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

Inside Apple's iPad: Adobe Flash - Page 6

post #201 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

The original question was "if Apple's marketshare is so small, then why does Adobe care about Apple?" (paraphrased) The answer I gave is relevant.

Not really. If the mobile market makes up a small percentage of the overall internet market (and I have no idea what the percentage is), then owning a big or small share of the mobile market is still irrelevant.
post #202 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

When someone calls someone a liar directly to a preceding post why must one read the whole thread? No blood vessel bursting but between his calling people liars and trolls- like enough already.

Yes read the entire thread and then comment.
post #203 of 563
There is no Creators and Designers who can use HTML5.
Flash is a Bridge of Creative people and WebMedia.
Code Creators can't make media contents.
Flash is not just a CPU Hog plugin, but a Huge Creative Culture.
Smartphone and TabletPC need appealing contents media.
post #204 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

Yes read the entire thread and then comment.

Sorry no need to. Mac OSX has a small share and Adobe has no need to change for it and that's NO lie!
post #205 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Not really. If the mobile market makes up a small percentage of the overall internet market (and I have no idea what the percentage is), then owning a big or small share of the mobile market is still irrelevant.

Tell that to Adobe.
post #206 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

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!

If Apple is trying to force you into iTunes, then why are they embracing HTML5 and H.264? You can do all your video streaming and rich web stuff, sans Flash, right now on your iPhone or iPod touch.
post #207 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

Yes read the entire thread and then comment.

I've said it a dozen ( and counting), that we, as Americans, have yet to enjoy TV non wifi on a mobile device going from #3 to #28 in terms of global speed. Some speculate flash accounts for 85% of the web but that's counting ads. I say more like 50%, or even 25% if talking about websites.

Where flash does rise to 85-100% are on network sites watching Lost or The Forgotten and some are moving toward other delivery methods but it's mosty flash.

Whom ever gets a portable device to show TV programming non WiFi will do very well. I am also curious as to see obamas 80 billion Internet funding as he wants the web to count as a utility, which it sort of is. I wouldn't be surprised to see free nation wide wifi someday but it's coming.

Againg, the device that has a great touch website and TV media like on a desktop or laptop, will do very well.
post #208 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by TEKSTUD View Post

Sorry no need to. Mac OSX has a small share and Adobe has no need to change for it and that's NO lie!

Apple are not asking them to. It you, iGenius and extremeskater are getting your knickers in a twist because apple people do not like Flash and prefer HTML5. As a consumer if a company is not supporting my choice of computer, then I have every right to use the apps, which gives me the best output for my computer.
As far as I concerned I really do not care for Flash until Adobe resolve the resource issues and btw Adobe do care as by their comments provided by Appleinsider in an earlier article.
post #209 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Tell that to Adobe.

I don't understand your comment, but what I said applies equally well to Adobe as it does Apple, because it is a simple market share issue.

As an arbitrary example, owning 50% of the mobile internet surfing market does not mean much if that market is only 1% of the ENTIRE internet surfing market.
post #210 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraBuggy View Post

Such a short-sighted comment. Lets say Flash went away tomorrow for good. Do you really believe that irritating ads are going away when Flash is gone? You'll be crying for ClickToHTML5. Adobe will resolve the Flash problems....Remember, these are the guys who wrote Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver and InDesign and developed PDF as a Standard. Most of Adobe's tools are industry standards that have made careers for thousands and thousands of people. Flash CS5 allows developers to compile native iPhone/iPad apps ready for the App store. there are currently 5 Million Flash developers today. There is going to be a flood of new apps when CS5 is released......some great and some crappy just like there is now. Once Apple sees the new revenue stream on the App store along with Adobes efforts to re-tool Flash for a consistent CPU-hog free experience, Apple will embrace Flash. I love all that Steve Jobs has done so far, he's a true visionary, but, he WILL lose the war over Flash. HTML 5 will share the same fate as Silverlight, why? you may ask.....Developers! I wish Adobe would play hardball with Steve and tell him that if he can talk crap and ban Flash from the iPhone, then Adobe can talk crap and ban Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, InDesign, Dreamweaver, Premiere and After Effects from running on the Mac. I wonder what would happen.

