or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'We have never, ever abandoned Apple,' Adobe co-founder says
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'We have never, ever abandoned Apple,' Adobe co-founder says - Page 2

post #41 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

'We have never, ever abandoned Apple,' Adobe co-founder says ... Chuck, I beg to differ ...

i wonder if Chuck can explain why Adobe forced Carbon onto Apple and refused to make a Cocoa version until Apple finally cut them off. AND THEN it isn't a top to bottom optimized native code using a UI that organically fits with the Mac OS. but the windows version with a few lines of translator code slapped on it. just like they wanted to make their fantastic iphone apps.

My fav quote from another Adobe was the engineer who said "Flash works great on Windows so there can't be any problems on Macs, the code is exactly the same"

**Facepalm** major.
post #42 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

Very simple. check this video - http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/2...ng-on-android/

Non-mobile optimized flash websites running on an android phone. 3D rendering, videos, etc. One hic-up here and there, but very very usable overall

That video is fairly impressive. There is no question about the performance. The obvious thing here is that it is indeed possible to create a Flash plug-in for a mobile device that can be efficient, lean and fast. How stable? We simply can't know, since so far, Flash on mobile has only been seen on YouTube, through videos such as this one. We still don't have it in the wild, and it is STILL not available on ANY mobile platform. Obviously, Adobe still considers it inadequate for release.

I can see a possible scenario here. Eventually, Adobe will get the bugs worked out and it will release Flash for Android. The era of Flash on mobile will begin. As more and more people begin to experience Flash on their mobile devices, many will realise what are the TRUE problems with Flash on mobile, and it won't be performance, and perhaps not even stability. It will be UI. Vast majority of Flash content requires mouse-over and (to some extent) right-click for most basic navigation, without which the content is unusable. No (multi)touch-screen device will have a mouse button, or a mouse-hovering feature.

So what will happen then? Most likely, judging by the speed everyone's now jumping on the HTML-5 bandwagon (following the iPad's release), all the Flash content owners who didn't bother with HTML-5 (expecting that Flash for Android might mitigate the mobile issues and allow them to ignore the iPad for some time) will likely realise that no mobile device can actually use their content. One of the two things may happen: either they will re-engineer all of their Flash content to eliminate the mouse-over functions, or they will simply abandon flash and develop using HTML-5.

There are very many web sites that have fairly elaborate Flash apps out there. These simply CANNOT be ported over to HTML-5 (HTML-5 is NOT a programming language). It may be lesser effort to re-engineer for mouseless navigation (than to build separate apps for iPod/iPad/iPhone platform, and another one for Android). They may choose to do the modifications and try and capture the Android audience, continuing to ignore Apple audience, or at least buying themselves some time.

If Android audience becomes large enough, and Flash content ends up being re-coded for mouseless navigation in significant enough numbers, and if that Flash experience becomes consistently reliable, Apple might end up making a prudent business decision and allowing development of that Flash plug-in after all (with a set of conditions that would provide tight enough control over user experience quality).

This whole scenario may take several years to unfold.
post #43 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

"He said his company knows a number of developers who want to create applications for the iPad, but are frustrated by the prospect of having to learn to write for a new device rather than sticking with one language they're already familiar with."

BS! You can write iPhone/iPad apps in C, C++, or Objective-C. If he is implying with his statement that Apple isn't allowing C# to compile, then he needs to realize that almost all developers who write in C# started off with C++.

What I find odd is, how can you call yourself a software engineer and not know basic C language in any form?
post #44 of 188
Adobe refuses to use Apple technology in their apps. They insist that both the Mac and PC versions of their app be exactly the same. There is an exception in that Preferences is under the Application menu on the Mac. Their thinking is that a designer should be able to go to either a Mac or a PC and feel perfectly comfortable using their apps.

So, that means that Control-Command-D does not bring up a pop-up dictionary as it does in other Mac program, Quick Look does not work in Bridge, etc. So, it is really a matter of philosophy, I think. I would prefer that Adobe programs be more Mac-like.
post #45 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

The question is, were they allowed to?

That is irrelevant when Flash 10.1 for The open Android can't even come close to running on any of the iPhone HW they have released so far.


Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

i wonder if Chuck can explain why Adobe forced Carbon onto Apple and refused to make a Cocoa version until Apple finally cut them off.

