FTC believed to be investigating Apple's anti-Flash stance - Page 4

Since this seems to be the kernel of so many arguments here, I have to wonder out loud what it means, or implies. Should laws only be enforced by torts? Should we do away with District Attorneys, Grand Juries, and maybe even police departments?

Show you what?

For the most part, yes. They are aggression incarnate.

Extra CPU cycles on Mac: Apple doesn't allow Adobe to use the GPU for non-video content, and they can only use it for video content if the video is h.264 encoded and ONLY on a handful of newer devices using specific GPU's. On top of that, studies show that HTML 5 isn't significantly more efficient across the board (and is actually less efficant on windows machines, largely because on windows, Flash can use the GPU at will.

Security: You mean like how you can Jailbreak ios devices from the browser? Yes, the exploit is getting fixed via an update.. kinda like how flash exploits are fixed. You could also do what Google did with Chrome and build flash directly into the browser (no longer a plugin) so when there is a flash update, your browser applies it automatically. No system is secure. One of the reasons flash has so many exploits is because it's everywhere. More people will exploit iOS/html5 as it continues to gain popularity.

Laziness: You do realize that HTML5 just really became a contender for video THIS YEAR, and it's still years away from replacing flash in other content right? And that the standard is still a work in progress, so a lot can change. On top of that, Apple's chosen codec for video (h.264) is one that Mozilla, the second largest browser by users in the world, doesn't support. (and the largest browser, IE, still sucks at HTML5 unless you're using the beta. So these developers have no choice but to USE flash for the foreseeable future.

IE is getting heavy html5 support soon (but it's still years behind chrome/safari when it comes to supported API's) and with the new WebM format, Mozilla has an alternative when it comes to html5 video. But will Apple support WebM? Flash gets around these codec issues because it's a wrapper for video, but if flash doesn't work on a device, say an iphone, what happens if webM becomes the codec of choice for iphone users and apple doesn't adopt it?

Don't call developers "lazy" when it comes to flash. It's the single platform that will hit the most potential users, and HTML5 is still in a lot of flux for a lot of developers to commit to developing for two platforms. HTML5 is the future of video, but it's still not there yet, and it's years from being ready for other content.

I don't think it really means going that far. It's hard to put into words, but it does seem like people and corporations run to government entities and the judicial system too often.

It seems that because Adobe can't force Apple to support the product of their products, so they'll complain to some higher power to do it for them. It probably doesn't cost them anything though. I don't really see where they'll get traction, but if it's the thought that counts, I don't know if I like that thought. I'm not seeing the crime, and I'm not seeing where the technology markets are harmed, because there are plenty of other platforms that Adobe supports with their products.

OK, when using Cocoa/Objective C, the foresight in the framework is incredible. I have learn't that if ever I think "why the hell did Apple do that" 99% of the time it becomes clear at a later date the reason why they chose that path.
Whereas in Flash every day I screamed "why the hell did Adobe do that" but no answer ever came. Just visionless nonsense.
I must admit I haven't touched Flash for two years, but I was a dev since the early nineties and prior to that I used Director.
I used to be a big fan of Macromedia until Adobe bought them.
I have used a multitude of frameworks and languages over the past 27 years, and most make my blood boil bar Cocoa.

That aside, there are obvious (and huge) performance differences.

When people make statements like this, I have a suspicion that they are secretly happy to know that the world they've made up in their heads will never exist. If that wasn't the case, they'd already be living in some lawless country which suits their ideal concept of every man for himself. I can suggest a few in Africa.

The irony is that the FTC and the Antitrust Division of the DoJ have been emasculated in recent decades. Any and all mergers, for instance, were routinely approved with only the most cursory review. Do we really benefit when the cops avert their eyes?

Adobe can complain all they like -- just as you and I can about a neighbor's barking dog. That doesn't mean they're getting anywhere.

Gross Profit is simply Revenue minus Cost of Goods Sold (the latter being a rough measure of direct costs). By itself, it's an intermediate metric that is somewhat meaningless, quite different from, say Profit (Net Income) or Cash Flow or, for that matter, even EBIT (Operating Income).

What is the point you're trying to make?

