AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe slips mobile Flash Player 10.1 to second half of 2010
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe slips mobile Flash Player 10.1 to second half of 2010

post #1 of 102
Thread Starter 
After mounting an intense attack on Apple for not supporting Flash on its iPhone OS mobile devices, Adobe has admitted that it will not be able to ship its promised Flash Player 10.1 for mobile platforms until the second half of the year.

Adobe's Flash Player 10.1 has been widely publicized as being the first version of the company's runtime that will enable mobile devices to play most of the Flash content originally designed for playback within web browsers running on the PC desktop.

The new 10.1 version was initially targeted at Android and Palm's webOS, with developer preview editions released over the last few months. Adobe has since committed to also supporting RIM's Blackberry OS, Symbian, and Microsoft's Windows Phone 7, which is slated for release this winter.

The company originally intended to release Flash 10.1 in the second half of 2009 (as depicted in the timeline below), then the first half of 2010. The latest slip now makes the release a year late. Despite its problems in delivering a real version of Flash for mobile devices, Adobe executives are seeking to pin the blame on Apple for not even wanting to wait for Adobe and its promised mobile Flash runtimes.

Engadget reports that Adobe's chief executive Shantanu Narayen told Fox Business that Apple's disinterest in bundling the upcoming Flash Player on the iPhone OS was a business rather then technology decision, and that it "hurts customers," even though his company hasn't ever shipped a full mobile version of Flash for any platform that actually works with the broad array of Flash content users might want to view.



There is no mobile version of Flash

Existing mobiles that say they run Flash really only support old versions of the runtime (such as Sony's PlayStation Portable, which runs Flash 6 from 2002, or the legacy Palm OS, which runs a very old version of Flash 5 from a decade ago) or Adobe's "Flash Lite," a version that does not even aspire to playback the same content as desktop versions (it is based on Flash 8 from 2005). Symbian and Windows Mobile are limited to Flash Lite playback.

Adobe's problems in delivering a real version of Flash for mobile platforms is complicated by the fact that most Flash content is not well suited to play on a small screen, and particularly not in a multitouch environment where desktop browser conventions of a mouse pointer and mouseover events are simply not present.

Flash is also hampered by the memory and processor limitations inherent in mobile devices. The upcoming 10.1 version of Flash for mobile devices will demand a fast Cortex A8 processor, which means it won't run on anything but the highest-end Android, Palm, Blackberry, and Symbian phones sold over the last several months. Even if Apple wanted to bundle Flash 10.1, it would only minimally work on the iPhone 3GS and newer products.

In February, Apple's chief executive Steve Jobs reportedly told executives from the Wall Street Journal that Flash was a CPU hog riddled with security holes and dismissed his interest in working with Adobe to fix Flash playback in saying, "we don't spend a lot of energy on old technology."

Adobe's inability to ship Flash Player 10.1 on schedule means that the company's current 0% share of the mobile market will continue through the second half of the year. The fact that more than half of the world's mobile web traffic is originating on devices running Apple's iPhone OS also means that Adobe won't gain more than a minority share of the mobile market even once it actually ships its first functional version of Flash for mobiles.

This is in stark contrast to the 96% installed base Adobe claims for Flash on desktop PCs. With mobile devices becoming an increasingly important way for content creators and advertisers to reach people, the fact that they simply can't currently do that using Flash is a serious problem for Adobe right now and into the near future.

Competition for Flash

Adobe also hopes to get Flash Player installed in tablet devices running Android and Chrome OS later this year in order to head off a similar issue with Apple's iPad, which will similarly not run Flash. If Flash becomes the primary way to deliver dynamic content, games, and apps for Android, it will frustrate Google from being able to build a competitive native platform that can attract custom mobile development. It will also impede Google's ability to push HTML5 as the preferred way to deliver applications on its upcoming Chrome OS.

In addition to facing competitive pressure from Apple's App Store and its viable business model as a market for third party developer's content and games, Adobe is also scrambling to make Flash competitive with the emerging HTML5, which enables web developers to deliver rich apps and multimedia playback without resorting to an external plugin.

