Isn't it Adobe's responsibility? It is their software, isn't it?
But given how much of a presence Flash has on the web, you'd think that Apple would want to work with Adobe to resolve the issue. Apple may not like Flash, but there's no reason for this to have gone on for so long.
Both parties need to come to the table to resolve this. I mean, I consider flash to be a rather basic necessity for web surfing.
Unfortunately only Adobe has the power to fix this problem. This is exactly why we shouldn't be relying on a closed source platform for a core Internet standard. Adobe ignored Flash on Linux for years and finally in the last 12-18 months has given it some attention. Now it's quite good. Flash on the Mac is a distant third in terms of performance and stability.
Flash on 32bit Linux is better. Flash on 64bit Linux is far less acceptable.
I see your analogy with the language translation; however, you are completely missing the point of object oriented programming....
Since Cocoa Touch is a collection of Frameworks (UIKit, Foundation, etc) and each Framework is a collection of classes, Apple has enabled porting to an artform! ....don't give me this "porting always leads to disaster" talk of the 1980's.
Porting does not always lead to disaster, but it almost always does when the developers port the conventions of the original platform to the new one. This doesn't have anything to do with Cocoa Touch or object oriented programming in general. The same problems would exist whether the native development environment were smalltalk or assembly language. Every user interface, just like every language, has a way of behaving, presenting information to a user and reacting to user input that is unique. It doesn't matter how good a job Adobe does translating Flash to Objective-C code, they can't translate those idioms and if the developers don't understand them, and use them, which most people looking to Flash as their ticket to an iPhone app won't, because they are looking for shortcuts and quick fixes, then the app won't work well on the platform. So there's every reason to believe that most of these Flash apps will generally not work well as iPhone apps, and that there will be a low level of user acceptance.
I can't seem to get ANY virtual machine to run for long before they begin to use 100% of one of my CPUs. I've tried VMWare Fusion, Parallels, and Virtual Box. All seem to eventually max my CPU and stop working or work VERY slowely. I have to resort to booting into my Boot Camp partition to work in Windows XP. I only need XP to use Remote Desktop Connection for remote connection to work. Does anyone know of a MAC client I can use for this, that supports Terminal Services Gateway?
RDP for mac... CoRD is another. One of the Linux apps, rdesktop I believe runs perfectly on the Mac as well (X11).
I can sum up in a few words why flash is making such an issue on the 27" imacs only.
Its simple
People that have gone out and bought the 27" have done so because they want the latest and greatest. The iPenis as it were.
If they had plugged in their keyboards and the left hand side shift key made a clunking noise then you will hear about it on a blog and suddenly all the other "early adopters" out there start reporting they too now have the same issue.
But was it really an issue?
Probably not.... i mean im not saying that it wouldn't be annoying. But i wouldn't call it news worthy.
The same kinda thing is happening with flash. Remember when 10.6 came out all those months ago now and low and behold flash was running like a pig. Turned out that there was an older version running. That too made front page news. But why?
A few days later there was a flash patch and suddenly oh it works. Its par for the course.
In this case id say that there was probably an older patch installed of flash or maybe there is a clash with a driver to fun the "friggin huge" screen. Either way it will be patched sooner rather than later and these people will then have to find something else to bitch about.
Funny if it was hardware alone or software alone that the smaller 21.5" people don't seem to be making as much of a fuss about this.
This makes me lean towards the driver clash with the display drivers.
The world's first operating system to automatically wipe out your data so you can free up space on your harddrives! No Windows have ever done such a thing before!
"Full support for Adobe Flash"
Apple makes both the software and hardware so we can make the best experience possible; in this case not being able to run Flash even though we charge you two times the price of comparable PC with the same hardware! That little netbook can play Flash, but your $2000 iMac cant!
Originally Posted by Some random in no way paid by Redmond
Introducing "Snow Leopard"
"iDelete"
The world's first operating system to automatically wipe out your data so you can free up space on your harddrives! No Windows have ever done such a thing before!
"Full support for Adobe Flash"
Apple makes both the software and hardware so we can make the best experience possible; in this case not being able to run Flash even though we charge you two times the price of comparable PC with the same hardware! That little netbook can play Flash, but your $2000 iMac cant!
