or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe resumes development of Packager for iPhone tool
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Adobe resumes development of Packager for iPhone tool - Page 2

post #41 of 82
I'm more annoyed by Flash than maybe your average Mac user.

That said, if I was a Flash developer I'd be pretty gun-shy about putting much effort in converting my app.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #42 of 82
Good thing. Not allowing cross platform tools was retarded. You need to think of dev cost and most dev's now wants to make apps for both Android and iOS. In fact, Android is getting fast toward a point where dev are going to choose it instead of iOS so Apple better allow those tools.

Apple is in the business of selling hardware, its not going after Os world domination and you cant win an OS war if your the only one making hardware for it. Android will beat iOs pretty quickly so they need to adjust and allow easy porting of apps between OS.

In fact, Apple should start planning on releasing an Android based iphone. The goal of Apple is making usefull, simple and superior hardware, not software.
post #43 of 82
You know until Jobs point out the fact that Flash is the number one reason Mac's have crashed. I could not figure out from time to time why Safari locked up and sum time getting the you must shut down now warning message or worse yet the kernel panics with black and white text all over the screen.

After that comment was made I paid much more attention to what was going on at the time when these odd events happened and Jobs was right. I was on a website that had flash running on it for some stupid advertising and 9 out of 10 time Safari would lock up. I could reproduce it buy going to that sight again and is the same ad came up since the random place ads in front of you so some developers of flash ads are more hackers then others but it would cause the mac all sort of problems.

Since I have figure this out, I use Saft to block these ad sites so not to ever load their content in Safari.

Also, I do not think Apple specially did this for Adobe, in reality they probably change the language to allow other companies to do things they want done and there was no way of disallowing adobe and allow everyone else.

I hope someone comes out with an app like Saft for the mac that allows you to block ads. I also hope the developers of little snitch make and app for iOS so i can block out going information.
post #44 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

You should probably start looking for a good therapist because your hated for Flash is psychotic. Now that Flash ports are going to be allowed on iPhone, you might just go postal on us without professional help.

You are deluding yourself if you think this is being allowed because Apple decided they were wrong, that Flash wasn't a piece of shit. This is corporate influence over government in action, pure and simple. Flash is still dead on the web in 2-5 years, and this won't save it.
post #45 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Flash stands no chance of dying because Windows users have zero problems with Flash. Also with the speed of the new Android phones Flash 10.1 runs just fine.

Do you realize that this is BS or do you actually believe the nonsense you continually post on this forum?
post #46 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViktorCode View Post

It means that no app can use plug-ins / scripts downloaded from any other place but AppStore. Say, you can make a photo editor application and can offer its users additional image filters and effects for a fee. Those are essentially pieces of code. But you can offer them only through IAP (in-App Store), not from some internet server or local computer.

In other words, every piece of code - integrated or not - must pass AppStore approval.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

My guess would be that these cross-compiled solutions (Flash, C# "Mono", Java etc) are actually interpreter engines for applications that can run on them, in a similar way that your web browser is an interpreter for HTML pages.

Just like you can load multiple pages into your web browser once it is on your computer, so you can load the code for multiple applications into your cross-compiled solution once it is installed.

It looks like Apple are limiting cross-compiled solutions to the one application that Apple certifies and blocking them from downloading more applications. This is kind of like bundling up your web browser and a specific HTML page together, and blocking the browser from going to different pages.

It makes sense. If Apple let Adobe load multiple applications into their Flash application on the iPhone then Adobe could essentially build their own competing application store.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Very simply that is has to use only the code that is part of the app submitted to the app store, it's not allowed to call/download extra code during runtime.

I'm not a programmer, but I wonder if this is entirely correct. An app like Netflix seems like it's developed with HTML, which means it's probably using Java or Javascript. Any app that calls for data to be delivered from a server could execute something which is arguably "code" from that server. How can this be prevented entirely?
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #47 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Flash is still dead on the web in 2-5 years, and this won't save it.


Flash will be dead when something can replace it.

One reason Flash appears to overwork the CPU, the single biggest complaint I hear, is that it is doing something that HTML 5 cannot. It is preloading while streaming at the same time. Take for example a picture viewer application that has thumbnails and large images. With HTML you have basically two choices. Load all the images and thumbnails before displaying anything, or load images as needed. In both cases you experience undesirable delays, however with Flash it starts loading what it needs to get started and continues to load all the content so that it is immediately available when requested. This is what is heating up the CPU, the high speed background processing, but it is for a good reason. Better user experience. That is just one example. There are many others why Flash is still unmatched for what it does best - animation.

