Adobe releases Flash Player 10.1 for Mac - Page 5

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Well, they still aren't ready for Mac OS and they aren't even close to ready for Linux, so it's not really surprising that they aren't ready for mobile, and they never will be ready.

Originally Posted by mstone

thanks that answers that question. So apparently Adobe showed them something,

Originally Posted by solipsism

It's so odd that would make a "250M devices claim by the END of 2012" claim.

For comparison, 2.5 years ago was December 2007...

A lot has changed in 2.5 years. I have to imagine things will change even more rapidly in the next.

Originally Posted by Mr. H

No one is attempting to change the subject. You are attempting to make the subject about delivery of video and nothing else, and in the process you are entirely missing the point of Groovetube's arguments. I suggest you go back and read his posts over and over until you get it. Flash is not just about video delivery, in fact it is only relatively recently in the context of its lifetime that Flash has been able to deliver video.

For all the things that Flash does apart from video, there is (sadly) currently no big exodus from Flash. If a small business goes to a web-developing-house to buy a website, you can bet that 90% of the time they'll be given a website that uses Flash, along with all the usability problems highlighted in my post I linked to earlier.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

Very good point. Adobe is taking way too long, the industry is not going to sit around waiting.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

what exactly, is the... "industry" gonna do though?.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

what exactly, is the... "industry" gonna do though?

Adobe is indeed taking their time. My theory is they need more power on a phone to make the player run better. 1 GHz is the entry level for them perhaps. My feeling is, we won't know if flash is going to really die, until about a year from now. Maybe a bit sooner perhaps.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Plus, gotApple has either ignorantly overlooked or was just being sleazy about Flash game numbers by ignoring all the native app games and the fact that Adobe had to rewrite Flash, not just to be more efficient, but to even work on a touch-based phone.

Originally Posted by jragosta

They're going to do exactly what they've been doing for the past 6 months - creating web sites and apps that don't rely on Flash.

Maybe you missed the announcements about Youtube, Hulu, Disney, CBS, NYTimes, and Farmville? And the web sites from automakers which now run on iPhones? Have you really missed all those announcements?

Face it - the industry is rapidly leaving Flash behind.

Originally Posted by lowededwookie

Ah no because one of the links in the "10 games" collection is actually for a collection therefore the total is roughly 16.

That being said though there are far more and the best thing is that you can also download the source code much easier than for a Flash game.

Originally Posted by gotApple

Now that's a joke. Because some companies make versions of their games/apps/systems for iPhone doesn't mean they are abandoning the 95% of their markets and support only iPhone. The world will continue to use Flash for a long time. Now much Apple has foothold in China? None. Zero. Nothing. How many PCs are there in China? A lot. They can all play Flash...

Originally Posted by Groovetube

what exactly, is the... "industry" gonna do though?

Adobe is indeed taking their time. My theory is they need more power on a phone to make the player run better. 1 GHz is the entry level for them perhaps. My feeling is, we won't know if flash is going to really die, until about a year from now. Maybe a bit sooner perhaps.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Industry is a blanket term for the way companies can connect with users via the internet. That should be self evident.

I expect every mobile OS except the iOS to be shipping with Flash by their "end of 2012" date. I expect every new Android phone being released in the latter half of this year onward to be shipping with Flash.

The problem for Adobe as seen many times over in this still nascent "industry" is that being shipped with doesn't mean being used. HTML5's Canvas element is a prime example of this in modern browsers. it's just too inefficient to be useful at this time. On top of that it doesn't have a proper development platform for it, but that is another issue.

On the flip side, other aspects of HTML, CSS, JS and native apps are efficient and effective options for users over Flash. I still have yet to see a Flash demo on an Android phone be valuable enough to the average user to warrant the browser/system slowdown and power drain associated with it.

Q: How did Adobe tackle the input issue with Flash app? They have the user tap and hold in the Flash window to switch access to Flash, but what about all those Flash games people are clamouring for that require the keyboard and/or mouse pointer to navigate? Does that require retooling from the developer or have they made Flash 10.1 clever enough that they account for these with on-screen buttons as layovers, for example?

