or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe abandons development of Flash-to-iPhone porting software
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe abandons development of Flash-to-iPhone porting software - Page 4

post #121 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i don't think this is about video playback. that train has left the platform. 3 years of iphone, and the support for other solutions by youtube/vimeo and maybe soon hulu prove that you don't need flash for that. i don't think adobe was pushing their flash-to-iphone development platform to put more flash video online.


What's this hulu thing? Remember 96% of the worlds population doesn't care about a restricted US product. At the moment the local TV streaming available here is still Flash, and while flash is a resource hog, a massive resource hog, a damn pig of a resource hog, it seems to be a lot more reliable than HTML5 via Safari on Youtube

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

h264 is licensed free until 2015 (?) i think. i sure hope we're not going to drag out this discussion until then...

No, but in 2015 when everyone is using h.264 what happens when the mpeg-la starts passing the hat around?
post #122 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihxo View Post

Given the fact that Adobe got their start with Mac People, why would they suddenly turn on Adobe? Mac People must be mentally unstable.

Where in the world did that come from. I said that Mac users have a legitimate complaint with Adobe, so there is no implication of Mac users being mentally unstable.
post #123 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

good one, actually. It seems fanboysm does tend to distort reality field even further

The difference is one of momentum.

While Apple loves to laud the 185k or so apps they have in the store they've become more and more aggressive about weeding out the garbage (explicit stuff recently ) and now they are pre-emptively attacking "tribble" like spawning of "me too" apps created with cookie cutter meta platforms.

The app store is not a Democracy and for that i'm glad.
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 #124 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

no. i'm not saying that. i said that if adobe had been more pro-active in getting flash on osx up to snuff years ago, there would have been a much better chance in getting flash on the iphone.

we were all speculating if flash would be part of the iphone in 2007, and at the time there was no definite 'no. never. not ever.' coming from apple (iirc). i think steve jobs' comments (resource hog, battery life, cpu killer) didn't surface until later, probably after adobe showed them work in progress (admittedly pure speculation on my part).

i seem to recall that jobs was dismissing flash lite pretty much right away as 'useless'. maybe we read too much into it at the time, but adobe was talking a lot about bringing a full flash version for mobiles out. it was just around the corner. and has been for three years now.

we have to remember also that at the time of the iphone launch, nobody could have predicted it to be a runaway success. i'm sure that apple is more confident now than they were back then and have adjusted their roadmap accordingly. three years of no-flash iphone sales do prove that apple doesn't need flash.

if adobe pulls it off, they might want it at some point. time will tell. i wouldn't bet money on it.

What you say is true, but much of that is water under the bridge. Woulda, coulda, shoulda so to speak.

I was talking about right now, given the state of affairs, Adobe may not see much of a point in trying to pull it off.

As to whether Apple does not need it, we shall see. People buy the iPhone for lots of reasons, and few of them involve Flash. However, the iPad is being billed as a media consumption device and the "perfect" way to browse the web. Initial sales have been excellent, but I remember reading something to the extent that sales were mostly from Apple owners. The question is what happens when none Apple owners start to buy the iPad (if they do) and see that Flash does not work.
post #125 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihxo View Post

I think Flash on desktop is a good indicator for the same crap on phone.

You are kidding yourself if you say that flash is working great for you, whether you are on mac, windows or linux.

Do you have any clue what you're talking about or are you here just saying things that "go along" with what you think everyone at a site like this should say or think?

Please show me these flash sites that don't work great for ANYONE.
post #126 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Where in the world did that come from. I said that Mac users have a legitimate complaint with Adobe, so there is no implication of Mac users being mentally unstable.

but you seems to think that it's ok for Adobe to keep not give a crap about Mac People.
On the other hand keep whining about how Apple tell them to go F themselves.
You can't have it both ways ....
unless of course you are b .... l and having a t.......e......

Maybe I am in the bizarro world. I need to wake up.
post #127 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

What you say is true, but much of that is water under the bridge. Woulda, coulda, shoulda so to speak.

I was talking about right now, given the state of affairs, Adobe may not see much of a point in trying to pull it off.

