I still think if Adobe proves that Flash 10.1--which offloads Flash code processing to the GPU to reduce CPU usage--has little effect on overall battery performance, we may be heading for a potential legal showdown over Flash on the iPad as a violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act by Apple. Now that will be a case that could last for years. And I'm sure the aggressive antitrust authorities of the European Union are watching, too.
This is, of course, total horsesh*t.
Start by learning a little bit about antitrust law. Apple doesn't have a monopoly and even if they did, they have no obligation to carry every product from every software developer out there. There is absolutely ZERO legal principle supporting that contention.
More importantly, if Adobe were actually able to get Flash running well on the iPhone with little impact on performance or battery life, Apple would almost certainly adopt it. Of course, given Adobe's history to do that over the past few years and the lousy performance of the 10.1 beta, Apple is unlikely ever to face that option.
Why wouldn't I post it, I only care about the truth. I never said Adobe couldn't fix their problems, I said Flash was designed for mobiles and Adobe dropped the ball a long time ago. The pressure from 3 years of Flash being replaced by open standards has made them get off their asses, which is typical.
It's a relevant demonstration of Adobe finally making Flash better for the mobile space, over 3 years after people started blaming Apple for the lack of Flash. Note that the battery shows a 25% drop in 5 minutes, there are usability issues, and the Nexus One is a much newer phone running a new ARM at 1GHz, not the 400MHz people said would work great in the iPhone.
So you don't care who else is trying to make a better internet by avoiding Flash in places, just so long as pooh pooh Apple at every turn. Do you know what those posters are called?
You know, for also "NOT ALLOWING" Adobe Flash on their platform either.
When Adobe makes it, as Jobs asked for in 2007, then Apple can accept or reject it until then they are in the same position as RIM, snubbed by Adobe who are buck-passing.
The somewhat overlooked fact that there is no version of Adobe Flash? available for iPhone OS, to be run on the CPU, GPU or whatever.
Read up on Grand Central Dispatch? The beauty of it is that it is not necessarily dependent upon an application being written or optimized for multi-core utilization. GCD? does it for them (ideally).
Also greatly overlooked is the fact that Adobe® said (several years ago) that Apple® had everything they needed to implement Flash? on the iPhone?.
As Steve. He is the one who promised "all the internet", not me.
He didn't promise that every plug-in and codec would be included. If you read it as such you are mistaken. Since browsers doesn't even support every open standard in CSS, HTML, etc. I guess there is not a single browser than can or will ever support "all the internet" based on your simple definition.
He didn't promise that every plug-in and codec would be included. If you read it as such you are mistaken. Since browsers doesn't even support every open standard in CSS, HTML, etc. I guess there is not a single browser than can or will ever support "all the internet" based on your simple definition.
And yet Android, WebOS, Symbian, WinMo, BB OS, etc. still don't have Flash.
Perhaps you want to show us this great version of Flash for the iPhone from 2007 that somehow still isn't available for mobile or Mac OS X in 2010.
Actually, Flash is in the new US retail version of the Motorola Devour (Android) running on a 600mhz Qualcomm chip. Its being sold by Best Buy for Verizon soon if not already released.
Agree that Apple is primarily using performance as an excuse to exclude Flash from their mobiles, and they are trying to kill it, but I don't believe it has anything to do with iTMS whatsoever.
That is FUD in my view. Apple's business model is and always has been about making their profit from selling hardware. Content is to make the hardware more desirable. Otherwise why would they encourage free apps?
Business models are prone to changes.
Apple's business model for ages was selling personal computers, yet at some point they started with mp3 players and phones... tablet comes next... and judging from another article here, they might have some more devices soon. That is already changing business model, and changing it big.
Yes they do have free apps out there, but it seems to me majority of them (useless fart apps etc. aside) are demo/lite versions of commercial, pay-for titles.
That aside, there is another thing - control. Not only that free Flash apps would impact Apps Store, but Apple would lose (some) control over what is being available for their platform.
