Brightcove converts Time, NYT Flash video to HTML5 for iPad - Page 2

Did you seriously not even look at the link I posted? It's all right there plain to see: Flash working perfectly on the iphone. Besides that, 10.1 is coming to Android. I won't even make much of a comment on the firefox mobile team: a group of people who utterly abandoned the WM platform because of their own failure.

Baseless assertion? Oh, so Apple doesn't wish to control such a thing. Ok, please show me how that's true. And we're not talking about fetch and send apps here. Flash content over a mobile browser could mean many things, including entire webpages devoted to distributing iphone/ipad specific content on par with what you find in the app store, thus bypassing Apple's control over what content is allowed in the app store. Really, you're going to argue with me on that?

It's funny how you say if they were smart, as if a bunch of morons developed flash lol

What I see here is a bunch of stupid reasons to get rid of something that's not broken, and these stupid reasons stem from misinformation by Apple.


No, I've got a fairly steady paycheck as a fortune cookie writer (BTW, You will inherit some money or a small piece of land.)

Also, I'm fairly certain I'm not the first person to use an adult word around here.

But I thought Apple's operating systems were immune to viruses? I mean, they sure do attack Microsoft enough for it, don't they? Oh right, all viruses and security threats come from Flash... But Flash is on OSX?

Honestly, by your logic, if security truly was the reason, then Flash would not work on OSX (especially considering usually no AV software installed.)

Calling Apple assholes as the reason is a very general statement, but isn't it funny how it so correctly sums up everything?

So sorry Adobe ... everybody's abandoning your sinking ship.

Apple asshole right here! You know nothing. Charlie Miller, the man who has hacked Safari for 3 years to win the prize said to not install Flash.

http://blog.intego.com/2010/03/03/ma...flash-is-weak/

If you knew anything, you'd know that most of the exploits for the past year have been coming through Flash and PDF. No, Macs aren't more secure but they are more safe. I'd rather have unlocked doors in Beverley Hills than have full security with cameras living in the Bronx. BTW, just so you know, there have been many rumors that the Click2Flash plugin code had come from a programmer at Adobe because even they knew how much Flash sucked on the Mac. Also most at Adobe use Macs so they would know.

You have no idea what what you're talking about and are reposting just trying to win an argument. If you don't know any better then admit. Don't be a poser. I admit it when I when I don't know enogh about a particular subject.

BTW, to those arrogant Flash devs who think they know so much, you aren't real programmers. My 15 year old kid sister can program on Flash and make her websites look like crap so don't think you're any different judging from the sites I've been to.

I'm fairly certain Flash was not the vector in any of the latest PWN2OWN compromises, at least not on the iPhone hack.

Right?!

And it's going into April 2010 and Android, a mobile OS known to the Mozilla a couple years before Apple announced iPhone OS STILL doesn't have Flash. Yet, we to believe that Flash is great and it's Apple's fault, going back to 2007 that it's not on iPhone OS.

Then there are the glaring issues with the desktop version that still having used native frameworks, like Core Animation, available since Leopard development started, yet we are told that Adobe it up to date with Flash development and hasn't been slacking at all.

Then there is the obvious elephant in the room, the power consumption. Even when Flash 10.1 is released sometime this year for the Nexus One (though how long for all Android, WebOS, WinMo, Symbian and Maemo devices? Years?) we'll see how much of a power drain, performance slow slow down and usability hinderance it will make. My bet is that it will be substantial. Just because you offload the work from the CPU to the GPU doesn't mean the battery isn't being used. Then we'll have to see how video playback works from sites like Hulu. Have they even altered their Flash controls to work with a touch-based device?

Well, it wouldn't display in my browser, and I don't bother with content that won't display in my browser. But, the title, at least, indicates that they are talking about iPhone apps, presumably generated from Flash content, which doesn't seem like anything to get excited about.

As for Flash 10.1 coming... I'm not holding my breath.


Well, it's your baseless assertion, so your obligation to back it up.


And, exactly how will Apple control HTML5 content? Based on Apple's actions, they have no problem with anyone "bypassing [their] control" over content, whether it's HTML5 content, content for 3rd party ebook readers, etc.

I don't see that your "arguments" have even half a leg to stand on.


Well, it's not the developers who make the decisions on what to work on, and Flash was not originally developed by Adobe.


What I see here is you grasping at straws.

Is that your straw man for this hour?

