AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Steve Jobs slams Adobe Flash as unfit for modern era
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Steve Jobs slams Adobe Flash as unfit for modern era - Page 6

post #201 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

Because there is a great deal of angst in the community,... My kids want to know why they can't play on their "Poptropica" accounts. ... I certainly appreciate the decision more now, and I wasn't even that much against it to begin with.


Did the letter quell your kid's angst?
Reply
Reply
post #202 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

The lack of Flash on the iPod Touch and the iPhone is understandable, they have lower performance processors because the nature of the device fits into small places.

The iPad is a different story, it could have been just a hair thicker with a slightly larger processor and have Flash support, just like the HP Slate does, but Apple decided to basically create a large screen iPod Touch instead.

Yes, sure it is a a large iPod Touch if you like. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. Apple is obviously striving for common, consistent, perhaps identical experiences between their touch devices. That makes a lot of sense.

You acknowledge that it makes sense not to include Flash on iPhone and iPod. The web experience on the iPhone OS has been a pillar of the platform. What incentive would Apple have for breaking the consistency of offering between their touch devices, simply then to get Flash only on the iPad? If one does Flash and the others do not, that consistency is broken.

You also acknowledge that Apple would have to change their engineering specs just to get Flash on the iPad usefully. Why would the spend extra money to do this, which would in turn break the consistency with their other devices?

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply
post #203 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

It´s a no brainer why iPad supplies have been constrained on purpose and the 3G model is weeks away. Apple is giving web sites time to convert as to have minimal impact on iPad users, and to create the sense the device is being sold out everywhere, that itś in high demand.

Websites started converting as soon as the iPad was announced. It wasn't but a couple of weeks (if that) before there were almost daily announcements of yet another major website converting over so it would be easily read by the iPad. If by "constrained on purpose" you mean the buying public eating them up, then yes. Current estimates have Apple as having sold a million already. By the 2nd weekend my local Apple store had sold out of all but the $500 model. 3G arrives tomorrow in the US, next month worldwide.

There is such a thing as underestimating popularity. Look at the World of Warcraft launch back in 2004. They expected to sell their 250k copies of the game over the course of the first 3 months. Instead, they were sold out by the end of the first weekend and they had serious server problems. If Apple underestimated the popularity of the iPad, hey it happens.



Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post

[SIZE="2"]MPEG LA, of which Apple is a member, owns patents regarding the implementation of said codec and has the right to charge royalties for its use.

Looking at the MPEG LA site, Apple is not a member, they are a licensor. In other words, they pay MPEG LA to license products from them. They do not get money from MPEG LA licensing things to other people.
Reply
Reply
post #204 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post

You managed to reply to my comment without confronting its central thesis. Steve Jobs claims that Adobe's Flash technology is proprietary. This is a fact. Flash IS proprietary. However, Steve also claims that HTML5 (which includes H.264 for video playback) is an "open standard". His words:

"...we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript all open standards."

This is undeniably false. H.264 is a proprietary codec which must be licensed from MPEG LA. It is not "open" in any sense whatsoever. Steve Jobs is, therefore, a liar.


I'm not qualified to opine on the subject of this thread, but regret that some who do can write with a passion that seems out of scale.

How about "mistaken," "in error," or simply "wrong?"
Reply
Reply
post #205 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

You mean the product that Ballmer kind of demonstrated but that isn't going to hit the market now? Wonder why? Wonder what the battery life would have been like on that thing.

Thompson

Uhm...the Slate hasn't been cancelled. The HP Slate is listed as having a 5 hour battery life


Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

The iPad is a different story, it could have been just a hair thicker with a slightly larger processor and have Flash support, just like the HP Slate does, but Apple decided to basically create a large screen iPod Touch instead.

Except it couldn't as there is still no full version of Flash for mobile devices published. Try again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

IMO, if they wish to blunt the success of Android they need to make the iPhone available to ALL US carriers. They are plenty of users who simply will not choose ATT as a a carrier, regardless of the device.