Agreed that performance isn't the biggest reason for Apple's opposition to flash. I think the real reason is that Adobe poses a competitive risk to the iPhone platform.
Imagine flash becomes widespread in the mobile handset space in the next couple of years. By then, the smartphone market is likely a contest between iPhone and Android. As has been mentioned several times, Adobe can choose to spend it's engineering resources however it wants. Suppose, for whatever reason, Adobe decides to really make flash on Android the best thing ever and passes off each new release to a second-rate intern to do an iPhone port a couple months later.
Suddenly Apple is at a competitive disadvantage due to something they can't improve. Avoiding that situation is why Apple will never, ever allow flash on the iPhone/iPad unless it has absolutely no choice.
Adobe did the same thing to Apple back when Apple owned the desktop publishing market and Adobe decided to make the windows versions of its tools better than the Mac versions and release them sooner. Apple isn't going to let Adobe screw them twice.
If Adobe were serious about making flash an "internet standard", they would license it so Apple and others could do their own implementations. If that happened Apple might well develop a version of flash on the iPhone. However, Adobe have been quite clear that they wish to own flash and all the runtimes and have no intention of making it a standard.
Well... it is possible that Apple fears that, but I don't see that being real danger - considering that Apple has much bigger chunk of smartphone market (and, soon, tablet market - very likely) than they have from desktop market.
It is much easier to ignore or neglect Apple in PC domain that in mobile domain, and I don't think that will change any time soon.
Actually, Flash is in the new US retail version of the Motorola Devour (Android) running on a 600mhz Qualcomm chip. Its being sold by Best Buy for Verizon soon if not already released.
That is Flash Lite. Nary a video site will work. Flash 10.1, the first full version of Flash for Android and other mobiles has yet to be released, but the last Nexus One demo looking pretty good even if did show a 25% battery drop in 5 minutes.
It's not just OS/X! Windows is no different - I have an HP notebook running XP that does exactly the same thing - I was using a site with Flash ads as my homepage - and had to stop. You'd walk into the house and hear the notebook's fan running upstairs - SIMPLY for the ads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by derrickh
It makes me so mad when I hear my little Macbook's fan running at 4000+ rpms (when it's closed and should be sleeping) only to open it up and find that I left a Safari tab open that has some Flash ads on it. Check the Activity Monitor, sure enough: Flash Player draining the life out of my computer. I think you have to have experienced Flash Player's poor performance to appreciate how Adobe has neglected us Mac users.
Just wanted to note that the Flash-Bashing video embedded in the article is brought to you in part by Flash.
I don't get why anything about making the web better is automatically an Apple-centric comment about eliminating Flash from the planet. Have we forgotten that Microsoft, Mozilla and Google, to name a few are also working on alternatives to supporting Flash because of its many problems?
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I think the issue is that though they're looking for alternatives, Microsoft, Mozilla and Google are currently making browsers that DO support Flash....I may hate the current weather outside, but until it changes, NOT bringing an umbrella only hurts me.... I really want to see Apple win this battle, I find Google creepy, but between the rumored negotiations with Hulu, and talks of lowering the price of TV shows to .99 through iTunes, I can't help but question whether this is about user experience or about trying to monetize as much of the web as possible.
What would be the disadvantage of having something like ClickToFlash on the iPad?
I'm sure this has been said before, but if Apple's own marketing team stumbled over a Flash interactive graphic on NYT in making the iPad demo, how can you argue it's unnecessary and extinct?
Goes back to Steve's mandate that it has to be "better than a laptop, better than a smart phone". Not having something like ClickToFlash just doesn't make sense....
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I think the issue is that though they're looking for alternatives, Microsoft, Mozilla and Google are currently making browsers that DO support Flash..
Apple makes browsers that support Flash, too. They even had to go out of their way to make it possible for 32-bit plugins to work on a 64-bit browser so Flash would work in Snow Leopard. They could have pissed off Mac users and forced Adobe's hand, but Flash, depsite its issues, was designed for desktop OSes.