Porting does not always lead to disaster, but it almost always does when the developers port the conventions of the original platform to the new one. This doesn't have anything to do with Cocoa Touch or object oriented programming in general. The same problems would exist whether the native development environment were smalltalk or assembly language. Every user interface, just like every language, has a way of behaving, presenting information to a user and reacting to user input that is unique. It doesn't matter how good a job Adobe does translating Flash to Objective-C code, they can't translate those idioms and if the developers don't understand them, and use them, which most people looking to Flash as their ticket to an iPhone app won't, because they are looking for shortcuts and quick fixes, then the app won't work well on the platform. So there's every reason to believe that most of these Flash apps will generally not work well as iPhone apps, and that there will be a low level of user acceptance.
Your point is well taken; however, Apple has abstracted the API so far away from the hardware that most objective-C programmers don't understand the idioms of the iPhone hardware architecture. People who write firmware for microcontroller's do understand the hardware at its core. My point is this, what Apple has done with Cocoa Touch is wonderful because you don't need to understand the hardware inner-workings, you simply need to understand what the device can do; this is a programming environment at its best, this is what the competition is trying to accomplish.
This has everything to do with Cocoa Touch and object-oriented programming. A well formed collection of Frameworks such as this is exactly what is needed for a more transparent port...isn't this obvious? This is why Apple created Cocoa and Cocoa Touch....Exclusively for porting between platforms (desktop, laptop, mobile and soon slates). Now think ahead for a moment, lets think like Apple: Lets create a programming environment that allows non-Apple programmers to easily port their code...during the port, they discover the Apple tools and IDE and voila ....new Apple programmers....think about all the games, calculators and utilities...I know for a fact, that a majority of the early iPhone programmers were not Apple programmers...they had pre-existing source code that was easily ported to the iPhone because of Cocoa Touch...there are thousands of developers and more everyday from many platforms because of ease of portability........with this in mind, think of the port that Adobe did, with some of the most talented programmer's in the world.....Flash will be a smash hit......but hey, Ballmer laughed at the iPhone.....and many people see the demise of Flash.....lets see what happens.
The world's first operating system to automatically wipe out your data so you can free up space on your harddrives! No Windows have ever done such a thing before!
"Full support for Adobe Flash"
Apple makes both the software and hardware so we can make the best experience possible; in this case not being able to run Flash even though we charge you two times the price of comparable PC with the same hardware! That little netbook can play Flash, but your $2000 iMac cant!
It Just Works!
"Imagine That"
Like in politics, this guy keep out a few key facts:
The issue with Apple is limited to guest user accounts (less than 200 people have reported the issue).
No, Microsoft does not screw up their own customers (will we could debate, if Vista was not total screw job on consumers and Longhorn was on shareholders/investors), MS screws up T-mobile's 1 million plus customers because their did not practise the simplest of IT manangement procedures, always backup data when you install new updates.
Now screwing up few hundred people or 1 million plus, I wonder who is bigger screw-up to the public and shareholders. Oh yes because MS will be going to court wether, it is T-mobile or consumers, payment will be made for BIGGEST screw-up in consumer data HISTORY!!
The irony is MS was pushing the system restore feature in Windows OS to their consumers
...adobe has abandoned its mac user base years ago. if you look at the amount of products that adobe lists on their website, you can see that the tools that are critical to graphic designers on the mac are probably just 5 out of 100 or so. i don't know where adobe makes its money, but from their product list it looks like they see more value in supporting windows with cheap crap than in supporting high end mac software.. their flagship products are now windows first and the mac has turned into an afterthought
Absolutely agree!
Quote:
i think that apple should take a hard look at adobe and consider buying the lot.
I've stated the same here at AI in other threads... multiple times (sorry!)
Quote:
can you imagine how many graphics people would buy high end mac pros if the mac versions would get preferential treatment at an apple owned adobe? i don't know if they could shut down windows development altogether, but they could certainly prioritize the todo lists of their most talented people.