Hear hear! AT&T wanted ridiculous amounts of deposit when my credit rating is fine. Sprint signed me right up no problem. I'd love to see a WiMax version of the iPhone released for Sprint. C'mon Apple, my period on my LG Lotus is more than up, we have just been waiting for better phones to show up to bother upgrading
Reply
Reply
post #206 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post

Please, kind Sir, tell me what I don't understand. I understand that Steve Jobs conveniently failed to mention that Apple will make money when a content provider pays the $5 million license fee since they hold patents on the technology. I understand that their "open" industry standard H.264 is just as closed and proprietary as Flash. I understand that Steve Jobs is an egomaniac and a control freak who can't stand the thought of using truly "open" and "free" standards.

This ego maniac control freak you speak of, has brought to the world macosx/unix based/most secure personal operating system to date, iPods/iPads/App store. What has microsoft brought to the world? blue screen of death and norton anti virus subscriptions.
Reply
Reply
post #207 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkerkay View Post

Not to mention several tech sites. Which people do read. Not just geeks.

My guess is that you consider yourself a geek and observe that some non-geeks also read tech sites. (I'm in that same camp, by the way.) But if we were to ask someone who claims NOT to be a geek (e.g. my wife) they would probably say that if you are reading tech sites then you are, by definition, a geek. Since more people consider themselves non-geeks than geeks, most people would probably disagree with your statement above.

By the way: that was mostly tongue-in-cheek above. But the following is true...

Geekness is in the eye of the beholder.

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #208 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:34am
"Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind."

Hit the nail on the head!
Reply
Reply
post #209 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Personally, I think agl82 has gotten all the info on this topic that he can possibly get. If he doesn't a difference between open web standards and Adobe Flash at this point I doubt he never will. ... There is an agenda here and it comes the day after Adobe has made some real changes to Flash for Mac OS X, and rather quickly too boot. What is the next move for Adobe and Apple? ...That is just MacTripper trolling under a new alias.

Hey, I really like many of your more substantive posts but I've noticed this thing you do a lot lately where you get tied up in long discussions about "who (user x, y, or z), really is."

It's really distracting, it's against the forum rules, and let's face it ... unless you run the board, you don't really know these things to be true. Broad assumptions presented as fact are poison to proper debates.

I think you are getting away with this kind of thing because of you do contribute a lot of good stuff as well and because you don't say anything overly negative about these folks, but making posts about the person, instead of the topic (ironically like I'm doing right now! ), is actually against the rules.

I hope you take it as the well intentioned criticism I intend it to be and I won't bother to say it again, but please stop doing the "forum intrigue" thing. Thanks.
Reply
Reply
post #210 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

From reading your post it seems that you agree with me. If Apple provide developers with good tools for wring iPhone apps they'll naturally gravitate to them.

But I think there is another agenda here at work. Apple wish to make it difficult to write apps that can easily be ported to several platform in order to blunt the the success of Android. IMO, if they wish to blunt the success of Android they need to make the iPhone available to ALL US carriers. They are plenty of users who simply will not choose ATT as a a carrier, regardless of the device.

Adding the other US carriers will solve that problem.

At one point, this was what I was thinking as well, and that they were doing it to hamper development of apps across platforms to lock apps into the Apple ecosystem.

On further thought, it seems the reasons are likely different. There is a subtle difference. When using cross platform tools, the best they generally do is to meet the lowest common denominator of all supported platforms. For Apple, more than any other company, experience is important. Allowing apps that only meet the basest commonality across platforms is simply allowing an inferior experience. You are free to continue to develop and release your apps for any and all other platforms, but if you do it for the iPhone and you have to do it using Apple tools, then perhaps you are less likely to handicap your app.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply
post #211 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

The web is Apple's main competitor to iPhone apps. Also Google depends on people staying on the web. One conspiracy theory might go that Apple knows that Flash makes the web passable, so they are trying to kill it, to lower the quality of the web, weakening competition with iPhone apps, and in general getting people off the web and in to apps (iAd!) to disrupt Google's ad revenue/plans.