Flash also faces threats from Microsoft's Silverlight. While Silverlight is currently confined (like Flash) to the PC desktop as a web browser plugin, Microsoft hopes to rapidly push its Flash-alternative platform into its mobile devices, making Silverlight the primary way to create apps for Windows Phone and Zune.

Like Google, Microsoft is currently pushing Flash as a competitive feature checkbox, apparently in an effort to create the impression that Flash is important to browsing the web on mobile devices, and that Apple's iPhone OS users are therefore missing out. Once Microsoft delivers a mobile version of Silverlight, its commitment to Flash could evaporate quickly however.
post #2 of 102
And Adobe is chastising Apple for not supporting a yet-to-be-released product? Epic Fail...
post #3 of 102
idiots
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #4 of 102
Excellent, another unbiased AI news story.
post #5 of 102
post #6 of 102
Flash has more than 0% mobile coverage, just because 10.x isn't out yet for mobile doesn't mean Flash is not supported.

For example the Nokia N900 has Flash 9.x and definitely can access any usual Flash sites, such as Disney content. YouTube plays natively as Flash too. Definitely usable and broadens access a lot.

This article makes it sound like 10.x is somehow a requirement for all Flash content. Much of the content out there is already supported on many mobile devices.

Apple could easily support the same level of Flash as N900/Maemo does, if they wish. Please, good arguments are one thing, but let's not make it sound like Flash isn't available for mobile.

It is available, it is usable and I use it daily.
post #7 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbera View Post

Flash has more than 0% mobile coverage, just because 10.x isn't out yet for mobile doesn't mean Flash is not supported.

For example the Nokia N900 has Flash 9.x and definitely can access any usual Flash sites, such as Disney content. YouTube plays natively as Flash too. Definitely usable and broadens access a lot.

This article makes it sound like 10.x is somehow a requirement for all Flash content. Much of the content out there is already supported on many mobile devices.

Apple could easily support the same level of Flash as N900/Maemo does, if they wish. Please, good arguments are one thing, but let's not make it sound like Flash isn't available for mobile.

It is available, it is usable and I use it daily.

Just curious: What kind of battery life does the Nokia N900 get when using Flash via its browser and YouTube? Also, what is the watt-hour rating of the battery in N900?
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #8 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark2005 View Post

Just curious: What kind of battery life does the Nokia N900 get when using Flash via its browser and YouTube? Also, do the watt-hour rating of the battery in N900?

Flash is just a small part of the overall experience, so no idea - but overall I charge every night or every other night but the latter is usually pushing it.
post #9 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbera View Post

Flash is just a small part of the overall experience, so no idea - but overall I charge every night or every other night but the latter is usually pushing it.

not even an anecdotal answer?
post #10 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbera View Post

Flash has more than 0% mobile coverage, just because 10.x isn't out yet for mobile doesn't mean Flash is not supported.

For example the Nokia N900 has Flash 9.x and definitely can access any usual Flash sites, such as Disney content. YouTube plays natively as Flash too. Definitely usable and broadens access a lot.

This article makes it sound like 10.x is somehow a requirement for all Flash content. Much of the content out there is already supported on many mobile devices.

Apple could easily support the same level of Flash as N900/Maemo does, if they wish. Please, good arguments are one thing, but let's not make it sound like Flash isn't available for mobile.

It is available, it is usable and I use it daily.

Flash to play YouTube videos instead of a dedicated player or HTML5 on an ARM-based device? I like my battery power and I like to use a quality ≥ 360p so Flash for YouTube is not the best option.

If Flash is so great on Maemo why did Mozilla disable it in Firefox Mobile when that would have been a great selling point? Performance?

Which phone plays Hulu and other sites that stream TV shows on Flash? All the ones I know of require Flash 10.x or greater and without Flash 10.1's HW acceleration there is absolutely no chance that this will even work on a Cortex-A8, much less slower ARM-based devices.

