A few things about flash, I have always hated sites with a lot of flash, why, because they take to much time to load, you often have to watch animated bits and pieces countless time to get through a few pages. It is true with Safari at least these sites will crash and burn something that should not happen in the year 2010.
Now for Adobe and their "we listen to our customers" bs. Most users of Macromedia and Adobe pro apps will agree the merger of those 2 companies was a disaster for Adobe and its customers. Favorite apps were discontinued and competition was snuffed out. Only now are smaller companies and software developers addressing the desire for alternatives to Adobe's buggy bloatware.
Steve seems to be on a campaign to make the iPad and Iphone platforms succeed and pointing out Adobe's lax efforts towards the Mac and mobile devices is justified. I am probably not the only person that uses Photoshop (and Golive until Adobe knifed it) that wishes a good alternative existed. Adobe better watch its back the future is coming.
Unplug a MacBook Pro and browse any flash based "tube" site for about 20 minutes and watch your battery hemorrhage juice as it sounds like a jet is taking off.
Exactly, or better still do this comparison with your laptop sitting on your lap: make an HD video and play with with QuickTime. Then upload that to YouTube and play it in normal, non-HD mode and feel the heat increase and increase. Think that isn't a problem? Then think about doing this in Summer, with an ambient temperature of 40 degrees Celcius.
Adobe needed to optimize Flash for the mac 5 years ago. They didn't. Steve Jobs is right and it needs to go away. It won't go away soon, but the sooner it goes away the better.
Then have the users bitch and complain about battery life and sluggish systems? It doesn't work that way junior. Just like google saying how open android was going to be and there are already rumblings of app restrictions and apps being pulled... wow go figure, bitch about apple all you want, just because they could foresee the problems, don't worry pretty soon all mobile 'software' will go through approval processes before being released officially.
Whether flash is supported or not, I would like to know if Apple would ever seriously work with Adobe to optimize it. I am sure Adobe wants to do it, but will Apple help them? I doubt it.
This is an interesting question. I think the short answer is no.
It seems like a no-brainer that would have happened already if it was ever going to happen. Maybe not though. I have read that the collaboration between Adobe and Apple when Apple was developing their postscript implementation was not very friendly.
I think that in reality, the Flash performance issue is really just an excuse for Apple to deny Adobe access to the Apple mobile platform. The real reason is politics and control. Not saying that the performance issues don't exist, but if Apple really wanted Flash on iPhone, they would make it happen. They don't want it on their mobile products for multiple reasons. A few being that no third party software will be given direct hardware access, and Apple is on a crusade to stamp out proprietary standards. Apple simply does not want any aspect of the user experience on their mobile platform to be controlled by third parties.
Sure it's a CPU hog when it's running on the underpowered devices like the iPhone, iPod Touch and the mere 1 Ghz iPad which Flash wasn't designed to run on.
Flash was designed with the increase of processor performance on computers in mind, not these underpowered hand held devices.
Wrong. Ignorant troll.
Flash wasn't designed with any performance in mind. It is a hog because even in Macs it creates an unacceptable drain on the CPU.
And that "Mere 1GHz iPad" is probably more powerful than a 1.8Ghz Core 2 Duo. See the Megahertz Myth. Not to mention that it is probably multi-core.
Oh, I forgot that you are a worthless troll, so I guess you won't even bother to check it.
No, it doesn't. Flash doesn't have to do anything, and neither does Apple. If you don't want the device since it doesn't include flash, then don't get it.
However, I think its very backwards to reject the iPad on the virtue of it not having flash built-in. There's nothing stopping a developer at Vimeo or Dailymotion from simple looking at the user-agent, seeing that its an iPad, and have a special version of the site pop up that uses HTML5 instead of Flash. The only concern I can see is that you essentially have to have two versions of the same video taking up twice as much storage space, but really, who's fault is that? Adobe is the one that forced H.264 video to be held within the FLV container, rather than using the player to simply stream MP4 video and audio.
Adobe can make things easier on developers and services switch between Flash and HTML5 standards by making a few changes, but since they're just as proprietary as any other corporation, they'll use that closed-platform to get some sort of leverage out of Apple, and thus, more control over their products. I *REALLY* applaud Apple for taking a stand and saying head on, "You don't need flash." Frankly, I agree.
Sure I'm aware that there are alternatives, but I've only used Safari and Firefox on the Mac. Would you recommend any of these?
