or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple blocks older Flash plug-in versions in Safari due to vulnerability
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple blocks older Flash plug-in versions in Safari due to vulnerability

post #1 of 41
Thread Starter 
Apple late Thursday issued a security message saying it has blocked old versions of Adobe's Flash Player plug-in for Safari, citing a recent flaw that could potentially allow hackers to harvest browser data like cookies.




As noted in an updated support document regarding the issue, Apple has taken action against a recently discovered Flash vulnerability by restricting plug-in access through its Safari Web browser.

Users with out of date plug-ins will be met with a message saying, "Blocked plug-in," "Flash Security Alert" or "Flash out-of-date" when attempting to access Flash content in Safari. Clicking on the alert takes users to Adobe's Flash installer page, where the latest version of the plug-in can be downloaded and installed.

According to Adobe, the flaw can be found in Flash Player for Mac version 14.0.0.125 and earlier. After a proof-of-concept exploit was demonstrated by Google engineer Michele Spagnuolo, Adobe advised Mac users to update to version 14.0.0.145. Aside from OS X, Windows and Linux builds of Flash were also affected by the bug.

Users who need to run older, flawed versions of Flash may do so by configuring Safari's plug-in management settings to allow specific websites to "Run in Unsafe Mode." Re-enabling older Flash versions requires Safari 6.1 or later.
post #2 of 41

Good. Though haven’t they already been doing this with all older versions?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 41
In other news… Many Users Have Been Blocking Adobe Flash Versions 0.0 Thru .

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #4 of 41
I haven't had Flash installed in over 3 years now. In the last 24 months or so I think I have only had an issue where I was promoted to install Flash on a site maybe 3-4 times and all of those times I was able to access the content I needed anyways.

When are we going to see Flash and the inherited vulnerabilities be something of the past?
post #5 of 41
Originally Posted by realjustinlong View Post
When are we going to see Flash and the inherited vulnerabilities be something of the past?


When Apple finally buys Adobe and shuts down everything but Photoshop and Illustrator.

 

“What about Light…”

Integrated into Photos.

“What about Prem…”

Integrated into Final Cut.

“What about After…”

Integrated into Motion.

“What about Audi…”

Integrated into Logic.

“What about Dream…”

It’s terrible. Use Coda.

“What about InDes…”

Integrated into Pages. Imagine how great Pages would be with professional layout tools!

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #6 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by realjustinlong View Post

I haven't had Flash installed in over 3 years now. In the last 24 months or so I think I have only had an issue where I was promoted to install Flash on a site maybe 3-4 times and all of those times I was able to access the content I needed anyways.

Same here. And whenever I hit a site that uses Flash that I want to see, like Google Street View, I simply grab my 1st Gen iPad. Love that app from Apple. For regular webpages, irony to the max, I grab my other iPad and the site simply has the content in a different format. YouTube is one of those sites from Google that I think is truly despicable so I don't even go there.
Quote:
When are we going to see Flash and the inherited vulnerabilities be something of the past?

Probably never. There's no reason why different tech can't both be alive. There's stuff Flash can do that HTML5 can't.
post #7 of 41
So looking forward to a prosumer Appladobe CS Suite. Not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


When Apple finally buys Adobe and shuts down everything but Photoshop and Illustrator.

“What about Light…”
Integrated into Photos.

“What about Prem…”
Integrated into Final Cut.
“What about After…”
Integrated into Motion.
“What about Audi…”
Integrated into Logic.
“What about Dream…”
It’s terrible. Use Coda.
“What about InDes…”
Integrated into Pages. Imagine how great Pages would be with professional layout tools!

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #8 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
Originally Posted by realjustinlong View Post
When are we going to see Flash and the inherited vulnerabilities be something of the past?


When Apple finally buys Adobe and shuts down everything but Photoshop and Illustrator.

 

“What about Light…”

Integrated into Photos.

“What about Prem…”

Integrated into Final Cut.

“What about After…”

Integrated into Motion.

“What about Audi…”

Integrated into Logic.

“What about Dream…”

It’s terrible. Use Coda.

“What about InDes…”

Integrated into Pages. Imagine how great Pages would be with professional layout tools!

