AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Flash on the iPhone again sounding like wishful thinking
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Flash on the iPhone again sounding like wishful thinking - Page 2

post #41 of 80
2/18/09 at 12:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy View Post

Thank you.

I agree that new web standards will go a long way towards reducing the need for RIA's like Flash. However, there are two problems with your argument:

1) Internet Explorer won't implement many of these new technologies, including SVG graphics.
2) The latest standard technologies (HTML 5, new CSS animations, etc) can only go so far for functions like charting, animations, grids, and other applications that businesses need for complex RIA's.

That's why I'm in the JavaFX camp. Open technologies are better than closed ones, and JavaFX is the open RIA technology to bet on.

Yes, I am biased, since I'm a Java developer as well as a Sun fan. However, Apple and Sun have far more in common than you think, and certainly have far less in common with Adobe than they don't have in common with each other.

Fair enough.

I will disagree on the relevance of MSIE (or at least that it will continue to echew standards in the future), but I will agree that if there has to be an RIA to pick that JavaFX is indeed the best or most likely choice for Apple to make.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #42 of 80
2/18/09 at 12:52pm
For everyone that claims they don't need Flash on the iPhone, I guess you have never been to a website that required Flash. A real pain in the ass on the iPhone when that happens. So it is not really a full internet experience.

Of course problem would be solved if the web developers always offered a Non-Flash version, but most don't.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 80
2/18/09 at 2:23pm
"The Cupertino-based iPhone maker", "The iPhone and Mac maker"... WTF? Sounds like AI just copied and pasted these tabloid-style comments right off another website. AppleOutsider more like.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 80
2/18/09 at 3:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

They're investing in HTML 5.0 and related tech.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML_5

I kinda agree with JavaCowboy on the RIA issue. If HTML/CSS is the way to go for developing apps, why did the iPhone app market take off only after the SDK was released? Web based iPhones apps languished for a year until the SDK. And all the advertisements Apple is doing are for the "desktop" apps on the iPhone, not Safari-only HTML ones.

And if Apple is promoting open standards and open source, why the emphasis on a more obscure language like Objective-C? Java is definitely more open and accessible than Objective-C.

Funny how Apple tried to force developers to create HTML apps only to switch a year later and then profit from it by getting a cut of the action through the iTunes store. They couldn't have done that with browser apps.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 80
2/18/09 at 4:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

An Adobe spokeswoman told Dow Jones Tuesday (today) that Flash Lite needs more help from Apple than iPhone maker has traditionally afforded its developers. She then refused to confirm whether Apple and Adobe are working together, possibly signaling that the two are not working as closely as previously thought.

Who on earth thought they were working closely together? Adobe & Apple haven't seen eye-to-eye since Adobe snubbed the Mac by pulling Premiere and Apple's response with FCP relieved Adobe of their market share.

The iPhone alone is a real kick in the arse to Flash as it proves life is better without it. I think Apple should port the full version as is but with a power drain warning when flash content is encountered, let it drain everyone's battery and provide an off switch in preferences. Flash is just a bad way to package h.264 - RIP & good riddance!

McD
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
Android proves (as Windows & VHS did before it) that if you want to control people, give us choices and the belief we're capable of making them. We're all 'living' the American dream.
Reply
post #46 of 80
2/18/09 at 5:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rmacuser View Post

I kinda agree with JavaCowboy on the RIA issue. If HTML/CSS is the way to go for developing apps, why did the iPhone app market take off only after the SDK was released? Web based iPhones apps languished for a year until the SDK. And all the advertisements Apple is doing are for the "desktop" apps on the iPhone, not Safari-only HTML ones.

And if Apple is promoting open standards and open source, why the emphasis on a more obscure language like Objective-C? Java is definitely more open and accessible than Objective-C.

Funny how Apple tried to force developers to create HTML apps only to switch a year later and then profit from it by getting a cut of the action through the iTunes store. They couldn't have done that with browser apps.

Two points...

First, Objective C is 'open' just like any other language where you can buy a book and learn it. There is nothing hidden from you, there are no secret keywords that only the maker(s) of the compiler (which, i believe is usually gcc so you can go get the source code for that) would know about and not you. Of course you already know there are plenty of things you can do with C that you can't do with Java, but can you please define how java is more accessible than C? Or is that just because all the script kiddies like to write stuff in java because that's what they teach you in college..