It's unlikely that I would use Chrome, I'm not that fond of Google's stuff to be honest. In theory I like their free apps approach, but the implementation falls short in my view.
Yeah I'm no fan of Google either, but right now Chrome is the best option because of how each tab runs as an isolated process, and while other browser have added this feature to some degree, Chrome is the only browser to catch Flash crashes gracefully. Instead of locking up the tab or the whole browser, it just puts a sad mac style face where the offending code is.
I dunno, it's minimal ui is slick to me + the theming is cool if you want to doll it up... and it's the faster browser speedwise. Yeah google might blow but that Flash crash protection alone is worth it.
Jobs sounds like a really nasty piece of work. Why should any newspaper spend their money on abandoning flash (a technology already installed and working on millions of computers) just because Steve has taken a disliking to it?
Jobs sounds like a really nasty piece of work. Why should any newspaper spend their money on abandoning flash (a technology already installed and working on millions of computers) just because Steve has taken a disliking to it?
He lives in a dream world.
Because it is a dying technology. Like he said, it is also a source of security issues, battery issues, and on top of it all it is a proprietary platform.
HTML5, on the other hand, is an open standard, and it is NOT a hog.
Sure I'm aware that there are alternatives, but I've only used Safari and Firefox on the Mac. Would you recommend any of these?
It's unlikely that I would use Chrome, I'm not that fond of Google's stuff to be honest. In theory I like their free apps approach, but the implementation falls short in my view.
I switched to Chrome recently from Firefox. It's the fastest browser around and you really notice the difference. I also like the clutter free, minimalistic design. Plus it has extensions now so you can install adblock etc.
And hey, Google have been on a roll lately, up to all sorts of good from fighting censorship in draconian regimes like China and Australia, giving millions to Wikipedia, and also bringing out the best smart phone to date. (which I don't have, sadly)
During that same meeting, Journal editor Alan Murray posted to Twitter from an iPad Jobs brought with him. That incident reportedly upset Jobs, who allegedly had the editor delete the post after he was said to be "furious."
I'm sorry, but I am calling BS on this one.
Editors are thick skinned by nature. I can not believe that an editor would retract a statement, especially if it is a true one, just because the person they are quoting is furious.
He is in the news dissemination business. With the long and on going flurry over Flash not being useable with iPhone OS then Jobs' statement is extremely relevant. What is Alan Murray's incentive to retract his statement? Did he make it up or misquote Jobs?
Just how did Steve Jobs get Alan Murray to delete the post? Was there an NDA and if there was why would he even talk about any of it. Did Jobs threaten to boot them from the platform?
Sure it's a CPU hog when it's running on the underpowered devices like the iPhone, iPod Touch and the mere 1 Ghz iPad which Flash wasn't designed to run on.
Flash was designed with the increase of processor performance on computers in mind, not these underpowered hand held devices.
This is just completely false. Try looking some of these things up before you comment. Flash is a crashy CPU hog on some of the fastest computers known, it has nothing to do with the processor's "power."
comparing activity monitor's CPU info showed that it was flash and not bandwidth. bandwidth here is fine. same happend with single windows attempting to load one flash intro. device came to a standstill. hardly bandwidth either.
If you use iStat Menus you can see the CPU stats (among other things) in your Menu Bar without having to directly open Activity Monitor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamIIGS
Then have the users bitch and complain about battery life and sluggish systems? It doesn't work that way junior. Just like google saying how open android was going to be and there are already rumblings of app restrictions and apps being pulled... wow go figure, bitch about apple all you want, just because they could foresee the problems, don't worry pretty soon all mobile 'software' will go through approval processes before being released officially.
It's funny, because that is exactly what these complainers would do.
The mentality is interesting. They think it's their right to force a company how to make a product to their shortsighted, nerdy specifications and not the company's right to make a product that best suits their market.
Exactly, or better still do this comparison with your laptop sitting on your lap: make an HD video and play with with QuickTime. Then upload that to YouTube and play it in normal, non-HD mode and feel the heat increase and increase. Think that isn't a problem? Then think about doing this in Summer, with an ambient temperature of 40 degrees Celcius.
Adobe needed to optimize Flash for the mac 5 years ago. They didn't. Steve Jobs is right and it needs to go away. It won't go away soon, but the sooner it goes away the better.
Just so I understand, because flash does not work on the Mac well, it has to go away.