Flash has not been released for any mobile platform. It's just not Apple's fault that in 2010 Flash still isn't available on mobile browsers that have no restricitons on development.
PS: I never said it was unnecessary and extinct. Quite the contrary. I've said it's not ideal for a mobile platform and that is all Adobe's fault for sitting on their interactive and video monopoly without worrying about competitors. The only thing I said will happen is Flash will no longer increase it's video streaming in favour of HTML5 video.
Read this, it explains what Adobe did wrong, though you might want to hit Control+Option+Command+8 to reverse your colours: http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=292
Yeah, sorry if my post came off as a bit of a rant... Really focused more at the Apple community as a whole and not you....
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Flash has not been released for any mobile platform. It's just not Apple's fault that in 2010 Flash still isn't available on mobile browsers that have no restrictions on development.
From my perspective...I bought the original iPhone right when it came out...I became an obsessive fan and feel that Apple forever changed computing with the iPhone.... Android seemed to borrow so much from the iPhone OS...They're improving very quickly though...I hope stubbornness doesn't get in Steve's way.... It will be at least a few years we're wrestling with Flash...again, I just don't see any disadvantage with a ClickToFlash-type option... Even if it?s a resource hog, you have to give users choice.
From my perspective...I bought the original iPhone right when it came out...I became an obsessive fan and feel that Apple forever changed computing with the iPhone.... Android seemed to borrow so much from the iPhone OS...They're improving very quickly though...I hope stubbornness doesn't get in Steve's way.... It will be at least a few years we're wrestling with Flash...again, I just don't see any disadvantage with a ClickToFlash-type option... Even if it?s a resource hog, you have to give users choice.
The Hero does have Flash version 9(?), but if you read reviews on it it's so very poor that it makes since that only Flash Lite is on other Android phones until Flash 10.1 is finalized, and even then it may not be for every Android-based device. Since the primary reason for Flash is to play videos if you can't do this then it's as good as Flash Lite. Note that Hulu and other Flash-based video sites require Flash 10.x.x at this point. Games and apps still need to be rewritten for a touch-based device that has no mouse of keyboard. How Flash 10.1 for mobiles will accomplish this is still a mystery, but getting it run on ARM with HW acceleration is the primary goal that can all come later.
So it's still a case of in 2010 Flash (10.1) still isn't released for mobiles, they still don't have a64-bit or HW accelerated (Core Animation) version for Mac OS X, and even once it does get on Android this year there is still going to be an issue with power drain.
We also need to look at what Apple has done to force Adobe's hand here. If not for Apple pointing out Flash's shortcomings and exploding the smartphone market Adobe may still have been okay with allowing Flash Lite to reign king on mobiles. If an efficient version of Flash was available for all mobiles except for the iPhone back in 2007 and Adobe was on the ball with Mac development then it would be Apple's fault, but Android has been out nearly as long as the iPhone so there is no excuse that all Android devices are not shipping with Flash. It's certainly not Apple's fault.
I still think if Adobe proves that Flash 10.1--which offloads Flash code processing to the GPU to reduce CPU usage--has little effect on overall battery performance, we may be heading for a potential legal showdown over Flash on the iPad as a violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act by Apple. Now that will be a case that could last for years. And I'm sure the aggressive antitrust authorities of the European Union are watching, too.
A law student at Columbia Law School put together a blog post about how Apple might be forced to support Flash, as the FCC might try to make a net neutrality argument against Apple's exclusion of Flash. I personally don't think Apple will be subject to the same rules as an ISP like Comcast, but maybe with enough bad press Apple will be convinced to make a change. Disclosure: I too am a student at Columbia Law and the blog editor for the journal I'm linking to.
LOL I just tested two 1080p videos. One is 3.3Mbps and the other 3.7Mbps. That is well below iTS HD but it's the number before the little 'p' that is marketable, not bitrate.
edit: For another point of reference it looks like the iTunes Store SD content I have ranges from 1.5Mbps to 2.2Mbps.
Ours runs about 25-30Mbps and were told by charter thar 100 or 10MB is coming soon.
