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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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...

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.

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.)

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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)?

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.

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. \

Nor I, but many of the Flash proponents say we can't live without it.

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...

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.

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.

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.

*******

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.

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.

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

.

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!

.

I thought hardware acceleration is coming in 10.1.


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.

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.

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.)

Why!? It's used EVERYWHERE.

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).

.

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).

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?

Ummm... more than 1 CPU!


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!

.

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.

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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.

Great news. I don't want Flash on my mobile Apple devices, and would prefer them not to be on my computers either.

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?