In other words, the computer world has to do what Steve Jobs says?
The title of which is "The Microsofting of Apple? Apple is in danger of becoming preoccupied with zero-sm maneuvering vs hated rivals"
That article is BS. Apple is trying to push in an OPEN, NON-PROPRIETARY STANDARD, while M$haft tried to obliterate everyone forcing .wma and silverlight proprietary BULL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo!
So all you did was stop the auto-loading of multiple tabbed YouTube videos in Safari so only one loads at a time with ClicktoFlash.
If he's getting a colored beachball and has to restart, it's a software problem as the OS or program is hanging and requires a backup, wipe and zero and reinstall of the OS and latest Flash version.
No, he just said that the problem only happens on Safari, while watching stuff only YouTube.
So, besides being a troll, you're also an Adobe fanboy? How much are they paying you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo!
If he's getting a colored beachball and has to restart on a new machine, it's a software problem as the OS or program is hanging for some reason. Do a file backup, erase w/zero from disk utility, reinstall the OS and latest Flash version.
Should take care of the problem, it's not Flash or bandwidth.
If there are still issues, take it to Apple to check the hardware.
WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWH YWHYWHYWHYWHY can't you stop doing that? THIS IS FLASH'S FAULT. F-L-A-S-H
Jobs sounds like a really nasty piece of work. Why should any newspaper spend their money on abandoning flash (a technology already installed and working on millions of computers) just because Steve has taken a disliking to it?...
They should listen because the majority of the *new* computers on the new *mobile* platform they are going to be selling their wares on don't have Flash. Also, given that a website without Flash runs on *all* devices, whereas a Flash infested on only runs well on Windows desktops, it makes sense to get rid of it if you can. When you think about how trivial it is to remove Flash from most websites it's really a no brainer.
Comments
Now for Adobe and their "we listen to our customers" bs. Most users of Macromedia and Adobe pro apps will agree the merger of those 2 companies was a disaster for Adobe and its customers. Favorite apps were discontinued and competition was snuffed out. Only now are smaller companies and software developers addressing the desire for alternatives to Adobe's buggy bloatware.
Steve seems to be on a campaign to make the iPad and Iphone platforms succeed and pointing out Adobe's lax efforts towards the Mac and mobile devices is justified. I am probably not the only person that uses Photoshop (and Golive until Adobe knifed it) that wishes a good alternative existed. Adobe better watch its back the future is coming.
Mind your own business.
Flash must be installed by user's decision.
Unplug a MacBook Pro and browse any flash based "tube" site for about 20 minutes and watch your battery hemorrhage juice as it sounds like a jet is taking off.
Exactly, or better still do this comparison with your laptop sitting on your lap: make an HD video and play with with QuickTime. Then upload that to YouTube and play it in normal, non-HD mode and feel the heat increase and increase. Think that isn't a problem? Then think about doing this in Summer, with an ambient temperature of 40 degrees Celcius.
Adobe needed to optimize Flash for the mac 5 years ago. They didn't. Steve Jobs is right and it needs to go away. It won't go away soon, but the sooner it goes away the better.
It's user's choise, not yours Steve.
Mind your own business.
Flash must be installed by user's decision.
Then have the users bitch and complain about battery life and sluggish systems? It doesn't work that way junior. Just like google saying how open android was going to be and there are already rumblings of app restrictions and apps being pulled... wow go figure, bitch about apple all you want, just because they could foresee the problems, don't worry pretty soon all mobile 'software' will go through approval processes before being released officially.
Whether flash is supported or not, I would like to know if Apple would ever seriously work with Adobe to optimize it. I am sure Adobe wants to do it, but will Apple help them? I doubt it.
This is an interesting question. I think the short answer is no.
It seems like a no-brainer that would have happened already if it was ever going to happen. Maybe not though. I have read that the collaboration between Adobe and Apple when Apple was developing their postscript implementation was not very friendly.
I think that in reality, the Flash performance issue is really just an excuse for Apple to deny Adobe access to the Apple mobile platform. The real reason is politics and control. Not saying that the performance issues don't exist, but if Apple really wanted Flash on iPhone, they would make it happen. They don't want it on their mobile products for multiple reasons. A few being that no third party software will be given direct hardware access, and Apple is on a crusade to stamp out proprietary standards. Apple simply does not want any aspect of the user experience on their mobile platform to be controlled by third parties.