In Adobe's defense, Apple is still using plenty of Arbon in their pro suites, iLife and iTunes.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #46 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubert View Post

"He said his company knows a number of developers who want to create applications for the iPad, but are frustrated by the prospect of having to learn to write for a new device rather than sticking with one language they're already familiar with."

BS! You can write iPhone/iPad apps in C, C++, or Objective-C. If he is implying with his statement that Apple isn't allowing C# to compile, then he needs to realize that almost all developers who write in C# started off with C++.

This is an excellent point that I have never thought about. Photoshop was written in C and C++. Photoshop plugins are written in C and C++. Apple compiles both along with their standard objective C. So if they want to, they can have same programmers go after the iPad. There is risk of rejection, but there is already at least 2 iphone apps out there from adobe that are decent.
post #47 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"We never abandoned Apple," Geschke responded. "Apple now seems to be abandoning at least one aspect of our product line right now. No, we never abandoned them. We've always ported our apps simultaneously to both platforms."

Bllsht. There was a months-delay between PC and Mac releases of Photoshop Elements a cycle or so back, and I know everyone was happy when PC users got CS3 months before the Mac, right? From http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...hallenges.html

"A software engineer working on Adobe Photoshop says the company's decision not to deliver native Intel Mac support until the next major release of its high-end graphics suite is a result of the enormous task associated with switching to Apple Computer's Xcode development environment.
"Last month, Adobe chief executive Bruce Chizen stated that Creative Suite 3 -- which will include the next major releases of Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, GoLive and Acrobat -- will not be available until the second quarter of 2007. "

Then there's the whole 64-bit in CS4 debacle.From http://www.betanews.com/article/Adob...ows/1207258861

"Mac OS X users probably won't get 64-bit support until CS5, the subsequent release of the graphics editing software, according to John Nack, Adobe's Photoshop product manager.
Nack attributes this unanticipated state of affairs to Apple's decision last year to halt development of 64-bit support for Carbon, a move which he says took Adobe and third-party developers by surprise. Adobe did make CS3 Intel-compatible, but kept Carbon as its core architecture"

So it's Apple causing the problems? And not telling anyone about architecture changes far enough in advance? Then why is Adobe the only one whining about it?
post #48 of 188
Why is this crap still news?
Apple doesn't want flash and Adobe is bit*****! Too bad for Adobe. They should move on.
I went to Apple's site (I'm always there. I'm a 20 year Apple geek.)and checked out the Popular science stuff for the ipad.
WOW!
Just wait until other companies follow suit. The ipad is where the eyeball are at so you put your money there.That is how the business is run.
post #49 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbonner View Post

OMG, they are whining a bit much. Adobe put out a product that Apple ended up not liking. How about focusing on making it way better than HTML5 so the market will beg to use it, or focus on your products that work well.

How about this:
Adobe: We admit that in the past we might have been lax in creating Mac OS versions of our applications that were optimized for said systems. This is unfair to the users that make up half of our customers. We have pledged to line one rewrite all of our software starting with the 3 most popular -- Photoshop, Illustrator and Flash and continuing through our entire line up. And we pledge that these new versions will be out by the end of 2010.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Face it - Adobe has never released a full version of Flash that will run on the iPhone. That's an unquestioned fact.

it's not that might not have wanted to. there was no point. Apple doesn't support Flash in the iphone OS.

however if you say "mobile devices" instead of the iphone, you are correct. to date we have not seen a full version of Flash running on any mobile OS. demos and betas (of questionable quality) but not a final version,

Quote:
Adobe has been promising a version of Flash for the iPhone for 3 years and not delivered. Apple got tired of waiting.

no they didn't. they aren't waiting for Flash for the iphone. they are waiting for anything from Adobe that shows that they will do the work required. until they give that sign, Apple isn't going to put the needed support into the OS. An optimized version of Flash for MacOS that isn't just a slapped up port of the windows version and a promise to recode all other apps (with a firm deadline and not just 'in the future') would be huge steps that way.