The graphics industry i.e. publishing, print, media and advertising has supported Apple from the get-go. Without our contribution in the early years (1984-1999), may I dare say that Apple would have folded BEFORE their successful venture into consumer computing. Adobe, Macromedia, and Quark were the software cornerstones for Apple in the day. Now there's only Adobe... and to a lesser degree Quark (did THEY ever screw up!)... and they have most obviously went Windows-first in their development.
Quote:
the same graphics whores that switched to windows in the 90s would certainly buy new shiny boxes from apple if that's where their tools would run the best.
...I can call and describe myself with the above epitaph, but it sounds sooo condescending reading it from someone else... but it still made me laugh!
Quote:
i also think that adobe's product line could use some of that minimalist obsession that mr jobs is so famous for.
I've also stated the same. Funny how Adobe originally built their programs using the strict GUI guidelines from Apple, then ported those same popular and productive GUIs to Windows, creating the most sought after and stolen photo editor in the process... and then decided that the "Apple GUI" wasn't good enough. The response to their recent GUI changes have been less than complimentary from both Mac and/or Windows users.
Quote:
as for flash - if apple owned it, i'm sure it could get optimized for the mac, replaced by Quicktime on the video front, open sourced, or killed outright. I certainly wouldn't miss it.
In all truthfulness, Flash in and of itself is great software. It's how it's used is the problem. Technically it was only meant to be an interface builder for manipulating images, animations, and later video. It's how Macromedia first, and later Adobe implemented video, that problems started to arise. I believe Apple could make the "Flash experience and performance" so much better using their own tech and Open Source tech.
I actually think that Adobe's investors would LOVE Apple to come courting, if not only because Adobe has definitely lost their focus IMO, and because there are a ton of synergies to be exploited. Culling the software overlap alone would save Adobe and Apple millions... maybe billions, in reduced marketing and R&D costs.
Actually, the near future is the time for Apple to make it's move if ever, because with less than double-digit market-share (still... but for how long?), Apple could get through any attempts to block it due to anti-competitive or monopoly issues.
In the end, it would revert to being the same Mac vs.PC sales argument started in 1984: Apple=media and content creation/manipulation... PC=office back-end, organization, and processes... and let's not forget Über-GAMERS! <--How did THAT ever happen? What strange bedfellows those 2 market segments make!
Regardless, Apple and the Mac will still be the platform of choice for professionals in the industry. I can't count the number of photogs, printers, agencies, etc. here in Germany that have switched "Back to Mac" (as I did), or have switched, over the last few years. However, they are ALL gnashing their teeth over the Adobe dilemma though. Mainly because CS could be sooo much better taking it's cues from Apple, and Adobe returning to their roots so-to-speak.
Sorry for the long post... did I say I was a "passionate" Graphics Whore? <-- Titles should be capitalized
Like in politics, this guy keep out a few key facts:
The issue with Apple is limited to guest user accounts (less than 200 people have reported the issue).
No, Microsoft does not screw up their own customers (will we could debate, if Vista was not total screw job on consumers and Longhorn was on shareholders/investors), MS screws up T-mobile's 1 million plus customers because their did not practise the simplest of IT manangement procedures, always backup data when you install new updates.
Now screwing up few hundred people or 1 million plus, I wonder who is bigger screw-up to the public and shareholders. Oh yes because MS will be going to court wether, it is T-mobile or consumers, payment will be made for BIGGEST screw-up in consumer data HISTORY!!
The irony is MS was pushing the system restore feature in Windows OS to their consumers
I not sure if i should reply to this, I could pick thousands of faulty issues with 10 different PC manufactures on their PCs releases and point you to numerous other forums.
Again show me the number of 27" iMacs that have been purchased and the number of faulty iMac returns/issues/displeased customers and then maybe I will listen to you.
It is easy to found a number of people, who are not happy, does that mean every consumer who buys the product will found a fault!
Show me statistical signifcance, significant ternd in terms of faulty 27" iMacs and then maybe I listen to you.
I have to wonder if the issue with Flash on these iMacs is not with Flash itself, but with an underlying issue with a small number of iMacs in general. Flash, being such a huge resource hog, would likely be the first thing many would notice if the system as a whole was having issues. The proverbial canary in the mine, if you will.