Second, with regards to Apple offering HTML apps vs native apps and the whole timing issue... what a great opportunity to show people that trying to webify all apps is silly. Sure, some are great.. but not everything. This is the reason (or one of them) we are stuck with flash in the first place. Sure embedded video is great in a website, or animated graphics. But the video should be H.264 or some other standard and should NOT require a plugin or activex control. As a previous poster explained, it should be a stream to the media processing APIs of your browser or operating system. If you built an internet facing site that requires the user to install a plugin (even Flash), you built it WRONG.... Yes you did, please no arguing or you will receive a timeout

Also, having said that, to those who complain about flash only sites.. can you provide some examples? I'm sure they're not anything remotely important (granted that 'important' is a subjective term).

Any 'important' site will have accessibility built in to it. Text only to enable browser support for the visually impaired (think TTS for the blind, font scaling due to poor vision, text to braile machines and so forth). Just choose another site that doesn't require you to belabor your browser and CPU to support whiz-bang animations.

</rant>
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 80
2/18/09 at 5:46pm
Objective-C is open, but Cocoa/XCode/Interface Builder as well as Apple's own APIs are decidedly closed-source. Java, with the exception of the browser plugin, Java Web Start, and the SNMP code is completely open source, including the Netbeans IDE.

Unfortunately, there are far too many sites that require Flash. Most restaurant sites and all movie sites require Flash. I have no admin rights to my computer at work, but I was able to install Firefox without Flash. I'm shocked at the number of sites I visit on a daily basis that complain that I don't have Flash installed, even though, thankfully, I can still access most of those sites.

Flash definitely has to go. It's an abomination that chews up my CPU. Unfortunately, it's the only way to deliver video in a cross-browser way. Otherwise, YouTube would not require Flash, because Google would be first in line along with Apple to get rid of Flash entirely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by landy View Post

Two points...

First, Objective C is 'open' just like any other language where you can buy a book and learn it. There is nothing hidden from you, there are no secret keywords that only the maker(s) of the compiler (which, i believe is usually gcc so you can go get the source code for that) would know about and not you. Of course you already know there are plenty of things you can do with C that you can't do with Java, but can you please define how java is more accessible than C? Or is that just because all the script kiddies like to write stuff in java because that's what they teach you in college..

Second, with regards to Apple offering HTML apps vs native apps and the whole timing issue... what a great opportunity to show people that trying to webify all apps is silly. Sure, some are great.. but not everything. This is the reason (or one of them) we are stuck with flash in the first place. Sure embedded video is great in a website, or animated graphics. But the video should be H.264 or some other standard and should NOT require a plugin or activex control. As a previous poster explained, it should be a stream to the media processing APIs of your browser or operating system. If you built an internet facing site that requires the user to install a plugin (even Flash), you built it WRONG.... Yes you did, please no arguing or you will receive a timeout

Also, having said that, to those who complain about flash only sites.. can you provide some examples? I'm sure they're not anything remotely important (granted that 'important' is a subjective term).

Any 'important' site will have accessibility built in to it. Text only to enable browser support for the visually impaired (think TTS for the blind, font scaling due to poor vision, text to braile machines and so forth). Just choose another site that doesn't require you to belabor your browser and CPU to support whiz-bang animations.

</rant>
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 80
2/18/09 at 6:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galley View Post

Flash is evil. Death to Flash!

I concur. I hate advertisements.
ALTER BRIDGE is the greatest rock band of today. Myspace || Street Team
Reply
ALTER BRIDGE is the greatest rock band of today. Myspace || Street Team
Reply
post #49 of 80
2/18/09 at 7:42pm
The original web app implementation was half baked at best. But developers did quickly make over 2000 web apps. Web apps have no real access to system-level features. The iPhone OS 1.0 did not have optimized javascript rendering.





Their were leaks from WWDC 2008 that Apple has future plans to build a better web app development platform. Javascript rendering is magnitudes better in iPhone OS 2.0. Web apps will have access to system level features and launch without the need of a browser. Google's Book Search for iPhone is an example of this. Book Search for iPhone is a web app that does not launch within a browser window. Essentially the same development method for the Palm Pre.

