or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe evangelist lashes out at Apple over iPhone 4.0
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe evangelist lashes out at Apple over iPhone 4.0 - Page 7

post #241 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

For the record, I'm working on putting my 'comic' out there in the next year. The digital press company I wish to use accept RGB files to print from. There's no requirement for Photoshop, Illustrator or Indesign or Quark. The 'old gods' have had their fun at Apple's expense since Windows 95.

Just because Apple are shunning Flash in their mobile environment and because the Flash plugin may be buggy on certain Mac OS X set-ups, it doesn't mean the whole Adobe Creative Suite is going to crumble. And just because your comic doesn't require the apps above, it doesn't mean that the creative world is going to ditch industry-standard software such as Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and After Effects. You have to remember that if it wasn't for companies like Adobe and technologies including PostScript and the desktop publishing revolution, there would be no Apple.

Don't get me wrong, I love Apple products, but they've got it wrong this time. With members on the board of WHATWG, Apple have a vested interest in HTML5, so they'll make you think it's a simple case of HTML vs Flash. IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE. The 'standards' in the canvas tag are a long way from the semantics of XHTML, which are used both on Apple's website and in the eBook format. There are many great HTML5 features, but canvas is still a bit of a mess.

And although royalty fees are not being charged until at least 2015 (companies still pay other licensing fees), h.264 is still propriety software. It is a great technology and companies like Apple (and now Microsoft and Google) have backed this format in their browsers, but Firefox has not. So the argument of using video tags in HTML5 is not that clear-cut. There is also no standard API or tags to control interface or things like buffering in HTML5 video. Clearly Quicktime and Safari have these in place, but then that is just proprietary software that doesn't run consistently on all platforms

EDIT: My mistake, there are tags for controls and preloading that can be implemented in HTML5 (although I'm not sure how this works with progressive download. It seems to download the whole thing only, unless you're streaming, which requires good old-fashioned proprietary software).
post #242 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by simantic View Post

Don't get me wrong, I love Apple products, but they've got it wrong this time. With members on the board of WHATWG, Apple have a vested interest in HTML5, so they'll make you think it's a simple case of HTML vs Flash. IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE. The 'standards' in the canvas tag are a long way from the semantics of XHTML, which are used both on Apple's website and in the eBook format. There are many great HTML5 features, but canvas is still a bit of a mess.

And although royalty fees are not being charged until at least 2015 (companies still pay other licensing fees), h.264 is still propriety software. It is a great technology and companies like Apple (and now Microsoft and Google) have backed this format in their browsers, but Firefox has not. So the argument of using video tags in HTML5 is not that clear-cut. There is also no standard API or tags to control interface or things like buffering in HTML5 video. Clearly Quicktime and Safari have these in place, but then that is just proprietary software that doesn't run consistently on all platforms

Between H.264 and HTML5, a lot of big companies have a vested interest. Apple, Google, MS and Intel (and ARM from an architecture standpoint), to name the heaviest hitters. For Adobe and Mozilla to fight against the inevitable will not result in a David v. Goliath outcome.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #243 of 274
It's time for Apple to release a CS5 killer.

I'm suggesting an app that will be backward compatible with all Adobe CS5 apps including Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign.

If you look at the lag to introduce Mac versions of Adobe's apps compared to Windows versions for the past several years, it is clear Adobe forgot its origins.

If Apple had not helped Adobe when it started, there would be no Adobe today. I worked in publishing when Macs were launched (we dumped al IBM PCs at the time when we switched to Macs) and the original Adobe apps showed promise but were clunky. Even after Photoshop and Illustrator were introduced, publishing typically relied upon film-based photos and hand drawn artwork which was scanned by service bureaus since it was faster and cheaper to do so.