Quote:
Show us Flash working on an iPhone. Surely Adobe knows that they can jailbreak a phone in order to show that it works.

this isn't like that wifi syncing app. the language to make Flash run isn't there. it's like trying to run a Windows program in Mac OS (not a VM like parallels but just click it and it runs)

Quote:
Oh, and get off they hypocrisy about openness.

that I will agree with. They are playing the FUD game. Apple is showing folks that there's more potential options than Flash. They are getting behind HTML5 etc to make sure that the options are as equal as possible so folks have a choice and aren't picking one or the other cause nothing else works.



Quote:
Originally Posted by rjosborn View Post

I don't think that there has ever been a statement that Apple "has banned" Flash anyways.

they have, just not in those words. Apple won't put the needed code into the iphone OS, thus preventing it from
running in said OS. that's in essence banning it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CIM View Post

Didnt Adobe pull Premiere from Mac when Apple released Final Cut?

not exactly. Apple wasn't too happy with the performance of Premiere using Carbon and strongly pushed Adobe to redo with Cocoa. Adobe didn't want to and just dropped the software from continued development.

Shortly afterwards Apple bought the company that was making Final Cut, reworked the code etc and the rest is history.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

What I find odd is, how can you call yourself a software engineer and not know basic C language in any form?

indeed. what I want to do is how hard would it be to take an app written in C and tweak it to run in the other OS's. is it really that difficult. would they be so horrible that they basically wouldn't work. do the other OSs have some kind of requirement that you can't use C and/or must use Flash
post #50 of 188
Let me get this straight, the NPD group just released a large size sample survey that shows Android OS overtaking iPhone OS in market share, Google has announced their Android OS will support Flash mobile once its released by Adobe. If Android OS is kicking iPhone OS in market share, and Flash is promised to run in that environment, then what is Adobe crying about?
post #51 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Predrag View Post

I can see a possible scenario here. Eventually, Adobe will get the bugs worked out and it will release Flash for Android. The era of Flash on mobile will begin.

Yes, but for which version of Android? On what hardware? The Android ecosystem is unlike the iPhone OS's, in that there has been a diaspora of hardware and software configurations to support. It's not impossible that Flash could be available on Android for years before even a majority of Android phones could utilize it. And if that's the case, who is going to base their business around developing for (and worse, supporting) it? And how will they monetize it?

Even completely leaving out how awful Flash's multi-touch experience is or its inefficiency with regards to processor or battery life, Android just doesn't seem like a very viable way to build a Flash market place. Apple's strict control over their ecosystem has been disparaged by many, but it means that they're the white whale of a target market for someone with a developer tool like Adobe's.
post #52 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Predrag View Post

That video is fairly impressive. There is no question about the performance. The obvious thing here is that it is indeed possible to create a Flash plug-in for a mobile device that can be efficient, lean and fast. How stable? We simply can't know, since so far, Flash on mobile has only been seen on YouTube, through videos such as this one. We still don't have it in the wild, and it is STILL not available on ANY mobile platform. Obviously, Adobe still considers it inadequate for release.

I can see a possible scenario here. Eventually, Adobe will get the bugs worked out and it will release Flash for Android. The era of Flash on mobile will begin. As more and more people begin to experience Flash on their mobile devices, many will realise what are the TRUE problems with Flash on mobile, and it won't be performance, and perhaps not even stability. It will be UI. Vast majority of Flash content requires mouse-over and (to some extent) right-click for most basic navigation, without which the content is unusable. No (multi)touch-screen device will have a mouse button, or a mouse-hovering feature.

So what will happen then? Most likely, judging by the speed everyone's now jumping on the HTML-5 bandwagon (following the iPad's release), all the Flash content owners who didn't bother with HTML-5 (expecting that Flash for Android might mitigate the mobile issues and allow them to ignore the iPad for some time) will likely realise that no mobile device can actually use their content. One of the two things may happen: either they will re-engineer all of their Flash content to eliminate the mouse-over functions, or they will simply abandon flash and develop using HTML-5.

There are very many web sites that have fairly elaborate Flash apps out there. These simply CANNOT be ported over to HTML-5 (HTML-5 is NOT a programming language). It may be lesser effort to re-engineer for mouseless navigation (than to build separate apps for iPod/iPad/iPhone platform, and another one for Android). They may choose to do the modifications and try and capture the Android audience, continuing to ignore Apple audience, or at least buying themselves some time.

