AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Inside Apple's iPad: Adobe Flash
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Inside Apple's iPad: Adobe Flash - Page 5

post #161 of 573
2/20/10 at 12:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIM View Post

People that actually own an iPhone or iPod touch know that Flash isn't needed to view the web.

Both of these devices have done just fine (in fact astoundingly fine) without Flash. No reason to think it will be any different for the iPad. Flash doesn't drive Apple products. A Superior UI, beautiful hardware, and a wonderful User Experience does. This has been the case for years now.
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
post #162 of 573
2/20/10 at 12:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Flash doesn't drive Apple products.

If it did we'd have at least gotten a 64-bit version of Flash by now. \ They can't even deliver that so are we suppose to think they have any real interest in supporting Mac OS (umbrella term) in any other capacity.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #163 of 573
2/20/10 at 12:59pm
This site let tekstud back on? Seriously? Do you guys want these threads to suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

And it continue to be included with every Mac you buy, just not on iDevices with limited resources, especially power.

And it will keep some from buying those devices. There are people who understand that it is a power hog yet still would like to have the option available when it is needed.
Reply
Reply
post #164 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

So when is Apple Insider going to stop using Flash? I'm seeing some very annoying Flash adverts at the moment.

I'm not seeing them.

I use ClickToFlash.
Reply
Reply
post #165 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

And it will keep some from buying those devices. There are people who understand that it is a power hog yet still would like to have the option available when it is needed.

That is the nature of business. You have choose to exclude some to include others. If people think that Flash will work the same way as it does on a Macwhich as extremeskater points out requires at least an Intel Core 2.66GHz processorthen the user experience drops. When they try to watch Hulu and realize that they can't even begin to stream the content because it's too much or a resource hog or it's using Flash Lite, if we go back to 2007 and assume the iPhone came it.

And what abut banner ads chocking the loading of pages, we've already seen the iPhone beat on android phones with Flash Lite installed for that very reason? Or how about when they try to play their favorite Flash game or app and can't because they were designed for a keyboard and mouse, not a finger-based touchscreen?

There are just too many issues that Adobe failed to address that makes it a non-starter for a lot of companies, not just Apple. It's 2010 and Adobe is still working on Flash 10.1 for mobile OSes. Where are the public Betas? Would Adobe have even been to this point of development of Flash 10.1 if not for Apple pointing out how pathetic it really is? I don't think so. They surely didn't move to offer the H.264 codec or HW acceleration until MS Silverlight did.

Apple isn't making their iDevices for geeks at CES they are making it for consumers as a whole who aren't going to know why this or that doesn't work, they're only going to know it works on their Windows PC at work but not on their iDevice so not including it is the best method possible.

Adobe has been lying to people for over 3 years now about how easy it would be to run Flash on the iPhone which is OS X and yet no 64-bit Flash plugin for Mac OS. What gives?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #166 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

If it did we'd have at least gotten a 64-bit version of Flash by now. \ They can't even deliver that so are we suppose to think they have any real interest in supporting Mac OS (umbrella term) in any other capacity.

As a question, what if the DON'T really want to support Apple. What if Adobe made the decision that it would only give token support to Mac Ox

Doesn't Adobe have the right to make their own decisions regarding their product and their business plan, just as Apple has the right not to put Flash on their products.
Reply
Reply
post #167 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Doesn't Adobe have the right to make their own decisions regarding their product and their business plan, just as Apple has the right not to put Flash on their products.

Absolutely, but if Adobe's not going to properly support Flash then we shouldn't be pointing the finger at Apple and expecting them to pick up the slack. Nor should be upset at Apple and Google for finding and developing better solutions.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #168 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:24pm
Bottom Line:

If Flash is so bad, and HTML 5 is so good, then Apple needs to do nothing. 'It's no big deal. Just put Flash on the device.' Flash will wither and die anyway, and your customers will be happy along the way. HTML5 has Firefox, Google Chrome, Safari, and all the other weblings hoo-rahing for it.

But Steve Jobs cult insists this is 'proprietary vs. open standards.' Well, if that is true, then what I said above covers it. So why all the extra blather and bluster from Steve Jobs? Because Flash is NOT dying. It is morphing into a competitor to the iPhone OS and the crApp store.(www.openscreenproject.org) And Steve can't stand that! It is a battle of proprietary Steve vs. proprietary Flash/AIR. Steve doesn't want the Apple customer to be able to choose. He insists you have decided when you bought his gadget.

There's nothing noble about that; nothing noble about keeping Flash off iPhone or iPad. It's just about Steve's money flow and having dictatorial control over what runs on your iPhone.

