Inside Apple's iPad: Adobe Flash - Page 11

Well movies get released on Blu-ray, they don't in HD-DVD, so that would make Blu-ray automatically better.

That looks very cool. Are external, USB-connected DACs getting more common? This tube amp has one, and supposedly sounds good:

http://www.neuhauslabs.com/

Okay, whether or not Flash is evil isn't the case here. Comparing the need for Flash to that of the iPhone is not the case here.

Steve Jobs said himself that the iPad would not succeed unless it was the best device at certain things. Internet, email, photos, whatever. The iPhone gets away with having no Flash because people don't expect that their phone is the ideal way to browse the internet. When I hit a link to a site that requires Flash, I just "Instapaper" it and make a note to browse it later on my laptop. But if I'm on the iPad, browsing the internet, expecting it to be the ultimate way to experience the internet, how am I going to feel if I'm running into sites that won't run on the iPad. Well, that's not the ultimate internet if I can't view a bunch of sites, is it?

The iPad will not be the best browsing experience if it doesn't have Flash support. And according to Steve, if it doesn't do the internet better than a phone and better than a laptop, it won't succeed.

Exactly right. Steve has gambled this iPad's success on exactly what you wrote and if it fails it's failure rests squarely on those claims.

Hmm, not quite sure why if one's going on vacation one must forego AI that is unless it's incarceration we're really talking about.

You are kidding right? The technically better format does not necessarily win the format war, as the whole VHS / Beta Max issue demonstrates.

Sometimes HD-DVDs didn't have lossless audio when the Blu-Ray counterpart did. It would seem that audio quality differences like that would be important to an audiophile.


In the end, yes, but HD-DVD did have some advantages. It didn't have as many potentially onerous copy protections, and you could press a small run of discs without having to pay a $3000 fee for the encryption key. The fee is less now, but it's still required.

It is amazing what a small investment will do to the sound. The DACs and Power Supplies in either computers or iPods stink. So, if you really like music and use a lossless format, a headphone amp or something like the total bithead will improve sound. I do not know if USB dacs are more common.

That is a sweet looking piece. I used to have a Cary tube amp for my music system. However, when I built my speakers a few years ago, I did not like the sound of the combo and switched to Naim, and it is much better sounding.

That $3,000 fee though never meant much to a consumer especially now that Blu-ray discs can be had for as low as $9.99. HD DVD had the advantage of having discs pressed with HD DVD on on side and DVD on the other. But now Blu-ray has finally gone that route as well.
I can't believe people are actually still talking about HD DVD - that bridge has been passed a long time ago- 2 years now.

Sorry, all dropping Flash support from Safari to do is lower Safari's already low user total. Nor would Apple make users do something as complex as click on a spot to make something that should work by default actually work. Apple won't even provide the option to decide whether attempts to open new windows should be converted to new tabs instead (yes, I hate that Safari doesn't give such a useful option). The "complexity" that ClickToFlash would create are far beyond Safari's "Web Browser for Idiots" design mantra.


That's your opinion. I've been to sites that are completely inaccessible without Flash. Maybe that's just poor web design,but that's a different point.

People try to extrapolate from the iPhone's popularity and lack of Flash. With it's larger screen, the iPad comes closest to replicating the desktop browsing experience. Users have different expectations for desktop browsing than they do for mobile devices which has traditionally been a pretty lousy experience. If people equate the iPad to a desktop experience, the fact that the web doesn't work right because of all those missing spots where some Flash element should be, it's not going to be well appreciated.

The article points what is probably the real reason that Apple doesn't want Flash on it's mobile devices: Flash competes directly with the App Store. It gives developers an alternative method of creating apps that do nothing to promote the App Store infrastructure.

Blu-Ray was better if you had really really good equipment. For my HT I have Rotel separates and Totem Acoustics Speakers. I could barely tell the difference with the lossless and 24/96 soundtracks for movies, and most people could not tell the difference between the lossless and 24/96 soundtracks on normal equipment. So, for the average person, I did not think that Blu-Ray was worth the extra money.

