nobody could hack a machine running google chrome as the browser at the last hack attack contest thingy. Flash doesn't pose a threat like that anymore.
Flash is a total turd in OSX, but only because Apple refused to work with Adobe at improving it. Adobe worked with Microsoft, and the result has been awesome, and a driver in it's acceptance across the web.
I'm all for moving to HTML5, but we aren't quite there yet. Flash is still being used heavily, and Adobe showed us it can run fine in Android. You admit you removed it from your Android device before even giving it a chance, and you claim you only use it on your tablet when you want to run the battery down? Those two statements alone would lead me to believe you're lying about even owning an Android device.
Not true at all. Apple gave Adobe many chances to improve mobile flash, but they never delivered a suitable product. Adobe never knocked it out of the park with desktop flash either, but Apple at least found it to be adequate, and so they allowed it to remain in OS X. But for mobile, they never got it right, and Apple is not about to ship a product with Flash support if it halves the battery life. This would be suicidal, especially in the early days when the iPhone was too expensive for most adopters.
Even after Apple omitted Flash with the first iPhone, Apple still left the door open almost begging Adobe to deliver a good product and made available their engineers to work with them, but they couldn't deliver.
This isn't is a suburban elementary school. Not everyone gets a trophy for participating. We keep score, and decided winners and losers.
Although, it seems all of Apple's competitors are getting a gold star for participating in the tablet market while Apple got berated for its original, breakthrough iPad.
Berating Apple for its innovative ideas and products, and giving a lot of credits to others who try unsuccessfully to copy them beats me too.
Yes, ironic isn't it?: If the claims about battery life are true, iPhone just lost one more advantage.
Very true. And if the mobile industry had gotten rid of flash years ago, all phones would have been on the same playing field all along (as it pertains to battery life). Now other companies can see the rewards that Apple has had these past few years.
EDIT: I should also add though that, regardless of a better or equal battery life, no other company can provide me the combination of hardware and software that Apple can. So, better battery life for awhile was great, but was only icing on the already amazing cake.
Well, that's sorta my point. HTML5 may have been there in 2007, but we certainly weren't benefitting from it then like we are today.
It'd be like saying iPhone 4S users have been benefiting from Bluetooth 4.0 since October 2011. Well, uhh, there aren't any BT4.0 peripherals out there to use
I so strongly disagree with this. Having developed in both Java and iOS, I can tell you that developing for iOS is by far an easier solution. I have yet to see any kind of GUI that allows you to model data or create the GUI for Java that is anywhere close to Xcode.
I do understand the Java more closely resembles other languages (as far as look of syntax, and the way it handles OOP), however once you have gotten over the initial hump of learning Objective-C and why it uses the messages approach; doing the other way just seems archaic to me.
OK. I am not a developer
My understanding is that Java's 'write once, run everywhere' approach while not perfect greatly simplifies the task of writing apps for multiple platforms. Apple's Xcode/Objective-C environment is no doubt elegant.
The central point of my response is that Android and Blackberry are mobile platforms that DO have runtime environments...
He's giving God tips on Intelligent Design telling him he needs to focus this products better starting with discontinuing the designed-by-committee platypus.
Although I agree with Gruber's overall point, he lost me with the last, bolded sentence. We iOS users didn't "magically" have access to the full web and HTML5/video/animation playback beginning in 2007.
I think you have missed his point. iOS users couldn't care less about this so-called "full web", they'd rather a better experience. He said "it will make the entire web better." and we've had this better experience of the mobile web since the first iPhone came out.
Comments
I just hope Flash doesn't go away on the desktop¡ I don't know what I'd do if I went to a restaurant's website and actually got useful information.
I can't believe that graphic left out the obnoxious music that plays at full volume. But otherwise they nailed it.
nobody could hack a machine running google chrome as the browser at the last hack attack contest thingy. Flash doesn't pose a threat like that anymore.
Flash is a total turd in OSX, but only because Apple refused to work with Adobe at improving it. Adobe worked with Microsoft, and the result has been awesome, and a driver in it's acceptance across the web.
I'm all for moving to HTML5, but we aren't quite there yet. Flash is still being used heavily, and Adobe showed us it can run fine in Android. You admit you removed it from your Android device before even giving it a chance, and you claim you only use it on your tablet when you want to run the battery down? Those two statements alone would lead me to believe you're lying about even owning an Android device.