 

As much as the idea of letting Apple's software lunatics get ahold of tools I depend on scares the crap out of me, I gotta admit I often finding myself wishing for an Apple designed UI when I use them. I'm sure the various procedures and tools make sense to the people who designed them, but DAMN they're confusing to me! I forced my way through a beginner's tutorial for After Effects and marvelled at how utterly impenetrable that app is. It made me wonder if Adobe makes more money on training than software sales.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #9 of 41
Adobe has The Feces Touch.
post #10 of 41

What's 'Flash?'

post #11 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by realjustinlong View Post

I haven't had Flash installed in over 3 years now. In the last 24 months or so I think I have only had an issue where I was promoted to install Flash on a site maybe 3-4 times and all of those times I was able to access the content I needed anyways.

When are we going to see Flash and the inherited vulnerabilities be something of the past?

 

Don't I wish!

 

Although I've completely jettisoned Java, I do unfortunately have to run Flash on occasion.  The answer in this case is to run a Flash blocker so the content doesn't auto run.  Important because a lot of Flash content isn't sourced or controlled from the websites that tend to host it.

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply

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

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MD481LL/A MD388LL/A ME344LL/A

Reply
post #12 of 41
Ugh...I hate that Apple does this. I know it's great for consumers and I totally agree with it for them, but for enterprise folks like myself this turns into a nightmare. I wish there was the option to opt out based on serial #. Unless, someone can think of a good solution for doing mass deployment updates of flash. And no, not using flash isn't an option and Apple Remote Desktop sucks now and doesn't work worth a darn. They ruin that program with every update unfortunately. 1frown.gif

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5

120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM

AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #13 of 41

I tried to live without Flash when I got my new iMac but only lasted a week.

It was the lack of YouTube that made me give in. Despite them saying that most of their videos run in HTML 5, if you try it, you'll get a Flash pop up.

post #14 of 41
Originally Posted by Evilution View Post
It was the lack of YouTube that made me give in.

 

There IS no lack of YouTube. There has never BEEN a lack of YouTube. Every single YouTube video will play in a QuickTime window embedded into the page when you don’t have Flash installed.

 

Use ClickToFlash to force it.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #15 of 41
This happens all the time, for me. If I don't upgrade Flash when prompted a few hours later YouTube will stop working until I upgrade.
post #16 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
It was the lack of YouTube that made me give in.

There IS no lack of YouTube. There has never BEEN a lack of YouTube. Every single YouTube video will play in a QuickTime window embedded into the page when you don’t have Flash installed.

Use ClickToFlash to force it.

For Click2Flash he'll need to install Flash first, no? Better to set your user agent to an iPad instead. And that's only the better option, the best is to not use YouTube, although it does cost them money so maybe we should all have a YouTube window running in the background 24/7 lol
post #17 of 41
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
For Click2Flash he'll need to install Flash first, no?

 

Of course not. It’s just an extension.

 
Better to set your user agent to an iPad instead.

 

Except then you get fed a completely worthless mobile version of the website.

 

Mental defectives, every single one of them. THE IDEA BEHIND THE IPHONE AND IPAD IS THAT YOU DON’T NEED A “MOBILE WEB” ANYMORE. STOP FORCIBLY REDIRECTING ME TO A MOBILE SITE. STOP MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO VIEW THE REAL SITE.

 
the best is to not use YouTube,

 

ClickToFlash+AdBlock=no ads on YouTube, anywhere. Combine that with Disconnect, Ghostery, and DoNotTrackMe and Google gets nothing from you.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #18 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 


When Apple finally buys Adobe and shuts down everything but Photoshop and Illustrator.

 

“What about Light…”

Integrated into Photos.

“What about Prem…”

Integrated into Final Cut.

“What about After…”

Integrated into Motion.

“What about Audi…”

Integrated into Logic.

“What about Dream…”

It’s terrible. Use Coda.

“What about InDes…”

Integrated into Pages. Imagine how great Pages would be with professional layout tools!


+1 ................ except for FrameMaker.

 

FrameMaker 9 & 10 will disappear as if they had never existed.

 

Adobe coders will be put back to work bringing this software to OS X.

post #19 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
For Click2Flash he'll need to install Flash first, no?

Of course not. It’s just an extension.
Quote:
Better to set your user agent to an iPad instead.

Except then you get fed a completely worthless mobile version of the website.