Objective C is the development platform Apple uses for Mac OS X. Its only natural to leverage the same tools for the iPhone. Developers for the Mac can easily learn how to create iPhone apps. New developers to the iPhone may also become developers for the Mac.

The iPhone actually does not support java at all.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rmacuser View Post

I kinda agree with JavaCowboy on the RIA issue. If HTML/CSS is the way to go for developing apps, why did the iPhone app market take off only after the SDK was released? Web based iPhones apps languished for a year until the SDK. And all the advertisements Apple is doing are for the "desktop" apps on the iPhone, not Safari-only HTML ones.

And if Apple is promoting open standards and open source, why the emphasis on a more obscure language like Objective-C? Java is definitely more open and accessible than Objective-C.

Funny how Apple tried to force developers to create HTML apps only to switch a year later and then profit from it by getting a cut of the action through the iTunes store. They couldn't have done that with browser apps.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 80
2/18/09 at 8:09pm
No its not really. Many iPhone apps are simply front end UI for a web service. These apps would work perfectly fine as web apps, they only need the ability to access system services the way native apps can, and the ability to launch without a browser and you would see little difference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by landy View Post

Second, with regards to Apple offering HTML apps vs native apps and the whole timing issue... what a great opportunity to show people that trying to webify all apps is silly.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 80
2/19/09 at 5:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

No its not really. Many iPhone apps are simply front end UI for a web service. These apps would work perfectly fine as web apps, they only need the ability to access system services the way native apps can, and the ability to launch without a browser and you would see little difference.

Wow, I really enjoyed reading all the techy stuff from you clever guys. Do any of you see Apple brining out a more sophisticated web development app for us 'users' that keeps the ease of iWeb but moves in to the pro development arena? I migrated from Premier way back when to FCPro and never looked back, I'd love an Apple web development tool with the same leap in power.
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #52 of 80
2/19/09 at 6:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

I could care less if Flash ever makes it to the iPhone....

Really?

How much less could you care? A little less? A whole lot less?

Reply
Reply
post #53 of 80
2/19/09 at 6:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillstones View Post

For everyone that claims they don't need Flash on the iPhone, I guess you have never been to a website that required Flash.

Yes, none of those people have ever been to a website that required Flash.

Do you just post whatever pops into your head?

Reply
Reply
post #54 of 80
2/19/09 at 7:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilco View Post

Really?

How much less could you care? A little less? A whole lot less?


You beat the language police to it.
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #55 of 80
2/19/09 at 9:06am
I used to want flash on the iphone before I'd bought one. Well, I bought one. and now I don't want flash on the iphone. Leave flash to die with the desktop - and I'll create RIAs for the iphone as applications.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 80
2/19/09 at 9:51am
There is only one reason Apple is doing this - to preserve QuickTime's relevance. They can't get that to work on the phone without draining the battery so the don't want to help Adobe. Period. Adobe should get antitrust regulators involved as they are in Europe and will b/c of restrictions around the AppStore!
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 80
2/19/09 at 10:08am
Apple isn't pushing Quicktime, Apple is pushing embedded H.264 and AAC. Both are open standards that any media player can play.

Quote:
Originally Posted by treymaier View Post

There is only one reason Apple is doing this - to preserve QuickTime's relevance. They can't get that to work on the phone without draining the battery so the don't want to help Adobe. Period. Adobe should get antitrust regulators involved as they are in Europe and will b/c of restrictions around the AppStore!
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 80
2/19/09 at 1:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy View Post

Objective-C is open, but Cocoa/XCode/Interface Builder as well as Apple's own APIs are decidedly closed-source. Java, with the exception of the browser plugin, Java Web Start, and the SNMP code is completely open source, including the Netbeans IDE.

Unfortunately, there are far too many sites that require Flash. Most restaurant sites and all movie sites require Flash. I have no admin rights to my computer at work, but I was able to install Firefox without Flash. I'm shocked at the number of sites I visit on a daily basis that complain that I don't have Flash installed, even though, thankfully, I can still access most of those sites.

Flash definitely has to go. It's an abomination that chews up my CPU. Unfortunately, it's the only way to deliver video in a cross-browser way. Otherwise, YouTube would not require Flash, because Google would be first in line along with Apple to get rid of Flash entirely.

I think maybe I misunderstood you a little or you misunderstood me a little...