Also, if Apple had not provided an OS that could handle Postscript fonts, and laser printers that could handle them, Adobe would have been out of business since Windows was not up to the task.
post #244 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by simantic View Post

Just because Apple are shunning Flash in their mobile environment and because the Flash plugin may be buggy on certain Mac OS X set-ups, it doesn't mean the whole Adobe Creative Suite is going to crumble. And just because your comic doesn't require the apps above, it doesn't mean that the creative world is going to ditch industry-standard software such as Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and After Effects. You have to remember that if it wasn't for companies like Adobe and technologies including PostScript and the desktop publishing revolution, there would be no Apple.

Sometimes I wonder what ever happened to that good Adobe. The new one has a bunch of whiny little brats where there used to be reasonable, intelligent management teams.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #245 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Can we make this a sticky?

Why, yes. Yes we can!
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #246 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Sometimes I wonder what ever happened to that good Adobe. The new one has a bunch of whiny little brats where there used to be reasonable, intelligent management teams.

I'm struck by the "redacted" remarks (one actually removed, where he had claimed that Apple is trying to kill CS5, several simply struck through so you can still read them regarding his status as an official Adobe spokesperson).

The net effect is that Adobe read and slightly moderated their evangelist's remarks, while giving tacit approval to his even more inflammatory rantings.

"Go screw yourself Apple" amounts to the Adobe response, via plausibly deniable intermediaries. Which is kinda chicken shit, and probably not very productive.

In all the years that Adobe openly thumbed their nose at Apple, encouraging their customers to migrate to the PC , charging more for less, and refusing to adapt their UI to OS X conventions, did anyone so closely associated with Apple ever publish a "screw you Adobe" manifesto? Probably not, because they were too busy trying to build products. But they noticed. They remembered. And it turns out Adobe fucked up by assuming they didn't have to care about the Mac market, even as they made 50% of their money off of Apple's customers. They made it very clear that those customers could either make do with whatever Adobe deigned to give them, or move over to the "approved" platform.

Anyway, Adobe is run by a sales guy now, and seems to spend a lot of their resources on PR and bullshit like "The Open Screen Project" (i.e. if everybody users Adobe products for everything what a wonderfully interoperable world it would be), so I'm not sure they have the corporate culture to do anything but wage a PR initiative now. God forbid they write better software for the platform.

Screw you, Adobe.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #247 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I'm struck by the "redacted" remarks (one actually removed, where he had claimed that Apple is trying to kill CS5, several simply struck through so you can still read them regarding his status as an official Adobe spokesperson).

The net effect is that Adobe read and slightly moderated their evangelist's remarks, while giving tacit approval to his even more inflammatory rantings.

"Go screw yourself Apple" amounts to the Adobe response, via plausibly deniable intermediaries. Which is kinda chicken shit, and probably not very productive.

In all the years that Adobe openly thumbed their nose at Apple, encouraging their customers to migrate to the PC , charging more for less, and refusing to adapt their UI to OS X conventions, did anyone so closely associated with Apple ever publish a "screw you Adobe" manifesto? Probably not, because they were too busy trying to build products. But they noticed. They remembered. And it turns out Adobe fucked up by assuming they didn't have to care about the Mac market, even as they made 50% of their money off of Apple's customers. They made it very clear that those customers could either make do with whatever Adobe deigned to give them, or move over to the "approved" platform.

Anyway, Adobe is run by a sales guy now, and seems to spend a lot of their resources on PR and bullshit like "The Open Screen Project" (i.e. if everybody users Adobe products for everything what a wonderfully interoperable world it would be), so I'm not sure they have the corporate culture to do anything but wage a PR initiative now. God forbid they write better software for the platform.

Screw you, Adobe.