All the other stuff, about 'open', 'obsolete', cpu hog, etc, is going to take care of itself, whether Flash is on the iThing or not. Isn't 'open' supposed to be about being able to use things as you'd like, without some turtleneck cashier sticking his hand out everytime you try to do something? Isn't Steve the tollkeeper here?
Reply
Reply
post #169 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Absolutely, but if Adobe's not going to properly support Flash then we shouldn't be pointing the finger at Apple and expecting them to pick up the slack. Nor should be upset at Apple and Google for finding and developing better solutions.

I agree with you 100%, that no one should expect Apple to pick up the slack, nor should anyone be upset at Apple finding an alternative. OTOH, there is a difference between finding an alternative and calling for the elimination of Flash.
Reply
Reply
post #170 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:25pm
Then the games could be based on ActionScript 2 compatible with Flash Lite or ActionScript 3 compatible with Flash 10.1.

How many sites are using old Flash compared to new Flash?

Who is going to rewrite all these old sites, how much will it cost them to buy the required tools from Adobe?

I notice Adobe is being very quiet on this bag of hurt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Or how about when they try to play their favorite Flash game or app and can't because they were designed for a keyboard and mouse, not a finger-based touchscreen?

Is that like a Casper the Friendly Ghost DVD or something?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

...now like it's tried to squash bu-ray and failed...

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #171 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:28pm
Flash is proprietary! Made by one and only one vendor. Of course, Adobe wants to continue the addiction. "The web must have Flash." = DON'T make me stop the HEROINE !!!!

(It might take some work: - OMG!)

HTML5 isn't (any of the above).
Reply
Reply
post #172 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

So what's wrong with teaching people to read rather than sitting there interacting with cartoons?

Now this comment is nothing to do with Flash or H.264 or anything like that. But from your comment, you haven't taught someone to read before, you don't need to use an expensive device like a tablet (iPad or any other one really), or a computer at all. Books, and other aids to teach someone to read are very cheap, and more durable than any electronic device will be.
Reply
Reply
post #173 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It's one thing to have opinion, it's another thing to outright lie. All you need to do is due the simple test outlined above, at your request to see the resource spike from using using Flash over the HTML5 video tag in YouTube.

How is stating that OSX has a low market share lying? Link please or go on vacation ALREADY!
Reply
Reply
post #174 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amdahl View Post

Bottom Line:

If Flash is so bad, and HTML 5 is so good, then Apple needs to do nothing. 'It's no big deal. Just put Flash on the device.' Flash will wither and die anyway, and your customers will be happy along the way. ...

You don't do logic much do you?

It ain't capitalism, it's web standards. The "market" isn't going to sort it out.
Reply
Reply
post #175 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

1) The conversation is about Flash being a resource hog compared to other options, not in comparison to different OSes where it's clear Flash is less developed on Mac OS X.

2) As you have astutely pointed out, Flash is a resource hog on Mac OS X, requiring an Intel Core Duo 2.66GHz processor or better, so why would you even argue that Flash would work just fine on the 412MHz to 600MHz iPhone ARM processors or the 1GHz processor in the iPad? Game. Set. Match.

I have never argued that Flash would work great on mobile devices including the iPad. However being the "geek" that I am when there is a software issue I look at fixing the issue not trying to kill the product as I see your buddy Quadra is trying to promote...lol.

You said the other member was incorrect and the fact is he isn't, Flash is clearly more of an issue for OSX then it is for Windows so you aren't going to kill Flash when 5% of the market has an issue with it.

What should happen is Adobe and Apple should work together to see why Flash is an issue for OSX.

Technology trends like this change very slowly, Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon and the only people that suffer is the end users if they can't view all the content on the internet. When someone looks at a Mac if a website they like doesn't work they aren't going to blame Adobe they are going to walk away from buying a Mac.

Many consumers just want something to work, they don't care how it works or why it works but if it doesn't work they will simply look at it as Apple fault.

To sum up my points what I am saying is fix the issue instead of talking forever about trying to kill something you can't kill or kill anytime soon. Apple is not big enough even at its peak and doesn't have the market share to kill Flash or for that matter anything Adobe has to offer.

If Steve Jobs really wanted to give his users the best browsing experience ever he would work with Adobe to correct the issue instead of trying to force techology in another direction which he doesn't have the power to do.

While Flash may go away at some point you and I both know that isn't going to be anytime soon.

While Flash may not be the best option for mobile devices including the iPad there is simply no reason why it shouldn't perform better on a system running OSX.
Reply
Reply
post #176 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCJ001 View Post

I'm not seeing them.