As to whether Apple does not need it, we shall see. People buy the iPhone for lots of reasons, and few of them involve Flash. However, the iPad is being billed as a media consumption device and the "perfect" way to browse the web. Initial sales have been excellent, but I remember reading something to the extent that sales were mostly from Apple owners. The question is what happens when none Apple owners start to buy the iPad (if they do) and see that Flash does not work.

i think we're on the same page. i don't really see flash ever happen on the iWhatever. what i think will happen though is that the content providers are going to drop flash for video delivery (that's what you're really talking about, right), or will at least provide alternate solutions. it's not in their interest to stick with flash if fairly big parts of a choice demographic can't consume their offerings. for them it's about eyeballs, not about technology. whether or not it's feasible for them is another question. i'd say that's their issue to sort out. some won't i'm sure. the big boys will and have started to.

as far as 'most are from apple users' goes - the same was predicted about the ipod, then the iphone... only time will tell i guess. the window of opportunity is certainly smaller than it was with the iphone.

keeps it interesting though, eh?
post #128 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

SNIP

Please show me these flash sites that don't work great for ANYONE.

http://flashcrash.dempsky.org/

sorry. i couldn't resist.
then again - now that i think about it - i guess it DOE'S work for everybody...

post #129 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert View Post

Flash 9 and Flash 10 already run on mobile devices FAR BETTER than anything in HTML5 and Canvas which you probably don't know is ONLY A DRAFT! Dude, you guys are pimping something that's not even adopted or finalized! When Flash Player 10.1 hits all the android, symbian, windows, and rim devices, the cheese will stand alone.

There is no such thing as "Flash 9" and "Flash 10" on mobile devices. There is currently no working flash on mobile devices. 10.1 (when it leaves beta) will be the first. i.e. - you got it completely backwards.

Also, just as general food for thought .... Apple has a history of having closed systems and platforms at first, and then gradually opening them up as they gain traction. The reason to leave Flash off of the iPhone is it sucks, a mobile version didn't even exist, and it's proprietary. Apple has made some significant progress in getting others to agree with them and remove Flash content from the web.

If on the other hand, 4 or 5 years after platform introduction, it turns out there *is* a mobile version of Flash, that it *does* work on other platforms and it also gains in popularity, Apple will put Flash on the iPhone quick as a wink.

They aren't stupid, and the fight is not as ideological as many people think. It's a highly practical goal to get the web off of Flash, but if it starts to interfere with their products and acceptance of same, they will swivel right around.
post #130 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

I have recent (and continued) personal experience that shows that Flash is, in fact, a resource hog on a Mac.

I had run a couple of YouTube Flash videos... all had completed... only one open window had a Flash player in it... the Flash player was not running:




This was run on a 2.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo iMac 24 with 4GB RAM


This person, agrees with this Jobs truth, because it is consistent with my own experience.

.

I honestly had no clue. My God. Ok, my position just changed: Adobe shouldn't bring flash to the iphone because obviously the OS can't handle it.



(4 youtube vids playing, 21% cpu utilization. Intel C2D at 3 ghz, 2gb of ram.)
post #131 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruel24 View Post

Ummmm, no! What has ruined the PC gaming market is Microsoft's entry into the game console market: The XBox and XBox 360. Consoles have always been around, but the current crop of high powered consoles combined with 1080P HDTV's and Microsoft's ignoring of PC gaming to foster the XBox has all but ruined the PC gaming market.

No, not really. Original Xbox was completely marginal. 360 is doing great, but thinking of it, there's only a handful of 360 exclusives not available on PC - games like Fable, GOW1, Halo 1 and 2... did appear on PC, though some did with delay.

As it is, MS is trying to strike some sort of balance - no matter how 360 platform is important for them gaming wise, "Games for Windows" business is also important. Without healthy Windows gaming, many of MS allies will suffer (as games are strong motive for home users to purchase new hardware) and whole MS home market share might suffer as well as there is number of people sticking with Windows at their homes primarily because of games. Without games, OSX platform would be much more competitive to Windows platform for home users.

I think that Sony and Nintendo are hurting PC gaming much more than MS - their exclusives remain their exclusives for lifetime. We might see GOW2 and Halo3 on PC at some point, but Gran Tourismo, God of War or any Mario game we will never see.

But at the end of the day, what hurts Windows gaming most are... gamers. Much as I recall, majority of multiplatform games will sell better on consoles than on PC. Pirating does have impact, but it's not only that. Gaming on consoles is more casual and more social as well. Playing FIFA10 with your mate in your living room, from sofa, on big screen beats the crap out of playing FIFA with your mate in study, sitting on chairs and squeezing in front of 24" monitor. Even gaming alone, living room is much more relaxing than sitting at the desk - especially if you sit at the desk most of your work time. Plus, no one cheats on console online games (major reason for me).

