or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Adobe exec defends Flash, says Mac improvements are coming
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe exec defends Flash, says Mac improvements are coming - Page 5

post #161 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

That might happen about the same time that fax machines are no longer found in offices. Right now you would be hard pressed to find an IBM Selectric in an office (although we do have one) so sure someday, but I wouldn't hold your breath waiting on the demise of Flash.

Maybe you're right, but maybe not.

I believe Apple is trying to kill Flash, at least to the extent that it is any kind of internet standard. I believe they will succeed. They are already selling millions of mobile internet devices every quarter that don't support Flash. That number is going to increase, substantially I believe, when iPad ships. The tide is turning, and not in Adobe's favor.
post #162 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

Wow. I too am running a quad-core i7, with only 4 gigs of Ram, and firefox reports only 1% to 3% CPU usage.

If I were to use Safari, do you think my results would be different?

The music on that website is mucho annoying.

On Quad G5, CPU load in activity monitor for Safari is about 150% higher when jimcarrey.com is open in a big window. (170% vs. 20%). Safari is only about 110% higher when I have jimcarrey.com open in a very small window. I have never had Flash problems on PPC or Intel Macs. I have Flash 10.0.45.2(whatever is newest)

I, for one, am hoping that Adobe is actually getting their stuff together with Flash 10.1 and performance is going to be greatly improved. The early benchmarks show 'phenomenal' and 'magical' improvements on HD video on Intel Macs. Adobe indicates 10.1 will be the last release that supports the G3 processor. Perhaps part of the improvements in 10.1 are that they are finally supporting Alti-Vec and SSE?
post #163 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by DdubRes79 View Post

Everyone breathe in, now exhale.

This matter comes down to user numbers and resources. As wonderful as our Mac computers are they are still the vast minority of global users. Adobe has no incentive to spend millions in fixing Mac related issues when they can put that money towards the other 95% of the market.

I hate that apps like Photoshop are 64bit and faster on windows but again 95% vs 5% of the market, guess who gets more resources thrown at it? It was my choice to play on the Mac side of the tracks and I accept it. Plus now that Apple is bashing Adobe on a regular basis and creating competing products (FInal Cut and now Aperture) I'm sure Adobe is even LESS interested in the Mac market.

Until Apple can grab a significant portion of global users this isn't going to end anytime soon. We all chose to side with the underdog and there are always downsides to that decision.

The problem with your argument is that the situation is far more complicated than the 95%-5% marketshare statistic that you cite. If it were that simple, then Adobe wouldn't care that Apple has refused Flash access to some of Apple's products. Whatever the marketshare numbers are, I would argue that Apple's share of the mobile browser market is way more significant, and likely to become even more so once iPad hits the market. If you believe that Adobe isn't concerned, then you aren't paying attention.

In my view, herein lies the problem for Adobe. They set their policy with regard to their Macintosh software development based on the 95% vs 5% meme, and the notion that Apple's significance would continue to decline. Neither of those things are really true presently, and on top of that, Apple's surprise success in mobile has made Adobe's decision look bad.

I think Adobe is in a bad spot regarding Flash. One essentially of their own making.
post #164 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

A Ferrari cost around $300k, is that too much? Just go get some more money - what's the problem. Want Flash to run on your netbook... Sorry no can do. Go get some more ram and CPU power.

I don't think you or your alter-ego "iGenius" have ever been within ten feet of a Mac.

Isn't there a nice Windows forum somewhere that you two could hang out at together?

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #165 of 206
When YouTube is transitiong to HTML5, with Vimeo and others following suit, you know that the current "standard" is about to change.

With Google and Apple pushing HTML5 Adobe doesn't stand a chance. With the impending proliferation of iPads, this is more true now than ever. If you're backing a standard that is incompatible with Apple devices you're playing the wrong game. It's just that simple.
post #166 of 206
are these improvements coming five years ago? because that's when i'd want them.
>>< drow ><<
Reply
>>< drow ><<
Reply
post #167 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

I don't think you or your alter-ego "iGenius" have ever been within ten feet of a Mac.

Isn't there a nice Windows forum somewhere that you two could hang out at together?

As an exercise in Logic:

Flash is to the Mac OSX creative environment what
Mstone, iGenius and others are to the Comment Section of AppleInsider.

The symmetry is remarquable.
post #168 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berp View Post

As an exercise in Logic:

Flash is to the Mac OSX creative environment what
Mstone, iGenius and others are to the Comment Section of AppleInsider.

The symmetry is remarquable.