Sorry, Flash has jumped the shark. If the iPad takes off like it is predicted, expect Flash to lose a significant amount of relevancy over the next few years. Not just because of the iPad, but the convergence of better HTML5 tools and the continued problems, despite what you or Adobe claim, of it running on mobile devices.

You may not like it, but it's not some grand conspiracy from Apple. They are simply the most visible company making this stance. And Jobs does have a record of pushing industries; he killed the floppy drive on the Mac at considerable risk (Apple was still a vulnerable company then) and teeth-gnashing from the PC crowd, and he convinced the record industry to drop DRM on music downloads. He's getting cited as CEO of the year/decade left and right - I'd say he knows what he's doing.

Your arguments... not so convincing.

Apple has even created and submitted HTTP Live Streaming, which gives them even less control over the content but allows them video to be streamed more efficiently and effectively to various devices with varying connection speeds.

Every argument Chronster can say about Apple wanting to control everything as being the only reason Flash is on the iPhone comes down to one fact: if they really wanted to lock down iPhone OS they wouldn't have made mobileSafari browser so damn useful.

Yes but when you look at the code that some artists produce with Dreamweaver you wonder how it runs at all, They have multiple head tags, body onload, mouseover functions in there several times. And the server has a Scripts folder and a JS folder and some other CSS and JS files loose in the root. So yeah they duplicate code. I guess it doesn't matter if the whole thing is AFU, it still works.

I don't think flash should go away as an interactive medium. I think it should evolve with HTML5. What do we use flash for anyway? Videoplayer? Interactive sites? Dynamic data like in Google Finance? Games?

Most of the things described here can be done with Ajax, SVG, DOMs, etc. HTML5 ultimate purpose was to eliminate installing plugins. For example Google Gears plugin is not needed anymore since HTML5 supports Local Database. The problem designing with HTML5 is there is no rapid content authoring and the only company that has the mature software is Adobe.

Adobe should embrace HTML5 feature set particularly the canvas tag which can be GPU accelerated for vector animations. Canvas is a very powerful element and it supports OpenGL 3D graphics. Adobe should integrate their flash player with Canvas.

If Adobe doesn't start now, some coder will port flash using html5.

EDIT: It already has started. http://m.sitepoint.com/blogs/2010/02...-flash-player/
EDIT2: And it works on the iPhone! http://paulirish.com/work/gordon/demos/

So true. But my first experience with this was when Macromedia shifted focus from Director to Flash, which was so frustrating that I transitioned from multimedia development to LAMP development, so I do get a bit of satisfaction from seeing Flash in decline now. But it had a pretty good run!

I was under the impression the major reason for flash not being implemented in apple devices was because it was built around using a mouse pointer at its core architecture, and Apple obviously designs its products around multitouch capabilities which flash obviously lacks?

Canvas is not in the spec and I believe it is copyrighted by Apple who has not actually licensed it. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

likely not. Because many if the apps require more power than the ipad is likely to ever have.

now some ilife lite apps that work with the desktop versions and allow you to do some stuff off your ipad sure. the video editing we have on the iphone, sure. the recording podcasts from garageband and updating blogs from iweb, probably. very basic photo editing like cropping and redeye, yeah.

and yes the iweb stuff will likely be html5 as will the desktop version in the near future. if they would also work on being able to make your own page templates and better html inserting without the whole iframe nonsense (or at least let me lock it to a relative point) then I might use iweb more.



but what are those other uses. Ads jumping all over the place and taking over your screen when you hover over them. blech.
games. well the games developers are the first to point out that Flash is a mouse based tech and thus doesn't really work on a touch system so they get why there's no flash on the iphone os.


yep. designers are loathe to spend time learning something new when the old school works.

we see it in video as well. My boss just bid on a pack of industrials and found out that our price was one fifth that of the Avid only company that also bid and tried to tell the company that Final Cut can't do what Avid can (which is how they justify the higher price). My boss countered with a reel of our work AND comments from several big name professionals about how they use Final Cut for their work. oops.


no it is not. for the plain fact that there's no support in the OS. Just like you can't run Windows software natively in Mac OS. The support isn't there.

As for your link. Those are not Flash apps running on the phone. they are apps built using Flash for the layout etc and then ported via Adobe's own convertor to the iphone's 'non Flash' OS.


well sure. That's Apple's right. You don't like it, don't buy. And if you are a publisher or developer and don't like those rules, don't play. Don't make stuff for Apple's devices. If you lose a lot of money over it, it will be worth it cause you took a stand against Apple's tyranny.


but that also means being online the whole time. Many games don't need to be online for the actual game play because they aren't some kind of networked multiplayer gig. But if they are in the browser you are stuck if you lose connectivity. As a standalone app that's not a problem.


someone using his head for more than holding a hat. well said


Ads and inaccessible websites don't win me on the whole Flash is best/better/just as good argument.

