Inside Apple's iPad: Adobe Flash - Page 10

Come on, seriously? So Jobs would spend a bunch of engineering hours to prevent a specific plug-in from being loaded on all browser on the Mac? It's not like the iPod or iPhone where Apple controls what software get onto the device. Maybe he could just disable Flash on Safari and see how popular that would turn out. And there is always Parallels where we can still run Windows.

Jobs is the largest on the board of Disney and their website has a bunch of Flash videos. So does Disney owned ESPN and ABC. Without being a Flash lover or hater, there is just a lot of Flash video out there.

I see what you're saying, but that isn't a message to send. Macs can handle Flash, albeit much more poorly than HTML5 video tag for the same function. Flash wasn't designed for mobiles and Adobe dropped on the ball on development so it makes absolute sense not to include it there, but that doesn't mean Flash can't run on the desktop and doesn't have uses on the desktop. Let's not forget that the way Flash interacts with the user is by and large designed for a mouse and keyboard, not a finger-based touchscreen which makes most of the Flash world inaccessible for even Windows tablets.

Like many on this forum, I have Flash installed with ClickToFlash installed to control it. Not installing Flash on Macs would mean another thing to install on a new Mac. I listened to BBC Radio 1 all morning with Flash. It was taking 100%/200% across two-core for several hours for 48Kbps HE-AAC audio but that is that. If I were using just the battery Id get 1hr:37min out of a brand new 4400mAh battery. Not good!

edit: I just found an unofficial Dashboard Wdiget for BBC Radio. Reduced my load to 5%. Awesome!

•

http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashb...nofficial.html

He doesn't dislike it as much as you think. His beloved Disney owned websites (Disney, ABC, ESPN) has lots of Flash video. It is just a rally cry to get people to buy from his iTunes store.

If that were true then they wouldn't have added HTML5 video tags to Safari, created HTTP Live Streaming and offered it for free to facilitate free video streaming from sites like Hulu.

I remember not to long ago computers were running with single core CPUs at 800Mhz or something, and 512MB of ram. In fact, my parents still have one: a 2002 iMac. They could surf the web just fine, back then, but today it's often a struggle. No YouTube, that's for sure. And not because the computer has any hardware issues either. I find it amusing how something as simple as viewing a document or video on the web nowadays practically requires dual core 2.16Ghz and 2Gb of ram. We sure are using that extra computing power efficiently, aren't we?? And what of the increased energy required to run a 2.16Ghz processor? Battery life = s**t compared to the possibilities with 800Mhz.

Personally, I think most flash pages look like s**t, artistically, with an equal value in functionality.

What vested interest?

HTML 5 is open source, you can write the tags in a text editor if you want, it will run in any browser, even IE with the Google Frame plug in.

Firefox and Opera take it even further by using open source codecs for video and sound rather than the proprietary (and free to use) H.264 and MP3 codecs.

That's going to be the next shot in the flash/html5 conflict. Not disable flash completely but build in ClickToFlash as a Safari option and default it to on. It's a dramatic improvement in the browsing experience with no loss of functionality.

Firefox and IE8 may add it by default as well. That's already a very popular Firefox add-on so it's not a big stretch to imagine it part of the stock installation. And Microsoft wants to push Silverlight.

The use of flash is driven by advertising dollars. Already virtually all the mobile ad space can't use flash. Safari with ClickToFlash knocks off another 10% of the ad market for flash, Firefox another 30%. If my ads can't be seen by most mobile users and 40+% of the desktop users, ad designers will switch to something else very quickly. Once the ad designers are gone, flash becomes just a specialty plugin for certain kinds of interactive web sites.

Interesting points and welcome to the forum. I agree that ads will have to switch from being Flash to webcode, but I have my doubts about ClickToFlash or its equivalent will be added to Safari, though I hope you are correct. Would there not be any anti-trust ramifications if Apple, Google, MS and Mozilla started offering that as part of the browser?

Fully agree .

will the porn industry change to HTML5?

Flash was designed with the intention that computers would get faster, not slower.

Apple and netbook makers are producing what people want, and they want cheap web/email/word processing type computers and devices instead of large bulky, powerful, power hungry portable devices like laptops.

Unfortunately it's hard to reverse course once you make a standard like Flash.

It all has to do with games, higher quality 3D games mostly, going to consoles mostly instead of computers. Means most people don't need a powerful computer anymore.

Anything that needs a lot of performance can be either done on a desktop machine or "cloud computing" from a smaller portable device if need be.

All has to with the thermal wall being reached in processor performance.


So Flash needs a rewrite to run on smaller processor devices and touchscreens, like the iPad.

In fact a lot of websites will have to be updated to have the iPad version of Flash content so it can be interacted with correctly.


Just to let everyone know, someone made Photoshop 1.0 run on a iPhone...

So it's possible, it's just going to take time. No use crying, the iPad was just announced it's no wonder Flash isn't allowed on the device.

Eventually it will, if the device sells well.