If Android audience becomes large enough, and Flash content ends up being re-coded for mouseless navigation in significant enough numbers, and if that Flash experience becomes consistently reliable, Apple might end up making a prudent business decision and allowing development of that Flash plug-in after all (with a set of conditions that would provide tight enough control over user experience quality).

This whole scenario may take several years to unfold.

I agree with most of what you said. I think that if android-flash gains traction we'll see lots of sites starting to support lower definition videos that fit the mobile screen and simply smaller swf's without requiring mouseover (although they could simply assume a 2 key tap-and-keep-tapped gesture to be a mouse over something - just an example on how to solve the problem).


And about a version of flash that will run on the iPhone - quite sure the 3GS could do it, especially if apple created api's to access video and stuff (if they don't exist already), but that's a whole other matter. The iPad certainly could use flash (even if it isn't the best thing out there, some parts of the web are flash-centric (no way around it yet) and the iPad is kind of like a web-tablet). I think it is a bit crippled by this no-flash policy.
post #53 of 188
"We've always ported our apps simultaneously to both platforms."
is demonstrably false, and they know it.

I am not in the market for Photoshop or CS (although I know someone who does a lot of it). I'm more of a "PS Elements" user and the Windows version has been released sooner, had more features and is cheaper.

Stop lying, Adobe !
post #54 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

Yes, but for which version of Android? On what hardware? The Android ecosystem is unlike the iPhone OS's, in that there has been a diaspora of hardware and software configurations to support. It's not impossible that Flash could be available on Android for years before even a majority of Android phones could utilize it. And if that's the case, who is going to base their business around developing for (and worse, supporting) it? And how will they monetize it?

You can't fore sure say it is only for "the latest android". If the API's are there, and the phone is good enough (and most android phones are), they might be able to support flash...

Quote:
Even completely leaving out how awful Flash's multi-touch experience is or its inefficiency with regards to processor or battery life, Android just doesn't seem like a very viable way to build a Flash market place. Apple's strict control over their ecosystem has been disparaged by many, but it means that they're the white whale of a target market for someone with a developer tool like Adobe's.

Won't comment on the multi-touch experience, but did you see the earlier video I posted? And the battery life problem is a myth - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwWonKwVp1s - Over 3 hours of video on a flash player in a mobile phone. That's quite decent...
post #55 of 188
Why is Adobe crying so much? They are getting seriously worried about all this. I don't care either way, I don't own an iPhone/iPad but I hate flash on OSX. it is constantly crashing, slow, cpu draining, battery draining, and a hassle to deal with.
post #56 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Geschke was also asked why Flash isn't an "open standard," a question that the Adobe co-founder took issue with. He argued that Flash is open because Adobe published the SWF format and removed a previous requirement for a license to use it.

"No, we haven't put Flash out to a standards body yet as we have with PDF and Postscript," he said. "But I wouldn't be shocked if we do someday when it makes sense."

It doesn't make sense now, he said, because he isn't interested in having Flash being stuck with "design by committee." He pointed to HTML5, the open standard that Apple has embraced, and noted that it is taking a great deal of time to become finalized because "there are an awful lot of vested interests trying to influence its development."

OBTW, one of the companies with "an awful lot of vested interests trying to influence its [HTMLs] development" just happens to be Adobe. They tried (and ultimately failed) to neuter the features of HTML5 that will provide alternatives to Flash, including the <video> tag and Canvas.

Just sayin'...

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #57 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

Let me get this straight, the NPD group just released a large size sample survey that shows Android OS overtaking iPhone OS in market share, Google has announced their Android OS will support Flash mobile once its released by Adobe. If Android OS is kicking iPhone OS in market share, and Flash is promised to run in that environment, then what is Adobe crying about?

Adobe has never had anyone question Flash to this extent. It doesn't matter if Android has, or will have, greater market share. No one really gives a shit about Android. Ask your parents what they think of Android and they'll probably tell you the guy who fit into the original R2-D2 suit was cute.

Here is what Adobe is crying about:

Some people may know what a Nokia 5800 XpressMusic is.

*EVERYONE* knows what an iPhone is.

Adobe is crying because there is now a company out there who has the worlds mindshare in the palm of their hands... and this company is telling everyone that Flash sucks.
post #58 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

You can't fore sure say it is only for "the latest android". If the API's are there, and the phone is good enough (and most android phones are), they might be able to support flash...