Yes it is passed. I brought it up though because the nastiness of the debate way back when there were 2 formats was far far far far far worse than what you see here.

Also, way back when, Blu-Ray discs were more expensive than HD-DVDs

http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/02/16...p-lookin-good/

Nice video of Wired's new format for the iPad (and other tablets).... built using Adobe Air and Flex.

Very nice. (you see, Adobe's not all evil )

I haven't heard that (ahem) Naim in years. My audiophile days are long behind me. In fact, I'm currently selling off all my vinyl (or, at least, the valuable stuff) on eBay. I've gotten insane prices for some of it.

Wow, that one flew right by you, didn't it...

well, you know that audiophiles can be nuts. If I may ask, why sell off the vinyl?

Cute pun BTW

Cute to see all the giggly banter between TEKSTUD, grking, and iGenius.

/puke.

Yet you're the one that commented as if he wasn't talking about quality, not availability.

You still haven't figured out how to use the iGnore list or multitask to another site?

Man, you have the best holidays, all you do is sit around posting here.

It doesn't matter which one has the better quality, because at the end of the day one is available for purchase, the other isn't, so the better one is the one you can actually buy.

I got my turntable up and running again, thinking I'd use it. I dug out lots of great old stuff.

But the system I have now isn't what I used to have. Years ago, I replaced the guts of the music system and got a home theater receiver for my ex-wife's convenience. Before that, I had the turntable running through a New York Audo Labs SuperIt tube-type phono preamp, controlled by a Mod Squad passive preamp, all dumped straight into an Adcom GFA 555 200 Watt amp.

I still have the speakers, some Snell Type E's, and have added a pair of smaller KEFs for the back channel.

So after I got a new Grado cartridge and set up the turntable, I found that I didn't really sit and listen critically, and the vinyl didn't sound so special anymore on the non-audiophile-style home theater system.

So I'm putting the vinyl into the hands of folks who value it MUCH higher than I do. Some of those record collectors are nuts.

Here is how your request might look...

You are certainly more than welcome to join the conversation if you wish. We are not exclusionary.

No arguments from me. I am not the one saying that Flash crashes my browser (but fail to provide any links to reputable sites that do) or that HTML 5 can replace Flash (without providing any tool or workflow information about how to do it).
It seems that most people are opposed to Flash because A) Steve Jobs is rumored to have panned Flash so they must too B) there are annoying Flash ads (like there will never be annoying ads if Flash somehow disappeared) and C) it is a resource hog (which seems to be accurate - so you can uninstall it and live with whatever HTML 5 offers right now or put up with it until Adobe fixes it and do something of use and send your feedback to Adobe at http://www.adobe.com/bin/webfeedback.cgi).

Snell's are SWEEEEEEEEEEET speakers. Man, you must be a happy camper.

I agree 100% that vinyl does not sound good on a HT system, which is why I separate systems.

Well, off to dinner.

I'd say that Apple realised inevitable changes and was faster to apply them before the others, but to say that Apple forced others into abandoning FDD, Serial, Centronics... is a bit over the top. Especially when you consider that, when some of those changes happened, Apple was not even remotely strong and popular as it is today.

For quite a while major role for FDD was that older versions of Windows actually required DOS floppy diskette to initiate Windows setup, kill/create partitions (famous fdisk, if my memory serves me well)... also to load some critical yet not standard drivers during that setup (RAID controller, for example). Coincidently, for older motherboards, optical drives were not bootable. Once MS did come out with fully floppy-less setup and manufacturers adopted bootable opticals, FDD was destined to die.

Do you really believe PC industry would still be using floppies and other old tech without Apple around? Because, frankly, I don't. IT industry adopted things that were cheaper, faster, easier to apply. They skipped on massively implementing other things they didn't find enough reasons for, even if some of them were good ideas (Firewire, display port...) and some other things are being adopted through industry without or before Apple did - BR, card readers...).