You are very wrong. Why you may ask?.... Developers! Have you noticed how many apps there are on the iPhone? There will be even more coming especially now with the iPad. They want to be able to reach as many people as possible which means they want to use standards that work on the iPhone/Touch/iPad/blackberry.

For our businesses I make sure there is no flash used so people with blackberrys and iPhones can access our webpages. We are obviously not the only ones.
post #211 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

Apple are not asking them to. It you, iGenius and extremeskater are getting your knickers in a twist because apple people do not like Flash and prefer HTML5. As a consumer if a company is not supporting my choice of computer, then I have every right to use the apps, which gives me the best output for my computer.
As far as I concerned I really do not care for Flash until Adobe resolve the resource issues and btw Adobe do care as by their comments provided by Appleinsider in an earlier article.

You are absolutely right. You have every right to use the apps that work best for your computer, and you have every right to find alternatives if you wish. You have the right to call for a boycott of a company that does not support your computer.

That is not the issue. The issue is that multiple posters want Flash to die.

In other words, multiple users want the rights that you want, and outlined above, and DENY those rights to others.

That is the issue.
post #212 of 563
I just wish Adobe would release a version for JB phones and be done with it. Those that want it can download it and those who don't, won't have to.
post #213 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

You are absolutely right. You have every right to use the apps that work best for your computer, and you have every right to find alternatives if you wish. You have the right to call for a boycott of a company that does not support your computer.

That is not the issue. The issue is that multiple posters want Flash to die.

In other words, multiple users want the rights that you want, and outlined above, and DENY those rights to others.

That is the issue.

That is true on both sides, we have Apple haters and Adobe haters who both have flawed thinking on this matter. Do you really think SJ would support HTML5, if Adobe had really supported Mac in the past.
My opinion: Flash makes Mac computer seem to consumer to be slow and less efficient in running the content. To untrained eye, the comment would be, damn my computer is slow and have negative opinion of Apple computers, not knowing it is actual Flash.

I for one thought this until I talked to techie, who told me the real story.
post #214 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

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.

Why shouldn't it die?

Flash is a solution to a problem that no longer exists, and now has become a problem in its own right. My view is that something as important as the delivery method for multimedia content over the internet should absolutely not be owned by any one company. Period.

The fact that Flash doesn't happen to work well on the Mac is really just an aside, but also amplifies the importance of fostering licensable industry standards that create a level playing field for competition and for consumers alike. Using the argument that Apple's marketshare doesn't entitle them or their customers to reasonable access to internet resources, aside from being specious, actually points out the flaw of allowing a company such as Adobe to arbitrarily decide who gets to play.

It's just wrong, and unless you're an Adobe shareholder, a Flash developer, or just simply hate Apple (or anybody else that isn't in Adobe's graces), then there is really no valid argument for Adobe to have such control over multimedia distribution.
post #215 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

That is true on both sides, we have Apple haters and Adobe haters who both have flawed thinking on this matter. Do you really think SJ would support HTML5, if Adobe had really supported Mac in the past.
My opinion: Flash makes Mac computer seem to consumer to be slow and less efficient in running the content. To untrained eye, the comment would be, damn my computer is slow and have negative opinion of Apple computers, not knowing it is actual Flash.

I for one thought this until I talked to techie, who told me the real story.

Yes, it is true on both sides, and I have made the same comments to Apple haters.

If Adobe had supported Flash on a Mac, the situation would be different, and SJ would not be acting this way, IMO.

I fully understand why Mac users don't like flash, although it is not too bad on FireFox, on the Macs I have (MBP and iMac), particularly after I installed the Adobe beta.

I also do understand why SJ doesn't want Flash on the iPhone, iTouch and iPad.

What I don't really understand is why those reasons are sufficient to call for Flash's death, and the denial of other users' rights to use software and programs they want.
post #216 of 563
Why same mobile Andorid and Palm allows Flash?
It's not about technology. It's all about Money.

"Hey Adobe, This is my world, my country,
If you want do something in here, just pay Money!"

Just like iPhoneSDK...

"Hey Developers, This is my world, my country,
If you want make apps in here, just pay Money!"

Flash and Air will be Freeway of publish apps in Steve's Shiny&Tiny world.
That's because He hates Flash.
post #217 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

I don't understand your comment, but what I said applies equally well to Adobe as it does Apple, because it is a simple market share issue.