While I'm fairly certain that what you are saying is true, it must really kill Adobe that the reasons that Apple gives are ALSO CORRECT. Flash blows for mobile devices for a multitude of reasons.

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #212 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

Everything Steve does in public is carefully orchestrated, this letter is no exception.

There's nothing wrong with careful orchestration, in and of itself. Even when you are right, it pays to carefully express yourself. Look at you for example: you are not careful, and you look like a fool because of it. We can't even tell if you are right, because you're too foolish to prove it.

Oh well.

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #213 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post

To my knowledge, I never said they were synonymous. Steve Jobs is the one who implied they were synonymous by using "HTML5" in his letter as opposed to "H.264". Adobe's Flash technology will mainly compete with H.264 for video playback. HTML5 is just a spec for markup language on the web. I understand the difference, but Steve Jobs doesn't want you to.

I didn't say you SAID they were synonymous. I said you were writing AS IF they were synonymous. My meaning is this: you keep using qualities of H.264 to disprove something that Steve Jobs said about HTML5. You are either making a mistake or deliberately misleading. Either way, I'm just pointing out the error for others to see.

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #214 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post


Perhaps, but Steve Jobs claiming H.264 is "open" is an absolute falsehood. It is nothing of the sort. That's why Firefox and Opera are not adopting it.

"H.264 is neither free nor open-source. If...you want to use H.264 to serve HTML5 video in your browser, you need to pay MPEG LA, the owners of the codec, a $5 million licensing fee. This has raised some eyebrows by the likes of Mozilla Firefox, who want HTML5s video compression standard to be the free, open-source Ogg Theora. Their argument, summarized, is its foolish to build the next decades internet video standards upon the back of a licensed codec when theres a free alternative that works nearly as well."

http://www.cultofmac.com/h-264-will-...ugh-2016/28982

Welcome to AI, now run along.

Overall great 'letter', clear and to the point. Notice how he aligned with Google not only for web browsing but Android and Chrome OS as well.
Reply
Reply
post #215 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

You know it is not pretend stuff.

Adobe now taking beta testers for Flash Player 10.1 and AIR 2.0

http://www.betanews.com/article/Adob...oid/1271687589
‎

OK. So it's not 'pretend'. It's only vaporware. Let me know when it ships.

More importantly, let me know when they ship a version that EVEN ADOBE thinks will run on a 600 MHz processor like the iPhone 3GS or 400 MHz like the iPhone 3G.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I went all over that site and never saw the activity above 58% for a second or two peak most of the time is was in the low teens and even single digits even with all the animations. So I don't know what might be wrong with your set up but I certainly don't see the same CPU usage you report.

What type of computer? If you're using Windows, your comparison only proves the point. (Not to mention that I don't believe you - my daughter uses that site all the time and it's ALWAY over 100% CPU usage and the computer gets hot enough within seconds that she can't hold it in her lap). ALWAYS. And everyone else I know who uses the site has the same experience.

But even if you're right and it 'only' went to 58%, isn't that pretty absurd for a computer with the amount of power that I have that it can't even handle a simple web page without using 58% of the CPU? You're not embarrassed to be advocating such a crappy program? Not to mention how many millions of dollars worth of energy it wastes?
Reply
Reply
post #216 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

The iPad is a different story, it could have been just a hair thicker with a slightly larger processor and have Flash support, just like the HP Slate does, but Apple decided to basically create a large screen iPod Touch instead.

You know, until there actually IS an HP Slate and we can all see the performance, it doesn't really seem appropriate to use it in an argument (especially in the present tense). That's just lame.

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #217 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

Did the letter quell your kid's angst?

Honesty...

Not yet, no. For now, they still use Macbooks and my MacPro for that. (I still need to check on that App!) I'm thinking that time will solve this: Poptropica will most likely build an App (at least for iPad if not iPhone).