My opinions are my own and I defend Adobe and Flash and CSx because they are the best professional tools available to working designers, programmers, application developers etc. If something else better comes along, we will be the first to adopt it. So far, nothing is on the horizon.

Please go HTML 5 yourself into a professional corporate marketing, sales. design, advertising gig preaching your holier than thou 'standards' and suffer along until the tide finally turns in your favor. While you are preaching to the idealists I'll be raking in the cash programming with the most robust and ubiquitous protocols in the industry. By the time your beloved HTML 5 makes its mark it will be passé and I'll still be cashing in on whatever is in style just like I have been doing for 25 years.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #169 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

My opinions are my own and...


Flash is the best programing tool available? Are you joking?

Flash is a piece of shit and you know it. You may indeed make money from it, but you might want to consider brushing up on some alternate programming skills. Flash has had its day in the sun, and sunset is approaching.
post #170 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Flash is the best programing tool available? Are you joking?

Flash is a piece of shit and you know it. You may indeed make money from it, but you might want to consider brushing up on some alternate programming skills. Flash has had its day in the sun, and sunset is approaching.


'dude' I doubt you have ever programmed a single line of code in your life. There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research. You try to come off as some sort of authoritative and knowledgeable expert but you haven't a clue what you are talking about. Please STFU or post something that validates your expertise on the subject.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #171 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

If you're backing a standard that is incompatible with Apple devices you're playing the wrong game. It's just that simple.

Thing is that Apple devices are currently targeted at consumers who are notoriously cheap. They want everything for free. I'm on the side where the money is. For me that is business applications. Sure 100,000 farts apps can't be wrong, but I'll stick with business clients. As soon as the winds shift, I'll adapt in a second so there is no time wasted endorsing a future trend until it is ready for prime time.

I have the same clients I have retained for 15-20 years. The only side of the business I need to be on is what they want. I don't need to chase after the latest 'in thing' unless it is going to make money right now. As far as HTML5/Ajax is concerned, We have been integrating that into our applications for some time now. Many people don't even realize that MS invented it a decade ago. (innerHTML)

So glad we didn't invest too much time in Rails, what a disaster that turned out to be. You never know what is going to catch on.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #172 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Maybe you're right, but maybe not.

I believe Apple is trying to kill Flash, at least to the extent that it is any kind of internet standard. I believe they will succeed. They are already selling millions of mobile internet devices every quarter that don't support Flash. That number is going to increase, substantially I believe, when iPad ships. The tide is turning, and not in Adobe's favor.

Bingo!!!

There are already 75 million iPhone/iTouch's in the wild that CANNOT view those Flash ads... And now the iPad too.... Those numbers will definitely make an impact and cause most advertisers to reconsider using Flash going forward.

And the whole spiel about Mac marketshare being "so much smaller" that it doesn't make a difference is ridiculous.. Apple sold about 11 million Macs last year, and about 9 million the year before, that's about 20 million current Mac users not to mention another approximate 10 or so million with computers over 2 years old..

So were talking approximately 30 million Mac users out there.. And those Mac users are at the top end of the Pc market, computers over $1000 dollars.. People who buy $1000 and up computers are the demographic that generally have more disposable income. Those 30 million people are the ones who advertisers want seeing their ads.

So between the 75+ million iDevices and the 30 + million Mac users, well, let's just say that Adobe definitely needs Apple's customers...
post #173 of 206
Old inefficient software is supplanted and replaced by newer and more nimble software all the time. Its inevitable and necessary.

You do have admit Adobe has its hands full trying to push Flash forward all by itself. There are far more people working on HTML5.

What you have to consider is the fact that all of the newest mobile platforms use HTML5 right now. Apple, Google, Palm, Nokia, very soon RIM all ship phones that make use of HTML5 right now. They have all worked to make their platforms HTML5 compliant.

Its exactly the opposite for Flash. Adobe will be all by itself attempting to adapt Flash to work on all of these different platforms with little to no difference in functionality and performance and no help from any OS makers. That is a tall order.



Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research.
post #174 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Thing is that Apple devices are currently targeted at consumers who are notoriously cheap. They want everything for free. I'm on the side where the money is.

Seeing as the app store and peripherals for Apple's iDevices are multibillion dollar business. The fact that an iPod dock is built into nearly every consumer electronic device that makes noise, I don't think your statement quite holds up under the weight of reality.

Quote:
Many people don't even realize that MS invented it a decade ago. (innerHTML)

MS has added some important pieces to HTML, but they certainly did not invent it.
post #175 of 206
Very good point, to even further it. Palm, Google, Nokia, (very soon) RIM are shipping hundreds of millions of devices that make productive use of HTML5 right now.