By the way I'm looking for good HTML 5 programmers. Send me a PM.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I'm not a programmer, but I wonder if this is entirely correct. An app like Netflix seems like it's developed with HTML, which means it's probably using Java or Javascript. Any app that calls for data to be delivered from a server could execute something which is arguably "code" from that server. How can this be prevented entirely?

Because a) the code that runs on the server isn't downloaded to the iPhone, and b) any "code" downloaded from the server may only be run by WebKit, which doesn't support Flash. Any app that operates outside these restrictions will be rejected.
post #49 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

You are deluding yourself if you think this is being allowed because Apple decided they were wrong, that Flash wasn't a piece of shit. This is corporate influence over government in action, pure and simple. Flash is still dead on the web in 2-5 years, and this won't save it.

hmm lets not mixed up interpreted flash code with converted flash apps. Converted flash apps will be pre-compile apps in iOS code. Flash on the net is code that is interpreted on the fly has its received.

Flash reminds me of the Basic language we had on PC's long ago. You could have an app abend on a syntax error, something a compiler will pick up before the app is release. Not to mention compiled apps are much faster and a lot more secure.
post #50 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I'm not a programmer, but I wonder if this is entirely correct. An app like Netflix seems like it's developed with HTML, which means it's probably using Java or Javascript. Any app that calls for data to be delivered from a server could execute something which is arguably "code" from that server. How can this be prevented entirely?

Not Java, but apps are allowed to use Webkit. The rules have been changed a few times but at one point if you used a web browser like interface in your app that downloaded HTML/JS then it was considered adult content. The difference with this new clause is probably in reference to compiled code. HTML/JS is not compiled and runs in a sandbox. Compiled code can potentially do a lot of damage if the programmer had some malicious intent.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #51 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackintosh View Post

Oh oh. Name calling. Gonna report you.

But for the record, there is a word for someone who doesn't respond to what a person says and tries to dismiss the person with name calling and insults. You, sir, are a...

Agh, I can't name call. I have too many points already.

Stop whining, and grow up.
post #52 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

hmm lets not mixed up interpreted flash code with converted flash apps. Converted flash apps will be pre-compile apps in iOS code. Flash on the net is code that is interpreted on the fly has its received.

Flash reminds me of the Basic language we had on PC's long ago. You could have an app abend on a syntax error, something a compiler will pick up before the app is release. Not to mention compiled apps are much faster and a lot more secure.

No, I'm not mixing up the two. That's why I don't believe this will save Flash on the web, because it will have no impact there.
post #53 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Stop whining, and grow up.


Did you just call me a winer? I'm gonna report you!
post #54 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

I'm not a programmer, but I wonder if this is entirely correct. An app like Netflix seems like it's developed with HTML, which means it's probably using Java or Javascript. Any app that calls for data to be delivered from a server could execute something which is arguably "code" from that server. How can this be prevented entirely?

My instant reaction to that comment was "no, that's different"... but when you get down to it the example you gave (i.e. an application using HTML\\Javascript) is quite similar to other cross-compiled solutions. The main difference is that in the case of HTML\\Javascript Apple control the interpreter (e.g. Webkit\\Safari) so they are able to control what the interpreted application can and cannot access on the phone.

If we assume "code" means "a set of instructions that tell an application how to behave" then basically any application that supports complex file formats with some level of scripting could potentially be blocked under this clause.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple left the definition intentionally ambiguous so the blocking of an application could be left up to their discretion.
post #55 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Flash stands no chance of dying because Windows users have zero problems with Flash

Seriously? Run that statement by anyone who manages an IT dept, and prepare to get an earful about continuous updates for bugs and security holes.
post #56 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccherry View Post

let me tell yall something! I'm on my 2ghz macbook original AL(13 inch) with 2 gigs of ram and 250 megs of Nvidia shared video. I tell you when I play quake live it looks like I'm in a pixar movie. The macbook can handle high-end graphics like a mothe*****.
Anyway, I was on that Nike.com site tonight and I wanted to explode! That site with all its nasty freaking flash is hell to navigate through. Flash is a disease. Kill it.

rofl! Quake live is high end graphics?
post #57 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArchAngel21x View Post

Seriously? Run that statement by anyone who manages an IT dept, and prepare to get an earful about continuous updates for bugs and security holes.

I just did. He told me to tell you to shut up. Apparently it's better to patch security holes than not to or something?

