball	PDF	0	11-26-2009 02:21 PM

08-04-2011, 04:45 PM	#16
morana69 Member Posts: 14 Karma: 10 Join Date: May 2008 Device: Cybook Opus, Cybook Gen 3 (broken)	I think it might be worthwhile beginning to lobby Adobe's customers: the booksellers; explaining that Adobe not supporting Linux is cutting their potential customer base. Only when the people who pay Adobe start to asking for Linux support will it get onto their roadmap. - John

08-04-2011, 10:44 PM	#18
Hellmark Wizard Posts: 2,592 Karma: 4290425 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Foristell, Missouri, USA Device: Nokia N800, PRS-505, Nook STR Glowlight, Kindle 3, Kobo Libra 2	Yeah, having it run under Wine is merely a backup option when they do not support linux. If they supported linux, we'd have no need for it to run under Wine. I mean, at least at one point, they had a linux version developed and used in house, they just never released it to the public.

08-05-2011, 09:25 AM	#22
ATimson Evangelist Posts: 456 Karma: 1044878 Join Date: Apr 2009 Device: Kindle Paperwhite 4	Silly question: since it's using only .NET 2, shouldn't Mono be an option?

08-05-2011, 02:12 PM	#25
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 79,763 Karma: 145864619 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	Blame Wine for not being .net compatible. Don't blame Adobe for using .net.