As an arbitrary example, owning 50% of the mobile internet surfing market does not mean much if that market is only 1% of the ENTIRE internet surfing market.

Then maybe you should go back and read the original post that my response was answering. The point is that Adobe DOES care that Flash doesn't work on iPhone, iPod Touch, and now iPad. The reason is that Apple is selling millions of these devices every quarter, and Flash advertising does not reach those devices.

I don't know how to make it any more clear. The argument that Apple's marketshare is so small that Adobe doesn't need to care that Apple shuns Flash is bogus.
post #218 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Why shouldn't it die?

Flash is a solution to a problem that no longer exists, and now has become a problem in its own right. My view is that something as important as the delivery method for multimedia content over the internet should absolutely not be owned by any one company. Period.

Ok, you can have your opinion, and I am trying to understand this.

First, why not let the market sort this out? If Flash is such a problem, then some company should be able to come in and develop a better alternative.

Second, who is going to decide what the new standard is? SJ? As much as I admire the guy, he has an agenda, and why wouldn't he pick standards that would benefit Apple and hurt MS and everyone else.

Third, let us say some standards body comes along, decides Flash is evil and can no longer be used. Who and how is Adobe to be compensated for their loss? Essentially, some entity will have come along and eliminated a large chunk of their revenue stream. If they are not to be compensated, then you are punishing success, and if you can do it to Adobe, then it can be done to any company, Apple included, at a later date.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

The fact that Flash doesn't happen to work well on the Mac is really just an aside, but also amplifies the importance of fostering licensable industry standards that create a level playing field for competition and for consumers alike. Using the argument that Apple's marketshare doesn't entitle them or their customers to reasonable access to internet resources, aside from being specious, actually points out the flaw of allowing a company such as Adobe to arbitrarily decide who gets to play.

First, it does not seem to be an aside, as poor performance seems to be the MAIN gripe leveled against flash. To me, it seems to be the main reason for calling for Flash's death.

Second, I may be confused, but how are Apple or Apple users in any way denied access to internet resources? I surf and use the net everyday from my MBP, including flash sites. I am in do way denied access to any resources.

Third, again, I may be confused, but how does Adobe decide who gets to play?

Lastly, what kind of computer do you own. Like I said above, if you are REALLY concerned about open standards, etc, then the consistent position is to be for open source, and hence you should be running Linux, and associated software.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

It's just wrong, and unless you're an Adobe shareholder, a Flash developer, or just simply hate Apple (or anybody else that isn't in Adobe's graces), then there is really no valid argument for Adobe to have such control over multimedia distribution.

Again, how does Adobe control this? I am not trying to be difficult. People buy Adobe's products, people use Adobe's products. Adobe cannot force people to buy and use their software.
post #219 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by tundraBuggy View Post

Such a short-sighted comment. Lets say Flash went away tomorrow for good. Do you really believe that irritating ads are going away when Flash is gone? You'll be crying for ClickToHTML5. Adobe will resolve the Flash problems....Remember, these are the guys who wrote Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver and InDesign and developed PDF as a Standard. Most of Adobe's tools are industry standards that have made careers for thousands and thousands of people. Flash CS5 allows developers to compile native iPhone/iPad apps ready for the App store. there are currently 5 Million Flash developers today. There is going to be a flood of new apps when CS5 is released......some great and some crappy just like there is now. Once Apple sees the new revenue stream on the App store along with Adobes efforts to re-tool Flash for a consistent CPU-hog free experience, Apple will embrace Flash. I love all that Steve Jobs has done so far, he's a true visionary, but, he WILL lose the war over Flash. HTML 5 will share the same fate as Silverlight, why? you may ask.....Developers! I wish Adobe would play hardball with Steve and tell him that if he can talk crap and ban Flash from the iPhone, then Adobe can talk crap and ban Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, InDesign, Dreamweaver, Premiere and After Effects from running on the Mac. I wonder what would happen.


I find your comment as very short sighted. I do not use ClicktoFalsh only to remove ads. There are issues with Flash and by disabling it I don't miss much on the web.

Necessity is the mother of invention. Flash did serve a good purpose when there were many issues playing video on the web. It provided developers ability to create nice UI with animations with relative ease. And Adobe made good money on selling development tools. But it is getting a bit behind curve with some of the expectations/ requirements for mobile computing.