FTC ought to just bud-out. Government only makes matters worse and makes a mess of things. Government is the PROBLEM, NOT the solution!

If Adobe really wants Flash on iPhone, release it on Cydia, OR make an Adobe Flash phone.

I understand that, for example, I don't know if the cellular mergers have benefited anyone but the cellular companies, where it's closer to an oligopoly than it was before. I realize some countries have fewer cellular companies, but those countries generally have far smaller populations as well.


You're right, I agree on this.

Something else is that this might not even be happening anyway.

Lol. Let me guess. You must have grown up in the Sixties calling them 'pigs.'

You wrote "As a Flash developer & an iOS dev, I can unequivocally conclude that Flash is a complete crock of shite in comparison."

Show us the comparison.

On the other hand, Government should be transparent, denying Wired's request is nonsense.

On the flipside, Government really has NO BUSINESS in this matter!!!

Just because you may not be familiar with the current version of ActionScript, or don't know how to use it, does not mean anything. That would be like me saying about Objective-C (with which I'm not familiar) "That seems really hard and unintuitive, it's shite."

As I thought when you made your assertion, it's baseless hyperbole (but thanks for your input).

Any citizen -- that includes corporations, even foreign corporations doing business in the US -- has the right to petition government. Once petitioned (and assuming the complaint is not an unreasonable or outlandish one), the government (pretty much) has an obligation to look into it.

As Millmoss has pointed out, nothing at all may come out of it.

Incidentally, it is not much different in the EU. Lately, they have been even more aggressive in matters like these.

Wow, you are beginning to sound like a stuck record. (Remember those? )

Whatever man. Protest too much....

comprehend English too little.

Speak for yourself. I want Flash to die, and tomorrow isn't soon enough.

Respect is to be earned, not donated. They do nothing to earn it.

This is completely false. You can use the hardware on the Mac - via OpenCL and other Apple APIs. It's just that Apple won't let developers write directly to the hardware. That's why Mac OS X is so stable. Developers work through Apple's APIs and they can't open security holes left and right.

It's funny how people can do things that do amazing things on the Mac but Adobe can't write a version of Flash that doesn't suck CPU cycles. Heck, Photoshop will sling around multi MB images like there's no tomorrow on my Mac, yet it comes to a screeching halt running a simple 640x480x8 bit image (with no action) on Flash. It's not about Apple, it's about Adobe.


That's true under the Bush Administration. Unfortunately, there are signs that Obama may go too far in the other direction.


I don't need to quit. The posts you cite prove my point. I never said any such thing. YOU are the one who pretended that I said that - in your usual idiotic, fact-free way. You claimed that Apple had 40% profit on something or other (I don't remember). I explained to you that the 40% figure was GROSS PROFIT, not PROFIT. NO ONE with any business knowledge refers to gross profit (or gross margin) as profit.

And, even after all this time, and all the times I've explained it to you, you STILL haven't learned the difference. Amazing.


First, there's no evidence that Adobe can make Flash for the iPhone that won't crash. The best they've been able to do is release a slow, buggy version that runs on a tiny percentage of 1 GHz phones. When this all started, the iPhone was 400 MHz. There's no way in the world that Flash would have worked - but it's Adobe's burden to prove that they could. After years of Apple asking, they still never did.

But even if they DID release a slow buggy version that ran on the iPhone, it would be the worst of both worlds. Even if it was optional, developers would continue to produce Flash crap and would not put the energy into developing REAL apps and web pages. They would count on users clicking 'yes' on the "Flash is not installed, do you want to install it?" page.


ROTFLMAO. Someone suggested that Adobe should release Flash to Open Source. You come up with some project that USE flash (or flash converters, etc). Do you really not know the difference?


We don't know that. All we know is that there are RUMORS of an investigation. If people panicked every time there was a rumor of an investigation, we'd all be in huge trouble. Let's wait to see if there's EVER an investigation and then wait to see if Apple is found guilty of anything.

The degree of intelligence in the anti-Adobe crowd is self-evident.

You attempt at sarcasm belies a complete disconnect from the obvious parameters in play.