I'm not even kidding.
post #58 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

rofl! Quake live is high end graphics?

For Apple's video card choices, seemingly.
post #59 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

There is nothing to backup the statement that Flash is going to be dead in 2-5 years.

You don't understand. Apple users account for almost 5% of web page hits.

If Apple devices won't work with Flash, every content provider will invest however many millions of dollars it takes to reach those users. Or so say some...
post #60 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by nkhm View Post

Adobe already support HTML5. HTLM5 != a flash replacement.

HTML5 is the successor to HTML4 - hyper text mark up language - its nothing new, and most professional developers already use it. It's the core language of web page development, nothing else. It's not some brand new black magic and seems to be very misunderstood on these posts.

It's not misunderstood at all. Flash is made up of two main parts, the Actionscript API and the vector graphics component. Apple submitted the Canvas HTML element to take the role of the vector graphics component and Javascript is an Actionscript equivalent.

The tools aren't as mature as Flash yet but without any shadow of doubt, the HTML 5 demoes that exist replace over 90% of the applications that Flash is used for:

http://www.chromeexperiments.com/

- web fonts
- vector graphics animation and interactive control
- embedded video and audio

Not only this but HTML 5 + JS separates the loading out so it's not just one long wait for a 5MB SWF to download before you can do anything and it's accessible so it downgrades for older browsers or screen readers. Just because Google says things like HTML 5 can't replace Flash on Youtube, they just mean not yet. Any minor features will be added in time like being able to skip to part of a clip without waiting for the whole movie to load.

Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly

Most people seem to think that html+js is a viable alternative to flash now that html5 is around. I would challenge those people to go to a website like http://10k.aneventapart.com/ and see how their iphone just EATS IT UP. It won't.

To me the real reason Flash sucks is that the horsepower isn't there. Not for flash, and in my experience, not for html5+js, either.

I agree that many HTML 5 apps aren't designed for touch just like Flash so the iPhone won't work well with them and interpreted code in Flash is slow as is JS. But HTML 5 + JS isn't worse than Flash performance-wise and it's open for any manufacturer to implement, they don't have to wait on Adobe doing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron

If not for Adobe, the Mac Pro would be unlikely to still exist. You should be kissing their feet for supporting Apple.

Only After Effects in the CS Suite would tax a Mac Pro, there are many more apps that a workstation is needed for. Also, Apple made Adobe what they are and I think their love notes to Apple show that they know this. Both companies have driven each other's business models so I think there is a mutual respect. This conflict had to arise at some point though and they just have to work through it - neither company will suffer as a result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone

Probably an indirect reference to Flash. The way some advanced Flash programmers write applications is to create a shell application that loads other swf files (compiled code) into the main stage. These other swf files could actually come from a internet and not reside in the local app package. I think that is the part that is prohibited.

It means interpreted code, which is all Flash code. Flash is authored as bytecode as you said, which is downloaded and run on a virtual machine. The Flash packager converts to native code at compile time so there can be no dynamic code run with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone

It is actually kind of a bummer though because it could serve as a great platform to deliver animated magazine subscriptions which are loaded into the reader app, if they allowed it.

They can dynamically load content and even dynamic code so long as it runs through one of Apple's interpreters like the Javascript engine so regularly updated magazines are fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Millmoss

Any app that calls for data to be delivered from a server could execute something which is arguably "code" from that server. How can this be prevented entirely?

That's what the sandbox is for. To run code, something has to allow it to run. In the case of interpreted code, that's up to the VM, in the case of native code, it's the system kernel. On the iPhone, you'd want to call a function like system() with the path to a binary that you'd downloaded but a non-jailbroken iPhone won't let you. Plus if they did allow it, Apple would quarantine it before release to ensure the calls only ran code that was bundled with the app.

For example, Apple could allow you to run an emulator so long as every emulated call was to run code bundled with the app and nothing else.
post #61 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Also, I do not think Apple specially did this for Adobe, in reality they probably change the language to allow other companies to do things they want done and there was no way of disallowing adobe and allow everyone else.

Fully agree with this comment. I think it wound up to be a case of "throwing out the baby with the bath water". I believe Apple would still prefer not to allow apps that are cross compiled from Flash, but realized, very quickly, that these restrictions were much further reaching, and especially including games development.

If there were any influence from the FTC, I believe that would be related to the Admob situation.