The fact is, this is not Apple's fault, this is Adobe's fault. We can speculate that if not for Apple's stance to not support Flash Lite, Adobe would not be as far as they are today with Flash 10.1 for mobiles. Credit also goes to MS' Silverlight for making Adobe try to compete on a different front. Adobe got lazy from a lack of competition and now they are paying for it dearly. This year we'll see a lot of video streaming sites move to HTML5 and dedicated players for mobiles, just like we've been seeing. Flash will no longer gain traction with streaming video sites.
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 #11 of 102
The fact you even have to write this article means that Apple could be doing a better job at PR. I didn't realize this and I tried to find Flash for my sister's Android phone. It makes this whole Flash whine ridiculous. How could it be on the iPad, when it's not even out yet!

Lame.
post #12 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbera View Post

Flash is just a small part of the overall experience, so no idea - but overall I charge every night or every other night but the latter is usually pushing it.

just a quick google search shows complaints about the N900's battery life even without being linked to flash. i guess it's not much of a bragging point, and most likely to be aggravated by flash. i have to wonder if 'small part of the overall experience' is a euphemism for 'problem'.

the good news: there seems to be a flash blocker for maemo!
post #13 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

just a quick google search shows complaints about the N900's battery life even without being linked to flash. i guess it's not much of a bragging point, and most likely to be aggravated by flash. i have to wonder if 'small part of the overall experience' is a euphemism for 'problem'.

the good news: there seems to be a flash blocker for maemo!

I think that is probably why Adobe has delayed it again. I've seen demos of 10.1 working on the Nexus One. The speed looks good for Flash games and sites, but the power usage and lack of video playback are deal breakers for users. If Adobe releases this without adequately tackling these things then everything Apple has been saying since 2007 will have been proved right by Adobe's own hand. The Flash cheerleaders will no longer have the "just wait and see" argument to fall back on. They have one shot to get this right or risk losing Flash to better, more efficient options for the foreseeable future.
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 #14 of 102
Seems Adobe simply is waiting the miracle new cpus and phones from the future (so, in 6 month )

I named that the "Windows 7 manuvre"
post #15 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I think that is probably why Adobe has delayed it again. I've seen demos of 10.1 working on the Nexus One. The speed looks good for Flash games and sites, but the power usage and lack of video playback are deal breakers for users. If Adobe releases this without adequately tackling these things then everything Apple has been saying since 2007 will have been proved right by Adobe's own hand. The Flash cheerleaders will no longer have the "just wait and see" argument to fall back on. They have one shot to get this right or risk losing Flash to better, more efficient options for the foreseeable future.

i think we're already past the point of no return. it almost seems like adobe is waiting for more powerful phones and a breakthrough in battery technology to make flash feasible on mobiles.
post #16 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbera View Post

Flash has more than 0% mobile coverage, just because 10.x isn't out yet for mobile doesn't mean Flash is not supported.

For example the Nokia N900 has Flash 9.x and definitely can access any usual Flash sites, such as Disney content. YouTube plays natively as Flash too. Definitely usable and broadens access a lot.

This article makes it sound like 10.x is somehow a requirement for all Flash content. Much of the content out the
re is already supported on many mobile devices.

Apple could easily support the same level of Flash as N900/Maemo does, if they wish. Please, good arguments are one thing, but let's not make it sound like Flash isn't available for mobile.

It is available, it is usable and I use it daily.



Imho, Let S.Jobs be S.Jobs or just go out and start your oun company. PS Name is Lemon Inc.
post #17 of 102
Ya know...

I can remember Adobe from the LaserWriter days... had friends who worked for them... they (Adobe) were good guys...

I can remember MacroMedia from the Marc Canter days, before Flash. They were good guys, too. I even enjoyed early Flash.


<opinion>

It appears that time has moved on, and it is likely that Flash has been left behind:

-- the future is mobile... if only based on millions of potential users.