I use ClickToFlash.

You mean you're not having " the best web experience"?
Reply
Reply
post #177 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

I agree with you 100%, that no one should expect Apple to pick up the slack, nor should anyone be upset at Apple finding an alternative. OTOH, there is a difference between finding an alternative and calling for the elimination of Flash.

I've never called for the elimination of Flash. I've stated on many occasions that Canvas is far from being able to replicate Flash animations as there is no development kit for it. I've even posted some interactive Canvas demos that push your CPU the way Flash does.

The only thing I'm prognosticating is that Flash for video streaming will be going downhill in favor of HTML5 video from here on out. But note that Flash for video is current on Mt. Everest so this will not happen overnight.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Who is going to rewrite all these old sites, how much will it cost them to buy the required tools from Adobe?

I notice Adobe is being very quiet on this bag of hurt.

They've already made a way to convert Flash to Cocoa Touch so they at least have that going for them. I was surprised they even went that route at all. I'd much rather have a 64-bit version of Flash for Mac OS X.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #178 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:44pm
While I look forward to Flash's demise in favor of an open standard, your lengthy explanation leaves out concerns about h.264's patents. Mozilla is pushing for the competing OGV video codec which, though slightly inferior in benchmark performance, benefits from being completely free and unencumbered by patents.

With patents on h.264 not scheduled to expire for many years, shouldn't we be concerned that the patent holders will try to monetize h.264 on the web once it's established as a standard? And if royalty payments were imposed in the future, couldn't that effectively destroy any free software that relies on it?
Reply
Reply
post #179 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

I have never argued that Flash would work great on mobile devices including the iPad. However being the "geek" that I am when there is a software issue I look at fixing the issue not trying to kill the product as I see your buddy Quadra is trying to promote...lol.

You said the other member was incorrect and the fact is he isn't, Flash is clearly more of an issue for OSX then it is for Windows so you aren't going to kill Flash when 5% of the market has an issue with it.

What should happen is Adobe and Apple should work together to see why Flash is an issue for OSX.

Technology trends like this change very slowly, Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon and the only people that suffer is the end users if they can't view all the content on the internet. When someone looks at a Mac if a website they like doesn't work they aren't going to blame Adobe they are going to walk away from buying a Mac.

Many consumers just want something to work, they don't care how it works or why it works but if it doesn't work they will simply look at it as Apple fault.

To sum up my points what I am saying is fix the issue instead of talking forever about trying to kill something you can't kill or kill anytime soon. Apple is not big enough even at its peak and doesn't have the market share to kill Flash or for that matter anything Adobe has to offer.

If Steve Jobs really wanted to give his users the best browsing experience ever he would work with Adobe to correct the issue instead of trying to force techology in another direction which he doesn't have the power to do.

While Flash may go away at some point you and I both know that isn't going to be anytime soon.

While Flash may not be the best option for mobile devices including the iPad there is simply no reason why it shouldn't perform better on a system running OSX.

Apple, Google, Mozilla, and a few other companies are betting on Flash's demise. This isn't an Apple vs. Adobe fight.
Reply
Reply
post #180 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

While I look forward to Flash's demise in favor of an open standard, your lengthy explanation leaves out concerns about h.264's patents. Mozilla is pushing for the competing OGV video codec which, though slightly inferior in benchmark performance, benefits from being completely free and unencumbered by patents.

With patents on h.264 not scheduled to expire for many years, shouldn't we be concerned that the patent holders will try to monetize h.264 on the web once it's established as a standard? And if royalty payments were imposed in the future, couldn't that effectively destroy any free software that relies on it?

It's free until 2016. By then H.265 should be the next best thing. Even if it isn't OGG doesn't perform well as the bitrate increases, Apple, MS, Google, Intel and even Adobe are behind H.264. It's HW accelerated, while OGG is not. It's a losing game no matter you cut it. For once the superior quality beat the more convenient one out of the gate.

I don't see many sites adding OGG as an alternative option. I think a plugin will likely be made to give Firefox H.264 support and the site will check for the browser and if the codec is available. If not, it will simply put up a link telling the Firefox user they need to install the plugin to play the video, the same way Flash does. For older browser Flash will be used for a long time to come but it will still be streaming H.264.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #181 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIM View Post

Apple, Google, Mozilla, and a few other companies are betting on Flash's demise. This isn't an Apple vs. Adobe fight.

Then Apple, Google and Mozilla are all going to be very disappointed for a long time. While trends are moving towards HTML5 its going to be a very long time before Flash is even remotely gone.
Reply
Reply
post #182 of 573
2/20/10 at 1:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

The real reason you will not see Flash on the iPad is so Apple can force you to buy content on iTunes. It's a ploy.