By open, I don't mean 'open source'. I'm referring to the fact that, like java, with Ob-C/Cocoa/IB you can go out and buy a book and write software - except Ob-C code is more efficient. I agree though that yes, Java is everywhere... I just think it's a poor choice to write software, although it's a wonderful scripting language.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 80
2/19/09 at 1:35pm
Flash sucks a s s, plain and simple. It's for ads and creating a horrible video interface. I wish it would die and go away.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 80
2/19/09 at 4:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by landy View Post

I think maybe I misunderstood you a little or you misunderstood me a little...

By open, I don't mean 'open source'. I'm referring to the fact that, like java, with Ob-C/Cocoa/IB you can go out and buy a book and write software - except Ob-C code is more efficient. I agree though that yes, Java is everywhere... I just think it's a poor choice to write software, although it's a wonderful scripting language.

I would argue that Java is more efficient, since it has better garbage collection, doesn't require header files, exception handling, a richer API, a wealth of third party libraries (log4j, ant, junit, to name a few), and the language is much more readable. Plus, Java is the language of choice for large enterprises.

Eclipse and Netbeans are superior IDEs to XCode (with the notable exception of GUI builders). I found XCode lacking in features that I take for granted in the Java IDEs.

Plus, if you really don't want to code in Java, you have a wealth of choice of languages to use with the JVM, including Ruby, Python, Groovy, and Scala, not to mention JavaFX Script.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 80
2/19/09 at 4:29pm
Java is not the language of choice of any major consumer development platform. Mobile devices being the newest platforms in the early stages of development standardization, if Java was superior they could choose to use it, but the major players are choosing HTML/CSS/javascript.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy View Post

Plus, Java is the language of choice for large enterprises.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 80
2/20/09 at 6:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by emulator View Post

that's why we use firefox with noscript. all the other browsers are useless.

that the iPhone is pretty much useless as an internet device without Flash capability. There are more web sites out there than most people are aware which use Flash for everything from buttons to selecting the region to load the support information and other basic functions without which you are unable to access the web site in any useful fashion.

As the article comments, Apple is just now trying to get Flash off their own web site.

Sure, many web sites use grandiose, over produced Flash presentations that serve no good purpose, but without Flash, you most assuredly are NOT accessing "all the web" as Apple likes to claim.

Firefox with Flashblock is very enlightening as to just how widespread the use of Flash is.

Without Flash, or a way around it, the iPhone is crippled in my experience which makes it a nice concept which is fatally flawed.

An Apple netbook or "travel companion" with a full OS X install would be vastly more interesting to me. Get the apps ported to run on OS X as well as the iPhone OS and "there you go".
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 80
2/20/09 at 6:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by treymaier View Post

There is only one reason Apple is doing this - to preserve QuickTime's relevance. They can't get that to work on the phone without draining the battery so the don't want to help Adobe. Period. Adobe should get antitrust regulators involved as they are in Europe and will b/c of restrictions around the AppStore!

Indeed!
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 80
2/20/09 at 7:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

Without Flash, or a way around it, the iPhone is crippled in my experience which makes it a nice concept which is fatally flawed.

Wow, in which case Apple has been pretty successful with this 'totally flawed' product.
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #65 of 80
2/20/09 at 8:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

that the iPhone is pretty much useless as an internet device without Flash capability. There are more web sites out there than most people are aware which use Flash for everything from buttons to selecting the region to load the support information and other basic functions without which you are unable to access the web site in any useful fashion.

This used to be more of the case, but its not true anymore. Flash is not that ubiquitous. The only place Flash is missed is in streaming video.

Quote:
As the article comments, Apple is just now trying to get Flash off their own web site.

Apple has had no flash in its website for a few years now.


Quote:
Firefox with Flashblock is very enlightening as to just how widespread the use of Flash is.

If flash is so important to the web experience why would their be a need to block it?

Quote:
Without Flash, or a way around it, the iPhone is crippled in my experience which makes it a nice concept which is fatally flawed.

The only people who say this are people who don't own and use the iPhone. Once you use it regularly, the only place flash is missed is in streaming video.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 80
2/20/09 at 11:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy View Post

How does this solve the problem of RIAs on the desktop?

The target platform is the iPhone. Cocoa/ObjC native apps covered.

