Adobe manager puts partial blame on Apple for mobile Flash failure - Page 3

If Adobe's mobile Flash wasn't a piece of crap, Apple would never have banned it from their mobile devices in the first place!

That's ridiculous logic. The fact that some people prefer software that works makes them a hater?

And blockers don't solve the problem. First, there are many sites and/ or features that only work with Flash. A blocker doesn't allow you to use that site at all. Second, even for video and things that could just as easily be handled with html, when the site uses Flash, the blocker means you don't get the video - and the site owner doesn't get the message that they need to drop a useless, inefficient, insecure technology.

If it is bloated whores you are looking for, try Visual Studio for a while.

I guess not everyone feels the same way you do about Flash. As you say, many sites still use Flash.




If it is useless then don't use it. That is the only way the site owner will get the message.

Over the years I've seen people pontificate about how flash runs great on their device, but i've never experienced that to be true myself. I've had two Android devices, neither of which could be considered as resource constrained as a phone would be, and on both of them Flash simply sucked. There really isn't a better way to put it - it was slow and buggy. Crashed often. Stuttered and hung. It was basically useless.

I have a Sony TV with Google TV built into it. I bought it primarily so I could test large screen software I develop at home. I also have an Apple TV. I wind up using the Apple TV a lot, because Flash on the Android GoogleTV platform is so rotten.

Listen, you only have to get the 'Plugin crashed' sad face from Android so many times before you realize that Flash is essentially useless on an android device. Think about that for a minute as it pertains to Google Tv. There you have a device for which one of the major draws is being able to present internet content (like YouTube) on your big screen TV... and the underlying technology is so much of a farce that it is basically unusable for its intended purpose. Who in their right mind would ever think that it is ok for a consumer appliance like a TV to ever crash in the middle of programming? It's absurd.

Flash is not performant or reliable on mobile and resource constrained devices, no matter what anyone has to say about it. Those who claim it 'runs great' on their handset probably haven't used it extensively, or they have a different grading mechanism than the typical consumer. Consumer appliances have to provide a level of reliability that is much greater than the typical desktop computer - the expectations are just there. Phones that crash in the middle of phone calls Televisions that crash in the middle of programs are not acceptable, and Flash simply is not able to deliver the performance and reliability needed. That's the bottom line.

Well that's the issue isn't it. All the tech pundits, Fandroids, and anti-Apple bloggers predicted the opposite. They predicted the lack of Flash on iOS would damage Apple badly and cause the ultimate failure of the platform. Now they want to blame Apple for mobile Flash's demise. They simply can't have it both ways.

Meanwhile, if you read the Isaacson biography, you will find out that Adobe pissed Jobs off long before mobile Flash became an issue. I remember how long it took Adobe to port Photoshop to OS X and even longer to release the OS X Intel version. Something went wrong between Adobe and Apple and they've had a lukewarm relationship ever since.

If you read Mike Chambers' blog and the posts/responses as well as the linked product blog/posts/responses....

You come away with the impression that a lot more than the mobile browser Flash plugin is set for EOL.

As typical with Adobe offerings -- why have one bloated solution when three or four, overlapping bloated partial-solutions will do.

For Flash, I count Flash, Flex, AIR, Flash Professional, Flash Builder and one or two future Flash replacements.

From what I've read there are quite a few companies and Web IT Departments/Developers who have organized their businesses around Flash and its derivatives -- often spending hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in the process.

The Lorelei song of Flash has been the capability to deliver a single, platform-independent implementation of a programming task.

Like, Java before it, Flash has failed to deliver on its tempting promise.

Now, computing is changing from the PC era to the post PC era -- the platforms we've known and loved (or hated) for the last 3 decades are becoming less relevant in what billions of people do.

The Internet and Web have been part of this disruption -- but this is changing too.

Siri (and other offerings) are changing the way we use the web and (soon) the desktop too.

We will empower the Siris to know what we do, how we do it -- then deputize them to act on our behalf -- running whatever apps and perform any needed searches or surfing -- presenting results or cogent alternatives for our approval -- minimizing distractions.

What gets lost in the process, unseen except by the Seris, are all the intermediate presentations of results... and all the points of monetization that go with them.

Soon, most of the worlds population will not see the Flash ads, Flash [restaurant] web sites... nor the web searches/ads/click-throughs that deliver us there.

The Siris will bypass all that.

So, what happens to the Flashes, the Googles, the Legacy desktop apps (that can't be run by your Siri assistant)...

Damned if I know... but they will no longer be the major players!

Mobile Flash is dead, good. Can we do this on OS X too?


When I go to my local Nissan dealership, they are clearly biased into thinking that Nissan products are the best out there. This will not be tolerated.

roog

Hey, Tod... I see you lurkin' out there...

Where you been?

Just uninstalled flash.

Nelfrancis says ... "Are you just living in fear of falling out of Apple's good graces? Are you actually Apple employees? Or are you blinded by the light...so smitten with the Apple wave that you cannot see any signal that might minimize its stature?"