I have more than decent PC, yet since I got PS3 for Christmas, I purchased 24 PS3 games and only 1 PC game (Mass Effect 2). I haven't even downloaded any PC game in the meantime - heck, I haven't even played PC game I've purchased yet. In time, as the technology gap will spread between PC and PS3, I will get more into PC gaming, but at present numbers are obvious.
post #132 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I honestly had no clue. My God. Ok, my position just changed: Adobe shouldn't bring flash to the iphone because obviously the OS can't handle it.

(4 youtube vids playing, 21% cpu utilization. Intel C2D at 3 ghz, 2gb of ram.)

The issue is that Windows is perfectly okay with having a web plug-in have direct access to hardware acceleration. You know, the way things used to be done in 1991?

If you call that an OS "handling it" your dreaming. No decent OS would allow it.
post #133 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

What's this hulu thing? Remember 96% of the worlds population doesn't care about a restricted US product. At the moment the local TV streaming available here is still Flash, and while flash is a resource hog, a massive resource hog, a damn pig of a resource hog, it seems to be a lot more reliable than HTML5 via Safari on Youtube

No, but in 2015 when everyone is using h.264 what happens when the mpeg-la starts passing the hat around?

actually - being in canada, i don't have access to hulu myself, it just seems to be brought up as a talking point every time flash video is discussed....

i obviously don't know what will happen in five years. but h264 is not the only codec available. the members of mpeg-la will have to determine if this is about licensing fees or standards. then again - this is also going to be an issue for any h264 that's being wrapped in flash right now, isn't it?
post #134 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihxo View Post

but you seems to think that it's ok for Adobe to keep not give a crap about Mac People.
On the other hand keep whining about how Apple tell them to go F themselves.
You can't have it both ways ....
unless of course you are b .... l and having a t.......e...........

Maybe I am in the bizarro world. I need to wake up.

First off, the ad hominem rhetoric is completely unnecessary.

Second, at a certain level it is ok for Adobe not to give Mac people optimized software, just as I think it is ok for Apple to bar Flash on the iPhone.

In both instances, the companies are making decisions about their products, and as such it is ok.

Do I agree with Adobe's position. No, I think it is stupid, but it is their product and they can do with it as they please.

The point I am making is that behavior has its consequences. Adobe put out crappy software for a long time, and pissed Mac users off. Behavior and consequences.

Likewise, being barred from the iPhone platform and the vitriolic posts of Mac users, could have the effect of decreasing any incentive that Adobe may have to change.
post #135 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

There is no such thing as "Flash 9" and "Flash 10" on mobile devices. There is currently no working flash on mobile devices. 10.1 (when it leaves beta) will be the first. i.e. - you got it completely backwards.

SNIP

i thought so too, but somebody corrected me: there is a version of flash 9 that works on nokia's maemo platform on the Nsomethingorother. doesn't work with all files though. close - but no cigar.
post #136 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

HTML5 is free. Flash requires a license, and therefore it's Adobe's way of having control over the web (or something.)

What Adobe needs to do is highlight what flash can do that html5 can't.

To be perfectly honest, I think most people don't even care beyond watching videos on the web. I like to play a ren and stimpy fart cannon game every once in a while lol.

Isn't it the other way around? Since Flash was here before HTML5, shouldn't Apple (or HTML5 people) need to highlight what HTML5 can do that Flash can't? Why should whole industry replace one existing, wide-spread standard for another - that just does the same (and is not even fully standardised yet)?
post #137 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

First off, the ad hominem rhetoric is completely unnecessary.

Second, at a certain level it is ok for Adobe not to give Mac people optimized software, just as I think it is ok for Apple to bar Flash on the iPhone.

In both instances, the companies are making decisions about their products, and as such it is ok.

Do I agree with Adobe's position. No, I think it is stupid, but it is their product and they can do with it as they please.

The point I am making is that behavior has its consequences. Adobe put out crappy software for a long time, and pissed Mac users off. Behavior and consequences.