Not true at all. Apple gave Adobe many chances to improve mobile flash, but they never delivered a suitable product. Adobe never knocked it out of the park with desktop flash either, but Apple at least found it to be adequate, and so they allowed it to remain in OS X. But for mobile, they never got it right, and Apple is not about to ship a product with Flash support if it halves the battery life. This would be suicidal, especially in the early days when the iPhone was too expensive for most adopters.
Even after Apple omitted Flash with the first iPhone, Apple still left the door open almost begging Adobe to deliver a good product and made available their engineers to work with them, but they couldn't deliver.
This is all on Adobe.
This isn't is a suburban elementary school. Not everyone gets a trophy for participating. We keep score, and decided winners and losers.
Although, it seems all of Apple's competitors are getting a gold star for participating in the tablet market while Apple got berated for its original, breakthrough iPad.
Berating Apple for its innovative ideas and products, and giving a lot of credits to others who try unsuccessfully to copy them beats me too.
Yes, ironic isn't it?: If the claims about battery life are true, iPhone just lost one more advantage.
Very true. And if the mobile industry had gotten rid of flash years ago, all phones would have been on the same playing field all along (as it pertains to battery life). Now other companies can see the rewards that Apple has had these past few years.
EDIT: I should also add though that, regardless of a better or equal battery life, no other company can provide me the combination of hardware and software that Apple can. So, better battery life for awhile was great, but was only icing on the already amazing cake.
Ding dong the witch is dead, the witch is dead, ding dong. the wicked witch is dead.
Oh... sorry.
Mmm... I remember listening to a lady executive say that Adobe's objective with Flash was to: "make content rich" and "give content reach"...
Rich and Reach -- I thought that had a nice ring to it, but didn't go far enough. So I added a word to describe the user experience:
Rich, Reach and Retch...
But, Witch, Weach and Wetch... sounds good too
Well, that's sorta my point. HTML5 may have been there in 2007, but we certainly weren't benefitting from it then like we are today.
It'd be like saying iPhone 4S users have been benefiting from Bluetooth 4.0 since October 2011. Well, uhh, there aren't any BT4.0 peripherals out there to use
I can't believe that graphic left out the obnoxious music that plays at full volume. But otherwise they nailed it.
LOL They did completely miss that one.
Flash-derived iPad game tops App Store charts
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20...-store-charts/
That's old news. I actually have that game for Mac OS X on STEAM. It's an ok game, but what's your point? Flash still sucks.
That's old news. I actually have that game for Mac OS X on STEAM. It's an ok game, but what's your point? Flash still sucks.
Be careful here... lest you be accused of making an ad trollinem attack!
I so strongly disagree with this. Having developed in both Java and iOS, I can tell you that developing for iOS is by far an easier solution. I have yet to see any kind of GUI that allows you to model data or create the GUI for Java that is anywhere close to Xcode.
I do understand the Java more closely resembles other languages (as far as look of syntax, and the way it handles OOP), however once you have gotten over the initial hump of learning Objective-C and why it uses the messages approach; doing the other way just seems archaic to me.
OK. I am not a developer
My understanding is that Java's 'write once, run everywhere' approach while not perfect greatly simplifies the task of writing apps for multiple platforms. Apple's Xcode/Objective-C environment is no doubt elegant.
The central point of my response is that Android and Blackberry are mobile platforms that DO have runtime environments...
He's giving God tips on Intelligent Design telling him he needs to focus this products better starting with discontinuing the designed-by-committee platypus.
(I hope that doesn't offend anyone)
I am grievously offended!
Sincerely yours,
Hon. William T. Platypus
I heard that Google are offering the square root of minus one for these patents now.
*Imagine* how rich you would be with that amount of money!
I am grievously offended!
Sincerely yours,
Hon. William T. Platypus
Always a joker in the bunch.
Flash-derived iPad game tops App Store charts
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20...-store-charts/
Yup, that's the future of Flash...native apps. Not mobile web.
Yup, that's the future of Flash...native apps. Not mobile web.
He tried to paint Apple in a bad light just to prove that native apps are better than using a plugin..
Although I agree with Gruber's overall point, he lost me with the last, bolded sentence. We iOS users didn't "magically" have access to the full web and HTML5/video/animation playback beginning in 2007.
I think you have missed his point. iOS users couldn't care less about this so-called "full web", they'd rather a better experience. He said "it will make the entire web better." and we've had this better experience of the mobile web since the first iPhone came out.