Piece of advisce before you post a link, actually read it properly.
My points are clearly shown in the link you provided.
1. Not all the data was restored, hmm that different from what you posted "data restored", no mate its almost all data restored, get it right!
2. Lawsuits are still going to happen!
Here what I am pointing to:
Microsoft today reports it recovered the majority of lost customer data for Sidekick owners amid a flurry of lawsuits filed yesterday over the recent server failure caused a service outage and data loss.
The software giant, which owns Danger, the company that provides online services for Sidekick on T-Mobile's network, will begin restoring personal data "as soon as possible," starting with contacts and moving on to other content.
"We are pleased to report that we have recovered most, if not all, customer data for those Sidekick customers whose data was affected by the recent outage. We will continue to work around the clock to restore data to all affected users, including calendar, notes, tasks, photographs and high scores, as quickly as possible," writes Roz Ho, vice president premium mobile experiences for Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), in a statement issued today.
The service glitch was caused by a "system failure that created data loss in the core database and the back-up," according to Ho, who said Microsoft rebuilt the system "component by component, recovering data along the way."
I read last sentence again and you know that is BS, since it has been reported that MS were undertaking system updates, now its system failure that caused data loss in core database and the back-up. Who can smell BS and it is very STRONG!!
Piece of advisce before you post a link, actually read it properly.
My points are clearly shown in the link you provided.
1. Not all the data was restored, hmm that different from what you posted "data restored", no mate its almost all data restored, get it right!
2. Lawsuits are still going to happen!
Here what I am pointing to:
Microsoft today reports it recovered the majority of lost customer data for Sidekick owners amid a flurry of lawsuits filed yesterday over the recent server failure caused a service outage and data loss.
The software giant, which owns Danger, the company that provides online services for Sidekick on T-Mobile's network, will begin restoring personal data "as soon as possible," starting with contacts and moving on to other content.
"We are pleased to report that we have recovered most, if not all, customer data for those Sidekick customers whose data was affected by the recent outage. We will continue to work around the clock to restore data to all affected users, including calendar, notes, tasks, photographs and high scores, as quickly as possible," writes Roz Ho, vice president premium mobile experiences for Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), in a statement issued today.
The service glitch was caused by a "system failure that created data loss in the core database and the back-up," according to Ho, who said Microsoft rebuilt the system "component by component, recovering data along the way."
I read last sentence again and you know that is BS, since it has been reported that MS were undertaking system updates, now its system failure that caused data loss in core database and the back-up. Who can smell BS and it is very STRONG!!
I not sure if i should reply to this, I could pick thousands of faulty issues with 10 different PC manufactures on their PCs releases and point you to numerous other forums.
Again show me the number of 27" iMacs that have been purchased and the number of faulty iMac returns/issues/displeased customers and then maybe I will listen to you.
It is easy to found a number of people, who are not happy, does that mean every consumer who buys the product will found a fault!
Show me statistical signifcance, significant ternd in terms of faulty 27" iMacs and then maybe I listen to you.
read much..??
All I was saying is that other users are reporting issues with their iMacs that aren't flash related.
rest of your post is waffle and verbiage from a non existent argument.
I totally agree with this I was using 64 bit Linux five years ago and had to run Firefox in 32bit mode for the flash plugin to work.
There is no alternative to Adobe, the ball is squarely in Adobes court developers who rely solely on Flash to present their content are just as bad as those who messed up the web for years by catering only to Internet Explorer while ignoring open standards.
First thing I do in Windows and Linux is install Firefox with the no script plug in so I can choose whether or not to overload my system with flash, now I have a Mac I use click to flash in Safari.
If a website isn't navigable without flash I go somewhere else for what I want.
Adobe only caters to the largest market segment, i.e. Windows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
Flash on 32bit Linux is better. Flash on 64bit Linux is far less acceptable.
Comments
Isn't it Adobe's responsibility? It is their software, isn't it?
But given how much of a presence Flash has on the web, you'd think that Apple would want to work with Adobe to resolve the issue. Apple may not like Flash, but there's no reason for this to have gone on for so long.
Both parties need to come to the table to resolve this. I mean, I consider flash to be a rather basic necessity for web surfing.