No doubt about it: the lack of Flash is a handicap at this point in time. But I understand the reasons and I have hope that most (if not all) of the handicap will be rectified in time.

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #218 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

You also acknowledge that Apple would have to change their engineering specs just to get Flash on the iPad usefully. Why would the spend extra money to do this, which would in turn break the consistency with their other devices?

I´m not arguing for Flash on the iPad, the device can´t handle it in itś present form factor.

My point is Steve is making a media fuss because he needs web sites to create iPad (and iPhone and iPod Touch) friendly versions of their sites in addition to the Flash versions for more normal computers.
Reply
Reply
post #219 of 349
4/29/10 at 10:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

Nobody but geeks will even know the letter exists. This is hardly national news.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkerkay View Post

It's on FoxNews and guardian.co.uk already. Not to mention several tech sites. Which people do read. Not just geeks.

...and on the BBC site Apple boss Steve Jobs explains ban on Flash
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
post #220 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

This ego maniac control freak you speak of, has brought to the world macosx/unix based/most secure personal operating system to date, iPods/iPads/App store. What has microsoft brought to the world? blue screen of death and norton anti virus subscriptions.

Who said I was a fan of Microsoft? Far from it!
Reply
Reply
post #221 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

What type of computer? If you're using Windows, your comparison only proves the point. (Not to mention that I don't believe you - my daughter uses that site all the time and it's ALWAY over 100% CPU usage and the computer gets hot enough within seconds that she can't hold it in her lap). ALWAYS. And everyone else I know who uses the site has the same experience.

But even if you're right and it 'only' went to 58%, isn't that pretty absurd for a computer with the amount of power that I have that it can't even handle a simple web page without using 58% of the CPU? You're not embarrassed to be advocating such a crappy program? Not to mention how many millions of dollars worth of energy it wastes?

I'm using a Mac Pro. The site very well may use more cpu in the actual game but since it is a pay to play situation I only viewed the demo. And no I don't think 58% is too much. Driving your daughter to the mall uses way more energy than a Flash game and is considerably less beneficial. Don't play the green environment card unless you do everything else in your life accordingly. And I can say that with some conviction since I am a practicing advocate of saving energy.

The reason that ALL manufacturers shy away from the term 'laptop' is that they are too hot to use on your lap. So to avoid misrepresentation of the intended use of the device they have switched to calling it a 'notebook'.

Sure Flash uses a lot of energy but performance has its costs. An SUV uses more gas than a Prius but can haul a 2000 lb. trailer. If you want a lot of interactive animations there is no better solution than Flash. If you don't want animation in your browser, then don't use Flash. Simple.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #222 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post

Who said I was a fan of Microsoft? Far from it!

What exactly are you a fan of? Besides misrepresentation, of course.
Reply
Reply
post #223 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

From reading your post it seems that you agree with me.

That is a very strange conclusion to reach. All I did was giving an example of what Steve meant when he said they had been down that road before, and the solution was to remove the extra layer, which XCode did nicely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

If Apple provide developers with good tools for wring iPhone apps they'll naturally gravitate to them.

That has to be one of the most ignorant sentences I've ever read! And I don't mean ignorant in the vague insulting way, like "stupid" or anything like that. I mean it in the truest sense of the word, which is "incredibly unaware". The tools for writing iPhone apps are second to none and a large reason why there are so many apps available.

In other words, Apple DOES provide developers with such good tools, and that's WHY they have gravitated to them.

If you know so little about this particular aspect of the topic, you probably should move on to a different aspect of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

But I think there is another agenda here at work. Apple wish to make it difficult to write apps that can easily be ported to several platform in order to blunt the the success of Android. IMO, if they wish to blunt the success of Android they need to make the iPhone available to ALL US carriers. They are plenty of users who simply will not choose ATT as a a carrier, regardless of the device.

Adding the other US carriers will solve that problem.

Of course they want to maintain advantage over Android. They will eventually move to other carriers, but they are going to do it in a measured way, which is appropriate because of the dramatically changing technology landscape.