Sure it's a CPU hog when it's running on the underpowered devices like the iPhone, iPod Touch and the mere 1 Ghz iPad which Flash wasn't designed to run on.
Flash was designed with the increase of processor performance on computers in mind, not these underpowered hand held devices.
Wrong. Ignorant troll.
Flash wasn't designed with any performance in mind. It is a hog because even in Macs it creates an unacceptable drain on the CPU.
And that "Mere 1GHz iPad" is probably more powerful than a 1.8Ghz Core 2 Duo. See the Megahertz Myth. Not to mention that it is probably multi-core.
Oh, I forgot that you are a worthless troll, so I guess you won't even bother to check it.
It's user's choise, not yours Steve.
Mind your own business.
Flash must be installed by user's decision.
No, it doesn't. Flash doesn't have to do anything, and neither does Apple. If you don't want the device since it doesn't include flash, then don't get it.
However, I think its very backwards to reject the iPad on the virtue of it not having flash built-in. There's nothing stopping a developer at Vimeo or Dailymotion from simple looking at the user-agent, seeing that its an iPad, and have a special version of the site pop up that uses HTML5 instead of Flash. The only concern I can see is that you essentially have to have two versions of the same video taking up twice as much storage space, but really, who's fault is that? Adobe is the one that forced H.264 video to be held within the FLV container, rather than using the player to simply stream MP4 video and audio.
Adobe can make things easier on developers and services switch between Flash and HTML5 standards by making a few changes, but since they're just as proprietary as any other corporation, they'll use that closed-platform to get some sort of leverage out of Apple, and thus, more control over their products. I *REALLY* applaud Apple for taking a stand and saying head on, "You don't need flash." Frankly, I agree.
Sure I'm aware that there are alternatives, but I've only used Safari and Firefox on the Mac. Would you recommend any of these?
It's unlikely that I would use Chrome, I'm not that fond of Google's stuff to be honest. In theory I like their free apps approach, but the implementation falls short in my view.
Yeah I'm no fan of Google either, but right now Chrome is the best option because of how each tab runs as an isolated process, and while other browser have added this feature to some degree, Chrome is the only browser to catch Flash crashes gracefully. Instead of locking up the tab or the whole browser, it just puts a sad mac style face where the offending code is.
I dunno, it's minimal ui is slick to me + the theming is cool if you want to doll it up... and it's the faster browser speedwise. Yeah google might blow but that Flash crash protection alone is worth it.
He lives in a dream world.
iTunes is a CPU hog too - Hello?
In Windows, perhaps. But even iTunes for Windows is relatively less "hoggy" than Flash considering what each of them do.
Jobs sounds like a really nasty piece of work. Why should any newspaper spend their money on abandoning flash (a technology already installed and working on millions of computers) just because Steve has taken a disliking to it?
He lives in a dream world.
Because it is a dying technology. Like he said, it is also a source of security issues, battery issues, and on top of it all it is a proprietary platform.
HTML5, on the other hand, is an open standard, and it is NOT a hog.
Jeez, why so many trolls?
Sure I'm aware that there are alternatives, but I've only used Safari and Firefox on the Mac. Would you recommend any of these?
It's unlikely that I would use Chrome, I'm not that fond of Google's stuff to be honest. In theory I like their free apps approach, but the implementation falls short in my view.
I switched to Chrome recently from Firefox. It's the fastest browser around and you really notice the difference. I also like the clutter free, minimalistic design. Plus it has extensions now so you can install adblock etc.
And hey, Google have been on a roll lately, up to all sorts of good from fighting censorship in draconian regimes like China and Australia, giving millions to Wikipedia, and also bringing out the best smart phone to date. (which I don't have, sadly)
During that same meeting, Journal editor Alan Murray posted to Twitter from an iPad Jobs brought with him. That incident reportedly upset Jobs, who allegedly had the editor delete the post after he was said to be "furious."
I'm sorry, but I am calling BS on this one.
Editors are thick skinned by nature. I can not believe that an editor would retract a statement, especially if it is a true one, just because the person they are quoting is furious.
He is in the news dissemination business. With the long and on going flurry over Flash not being useable with iPhone OS then Jobs' statement is extremely relevant. What is Alan Murray's incentive to retract his statement? Did he make it up or misquote Jobs?
Just how did Steve Jobs get Alan Murray to delete the post? Was there an NDA and if there was why would he even talk about any of it. Did Jobs threaten to boot them from the platform?