Now regarding the iPhone/iPad support for Flash. So far it has helped Apple significantly. Lack of Flash has made the developers use iPhone SDK to develop iPhone specific Apps. Sometimes an easy way out is not the best way. With Flash support on iPhone a lot of these developers would have chosen that route and actually missed on the rich features of iPhone OS (touch, etc).

For Adobe, it is in their interest to keep building the Flash based ecosystem rich and making more features for developers easily. As long as that exists developers will keep using it. Not every developer thinks about following the standard but more about getting the project done quick with less effort. But they have nothing to play hardball with. It would be a big gamble and potentially a huge loss for them.
post #220 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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?


IT DOES NOT Require a 2.66ghz processor to show flash well on the Mac. My Mac Mini 2.0 GHz worked extremely well.... Just stating the truth....
post #221 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post


What I don't really understand is why those reasons are sufficient to call for Flash's death, and the denial of other users' rights to use software and programs they want.

The issue here is that Adobe refuses to relinquish ownership over internet delivery of multimedia content to licensable internet standards oversight. It would appear, as well, that they are trying to sabotage the HTML5 approval process, although this fact is disputed.

I personally have no problem with Adobe developing and maintaining a propriety programming runtime, just so long as it is not any kind of "defacto" standard for internet functionality. The fact that its performance is inconsistent (to be kind) makes it all the more egregious that they seem unwilling to relent and allow standards to prevail.

Short of Adobe acting like a good corporate citizen, what is left but for other companies to try to kill Flash?
post #222 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by tortlebow View Post

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).

However, the H.264 codex that Apple is pushing IS proprietary and your argument is again moot...

Now if Apple would also stated H.264 is proprietary and we should not use it in conjunction with HTML5 you might have a logical leg to stand on....
post #223 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

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.

Of course they were NOT billed as the best web experience ever.....
post #224 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Then maybe you should go back and read the original post that my response was answering. The point is that Adobe DOES care that Flash doesn't work on iPhone, iPod Touch, and now iPad. The reason is that Apple is selling millions of these devices every quarter, and Flash advertising does not reach those devices.

I don't know how to make it any more clear. The argument that Apple's marketshare is so small that Adobe doesn't need to care that Apple shuns Flash is bogus.

I understand your point. I could easily be wrong, but my feeling that the reason Adobe cares about Apple is damage control. Apple and SJ get LOTS and LOTS of press. If SJ goes around saying that your product sucks, etc. Then Adobe has to respond to protect its image and its product.
post #225 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by sranger View Post

However, the H.264 codex that Apple is pushing IS proprietary and your argument is again moot...

Now if Apple would also stated H.264 is proprietary and we should not use it in conjunction with HTML5 you might have a logical leg to stand on....

H.264 is licensable, and the HTML5 spec will be open for anybody to develop for. That's the difference. FLASH is a proprietary runtime that afford device vendors no control over the implementation on their products. They are simply at the mercy of Adobe.

It's beyond me why people don't see the problem with this scenario.
post #226 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

The issue here is that Adobe refuses to relinquish ownership over internet delivery of multimedia content to licensable internet standards oversight. It would appear, as well, that they are trying to sabotage the HTML5 approval process, although this fact is disputed.

I personally have no problem with Adobe developing and maintaining a propriety programming runtime, just so long as it is not any kind of "defacto" standard for internet functionality. The fact that its performance is inconsistent (to be kind) makes it all the more egregious that they seem unwilling to relent and allow standards to prevail.

Short of Adobe acting like a good corporate citizen, what is left but for other companies to try to kill Flash?

If Adobe is trying to sabotage HTML 5, that would be wrong. The fact that Flash's performance is inconsistent sucks, and is a pain in the ass, and is a valid reason for Apple to push an alternative. But again, if they make a business decision not to optimize the code for a Mac if they do not want to, why shouldnt that be their decision? Should Apple be forced to open the iPad to Flash?

what makes flash the "defacto" standard is that so many people use it. By any common definition, that means it is a defacto standard because it was successful. So, if they give it up, will the licensing fees be fair, which seems to be the main issue in the Nokia / Apple dispute.
post #227 of 563
I'm not a programmer...but flash does seem to be a resource hog, buggy and for lack of a better term, 'old technology!' (from what I've read)


I think this debate is pretty much settled...Apple/Jobs is cutting edge and every other CEO seems lame in comparison...or is it just me?