Web developers are already making use of HTML5 and H.264 video without the need for Flash today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

Bingo!!!
So between the 75+ million iDevices and the 30 + million Mac users, well, let's just say that Adobe definitely needs Apple's customers...
post #176 of 206
I'm surprised at how uninformed some of the posters here are.

1) Adobe has announced that the forthcoming version of Flash CS5 will be able to output stand-alone app code, that will be useable on the iPhone/iPad... I suspect for games mostly.

2) Here is a great example of HTML5 Video: Sublime Video

I also agree that someone (Apple?) needs to come out with software and tools that make creating content (HTML5 with CSS, Java, whatever) easier. I say Apple, because it's in their best interests considering the iPhone... and especially the upcoming iPad, for designers/publishers to easily and expediently get their content re-purposed for Apple's mobile devices. I would expect the software could also be used to make those "Albums" that Apple has been pushing.

The benefit is obvious, but considering that this software would be outputing Standards complaint code, it would also more than likely be the software of choice to create content for any "standards complaint browser". This would be the fastest route to "suspending" Flash and Silverlight development and adaptation.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #177 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pascal007 View Post

Adobe should have reacted the moment flash blockers started to appear for browsers. The very fact that these exist show that Flash is indeed a problem for internet usability and pleasantness. If Flash was so great, do you think that Flash blockers would be the most downloaded add-ons for Firefox and Chrome ? (I'm mentioning those 2 because their add-on pages allow to compare the popularity of various add-ons.) In business, there is the 1:10 rule : for every person that complains or show dissatisfaction, there are 10 other people out there who are the same but didn't say so. So Flash blockers are a very serious symptom that something is wrong in Flashland.

The second reason Adobe should have reacted is because the Flash blockers allow users to realize that one can live without Flash and it's not that bad to not have Flash in your web pages. So people start wondering why they should install this security hole in the first place. Leading to less and less demand for Flash. This in turn leads to a downward spiral : less demand, less sites requiring Flash. Less site requiring Flash, less interest for Flash...

It's the ad's people disike, but the truth is, there will always be ads. Not like the days of BBS. LOL. For streaming video though, it rocks. I have it on SL 10.61,62, Tiger and Leopard 1058 and never had a problem with it. Xvid is also very good but much larger. QuickTime can be very large. Ist really about the ads and file size and by comparison, Flash is very small.
The only reason we don't see it on the iPhone is twofold, battery life and iTunes would take a hit from users going to the networks instead of buying it from iTunes. Personally, I see this $1.00 test as a way that Jobs is getting the message and that many netbooks, smart phones, and all computers will have it. I never see it going away. If HTML5 is so great (which will be about five years for all the web programs to adopt, Macromed.... I mean Adobe will work on it and get the compression very small. Whoever gets the compression the best and smallest wins. I think I said that about ten years ago. CIO
post #178 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by apptastic View Post

thank you. exactly...

But nearly 100% for networks ala NBC, CBS,FOX,ESPN,MLB,ABC. You get it.
post #179 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by iReality85 View Post

You purchased a Mac. Mac's cannot handle Flash well, and this is widely known. Yet, it is a pastime for Mac users, and those who are on these forums, to berate Adobe. So who's fault is it? Is it Adobe's, for not bending over backward to the whims of Jobs, his needy customers, and the obstructiveness of OS X? Or is it your fault, for making the decision to buy a product you knew full well does not support Flash- a rich media format used extensively throughout the web? I have to tell you, my non-Apple desktop at home has much the same specs as yours, and Flash just works (to quote a familiar tag line). Do not complain about it after the fact, as you're doing at the very end of your post.

And as of yet, Adobe still hasn't released a Mac suitable version of Flash. From a business perspective, which do you cater to first? The 80% of the market which uses PCs and has very little to no issues with Flash and whose hardware can handle it? Or do you cater to <15% of the market which uses Macs, a company that openly chastises your product, and whose products feature software (and possibly hardware?) that cannot adequately handle Flash? I wonder.

As you said, your post also speaks for itself.

EDIT: misc grammatical stuff

This post made me realize something. Most pcs come with a dedicated gpu wheras MacBook use onboard gpu. I wonder if that plays a role. I have a few macs, all dedicated GPU, zero problems.
post #180 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Your posts speak for themselves. If you are trying to make some other point with those comments, you'll forgive us if we missed it. If there were any probing questions in there, I must have missed those too.