Maybe, maybe not. And if you have an "app" that was written in Flash you have to deal with that discrepancy especially if you want someone to pay for it somehow. (Again, the monetization story is very unclear to me with Flash, which intuitively makes me thing you're going to get lower quality product with it.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

Won't comment on the multi-touch experience, but did you see the earlier video I posted? And the battery life problem is a myth - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwWonKwVp1s - Over 3 hours of video on a flash player in a mobile phone. That's quite decent...

Flash video isn't really the issue. I can already watch YouTube and many others without Flash. What about the Flash games my kids like? That's the only thing I really see bringing additional value to my iPad, and I have no idea how it would affect system performance and battery life since it's a completely different beast than video.
post #59 of 188
Apple spent so much time messing around with Classic and Carbon precisely because Adobe (and to a lesser extent Microsoft) not wanting to back an unproven OS.

Adobe:
Last major developer to deliver Mac OS X version
Last major developer to deliver a universal binary

Cause let's face it, Classic was only seriously used for 1-2 years by most users and only officially supported for 6 years (2001-2007).
post #60 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celemourn View Post

I dislike flash in general. The main use of it on the web these days seems to be really annoying ads which hijack your screen...

What do you think iAds are going to do?

I'm not a huge fan of Flash or iAds, but I think obnoxious advertising is inevitable.
post #61 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by columbus View Post

Apple spent so much time messing around with Classic and Carbon precisely because Adobe (and to a lesser extent Microsoft) not wanting to back an unproven OS.

Adobe:
Last major developer to deliver Mac OS X version
Last major developer to deliver a universal binary

Cause let's face it, Classic was only seriously used for 1-2 years by most users and only officially supported for 6 years (2001-2007).

Well, payback is a bitch. Adobe dragged their grudging feet supporting Apple these last ten years. With feature, software parity...and failure to back Apple's tech initiatives. And now they want Apple to back their vapourware? Don't think so.

Now, the shoe is on the other foot.

I don't want a sucky flash plug in that takes over my web window. I don't want it's irritating noises, unoptimised video or its cpu drain. Or crappy adverts I can't turn off.

There's 200k applications that don't used flash. That use Apple's tools. No middleware Adobe crap. It's about power. Apple have finally broken the software dependence on Adobe and M$. In the new era, Adobe and M$ are nowhere. Apple don't need their support. They don't need their lagging implementation of Apple innovations. Apple have got 200k and loads of developers 'who get it.'

Apple's days of waiting for the grim reaper's axe to fall under veiled threats from M$ and Adobe are over.

Apple are finally free of both of them. And are stomping all over their ass. Expect more squealing.

If Apple made a photoshop alt, I'd use it. They made a bad move trash talking Apple. Note the 'we love Apple but...' sucking sound. It won't save them. As the new iPhone 4 and the iPad grow to obscene sales heights...it will merely increase Adobe and M$'s pain...and their irrelevance. They aint going to subject Apple and computer users to the crap they dished up on the desktop. No. They can't transfer their 'monopoly' to mobile computing. That's what the squealing is really about.

Now that it means innovating and getting creative...and earning the right in the '3rd Great Age..,' Adobe and M$ have been found out.

Advantage Apple.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #62 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Predrag View Post

That video is fairly impressive. There is no question about the performance. The obvious thing here is that it is indeed possible to create a Flash plug-in for a mobile device that can be efficient, lean and fast.

That video just shows it working. It gives is no evidence of it being lean and efficient.

Quote:
I can see a possible scenario here. Eventually, Adobe will get the bugs worked out and it will release Flash for Android. The era of Flash on mobile will begin. As more and more people begin to experience Flash on their mobile devices, many will realise what are the TRUE problems with Flash on mobile, and it won't be performance, and perhaps not even stability.

Performance and stability can be problem on the desktop. It's certainly a problem on mobile devices. This is why Adobe keeps pushing back Flash for mobile.

Quote:
There are very many web sites that have fairly elaborate Flash apps out there. These simply CANNOT be ported over to HTML-5 (HTML-5 is NOT a programming language).

Which sites are those? If the functionality is that elaborate why could they not make a native app for the iPad?