Nothing but FUD
Reply
Reply
post #183 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:02pm
And Adobe's patented Flash?

You know the only way that developers can make Flash based products is to buy the patented developer tools from Adobe.

The only way consumers can view Flash content is via patented software provided by Adobe for their platform of choice.

There are no open source plug ins.

HTML 5 can be written in a text editor.


Quote:
Originally Posted by freediverx View Post

While I look forward to Flash's demise in favor of an open standard, your lengthy explanation leaves out concerns about h.264's patents. Mozilla is pushing for the competing OGV video codec which, though slightly inferior in benchmark performance, benefits from being completely free and unencumbered by patents.

With patents on h.264 not scheduled to expire for many years, shouldn't we be concerned that the patent holders will try to monetize h.264 on the web once it's established as a standard? And if royalty payments were imposed in the future, couldn't that effectively destroy any free software that relies on it?

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #184 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:04pm
Google on HTML5...
If you've wondered why there haven't been many Gears releases or posts on the Gears blog lately, it's because we've shifted our effort towards bringing all of the Gears capabilities into web standards like HTML5. We're not there yet, but we are getting closer.
http://gearsblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/hello-html5.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Then Apple, Google and Mozilla are all going to be very disappointed for a long time. While trends are moving towards HTML5 its going to be a very long time before Flash is even remotely gone.

I'm so curious about the mentality that can't see how both technologies can co-exist. How growing HTML5 support in no way means that Flash is going to be "gone" from the internets.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #185 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

The real reason you will not see Flash on the iPad is so Apple can force you to buy content on iTunes. It's a ploy.

Makes no difference. If it's a better standard (which it clearly is - especially for Macs), then you should have no problem with everyone moving toward it.
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1713.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1685.jpg
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1704.gif
Reply
post #186 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac View Post

There seem to be a lot of people here who have issues with flash and want it gone. So be it, but don't take it away until there is another option in place. Make Hulu and the rest work on another format then get rid of it, in that order.

Wrong. Web development on Flash needs to be de-incentivized, Flash development at Adobe needs to but cut off at the knees.

Apple selling more and more non Flash capable devices is the right approach. If you need Flash, then use something else. The rest of us who don't care about Flash will buy Apple mobile products and contribute to the death of Flash.
Reply
Reply
post #187 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Then Apple, Google and Mozilla are all going to be very disappointed for a long time. While trends are moving towards HTML5 its going to be a very long time before Flash is even remotely gone.

I doubt it. They're supporting HTML5 and H.264 and not looking back.
Reply
Reply
post #188 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

On the other hand Steve Jobs has made many statements in the past about the value of certain technologies only to adopt them later on. Maybe this is just a kick in the pants to Adobe to get with the plan. It wouldn't surprise me to find out that Adobe and Apple engineers are locked in a lab somewhere in Cupertino with NDAs shoved up their noses and are only being let out to take a leak now and then.

Apple will never willingly accept proprietary internet standards, unless they are owned or controlled by Apple.
Reply
Reply
post #189 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post


So why do the trolls and Adobe even care what Apple does? That's the real question isn't it. Apple has absolutely no influence on the industry because of its miniscule market share. No one pays any attention to what Steve Jobs says and never has. So why is Adobe defending itself from the rantings of the irrelevant CEO of an insignificant corporation that will soon fail and cease to exit?

That's what I'd like to know. Any ideas?

Among many other things, the marketshare argument is a giant red herring. And in reality, Apple's marketshare of mobile web capable devices is substantial.
Reply
Reply
post #190 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

And Adobe's patented Flash?

You know the only way that developers can make Flash based products is to buy the patented developer tools from Adobe.

The only way consumers can view Flash content is via patented software provided by Adobe for their platform of choice.

There are no open source plug ins.

HTML 5 can be written in a text editor.

Check your facts. Flash can be written in a text editor and can be compiled into a flash movie with a free command line app.

Adobes developers tools are also not the only ones available, there are plenty of others even open source ones.

Adobes flash player is patented and the only way to view flash content, but it is also an official standard.
Reply
Reply
post #191 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

The rest of us whu don't care about Flash will buy Apple mobile products and contribute to the death of Flash.

But here is the question that no one has really answered. Why does Flash have to die beyond the simplistic answer of it does not run well on a Mac?

some people answer because it is proprietary. If people are really concerned about proprietary software, why are they using a Mac, and not running a Linux box, using OpenOffice, Miro and all the rest?