Originally Posted by jragosta

*cough* Safari *cough*

I guess in fairness I should add Chrome, Firefox, Opera, etc. Those apps are far more complex than Flash - and almost certainly some of them do not have the amount of resources that Adobe can afford.

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Well, Firefox I would really only consider a native app on Windows, and I don't use Chrome or Opera on any platform (well, ok, I sometimes use Chrome on a "test" laptop at work, but only to verify that stuff already tested in Firefox and Safari works ok) so I can't really speak to how well they are implemented across platforms. Safari isn't really a fully native app on Windows, and I don't count the iOS versions as really distinct platforms from Mac OS. But, that being said, Mozilla, at least, has certainly done a better job of supporting Windows, Mac OS and Linux than Adobe has with Flash.

Originally Posted by jragosta

They're going to do exactly what they've been doing for the past 6 months - creating web sites and apps that don't rely on Flash.

Maybe you missed the announcements about Youtube, Hulu, Disney, CBS, NYTimes, and Farmville? And the web sites from automakers which now run on iPhones? Have you really missed all those announcements?

Face it - the industry is rapidly leaving Flash behind.

Originally Posted by TenoBell

The same as what always happens, the industry will innovate and move on. There are numerous technologies that were once dominant-stagnated-and were left behind. Its a lot easier to replace Flash than replace floppy drives.

I'm not saying Flash is going to die. I've said quite the opposite that it will go on for quite some time. It simply will not continue to have the dominating presence it has had in the past.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

a browser is far more complex than the CS5 suite?



riiiiight.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

you just love talking, and talking, and talking.

I haven't missed anything. But I tend to see the bigger picture a little better it seems.

The "industry", which I work in, is still creating flash sites as fast and as many as a year ago. The er, "industry", is also creating lots of non flash sites.

yawn.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

I agree. Though, for floppy drives, I thought they were kinda pretty dead by the time Steve Jobs called quits on them. It was a pretty safe bet.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

Flash. Hmmm. Well, it ain't gonna happen very quickly if it -did- die. But I as I said before, I see some real shifts coming in that regard.

Originally Posted by jragosta

Of course, no one ever claimed that. What he implied was that a full-blown browser is more complex than Flash - which is a true statement.




Oxygen deprivation?

4 months ago, you and your ilk were insisting that Apple was wrong and that Flash was essential for the Internet - and that no mobile device would survive without Flash. You cited a bunch of examples like Farmville, Youtube, Hulu, car dealers, Disney, and so on.

Since then, most of those sites have either released or announced a way for iPhone users to access their sites.

Lacking the integrity to admit that you were wrong, you dance around like a bunch of Microsoft weenies at a store opening.

Really? Then would you like to explain why every single other computer being sold at the time had floppy drives if floppies were already dead?

Just more of your inane revisionism.

Well, gee - the first sign of your approaching the real world.

Originally Posted by jragosta

4 months ago, you and your ilk were insisting that Apple was wrong and that Flash was essential for the Internet - and that no mobile device would survive without Flash. You cited a bunch of examples like Farmville, Youtube, Hulu, car dealers, Disney, and so on.

Originally Posted by mstone

The companies that have financial resources to rewrite all of their code to accommodate 1% on the market are probably banking on earning it back by selling stuff to the affluent iPhone user demographic. The average small company that simply needs a web presence will not see the need to spend that much money on such a small minority.

Originally Posted by Mr. H

Look, you've made this "point" several times. No need to repeat yourself over and over. All you're doing is demonstrating an inability or unwillingness to understand what people are telling you.

Do you develop websites for a living? Or are you otherwise involved in the web developer community?

Just because 10 websites which used Flash now have non-flash alternatives, doesn't mean Groovetube's arguments are wrong.