Too much 'Foresight'=Jobs

Other CEO's=Too much 'Foreskin!'


clicktoflash FTW!
post #228 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

H.264 is licensable, and the HTML5 spec will be open for anybody to develop for. That's the difference. FLASH is a proprietary runtime that afford device vendors no control over the implementation on their products. They are simply at the mercy of Adobe.

It's beyond me why people don't see the problem with this scenario.

I think people see the problem with the scenario. However, there are always two sides to every issue. Like I said above, having Flash die or removed by some industry standards board, is depriving Adobe of a revenue stream.
post #229 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

I think people see the problem with the scenario. However, there are always two sides to every issue. Like I said above, having Flash die or removed by some industry standards board, is depriving Adobe of a revenue stream.

Agreed! But what if Flash is indeed 'sloppy' and archaic? Just because it is ubiquitous does not in of itself justify its 'survival!'

No offense, but if that were the case, we would all still be watching black and white TV's. No?
post #230 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Agreed! But what if Flash is indeed 'sloppy' and archaic? Just because it is ubiquitous does not in of itself justify it's 'survival!'

No offense, but if that were the case, we would all still be watching black and white TV's. No?

I have no doubt that flash is sloppy. Personally I have the feeling most code is sloppy, largely because storage space is so cheap. I am nearly 50. My first computer had 2 5.25" floppies, with the OS on one floppy and WordPerfect on the other. Yes, things have gotten more complicated but when an operating system now requires multiple GB's of space, sloppiness is probably there.

Like I said before, if Flash is so bad, then someone will come along with something better.

Isn't that what SJ did with Apple?

Why does it have to be the case that some standards board, with all its politics, has to be involved.
post #231 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

I have no doubt that flash is sloppy. Personally I have the feeling most code is sloppy, largely because storage space is so cheap. I am nearly 50. My first computer had 2 5.25" floppies, with the OS on one floppy and WordPerfect on the other. Yes, things have gotten more complicated but when an operating system now requires multiple GB's of space, sloppiness is probably there.

Like I said before, if Flash is so bad, then someone will come along with something better.

Isn't that what SJ did with Apple?

Why does it have to be the case that some standards board, with all its politics, has to be involved.

Now you are using logic and reason. I have notice that this is not recieved well on this board unless of course Steve Jobs says it is ok...

I agree that If Flash is so bad it will die on its own and there is absolutely no rational reason to keep it off of Apple mobile products. Now personally I think that the new Android phones that will soon support Flash will make many of the arguments against including on Apple products pointless....

I do have one question for the Apple fan boys ( by the way I do like the Mac )

If the new Android phones work well with Flash 10.1 enabled. What are you going to use as your technical justification for hating it so much?????
post #232 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

First, why not let the market sort this out? If Flash is such a problem, then some company should be able to come in and develop a better alternative.

Gazoobee had it right, you really are a troll. You will likely go on my ignore list soon. I'm definitely not going to spend the rest of my Saturday night arguing this.

The market WILL decide. Apple will sell more and more mobile devices with each and every quarter, and one by one, websites that rely on Flash will convert to alternatives.


Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Second, who is going to decide what the new standard is? SJ? As much as I admire the guy, he has an agenda, and why wouldn't he pick standards that would benefit Apple and hurt MS and everyone else.

Look it up for yourself. Do a websearch for HTML5 and you can read up on who is working on it, and you will also likely find articles talking about Adobe's (alleged) sabotage of the development of that spec.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Third, let us say some standards body comes along, decides Flash is evil and can no longer be used. Who and how is Adobe to be compensated for their loss? Essentially, some entity will have come along and eliminated a large chunk of their revenue stream. If they are not to be compensated, then you are punishing success, and if you can do it to Adobe, then it can be done to any company, Apple included, at a later date.

No compensation is warranted, that's life, some win, some lose. What about Apple and MacOS9? Did they ever get compensated when Win 95 took off? No, they didn't. Another example? Was Apple compensated when QuickDraw was trumped by OpenGL? No again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

First, it does not seem to be an aside, as poor performance seems to be the MAIN gripe leveled against flash. To me, it seems to be the main reason for calling for Flash's death.