Adobe's CEO outright admits that Flash over utilizes the CPU on Macs. It is abused beyond belief, unsafe, ignores browser cookie settings, requires more bandwidth than simple text and images, and is IMO, just gives a bad experience on the web.

http://jimcarrey.com/

Web sites like that speak for themselves. I'm running a Quad I7 with 8GB of ram, and it's utilizing 30% just for a web page.

Inexcusable.

We'l since we've never found code that does this, at the hardware EE micro photolithography level, there could be a conspiracy to tripple the CPU whenever flash code is found on motherboards with Apple chips. Is it happening, naa, but for fun I thought everyone should know. Hee hee.
post #181 of 206
Wai a second. While what youbsaybis 100% true, those were Aldo the days when Apple was Chic' and store employees were told not to bother the customer and the studio was filled with Logic, Shake, and FCP users and NOT baby strollers (we do love chidren though, can't wait to have our own), and people with their dogs, iPods and iLife ads on-screen, running on an endless loop.

Those days are long gone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Your posts speak for themselves. If you are trying to make some other point with those comments, you'll forgive us if we missed it. If there were any probing questions in there, I must have missed those too.

Adobe's CEO outright admits that Flash over utilizes the CPU on Macs. It is abused beyond belief, unsafe, ignores browser cookie settings, requires more bandwidth than simple text and images, and is IMO, just gives a bad experience on the web.

http://jimcarrey.com/

Web sites like that speak for themselves. I'm running a Quad I7 with 8GB of ram, and it's utilizing 30% just for a web page.

Inexcusable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post

Are you such a fraking idiot that you can't remember where adobe started? We should feel so lucky that Adobe would develop for the Mac? Oh yes we are blessed and humbled that the great Adobe has not forsaken us. (Bloated POS software maker) Your belief is not only arrogant but illogical and misinformed. Adobe wouldn't have had a platform to develop for if it weren't for the mac OS and the Apple computer. Those computers were the first to offer color displays and other features needed by graphic artists. There was no other platform to develop for at the time of Photoshop V1. Pc's were and are still primarily office machines. Only in the 90's did things change and designers finally felt comfortable switching to PC.

While there may be millions more PC's than Mac users (22million of us) but that says nothing about Adobe's client share of each. The percentage of mac users with PS installed is much higher than on PC's no doubt about that . Your attitude is probably the same attitude that lead Apple to build Aperture and Iphoto and F_-K Adobe.
post #182 of 206
I use a PC for most things, so for me flash is fine and rarely causes any problems, but I also have a Macbook. It's pretty old and slow for well, just about everything, but I can't say I've ever noticed Flash crashing Firefox or slowing the system down.

Maybe I've just been lucky.
post #183 of 206
Is it just Mac Flash that is slow and buggy, or is it every version except for Windows?
post #184 of 206
I don't care for flash for the same reasons as many of the others here. One customer of ours got a flash movie developped for their website and it ended up hogging 80% of one of the cores of a Core 2 Duo Windows PC. The problem here is that a good number of these flash developers don't seem to understand anything about optimising the user experience or the performance. All they care about is making it look good. In this regards it is not necessarily Adobe's fault, but they could provide solutions to help reduce the resource impact of flash applications.

I have seen plenty of cases where a Flash movie could have easily been written in HTML within a day. I believe the problem for many of these designers is not whether it is Flash or HTML, but the authoring tools to do the same thing in HTML just aren't there. The field is wide open for someone to develop an authoring tool that makes itvas easy to make solutions in HTML as it is in Flash. One other thing that Flash does manage to address is that it looks the same in every browser. The bane of web development is IE and this is probably the biggest hinderance to a DHTML authoring tool. In just hope IE9 supports HTML5, SVG and CSS3. Special casing for IE is a pain.

I am all for getting rid of flash, but certain things need to be done first.

Edit: Just wanted to add a note, while Windows and OS X may share the same CPU, an application needs to be adapted to take advantage of the OS architecture and frameworks that are optimised for a particular task. There is also a good chance that Flash is still a legacy 32-bit application with code that was never really updated to take advantage of the right APIs. Also, if Adobe is having such a hard time here it makes hard to feel how that they can do a good job on an alternative CPU, which in this case is the ARM. Adobe needs to prove itself for us to believe.
post #185 of 206
They most certainly do not. Virtually all sub $1000 PCs use integrated graphics. Intel integrated graphics are in most of the worlds computers. Once you price out a decent dedicated GPU and a decent monitor your computer heads north of $1000.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avidfcp View Post

This post made me realize something. Most pcs come with a dedicated gpu wheras MacBook use onboard gpu. I wonder if that plays a role. I have a few macs, all dedicated GPU, zero problems.
post #186 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rokken View Post

Yes, there are a lot MORE windows machines than Macs in the wild, but would you consider it a waste of resources when that 10% of the market makes up more than half of your revenue? By your logic, you would consider it a waste of resources even if only 1% of the market are Mac users but they make up of 99% of your revenue, wouldn't you?