As I said before, you are demonstrating an awesome lack of understanding as to how big the world wide web is. 10 websites is nothing. As mstone said earlier:

Originally Posted by jragosta

No, YOU are missing the entire point. People were arguing about how the iPhone and iPad would never catch on because Flash was so critical. They listed a bunch of sites as being critical. Almost all the sites that were cited now have Flash-free versions. All those people whining about the iPHone's pending failure were completely wrong.

Originally Posted by Mr. H

You need to check out the title of this thread. The thread is about Flash, not about the iPhone.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

a browser is far more complex than the CS5 suite?
... riiiiight.

Originally Posted by jragosta

I realize the article was so poorly written that it's hard to get through it, but since you apparently never finished reading it:

"Mobile beta for Android

A second beta release for Android 2.2 was also released, along with the claim by Adobe that more than 250 million smartphones would be able to run Flash Player by 2012, also phrased as 53% of the 300 million smartphones it expects to be sold two years from now.

Adobe also said it plans to bring Flash Player to HP's Palm OS, Microsoft's Windows Phone 7, Nokia's Symbian OS, and RIM's BlackBerry OS at some point in the future. Apple has passed on supporting a version of Flash Player for its iOS devices, with the company's chief executive Steve Jobs saying recently that Adobe failed to ever demonstrate a version of Flash Player that could perform well enough to include on the iPhone."

Originally Posted by jragosta

... What he implied was that a full-blown browser is more complex than Flash - which is a true statement. ...

Originally Posted by Mr. H

This thread has never been about whether or not the iPhone is going to fail because it doesn't run Flash.

Originally Posted by jragosta

No. It's about how Flash for mobile devices is a fail.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

Though, for floppy drives, I thought they were kinda pretty dead by the time Steve Jobs called quits on them. It was a pretty safe bet.

Flash. Hmmm. Well, it ain't gonna happen very quickly if it -did- die. But I as I said before, I see some real shifts coming in that regard.

Originally Posted by solipsism

[Floppy drives] were far from dead ...

Originally Posted by Mr. H

... On the latter point, you made several attempts to argue that it is more-or-less already dead; you are wrong.

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Yes, people would hardly have been declaring Apple totally insane for dropping them if they were obviously on their death bed.

Originally Posted by Mr. H

I think a lot of people were concerned at the time, not because they had dropped the floppy, but that they hadn't provided a direct alternative such as a zip drive or a super-floppy (both proprietary standards, the latter being backwards-compatible with standard floppies whilst offering up to 120 MB storage on "super-floppies" which were physically similar sized disks).

Of course, as it turned out it wasn't a problem. Also of note is that it took them a while longer to drop floppies from their other machines.

Originally Posted by anonymouse

I did not actually mean to imply that. A browser is a complex piece of software -- rendering engine, javascript engine, etc. -- but I'm not actually sure that it's more complex than Flash, which obviously has it's own version of these things.

My point was that for anyone, writing a fully native app that runs well on multiple platforms is a daunting task. Too daunting, perhaps. And this is one of the key problems that Adobe's "Flash everywhere" strategy comes up against. They haven't demonstrated that they can do it on three "desktop" platforms, so why should anyone give any credence to the idea that Adobe can actually cover an additional, how many is it, at least 3 or 4 of significance, platforms?

They can't. That's why I referred to it as a house of cards. The whole strategy is doomed to failure and will crumble under its own weight.

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Yes, people would hardly have been declaring Apple totally insane for dropping them if they were obviously on their death bed.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

I agree. Though, for floppy drives, I thought they were kinda pretty dead by the time Steve Jobs called quits on them. It was a pretty safe bet.

Originally Posted by solipsism

But we can't really compare HW to SW because SW can evolve to meet changes while HW usually can't.

Originally Posted by extremeskater

Its not an argument its the reality of the situation. Do you not use the web? Are you that blind that you don't understand the vast majority of websites use Flash for streaming video and they are not using HTML5.