Mental defectives, every single one of them. THE IDEA BEHIND THE IPHONE AND IPAD IS THAT YOU DON’T NEED A “MOBILE WEB” ANYMORE. STOP FORCIBLY REDIRECTING ME TO A MOBILE SITE. STOP MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO VIEW THE REAL SITE.
Quote:
the best is to not use YouTube,

ClickToFlash+AdBlock=no ads on YouTube, anywhere. Combine that with Disconnect, Ghostery, and DoNotTrackMe and Google gets nothing from you.

Indeed, no 'mobile websites' anymore, please. Fine if they 'optimise' the page, but leave the basics intact so the experience is the same on an iPad and a desktop.

As for blocking Google out, you'll also need to disable 'Fraudulent Sites' the prefs:



Because I think when ticked on it sends the URL to Google when visiting a site. Correct?
https://developers.google.com/safe-browsing/
post #20 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Of course not. It’s just an extension.

Except then you get fed a completely worthless mobile version of the website.

Mental defectives, every single one of them. THE IDEA BEHIND THE IPHONE AND IPAD IS THAT YOU DON’T NEED A “MOBILE WEB” ANYMORE. STOP FORCIBLY REDIRECTING ME TO A MOBILE SITE. STOP MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO VIEW THE REAL SITE.

ClickToFlash+AdBlock=no ads on YouTube, anywhere. Combine that with Disconnect, Ghostery, and DoNotTrackMe and Google gets nothing from you.
There's a reason IOS 8 has a desktop site option
post #21 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

As for blocking Google out, you'll also need to disable 'Fraudulent Sites' the prefs:



Because I think when ticked on it sends the URL to Google when visiting a site. Correct?
https://developers.google.com/safe-browsing/

I don't think I'd do that myself. In the past few months Google has twice warned me of a fraudulent site posing as legit and directed me back to a safe page before any damage could be done. There's such a thing as cutting off your nose to spite your face.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I don't think I'd do that myself. In the past few months Google has twice warned me of a fraudulent site posing as legit and directed me back to a safe page before any damage could be done. There's such a thing as cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I'm reluctant in turning it off myself as well. Do wonder how this technique works; going read up on it.
post #23 of 41
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
I'm reluctant in turning it off myself as well. Do wonder how this technique works; going read up on it.

 

Wouldn’t any problem in this regard just be solved by navigating directly to the URL in question by typing it in?

 

These are different: ************ 9to5mаc.com

 

The first’s one’s real. We know that because you can’t see it. The second one has a cyrillic a. But you’re not going to TYPE that last one yourself.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #24 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I'm reluctant in turning it off myself as well. Do wonder how this technique works; going read up on it.

I assume it just checks against a database that Safari downloads locally. If so, it would mean Google isn't seeing what URLs you're wanting to go to, but they would be able to see what IP address you've used to download the database.
Edited by SolipsismX - 7/12/14 at 8:40pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #25 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
I'm reluctant in turning it off myself as well. Do wonder how this technique works; going read up on it.

Wouldn’t any problem in this regard just be solved by navigating directly to the URL in question by typing it in?

The API is there for webdevs to safeguard their visitors, so I don't see this as something people would type in a URL as opposed to the ease of use by clicking a link.
Quote:
These are different: ************ 9to5mаc.com

The first’s one’s real. We know that because you can’t see it. The second one has a cyrillic a. But you’re not going to TYPE that last one yourself.

Cyrillic, always fun.
post #26 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I assume it just checks against a database. Google isn't seeing what URLs you're wanting to go to, but they would be able to see what IP address you've used to look at the database.

I'll look into this setting and see if it indeed is checking against a DB updated by Google. Would be interesting to see if there are alternatives, though I assume a DB from Google would be the most up-to-date.
post #27 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I'll look into this setting and see if it indeed is checking against a DB updated by Google. Would be interesting to see if there are alternatives, though I assume a DB from Google would be the most up-to-date.

This falls inline with how I would assume the service is setup.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #28 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I'll look into this setting and see if it indeed is checking against a DB updated by Google. Would be interesting to see if there are alternatives, though I assume a DB from Google would be the most up-to-date.
http://www.macworld.com/article/1137094/safari_safe_browsing.html
Hope this helps.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #29 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

This falls inline with how I would assume the service is setup.

For your girlfriends' sake, you better not be that fast with everything.

Thanks!
post #30 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

http://www.macworld.com/article/1137094/safari_safe_browsing.html
Hope this helps.