There are no APIs that Adobe doesn't have access to to make Flash run with acceptable performance on Mac OS X. The problem is that Adobe doesn't want to implement Flash as a Mac application. (And one could argue that they they have the same approach to their Creative Suite apps.) Now they even have access to APIs that they didn't need but wanted.

Flash is a piece of crap software, buggy, inefficient, poorly conceived, bloated, and the epitome of bad cross platform development. It's entirely unsuited to Mobile computing, and even on your Droid where you say it runs great it will suck your battery down in a flash, and, although I haven't run it on a Droid, I've seen other reports that call into question your exact description of its performance.

Besides being an outdated concept that holds back progress (And Adobe seems to be doing all they can to hold back progress on HTML5.) and besides the fact that by its very nature it's unsuitable for mobile computing -- not just the runtime, but the flash files themselves -- Adobe will never be able to make Flash run acceptably on multiple platforms, especially not mobile platforms. Yeah, they are hoping that processor and battery advances will make performance issues go away, but they won't, fast enough.

Adobe has demonstrated that it's just not capable of making Flash run decently on more than one desktop platform. The idea that they'll suddenly be able to have Flash running well on Windows and Mac OS, and Linux (ha!) and iOS, and the various flavors of Android and WebOS and Blackberry OS and Windows Phone 7 and, assuming Nokia stays alive, whatever OS they end up using in the future. The idea that this is suddenly all going to change and that Adobe will support all these platforms, when they can't even support two well now, is utterly preposterous. Their culture will never be able to make the adjustment, they'll simply never be able to do it.

And this is exactly the root of the problem with Flash and why it needs to die. The choice is to saddle countless users on multiple platforms with crappy Flash performance for years to come -- not to mention the crashes, the security exploits (they'll never keep up with those), etc. -- or to completely abandon the model of content distribution that Flash represents and move to HTML5, where multiple browser vendors, each focused on their platforms of interest, optimize browser performance and security, all working toward the same goal of implementing a common standard.

Now, which of these is likely to produce the better result for users, developers, content publisher's and even advertisers, over the long haul? It's pretty clear that it's not the one that Adobe is try to ram down our throats because they bet the company on it.

You were the same one saying the DOJ needed to grab a piece of Microsoft's ass a decade ago. Now you say it's not the place of the government.

Apple has become the new Microsoft, as a wide array of Mac-loving Apple fanboys readily agree.

You'd think if such a memo or the idea behind it was real someone would be rich by now. Let us know when someone is awarded this bounty.

As a developer I use ANY tool that does the job.

The reality is that HTML 5 is 10 years behind Flash when it comes to building anything immersive or significant.

I've seen the HTML 5 demos and all I can do is laugh. Why do you think all the big web sites use Flash?

Yeah, but do you really think those other companies will keep updated like Apple does?

There is nothing in that history to support your conclusion, and I doubt very much that you are in a position to say what motivates Steve Jobs. It's really a ridiculous notion that Apple has any interest in "hurting" Adobe, or that they have any other motivation for their actions than to insure the success of their platforms.

HaHaHa! Love it!

It's called DAMAGE CONTROL.

ADOBE IS NOT GOING TO FOOL ANYONE.


Why Demo a product using a shitty version?

The reality is that Flash is 5 to 10 years behind itself, then, or it's developers are. Seriously, I can't even remember a time when I've gone to a website and said, "Oh, wow, this Flash thing they did is so cool, I'm totally immersed in it." (Should there be a "dude" on the end of that?) The reality is that I've yet to see a Flash based website that wasn't a piece of shit and that I didn't wish that they had just used HTML as god intended on the web. Maybe I'm just not impressed by "cool" animations and transitions and "effects". Actually, I'm really not because they just get in the way of what the site is supposed to be about. Or maybe it's the mentality of people who choose to develop in Flash that's the problem. The bottom line is that Flash is a technology that just seems to bring out the worst in web design and development.

Because he was testing out a new release. It's called Beta testing. not every release will have everything working.

That video is using a NexusOne running Flash10.1 flawlessly.

Again that's a false dichotomy. Just because Apple isn't meeting all of their goals, it doesn't mean the process is totally lacking in value and it should be tossed out!