Unfortunately only Adobe has the power to fix this problem. This is exactly why we shouldn't be relying on a closed source platform for a core Internet standard. Adobe ignored Flash on Linux for years and finally in the last 12-18 months has given it some attention. Now it's quite good. Flash on the Mac is a distant third in terms of performance and stability.
Flash on 32bit Linux is better. Flash on 64bit Linux is far less acceptable.
Remote Desktop Connection for Mac doesn't cut it since it doesn't support the TS Gateway settings
What the hell does Terminal Services Gateway [Microsoft Terminal Services] have to do with OS X?
Apple's Terminal Services are POSIX Compliant.
Windows TS are not.
Windows doesn't want to play nice with everyone else. That's how they spread into the Enterprise and cut out every other vendor OS.
I see your analogy with the language translation; however, you are completely missing the point of object oriented programming....
Since Cocoa Touch is a collection of Frameworks (UIKit, Foundation, etc) and each Framework is a collection of classes, Apple has enabled porting to an artform! ....don't give me this "porting always leads to disaster" talk of the 1980's.
Porting does not always lead to disaster, but it almost always does when the developers port the conventions of the original platform to the new one. This doesn't have anything to do with Cocoa Touch or object oriented programming in general. The same problems would exist whether the native development environment were smalltalk or assembly language. Every user interface, just like every language, has a way of behaving, presenting information to a user and reacting to user input that is unique. It doesn't matter how good a job Adobe does translating Flash to Objective-C code, they can't translate those idioms and if the developers don't understand them, and use them, which most people looking to Flash as their ticket to an iPhone app won't, because they are looking for shortcuts and quick fixes, then the app won't work well on the platform. So there's every reason to believe that most of these Flash apps will generally not work well as iPhone apps, and that there will be a low level of user acceptance.
I can't seem to get ANY virtual machine to run for long before they begin to use 100% of one of my CPUs. I've tried VMWare Fusion, Parallels, and Virtual Box. All seem to eventually max my CPU and stop working or work VERY slowely. I have to resort to booting into my Boot Camp partition to work in Windows XP. I only need XP to use Remote Desktop Connection for remote connection to work. Does anyone know of a MAC client I can use for this, that supports Terminal Services Gateway?
RDP for mac... CoRD is another. One of the Linux apps, rdesktop I believe runs perfectly on the Mac as well (X11).
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/product...p/default.mspx
I can sum up in a few words why flash is making such an issue on the 27" imacs only.
Its simple
People that have gone out and bought the 27" have done so because they want the latest and greatest. The iPenis as it were.
If they had plugged in their keyboards and the left hand side shift key made a clunking noise then you will hear about it on a blog and suddenly all the other "early adopters" out there start reporting they too now have the same issue.
But was it really an issue?
Probably not.... i mean im not saying that it wouldn't be annoying. But i wouldn't call it news worthy.
The same kinda thing is happening with flash. Remember when 10.6 came out all those months ago now and low and behold flash was running like a pig. Turned out that there was an older version running. That too made front page news. But why?
A few days later there was a flash patch and suddenly oh it works. Its par for the course.
In this case id say that there was probably an older patch installed of flash or maybe there is a clash with a driver to fun the "friggin huge" screen. Either way it will be patched sooner rather than later and these people will then have to find something else to bitch about.
Funny if it was hardware alone or software alone that the smaller 21.5" people don't seem to be making as much of a fuss about this.
This makes me lean towards the driver clash with the display drivers.
Bingo.
"iDelete"
The world's first operating system to automatically wipe out your data so you can free up space on your harddrives! No Windows have ever done such a thing before!
"Full support for Adobe Flash"
Apple makes both the software and hardware so we can make the best experience possible; in this case not being able to run Flash even though we charge you two times the price of comparable PC with the same hardware! That little netbook can play Flash, but your $2000 iMac cant!
It Just Works!
"Imagine That"
Introducing "Snow Leopard"
"iDelete"
The world's first operating system to automatically wipe out your data so you can free up space on your harddrives! No Windows have ever done such a thing before!