Perhaps you need to read the Steve Jobs biography and understand what drove the man. I can imagine exactly what he would have said at product team meetings when the issue of Flash support was raised ... 'Flash is a piece of shite'.

Hopefully all product development managers in the IT industry now know what it takes to develop a product portfolio like Steve Jobs did at Apple. People are 'smitten' with Apple and its products because they are so much better than those that are developed second-class developers under the evil eye of accountants who insist on cutting costs on both quality and design.

May the spirit of Jobs and Apple live on in the IT industry for ever more, and the spirit of Adobe/Flash and Microsoft/Ballmer rapidly fade away.

The problem is not what Flash does, the problem how it does it. It is buggy, full of security holes and even optimized applications take up far more CPU time (and therefore battery life) than is required - it is also proprietary.

HTML5 is pretty much the opposite.

I'd bet building a native app iOS in Xcode v. an equivalent iOS app built using Adobe's Flash Builder would also yeild some surprising performance differences.

Most likely - it would negate the need for the Actionscript Virtual Machine (AVM) to translate code on the fly. Plus, the Actionscript language has Zero multi-threading capabilities - however, the AVM itself creates so many threads I always wonder what on earth the plugin is doing that warrants so many of them.

An Air app would overload the CPU with pointless threads, work the GPU more than required for the vector graphics and any application that requires any form of data processing would be ungodly slow due to its single threaded, single core nature.

Thanks Solips for making the effort. I was going to, honestly I was. But then after a moment of though decided not to. If he could not read enough of the countless postings, trolls, blogs, etc.. all describing the demise of Apple's non-Flash approach and realize it's been said since essentially day one, I was simply writing him off as uninformed.

+++ QFT

This

Maybe. Apple doesn't allow runtime interpreters and virtual machines on iOS, if I recall correctly. This would mean any Flash "translators" would have to emit Objective-C source or LLVM instructions to get around the restriction. A quick web search netted the answer: LLVM.

http://www.adobe.com/devnet/logged_i...od_iphone.html

Adobe simply created an ActionScript front-end to LLVM. Optimizations are done to LLVM code before compiling it down to native ARM assembly.

Add to that, Flash and its derivatives insert themselves as middleware between the app and the target device and OS.

Flash, et al, implement the lowest-common-denominator of features, and implement them so that they run on the greatest common multiple of OSes and devices.

This means that it's in Adobe's interest not to exploit new capabilities or exploit hardware features until they become mainstream.


I don't want my apps limited by some other manufacturers' device running yet aonther company's OS -- both of which are, likely, out of date.

That would explain some things...

1) AIR appears to run acceptably fast and [mostly] responsive on an iPad 2

2) but AIR apps don't act quite right:
-- no variable-speed scrolling - flick, fast start, then slow down
-- no bump/bounce when the end of a scroll is reached
-- scroll always centers on an item
-- no universal pinch-zoom capability within the app
-- apparently no capability to handle more than 2 concurrent touches
-- noticible lag when dragging - the hand moves, then the dragged item moves

3) I suspect that using Flash-generated general functions is less efficient than native iOS specific functions

4) Not sure if AIR is robust enough to exploit iDevice features across several iOS versions


I get the impression that AIR iOS apps are lobotomized to make them "just acceptable" for iDevices, so that the same code base can be used for Android, QNX...

It's almost like the Adobe-generated "magazine" apps -- they're all content...

They don't appear to use any standard UI, expected iOS features don't work, and the UX is confusing and unsettling...

They're just there...

Yeah, I was just responding to the speed question. The way Adobe targets iOS with Flash, it ends up isolating the ActionScript from the iOS libraries so programmers can never directly, say, use Core Animation. The result is what you're describing: lobotomized apps. It might be acceptable for games where you never really see the iOS UI, but for productivity apps, it might produce a rather un-iOS-like user experience.

Does AIR use OpenCL or GCD... I doubt it.

Then AIR is the poster boy for LCD middleware that Steve feared... All of a sudden we have a 3rd-party setting the bar for Apple app features, UI, UX, performance.

I am surprised That Apple allowed/allows this!

Wasn't it because they had to allow for game engines and interrupters, which opened the door for Adobe and others. I think if Apple cherry picked those that would be allowed it could be considered anti-competitive and fall under Refusal to deal,


Press release:

Timing, maybe in light of Steve's passing. Adobe knew Steve would be the only person that could throw them a lifeline to resurrect Flash on iOS. Which was never going to happen anyway, so actually I have to bl**dy idea what Adobe is thinking.

Like Samsung, Google, Moto, Microsoft... everyone's losing the plot!

I open up AppleInsider, see Steve's picture, and then it hits me, he's not around. I was always comforted somehow in the past few years that no matter what, he was always tinkering on something despite being more and more in the background.

Anyway, to repeat myself, clearly Adobe has given up all hope that anyone at Apple post-Steve would be bothered with Flash anymore.

And more vindication for Steve not pre-loading Flash on new Macs.

Yeah, and there was Unreal Engine for iOS which is a big, big deal. As mentioned, in a few years with Unreal Engine 4 higher-spec than PS3 and Xbox360 on iPad 4 and 5... Opening up to other engines/compilers will be well worth it.