Early browsers had the option to load images automatically or only when user requested. There are preferences for enabling java or javascript or pop-up windows. Enabling flash by default or by user request seems exactly the same kind of user control option. So, no, I don't think there are any anti-trust issues.

Why would Apple not add ClickToFlash type functionality to Safari? What would be the downside for them?

My Intel iMac has no firewire 800 connection. Probably didn't exist yet. My wife had the misfortune of pulling the trigger on a new MacBook pro when Apple decided the world didn't need firewire 400 anymore.

I guess the next product I buy wont have firewire or USB or express card or a DVD drive or flash or a matte screen. It will be called an iPad, a revolutionary device that will change the world and put Apple's stock over 300.

Why not just go to http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/141/tn_14157.html and uninstall flash on your computer. There - now you no longer have to deal with it without deciding for the rest of the Mac world what they should / should not have on their computers.

Yes but unfortunately doing that yields a compromised computer much like the Chinese stripped of Google.

Are you suggesting that HTML 5 should not be approved as an open standard because it would harm Adobe if there was an alternative to Flash?

If the standard is finalized, approved and subsequently takes hold no one owes Adobe anything. There would be nothing to keep them from creating a suite of awesome tools to design for the web using open standards. They would need to either adapt or move on.

This whole topic could have been avoided if SJ and Apple had given us a mini Mac notebook instead of another iTunes handheld device -this time just larger.

I'm not so sure. First of all, all those items came well before Safari was developed. Secondly, Jobs and Apple have already talked about how Flash in disparaging ways and are trying to promote good, free alternatives. They might not win but I can certainly see this being an issue of Apple illegally using it's position to hurt Flash while promoting options it has a vested interest it.

Apple's rebuttal could be that they do still ship makes with Flash installed and that the reason for the images, java, and JS on/off options are for bandwidth and/or security. Apple could also argue that the Plug-ins on/off option doesn't allow Flash to be used at all if that is turned off and that a comprehensive option would allow the best of both world for users and Adobe.

It would be great if it happens but I see some pitfalls for the first to offer it. The best way to make it natural is for the lesser browsers to include support first making it an copycat option for more popular browsers.

Thanks for the link.

If you want Flash buy a notebook or a netbook. I don't know what the problem is. It's not like anyone needs an iPad.

It's not as if Adobe doesn't have the talent for SVG/OpenVG and rich multimedia development to produce the tools of choice.

You keep harping on Standards Boards eliminating Flash from the web. There is no mandate that you adhere to any web standards whatsoever. For God's sake the LARGEST browser market share is held by the least standards compliant browser on the planet.

I would not be surprised that Jobs--being on the Disney board of directors--starts to "twist some arms" to force Disney.com, ABC.com, ABCNews.com and ESPN.com to move in the direction of HTML 5.0 compliance. Given Disney.com and ESPN.com are some of the most highly-trafficked sites on the Internet in the USA, making these sites go HTML 5.0 compliant would certainly set the precedent for everyone else to go HTML 5.0 compliant.

Interesting you would post these. How exactly would those mouse overs work on a touch screen device. Performance may not be the only reason supporting Flash might not provide the best experience on the iPhone or iPad.

As a refresher to anyone who may have forgotten, SWF is now an open format. Adobe's moneymaker for Flash is from Flash CS4 Professional for$699 or Creative Suite 4 Web Premium for $1,699.

It might behoove Adobe to consider the future of the web and use their clever employees create the first good way to great content using aspects of HTML5 that have taken hold in WebKit- and Gecko-based browsers. For instance, making it a one step process for web developers to have HTML5 video tags in a site with the proper the JS and CSS code with a few simple options on the look and feel with a fallback to Flash built in for older browsers.

[CENTER]Universal Business Motto:
If you can't beat em', at least profit from 'em. [/CENTER]

Take a look at this web page:

http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/

Note the name of one of the editors of this document: David Hyatt, Apple, Inc. As such, this demonstrates vested interest by Apple in getting HTML 5.0 adopted as a standard by the W3C.

How about a couple of examples ... No porn please.

This was cleared up last night, and was based on a misunderstanding on my part. I come from a field (biomedicine) where the term "industry standards/standard of care/best practices" are required, not optional. Apparently for the computer industry the term "industry standard" really means "industry guidelines/suggestions".

Great, so can you suggest an alternative Flash player to Adobe's product?

Disney revamped their site long ago to idealize it for mobiles. ESPN and ABC News have mobile versions. ABC.com oddly doesn't appear to have one. All the videos I've tested on those mobile sites play on the iPhone.

However, moving the main pages to support HTML5 first and fallback to Flash if the browser doesn't support the elements would be nice. Once the code for the HTML5 video tag gets worked out I suspect the change will be fast in technology terms.



You wouldn't. This is a separate, but major issue. I can't wait for Flash 10.1 to go live on mobiles so we can see the poor reviews on usability.