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #224 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

Uhm...the Slate hasn't been cancelled. The HP Slate is listed as having a 5 hour battery life

Well, OK, I suppose I jumped the gun on that one. (Although I still have my doubts.) In any case...

The HP Slate is not even shipping. Detail specs are not verifiable. How can it be used in a present tense argument? How can it be used in ANY argument outside of speculation?

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #225 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

You know, until there actually IS an HP Slate and we can all see the performance, it doesn't really seem appropriate to use it in an argument (especially in the present tense). That's just lame.

Thompson


See for yourself, two videos here, there is another floating around too.

http://h20435.www2.hp.com/t5/Voodoo-...C0ABD6FFD08BE8
Reply
Reply
post #226 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

I didn't say you SAID they were synonymous. I said you were writing AS IF they were synonymous. My meaning is this: you keep using qualities of H.264 to disprove something that Steve Jobs said about HTML5. You are either making a mistake or deliberately misleading. Either way, I'm just pointing out the error for others to see.

Thompson

When Steve Jobs touts "HTML5" as a possible successor to "Flash", he's actually comparing H.264 to Flash. HTML5 is just a spec for markup language on the web. It doesn't specify a favored codec for video playback. HTML5 cannot play video without a codec. Steve Jobs uses HTML5 as a euphemism for H.264 when speaking about Flash's shortcomings, since Apple's implementation uses the H.264 codec. If I was unclear before, I apologize.
Reply
Reply
post #227 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

What you are saying is undeniably false. HTML5 does not "include" h.264 for video playback, the format for embedding video with the video tag within HTML5 is currently undefined.

There are some Netscape extensions from before there was an HTTP standard. Everyone supports them today, but they are still not in the standards. Basically, if you get enough people to do it, it doesn't really matter what the standards say. So arguing that the video tag is undefined is pointless, when Youtube, Vimeo, and all the others are already doing it. You may never see it in the standard, but the real standard is already set.
Reply
Reply
post #228 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:14am
It is absolutely amazing to me just how many Adobe trolls have come out of the woodwork to post their drivel in this thread.
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
Pity the agnostic dyslectic. They spend all their time contemplating the existence of dog.
Reply
post #229 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I'm using a Mac Pro. The site very well may use more cpu in the actual game but since it is a pay to play situation I only viewed the demo..

You accused me of lying when I said that playing the game took the CPU to 120% and you said that you only got 58%.

NOW, it turns out that you were lying - you never played the game at all. Do you really expect that a demo is going to be the same as playing the full game?

Maybe before you accuse people of lying in the future, you could think about telling the truth yourself instead of making false accusations.
Reply
Reply
post #230 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG View Post

You know it is not pretend stuff.

Adobe now taking beta testers for Flash Player 10.1 and AIR 2.0

http://www.betanews.com/article/Adob...oid/1271687589
‎

And yet, Adobe keeps slipping the go-live date. Repeatedly. As long as it's a prototype, it's a prototype. Call me when we can run some benchmarks on performance and battery life.

The thing is, I doubt anyone from the Android team at Google will have the stones to tell Adobe that performance sucks and it's not ready. So I'm sure it will eventually ship, but I'm unconvinced that it will be worth a sh!t when it does.

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply
post #231 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

What exactly are you a fan of? Besides misrepresentation, of course.

I enjoy pointing out hypocrisy when the most closed, proprietary, paranoid company in history rails on about the evils of "closed" standards while at the same time pushing their own proprietary standard.

Steve Jobs is a fan of control, manipulation, and fear...and himself of course.
Reply
Reply
post #232 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:17am
steve jobs is a badass. not many other CEO's who bring the thunder like him.
Reply
Reply
post #233 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr View Post

That has to be one of the most ignorant sentences I've ever read! And I don't mean ignorant in the vague insulting way, like "stupid" or anything like that. I mean it in the truest sense of the word, which is "incredibly unaware". The tools for writing iPhone apps are second to none and a large reason why there are so many apps available.

