Originally Posted by Marvin
"Does this mean Adobe is not committed to video on mobile devices? Absolutely not. We continue to innovate and solve mobile video fragmentation challenges. Specifically, on Android, we solve this with Adobe AIR, with high-end video features such as Adobe Access DRM.
Not sure how AIR and Adobe DRM solves anything on Android... Except for packaging AIR into Android apps? And who uses Adobe DRM, let alone purchases anything much on Android? Maybe I'm missing something. If Adobe is so committed, why can't I easily view Flash videos from any website on any Android device?
We made the decision to discontinue support for Android mobile browser because of two reasons: 1) Premium experiences on mobile devices are typically being delivered through apps and 2) Mobile websites mostly rely on HTML5 based video delivery."
Right, for all their hue and cry, Adobe failed for five years. Why can't Flash mobile deliver "premium experiences"? Why do mobile websites now use HTML5? Even so, a heck of a lot of desktop websites still need Flash video, heck, honestly, porn on mobile devices is probably Flash's best hope, and Adobe failed.
"The Flash Player browser plugin integrates tightly with a device’s browser and multimedia subsystems (in ways that typical apps do not), and this necessitates integration by our device ecosystem partners. To ensure that the Flash Player provides the best possible experience for users, our partner program requires certification of each Flash Player implementation. Certification includes extensive testing to ensure web content works as expected, and that the Flash Player provides a good user experience. Certified devices typically include the Flash Player pre-loaded at the factory or as part of a system update."
Right, and how many user-friendly, operating Certified devices are out there, I wonder? Also, has Flash Abuse changed, thanks to Adobe, for the mobile space? Not sure.
"For the past decade, Flash Player and, more recently, Adobe AIR have played a vital role on the web by providing consistent platforms for deploying rich, expressive content across browsers, desktops, and devices. Beginning as a platform for enabling animation, the Flash runtimes have evolved into a complete multimedia platform, enabling experiences that were otherwise not possible or feasible on the web.
Yes and No. In say 2000-2006 there was some compelling Flash content and ideas, but AIR never really made it to the desktop, and Adobe Media Player and AIR did fade out of favour because Windows apps are so rampant. As for the web, well, the rest is history. Flash is a compelling multimedia platform for the ~desktop~ web. Not for handheld devices or tablets. It just ~never~ made the transition.
Looking forward, Adobe believes that Flash is particularly suited for addressing the gaming and premium video markets, and will focus its development efforts in those areas. At the same time, Adobe will make architectural and language changes to the runtimes in order to ensure that the Flash runtimes are well placed to enable the richest experiences on the web and across mobile devices for another decade.
Highly dubious. The most relevant gaming market is mobile and tablet, or console at best. No Flash here. "Premium video market"? I don't even know what that means. Nobody will do "premium video" over 3G or 4G. For WiFi, well, mobile, tablet and PC can do everything Flash can do and more. So, not sure what Adobe is trying to do here.
Adobe's clearly grasping at straws. They're saying, well, HTML5, CSS3, JS and other modern technologies are where the action's at. And we're not in the game at all. But, we're cheering in the stands, yeah?" ..."And what it is used for will change"... What exactly is Flash now, in 2012, supposed to change to? At the end of the year can I buy Flash CS6.5 and it automatically creates standard-compliant, HTML5, CSS3, JS and non-JS websites? It's looking very grim for Flash. No site created now would even dream of being done in Flash. Videos, sure. But then everyone will be trying to do video for mobile from this point onwards, so in that case why the heck would you make Flash videos? Encode once, play everywhere.
As time went on, they rightly stuck to making sure publishers had the option to deliver rich content while the web standards groups slowly churned through their specs to the point that in 2011, HTML5 deployment for rich content was a reality. Adobe and Apple were both right. There wasn't an alternative to Flash to allow Adobe to drop it and Flash wasn't suitable for mobile devices. Adobe tried to improve what they had control over - Flash, Apple tried to improve what they had control over - Webkit.
In the end, they both come out on top.
That's true for video, which Flash could have hung on to past 2010, but if Flash video on mobile was truly successful, we would see more of that. But the BitTorrent scene, YouTube and so on was already moving beyond Flash and Adobe just didn't keep up. Apple improved Webkit ~and~ Apple apps ~and~ 3rd party apps. I'm not sure what Adobe Flash did in the past 4 years to be honest.
Adobe no longer has to deal with the arduous certification process for every Android device, security updates, being blamed for sluggish performance and security vulnerabilities.
But I'm not sure if Adobe even "dealt" with that in the first place? What did their certification actually do?
Apple (and indeed every mobile device manufacturer) no longer has to be concerned about their users missing out on rich content. There's no sense in turning this into a winner/loser scenario when they both stand to gain from the changes and each of their arguments were fully justified.
Well, not sure about Adobe, but Apple certainly seems to be doing alright.
Like Microsoft, Adobe sat on their laurels in a crucial point in 21st century technology, ran a disgraceful smear campaign against Apple, and now, the time has come to pay the piper.Edited by sr2012 - 6/29/12 at 8:22am