The target platform is the Web Browser: HTML5/XHTML2/CSS2&3/SVG/Rich Client Javascript APIs covered.

Both have interfaces to data pools? Yes. check.

The target platform is Mac OS X: Cocoa/ObjC native apps covered.

All three have interfaces to the same data pools? Yes. check.

Done.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 80
2/23/09 at 11:22am
Really!

Almost all advertisements are done with flash. iPhone doesn't show them and thank's to a flash blocker my Safari doesn't either. We should continue to support flash since without it, it won't be that easy to get rid of ads.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 80
2/23/09 at 11:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

This used to be more of the case, but its not true anymore. Flash is not that ubiquitous. The only place Flash is missed is in streaming video.



Apple has had no flash in its website for a few years now.




If flash is so important to the web experience why would their be a need to block it?



The only people who say this are people who don't own and use the iPhone. Once you use it regularly, the only place flash is missed is in streaming video.

I regret to inform you that your assertions are simply not correct.

Without Flash, the iPhone is, sadly, little more than a toy when it comes to the web. It most assuredly does NOT access "the entire web" as Apple has asserted.
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 80
2/23/09 at 11:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

I regret to inform you that your assertions are simply not correct.

Without Flash, the iPhone is, sadly, little more than a toy when it comes to the web. It most assuredly does NOT access "the entire web" as Apple has asserted.

Not many toys allow me to access real news articles and check my bank accounts and pay bills et cetera...

By your definition, to access "the entire web" the iPhone would also have to have Java, Silverlight, ActiveX and EVERY OTHER plug-in that is available for "the entire web". That just isn't going to happen as no computer is going to have or need such access.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #70 of 80
2/23/09 at 12:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Not many toys allow me to access real news articles and check my bank accounts and pay bills et cetera...

By your definition, to access "the entire web" the iPhone would also have to have Java, Silverlight, ActiveX and EVERY OTHER plug-in that is available for "the entire web". That just isn't going to happen as no computer is going to have or need such access.

That's what Steve claimed.

In my experience with a 3G iPhone, I was unable to access many web sites which I ordinarily used. It is a fundamentally flawed device.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 80
2/23/09 at 1:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

That's what Steve claimed.

In my experience with a 3G iPhone, I was unable to access many web sites which I ordinarily used. It is a fundamentally flawed device.

That only proves that you are not the primary consumer for the device, not that it's "fundamentally flawed." If you need a phone that can do the internet with Flash Lite but without being able to render pages with full HTML, JS and CSS, then the handset is not for you. the idea that having flash would make it less of a toy is laughable, at best, considering that Flash is the toy of the internet. HTML provides the substance and Flash, well, the Flash.

I don't need Flash-based sites, except for Hulu and Comedy Central, but that isn't relevant to the discussion because Flash Lite can't play those videos either. What I do need is competent HTML, JS and CSS rendering, which is greatly provided for with WebKit. A "toy" would need Flash to play games and such, not for mobile banking and the like. If any company I do business with decided that using Flash for secure access to their site was the way to go I would stop doing business with them, with or without Flash on the iPhone.

Luckily for you, all the other cellphone OSes are finally moving to include real browsers. Like it or not, you have Apple's iPhone to thank for that. WebKit is pretty dominate in terms of number of OSes supporting it, but I feel that Fennec, which is the mobile version of FireFox, should be quite nice when it finally arrives. I think it will take a dominate percentage of all mobile devices. MS is actually upping IE for WinMo, too.

PS: Did you read the reports about Adobe is having trouble making a viable version of Flash on the iPhone? Have you seen the CPU usage, on any OS, when using Flash on a site?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #72 of 80
2/23/09 at 1:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

That's what Steve claimed.

In my experience with a 3G iPhone, I was unable to access many web sites which I ordinarily used. It is a fundamentally flawed device.

Web authors have always had to take their client platforms into account. While desktops are the clients there's certainly an incentive to use heavy extensions to the Web (if it's part of the Web, show me the W3C standard that defines it) like Flash. But with mobile devices taking off they're just going to have to shift away, at least as an option, because none of these devices are going to have the half-dozen plugins that the designers seem to think that it's reasonable for people to have.