Well said.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #248 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by simantic View Post

SNIP You have to remember that if it wasn't for companies like Adobe and technologies including PostScript and the desktop publishing revolution, there would be no Apple. SNIP

that works both ways though, doesn't it? without apple and the mac, there would be no adobe. why do you think we're so pissed? it seems that adobe is too busy building 'platforms' and nickel and diming everybody to death, instead of giving us mac users the care and attention that they used to.

anybody that has used adobe software for more than ten years has been witness to the gradual decline of adobe's support for the mac. i don't know how much of adobe's bottom line depends on apple - i see all kind of numbers been tossed around - but i am sure that it's not peanuts.

if they can't support and embrace apple's technologies for over a decade, then they have no right to be belligerent in their response to being locked out of the iphone. they should get off their ass, give us back the old adobe, give us a true mac interface for their software instead of pushing their windows first ports on us, fix flash on the mac, and then we can talk about flash on the iphone.

so far the only reaction from adobe has been a resounding 'whaaaaa - not fair' and cries of 'freedom, freedom'. that is laughable from a company that wants to lock up the entire content creation on the web. they should go out and hire some competent mac programmers with the money they're spending on anti apple pr.

i remember reading that they got rid of their mac developers years ago. i don't know if that was true, but it wouldn't surprise me. even their awful installer was outsourced, a point that was used by adobe as an excuse when users had problems. puh-lease! it might be convenient for adobe to write for windows first, then port to the mac, but if they think that this lack of attention to our favourite os is going to stay unnoticed by their longtime core users - they have another thing coming.

it's funny how much we hear from adobe all of a sudden, when our complaints have been falling on deaf ears on for years. the way adobe is reacting is telling. they take zero responsibility, react with public outrage (like they did to a rumoured remark from steve jobs at an internal meeting). for years and years there has been zero reaction to criticism from mac users. things have just steadily gotten worse.

get it together adobe. we want our toolbox back and we expect it to work properly on the mac. restoring your credibility when it comes to supporting apple technology will go a long way in gaining our sympathy for your 'war' over mobile platforms.
post #249 of 274
There's an ironic example in Quark, which managed to build up a bunch of customer ill-will over the years by standing pat on their virtual monopoly industry standard software, while aggressively attempting to extract money out of their long-suffering but pretty much stuck user base.

Then Adobe came along with inDesign which launched a pretty good alternative into a market featuring long simmering unhappiness with the incumbent, and took away a big chunk of Quark's customers.

Creating a reasonable alternative to CS would be a Herculean task, but it's not impossible. And the fact is that Photoshop and Illustrator are huge old teetering piles of code that include tons of functionality that 99% of the user base never or seldom needs, ala Office style feature bloat (gotta keep the kids updating year after year, after all).

Pixelmator has demonstrated that it's possible to provide a lot of image editing functionality by leveraging the existing OS X technologies, and do it relatively quickly with relatively slim resources. If they had the deep pockets of an Adobe (or if they received the backing of deep pocketed angel), how long would it take them to grow into a legitimate competitor? And how happy would Adobe's ignored but significant Mac customer base be to drop them like a hot potato?

Please note I'm not claiming that Pixelmator is in any way, shape or form a Photoshop competitor, as it stands. I'm just saying that, with the right import/export options, plug-ins, and an intelligently selected subset of the vast Photoshop feature bloat, it's really not inconceivable that it could grow into one. Or if not them, the work of some other motivated (ahem) entity.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #250 of 274
i do not want to read through all the pages of this thread, so can anyone tell me if Apple wrote Safari and iTunes for Windows in native code, or do they use some sort of interoperability layer to get it to run on Windows
post #251 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

i do not want to read through all the pages of this thread, so can anyone tell me if Apple wrote Safari and iTunes for Windows in native code, or do they use some sort of interoperability layer to get it to run on Windows

Entirely irrelevant, a Microsoft does not have any restriction related to this in place for Windows development, just as Apple has no such restrictions for Mac OS X development. iPhone OS is a new platform with new restrictions and obligations associated with it, that's just the way it is.