The resource hog issue really only applies to Mac's, so then you are back to it not running on a Mac.

Ads will always be present, Flash or not.

So, the question remains, why must it die? This is not to say that people should not find alternatives if they wish, but as I said above, finding an alternative is not the same as eliminating an entire set of software tools.
Reply
Reply
post #192 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:27pm
As a designer I would buy an iPad as a digital portfolio for client meetings (and stop wasting time/money on my printed version) but if I help develop sites that use Flash I can't show them off so it's a deal breaker.

Don't really care for Flash and would love HTML5 to take over but that won't be for what, 2-3yrs? Face it many of you may hate Flash but clients still want it incorporated into their sites and until it does die I don't want to surf the web/show sites to clients with a missing plugin block on it.
You win, I've switched sides.
Reply
You win, I've switched sides.
Reply
post #193 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Among many other things, the marketshare argument is a giant red herring. And in reality, Apple's marketshare of mobile web capable devices is substantial.

Agreed that Apple's share of the mobile market is huge. But that is not really the question, the question is what percentage of the ENTIRE web market is the mobile market.
Reply
Reply
post #194 of 573
2/20/10 at 2:35pm
Flash was conceived and developed for the desktop, and it may be great for that arena, but the technology has moved on to to new form of computing, and Adobe must evolve Flash to run on it, not the other way around. Most everyone seems to agree that it is a resource hog, so who would want a device that has to be charged every couple of hours, because Flash has run the battery down. It doesn't matter if it's an iPad or any other tablet device. If you're streaming video, how long will the battery really last, which defeats the purpose of being mobile. Clearly, Steve recognizes this, which is probably one reason why Apple made the decision to not to include Flash. He said it at the unveiling: you can go from L.A. to Tokyo on one charge. Try that with Flash installed! What good is a mobile device if you constantly have to charge it. The bottom line is: Flash must evolve for mobile devices or face death.
Reply
Reply
post #195 of 573
2/20/10 at 3:16pm
[QUOTE=superacidjax;1576294]What the heck are you talking about? Korean taskmaskers in China? You do realize that they are different countries right? Have you been to China? I live less than 2 miles away from one of the big Apple factories in Suzhou and they don't "fear" anything there -- they're some of the best paid workers in the city. I know, because I teach English to one of the Chinese production managers.
I'm not sure what you were talking about in your post, but it seems like you were having a conversation with your imaginary friend. Quote]


FYI Fear Night=Phil Knight

Read this Mr. Avoid - the -truth,

http://tinyurl.com/y89jp3k

"Korean-owned footwear manufacturers own two of the plants in Jiaozhou City. In this one city in China, it is estimated there are 20,500 young women sewing Nike sneakers." At $.12 an hour!

I don't make this up, I just listen to what real and concerned people who really are there, tell us.
Reply
Reply
post #196 of 573
2/20/10 at 3:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

This site let tekstud back on? Seriously? Do you guys want these threads to suck?

Seriously do you not know how to use the ignore list? I've had very good conversations with others on here, I really don't care that you want to ignore my posts but please learn how to.
Reply
Reply
post #197 of 573
2/20/10 at 3:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

How is stating that OSX has a low market share lying? Link please or go on vacation ALREADY!

You need to chill and read entire discussion thread before bursting a blood vessel on his comments!
Reply
Reply
post #198 of 573
2/20/10 at 3:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post


So, the question remains, why must it die?

We all hate Adobe.
Reply
Reply
post #199 of 573
2/20/10 at 3:26pm
Premature. Today, a device made for web surfing that can't use Flash is a crippled device. Sure, HTML 5 will probably make Flash obsolete in a few years ... maybe then the iPad will be relevant as a multimedia web browser.

I love the form factor but I'm going to have to go with a non-crippled tablet instead. Not just for Flash audio/video that is all over the web ... My kids spend a huge amount of their Internet time playing Flash games (both for entertainment and learning ... pbskids.org etc). With no Flash support, the iPad is useless to them.

For reading, the iPad looks great. That's where its strength lies. But for Jobs to get up there and say the iPad offers "the best browsing experience" when it doesn't support the most widely used multimedia Web platform is just arrogant.
Reply
Reply
post #200 of 573
2/20/10 at 3:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseymac
The real reason you will not see Flash on the iPad is so Apple can force you to buy content on iTunes. It's a ploy.

EXACTLY. And I've learned my lesson BIG time with the APple TV which was morphed into an iTunes DIgital JukeBox. Had I known that at the time of purchase I would have been like - NO WAY!
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Inside Apple's iPad: Adobe Flash