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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.