Now, of course, we know that your point is, "See what hypocrites Apple are!" (Which, since that is your point, why don't you just come out and say it? No need to be coy here.) However, the important points are a) Apple is playing according to Microsoft's rules for Windows, and b) Apple setting different rules for one of its platforms doesn't amount to anything but just that. There's no hypocrisy involved.

However, if Microsoft somehow imposed such restrictions on Windows software, what Apple would do is get to work and write Safari and iTunes applications that followed the rules and could be installed on Windows. What Apple and SJ would not do is whine about how Microsoft was being unfair to them and write embarrassing blog posts about the same.
post #252 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Entirely irrelevant, a Microsoft does not have any restriction related to this in place for Windows development, just as Apple has no such restrictions for Mac OS X development. iPhone OS is a new platform with new restrictions and obligations associated with it, that's just the way it is.

Now, of course, we know that your point is, "See what hypocrites Apple are!" (Which, since that is your point, why don't you just come out and say it? No need to be coy here.) However, the important points are a) Apple is playing according to Microsoft's rules for Windows, and b) Apple setting different rules for one of its platforms doesn't amount to anything but just that. There's no hypocrisy involved.

However, if Microsoft somehow imposed such restrictions on Windows software, what Apple would do is get to work and write Safari and iTunes applications that followed the rules and could be installed on Windows. What Apple and SJ would not do is whine about how Microsoft was being unfair to them and write embarrassing blog posts about the same.

It is relevant, but it has nothing to do with the restrictions Apple placed. I have no problem with Apple placing the restrictions that they did. I have repeatedly said that it is Apple's product and they can do with it as they please. The same with Adobe - if they do not want to optimize Flash for the Mac, then as Mac users we need to find an alternative or live with it. Bitching about it is pointless, especially when most of us bought a Mac knowing the situation.

The relevance comes from the putative reasons that Apple instituted the ban - cross compiled code produces (can produce) bad programs that result in instabilities and problems for the OS. So, if Apple uses an interoperability layer, aren't they being "lazy" and "producing a poor product"?

Normally I would not have brought this up, but given how poorly/not usefully at all, iWorks for the iPad interfaces with iWorks for Mac OSX, I just have to wonder.
post #253 of 274
Interesting blog entry that makes the same points I was making above, but with some good links.

Quote:
In 1996 when Apple was seemingly on the ropes, Adobe made a crucial business decision and one that is coming back to bite them in the ass. They declared that their primary development platform would be Windows; subsequently, every new application or major revision of a product was introduced for Windows first and followed months later, sometimes never at all, by a Mac version.

After Steve Jobs took over and he was charting out a new course with OS X, Apple reached out many times to Abode to introduce a native version of their suite for the new OS. Adobe never committed standing by its prediction that OS X would never gain momentum or share and it would ride the Windows ascendancy. Adobe thought that it had the dominant hand and displayed its arrogance in public.

Quote:
Adobe had multiple chances to prove their worth to Apple and they failed miserably. They ignored the OS X version of Flash. They ignored Photoshop witness the rise of Acorn, Pixelmator etc.

Sorry, Adobe, you screwed yourself. You made a business decision in 1996 to screw Apple when it needed you most to gain credibility for its fledgling OS with the creative crowd. Somehow, Apple making a business decision to protect its customers from your shitty product is the most egregious ethical concern of our time.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #254 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

i do not want to read through all the pages of this thread, so can anyone tell me if Apple wrote Safari and iTunes for Windows in native code, or do they use some sort of interoperability layer to get it to run on Windows

Let me guess... TL;DR?

The desktop OS and mobile OS are necessary different beasts.

There is a longer explanation, but I can't be bothered to type it when you can't be bothered to read it.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #255 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Let me guess... TL;DR?

The desktop OS and mobile OS are necessary different beasts.

There is a longer explanation, but I can't be bothered to type it when you can't be bothered to read it.

what is TL (too lazy?) and DR (don't read?), which are not the case, rather TB (too busy) to read 8 or so pages of posts.