"Full support for Adobe Flash"
Apple makes both the software and hardware so we can make the best experience possible; in this case not being able to run Flash even though we charge you two times the price of comparable PC with the same hardware! That little netbook can play Flash, but your $2000 iMac cant!
It Just Works!
"Imagine That"
Wow thanks for that.
That added to the debate as much as this did.
Looks like we have another...
Internet TROLL.
Porting does not always lead to disaster, but it almost always does when the developers port the conventions of the original platform to the new one. This doesn't have anything to do with Cocoa Touch or object oriented programming in general. The same problems would exist whether the native development environment were smalltalk or assembly language. Every user interface, just like every language, has a way of behaving, presenting information to a user and reacting to user input that is unique. It doesn't matter how good a job Adobe does translating Flash to Objective-C code, they can't translate those idioms and if the developers don't understand them, and use them, which most people looking to Flash as their ticket to an iPhone app won't, because they are looking for shortcuts and quick fixes, then the app won't work well on the platform. So there's every reason to believe that most of these Flash apps will generally not work well as iPhone apps, and that there will be a low level of user acceptance.
Your point is well taken; however, Apple has abstracted the API so far away from the hardware that most objective-C programmers don't understand the idioms of the iPhone hardware architecture. People who write firmware for microcontroller's do understand the hardware at its core. My point is this, what Apple has done with Cocoa Touch is wonderful because you don't need to understand the hardware inner-workings, you simply need to understand what the device can do; this is a programming environment at its best, this is what the competition is trying to accomplish.
This has everything to do with Cocoa Touch and object-oriented programming. A well formed collection of Frameworks such as this is exactly what is needed for a more transparent port...isn't this obvious? This is why Apple created Cocoa and Cocoa Touch....Exclusively for porting between platforms (desktop, laptop, mobile and soon slates). Now think ahead for a moment, lets think like Apple: Lets create a programming environment that allows non-Apple programmers to easily port their code...during the port, they discover the Apple tools and IDE and voila ....new Apple programmers....think about all the games, calculators and utilities...I know for a fact, that a majority of the early iPhone programmers were not Apple programmers...they had pre-existing source code that was easily ported to the iPhone because of Cocoa Touch...there are thousands of developers and more everyday from many platforms because of ease of portability........with this in mind, think of the port that Adobe did, with some of the most talented programmer's in the world.....Flash will be a smash hit......but hey, Ballmer laughed at the iPhone.....and many people see the demise of Flash.....lets see what happens.
Introducing "Snow Leopard"
"iDelete"
The world's first operating system to automatically wipe out your data so you can free up space on your harddrives! No Windows have ever done such a thing before!
"Full support for Adobe Flash"
Apple makes both the software and hardware so we can make the best experience possible; in this case not being able to run Flash even though we charge you two times the price of comparable PC with the same hardware! That little netbook can play Flash, but your $2000 iMac cant!
It Just Works!
"Imagine That"
Like in politics, this guy keep out a few key facts:
The issue with Apple is limited to guest user accounts (less than 200 people have reported the issue).
No, Microsoft does not screw up their own customers (will we could debate, if Vista was not total screw job on consumers and Longhorn was on shareholders/investors), MS screws up T-mobile's 1 million plus customers because their did not practise the simplest of IT manangement procedures, always backup data when you install new updates.
Now screwing up few hundred people or 1 million plus, I wonder who is bigger screw-up to the public and shareholders. Oh yes because MS will be going to court wether, it is T-mobile or consumers, payment will be made for BIGGEST screw-up in consumer data HISTORY!!
The irony is MS was pushing the system restore feature in Windows OS to their consumers
...adobe has abandoned its mac user base years ago. if you look at the amount of products that adobe lists on their website, you can see that the tools that are critical to graphic designers on the mac are probably just 5 out of 100 or so. i don't know where adobe makes its money, but from their product list it looks like they see more value in supporting windows with cheap crap than in supporting high end mac software.. their flagship products are now windows first and the mac has turned into an afterthought
Absolutely agree!
i think that apple should take a hard look at adobe and consider buying the lot.
I've stated the same here at AI in other threads... multiple times (sorry!)
can you imagine how many graphics people would buy high end mac pros if the mac versions would get preferential treatment at an apple owned adobe? i don't know if they could shut down windows development altogether, but they could certainly prioritize the todo lists of their most talented people.