The Hero does have Flash version 9(?), but if you read reviews on it it's so very poor that it makes since that only Flash Lite is on other Android phones until Flash 10.1 is finalized, and even then it may not be for every Android-based device. Since the primary reason for Flash is to play videos if you can't do this then it's as good as Flash Lite. Note that Hulu and other Flash-based video sites require Flash 10.x.x at this point. Games and apps still need to be rewritten for a touch-based device that has no mouse of keyboard. How Flash 10.1 for mobiles will accomplish this is still a mystery, but getting it run on ARM with HW acceleration is the primary goal that can all come later.
So it's still a case of in 2010 Flash (10.1) still isn't released for mobiles, they still don't have a64-bit or HW accelerated (Core Animation) version for Mac OS X, and even once it does get on Android this year there is still going to be an issue with power drain.
We also need to look at what Apple has done to force Adobe's hand here. If not for Apple pointing out Flash's shortcomings and exploding the smartphone market Adobe may still have been okay with allowing Flash Lite to reign king on mobiles. If an efficient version of Flash was available for all mobiles except for the iPhone back in 2007 and Adobe was on the ball with Mac development then it would be Apple's fault, but Android has been out nearly as long as the iPhone so there is no excuse that all Android devices are not shipping with Flash. It's certainly not Apple's fault.
I hear you.... and on a small mobile device like an iPhone, I certainly don't miss it.... For something like the iPad though, I think it will be an issue for many people...You have to remember that Flash is not just video... The Wall Street Journal has beautiful interactive graphics and animations in Flash....NYT as well....For me, that reason alone is a deal breaker...I'd rather just stick with my laptop and not have issues.
The thing that got me MOST excited about the keynote was the iWork demo.... I'm soooooo hoping they move in the direction of like a MacBook iPad! Something I could synch my iPhone with (instead of having to synch the iPad with another computer). Something that could actually REPLACE my laptop. GO APPLE!!!
I hear you.... and on a small mobile device like an iPhone, I certainly don't miss it.... For something like the iPad though, I think it will be an issue for many people...You have to remember that Flash is not just video... The Wall Street Journal has beautiful interactive graphics and animations in Flash....NYT as well....For me, that reason alone is a deal breaker...I'd rather just stick with my laptop and not have issues.
The problem is the reliance of sites on Flash without an option for new technologies, but the iPhone was a breakaway success that made the smartphone market viable. A web browser that could display a website format accurately and then zoom in was not around before the iPhone. RiM is still working on a decent browser and Android's browser still isn't as intelligent as the iPhone even though the browser engines are as good or better in the case of JS.
Quote:
The thing that got me MOST excited about the keynote was the iWork demo.... I'm soooooo hoping they move in the direction of like a MacBook iPad! Something I could synch my iPhone with (instead of having to synch the iPad with another computer). Something that could actually REPLACE my laptop. GO APPLE!!!
I don't see that happening. This will likely be a tablet and not a notebook or netbook. They are clearly making this an accessory device to a Mac/PC. I think a lot of people would be happy with a $500 iPad as their main computer, with the keyboard dock, of course, if it had a couple USB ports and support for an external HDD for backups and media files and the ability to sync you iPhone/iPod with it and edit your iTunes Library on it. Sadly, as useful as those would be for a great many simple notebook users I don't think Apple will go that route.
Comments
I still think if Adobe proves that Flash 10.1--which offloads Flash code processing to the GPU to reduce CPU usage--has little effect on overall battery performance, we may be heading for a potential legal showdown over Flash on the iPad as a violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act by Apple. Now that will be a case that could last for years. And I'm sure the aggressive antitrust authorities of the European Union are watching, too.
This is, of course, total horsesh*t.
Start by learning a little bit about antitrust law. Apple doesn't have a monopoly and even if they did, they have no obligation to carry every product from every software developer out there. There is absolutely ZERO legal principle supporting that contention.