I am well aware that the Desktop and mobile OSs are different, but as I said in a subsequent post, the reason Apple implemented the policy (which I have no problems with) is that it produces programs that produce instabilities.

If that is not the reason Apple did this, please explain it and I will read it.
post #256 of 274
I'm amazed at some of the replies on this thread and others and I'm dumbfounded that the best comparative argument some of you are making is iPhone OS to Windows desktop, despite Mac OS X functioning the same as Windows desktop and WP7 apparently having the same locked in environment as iPhone OS.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #257 of 274
I'm with Steve and Apple on this. For far too long, Adobe has completely taken advantage of Mac users. I got sick and tired of their incredibly buggy and expensive software years ago. They can take their piece-of-shit CS software (including Flash) and stuff it.

Apple has been working on it's own suite of imaging software that will be called iCreate: Photo Editing and Illustration/Page Layout software that will handle all the functions that Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign currently provide.

This is why Apple can be so "in your face" to Adobe about Flash right now. Apple doesn't need Adobe anymore and that will be even more true after this year is over. And Adobe knows this, which is why they're exchanging harsh words so publicly with Apple over Flash. They already know the battle with Apple is lost.

Remember what happened to Corel Draw? The same will eventually happen to Adobe. I say good riddance!
post #258 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I don't think we should automatically assume Apple has the upper-hand here.

Adobe's market cap: $18.6B

Apple's cash: $24.8B

I've heard of few higher hands than "I could always just buy your ass and have it over with."

In a worst case scenario, Apple could buy 51-100% of Adobe, and the first order of business would likely be picking off flash and executive management. Those guys know this and even they don't want to be fired - for some it'd be watching a life's work go down the tubes.

I think Apple wants to kill flash badly enough to do it, too. They're just pushing harder in hopes that the death of flash doesn't have to cost ten billion dollars.
post #259 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHKOsta View Post

In a worst case scenario, Apple could buy 51-100% of Adobe, and the first order of business would likely be picking off flash and executive management. Those guys know this and even they don't want to be fired - for some it'd be watching a life's work go down the tubes.

Talk about your worst case scenarios -- wasting tons of cash on vendetta is about as worst case as it comes.

BTW, Apple has over $40 billion in cash, which is not an argument for spending it just to show someone else who's boss.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #260 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Talk about your worst case scenarios -- wasting tons of cash on vendetta is about as worst case as it comes.

BTW, Apple has over $40 billion in cash, which is not an argument for spending it just to show someone else who's boss.

Have to agree Doc. (excuse my familiarity

At the risk of continuing the debate ad infinitum, Adobe can bluster and continue with the obscurantism for all they're worth, however it's not their fiscal worth that is at question here.

Adobe has lost more and more relevence as it attempts to build the massive and without doubt bloated egregious monster that presented itself in CS3 and I doubt that today's announcement of CS5 'enhancements' to their much hoped-for unstoppable juggernaut will be too late to appease us - the one time dedicated users of Photoshop 3.0 and beyond.
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #261 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

{Re: Apple buying a controlling interest in Adobe}
Talk about your worst case scenarios -- wasting tons of cash on vendetta is about as worst case as it comes.

BTW, Apple has over $40 billion in cash, which is not an argument for spending it just to show someone else who's boss.

You're right that wasting tons of cash on a vendetta isn't smart. But buying Adobe could be much more valuable than simply killing Flash.

Apple could start rewriting CS using native Apple technologies and things like OpenCL and Grand Central - which would give the Mac version a far, far stronger market position than it has now. They could get back to the point where Macs offered real performance advantages on Adobe apps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eluard View Post

It's as though the Adobe CEO declared at some point "This is how we are going to treat Microsoft, and THIS is how we are going to treat Apple. And Apple will just have to take it." They dug their heels in and sniggered for five years. Now comes the reaction from Apple and they cry foul.