Likewise, being barred from the iPhone platform and the vitriolic posts of Mac users, could have the effect of decreasing any incentive that Adobe may have to change.

the difference of course is that a big chunk of adobe's bottom line depends on mac users. their responsibility to their shareholders should theoretically influence their decision making.

as far as 'vitriolic posts from mac users' - cranky users on their respective soapbox (guilty as charged at times, i admit) are one thing - company officials spouting vitriolic rhetoric like 'screw apple' is quite another.
post #138 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihxo View Post

I think Flash on desktop is a good indicator for the same crap on phone.

You are kidding yourself if you say that flash is working great for you, whether you are on mac, windows or linux.

My apologies, but it works fine on all my Windows machines - even single core P4 at the office. I can't recall any issue I had with Flash content recently, say last 2 years or so (since I moved to Vista and 7 later on). Likewise everyone else in my office and at home.

I can't even recall getting any support call from our clients that turned out to be Flash related. But then again, we don't have Apple clients. \
post #139 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I know nothing of this Farmville, my fine fellow.

Nor I, but many of the Flash proponents say we can't live without it.
post #140 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

The difference is one of momentum.

While Apple loves to laud the 185k or so apps they have in the store they've become more and more aggressive about weeding out the garbage (explicit stuff recently ) and now they are pre-emptively attacking "tribble" like spawning of "me too" apps created with cookie cutter meta platforms.

The app store is not a Democracy and for that i'm glad.

I will start respecting them more once they weed out garbage based on it's content, and not only on platform it is made with.

Of course that would cripple some of their PR efforts, so it's unlikely to happen any time soon.
post #141 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

I will start respecting them more once they weed out garbage based on it's content, and not only on platform it is made with.

Of course that would cripple some of their PR efforts, so it's unlikely to happen any time soon.

there have been a few culls. have they been 'only on platform' or on content?
i think you know the answer to that...
post #142 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

This has been one of the big arguments against Adobe all along. No regard for Mac users.

So just dump them. Apple and the rest of us are moving on. The more Adobe and old shiftless-Shantanu drag their feet with Mac products, the more incentive there is for other more enterprising developers to come up with alternatives (and the more incentive for Apple to move some of its $40 billion to help them.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1948 View Post

With all the problems Graphic Designers had with the Snow Leopard vs Adobe products when we all upgraded was an eye opener for me. Total crashes of Adobe products and this was after they (Adobe) said that their products weere compatible. HOGWASH.

Now my Illustrator version (CS3) will not work with SL and Adobe will not upgrade their product.

I am moving on no more dollars for Adobe products/upgrades.

Flash is dead!

I am with both of you. I hope some new company comes along and gives Adobe a run for its money. I am sick to death of Adobe.

MacBook Pro | iPad (3rd gen)
Samsung Galaxy Note

Reply

MacBook Pro | iPad (3rd gen)
Samsung Galaxy Note

Reply
post #143 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i obviously don't know what will happen in five years. but h264 is not the only codec available. the members of mpeg-la will have to determine if this is about licensing fees or standards. then again - this is also going to be an issue for any h264 that's being wrapped in flash right now, isn't it?

Yes that is true, but I'm am at a lost to understand why so many people think the worlds problems will disappear when flash does, all that will happen is a new problem will turn up.
post #144 of 166
Apple have lost credibility over this and they haven't gained anything.

Adobe were on the right track by moving away from their proprietary plug-in and toward generating native apps for the iPhone.

It's not going to hurt Apple's bottom line though, the tech market has proven they are happy to purchase from unscrupulous and deceitful companies, so at the end of the day I doubt Apple execs will care.
post #145 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

Apple have lost credibility over this and they haven't gained anything.

Adobe were on the right track by moving away from their proprietary plug-in and toward generating native apps for the iPhone.

It's not going to hurt Apple's bottom line though, the tech market has proven they are happy to purchase from unscrupulous and deceitful companies, so at the end of the day I doubt Apple execs will care.

The apps are Native if you're talking about leveraging the full API set from Apple. Flash tools would only create Native support in the areas the the Flash tool had mapped to Cocoa Touch.

No Apple hasn't lost credibility because the people walking into AT&T and buying iPhones don't give a flying leap about how the apps got there they just want good apps that work.
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 #146 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I honestly had no clue. My God. Ok, my position just changed: Adobe shouldn't bring flash to the iphone because obviously the OS can't handle it.



(4 youtube vids playing, 21% cpu utilization. Intel C2D at 3 ghz, 2gb of ram.)