I don't think anyone gobbled anything up without question. See AppleInsider's 3-part series exploring the topic, etc. I think that instead, after 2+ years of mixed messages about Flash on the iPhone, everyone was waiting to see what happened. When the iPad was introduced with no Flash, then everyone knew the score and now we're seeing big companies like the NY Times start to react. They had plenty of time to prepare a reaction so it shouldn't be surprising if they move quickly now.

By the way, I think this is partly an acknowledgement of Apple's leadership status, and partly an acknowledgement that at the end of the day, you can't make them support Flash if they don't want to.

As far as Flash running on iPhone, it does. Only version 1 and 2 but that is plenty good for making obnoxious ads. So to all who don't want to believe it, go ahead on, live in denial, but you'll be screaming for something to block it soon enough. Gordon JS Flash library runs real Flash on an iPhone[.]

Well, sure, plenty of people create horrible code that "works". That will never change.

Another thing that won't change is that coding web pages is getting more complicated and more difficult for artists all the time. With all the different platforms to target and so many server side languages, it is not going to be a trivial undertaking to produce an authoring application for HTML5 that is as easy to use Flash is now. Artists still screw Flash up anyway, which is one of the things that makes so many Flash swfs so crappy to begin with. 'Made by Amateurs'.

While the site layout is horrible this paragraph sums up nicely the problem Adobe is facing...

Google not only makes a browser, a phone, an OS, and Google Docs, it also owns a tremendous amount of video content that can be converted to play in HTML5, sans plug-in. Apple not only makes Macs, iPhones, and iPads, it is also among the largest retail distributors of video and audio content.

Over the weekend, a lot of people were doing the math, and there was panic at Adobe and schadenfreude elsewhere. Apple and Adobe invented modern publishing together in the 1980s, and theyve been fighting like an old unmarried couple ever since, but Apples decision to omit Flash from the iPad isnt about revenge, its about delivering a stable platform. And with HTML5 here, the tea leaves are easy to read. Developers who supplement Flash with HTML5 may soon tire of Flashbut Adobe has a brief but golden opportunity to create the tools with which rich HTML5 content is created. Lets see if they figure that out.

http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/01/flash-ipad-standards/
Really? When we talk about Flash not being designed for mobiles we're talking about Flash as a useful tool, like it can be on desktop OSes. That includes, but not limited to, playing video from sites like YouTube, Hulu, Vimeo, etc. That means Flash 10.x.x and greater.

Well, it's never trivial to produce any sort of content creation software, but it will be done.

And, of course, HTML won't make crappy web sites go away, people were producing those long before Flash was available, and they'll keep on doing it.

Hats off to Brightcove's marketing department for making their backoffice guy Ned with a Mac Pro, ClickToFlash, and a copy of Handbrake seem like it's a big deal.

But I guess that's what you have to do to charge huge clients huge money.

As a developer, I can relate but I see the need for continuous learning in our line of work as opportunities. It keeps things fresh & exciting and although we have to learn new languages and tools, the underlying principles stay the same. Most Flash websites are not based on MVC unfortunately and that is perhaps why these sites are so hard to maintain.

Most sites of any kind are not based on MVC, which is a good thing since it doesn't work as advertised. IMO MVC is DOA YMMV.

There was also a preview of the iPad App Store:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/29/i...ideo-ipad-app/

They seem to have released info in the video about the iPad spec too:



Brushes for iPad has 6 layers at 1024 x 768, pretty much the same as Sketchbook on the 3GS so it would seem 256MB RAM.

The way I hope they implement multi-tasking in the case of 256MB RAM would be to leave background apps open until an app in the front requests more and then executes the shutdown code of the largest RAM hogging background app. The background apps should be throttled down to under 10% CPU combined.

It can still be snappy with 256MB like the 3GS but I would have much preferred 512MB or 1GB of RAM. 2GB is overkill as it doesn't run desktop-class applications but even the Nexus One has 512MB. I guess they had to weigh up the cost of adding more RAM in vs the chances that people will be running heavy apps.

There's still the possibility of 512MB but no more. If it has the exact same specs as an overclocked iphone 3GS, it's clear the focus is on what the screen size can do for apps. Seems to me though a screen dock would have achieved the same effect, though wouldn't have the same traction probably.