(Oh wait, that was pretty much what did happen. I remember the discussion long ago of how Adobe were going to apportion their coding resources based on units sold.)

Absolutely. The bad news is that this doesn't change the fact that Adobe is arrogant and now is run by people who only care about units sold and don't care about a quality product. While they're clearly not going to stop selling CS5/Mac as some of the trolls here have suggested, they could continue to cut back on the Mac development side and continue to introduce new technologies on Windows first. That's the main reason Apple has to tread carefully here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by simantic View Post

As a web designer and front-end developer, I work with technologies such as HTML5, XHTML, JavaScript and Flash everyday. Several years ago, JavaScript was seen as 'bloated' and redundant, but thanks to JS libraries, it has resurfaced and for good reason. To say that Flash is dead is simply ignorant. With Adobe's adoption of SWFObject in Flash CS4, Flash can easily be embedded in websites using standards-compliant HTML. With the announcement of search indexing in swf files, there is still a chance that Flash can be a complementary technology for developers that choose to use it. I mean really, why can't we all just get along?

I have been a Mac OS user for about 20 years, but I refuse to be an iPhone OS user until options for development become reasonable.

The problem is that Flash is unsuitable for Mobile use - which is why NO smartphone has a full Flash implementation. It's not just Apple telling Adobe that Flash stinks, it's every single smart phone developer. (Android MAY have 10.1 some day, but even that has limited functionality, high CPU and battery usage, and won't run on more than a very tiny percentage of phones since it requires Cortex 8). Flash is bad enough on Macs, but it just doesn't work on mobiles.

As for not developing for iPhone, that's your choice. You're missing out on your share of billions of dollars. If you want to do that for some silly philosophical reason, consumers will just have to choose from among the other 185,000 apps.

Just what is unreasonable about the options, anyway? The fact that Apple won't allow unfettered access to private APIs? The fact that Apple expects you to follow the SDK? Sorry, but lots of other platforms work the same way.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #262 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Apple could start rewriting CS using native Apple technologies and things like OpenCL and Grand Central - which would give the Mac version a far, far stronger market position than it has now. They could get back to the point where Macs offered real performance advantages on Adobe apps.

If Apple bought Adobe, it'd mean more than that - the windows version of CS5 would likely go away.
post #263 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You're right that wasting tons of cash on a vendetta isn't smart. But buying Adobe could be much more valuable than simply killing Flash.

Apple could start rewriting CS using native Apple technologies and things like OpenCL and Grand Central - which would give the Mac version a far, far stronger market position than it has now. They could get back to the point where Macs offered real performance advantages on Adobe apps.

Actually, if Apple wanted to do that, I think the money spent to buy Adobe would be wasted. It would be cheaper, faster, and easier to just develop new competing apps, or buy some small, promising player that already has good cocoa based apps that would be a good starting point for development.
post #264 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celco View Post

Seriously guys make some hardware and see if you will lets others run software on it. Adobe frankly doesn't get it. Flash is one of the web's worst ideas and should be allowed to die. Canvas, and Jquery are proof that Flash is like a 1990s pop song, eye candy, without purpose and crap. Adobe, you screwed mac users with CS suite interface built for the PC and "just" ported for mac, and now you want us mac users again? WE DONT WANT YOU.

Since you ended in caps, i'll begin in caps: YOU'RE MISINFORMED. CS5 Flash has the ability to smart paste canvas elements into HTML which, to my knowledge, is more support and a cooler IDE for canvas development than anything else I know of. How does this translate to "Adobe hates canvas"??? Also, people keep pointing to the scalable vector graphics aspect of canvas and ignoring the abundance of components and underlying technologies like RTMP (and it's various flavors) that flash supports to which there are no competing alternatives. Without Flash showing what can be done TODAY, you're stuck with what can be done in 10 years IF there remains a huge interest from browser makers in the direction of standards compliance and feature development.