It just stinks of BS.
Sure it's a CPU hog when it's running on the underpowered devices like the iPhone, iPod Touch and the mere 1 Ghz iPad which Flash wasn't designed to run on.
Flash was designed with the increase of processor performance on computers in mind, not these underpowered hand held devices.
This is just completely false. Try looking some of these things up before you comment. Flash is a crashy CPU hog on some of the fastest computers known, it has nothing to do with the processor's "power."
comparing activity monitor's CPU info showed that it was flash and not bandwidth. bandwidth here is fine. same happend with single windows attempting to load one flash intro. device came to a standstill. hardly bandwidth either.
If you use iStat Menus you can see the CPU stats (among other things) in your Menu Bar without having to directly open Activity Monitor.
Then have the users bitch and complain about battery life and sluggish systems? It doesn't work that way junior. Just like google saying how open android was going to be and there are already rumblings of app restrictions and apps being pulled... wow go figure, bitch about apple all you want, just because they could foresee the problems, don't worry pretty soon all mobile 'software' will go through approval processes before being released officially.
It's funny, because that is exactly what these complainers would do.
The mentality is interesting. They think it's their right to force a company how to make a product to their shortsighted, nerdy specifications and not the company's right to make a product that best suits their market.
Here is Holman's response to Steve Jobs and Flash, on his WSJ blog.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...tml?mg=com-wsj
The title of which is "The Microsofting of Apple? Apple is in danger of becoming preoccupied with zero-sm maneuvering vs hated rivals"
This is not "a response to Steve Jobs."
It's an unrelated, and much maligned in the blogosphere (for poor logic), article from about a week ago actually.
This is not "a response to Steve Jobs."
It's an unrelated, and much maligned in the blogosphere (for poor logic), article from about a week ago actually.
And one that I couldn't read because I'm not registered.
But I don't feel so bad now!
Exactly, or better still do this comparison with your laptop sitting on your lap: make an HD video and play with with QuickTime. Then upload that to YouTube and play it in normal, non-HD mode and feel the heat increase and increase. Think that isn't a problem? Then think about doing this in Summer, with an ambient temperature of 40 degrees Celcius.
Adobe needed to optimize Flash for the mac 5 years ago. They didn't. Steve Jobs is right and it needs to go away. It won't go away soon, but the sooner it goes away the better.
Just so I understand, because flash does not work on the Mac well, it has to go away.
In other words, the computer world has to do what Steve Jobs says?
It is the MacWay or the HighWay?
Here is Holman's response to Steve Jobs and Flash, on his WSJ blog.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...tml?mg=com-wsj
The title of which is "The Microsofting of Apple? Apple is in danger of becoming preoccupied with zero-sm maneuvering vs hated rivals"
That article is BS. Apple is trying to push in an OPEN, NON-PROPRIETARY STANDARD, while M$haft tried to obliterate everyone forcing .wma and silverlight proprietary BULL.
So all you did was stop the auto-loading of multiple tabbed YouTube videos in Safari so only one loads at a time with ClicktoFlash.
If he's getting a colored beachball and has to restart, it's a software problem as the OS or program is hanging and requires a backup, wipe and zero and reinstall of the OS and latest Flash version.
No, he just said that the problem only happens on Safari, while watching stuff only YouTube.
So, besides being a troll, you're also an Adobe fanboy? How much are they paying you?
If he's getting a colored beachball and has to restart on a new machine, it's a software problem as the OS or program is hanging for some reason. Do a file backup, erase w/zero from disk utility, reinstall the OS and latest Flash version.
Should take care of the problem, it's not Flash or bandwidth.
If there are still issues, take it to Apple to check the hardware.
WHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWHYWH YWHYWHYWHYWHY can't you stop doing that? THIS IS FLASH'S FAULT. F-L-A-S-H
Jobs sounds like a really nasty piece of work. Why should any newspaper spend their money on abandoning flash (a technology already installed and working on millions of computers) just because Steve has taken a disliking to it?...
They should listen because the majority of the *new* computers on the new *mobile* platform they are going to be selling their wares on don't have Flash. Also, given that a website without Flash runs on *all* devices, whereas a Flash infested on only runs well on Windows desktops, it makes sense to get rid of it if you can. When you think about how trivial it is to remove Flash from most websites it's really a no brainer.