Poor performance is why Mac users are pissed. The fact that Flash is a proprietary runtime is why Apple doesn't want to use it because they have no way to optimize it's performance on their products. SDK states NO THIRD PARTY RUNTIMES.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Second, I may be confused, but how are Apple or Apple users in any way denied access to internet resources? I surf and use the net everyday from my MBP, including flash sites. I am in do way denied access to any resources.

Huh? iPhone doesn't have access to PROPRIETARY FLASH DELIVERED MULTIMEDIA CONTENT ON THE INTERNET. My own desktop experience trying to access FLASH DELIVERED MULTIMEDIA CONTENT is very poor. I use clicktoflash in order to minimize browser crashes and sluggishness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Third, again, I may be confused, but how does Adobe decide who gets to play?

How do they not? The Flash plugin is Adobe software. The code is not available for third parties to implement in their products in a way that they can optimize the performance. It only works on any given platform as well as Adobe's engineers are allowed to make it work.

The rest of your post is nonsense. What computer I use is not relevant, and I'm not going to use Linux, sorry. What you're trying to say is "it's not the road, it's your car". I just don't buy that argument.

It's 2010. HTML and multimedia codecs have evolved to the point where the proprietary Flash technology for distributing multimedia is no longer necessary, and can be handled in HTML with licensable codecs. Nobody has a sound argument for why this technology shouldn't be standardized and available for everybody to have equal access to.
post #233 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

I have no doubt that flash is sloppy. Personally I have the feeling most code is sloppy, largely because storage space is so cheap. I am nearly 50. My first computer had 2 5.25" floppies, with the OS on one floppy and WordPerfect on the other. Yes, things have gotten more complicated but when an operating system now requires multiple GB's of space, sloppiness is probably there.

Like I said before, if Flash is so bad, then someone will come along with something better.

Isn't that what SJ did with Apple?

Why does it have to be the case that some standards board, with all its politics, has to be involved.

I see your points...I too remember WordPerfect, blue background and white letters!

And I take your point about 'Boards' but is the consensus not that Flash is 'Sloppy.'

Snow leopard certainly was a successful attempt at reducing 'bloat!' I don't see the same attempts to curb 'bloat' from MS or Adobe....I think this is what Stevo is getting at.
post #234 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zogg View Post

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 t.... The bottom line is: Flash must evolve for mobile devices or face death.

This is why Steve-no is mad. Adobe is evolving Flash right onto his lunch. www.openscreenproject.org, and view the developer interviews that describe how 10.1 is taking the full Flash player down to all the smartphones.

Steve could be one of the CEOs in the interviews saying he is on board. Instead, Steve is NOT on board, not because Adobe is 'old,' but because they are too-new for his own margin of safety. He is flying around the country trying to derail Flash before they can release 10.1. But as others have pointed out, it takes a long time to stop a juggernaut like Flash.
post #235 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by naknek View Post

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.

I think that disingenuous is a better description than arrogant, but otherwise, I agree.
post #236 of 563
While I appreciate what Apple is trying to do with Flash (not accept sub-par software), that does not necessarily mean they aren't robbing users of a full web experience on the iPad.

What's good for the iPhone is not necessarily going to be acceptable for the iPad. That's quite a leap in faith. Web usage on the iPad is going to be different from how iPhone users use the web. It'll be a lot closer to desktop web browsing patterns. And this is why users will expect and want Flash integration.

The average Apple fan may think Flash is junk and that it shouldn't be polluting his device. But the average user will want a $500 internet appliance to let him surf the whole internet. He could not care less for Apple's politics with Adobe. That won't stop them from buying an iPad or surfing the web on it. But they are going to look at it as a defect and an annoyance. No question about that. And I am wondering if they'll blame Apple for it.
post #237 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Ok, but why?

Because Steve hates Adobe. The rest is just boring details.
post #238 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

The market WILL decide. Apple will sell more and more mobile devices with each and every quarter, and one by one, websites that rely on Flash will convert to alternatives.

If the market decides, fine by me, and we have no problem. I am all for someone developing a better delivery system. More power to them.

However, unless I missed your entire point, you want Adobe to give up Flash and be a good corporate citizen (your words), and/or some industry standards board to decide that Flash can no longer be used, and HTML 5 should be used instead.