-- By the time (if ever) Adobe delivers a viable mobile Flash solution there will be over 100 million smart mobile devices, all happily surfing the web, playing/streaming content and never missing Flash... (never looking back).

-- I suspect most of the significant content-deliverers will implement solutions using HTML5 (in addition to their current Flash solutions)... they've already started, and it will only snowball as these people clamor to reach this new marketplace of millions of targeted, qualified customers.


Oddly, this puts Adobe in the catbird seat. They could spearhead the delivery of services, tools and procedures to:

-- migrate existing Flash to HTML5

-- maintain compatibility to legacy Flash sites.

Adobe could develop and sell a Boffo IDE/SDK and lead the pack of "providers of interactive-content delivery" using open-source standards.

Are they agile enough... we shall see!

</opinion>

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #18 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by oomu View Post

Seems Adobe simply is waiting the miracle new cpus and phones from the future (so, in 6 month )

I named that the "Windows 7 manœuvre"

Is that anything like horse maneuver

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #19 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i think we're already past the point of no return. it almost seems like adobe is waiting for more powerful phones and a breakthrough in battery technology to make flash feasible on mobiles.

They might be. The demo videos of Flash 10.1 seem to all be on the Nexus One. By the time Flash 10.1 goes live it might just before Cortex-A9, bypassing A8 altogether. It certainly doesn't look like any ARM11 will get Flash 10.1, but it's still all Apple's fault.
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 #20 of 102
Die Baby Die!
post #21 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I think that is probably why Adobe has delayed it again. I've seen demos of 10.1 working on the Nexus One. The speed looks good for Flash games and sites, but the power usage and lack of video playback are deal breakers for users. If Adobe releases this without adequately tackling these things then everything Apple has been saying since 2007 will have been proved right by Adobe's own hand. The Flash cheerleaders will no longer have the "just wait and see" argument to fall back on. They have one shot to get this right or risk losing Flash to better, more efficient options for the foreseeable future.

If Adobe can't ship a decently-performing mobile version for Flash on at least one major smartphone OS by the end of this calendar year, I think their window of opportunity will be gone.

The onus is entirely on Adobe to get it done. Time is running out.
post #22 of 102
To Adobe I say... Bring That Baby On!
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #23 of 102
Reuters reports:

Beijing: Chinese government attacks human rights record of Apple

The Chinese government today released a statement strongly condemning the human rights record of Apple because of the following practices:

a) Apple's ongoing attack on the international not-for-profit philanthropic organisation known as Adobe. In particular the report noted Apple's ongoing suppression of Flash (the well known deoptimization and content delivery tax utility published by Adobe). The report noted that "this attack was particularly reprehensible given Adobe's record of support of Apple - an example being the very quick ten year development programme Adobe undertook to produce a fully native cocoa version of Creative Suite for the macintosh platform".

b) Apple's continuing overt control of the App publishing system for its own mobile platform (commonly known as the App Store). The effect of this has been to artificially raise the stability and attractiveness of Apple mobile apps far above the industry standard. A Chinese government spokesman said "its is clear that Apple's strategy of offering five times as many Apps as its nearest competitors seriously reduces the freedom of choice of consumers".

c) Apple's ongoing exercising of a monopoly business model. In particular the report notes Apples two most significant monopolies:

- a nearly total monopoly of computer and smart phone systems designed with good taste.

- a total monopoly of Microsoft-free, hassle-free personal computers.

In response to these findings the Chinese government has urged Apple to act immediately to hand control of App development to third parties by allowing cross platform development packages (thus lowing the quality of Apple's iPhone apps and ending its unfair and unique advantages over its competitors) and to immediately install Flash on all its mobile devices (so that it can destabilise and slow them down so that its competitors can catch up).

The Chinese Government urged Apple to work with YUCK (the International Association for the Promotion of Ugliness in Computing - currently chaired by Microsoft's Steve Balmer) in order to rapidly reduce the aesthetic pleasure enjoyed by users of Apple products. YUCK is in the process of referring the case of Jonathan Ives, the infamous employee of Apple, to the Hague International Tribunal to face charges of crimes against humanity.