More importantly, if Adobe were actually able to get Flash running well on the iPhone with little impact on performance or battery life, Apple would almost certainly adopt it. Of course, given Adobe's history to do that over the past few years and the lousy performance of the 10.1 beta, Apple is unlikely ever to face that option.
Why wouldn't I post it, I only care about the truth. I never said Adobe couldn't fix their problems, I said Flash was designed for mobiles and Adobe dropped the ball a long time ago. The pressure from 3 years of Flash being replaced by open standards has made them get off their asses, which is typical.
It's a relevant demonstration of Adobe finally making Flash better for the mobile space, over 3 years after people started blaming Apple for the lack of Flash. Note that the battery shows a 25% drop in 5 minutes, there are usability issues, and the Nexus One is a much newer phone running a new ARM at 1GHz, not the 400MHz people said would work great in the iPhone.
Try actually reading this. Maybe you'll stop get an idea of Adobe's issues with Flash: http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=292
So you don't care who else is trying to make a better internet by avoiding Flash in places, just so long as pooh pooh Apple at every turn. Do you know what those posters are called?
I know what you are called.
So will they go after Blackberry too?
You know, for also "NOT ALLOWING" Adobe Flash on their platform either.
When Adobe makes it, as Jobs asked for in 2007, then Apple can accept or reject it until then they are in the same position as RIM, snubbed by Adobe who are buck-passing.
The somewhat overlooked fact that there is no version of Adobe Flash? available for iPhone OS, to be run on the CPU, GPU or whatever.
Read up on Grand Central Dispatch? The beauty of it is that it is not necessarily dependent upon an application being written or optimized for multi-core utilization. GCD? does it for them (ideally).
Also greatly overlooked is the fact that Adobe® said (several years ago) that Apple® had everything they needed to implement Flash? on the iPhone?.
Also greatly overlooked is the fact that Adobe® said (several years ago) that Apple® had everything they needed to implement Flash? on the iPhone?.
And yet flash still isn't optimized for Mac OS X.
And yet Flash for Mac OS X still isn't 64-bit.
And yet Android, WebOS, Symbian, WinMo, BB OS, etc. still don't have Flash.
Perhaps you want to show us this great version of Flash for the iPhone from 2007 that somehow still isn't available for mobile or Mac OS X in 2010.
And yet flash still isn't optimized for Mac OS X.
And yet Flash for Mac OS X still isn't 64-bit.
And yet Android, WebOS, Symbian, WinMo, BB OS, etc. still don't have Flash.
Perhaps you want to show us this great version of Flash for the iPhone from 2007 that somehow still isn't available for mobile or Mac OS X in 2010.
Ask Steve. He is the one who promised "all the internet", not me.
As Steve. He is the one who promised "all the internet", not me.
He didn't promise that every plug-in and codec would be included. If you read it as such you are mistaken. Since browsers doesn't even support every open standard in CSS, HTML, etc. I guess there is not a single browser than can or will ever support "all the internet" based on your simple definition.
He didn't promise that every plug-in and codec would be included. If you read it as such you are mistaken. Since browsers doesn't even support every open standard in CSS, HTML, etc. I guess there is not a single browser than can or will ever support "all the internet" based on your simple definition.
That's a lame excuse.
Steve lied. He promised "all the internet".
And yet flash still isn't optimized for Mac OS X.
And yet Flash for Mac OS X still isn't 64-bit.
And yet Android, WebOS, Symbian, WinMo, BB OS, etc. still don't have Flash.
Perhaps you want to show us this great version of Flash for the iPhone from 2007 that somehow still isn't available for mobile or Mac OS X in 2010.
Actually, Flash is in the new US retail version of the Motorola Devour (Android) running on a 600mhz Qualcomm chip. Its being sold by Best Buy for Verizon soon if not already released.
Agree that Apple is primarily using performance as an excuse to exclude Flash from their mobiles, and they are trying to kill it, but I don't believe it has anything to do with iTMS whatsoever.
That is FUD in my view. Apple's business model is and always has been about making their profit from selling hardware. Content is to make the hardware more desirable. Otherwise why would they encourage free apps?