First paragraphs tell me this is a good article; thanks for the link.
post #31 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

First paragraphs tell me this is a good article; thanks for the link.

Soli and me got's yer back. 1cool.gif
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

http://www.macworld.com/article/1137094/safari_safe_browsing.html
Hope this helps.

I didn't think it would check with Google to verify a URL is unsafe if it matches the local hash value in the database.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #33 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 


When Apple finally buys Adobe and shuts down everything but Photoshop and Illustrator.

 

“What about Light…”

Integrated into Photos.

“What about Prem…”

Integrated into Final Cut.

“What about After…”

Integrated into Motion.

“What about Audi…”

Integrated into Logic.

“What about Dream…”

It’s terrible. Use Coda.

“What about InDes…”

Integrated into Pages. Imagine how great Pages would be with professional layout tools!

 

I don't know why you even suggest this when it wouldn't be good for either company. Apple's successes have involved making things more accessible. They typically buy smaller companies, presumably because they're easier to integrate. Beyond that have you considered the task of folding those codebases into some of these other apps? You're talking about millions of lines of code here, which is an enormous risk. The bolded portion is the only part where I agree with you, but none of it warrants such a big purchase. If they were interested in a paint and edit program like photoshop or a vectorized one like illustrator, they could make something much more modern in terms of both color handling and cursor path interpolation. Both of those programs are ridden with older design elements and algorithms simply because they have been around so long.

post #34 of 41
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
I don't know why you even suggest this when it wouldn't be good for either company.

 

What, Apple and Adobe or Apple and Panic?

 
Beyond that have you considered the task of folding those codebases into some of these other apps?

 

I mean to suggest in no way to fold any of their bloat into Apple’s applications. I mean to own Adobe to own the rights to their techniques and implementations, rewriting them from scratch where desired in Apple’s applications.

 
Both of those programs are ridden with older design elements and algorithms simply because they have been around so long. 

 

Exactly. There are multiple references to “Macromedia” throughout Adobe’s suite.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #35 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

What, Apple and Adobe or Apple and Panic?

I was referring to Apple and Adobe. I don't think they make a good match. It reminds me of when HP bought out Compaq.

 

Quote:
I mean to suggest in no way to fold any of their bloat into Apple’s applications. I mean to own Adobe to own the rights to their techniques and implementations, rewriting them from scratch where desired in Apple’s applications.

Adobe has very specific things going for them. They have industry standard applications that everyone knows. They support specific features in terms of both color management and extra channels. Because of this you have many businesses with pipelines built around the use of those software packages. I don't see much of an intersection with Apple there. They aren't so much about familiarity for long time professional users as they are about intuitiveness and creating applications that appeal to a broader base. They use that to market hardware. I don't think writing these features into Apple's applications would be the way to go, as much of that is an appeal to familiarity. Further I doubt Apple would want all of the functionality present in some of these applications, in spite of it being invaluable to a portion of Adobe's users.

 

Quote:

Exactly. There are multiple references to “Macromedia” throughout Adobe’s suite.

That's part of the problem with enormous code bases. A complete rewrite presents an enormous risk. I suppose rewriting application software  is less of a risk for Apple, given that they derive more of their profit from hardware sales. It was probably infeasible for Adobe with most of the Macromedia stuff. I was more pointing out that there has been a lot of advancement in color management and programmable hardware pipelines that hasn't made it into Adobe's applications in a meaningful way. Part of that is due to aging code. Part is simply the sheer range of hardware that they have to support. I do keep up to date on this stuff, and if you look at some of the more recent OpenGL specifications or ICC v4 standards, there are a lot of areas where you could implement better color pickers and painting tools. You can find some on Linux, but the interfaces aren't always that friendly. There are actually a lot of areas that could use improvement. With the updates in ICC specifications, you could implement transparent raw processing that does little more than assign white balance and dump the linear file data at its native gamma into an editing window. GPUs have enough power to implement just in time conversion to screen profiles, and you would have a much intuitive editing experience when doing things like brightness adjustments. You could apply the same logic to vector based programs and gradients or blends, and they could a lot of work with the way splines are mapped in vector based programs.  

post #36 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

That's part of the problem with enormous code bases. A complete rewrite presents an enormous risk. I suppose rewriting application software  is less of a risk for Apple, given that they derive more of their profit from hardware sales. It was probably infeasible for Adobe with most of the Macromedia stuff. I was more pointing out that there has been a lot of advancement in color management and programmable hardware pipelines that hasn't made it into Adobe's applications in a meaningful way. Part of that is due to aging code. 