*******

Your showing him how CPU non-intensive Flash is on Windows as a bench mark?

The same throttle is here on Linux as well.

UNIX/Unix-based operating systems are the oldest, most standards based platforms currently running, outside of VAX.

How poorly or well Flash runs on Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris, OpenSolaris, IRIX, AIX, RISC OS, HP-UX, etc, is due to Adobe's poor implementation for Flash on Non-Windows NT/XP/VISTA/7 systems.
post #147 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Dude, you are pimping Flash Player 10.1, which doesn't exist!

I love this particular brand of irrationality. Cheese indeed!

Or better yet, ``Dude we're pimping HTML5, WebGL, SVG1.1/1.2/2.0, CSS3 and more because they all are rolling rapidly into Safari, Chrome, Opera, Firefox, Epiphany, IE9, etc....''

Right now, Epiphany 2.30 is now out and in trunk, the small team of GTK+ devs are restructuring the Pasteboard framework for Epiphany back into WebCore and already rolling WebKit2 into Epiphany trunk.

Clearly, Adobe has a vested interest in their $4.5 Billion for Macromedia and this board is beginning to prove it wasn't a wise investment.
post #148 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i think we're on the same page. i don't really see flash ever happen on the iWhatever. what i think will happen though is that the content providers are going to drop flash for video delivery (that's what you're really talking about, right), or will at least provide alternate solutions. it's not in their interest to stick with flash if fairly big parts of a choice demographic can't consume their offerings. for them it's about eyeballs, not about technology. whether or not it's feasible for them is another question. i'd say that's their issue to sort out. some won't i'm sure. the big boys will and have started to.

as far as 'most are from apple users' goes - the same was predicted about the ipod, then the iphone... only time will tell i guess. the window of opportunity is certainly smaller than it was with the iphone.

keeps it interesting though, eh?

I saw an article, in the last day or so, that 40% of iPad users run Windows... Too lazy to find a link.

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #149 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I honestly had no clue. My God. Ok, my position just changed: Adobe shouldn't bring flash to the iphone because obviously the OS can't handle it.



(4 youtube vids playing, 21% cpu utilization. Intel C2D at 3 ghz, 2gb of ram.)

First: what you see in my post is the Flash plugin only... That's Adobe's code, not the OS.

Second: I can play a lot of YouTube vids, concurrently, too.. While rendering a Final Cut Studio hires vid at the same time. The hardware, OS, apps, etc. all work well together... This is not a pissing contest!

The odd man out is the Flash Plugin, downloaded from the Adobe site. It, just sucks!

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #150 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

The issue is that Windows is perfectly okay with having a web plug-in have direct access to hardware acceleration. You know, the way things used to be done in 1991?

If you call that an OS "handling it" your dreaming. No decent OS would allow it.

I thought hardware acceleration is coming in 10.1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

Isn't it the other way around? Since Flash was here before HTML5, shouldn't Apple (or HTML5 people) need to highlight what HTML5 can do that Flash can't? Why should whole industry replace one existing, wide-spread standard for another - that just does the same (and is not even fully standardised yet)?

Adobe has to justify the price of going with Flash. HTML5 could come up short, but so long as it did the same major functions for free, it's Adobe who has to show why flash is the way to go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Ever get mistaken for a fence post?

Your showing him how CPU non-intensive Flash is on Windows as a bench mark?

The same throttle is here on Linux as well.

UNIX/Unix-based operating systems are the oldest, most standards based platforms currently running, outside of VAX.

How poorly or well Flash runs on Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris, OpenSolaris, IRIX, AIX, RISC OS, HP-UX, etc, is due to Adobe's poor implementation for Flash on Non-Windows NT/XP/VISTA/7 systems.

Ever start your responses out without an insult? HI THERE [!]

I was showing him my cpu load doing something that apparently uses more than 100% of cpu utilization on a Mac? BTW anyone else find something wrong with saying "more than 100%"?

You bring up those other operating systems, but what kind of demographic uses them? I mean how often will someone want to check out hulu on IRIX?

Your bringing up those operating systems as proof Flash sucks is like me bringing up how HTML5 uses more cpu utilization in Windows than it does in OSX (which is a fact) and then saying HTML5 sucks.
post #151 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

First: what you see in my post is the Flash plugin only... That's Adobe's code, not the OS.