Got any stats on this, or are you just spinning "more than half" of Adobe's revenue from whole cloth?
post #187 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post


And while the mobile market is small compared to the "desktop" market, it will continue to outpace desktop sales and if Flash isn't as ubiquitous in the mobile space as it is on the desktop, then there's no reason to default to it. This of course scares the hell out of Adobe who makes all of its money from selling development and content creation tools.

Did you miss all the current events? Adobe has a new version of Flash for every popular smartphone OS EXCEPT iOS. Other mobile OSs are selling like hotcakes. Everyone expects Apple's market share to go down compared to other OSs.
post #188 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

There is nothing illogical about it. Mac users have been relegated to second class citizenship by Adobe many years ago, and we're FUCKING sick and tired of it.

What part of that don't you understand?

What I don't understand is how Adobe's attitude is different from the majority of other developers. Mac users are a niche market, and ISTM that most software developers spend their time serving larger market segments.

I also don't understand the attitude that a niche product should get widespread support from third parties. I've owned several products which were not market leaders, such as my Palm Treo, and relatively few accessories were available for it. But I didn't curse at Belkin - I knew what I was getting into when I bought a Treo instead of a Blackberry.

So what the heck is so surprising when the Mac has less current, less quantity and less quality of software? Isn't that something you knew when you bought a Mac instead of a popular platform?
post #189 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maximara View Post

How do you figure that. The majority of video on the web is not flash but rather whatever codec could be shoved into the avi format that week.

I base it on many quotes from various sources that say Flash accounts for X% of video on the 'web.

I've seen X as high as 85.
post #190 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezekiahb View Post

Wasn't iTunes compatible with Windows Vista before MS's own Zune software? Windows & multimedia have never played nice together, it's therefor not surprising to me that it might hit snags with iTunes.

I'm not talking about iTunes as a multimedia player. I use better software for that.

Instead, I'm talking about it as a means to get data onto my iPhone. And again, except for a few data types, third party software is MUCH better than iTunes.

CopyTrans, for example, is modular - you need not load the whole bloated shebang of iTunes for one simple function. And it will do what you tell it to do, as contrasted with iTunes, which mysteriously locks up (while still using CPU) and does God-knows-what while not responding to user input.
post #191 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eluard View Post

It sounds as though the big companies that use flash for advertisements are now putting pressure on Adobe to fix flash for the Mac.

Yeah? Got any support for that? I'd love to read your cites.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Eluard View Post

Many years ago Adob But the idea is nothing short of stupidity and will kill the company that follows it. It is killing Adobe.

Yeah? The stock is now more than twice its 52-week low. I guess they are going to go out with a BANG.
post #192 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

I don't think you or your alter-ego "iGenius" have ever been within ten feet of a Mac.

Isn't there a nice Windows forum somewhere that you two could hang out at together?

Personal insults have no place in this forum. Especially these sorts of lame attempts at insults. If you want to (f)lame folks who disagree with you, go elsewhere.
post #193 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berp View Post

As an exercise in Logic:

Flash is to the Mac OSX creative environment what
Mstone, iGenius and others are to the Comment Section of AppleInsider.

The symmetry is remarquable.

Personal insults have no place on this forum. Especially these sort of lame attempts at insults. There are other fora for (f)lame insults - but if you keep up your disruptive behaviour here, I will report it.
post #194 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post


And the whole spiel about Mac marketshare being "so much smaller" that it doesn't make a difference is ridiculous.. Apple sold about 11 million Macs last year, and about 9 million the year before, that's about 20 million current Mac users not to mention another approximate 10 or so million with computers over 2 years old..

So were talking approximately 30 million Mac users out there..

There's also millions of amputees out there, but Levis does not make one-legged pants. The absolute size of the market makes these millions a mere niche.
post #195 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post


2) Here is a great example of HTML5 Video: Sublime Video


Is the low frame rate a limitation of HTML5 or is it just this particular video? I noticed that many of the scenes were in slomo, and looked jerky, but that on the scenes with panning IRT it was also jerky. It also stuttered many times when there was a lot of motion on the screen.
post #196 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGenius View Post

Personal insults have no place in this forum. Especially these sorts of lame attempts at insults. If you want to (f)lame folks who disagree with you, go elsewhere.