Steve Jobs, the CEO of Apple, was unavailable for comment.
post #24 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Swash2 View Post

Reuters reports:

Beijing: Chinese government attacks human rights record of Apple...

ROFLMAO!

Actually, YUCK should go even further and insist that Apple release the Finder for all its mobile devices...

Cries of FTFMF would resound throughout the world!'

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #25 of 102
I'm one of this board's biggest Flash fans but Flash has no purpose on a mobile phone. In fact my belief is that regular html web sites have no purpose on a phone either. All developers should provide a dedicated iPhone web site that is optimized for a small screen. Flash is a very powerful application but it is only useful on the desktop.

Even on the desktop Flash ads have given Flash a bad name. Flash is like spray paint at the hardware store. If it weren't for graffiti criminals, they wouldn't have to lock up spray paint. Similarly, Flash ads are the curse of the internet so people need to run blockers. It still doesn't mean that Flash or spray paint are inherently evil themselves. There is a correct use for each.

iPad not being able to run Flash is more of a gray area except that most of the current Flash implementations are not designed for a touch interface, but if they we're, the iPad Flash experience might not be so bad, although the battery usage situation is still not optimal. Apple is willing to acknowledge that iPhone apps like Tom Tom are usually used when plugged into a power source so they get a pass on background multitasking. Maybe Flash should be allowed to run when the iPad is plugged in as well.

Furthermore, web developers need to start detecting lack of Flash and presence of Flash blockers and provide alternate content.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #26 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I'm one of this board's biggest Flash fans but Flash has no purpose on a mobile phone. In fact my belief is that regular html web sites have no purpose on a phone either. All developers should provide a dedicated iPhone web site that is optimized for a small screen. Flash is a very powerful application but it is only useful on the desktop.

I am one of the biggest opponents to Flash... I only use Mac computers and Apple mobile devices. However, I agree with the above... with one caveat: Ever since Flash MX, Flash has sucked on the Mac desktop!


Quote:
Even on the desktop Flash ads have given Flash a bad name. Flash is like spray paint at the hardware store. If it weren't for graffiti criminals, they wouldn't have to lock up spray paint. Similarly, Flash ads are the curse of the internet so people need to run blockers. It still doesn't mean that Flash or spray paint are inherently evil themselves. There is a correct use for each.

I also agree with this... same caveat.

I run Click2Flash and it has killed all the annoying ads (and their performance hits). When I want, I can enable Flash for a given [Flash] window and this works well... eliminates most hangs and browser crashes.

Quote:

iPad not being able to run Flash is more of a gray area except that most of the current Flash implementations are not designed for a touch interface,

Actually, this should be relatively easy to resolve... press-hold a Flash window and up pops a feature like a loupe-- that when moved over a mouse-over becomes a loupe-over.
Quote:



but if they we're, the iPad Flash experience might not be so bad, although the battery usage situation is still not optimal. Apple is willing to acknowledge that iPhone apps like Tom Tom are usually used when plugged into a power source so they get a pass on background multitasking. Maybe Flash should be allowed to run when the iPad is plugged in as well.

Furthermore, web developers need to start detecting lack of Flash and presence of Flash blockers and provide alternate content.

I wholeheartedly support this last statement... and Adobe should lead that effort, IMO.

.
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #27 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormj View Post

The fact you even have to write this article means that Apple could be doing a better job at PR. I didn't realize this and I tried to find Flash for my sister's Android phone. It makes this whole Flash whine ridiculous. How could it be on the iPad, when it's not even out yet!

Lame.

Apple doesn't talk about Flash anymore; it's yesterday's news. Jobs just said No when asked. No amplification, no nothing.