The graphics industry i.e. publishing, print, media and advertising has supported Apple from the get-go. Without our contribution in the early years (1984-1999), may I dare say that Apple would have folded BEFORE their successful venture into consumer computing. Adobe, Macromedia, and Quark were the software cornerstones for Apple in the day. Now there's only Adobe... and to a lesser degree Quark (did THEY ever screw up!)... and they have most obviously went Windows-first in their development.
the same graphics whores that switched to windows in the 90s would certainly buy new shiny boxes from apple if that's where their tools would run the best.
i also think that adobe's product line could use some of that minimalist obsession that mr jobs is so famous for.
I've also stated the same. Funny how Adobe originally built their programs using the strict GUI guidelines from Apple, then ported those same popular and productive GUIs to Windows, creating the most sought after and stolen photo editor in the process... and then decided that the "Apple GUI" wasn't good enough. The response to their recent GUI changes have been less than complimentary from both Mac and/or Windows users.
as for flash - if apple owned it, i'm sure it could get optimized for the mac, replaced by Quicktime on the video front, open sourced, or killed outright. I certainly wouldn't miss it.
In all truthfulness, Flash in and of itself is great software. It's how it's used is the problem. Technically it was only meant to be an interface builder for manipulating images, animations, and later video. It's how Macromedia first, and later Adobe implemented video, that problems started to arise. I believe Apple could make the "Flash experience and performance" so much better using their own tech and Open Source tech.
I actually think that Adobe's investors would LOVE Apple to come courting, if not only because Adobe has definitely lost their focus IMO, and because there are a ton of synergies to be exploited. Culling the software overlap alone would save Adobe and Apple millions... maybe billions, in reduced marketing and R&D costs.
Actually, the near future is the time for Apple to make it's move if ever, because with less than double-digit market-share (still... but for how long?), Apple could get through any attempts to block it due to anti-competitive or monopoly issues.
In the end, it would revert to being the same Mac vs.PC sales argument started in 1984: Apple=media and content creation/manipulation... PC=office back-end, organization, and processes... and let's not forget Über-GAMERS! <--How did THAT ever happen? What strange bedfellows those 2 market segments make!
Regardless, Apple and the Mac will still be the platform of choice for professionals in the industry. I can't count the number of photogs, printers, agencies, etc. here in Germany that have switched "Back to Mac" (as I did), or have switched, over the last few years. However, they are ALL gnashing their teeth over the Adobe dilemma though. Mainly because CS could be sooo much better taking it's cues from Apple, and Adobe returning to their roots so-to-speak.
Sorry for the long post... did I say I was a "passionate" Graphics Whore? <-- Titles should be capitalized
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=810722
Wow thanks for that.
That added to the debate as much as this did.
Looks like we have another...
Internet TROLL.
so on here truth about Apple, even if its negative means trolling...?
right got it
Like in politics, this guy keep out a few key facts:
The issue with Apple is limited to guest user accounts (less than 200 people have reported the issue).
No, Microsoft does not screw up their own customers (will we could debate, if Vista was not total screw job on consumers and Longhorn was on shareholders/investors), MS screws up T-mobile's 1 million plus customers because their did not practise the simplest of IT manangement procedures, always backup data when you install new updates.
Now screwing up few hundred people or 1 million plus, I wonder who is bigger screw-up to the public and shareholders. Oh yes because MS will be going to court wether, it is T-mobile or consumers, payment will be made for BIGGEST screw-up in consumer data HISTORY!!
The irony is MS was pushing the system restore feature in Windows OS to their consumers
data restored..
http://www.internetnews.com/mobility...uits+Filed.htm
guys, its NOT JUST flash thats the issue..!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=810722
I not sure if i should reply to this, I could pick thousands of faulty issues with 10 different PC manufactures on their PCs releases and point you to numerous other forums.
Again show me the number of 27" iMacs that have been purchased and the number of faulty iMac returns/issues/displeased customers and then maybe I will listen to you.
It is easy to found a number of people, who are not happy, does that mean every consumer who buys the product will found a fault!