Nothing in there was a personal attack.

I said that I didn't think you or your sock puppet "mstone" have ever been in the vicinity of a Mac, based on the fact that you make identical (but completely bogus) arguments and assumptions. Anyone who's run Flash on OS X knows it doesn't matter what GPU you have or how powerful the CPU is, CPU utilization goes right to 100%. Expect to get called out on not understanding that in any Mac forum.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #197 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Is it just Mac Flash that is slow and buggy, or is it every version except for Windows?

It's about Adobe entering markets that they are unprepared for but claiming they support.

They claim they have Flash for Windows, Mac and Linux. The claim is true to a degree. Adobe has created software for all three platforms, that inputs code and outputs Flash. The difference seems to be akin to compilation vs interpretation, where Windows users are treated to "compiled" Flash and everyone else gets "interpreted" Flash.

If Adobe were to truly support all three platforms, they would have people fluent in all three architectures and performance would be similar on all three. I suspect this is where the accusations of laziness come in.

Let's compare. When Apple moved from OS 9 to OS X, they supported a Classic environment that allowed older software to run UNTIL IT WAS RE-WRITTEN FOR OS X. When Apple transitioned to Intel they supported older software with Rosetta UNTIL THE SOFTWARE GOT RE-WRITTEN FOR INTEL PROCESSORS. They set a life span for the support and if the developer didn't want to adapt then the software died out when the crutch got removed.

Adobe? Apple's offered you the same crutch for well over their suggested time limit. They're pulling it. Adapt or die. Support the platform as you claim to, or go away.

Going away isn't an option - Apple's too popular. If Adobe is providing a conduit for web ads - yes, Flash is used for other things but where's the money coming from? - then those paying for the ads are going to want to hit as many people as they can. Missing a 10% slice of the market - give or take, for all you bean counters - is not tolerable. When they really start pushing for mobile devices, and they can't reach out to how many iPhone users, are they going to stick with Flash?

We're not talking feature parity here - we're Mac users and have come to expect to be shorted on every release. Microsoft does it. Adobe does it. We're used to it. Bt at least make the software work within acceptable parameters.
post #198 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

'dude' I doubt you have ever programmed a single line of code in your life. There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research. You try to come off as some sort of authoritative and knowledgeable expert but you haven't a clue what you are talking about. Please STFU or post something that validates your expertise on the subject.


Well, I actually have programmed, and more than just a few lines. Admittedly though, I'm not a software engineer, and don't make a living from programming. However, I don't need a PhD to be able to tell the difference between shit and shinola, and from where I'm sitting (at my Macintosh), Flash is definitely closer to the former than the latter.

Btw, I judge based on how it performs (like shit), and the content that it delivers (much of which is noise). I'm not concerned about offending either it's creators, who frankly should have just done a better job with it, or the people who use it to make annoying ads and useless web animations. None of those people add value to my life.

Not sure what sort of credentials you think I should have in order to state my opinions, but I'll continue to call Flash out for the way that I see it. Adobe have made their own bed in this case.
post #199 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Flash doesn't account for 85% of all web sites.

The reference is to the fact that 85% of the most popular sites has some bits of flash on it, not that it's created and housed inside the Flash Object container.

Maybe. But go to ABC NBC CBS FOX SCIFI and watch streaming video. What you can watch for free with 5 :15-:30 ads versus 17 minutes in tv, all the streaming devices use flash ifflash were in the iPhone, it's unclear how much CPU it would use but what would happen is Apple may lose iTunes tv shows. $2.99-$1.99 vs Free. You can't beat free and we stream on a MacBook pro driving a 24" HDMI monitor with no problems.

iTunes would take a hit and therefore I dont think we'll see flash on the iPhone until more smartphones have it.
post #200 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

'dude' I doubt you have ever programmed a single line of code in your life. There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research. You try to come off as some sort of authoritative and knowledgeable expert but you haven't a clue what you are talking about. Please STFU or post something that validates your expertise on the subject.


Everybody has an opinion on everyone's work and if you are telling me you never made a comment that may seem offense to another person's work..BS
Do not take the high mighty road with us, when you in the pass have done the same with other people. tired of lame people like you taking the high road when it suits you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Adobe exec defends Flash, says Mac improvements are coming