Theory is valid, but real life might be much different.

That was just one simple thing I came across (and paid attention to). As I'm not browsing much on iPhone, I don't even know how often do I come across Flash when on my PC. I'll actually start paying attention - it will be interesting study, sort of. For example, I just tried checking on my new TV details on Australian LG site; again, there is Flash requirement on the home page, though it seems you can browse without Flash... to a certain point.

As I've got PS3 with new TV month ago, I'm frequent on Playstation Network/Playstation Home webs, looking for interesting news. Haven't tried them on iPhone, but will.

Of course there are many sites without (or with just minor) Flash content, but at present, Flash - while not Internet - is big part of the Internet. It is that simple to me. Not getting Flash on the Internet is like not getting meat in the steak house - one can still enjoy fritters and salad, but that's not the same.

Of course not. When you wrote "push" I read that literally to "exert force on" which even a start up can do. I didn't know you mean the extreme of overpowering and forcing change on another.

Of course, there are still some examples of that. The Phone is one of them. Capacitance touchscreens and good mobile browsers would have come along but not nearly as fast. Mozilla still hasn't gotten Firefox Mobile on platforms other than Maemo. Then there is the iTunes Storeo. They got the labels to take a chance and have become the largest distributor in the world. Even Bill Gates was astonished by Apple's ability to ink those deals, according to recently released emails.

I guess it all comes down to your perception because everything you could define everything that has ever happened or will happen as inevitable.

Since Flash for mobiles doesn't yet exist sites are going to have to create a mobile site or just forget about it. How many people want to look up car sites on a 3.5" display anyway?

Once Flash 10.1 launches we may see a change that will require Apple to support it, but with Flash still having usage issues on a touchscreen, not scaling to a small display well, and still looking to be a resource hog compared to webcode I don't think that is likely. I think we''ll see even more sites create a mobile versions to idealize for these slow devices with small screens.

I do agree that Apple did shake up smart phone industry nicely.

I agree for mobile phones (and I keep saying that), though secretly I'd still like to have it - as a last resort if nothing else.

But for a tablet device capable of browsing web without constant zooming in and out, uh. For me that is big shortcoming.

Which interestingly enough is exactly what they provided in the handheld segment.

Flash is a power hog
Flash will slow the IPAD UE
Flash needs to be iflash TO dance with steve
Adobe is always slow with apple updates SO ADOBE is right now shooting itself in the foot by slow or lack of APPLE OSX support /SO bad is this i was forced to learn a new word <<clicktoflash>

and Concerning BLUE RAY
BD competes with itunes HD
So it may take a while to see apple BD support. TOO simple i guess for many here.


peace

9

For mass market movies or those pushed by the major studios, it doesn't matter, they are already in on it and can get keys cheap. But for independent movies, the fees can really drive up the per-piece cost or just make it seem too risky to try.

Total FUD

Wow,

Over 400 posts. Whether you think flash should or should not be included in Apple products, you cannot argue that the decision is not controversial....

edits

Yeah, good call.

I think it's attributable to iPad. I've noticed that Apple/Mac related forums have exploded since Apple's product introduction for iPad a few weeks back. Much of it is FUD in my view, although there's also quite a bit of 'back & forth' in the tech community about various topics that can be related to iPad.

I really believe much of this is indicative of that fact that Apple's iPad hits alot of competitors right in the nuts, and they and their fans are running scared.

It's only fairly recently that all these Adobe Flash™ fans started coming out of the woodwork.

Who would have thought that so many people wanted the Internet to become a place of closed proprietary standards dominated and controlled by large corporations.

I remember using Lynx, no pictures, no fancy frills, just text based content, the content I wanted with no distractions.

It's funny how free internet video does that to so many people.