Second: I can play a lot of YouTube vids, concurrently, too.. While rendering a Final Cut Studio hires vid at the same time. The hardware, OS, apps, etc. all work well together... This is not a pissing contest!

The odd man out is the Flash Plugin, downloaded from the Adobe site. It, just sucks!

.

Sorry if I didn't follow you entirely. I'm not an osx user.

So you're saying just the act of having the plugin installed and running uses the cpu, but then everything flows just fine afterwards?

I'm a little lost lol. (And no, I didn't mean for it to be a pissing contest.)
post #152 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Clearly, Adobe has a vested interest in their $4.5 Billion for Macromedia and this board is beginning to prove it wasn't a wise investment.

Why!? It's used EVERYWHERE.
post #153 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

Sorry if I didn't follow you entirely. I'm not an osx user.

So you're saying just the act of having the plugin installed and running uses the cpu, but then everything flows just fine afterwards?

I'm a little lost lol. (And no, I didn't mean for it to be a pissing contest.)

Here's what frequently happens on OS X

1) run non-Flash-- many apps, starting, stopping, all play well together... Occasional errant app aborts, with no effect on system. Go weeks without any problems or reboots.

2) as above, browse to many Flash sites... Slows entire system down, mem leaks, eventually need to abort Flash plugin... Acts like an enema. (Apple recently made Flash plugin run as a separate process so it wouldn't crash the browser).

The problem is that Adobe's Flash plugin (Adobe code) doesn't perform well or reliably on Mac OS X.

The situation I posted was after running several YT Flash vids, one at a time. Then any browser window with Flash (except 1) was closed. In the only window with Flash in it was not running.

Apparently there were mem leaks and runaway loops (100% CPU for an idle plugin). The only way to correct this is to kill the plugin... Then everything is fine.

The problem is that you can recreate it. Adobe has known about this for years, and has made no apparent effort to resolve it.

Bypass:

-- don't install Flash plugin

Or

-- install Click2Flash which intercepts Flash requests by the browser, and let's the user decide if he wants to allow Flash for a given embed. A byproduct is that all the annoying Flash ads are eliminated (not downloaded or displayed).

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #154 of 166
ok seriously guy, i've read some of the posts here and some of you said flash player 10.1 doesnt exist or some of you have no clue if hardware acceleration exists. yes hardware acceleration exists in the new flash player 10.1. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/

or course right now its a RC release right now but so far on my mac, the CPU usage has dropped down to 40-60(max)% in youtube HD. still not as good as the windows version(about 20-35% in youtube HD).
Visit http://www.vancouver2012.org: Vancouver, Canada - Proud Host City of WorldMUN 2012
Reply
Visit http://www.vancouver2012.org: Vancouver, Canada - Proud Host City of WorldMUN 2012
Reply
post #155 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by gt1948 View Post

With all the problems Graphic Designers had with the Snow Leopard vs Adobe products when we all upgraded was an eye opener for me. Total crashes of Adobe products and this was after they (Adobe) said that their products weere compatible. HOGWASH.

Now my Illustrator version (CS3) will not work with SL and Adobe will not upgrade their product.

I am moving on no more dollars for Adobe products/upgrades.

Flash is dead!

So because you installed an Apple update which broke your illustrator you blame Adobe? You've got nothing against Apple for not caring about backwards compatibility, or basically anyone with a machine out of warranty. They can just completely focus on new machine sales or anything new enough to support the latest OS and if people don't keep spending then tough.

Really what is it the SL does that makes it so vital that a whole industry re-work there products for compatibility?
post #156 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I
I was showing him my cpu load doing something that apparently uses more than 100% of cpu utilization on a Mac? BTW anyone else find something wrong with saying "more than 100%"?

Ummm... more than 1 CPU!

Quote:
Your bringing up those operating systems as proof Flash sucks is like me bringing up how HTML5 uses more cpu utilization in Windows than it does in OSX (which is a fact) and then saying HTML5 sucks.

How do you know this... in a prior post you said that you don't use OS X.

Most people in this forum are aware that Flash runs better on Windows. They are also aware that on OS X Flash sucks (performance, crashes, hangs, memory leaks, etc.). Since this is an Apple forum, i suspect that most visitors are expressing that when they post that [Adobe's Mac OS X implementation of] Flash sucks!