Quote:
If Android audience becomes large enough, and Flash content ends up being re-coded for mouseless navigation in significant enough numbers, and if that Flash experience becomes consistently reliable, Apple might end up making a prudent business decision and allowing development of that Flash plug-in after all (with a set of conditions that would provide tight enough control over user experience quality).

That's a whole lotta' IF's. No one is going to wait and see if all of this lines up. The world is going to move on.

Quote:
This whole scenario may take several years to unfold.

Flash doesn't have years. Actually it's out of time.
post #63 of 188
That video floating around where flash is running on a Android device is missing two things. Does not show battery or power usage, which obviously means that it's plugged in the whole time. Also the clips that they run only last for a few seconds.
post #64 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Flash doesn't have years. Actually it's out of time.

That is true. Flash no longer has years to get a proper player out. If it doesn't get done in the second half of 2010, it may be truly a serious problem.

I think the poster you responded to, likely meant it may take time after, -if- adobe gets that player out really soon. I've always maintained that the battling, elbowing etc. is far from over, but adobe is certainly getting some humble pie for not paying closer attention to the mac platform sooner.

Adobe needs to get that player out and on some phones playing interactive content really well well before html5 stuff starts hitting 'the streets', cause that still will take a little time. The video thing is pretty much a lost war fro adobe.

The upside is, actionscript is virtually identical to javascript.
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #65 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post

That is true. Flash no longer has years to get a proper player out. If it doesn't get done in the second half of 2010, it may be truly a serious problem.

It's already a serious problem. Even if they release 10.1 in June, it will only run on a tiny percentage of mobile phones - so 98% of the mobile phone market won't have Flash this year.

If they DON'T get it out during the 2nd half, game's over entirely.
"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 #66 of 188
well, I don't have crystal ball, so I can't make a prediction on where it'll be in early 2011. I'm merely a lowly web developer.
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #67 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qualia View Post


Honestly, I'm happy not to see apps from Flash developers flood the App Store more than it already is with junk.

I can't wait until I can hear my iPhone telling me, "Congratulations! You've won a free iPod Nano!"
post #68 of 188
apparently there are already quite a few apps on the app store built in flash. I didn't know this until recently. I think they were built using the iphone packager. So, I wonder what will happen to those apps soon.
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #69 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

The question is, were they allowed to?

They are allowed to try to develop whatever they wish. I'm sure they know how to jailbreak an iPhone. They just can't release it unless they can convince Apple that Jobs is wrong and Flash works fine on the iPhone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

Very simple. check this video - http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/2...ng-on-android/

Non-mobile optimized flash websites running on an android phone. 3D rendering, videos, etc. One hic-up here and there, but very very usable overall

You miss the point entirely. The original poster was talking about 400-600 MHz phones. You just pointed to a video of a Nexus One which has a 1 GHz processor. NOT equal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

Android is the majority and it is getting flash.

The majority of Android phones won't be getting flash either. They're too slow.


Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

Yes, waste months of development time just so you can show it is possible. There is another way to showcase flash - the competition.

So show Apple that it does work on the competition. Just don't try to spin it like it would have worked on any PREVIOUS generation iPhone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

They are both wrong. Flash was the key piece in the introduction of web 2.0 (or is it 3.0 already?). There are things you can do with flash that you can't do with HTML5, or not as well.

So use Flash for those things that it can do that HTML5 can't. Just don't insist that I need Flash for just video and other simple stuff that HTML5 is fine for. And provide other ways to access simple content for those devices that can't run Flash.

Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

And above all, Adobe makes money, not with flash (although it is a part of it), but with productivity suits. Flash bombs? It's ok, lets just make the ubber HTML5 compliant suit. And get shitloads of cash. It is THAT simple.

And all this to avoid saying the real reason apple doesn't want flash in their platforms - if they could run flash, millions of free games and apps would be available for free, and the monopoly of their app store would end.

You know, there already ARE tons of completely free games and apps on the App Store. Apple cut for those apps is zero. And ALL of those millions of free Flash games and apps would have to be redone to be accessible with a touchscreen with no mouse. Do you see that happening overnight?
post #70 of 188
I keep seeing the firefox ad going through my head. ( go google "IE Whee") The NS babbler is most enjoyable in relating it to the Adobe whining.