I've never seen a Flash site that offered anything in terms of features and usability that you couldn't replicate with HTML/CSS. Maybe it would come out simpler, maybe it wouldn't have so many things autostarting, maybe it wouldn't take a minute to load either. But the nice thing about shedding Flash and Silverlight and its companions in favor of standards is that your site reaches more clients than it would otherwise have, because you're making fewer assumptions about what enhancements they have in addition to a basic browser.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #73 of 80
2/23/09 at 1:44pm
First time poster and owner of a lovely iPhone :-)

There is nothing technically stopping Flash on the iPhone, I know it works and I know it exists. The problem is simple that Apple will not allow it for a variety of reasons - you allow Flash on the iPhone you will nigh on overnight take away the validity of the App Store for a large portion of the games - it is a revenue issue which Apple is not willing to give up...
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 80
2/23/09 at 2:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by feersum.engine View Post

First time poster and owner of a lovely iPhone :-)

There is nothing technically stopping Flash on the iPhone, I know it works and I know it exists. The problem is simple that Apple will not allow it for a variety of reasons - you allow Flash on the iPhone you will nigh on overnight take away the validity of the App Store for a large portion of the games - it is a revenue issue which Apple is not willing to give up...

Welcome to AI.

That train of thought seems to be incorrect from many of the articles that have been posted around. Adobe can't seem to make an optimized version of Flash for OS X and can only seem to muster an old and essentially useless version of flash, expect for Flash-based adverts, for ARM-based devices. How many web games are Flash 7 compliant? how many of these games will scale to fit a mobile device?

Anecdotally speaking, it seems that any real Flash sites need a modern version and sites that utilize it heavily aren't even considering smaller displays as I've had issues with my netbook being able to show an entire page in Flash.

There is no way that a local game made in Obj-C that can utilize the CPU, GPU, accelerometer, etc. on the iPhone could ever be outmatched by a Flash-based game running on a web-browser. Besides performance, the battery drain from a Flash game would be immense.

Apple seems to have no problem with Flash, but rather a poor implementation of Flash. If Flash was so simple to add to the iPhone then why is Adobe struggling so much to make a viable version for ARM-based mobile devices?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #75 of 80
2/23/09 at 2:22pm
While they're at it Adobe might want to explain why they want every Internet user on earth to be forced to use their products.

Quote:
Originally Posted by treymaier View Post

Adobe should get antitrust regulators involved as they are in Europe and will b/c of restrictions around the AppStore!

A friend wanted to set up a gmail account for her Blackberry Storm, unfortunately Google advised her to use a browser installed on a desktop to set it up.

I went to the same site on my iPhone, set up a new email address for her then she was able to add the new email account to her Blackberry.

It's remarkable how well "toys" perform when compared to "business phones".

Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

I regret to inform you that your assertions are simply not correct.

Without Flash, the iPhone is, sadly, little more than a toy when it comes to the web. It most assuredly does NOT access "the entire web" as Apple has asserted.

Would you mind pointing me to the Flash versions of games like Asphalt 4, Hero of Sparta, I love Katamari, Brothers in Arms, Silent Hill, Sim City, Crash Cart Racing, Billy Frontier, Flick Fishing and others I have installed on my iPhone

Quote:
Originally Posted by feersum.engine View Post

First time poster and owner of a lovely iPhone :-)
- you allow Flash on the iPhone you will nigh on overnight take away the validity of the App Store for a large portion of the games

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #76 of 80
2/24/09 at 1:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Would you mind pointing me to the Flash versions of games like Asphalt 4, Hero of Sparta, I love Katamari, Brothers in Arms, Silent Hill, Sim City, Crash Cart Racing, Billy Frontier, Flick Fishing and others I have installed on my iPhone

True enough, what I mean is that for some of the let's say "crappy" apps which do take up a large portion of the app space can be done in Flash and hence could add up to revenue.

it is a classic case of good versus evil (in whatever angle you come in ;-). I love my iPhone etc but would I love Flash on it - yes I would as Flash is ubuqituous and is a valid content delivery mechanism and a browser without it is incomplete in my eyes. Same with Siverlight..

Again, just my $0.02 ;-)
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 80
12/26/09 at 6:48pm
The way this thread seems to be going, I might be the only one that really wants Flash capabilities.

Not so much for games, but for the breadth of streaming video sites out there. Not all of them are willing to make H264 based app versions.
lmao internet
Reply
lmao internet
Reply
post #78 of 80
12/26/09 at 7:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

While they're at it Adobe might want to explain why they want every Internet user on earth to be forced to use their products.