Yes, I suspect that is exactly what happened...

Unfortunately, that opened the door for the Flash crapware...

I guess, you accept the bad to get the good.

Sigh!

I think iOS is better for it. I'm not a gamer (unless you count Word with Friends, Strategery and Angry Birds) but the demos I've seen are mighty impressive.

Looking at this from a business perspective, which fortunately, or unfortunately, is the way I look at about every thing, I think Adobe is making the right decision. Why waste R&D and assets on a technology that obviously is changing. To look at the opposite of this, look at RIM. They are continuing to waste valuable dollars on the playbook, and NOW they are saying they are going to continue their flash development. I am not much of an Adobe fan, and I was a longtime Blackberry user (and still prefer their wonderful physical keyboard), but technology moves on, and RIM is still making the same mistakes. Adobe....they are moving on. I guess we can say the same about Logitech and Google TV.

Adobe....they are moving on.

Adobe blames Apple for Flash's Demise ...

Apple takes full credit for Flash's demise

Good Riddance.

I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.

I don't think the app explanation works because web site flash objects aren't apps. I don't think people would download an app for every web site they randomly visit. I don't think a web site flash object is an equivalent or replacement to an app, or vise versa. Besides, most apps for web sites are free.

This is the sort of delusional spin that comes from people who have no idea what they are talking about. Addressing your "points" in order...

1. Steve Jobs liked things that worked well. Flash wasn't one of those things. To get things to work well, there has to be some measure of control: anarchy and working well are generally in opposition.

2. Apple likes making great products. Great products make money. See above.

3. This has already been addressed and dismissed, which pretty much dismisses your entire "argument".

I'm not sure how you'd objectively "measure" performance, but Flash works smoothly and quickly on my Droid. Video is smooth. I'm not a Flash expert or anything, but I'm pretty happy with it.

It works decently on OS X, too. Although lately I've seen the plugin "crash" a few times with the sad face in Safari. However, it does what it is supposed to do. It's a good interactive content platform. Take the alternative. On iOS, every web page has to have a special "app" for iOS or have a special version, because the full web just doesn't work. Flash is very, very popular. A lot of sites are 100% Flash. No plugin, no dice.

And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.

Thanks yet again, Steve!

To address your "argument 3": Soooo many people forget the crap Apple got when the iPhones debuted because it didn't issue (and stated that it didn't plan to but you never know about that) an SDK for 3rd party apps and wanted only web apps. Apple even had a little "store" which was basically a section on its website for them. This is a big reason (IMO) that it put so many resources into web kit and advocated HTML5 (since it would eventually provide local storage). Flash apps never were a threat to this so-called "money" Apple is rolling in from the App Store (which didn't even exist at that time). If you look at the revenue Apple makes from hardware compared to any kind of software/service combined (of course including this veritable cash cow called the App Store), you would see that the App Store's revenue much less profits is peanuts to Apple. If Adobe had a workable solution that ran well on the iPhone (or any other mobile device for that matter), Apple would have been more than happy to have flash apps running on its devices since it would only sell even more device (HINT: even MORE money) and possibly there would be no Apple App Store and instead Adobe App World/Store/Depot/What-have-you.

This is just stupid. You produce a shoddy product and then blame the folks that don't want to buy it for it being of poor quality?

While it's really nice of you to refer to Steve in the present tense (as if he were still alive and running Apple), you're jumping to conclusions. Apple doesn't try control the web. Unlike Microsoft and Adobe, who have tried to tie the web to their platforms (Windows and Flash) through plug-ins (ActiveX/Silverlight, Flash), Apple is doing quite the opposite by staunchly taking sides with open standards like HTML5, H.264 video, and their refusal to allow plug-ins of any kind on mobile Safari. They open-source Webkit so that other mobile platforms can have comparable HTML5 support. Apple has long encouraged and supported developers who wanted to create Web apps for iOS--it even pre-dates the availability of native iOS apps on the App Store. Apple makes no money from, nor exerts any control over Web apps, and yet they support fully it. All they want is for Web developers to use open standards like HTML5 instead of Adobe's Flash. Saying that it's all about the money is a hollow argument because they've never discouraged app developers from creating Web apps using HTML5.

Check with DED for a useful summery of the Apple vs Adobe 'dispute:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/0...dobe-vs-apple/

There were further problems in the 90s concerning Photoshop development being biased toward Windows as well.

Cheers

JeffDM destroyed your point 3 by pointing out that it made no sense at all since Apple wasn't making any money off web sites. The rest of your "information" simply flies in the face of all objective appraisals of Flash on Android.

What's funny is that just a few months ago on AllThingsD, Adobe CEO Shantanu Narayen openly declared that Android would beat iOS in tablets just as they have beaten iOS in smartphones. He said that by year's end, "over 130 million devices" would support Flash. Mossberg's exact words in response were, "And I have yet to review a single one of them where Flash works well."

Those buggers at Adobe have no business putting any blame on iOS for Flash. They're the ones who bet against iOS, saying that their refusal to support Flash would be their undoing.