The question is would it have been better selling a screen for maybe $199-299 to 70 million people and have those with an iphone contract not have to pay for data access again at the risk of the hardware being slower or sell a separate device and convince iphone/ipod touch users to spend another $500 and people who don't have one to choose between either it or a pocket device.

I think regardless of the move to HTML 5 for online content, subscription costs will be harder to push for a new device that people have just spent money on. Right now, I'm one of many looking to add value to my iPhone with content, not buy a replacement to then pay for content on top.

Also interesting in the above video is the price difference between Brushes for iPad and Brushes for iPhone. It may suggest users will have to purchase apps twice. Note, you will probably be able to put the iPhone version of Brushes onto the iPad free if you have it - it will zoom it up - but will have to pay another $10 for Brushes XL/HD.

No argument here but as we all know from endless posts about video players, you don't really need Flash. I mention the fact that I can create Flash ads that do run on iPhone only because it is particularly discouraging. When that knowledge becomes well known, the Flash ads will come in droves along with the HTML5 ads, neither of which can currently be blocked.

Hey calm down, pal. First of all, I'm not calling people like you assholes, I'm calling the decision makers at Apple assholes. Secondly, don't tell me to shut the fuck up. I have as much right to say what I want as you do. It's a public forum, and the things I'm saying here aren't baseless rants that don't make any sense. These are comments rooted in fact.

If you'll notice, I said I don't care how the content is delivered, so long as I don't notice a difference. This is how everyone should feel. So far my experiences with html5 vs flash have been unfavorable for html5. This might explain why:

On Googles browser, HTML5 used a sizable 25.66% of the CPU. Flash 10.0 was up at 22.00%, but 10.1 used only 6%. Firefox and IE showed similar huge gains from the 10.1 version of Adobe Flash.
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/new...ay_youd_expect Now while you think that what I'm posting is an attempt to win an argument of some kind, the reality is what I'm posting here are facts that fly right in the face of the misinformation Steve Jobs has been feeding you guys. The reason Flash runs better in Windows is because of the cooperation Microsoft gave. You can not argue with me that Apple doesn't work well with other companies, especially since Steve Jobs said it (and you have to believe everything he says, remember?)

As to your final statement: Just wow. The abortion of thought that went into THAT paragraph is just alarming.

How can Brushes for iPad be rated if no one has an iPad yet?

Mostly, we just think you're a troll, and an angry, bitter person.

The 4+ rating that you're seeing is the parental guidance rating -- like the movie ratings G, PG and R. Customer ratings (1-5 stars) are different and appear under their own heading when they are present. The terminology overlap is confusing.

Lets use quicktime as an example here. Lets say Microsoft decided quicktime was a cpu hog, even though it ran just fine in OSX. Lets also say the reason it ran like crap in Windows was because of a lack of cooperation on Microsoft's part. Would you not find it mildly irritating to see a company like Microsoft attempt to change YOUR experience based on the bs they pedaled?

I see nothing wrong with html5, just as I see nothing wrong with Flash. My problem here though is I see greater potential for Flash for mobile than html5. Maybe I'm just thinking too far outside of the box.

Gee Beav, I don't know, how can they porn "XXX" before it get's released to the public in the film industry, must be magic!!!

I don't see Chronster as a troll. I don't often agree with his PoV, but I don't recall him ever trying to derail the board or being an outright ass to anyone for no reason.

Because I don't accept the status quo, or bs these large companies try to get us to believe?


Yeah I mean when it comes down to it, I'm not angry or bitter, I just have a different taste than most people around here. I still respect what Apple does and I'm still as interested as everyone else in Apple's next big accomplishment.

Really? I wonder what brush stroke could have knocked a 0.5 deduction off of it?

Anyone who comes to AI with no point but to bash Apple (e.g., chronster) is a troll. I mean, why would you bother if you think Apple sucks, unless you get a kick out of getting people riled up.

I don't think Apple sucks. I think Apple rocks to be perfectly honest with you. If it weren't for them, other companies would be lazier. I just don't agree with some of the decisions they make, and that stems from me being a geek honestly.

You don't understand me at all.

You should keep ignorant and inflammatory remarks like this to yourself. They only weaken your stance and make you look like a moron.

Well, you're finally right about something.

Adobe is lazy. Flash is Buggy. Flash is CPU hog.

Flash is yesterday's technology, because it was made for a desktop computer. No telephone's run Flash. No netbook will run flash.

Flash makes Mac's crash.