Apple is content to let Adobe do all the whining in public and be exposed for the fools they've turned into. But it's just sad that the media, reporters and analysts, can't do their jobs either.
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
"you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free."
Reply
post #28 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by stormj View Post

How could it be on the iPad, when it's not even out yet!

in the end it doesn't matter because even if it was out, it won't be on the ipad. partly because of the bug and batteries and partly because

Quote:
most Flash content is not well suited to play on a small screen, and particularly not in a multitouch environment where desktop browser conventions of a mouse pointer and mouseover events are simply not present.

Adobe is trying to counter the bug stuff by saying that it works great on X, Y and Z platforms so the issues are all on Apple's side. And yet they don't have the product on the market so they have no actual data to back themselves up. At least with this latest version. And the fact that they are having issues getting a full version of Flash 10 out on any mobile OS is not going to help audience perception. The most issues and delays they have the more folks might start to believe that Apple has a point. At least among the non tech heads that want something that is cost effective and won't give them headaches with crashes, battery wipeouts etc
post #29 of 102
the emperor has no clothes!
post #30 of 102
All of this Flash nonsense just proves once again - we should trust Steve. He knows quite a bit more than any of us. All of you whiners - go off and Flash your Droid. Droid - what a crappy name.

Ray
post #31 of 102
I just have to laugh to myself whenever anyone throws "HTML5 is the Flash killer" around.
It seems most people don't really know HTML or what HTML5's video tag really does.
The argument about HTML5 replacing Flash doesn't really make sense.

<video> tag replacing an <embed> tag makes more sense.

The video tag requires your browser to have codecs already installed with the browser, and there lies the problem.
Because of a beautiful thing called capitalism, everyone wants their codec to be the standard.
So, the idea was to make the Ogg format the standard, and I support this. However, Apple did not, as with others, and so there is no standard at the present time.

Apple stated that the mpeg4 codec should be standard, but that goes against the "open-source" standard the w3c basically stands for.

This is one major reason why Flash will be around for quite some time.
I personally think it should be either replaced or updated or something, but I do not think Adobe is "dead". Quite the contrary. I, and many other designers will always use their other products, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator and the like -- which runs best on a Mac.
post #32 of 102
LOL imagine that! Adobe pushes a release back? Adobe still doesn't fully support mobile? Adobe is still BLAMING everyone but themselves???

One word... WOW
post #33 of 102
I wonder how this bonehead is going to spin it.

(And check out his personal 'bio', if that's what it's supposed to be.)
post #34 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Ya know...

I can remember Adobe from the LaserWriter days... had friends who worked for them... they (Adobe) were good guys...

I can remember MacroMedia from the Marc Canter days, before Flash. They were good guys, too. I even enjoyed early Flash.


<opinion>

It appears that time has moved on, and it is likely that Flash has been left behind:

-- the future is mobile... if only based on millions of potential users.

-- By the time (if ever) Adobe delivers a viable mobile Flash solution there will be over 100 million smart mobile devices, all happily surfing the web, playing/streaming content and never missing Flash... (never looking back).

-- I suspect most of the significant content-deliverers will implement solutions using HTML5 (in addition to their current Flash solutions)... they've already started, and it will only snowball as these people clamor to reach this new marketplace of millions of targeted, qualified customers.


Oddly, this puts Adobe in the catbird seat. They could spearhead the delivery of services, tools and procedures to:

-- migrate existing Flash to HTML5

-- maintain compatibility to legacy Flash sites.

Adobe could develop and sell a Boffo IDE/SDK and lead the pack of "providers of interactive-content delivery" using open-source standards.

Are they agile enough... we shall see!

</opinion>

.

You make very good points, and I remember those early days, too.

I love Adobe products and use them every day in my work--with the exception of Flash.

At first, I thought the Flash converter to iPhone OS was rather ingenious. But when Apple recently started prohibiting it, I understood the logic. Apple needs to be in control of the entire iPhone OS ecosystem. It's as simple at that.

Apple's initial stance on Flash makes sense, too. It's too cumbersome in its present form to be viable on ANY modile device, much less Apple products.

Though mileage obviously differs with different users, I for one don't really miss Flash beyond the occasional annoyance of not being able to visit a Flash site from time to time.