As for third party development tools, I think Apple is simply making trade-offs here. With the allowance of cross compiled apps from Flash, there will be a subset of iOS app developers whose API's will essentially be determined by Adobe. This is not good for Apple, but I suspect had they tweaked the restrictions to omit Flash tools and not other third party tools, they likely would have been flagged by the FTC for restraint of trade.

My guess is moving forward that there will likely be apps that break periodically when Apple updates iOS or their hardware, or that this phenomenon will be more prevalent than in the past.
post #62 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post

A few notes:
Why do we have to put Apple engineers at Intel headquarters! Intel processors use x86 architecture, iOS does not use x86 architecture, A4 is not a x86 system!

So even Apple customers are forgetting that Apple still makes Macs.
post #63 of 82
Does this mean that people who want to create iOS applications will no longer need to use a Mac or Xcode at all?
post #64 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

You know until Jobs point out the fact that Flash is the number one reason Mac's have crashed. I could not figure out from time to time why Safari locked up and sum time getting the you must shut down now warning message or worse yet the kernel panics with black and white text all over the screen.

After that comment was made I paid much more attention to what was going on at the time when these odd events happened and Jobs was right. I was on a website that had flash running on it for some stupid advertising and 9 out of 10 time Safari would lock up. I could reproduce it buy going to that sight again and is the same ad came up since the random place ads in front of you so some developers of flash ads are more hackers then others but it would cause the mac all sort of problems.

Since I have figure this out, I use Saft to block these ad sites so not to ever load their content in Safari.

Also, I do not think Apple specially did this for Adobe, in reality they probably change the language to allow other companies to do things they want done and there was no way of disallowing adobe and allow everyone else.

I hope someone comes out with an app like Saft for the mac that allows you to block ads. I also hope the developers of little snitch make and app for iOS so i can block out going information.

To everyone complaining about Flash crashing Safari: Do any of you know whether Safari in Snow Leopard really is "Crash resistant" to plugins as Apple claims? Has this feature actually worked for any of you?

http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/safari.html
post #65 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SinisterJoe View Post

Not looking forward to a tidal wave of shoddy ports but it seems Apple has very clearly reserved the right to reject applications for bad interfaces so I suppose that covers my biggest concern.

Flash Packager-originated apps have no internationalization story and no accessibility story, so it's a big screw-you to non-English speakers and those with visual and hearing impairments.

Thanks, Adobe!
post #66 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

Most people seem to think that html+js is a viable alternative to flash now that html5 is around.

Additionally, there are some things that are harder to do in Flash than in HTML + JS. Integrating with server-side scripting for accessing database content for one as well as Javascript and the DOM.

Take the example of browser ball:

http://www.chromeexperiments.com/detail/browser-ball/

When you spawn a window, you can throw the ball from one window to another seamlessly. This can probably be done in Flash too but you'd need to create local connections between multiple swf instances:

http://www.ahrooga.com/entry/how-to-...calconnection/

DOM referencing is way easier than that. Integrating Flash with Javascript has browser issues and you have to override a standard function call and process your events through it but create an IE-specific function to make it work properly and you continually have to jump from the browser back to the Flash IDE, compile, clear the browser cache and reload to test it. It's a horrible workflow.

You can't debug Flash either without building a debug panel into the Flash movie yourself. Then there's the problem of standard UI support and scroll-wheel actions not supported in the Mac version of Flash nor the behaviour of the scroll bar and images that can't be dragged from say a Flash gallery to your desktop.

There's just so many things it doesn't do well by design that to fix them would be like beating a dead horse. Just bury it and get a new horse - HTML 5 + JS is that new horse. Sure it rides a bit unevenly just now but it will catch up soon - everyone needs to get on the same page and realise that Flash has fulfilled its role to provide a stopgap for missing browser functionality but that role no longer needs to be filled or at least most of the duties required are no longer required to be done by a plugin.

Adobe make great content creation software and that won't be affected when Flash has no online relevance. Once people start switching embedded video to HTML 5, the most important function it currently provides will be no more. Then goes the quirky animation content and in 5 years, it's just a vague memory. Internet Explorer is moving this way (finally) and scored highly on the Acid test and has GPU accelerated HTML 5. With IE pushing ahead with this, it's just going to take a site like Youtube to pull the plug once the functionality is there.
post #67 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

To everyone complaining about Flash crashing Safari: Do any of you know whether Safari in Snow Leopard really is "Crash resistant" to plugins as Apple claims? Has this feature actually worked for any of you?

http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/safari.html

I would not know, I am not on Snow Leopard on my main Mac. All I know by blocking links to cite that create Flash based ads I eliminated most all the crashes.
post #68 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Funny it appears most people believe what you post is nonsense. In fact there are members recommending you get a good doctor. You are dreaming if you think Flash is going anywhere anytime soon, even more so now that the newest Android based phones support 10.1.