.
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
"...The calm is on the water and part of us would linger by the shore, For ships are safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."
- Michael Lille -
Reply
post #157 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

The alleged cooperation would have been years earlier when Macromedia was in charge. Silverlight is relatively new, only a couple years old. I would assume the warm relations between Adobe and MS has cooled considerably over the Silverlight launch.

Considering Silverlight came out to the public in 2007 that would be a safe guess.

Though, if statOwl is giving correct number Silverlight seems to be having more of an effect on Quicktime and Windows Media Player support and even there the effect is not such you call substantial.
post #158 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

Please show me these flash sites that don't work great for ANYONE.

OK. Go to www.webkinz.com and log in. It shoots the CPU to 120% on my Core 2 Duo 2.3 GHz and 3 GB RAM - and that's just showing the opening page, not doing anything. Read the Webkinz forums and users on ALL platforms complain about how worthless it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

Second, at a certain level it is ok for Adobe not to give Mac people optimized software, just as I think it is ok for Apple to bar Flash on the iPhone.

Sure. The difference is that Apple has shown that no Flash on its iPhone is not interfering with great sales. Adobe's failure to support OS X would put them out of business in 6-12 months.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

i thought so too, but somebody corrected me: there is a version of flash 9 that works on nokia's maemo platform on the Nsomethingorother. doesn't work with all files though. close - but no cigar.

That's not a full flash implementation - it's a VERY limited Mobile Flash. In fact, it is so limited that site developers really need a separate site if they're going to use Mobile Flash - in which case they might as well code for html 5. There is NO full version of Flash on any mobile device. Period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

I will start respecting them more once they weed out garbage based on it's content, and not only on platform it is made with.

Of course that would cripple some of their PR efforts, so it's unlikely to happen any time soon.

Actually, Apple HAS been weeding out crappy content over the past 6 months. They trimmed tens of thousands of apps - which probably accounts for the tens of thousands of apps now on the Android store.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwklam View Post

ok seriously guy, i've read some of the posts here and some of you said flash player 10.1 doesnt exist or some of you have no clue if hardware acceleration exists. yes hardware acceleration exists in the new flash player 10.1. http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/

So your point is that you're unable to tell the difference between a marketing release on vaporware and a real product? Flash 10.1 is not out yet. And even if it were, the hardware requirements are greater than the iPhone 3GS offers, so it wouldn't run, anyway - because of Adobe's inability to make it run on the most popular mobile devices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I thought hardware acceleration is coming in 10.1.

Supposedly. However, early reports are that it's still choppy and slow.

Even if it works, it's irrelevant. It's not available today, so Adobe's whining about Apple not having Flash on the iPhone is misplaced. Apple CAN'T have Flash on the iPhone until Adobe releases a version that would work with that level of computing power. Adobe has not done so, nor do they even have any vaporware that would work on a phone with the power of an iPhone. It's NOT Apple's fault.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I was showing him my cpu load doing something that apparently uses more than 100% of cpu utilization on a Mac? BTW anyone else find something wrong with saying "more than 100%"?

Yes. What's wrong is that you haven't bothered to learn how Apple reports CPU usage.

Apple reports CPU usage as a percentage of a single CPU. So if you have a quad core i7 iMac, you could get CPU usage well over 300% if you have an app that takes advantage of it.
"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 #159 of 166
Great news. I don't want Flash on my mobile Apple devices, and would prefer them not to be on my computers either.
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 #160 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

The issue is that Windows is perfectly okay with having a web plug-in have direct access to hardware acceleration. You know, the way things used to be done in 1991?

If you call that an OS "handling it" your dreaming. No decent OS would allow it.


Think again.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=18207

In short:

Apple to Allow Hardware Accelerated Flash on Macs; Android Gets Flash, Air

Jason Mick (Blog) - April 23, 2010 9:30 AM

Despite the pair's icy relationship, Apple did just quietly release a new API that will allow for Adobe to finally offer hardware accelerated Flash on Mac computers. Technical Note TN2267 describes the new API, the Video Decode Acceleration Framework, stating:

The Video Decode Acceleration framework is a C programming interface providing low-level access to the H.264 decoding capabilities of compatible GPUs such as the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M, GeForce 320M or GeForce GT 330M. It is intended for use by advanced developers who specifically need hardware accelerated decode of video frames
.

If this doesn't kill Flash, I don't know what will.

So... are we back in 1991? Or is OSX, after all, not a decent OS?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe abandons development of Flash-to-iPhone porting software