 

That's actually one of the reasons the newer houses, such as the Pixelmator guys, might end up with decent contenders. Of course, there is a tremendous amount of tools to be created and code to be written, but ageing code turns to code rot, and maintaining that costs even more than rewriting a separate version.

 

I wish there was a decent competitor to Adobe, because CC is the worst thing ever...

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post
 

 

That's actually one of the reasons the newer houses, such as the Pixelmator guys, might end up with decent contenders. Of course, there is a tremendous amount of tools to be created and code to be written, but ageing code turns to code rot, and maintaining that costs even more than rewriting a separate version.

 

I wish there was a decent competitor to Adobe, because CC is the worst thing ever...

 

I think another part of the issue is the sheer amount of branching. Their applications run on an extremely wide range of hardware. Pixelmator doesn't have that level of redundancy, and they drop support for older OS revisions fairly quickly. It's also pretty much OS dependent, as they rely heavily on apis present in OSX for more than just the interface, where Adobe has to make for a fairly consistent experience between OSX and Windows. At least they don't use QT to build their ui *shudder*. As for Pixelmator, I doubt many firms will switch to that. They could pick up a lot of smaller clientelle such as people who shoot portraits and weddings as long as they can build up a usable workflow around it. Quite a bit of research exists in academia that I haven't seen show up in any similar applications, so I know there are interesting things they could do. There are a couple applications that have gone for a slightly more modern take on this on iOS. If I buy an iPad at any point I will probably purchase procreate, as it's much more interesting than photoshop touch.  I don't really expect to see a lot of competitors in OSX due to the maturity of that market.

post #38 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

 

I think another part of the issue is the sheer amount of branching. Their applications run on an extremely wide range of hardware. Pixelmator doesn't have that level of redundancy, and they drop support for older OS revisions fairly quickly. It's also pretty much OS dependent, as they rely heavily on apis present in OSX for more than just the interface, where Adobe has to make for a fairly consistent experience between OSX and Windows. At least they don't use QT to build their ui *shudder*. As for Pixelmator, I doubt many firms will switch to that. They could pick up a lot of smaller clientelle such as people who shoot portraits and weddings as long as they can build up a usable workflow around it. Quite a bit of research exists in academia that I haven't seen show up in any similar applications, so I know there are interesting things they could do. There are a couple applications that have gone for a slightly more modern take on this on iOS. If I buy an iPad at any point I will probably purchase procreate, as it's much more interesting than photoshop touch.  I don't really expect to see a lot of competitors in OSX due to the maturity of that market.

I think that Procreate is pretty amazing, fwiw.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #39 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight View Post
 

I think that Procreate is pretty amazing, fwiw.

I do too. I had a few ideas of my own, but anything involving graphics is immensely time consuming. The frameworks are complex. I had some exposure to linear algebra in college, but I had to pick up a more advanced text recently to get to the level required. My course in it was a long time ago, and it glossed over things like mappings due to being only a sophomore level course. I'm still going through several books on color science, including some more abstract ones. Beyond that there aren't many good reference texts. There are a couple that are aimed as graduate level textbooks, but they are terrible and severely out of data on things like spatial filtering, color mappings, and edge finding.  You can find much better references by visiting academic libraries and pulling up Siggraph course notes from the past 10 years, which is what I've been doing (because I'm really really really nerdy).

 

That doesn't even include the OpenGL learning curve.


Edited by hmm - 7/17/14 at 11:47am
post #40 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
 

You can find much better references by visiting academic libraries, which is what I've been doing (because I'm really really really nerdy).

 

That kind of nerdy is arguably so out-of-date it's even trendy.

 

 

 

 

 

Put on a trendy beard and carry your iPad Air in a leather manly handbag, wear black-lined glasses (or turtled), and maybe a nice shirt from some underground designer, I'd say.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, from my experience, academic libraries are filled with hot chicks who can actually understand either math or greek, which is way more interesting than hot chicks that can tell you who won Voice of America this year. Well, I'd expect they know anyway, but that's not the point. Hah. Off to the library now...

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple blocks older Flash plug-in versions in Safari due to vulnerability