Just waiting for Apple to say...

SHUT UP!
post #71 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drow_Swordsman View Post

Why is Adobe crying so much? They are getting seriously worried about all this. I don't care either way, I don't own an iPhone/iPad but I hate flash on OSX. it is constantly crashing, slow, cpu draining, battery draining, and a hassle to deal with.

Adobe is a pissant little company worth about 45% of Apple's cash position.

I'm sure that, if the regulators allowed it, Apple would proceed with a hostile takeover, take control of this miserable little company, break off flash and dump the rest back to somebody for a fire sale price.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #72 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Adobe is a pissant little company worth about 45% of Apple's cash position.

I'm sure that, if the regulators allowed it, Apple would proceed with a hostile takeover, take control of this miserable little company, break off flash and dump the rest back to somebody for a fire sale price.

Haha, nice. But what's to stop them from developing Flash all over again when someone picks them up? It's better to let Flash just slowly die... it's happening anyway.
post #73 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

You can't fore sure say it is only for "the latest android". If the API's are there, and the phone is good enough (and most android phones are), they might be able to support flash...

I can't really agree that most android phones are of the Nexus One caliber. If mobile Flash is confined to 800 MHz or higher phones then a lot of Android phones will be left out in the cold.

Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

Won't comment on the multi-touch experience, but did you see the earlier video I posted? And the battery life problem is a myth - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwWonKwVp1s - Over 3 hours of video on a flash player in a mobile phone. That's quite decent...

Steve Jobs specifically pinpointed Flash video that uses non-H264 codecs. You know, the ones that aren't hardware accelerated in mobiles. That is what drains the battery as the software has to do the heavy lifting. Flash wrapped H264 should be alright on battery. MANY sites are re-encoding their video in H264 even if they still use Flash. This movement is a recent thing though.
post #74 of 188
"We have never, ever abandoned Apple"

I think thou protesteth too much!
post #75 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by sticknick View Post

Some people may know what a Nokia 5800 XpressMusic is.

*EVERYONE* knows what an iPhone is.

Why compare one specific model of a phone, with the generic naming of another?
post #76 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by err View Post

Android is the majority and it is getting flash.

ROFLMAO. I haven't laughed so hard in forever. Where the hell did you get that little nugget?

Android is distant last in smartphone sales. Android only looks close to Apple if you take the US in isolation.
post #77 of 188
I hate that Adobe is trying to turn two issues in to one.

Apple is not allowing it in the browser (as they are all plugins) mostly for performance, memory, and usability reasons.

Apple is not allowing them to use Flash to make apps because Apple could loose control over their own frameworks. It isn't that they want to restrict innovation of development tools or languages, they only care about the frameworks. Adobe seems to be implying that there is some sort of generic programmer out there that wants to write everything imaginable using one framework and language (and that somehow Flash is that language/framework). In reality there are different kinds of programmers out there. One programmer is good at one or two kinds of programming and that is it. If this mythical generic programmer did exist (and a few of them wielding Java probably do) they would write horrible software because they don't have the skills to write a particular type of program correctly. Cross-platform frameworks target the lowest level possible to make them cross-platform. That makes it really difficult on Apple. Say they are creating a triangle on the screen by writing each pixel individually instead of using some hardware accelerated function because that is the lowest common denominator. It is great that this "lowest common denominator" software is kept off of the AppStore. The only exceptions to this may be really heavily domain specific stuff like databases that do not simply wrap Apple's frameworks or programming languages that directly use the Objective-C runtime so that they are essentially native (like MacRuby may be if the iPhone ever adds the Garbage Collection extensions to Objective-C).
post #78 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by bartfat View Post

Haha, nice. But what's to stop them from developing Flash all over again when someone picks them up? It's better to let Flash just slowly die... it's happening anyway.

I agree that if Apple did nothing, the only thing that would ever be produced would be fart apps and Apple could just deny all the apps produced with Flash instead.
post #79 of 188
Flash will be open standard when Adobe can't make any money from it, like Postscript and PDF.
post #80 of 188
It is funny that we are talking about Flash on Mobile phones when there still isn't a real version out for any portable device on the entire planet yet besides some sort of beta...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'We have never, ever abandoned Apple,' Adobe co-founder says