Apple is leading the mobile industry, and there is no valid reason for Apple to "give in" on accommodating "old technology". There wasn't any mobile to speak of when Adobe acquired Flash, and there were plenty of Windoze machines for it to run on. "Human Interface Guidelines"? Yeah right. Only Apple cared about that. And Apple had been a second-class citizen from Adobe's vantage point.

So there was no reason for Adobe to suspect or predict that it would be painting itself into a sticky corner by happily rolling along on what appeared to be a nice ride with Flash. How could they have foreseen Apple busting into mobile and therefore caring like no one else cared about the user experience on small battery-powered devices with limited computing power?

The ball is in Adobe's court. There are worse situations under the sun than if the effort to make Flash viable ultimately fails.

If the future lies with HTML5, Adobe better have the humility to eat its flock of crow and move on into making some good mobile development tools of its own.
Daniel Swanson
Van-garde Imagery, Inc.
611 S. Ft. Harrison #365
Clearwater FL, 33756
http://www.van-garde.com
dan@van-garde.com
Reply
Daniel Swanson
Van-garde Imagery, Inc.
611 S. Ft. Harrison #365
Clearwater FL, 33756
http://www.van-garde.com
dan@van-garde.com
Reply
post #35 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeroinfinity2 View Post

I just have to laugh to myself whenever anyone throws "HTML5 is the Flash killer" around.
It seems most people don't really know HTML or what HTML5's video tag really does.
The argument about HTML5 replacing Flash doesn't really make sense.

<video> tag replacing an <embed> tag makes more sense.

Saying "HTML5" mostly just shorthand. Easier to type/say than "HTML5 <video> tag" all the time. Not a big deal.

Quote:
The video tag requires your browser to have codecs already installed with the browser, and there lies the problem.
Because of a beautiful thing called capitalism, everyone wants their codec to be the standard.
So, the idea was to make the Ogg format the standard, and I support this. However, Apple did not, as with others, and so there is no standard at the present time.

Apple stated that the mpeg4 codec should be standard, but that goes against the "open-source" standard the w3c basically stands for.

I agree. This is currently a problem. But the codec should not be defined in the HTML spec. The same way GIF, JPEG, and PNG are not defined in the HTML spec. Remember how long it took to get full PNG support in IE? Yup, IE7. BTW, the format isn't Ogg, it's Ogg Theora (I can be pedantic, too!). Ogg also failed with Vorbis, their answer to MP3, which like h.264 is encumbered with patents.

Quote:
This is one major reason why Flash will be around for quite some time.

I dunno. If the weight continues to go to h.264 (see YouTube and Vimeo HTML5 betas, and yes, Pink Visual [NSFW] mobile pr0n), both the Ogg Theora and Flash will be left behind.

Quote:
I personally think it should be either replaced or updated or something, but I do not think Adobe is "dead". Quite the contrary. I, and many other designers will always use their other products, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Illustrator and the like -- which runs best on a Mac.

Agreed. Photoshop, Illustrator and other parts of their product range aren't going anywhere any time soon. But guess what! Dreamweaver can do HTML5 including dynamic graphics.

That being said, you'll pry my aging copy of Freehand out of my cold, dead hands. Well, at least until it no longer runs on OS X.
post #36 of 102
Quote:
I dunno. If the weight continues to go to h.264 (see YouTube and Vimeo HTML5 betas, and yes, Pink Visual [NSFW] mobile pr0n), both the Ogg Theora and Flash will be left behind.

Actually, it looks like Google are going to open-source VP8. So if the licensing on h.264 ever reignites, it could be left behind too. But I don't think that is going to happen. And because Adobe and sites like Wikipedia (which would have to re-encode everything) have such a big market share in the desktop world, Flash and Ogg Theora aren't going to die straight away.
post #37 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woode View Post

But guess what! Dreamweaver can do HTML5 including dynamic graphics.