Business models are prone to changes.
Apple's business model for ages was selling personal computers, yet at some point they started with mp3 players and phones... tablet comes next... and judging from another article here, they might have some more devices soon. That is already changing business model, and changing it big.
Yes they do have free apps out there, but it seems to me majority of them (useless fart apps etc. aside) are demo/lite versions of commercial, pay-for titles.
That aside, there is another thing - control. Not only that free Flash apps would impact Apps Store, but Apple would lose (some) control over what is being available for their platform.
Agreed that performance isn't the biggest reason for Apple's opposition to flash. I think the real reason is that Adobe poses a competitive risk to the iPhone platform.
Imagine flash becomes widespread in the mobile handset space in the next couple of years. By then, the smartphone market is likely a contest between iPhone and Android. As has been mentioned several times, Adobe can choose to spend it's engineering resources however it wants. Suppose, for whatever reason, Adobe decides to really make flash on Android the best thing ever and passes off each new release to a second-rate intern to do an iPhone port a couple months later.
Suddenly Apple is at a competitive disadvantage due to something they can't improve. Avoiding that situation is why Apple will never, ever allow flash on the iPhone/iPad unless it has absolutely no choice.
Adobe did the same thing to Apple back when Apple owned the desktop publishing market and Adobe decided to make the windows versions of its tools better than the Mac versions and release them sooner. Apple isn't going to let Adobe screw them twice.
If Adobe were serious about making flash an "internet standard", they would license it so Apple and others could do their own implementations. If that happened Apple might well develop a version of flash on the iPhone. However, Adobe have been quite clear that they wish to own flash and all the runtimes and have no intention of making it a standard.
Well... it is possible that Apple fears that, but I don't see that being real danger - considering that Apple has much bigger chunk of smartphone market (and, soon, tablet market - very likely) than they have from desktop market.
It is much easier to ignore or neglect Apple in PC domain that in mobile domain, and I don't think that will change any time soon.
Actually, Flash is in the new US retail version of the Motorola Devour (Android) running on a 600mhz Qualcomm chip. Its being sold by Best Buy for Verizon soon if not already released.
That is Flash Lite. Nary a video site will work. Flash 10.1, the first full version of Flash for Android and other mobiles has yet to be released, but the last Nexus One demo looking pretty good even if did show a 25% battery drop in 5 minutes.
It makes me so mad when I hear my little Macbook's fan running at 4000+ rpms (when it's closed and should be sleeping) only to open it up and find that I left a Safari tab open that has some Flash ads on it. Check the Activity Monitor, sure enough: Flash Player draining the life out of my computer. I think you have to have experienced Flash Player's poor performance to appreciate how Adobe has neglected us Mac users.
Just wanted to note that the Flash-Bashing video embedded in the article is brought to you in part by Flash.
Ironic.
I don't get why anything about making the web better is automatically an Apple-centric comment about eliminating Flash from the planet. Have we forgotten that Microsoft, Mozilla and Google, to name a few are also working on alternatives to supporting Flash because of its many problems?
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I think the issue is that though they're looking for alternatives, Microsoft, Mozilla and Google are currently making browsers that DO support Flash....I may hate the current weather outside, but until it changes, NOT bringing an umbrella only hurts me.... I really want to see Apple win this battle, I find Google creepy, but between the rumored negotiations with Hulu, and talks of lowering the price of TV shows to .99 through iTunes, I can't help but question whether this is about user experience or about trying to monetize as much of the web as possible.
What would be the disadvantage of having something like ClickToFlash on the iPad?
I'm sure this has been said before, but if Apple's own marketing team stumbled over a Flash interactive graphic on NYT in making the iPad demo, how can you argue it's unnecessary and extinct?
Goes back to Steve's mandate that it has to be "better than a laptop, better than a smart phone". Not having something like ClickToFlash just doesn't make sense....
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I think the issue is that though they're looking for alternatives, Microsoft, Mozilla and Google are currently making browsers that DO support Flash..