Your rants have simply become a joke. Try running some benchmarks before typing so you actually have a clue what you are talking about.

Blah blah blah. The same old tired litany.

And exactly what percentage of Android phones can run Flash, and what percentage of mobile devices is that? A meaningless percentage.

And what do benchmarks have to do with your absurd claim that Windows users experience zero problems with Flash?
post #69 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Not Java, but apps are allowed to use Webkit. The rules have been changed a few times but at one point if you used a web browser like interface in your app that downloaded HTML/JS then it was considered adult content. The difference with this new clause is probably in reference to compiled code. HTML/JS is not compiled and runs in a sandbox. Compiled code can potentially do a lot of damage if the programmer had some malicious intent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

My instant reaction to that comment was "no, that's different"... but when you get down to it the example you gave (i.e. an application using HTML\\Javascript) is quite similar to other cross-compiled solutions. The main difference is that in the case of HTML\\Javascript Apple control the interpreter (e.g. Webkit\\Safari) so they are able to control what the interpreted application can and cannot access on the phone.

If we assume "code" means "a set of instructions that tell an application how to behave" then basically any application that supports complex file formats with some level of scripting could potentially be blocked under this clause.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple left the definition intentionally ambiguous so the blocking of an application could be left up to their discretion.

Thanks for the explanations. I understood most of it, I think. I agree, the ambiguity could well be intentional, but of course if Apple ever denies listing an app for technical reasons that seem questionable (and you know they will), then we'll hear the same old refrain all over again.
Please don't be insane.
Reply
Please don't be insane.
Reply
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Additionally, there are some things that are harder to do in Flash than in HTML + JS. Integrating with server-side scripting for accessing database content for one as well as Javascript and the DOM....<snip>..

These are all good points - you've obviously put your mind to the question.

My comments specifically were about performance on iPhone (and like devices), though, and comments like flash would run like a dog on iphone may be true, but a little bit of honesty about the matter would see people admit that the same content is just as likely to run as poorly using HTML5+js.
post #71 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

You know until Jobs point out the fact that Flash is the number one reason Mac's have crashed. I could not figure out from time to time why Safari locked up and sum time getting the you must shut down now warning message or worse yet the kernel panics with black and white text all over the screen.

Jobs was talking out his butt when he made that comment. Safari is the reason my Mac crashes, it will do it with or without any flash loaded
post #72 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsherly View Post

My comments specifically were about performance on iPhone (and like devices), though, and comments like flash would run like a dog on iphone may be true, but a little bit of honesty about the matter would see people admit that the same content is just as likely to run as poorly using HTML5+js.

The Flash demoes on Android devices generally run poorly and they would run poorly on an iPhone too. Some Adobe tests look quite good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJiqLivSUHE

but you still see the impact Flash has on the browser when it comes to scrolling and battery life:

http://blog.laptopmag.com/mobile-fla...ves-jobs-right
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367402,00.asp

People keep getting into the mindset that Steve Jobs just had an idea that Flash sucks and he's just running with it. He clearly said they asked Adobe to deliver the player and in 3 years they never did and they still haven't produced a player that gives an overwhelmingly good experience. So do we just keep waiting?

Do we just keep hoping they can fix security updates and improve performance over time? No, now is when we decide that content needs optimised for mobile devices so we have to pick the best technology to go forward and Flash isn't the right horse to bet on (because it's dead as mentioned previously).

Yes an overloaded page with HTML 5 content will slow the browser down too but the browser developer has control over that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar

To everyone complaining about Flash crashing Safari: Do any of you know whether Safari in Snow Leopard really is "Crash resistant" to plugins as Apple claims? Has this feature actually worked for any of you?

It loads the Flash Player plugin in a separate process so if it crashes, it can't take down the browser. I had a Flash ad sucking up 100% CPU and all I did was go into the activity monitor and force quit the plugin and it changes all Flash areas in the whole browser to the blue lego block. If you reload a page with Flash, it restarts the plugin on all pages. It makes a huge difference to the performance when it's off though.