Show me statistical signifcance, significant ternd in terms of faulty 27" iMacs and then maybe I listen to you.
data restored..
http://www.internetnews.com/mobility...uits+Filed.htm
Piece of advisce before you post a link, actually read it properly.
My points are clearly shown in the link you provided.
1. Not all the data was restored, hmm that different from what you posted "data restored", no mate its almost all data restored, get it right!
2. Lawsuits are still going to happen!
Here what I am pointing to:
Microsoft today reports it recovered the majority of lost customer data for Sidekick owners amid a flurry of lawsuits filed yesterday over the recent server failure caused a service outage and data loss.
The software giant, which owns Danger, the company that provides online services for Sidekick on T-Mobile's network, will begin restoring personal data "as soon as possible," starting with contacts and moving on to other content.
"We are pleased to report that we have recovered most, if not all, customer data for those Sidekick customers whose data was affected by the recent outage. We will continue to work around the clock to restore data to all affected users, including calendar, notes, tasks, photographs and high scores, as quickly as possible," writes Roz Ho, vice president premium mobile experiences for Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), in a statement issued today.
The service glitch was caused by a "system failure that created data loss in the core database and the back-up," according to Ho, who said Microsoft rebuilt the system "component by component, recovering data along the way."
I read last sentence again and you know that is BS, since it has been reported that MS were undertaking system updates, now its system failure that caused data loss in core database and the back-up. Who can smell BS and it is very STRONG!!
Piece of advisce before you post a link, actually read it properly.
My points are clearly shown in the link you provided.
1. Not all the data was restored, hmm that different from what you posted "data restored", no mate its almost all data restored, get it right!
2. Lawsuits are still going to happen!
Here what I am pointing to:
Microsoft today reports it recovered the majority of lost customer data for Sidekick owners amid a flurry of lawsuits filed yesterday over the recent server failure caused a service outage and data loss.
The software giant, which owns Danger, the company that provides online services for Sidekick on T-Mobile's network, will begin restoring personal data "as soon as possible," starting with contacts and moving on to other content.
"We are pleased to report that we have recovered most, if not all, customer data for those Sidekick customers whose data was affected by the recent outage. We will continue to work around the clock to restore data to all affected users, including calendar, notes, tasks, photographs and high scores, as quickly as possible," writes Roz Ho, vice president premium mobile experiences for Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), in a statement issued today.
The service glitch was caused by a "system failure that created data loss in the core database and the back-up," according to Ho, who said Microsoft rebuilt the system "component by component, recovering data along the way."
I read last sentence again and you know that is BS, since it has been reported that MS were undertaking system updates, now its system failure that caused data loss in core database and the back-up. Who can smell BS and it is very STRONG!!
piece of advice for you (hey look I can spell!)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8309218.stm
situation can change with time.
Lawsuits will happen because of the outage of the service not specifically the loss of data.
Can you hear Apple fessing up to problems with the iMac.??
***tumbleweed blows past***
just works..
I not sure if i should reply to this, I could pick thousands of faulty issues with 10 different PC manufactures on their PCs releases and point you to numerous other forums.
Again show me the number of 27" iMacs that have been purchased and the number of faulty iMac returns/issues/displeased customers and then maybe I will listen to you.
It is easy to found a number of people, who are not happy, does that mean every consumer who buys the product will found a fault!
Show me statistical signifcance, significant ternd in terms of faulty 27" iMacs and then maybe I listen to you.
read much..??
All I was saying is that other users are reporting issues with their iMacs that aren't flash related.
rest of your post is waffle and verbiage from a non existent argument.
There is no alternative to Adobe, the ball is squarely in Adobes court developers who rely solely on Flash to present their content are just as bad as those who messed up the web for years by catering only to Internet Explorer while ignoring open standards.
First thing I do in Windows and Linux is install Firefox with the no script plug in so I can choose whether or not to overload my system with flash, now I have a Mac I use click to flash in Safari.
If a website isn't navigable without flash I go somewhere else for what I want.
Adobe only caters to the largest market segment, i.e. Windows.
Flash on 32bit Linux is better. Flash on 64bit Linux is far less acceptable.