In other words, Apple DOES provide developers with such good tools, and that's WHY they have gravitated to them.

I never said Apple DON"T provide good development tools.

I said that's ALL that is necessary to ensure their adoption. No need for SDK restrictions, arm twisting and guns pointed at people's heads.

And some tools that are restricted by Apple's new SDK agreement are capable of producing good iPhone apps. Case in point, Now Playing. Consistently regarded as the best movie app on the iPhone. Apparently in was developed using tools that are forbidden by the SDK agreement.

How is that a 'good' thing for the platform?
Reply
Reply
post #234 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:18am
Great Steven Paul Jobs! I fully agree with You!

Giovanni B. Saccone
Creativity is just connecting things (Steve Jobs)
> > > My wEb SiTe < < <

Reply

Giovanni B. Saccone
Creativity is just connecting things (Steve Jobs)
> > > My wEb SiTe < < <

Reply
post #235 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You accused me of lying when I said that playing the game took the CPU to 120% and you said that you only got 58%.

NOW, it turns out that you were lying - you never played the game at all. Do you really expect that a demo is going to be the same as playing the full game?

Maybe before you accuse people of lying in the future, you could think about telling the truth yourself instead of making false accusations.

PM me your username and login and I will play the game to test it. Otherwise link to an example that doesn't require payment to view. The demo is Flash with a lot of animations. Your first statement was that the page used NO animations, So does the game use animations or not?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #236 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post

When Steve Jobs touts "HTML5" as a possible successor to "Flash", he's actually comparing H.264 to Flash. HTML5 is just a spec for markup language on the web. It doesn't specify a favored codec for video playback. HTML5 cannot play video without a codec. Steve Jobs uses HTML5 as a euphemism for H.264 when speaking about Flash's shortcomings, since Apple's implementation uses the H.264 codec. If I was unclear before, I apologize.

You write as if video is all Flash and HTML5 do. Maybe, Steve Jobs touts HTML5 as a euphemism for solving Flash's shortcomings across the board, plus all the other stuff that's in HTML5 -- i.e., HTML5 is a euphemism for HTML5. You're flogging a dead horse with a red herring.
Reply
Reply
post #237 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

See for yourself, two videos here, there is another floating around too.

http://h20435.www2.hp.com/t5/Voodoo-...C0ABD6FFD08BE8

Quote:
This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained.

Here we go again. What we have is a carefully edited video of some prototype that doesn't actually exist in the retail channel, and, isn't our stuff going to be sooooo cool someday in the future?

And, of course, we're all waiting for the Palm/WebOS version, you know, since HP is now "all in" with that technology.

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply
post #238 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by agl82 View Post

I enjoy pointing out hypocrisy when the most closed, proprietary, paranoid company in history rails on about the evils of "closed" standards while at the same time pushing their own proprietary standard. ...

Well, I guess you aren't having any fun today at all then. Hope your tomorrow is better.
Reply
Reply
post #239 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

See for yourself, two videos here, there is another floating around too.

http://h20435.www2.hp.com/t5/Voodoo-...C0ABD6FFD08BE8


If it's not an actual SHIPPING product, and all we see is a choreographed YouTube video, we don't know how far beyond prototype stage it is. The actual specs can't be independently verified (and therefore used in an argument).

My point still stands. I am having a hard time articulating it to you apparently. Either that, or you get my point and are trying to spin it. Which is it?

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #240 of 349
4/29/10 at 11:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

I´m not arguing for Flash on the iPad, the device can´t handle it in itś present form factor.

My point is Steve is making a media fuss because he needs web sites to create iPad (and iPhone and iPod Touch) friendly versions of their sites in addition to the Flash versions for more normal computers.

Which is something he is quite open about. That was the premise of his point about Flash being designed for PC's and not mobiles (especially with touch interfaces).

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. Sometimes it's both.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Steve Jobs slams Adobe Flash as unfit for modern era