I'm all for developing a better experience on the web using standards based technologies, but this FUD being spread about Adobe holding back the internet is opinion based in uninformed or misinformed bias. It's a tool, a technology, like any other, and a far more secure one than the "standards" based technologies being pawned off as some sort of holy grail of tech.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #265 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Actually, if Apple wanted to do that, I think the money spent to buy Adobe would be wasted. It would be cheaper, faster, and easier to just develop new competing apps, or buy some small, promising player that already has good cocoa based apps that would be a good starting point for development.

CS5 is the 64bit version of the creative suite. Nuff said.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #266 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

The problem is that Flash is unsuitable for Mobile use - which is why NO smartphone has a full Flash implementation. It's not just Apple telling Adobe that Flash stinks, it's every single smart phone developer. (Android MAY have 10.1 some day, but even that has limited functionality, high CPU and battery usage, and won't run on more than a very tiny percentage of phones since it requires Cortex 8). Flash is bad enough on Macs, but it just doesn't work on mobiles.

Just what is unreasonable about the options, anyway? The fact that Apple won't allow unfettered access to private APIs? The fact that Apple expects you to follow the SDK? Sorry, but lots of other platforms work the same way.

The newest android phones are cortex 8 and 9 or will be potentially tegra 1 and 2. Flash 10.1 is currently supported in the SenseUI from HTC and runs perfectly well when you upgrade the ROM on even the Nexus One. It also runs on the HD2 and EVO phones on T-Mobile and Sprint. Marketshare aside, those will be the next great phones to own. It runs amazingly well which makes me wonder what the hell you're trying to say about it being a resource hog. My guess is you have NO experience running flash on mobile and you're clearly repeating something you read somewhere that you bought into hook line and sinker. Good job.

As for how it's unreasonable that they lock down the SDK, well it's pissing off developers, losing them customers, and gaining them very little if anything other than a staunchly polarized developer base. How that benefits anyone is beyond comprehension.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #267 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Anyway, Adobe is run by a sales guy now, and seems to spend a lot of their resources on PR and bullshit like "The Open Screen Project" (i.e. if everybody users Adobe products for everything what a wonderfully interoperable world it would be), so I'm not sure they have the corporate culture to do anything but wage a PR initiative now. God forbid they write better software for the platform.

Screw you, Adobe.

I fail to see how the open screen project plays into your argument that Adobe is all about PR nor do I understand how a positive change to Flash is fodder for what appears to be unending hatred towards Flash as a platform and Adobe as a company. Do enlighten me. I await your profound and well informed retort.
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
Groupthink is bad, mkay. Think Different is the motto.
Reply
post #268 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

Flash 10.1 is currently supported in the SenseUI from HTC and runs perfectly well when you upgrade the ROM on even the Nexus One. It also runs on the HD2 and EVO phones on T-Mobile and Sprint..

I have seen nothing about Flash 10.1 being released. Do you have links to these non-Beta ROMs with Flash 10.1 included?

Quote:
As for how it's unreasonable that they lock down the SDK, well it's pissing off developers, losing them customers, and gaining them very little if anything other than a staunchly polarized developer base. How that benefits anyone is beyond comprehension.

Perhaps you should read this...
http://www.devwhy.com/blog/2010/4/12...framework.html
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #269 of 274
The Adobe evangelist seems like a petulant child.
Instead of acting like a spoiled brat maybe Adobe should've been creating instead.
One tactic works the other doesn't, especially with Jobs and Apple.
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
post #270 of 274
I can just set Apple aside for my own opinion on this one.

I've been disappointed and frustrated in Flash since the first day I saw it. I've never been into the fluffy stuff that makes me wait for downloads and makes my processors scream and ram disappear from available resources.

Macromedia/Adobe's "rich internet experience" has never been anything but a dog to me. I think it's too bad that so many designers have leaned so heavily on Flash based web "features" because there are a lot of us who suffer for it.