Apple makes browsers that support Flash, too. They even had to go out of their way to make it possible for 32-bit plugins to work on a 64-bit browser so Flash would work in Snow Leopard. They could have pissed off Mac users and forced Adobe's hand, but Flash, depsite its issues, was designed for desktop OSes.
Flash has not been released for any mobile platform. It's just not Apple's fault that in 2010 Flash still isn't available on mobile browsers that have no restricitons on development.
PS: I never said it was unnecessary and extinct. Quite the contrary. I've said it's not ideal for a mobile platform and that is all Adobe's fault for sitting on their interactive and video monopoly without worrying about competitors. The only thing I said will happen is Flash will no longer increase it's video streaming in favour of HTML5 video.
Read this, it explains what Adobe did wrong, though you might want to hit Control+Option+Command+8 to reverse your colours: http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=292
Flash has not been released for any mobile platform. It's just not Apple's fault that in 2010 Flash still isn't available on mobile browsers that have no restrictions on development.
Is this true? I thought Flash currently ran on the HTC Hero: http://www.htc.com/www/press.aspx?id=103536&lang=1033 and was soon coming to the Nexus One....
From my perspective...I bought the original iPhone right when it came out...I became an obsessive fan and feel that Apple forever changed computing with the iPhone.... Android seemed to borrow so much from the iPhone OS...They're improving very quickly though...I hope stubbornness doesn't get in Steve's way.... It will be at least a few years we're wrestling with Flash...again, I just don't see any disadvantage with a ClickToFlash-type option... Even if it?s a resource hog, you have to give users choice.
Yeah, sorry if my post came off as a bit of a rant... Really focused more at the Apple community as a whole and not you....
Is this true? I thought Flash currently ran on the HTC Hero: http://www.htc.com/www/press.aspx?id=103536&lang=1033 and was soon coming to the Nexus One....
From my perspective...I bought the original iPhone right when it came out...I became an obsessive fan and feel that Apple forever changed computing with the iPhone.... Android seemed to borrow so much from the iPhone OS...They're improving very quickly though...I hope stubbornness doesn't get in Steve's way.... It will be at least a few years we're wrestling with Flash...again, I just don't see any disadvantage with a ClickToFlash-type option... Even if it?s a resource hog, you have to give users choice.
The Hero does have Flash version 9(?), but if you read reviews on it it's so very poor that it makes since that only Flash Lite is on other Android phones until Flash 10.1 is finalized, and even then it may not be for every Android-based device. Since the primary reason for Flash is to play videos if you can't do this then it's as good as Flash Lite. Note that Hulu and other Flash-based video sites require Flash 10.x.x at this point. Games and apps still need to be rewritten for a touch-based device that has no mouse of keyboard. How Flash 10.1 for mobiles will accomplish this is still a mystery, but getting it run on ARM with HW acceleration is the primary goal that can all come later.So it's still a case of in 2010 Flash (10.1) still isn't released for mobiles, they still don't have a64-bit or HW accelerated (Core Animation) version for Mac OS X, and even once it does get on Android this year there is still going to be an issue with power drain.
We also need to look at what Apple has done to force Adobe's hand here. If not for Apple pointing out Flash's shortcomings and exploding the smartphone market Adobe may still have been okay with allowing Flash Lite to reign king on mobiles. If an efficient version of Flash was available for all mobiles except for the iPhone back in 2007 and Adobe was on the ball with Mac development then it would be Apple's fault, but Android has been out nearly as long as the iPhone so there is no excuse that all Android devices are not shipping with Flash. It's certainly not Apple's fault.
I still think if Adobe proves that Flash 10.1--which offloads Flash code processing to the GPU to reduce CPU usage--has little effect on overall battery performance, we may be heading for a potential legal showdown over Flash on the iPad as a violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act by Apple. Now that will be a case that could last for years. And I'm sure the aggressive antitrust authorities of the European Union are watching, too.