Those are just the editors. You have to expect they would be working for the best companies out there. It would be funny to see "Webmaster, Digg.com".

Here is the member list, which consisted of 334 companies as of February 2010, including Adobe. Wikipedia states the number of members was 355 back in September 2009.

http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List

And?

HTML 5 will be an open standard, anyone will be able to create it using such simple tools as a text editor.

Adobe is also contributing (sort of) to the standards body.

Your point?

Is that what the shoppers will be told at the iSore?

I don't know the specifics - I'm just repeating what Steve told us.

I don't know, why don't u go take an aspirin if uSore.

You are simplifying things a bit too much.

I don't care about Flash games - I'm surrounded with gaming options, both portable and at home. Likewise, I have managed to find all the apps I was ever looking for, be it paid or freeware. Ads, I'm not interested. Video... well YouTube works and that is majority of video for me, at least on mobile platform.

Yet I need Flash. For example, I'm looking for a new car these days. I have been driving Nissan for a while, yet I like Subaru for some reasons, so those two would be my first choice.

Except that if you go to subaru.co.nz or nissan.co.nz, you will not get far. Try with your iPhone or computer with disabled Flash and you'll see what I'm talking about. Honda, Mazda, Toyota, Ford, Holden... are better, having some Flash material but still browsable to a certain amount - yet much of multimedia content is Flash (car interior and exterior features, galleries etc). I still haven't check on local sites (NZ) for Euro brands.

I'm still finding that acceptable for iPhone. Screen is too small to be cluttered with too much media. I prefer text content on iPhone when browsing. But on device like iPad? I'd like to, when I get back home from work, stretch on my fav sofa or recliner, grab iPad from coffee table and do some car research. Not being able to see all info would result in my growing frustration and finally in replacing iPad with netbook or ULV notebook, even if I prefer iPad's format for casual browsing.

(Speaking of which, for such research I'd also prefer multitasking so that I can open, say, Word/Pages or Excel/Numbers together with my web browser and copy/paste some info into my car candidates comparison table... but this is not topic of this discussion).

Eventually, it is like saying (exaggeration warning!): "I don't like polluted city air, so I don't want to breathe it". I have option to leave city, which I don't want - my family, friends and job are in the city - or to stop inhaling polluted air - which would be another way to loose family, friends and job - life included - in the process. So no matter how much I despise polluted air, I simply need to use it until someone manages to fix it - or come out with new oxygen distribution process.

Likewise, I'm all for scrapping Flash for something leaner and fresher and better, but until that happens, I just need it.

There is one more thing - conspiracy theory (or not) behind Apple's real motives for excluding Flash from iDevices. We all know what they are (no matter if we believe or not), and this article rounds them nicely. I'd give it some credit as it comes from Jason Mick, who has history of a lot of Apple bias in the past:

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=17738

I'm not following. In what regard? I already stated one possible use for Adobe to keep making money by selling complete web development kits with a fall back dependancy on Flash.

lol- Remember iSteve told us Blu-ray was a bag of hurt yet the consumer did the exact opposite of his recommendation and Blu-ray has sold thru the roof this past holiday season.

I see that now ... just catching up is all

Even today, serial ports exist on Enterprise grade equipment - firewalls, switches... for console access.

Likewise, business grade laptops - even new models - still have serial port exactly for being able to interface with above mentioned appliances on console level.

Serial port disappeared from mainstream because it aged and better alternatives appeared, pushing whole industry to better, faster standards. Likewise, desktop hard drive interfaces - much as I remember - moved from MFM and RLL to IDE to SATA to... because technology was evolving. And RAM evolved from SDRAM to DDR to DDR2 to DDR3 to...

Believing that one brand (and minority one, market-share wise) can push whole industry around is really buying into reality distortion... \

That is an excellent argument but I only broke things down into the core elements. I've stated numerous times that Flash has its place and can be very useful, but a small finger-based touchscreen with a slow ARM processor is currently not of them.

The fact remains that Flash isn't the internet, Adobe hasn't yet released a viable version of Flash for mobile devices which would make those sites come up or be usable if they did, and iDevices aren't personal computers, but accessories to them.

I find it very interesting that subaru.co.nz is nearly all Flash but subaru.com has no Flash.

Where are your stats?
How do Blu-ray movie sales compare to Blu-ray movie sales?
What is the growth of, say, Netflix streaming?
How many of those Blu-ray players were sold in computers?
How much do 9.5mm ultra-slim slot-loading Blu-ray writers cost, anyway?
Who's making them?
You've never gotten away with counting Blu-ray appliances for home entertainment systems in you foolish claims so why do you think you will now?

PS: It's great that you can never have a well reasoned argument. At least I know something in this world isn't changing.



A couple historical points. The floppy drive was entrenched until Apple removed them all. USB didn't take off until after Apple added it across the board. The smartphone industry was lingering until Apple entered the market. WebKit has become the most popular internet browser. And just look at everything MS does to make Windows more Mac OS-like. Et alii, at cetera, ad nauseam.