That is not the market working, that is market intervention by a "government" body, which distorts the market forces.


Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

No compensation is warranted, that's life, some win, some lose. What about Apple and MacOS9? Did they ever get compensated when Win 95 took off? No, they didn't. Another example? Was Apple compensated when QuickDraw was trumped by OpenGL? No again.

Mac lost that market battle. It was not the case that the government, or some industry board, came in and said that Win95 will now be the industry standard, and MacOS9 can no longer be use. That is what I understand you are advocating with Flash.


Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Poor performance is why Mac users are pissed. The fact that Flash is a proprietary runtime is why Apple doesn't want to use it because they have no way to optimize it's performance on their products. SDK states NO THIRD PARTY RUNTIMES.

I understand completely why Apple does not want Flash on the iPhone. It makes perfect sense, and you get no argument there. I understand why Mac users are pissed. Heck, I do not particularly care for Flash performance on my MBP.

Where I do not understand you though is why this is justification for either outlawing flash (which is what the effect would be if HTML 5 were made the industry standard) or why Adobe should voluntary give up a revenue stream to make Mac users happy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

Huh? iPhone doesn't have access to PROPRIETARY FLASH DELIVERED MULTIMEDIA CONTENT ON THE INTERNET. My own desktop experience trying to access FLASH DELIVERED MULTIMEDIA CONTENT is very poor. I use clicktoflash in order to minimize browser crashes and sluggishness.

First, this statement seems to support the contention that the reason Flash should be eliminated is because Apple users are upset.

No one forced you to buy an iPhone, no one forced me to buy an iPhone or an Apple computer. No one will force anyone to buy an iPad. You buy a product, and you have to live with the limitations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

How do they not? The Flash plugin is Adobe software. The code is not available for third parties to implement in their products in a way that they can optimize the performance. It only works on any given platform as well as Adobe's engineers are allowed to make it work.

Adobe does not control anything in the sense that Adobe cannot force anyone to buy their software. If people did not buy the software, because there was a better alternative, then there would not be an issue.

I know you will not see this point, but you have no problem with Apple saying that some types of programs will not be allowed on Apple products because it is an Apple product. Why doesn't Adobe have the right to code for whatever operating systems it wants?


Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

The rest of your post is nonsense. What computer I use is not relevant, and I'm not going to use Linux, sorry. What you're trying to say is "it's not the road, it's your car". I just don't buy that argument.

You are wrong here. My point is that your apparent argument with Adobe is that it is proprietary. The thing is, if you have a problem with proprietary software, then you should be running open source software. End of story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

It's 2010. HTML and multimedia codecs have evolved to the point where the proprietary Flash technology for distributing multimedia is no longer necessary, and can be handled in HTML with licensable codecs. Nobody has a sound argument for why this technology shouldn't be standardized and available for everybody to have equal access to.

I agree with you 100%. It should be handled by HTML and licensable codecs. The argument against it, is that you are essentially depriving a company of business by "government" intervention. The difference between you and I is that you seem to feel that it is justifiable to shut Adobe/flash down, essentially by government fiat, to have that achieved, whereas I think the market should work it out by itself.
post #239 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill View Post

It's 2010. HTML and multimedia codecs have evolved to the point where the proprietary Flash technology for distributing multimedia is no longer necessary, and can be handled in HTML with licensable codecs. Nobody has a sound argument for why this technology shouldn't be standardized and available for everybody to have equal access to.

Not quite yet, but getting there. More annoying than this Flash business is the fact that there are still quite a few corporations (including mine) who are still basing their websites on IE6...! An 'open' web is still quite far away. Also to get the ball rolling, both IE and Firefox need to include support for HTML5, since they are the majority browsers (IE9 is going to have it, I believe).

I doubt iDevices will be that hurt by a lack of Flash. It's still "good enough" for desktops. If standards boards worked at all effectively, we wouldn't be stuck with Flash in the first place.
post #240 of 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by souliisoul View Post

It you, iGenius and extremeskater are getting your knickers in a twist because apple people do not like Flash and prefer HTML5.

I have never said anything like this. Not even remotely like this.

My position is that Joe Shmoe does not care about Flash, nor does he care about HTML5. What he will care about is that his shiny new "best way to surf the web" does NOT "just work" on many of his favorite web sites.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Inside Apple's iPad: Adobe Flash