A law student at Columbia Law School put together a blog post about how Apple might be forced to support Flash, as the FCC might try to make a net neutrality argument against Apple's exclusion of Flash. I personally don't think Apple will be subject to the same rules as an ISP like Comcast, but maybe with enough bad press Apple will be convinced to make a change. Disclosure: I too am a student at Columbia Law and the blog editor for the journal I'm linking to.
http://www.stlr.org/2010/02/is-the-i...lash-unlawful/
LOL I just tested two 1080p videos. One is 3.3Mbps and the other 3.7Mbps. That is well below iTS HD but it's the number before the little 'p' that is marketable, not bitrate.
edit: For another point of reference it looks like the iTunes Store SD content I have ranges from 1.5Mbps to 2.2Mbps.
Ours runs about 25-30Mbps and were told by charter thar 100 or 10MB is coming soon.
The Hero does have Flash version 9(?), but if you read reviews on it it's so very poor that it makes since that only Flash Lite is on other Android phones until Flash 10.1 is finalized, and even then it may not be for every Android-based device. Since the primary reason for Flash is to play videos if you can't do this then it's as good as Flash Lite. Note that Hulu and other Flash-based video sites require Flash 10.x.x at this point. Games and apps still need to be rewritten for a touch-based device that has no mouse of keyboard. How Flash 10.1 for mobiles will accomplish this is still a mystery, but getting it run on ARM with HW acceleration is the primary goal that can all come later.So it's still a case of in 2010 Flash (10.1) still isn't released for mobiles, they still don't have a64-bit or HW accelerated (Core Animation) version for Mac OS X, and even once it does get on Android this year there is still going to be an issue with power drain.
We also need to look at what Apple has done to force Adobe's hand here. If not for Apple pointing out Flash's shortcomings and exploding the smartphone market Adobe may still have been okay with allowing Flash Lite to reign king on mobiles. If an efficient version of Flash was available for all mobiles except for the iPhone back in 2007 and Adobe was on the ball with Mac development then it would be Apple's fault, but Android has been out nearly as long as the iPhone so there is no excuse that all Android devices are not shipping with Flash. It's certainly not Apple's fault.
I hear you.... and on a small mobile device like an iPhone, I certainly don't miss it.... For something like the iPad though, I think it will be an issue for many people...You have to remember that Flash is not just video... The Wall Street Journal has beautiful interactive graphics and animations in Flash....NYT as well....For me, that reason alone is a deal breaker...I'd rather just stick with my laptop and not have issues.
The thing that got me MOST excited about the keynote was the iWork demo.... I'm soooooo hoping they move in the direction of like a MacBook iPad! Something I could synch my iPhone with (instead of having to synch the iPad with another computer). Something that could actually REPLACE my laptop. GO APPLE!!!
I hear you.... and on a small mobile device like an iPhone, I certainly don't miss it.... For something like the iPad though, I think it will be an issue for many people...You have to remember that Flash is not just video... The Wall Street Journal has beautiful interactive graphics and animations in Flash....NYT as well....For me, that reason alone is a deal breaker...I'd rather just stick with my laptop and not have issues.
The problem is the reliance of sites on Flash without an option for new technologies, but the iPhone was a breakaway success that made the smartphone market viable. A web browser that could display a website format accurately and then zoom in was not around before the iPhone. RiM is still working on a decent browser and Android's browser still isn't as intelligent as the iPhone even though the browser engines are as good or better in the case of JS.
The thing that got me MOST excited about the keynote was the iWork demo.... I'm soooooo hoping they move in the direction of like a MacBook iPad! Something I could synch my iPhone with (instead of having to synch the iPad with another computer). Something that could actually REPLACE my laptop. GO APPLE!!!
I don't see that happening. This will likely be a tablet and not a notebook or netbook. They are clearly making this an accessory device to a Mac/PC. I think a lot of people would be happy with a $500 iPad as their main computer, with the keyboard dock, of course, if it had a couple USB ports and support for an external HDD for backups and media files and the ability to sync you iPhone/iPod with it and edit your iTunes Library on it. Sadly, as useful as those would be for a great many simple notebook users I don't think Apple will go that route.