I use various Linux distros, 3 Windows versions, mac, iPod Touch, and even a Pocket PC. Flash stinks on every one of those that supports it. If Flash dies I consider it good riddance. Take that in the DreamWeaver pipe and smoke it.
post #271 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by alandail View Post

If Apple bought Adobe, it'd mean more than that - the windows version of CS5 would likely go away.

Not likely. Apple is well aware of the value of cross-platform apps--which is why they offer Safari, iTunes, etc on both platforms. Not to mention the enormous revenues from the Windows version.

I fully expect that their programmers have more knowledge of how to make the Mac version fly, so the Mac version would quickly outpace the Windows version, but there'd be no reason to drop it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

CS5 is the 64bit version of the creative suite. Nuff said.

Wrong. Not all the apps are 64 bit. Nuff said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

The newest android phones are cortex 8 and 9 or will be potentially tegra 1 and 2. Flash 10.1 is currently supported in the SenseUI from HTC and runs perfectly well when you upgrade the ROM on even the Nexus One. It also runs on the HD2 and EVO phones on T-Mobile and Sprint. Marketshare aside, those will be the next great phones to own. It runs amazingly well which makes me wonder what the hell you're trying to say about it being a resource hog. My guess is you have NO experience running flash on mobile and you're clearly repeating something you read somewhere that you bought into hook line and sinker. Good job.

NO ONE has any experience running a release version of Flash on mobile devices--because it doesn't exist. Flash Lite is greatly limited and almost useless. Flash 10.1 is still in beta - and most reports are that it's still slow. Furthermore, even if it came out today, the devices that you listed that would run it make up less than 1% of mobile devices. Every other phone developer apparently agrees with Apple - Flash doesn't belong on mobile devices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

As for how it's unreasonable that they lock down the SDK, well it's pissing off developers, losing them customers, and gaining them very little if anything other than a staunchly polarized developer base. How that benefits anyone is beyond comprehension.

How many developers have left the iPhone platform? Will their 185,000 apps drop to 184,000? At worst?

How many customers have left? If it's more than single digits, I'd be surprised. In fact, banning Flash may lead to MORE customers since the quality of the experience is better without Flash.

And what makes you think they're gaining little? Apple says it will help them ensure app quality. Why should we believe that you know more about it than Apple?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #272 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I'm sorry, but if you can't learn to develop for the OS, you're not needed. There are enough fart apps already that more mindless clones of existing junk is a waste. Apple is saying "we're happy to have all the quality apps we can get, but if you're not interested in making a good app, don't bother". I support that 100%. I'd much rather have 100 great apps than 10,000 cookie cutter garbage apps.

Since you can't defend your position rationally, you just accuse my products of being "fart apps" and "mindless clones?"

Have you ever creatively produced a product worth selling?
post #273 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHKOsta View Post

In a worst case scenario, Apple could buy 51-100% of Adobe...

One way to do that even more affordably might be to lower their market cap by orchestrating a series of events that lowers the value of the products the company sells.

Not that that's what's happening here, of course....
post #274 of 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by seek3r View Post

I was with you up to this point.

A) Adobe's stance on carbon should not mean that apple gets a free pass on trying to maintain complete control of the iphoneOS dev toolchain in such a manner.

B) Do you *really* think that IBM really hurt much by losing Apple? Apple didnt exactly make up a large piece of IBM's business, nor motorola's really. Between those companies you have the chips in nearly every current set-top box, microwave, gaming system... the list goes on (not to mention all the other areas Big Blue and motorola are in)

Apple is not unlikely to put Adobe out of business either. But ask anyone at IBM or Motorola who was involved with the clone licensing fiasco whether noses were put out of joint. You can bet there was a lot of behind the scenes angst over this; big companies like this are not used to small clients reneging on this scale. The only real difference now is Apple is one of the big guys, not a small upstart battling to stay ahead of Chapter 11.

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe evangelist lashes out at Apple over iPhone 4.0