It would be nice if they had that level of protection for all dynamic content though including HTML 5 and JS. At least they can do something with the crash reports when they get them.
post #73 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I had a Flash ad sucking up 100% CPU and all I did was go into the activity monitor and force quit the plugin and it changes all Flash areas in the whole browser to the blue lego block. If you reload a page with Flash, it restarts the plugin on all pages. It makes a huge difference to the performance when it's off though.


Damn. No wonder Macs sell so poorly. They really crash just from normal web browsing?
post #74 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedos View Post

I think cross platform developers should proudly label their apps as 'Made With Flash', that way I will know which ones to avoid.

At first I was worried about this too, but then I started to consider that this reversal was also made at the same time they released app store acceptance guidelines that warned things like "we don't need more fart apps" and that if you submit an app in a saturated category that brings nothing new to the table that they probably won't approve it, I'm less concerned.

Also if someone releases an app that covers a new concept yet sucks performance wise, there is now an incentive for someone to write a version with native tools and out-compete them.

I now think this is brilliant on Apples part - its put up or shut up time. It also gets them out if evaluating how the apps are made and resumes focus in what really mattters: how the program works for the end user. Not that this will stop people from whining, but it certainly removes lots of possible criticism.

Apples message in their new guidelines are pretty clear - they want "customer delight". Poorly ported apps or apps that perform poorly are clearly not welcome. Just because you can now create crapware more easily, don't expect for it to get an automatic approval.

And don't expect help from Apple if you are using one of these abstraction layers. It's not uncommon for Apple engineers to work with developers - I would imagine that just as jailbreaking voids your warranty, you are on your own if you use non-Apple tools.

As it should be...
post #75 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Damn. No wonder Macs sell so poorly. They really crash just from normal web browsing?

I know you are just being a smart a$$, but you are actually proving Job's point about why they don't want Flash on the iPhone.

The OP's issue isn't with Macs or OSX, but Adobe's crappy implementation of flash on OSX. And there is nothing Apple can do to fix it - yet most users are quick to make the conclusion that "surfing the web on a Mac sucks" - when a more accurate statement would be "surfing the web with Adobe crapware on a Mac sucks"
post #76 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

Apple is in the business of selling hardware

Hardware is one piece of their strategy, sure. But Apples primary business is selling the end user experience.

That's why I guarantee Apple doesn't talk about any of the things in your post. Your in the techie weeds. Apple knows that if they delight their customers, all of the stuff you are focused on will take care if itself.

This is why its so hard for other tech companies to compete with Apple. They focus (like you) on the tech and all the little moving peices, while Apple focuses on the end user and their ultimate use of the products.
post #77 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newtron View Post

Damn. No wonder Macs sell so poorly. They really crash just from normal web browsing?

Flash used to cause the browser to crash regularly. Since it's been moved out into its own process, it shouldn't be able to do that any more.

Macs also don't sell all that poorly. Apple have about 15% of shipments compared to HP and Dell at around 30% each and various others in between. Considering the price points that those other manufacturers hit, Apple do ok. They could do better but they're a small outfit so they go for profit over volume.
post #78 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

To everyone complaining about Flash crashing Safari: Do any of you know whether Safari in Snow Leopard really is "Crash resistant" to plugins as Apple claims? Has this feature actually worked for any of you?

Yes it does. Indeed, if I get a beachball in Safari I can pop over to activity monitor, kill the flash task, and get my browser session back. Short of having a flash plug-in that doesn't suck, this is the next best thing.
post #79 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SinisterJoe View Post

Not looking forward to a tidal wave of shoddy ports but it seems Apple has very clearly reserved the right to reject applications for bad interfaces so I suppose that covers my biggest concern.

Yep. Apple has said very clearly that buggy etc apps are likely to be rejected (or pulled if they get a ton of complaints). And if this 'convertor' is still just a layer game there is a big chance it will fail over that issue. At the least they will require a restriction to only the newest of hardware

Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post

It probably has more to do with Apple being worried about an FCC bitch slapping.

I think you mean the FTC. And yes this is probably one part "give in and shut them up because it is easier and cheaper" not unlike the whole "bumpers will fix the antenna" biz

and the other part may be that they found a similar system that isn't crappy and had to change the rules to allow it. Which means allowing everyone.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #80 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Jobs was talking out his butt when he made that comment. Safari is the reason my Mac crashes, it will do it with or without any flash loaded

Not for me he wasn't. Since I have stopped whitelisting sites in my flash blocker Safari has yet to crash, and with tons of windows with lots of tabs in each window I rarely get a beachball. It's pretty damning how much better an experience web browsing is without flash.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Adobe resumes development of Packager for iPhone tool