Apparently this didn't make it into CS5. Not a good move by Adobe to not finish this feature. I guess they thought that HTML5 wouldn't be implemented by designers/developers as soon as it has. Mind you the spec is still in its infancy.
post #38 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by simantic View Post

Apparently this didn't make it into CS5. Not a good move by Adobe to not finish this feature. I guess they thought that HTML5 wouldn't be implemented by designers/developers as soon as it has. Mind you the spec is still in its infancy.

The thing about HTML5 is it is the domain of hand coders. There are not WYSIWYG authoring development environments for it (nor should there be IMO). Dreamweaver is presented as a split screen code/design application, not that many people use it that way but never the less anyone promoting HTML5 should go code some before posting so authoritatively about its merits and ease of use, as many on this board routinely do.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #39 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by simantic View Post

Actually, it looks like Google are going to open-source VP8. So if the licensing on h.264 ever reignites, it could be left behind too. But I don't think that is going to happen. And because Adobe and sites like Wikipedia (which would have to re-encode everything) have such a big market share in the desktop world, Flash and Ogg Theora aren't going to die straight away.

Seriously, besides Wikipedia (the only reason I installed Theora and Vorbis plug-ins on my Mac), who uses any Ogg codecs? Other than sites promoting Ogg stuff, I've never encountered a site that used Theora or Vorbis. Ever. Ogg is dead if they can't get more of the industry behind Theora for HTML5 video. I'll be hugely shocked if they pull it off.

VP8, now that's interesting. Remember, even on the Mac you need plug-ins for video (which are actually plug-ins for Quicktime, not Safari -- h.264 is handled by Quicktime, not Safari/WebKit itself). So you'd need a plug-in for VP8 too, but that would be much more likely to happen if the codec is open, and of better quality than Theora as claimed. However, iPhone/iPad is still up in the air: Apple would have to build-in support for VP8 in Quicktime for those devices, since you obviously can't install plug-ins.

I really don't see the "codec wars" being very protracted. The mobile market is exploding, and he who has the biggest clout in the mobile space is going to set the defacto codec, the same way Microsoft set defacto (if infuriating) web standards for so long with Internet Explorer.

I'd like to see an open codec over h.264 (MPEG LA's extension of free h.264 licensing notwithstanding) and I hope VP8 has a shot. I'd actually bet on it over Theora, because of Google's pull. Actually, I can envision the fight being between h.264 and VP8, with Theora dying in the crossfire. We shall see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by simantic View Post

Apparently this didn't make it into CS5. Not a good move by Adobe to not finish this feature. I guess they thought that HTML5 wouldn't be implemented by designers/developers as soon as it has. Mind you the spec is still in its infancy.

Bummer! Honestly, I'd wager that it's the HTML5 <canvas> element that's making Adobe's butt pucker, even more than HTML5 video. Have you seen what it can do? Adobe was alleged to have been actively blocking the <canvas> tag in the HTML spec. Because which would a n00b rather play with: free <canvas> and JavaScript, or shell out big dollars for Flash? (Even if Flash's dev environment is putatively better.)

[edited to quote re: <canvas> not in CS5]
post #40 of 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The thing about HTML5 is it is the domain of hand coders. There are not WYSIWYG authoring development environments for it (nor should there be IMO). Dreamweaver is presented as a split screen code/design application, not that many people use it that way but never the less anyone promoting HTML5 should go code some before posting so authoritatively about its merits and ease of use, as many on this board routinely do.

Why shouldn't there be an authoring environment for HTML5? Are you forgetting that all those CMSs and authoring environments out there ultimately have to generate HTML, otherwise the browsers couldn't do anything with their output. They could spit out HTML5 just as easily. So, ultimately, it really isn't just the domain of the hand coder, because if I want to embed video using the established standard (HTML5 video tag or whatever), then my authoring environment needs to be able to let me do that. What you're saying is nonsensical.

That said, if you're a web designer and can't code raw HTML, you suck at your job.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe slips mobile Flash Player 10.1 to second half of 2010