It means the process is new and needs to be improved! And over the last two (yes, just two years - that's all the older the App store is) Apple has made steady and continual improvements.

I'm glad you are so perfect in everything you can do - that you are able to predict every possible outcome, anticipate and plan for all of them and execute flawlessly. Your a genius - what are you doing posting on an Internet message board? You should be out there making huge money showing companies the errors of their ways!


Neither myself nor Apple are scared of anything. The vast majority of apps go through the approval process just fine.

Quality is a HUGE [sic] concern - that's why they banned third party porting tools such as what Adobe was working on.

Porting tools and abstraction environments aren't created for the benefit of the end user. Such tools are to make the programmers life easier. Is it any wonder why Apple has an issue with this? What's Apple's number one goal? The end user experience! Apple knows who their customers really are. It's not the developers, resellers, cell phone manufacturers or even share holders... their customers are you, me and more importantly non-technical people like my parents - the largest demographic of all.

That's who Apple focuses on, period, end of subject. It's also no accident that Apple has the highest customer satisfaction ratings in the industry - and by a wide margin.

People spin and try to justify porting tools and abstraction layers with lame straw men like it offers people more programs than they would have otherwise - again that's like saying you have more choices of homogenized, bland gruel.

Why bother?

Apple isn't about volume. Another fact that seems to drive people crazy - "what without raw numbers you are nothing!" goes the conventional wisdom. Yet look at Apple's profit vs. their market share. How can this be?

It's simple. Apple doesn't focus on crap like market share, or even to a lesser extent, profit. They focus on the end user experience (and thus, that's how they focus on profit - I'm not saying they don't focus on profit at all, just that they do it in context). If you ever watch Steve Jobs speak in public, you can't miss it - it's a theme that comes up constantly! How people can miss it, or dismiss it as Apple playing lip service is just boggling - much like the derisive attitude you display in your post. If you don't believe them, fine - that's your right. I reserve the right to pass you a tin foil hat.

You can't build as successful a business as Apple's by being disingenuous, which is what you are essentially accusing them of being - and to insinuate that they are is just nuts. Their actions and success simply speak otherwise. If you don't agree with their position, fine. But you shouldn't be surprised when you aren't taken seriously given their continued (and accelerating) success!

I've heard fart apps don't fart that loud when developed in Flash

HTML5 is JUST starting to support the API's needed to take it beyond simple text. a year ago, it was barely something worth talking about beyond an alternative way to stream video.

If flash was removed from all web content today, there is NOTHING that is ready to fill everything it can do. Yes, it's going to fade, and yes, HTML5 will be superior to it. But not today.

Fair enough. But even if there is an investigation - and let's, for the sake of argument, say that there is....

Big flipping deal. Investigations mean nothing. It could be as simple as reviewing what someone filing a complaint submits and then filing as "that was interesting but not actionable" up and to something far more serious.

I'd wager the vast majority of investigations go absolutely nowhere - the courts would be even more clogged than they are now.


...they would be fools and rightly compared to chicken little.


Let's not. Instead let's wait and see if there is a trial that finds Apple guilty of anything.

Investigations can't determine guilt, just the merit of going forward with prosecution. Investigations, in and of themselves, are pretty meaningless. It's the outcome of the investigation, if any, that is important. Not the fact that investigations happen.

A total non story, since as you point out it's just a rumor of investigation.

They are taking the profits of the iOS and preventing other companies from selling Windows computers? Wow.

They are a convicted monopolist? They focus on products and features instead of the end user? They produced a smartphone platform that no one wants?

Your right, they are exactly the same

As a non-Windows end user, it is.

Apple is preventing people to port apps developed with Adobe tools. To me, it does sound very anti-competitive.

No one can force Apple to develop porting tools, but if there are porting tools available, and resulting code is compatible with iOS platform without any modifications required on OS side, Apple should not enforce such an administrative restriction.

Porting is very common on much more complex levels than iOS apps. Games are being ported between different game console platforms all the time, for example. It is true that ports are by default not as superior as originals, but they can come close. Additionally, we are talking about code infinitely more complex than your average mobile phone application.