A friend wanted to set up a gmail account for her Blackberry Storm, unfortunately Google advised her to use a browser installed on a desktop to set it up.

I went to the same site on my iPhone, set up a new email address for her then she was able to add the new email account to her Blackberry.

It's remarkable how well "toys" perform when compared to "business phones".



Would you mind pointing me to the Flash versions of games like Asphalt 4, Hero of Sparta, I love Katamari, Brothers in Arms, Silent Hill, Sim City, Crash Cart Racing, Billy Frontier, Flick Fishing and others I have installed on my iPhone


Your reference to games is interesting, but is completely off topic. Flash on the web is the topic. Many web sites use Flash for everything from maps from which to choose your country for support to buttons to navigate the site with. Not every use of Flash is for the grotesquely overproduced Flash videos that strain most internet connections and much hardware.

Install Firefox and the the Flash block add-on (and enable it). You will then see just how much Flash there is on the web and how you are unable to make use of a great many web sites without it.

I will repeat, without Flash you can not experience "all the web" as promised by Steve himself.

This has absolutely nothing to do with your gaming activities.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 80
12/26/09 at 11:22pm
I use "click to flash" in Safari.

Here's an experiment for you to try, install iStat on a modern Mac and check your temperature then open a Flash heavy site, Farmville on Facebook is a good example.

Now as you hear your fans whir to life have a look at the CPU temp in iStat, I usually get a 20°C difference.

Flash is sh*t!

The sooner it's gone the better.

http://www.youtube.com/html5

Now any web developer worth their salt will know that in order to capture visits from arguably the most widely used mobile web browsing platform that they'd better dump the Flash or be ignored.

The only mobile platform with a usable non-lite form of Flash is the Nokia N900, running Maemo 5 and Fennec (released 9 months after this thread started) it uses 9.2 so is compatible with ActionScript 2 based content, Adobe is yet to release Flash 10 for mobile but they are working on it, it will be compatible with ActionScript 3 content.

Developers will need to update older sites for compatibility AND buy more software from Adobe in order to do so = profit for Adobe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RBR View Post

Your reference to games is interesting, but is completely off topic. Flash on the web is the topic. Many web sites use Flash for everything from maps from which to choose your country for support to buttons to navigate the site with. Not every use of Flash is for the grotesquely overproduced Flash videos that strain most internet connections and much hardware.

Install Firefox and the the Flash block add-on (and enable it). You will then see just how much Flash there is on the web and how you are unable to make use of a great many web sites without it.

I will repeat, without Flash you can not experience "all the web" as promised by Steve himself.

This has absolutely nothing to do with your gaming activities.

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply

"The cobbler's children have no shoes", is a saying that applies a lot to companies who provide products and services. -KDarling on Google Search.

Reply
post #80 of 80
12/26/09 at 11:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

I use "click to flash" in Safari.

Here's an experiment for you to try, install iStat on a modern Mac and check your temperature then open a Flash heavy site, Farmville on Facebook is a good example.

Now as you hear your fans whir to life have a look at the CPU temp in iStat, I usually get a 20°C difference.

Flash is sh*t!

The sooner it's gone the better.

http://www.youtube.com/html5

A balanced test would have to show the comparison of using HTML5, CSS and JS instead of Flash for the same general result. So far, the only real benefits Ive seen is from using the HTML 5 <video> and <audio> tags, HTTP Live Streaming and embedded A/V like using QuickTime in YouTube instead of Flash. Granted, these are huge benefits over Flash-based setups.

For interactive sites, like Farmville, even if open source code could be implemented as easily it does appear to be as pricessor heavy as Flash at this time, if not more so. Not sure about Silverlight but it does seem to fare better than Flash on the Mac in many respects.

Here are some demos of HTML5s Canvas element. My CPU spikes more and my CPU temp shoots up faster. I dont expect to see many sites using this for some time.
http://9elements.com/io/projects/html5/canvas/
http://www.benjoffe.com/code/games/torus/ Once WebGL becomes standard maybe things will change. I figure that will be standard in Safari before Adobe even has Flash for Mac with HW acceleration. \
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Flash on the iPhone again sounding like wishful thinking