Besides why is it when someone says they use something, if it doesn't fit into the cookie cutter mold of what Apple wants you to use then your a troll.

Maybe you should just cut and paste becasue again you commented and said nothing.

Try using any local news or weather site and not have Flash as a plugin. See how far you get. Try using sites like VEVO or any of the other hundred that stream music without Flash.

Its not like this is something made up. For you to think Flash still doesn't totally dominate the web, you are living in a cave.

See the difference with you is you modify your behavior based on Apples rules, you play in their little arena, within the walls they create and you allow them to think for you. Which in some sick way makes you happy.

Originally Posted by hezetation

Vast majority uses flash cause no one is forcing them to change. Remember when the vast majority of the web used ActiveX plugins? Man those were ugly times.

Companies have a lot vested in flash, it's true, but the reality is that most flash on the web is used for advertising, other services already have big plans to move into HTML5.

Originally Posted by anonymouse

I still don't see how your argument supports the claim that Apple made a mistake eliminating floppy drives from the iMacs... oh, wait, this is about Flash. Well, same thing.

Originally Posted by masternav

Unfortunately its still on my ignore list - but hey at least I can see you contribute. On the other hand perhaps the commenter you quoted doesn't spend all of their time on porn sites which is where the majority of Flash (outside of ads of course) resides on the intertubes. But you knew that. Didn't you.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Sure, more sites use Flash over HTML5 for video streaming, but even in the last few months that is changing. We have some offering an option for HTML5, others that have long sense started offering an HTML5 version for smartphones or a dedicated app, and others that have stated they will offer a non-Flash version.

I don't have wait until the milk jug to be empty before I know it's time to buy more milk. I can see the trend and Flash for video streaming is losing its hold. Adobe can try to salvage the video streaming it's lost to the largest growing sector of the market, but it doesn't look good. If you want fast and efficient video streaming to a phone, then Flash is not the answer. If you're more concerned with building once and not caring about mobile user eyeballs than Flash will be just fine.

For the other aspects of Flash it'll be a long time before webcode can begin to compete any of many levels, but it seems that isn't much of an issue either. It seems Flash apps are moving to dedicated apps for mobiles. All Flash splash pages are a thing of the past (thankfully) so that pretty much leaves businesses that use a Flash page for a sexy look and feel, but these aren't using the hardcore features of Flash and can be replaced with modern webcode with relative ease. But these sites don't matter much to the web as a whole if I'm looking for a fancy restaurant I will likely never use their website, Flash-based or otherwise.

In the end, even when Flash running on every modern mobile OS (sans iOS) and is pre-installed on every smartphone phone from the factory there is still the hurdle of usefulness to overcome. Like those super feature phones" of Japan and elsewhere and video conferencing that have been on phones for many years, it's not about technically having the capability, it's about it being a viable technology for the device. Nothing I've seen tells me Adobe has tackled that problem.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

I don't know who those people were. But floppies was dying fast before Mr. Jobs said anything about it. There were enough alternatives (like usb floppies I believe) that if someone really wanted it they could have it. It wasn't like STeve Jobs said "you're NOt allowed to have floppies on os x!"

Originally Posted by Groovetube

Adobe is indeed taking their time. My theory is they need more power on a phone to make the player run better. 1 GHz is the entry level for them perhaps. My feeling is, we won't know if flash is going to really die, until about a year from now. Maybe a bit sooner perhaps.

Originally Posted by jragosta

No. It's about how Flash for mobile devices is a fail.

Originally Posted by Stevie

It has not yet been released. How can it be a fail?

Originally Posted by Groovetube

perhaps I mistakenly quoted you as implying that. It appears it was jragosta which I guess isn't a surprise. Sorry.

Originally Posted by Groovetube

I don't know who those people were. But floppies was dying fast before Mr. Jobs said anything about it. There were enough alternatives (like usb floppies I believe) that if someone really wanted it they could have it. It wasn't like STeve Jobs said "you're NOt allowed to have floppies on os x!"