Flash is not a requirement of the internet. It's proprietary. Apple is fully within their rights to make devices that do not use it. Developers are fully within their rights to use other means to get their content on the web. If Apple didn't have the power to sway people, I'm sure they'd use Flash. But customers are mostly unfazed by Flash's omission and companies are beginning to code in other languages to accommodate Apple devices.
Leaving possible Valleywag sensationalism aside for a moment..
Flash has its issues and I don't have a problem with the iPad not supporting it.
Most of Steve Jobs's arguments I have a lot of sympathy for.
But I think he might have been wiser not to suggest to publishers that dumping Flash was 'trivial'. The major publishers who want to deliver compelling digital content have a lot of Flash talent in-house, that would normally generate the very kind of material we - consumers - would want to see on a tablet. But they can't. Their skills are simply not directly applicable to the iPad. And the publishers won't have a significant pool of talent just ready and waiting with an alternative. We're talking about retraining, hiring, reorganisation and, in the interim, placing greater demands on available resources. It can be done, especially by the kinds of corporations Steve and co have spent so much time wooing recently. But it is, I would suggest, at least a little disingenuous to argue that dropping Flash is trivial.
I base my argument on over twenty years of having worked for major media companies, online and offline, as well as knowing and working closely with developers from many different disciplines, from AS to Objective C.
But, despite my regret that Steve chose that particular - and in my opinion - contentious word to make his argument (because I think it makes him vulnerable to a line of criticism he could have mitigated by adopting a different tone), I still think that, when the dust settles, the iPad is going to seriously change the way we think about designing and consuming digital media. By gum, that was a long sentence for online. Better stop.
Still think the desire to not include flash is more about restricting web content so people continue to make apps rather than there actually being an issue with flash.
Microsoft have just powered there phone with Silverlight which is often seen as an alternative to Flash. If HTML5 really is an alternative why is the iPhone running on Objective C and not just pure HTML5 all the way through.
I'm late to this party, but better late than never. As an Adobe Certified Expert, Sr Interactive/Front End/Back End Developer, I know a thing or two about a thing or two. Flash on the Mac (I love my mac, but I hate the flash browser plugin) is lame for a few different reasons. When you see the beach ball and your computer hangs for a second during video playback or action sequences, that's because flash has started to run a process called garbage collection known to reduce it's memory foot print (in ram) by freeing up memory used by the plugin. The problem here is that it's running WAY too often especially on machines with tons of memory when it shouldn't run at all.
Second problem is that the flash plugin is written using the interfaces provided by os x provided through the browser vendors. Because of that, it's limited to a slower set of interfaces for drawing things on MOST browsers. I think the only exception to this currently is FireFox, which will receive a noticeable speed bump with the next iteration of the flash plugin (version 10.1 which is in beta).
When other browser vendors provide access to the latest interfaces provided from OS X, flash will perform better on browsers. When Adobe fixes the plugin so it stops trying to constantly recycle memory when there is no need to recycle memory, people will stop complaining all together with because they wont even notice the difference between pc and mac performance.
I use a 3 year old Core 2 iMac and Flash runs perfectly fine because I souped up the video RAM.
Where Macs are concerned I was referring to notebooks. You also had to upgrade the RAM for the internet to run "just fine", interesting. Flash is used on the web, "open" "far more efficient" technologies are on their way and people are beginning to embrace them. Apple just brought to attention what was already happening, and the public attention is walking other up too.
A huge chunk of the internet is built on Flash. It is a feature in some circumstances. It is a shame to see Apple taking yet another feature out because of its refusal to upgrade OS X underpinnings especially when even underpowered windows machines can run flash perfectly.
I recently installed Clicktoflash on my old Powerbook G4 because the fan would constantly scream even when just running Safari. Happily, the issue has been resolved and my own confirmation that Flash and Macs react as near polar opposites, has been revealed--at least on older machines. In addition, I now see how much of the internet truly relies on Flash.. Like you said, it's everywhere. The internet on the Ipad will be crippled without Flash, period. Anyone saying otherwise is living in a fantasy land.
Mouse-overs aren't the issue though. The issue is it's slow, buggy and inefficient on the OS X (and not even efficient on Win). Adobe could come up with a solution for mouse-overs, but that wouldn't make Flash suitable for the iPad.
The truth is that if Apple opens the door to Flash on the iPhone, it would undermine the iPhone SDK itself. It is Apple right to defend their turf.
In the long run, Apple and users are better served with HTML5 instead of Flash. Developers much prefer an open standard like HTML 5 than a proprietary one (Flash).
One would argue that Apple's SDK is a closed platform but who cares, it's their phone.
If publishers are not happy and don't want to write Apps for the iPhone because of this reason then they are doing themselves a disservice. The average customer does not care about Flash vs HTML. They just want content. Publishers should simply not have web designers write Apps instead of developers !
HTML5 can't and wont do everything that flash does. Anyone who says otherwise is selling a lie for their own agenda or offering up their own uninformed biased opinion.
I'm having a hard time squaring the story with the headline.
"Publishers", which suggests the top brass at big online media outlets, turns immediately, in the first sentence of the story, into the completely meaningless "members of the media" which within a few words is further downgraded to "contacts from various media outlets" which finally proves to be (at least as far as the AI story would have it) a Flash developer, an anonymous online producer and an anonymous designer.
OK, and now I've looked at the linked story and that really is pretty much it, save for one named ad agency guy. If that's "push back" from "publishers", it seems pretty low key.
Maybe a better headline would be "Valleywag manages to find a few critics of Apple's Flash stance."
Oh yeah, but that wouldn't be sufficiently click whore-ish.
Can't beieve I didn't think of this before... for those who worked in video...for decades, the industry was dominated by Adobe Premiere on the low end, Avid on the high end. Apple clearly didn't like either product, so they released their own, Final Cut Pro... As everyone knows it competely changed the industry. It was better and Premiere all but dissapeared. I don't think anyone here loves Flash or loves Silverlight, but you can't just wish them away... QuickTime is viewed as a heavier video player... I would LOVE for Apple to create a Flash / Silverlight alternative. It woud be some well developed authoring tool....maybe it saves a less buggy SWF-type file.... amaybe it renders HTML 5...whatever works best, I have faith in Apple.... Either way, create a better experience before you take away the existing experience. Again, for stand alone video the solution is simpe, go the HTML5 root....for complex animation though, we're not there yet.
Mouse-overs aren't the issue though. The issue is it's slow, buggy and inefficient on the OS X (and not even efficient on Win). Adobe could come up with a solution for mouse-overs, but that wouldn't make Flash suitable for the iPad.
Flash isn't buggy. The people who code it write buggy code. In 10.1 adobe even added a way to globally catch any and all errors that a flash app could throw, however it will be a while until it sees wide spread adoption, but it does hone in on the fact that they're working on a number of solutions to fix the holes in the user experience they're providing. They've got work left to do, but progress is being made
I'm the biggest Apple fan boy, but I think SB is making a huge mistake here..... I think it's an issue that really divides people... give me a ClickToFlash type tool and let ME decide what content I can access....The problem (as the article states) is the divide between devs and designers.... Designers know Photoshop, illustrator, Flash, etc... There needs to be some kind of authoring environment for HTML5... I know Wookie Boy will disagree and have links to tutorials.... But until the majority of existing Flash content is replaced with HTML5 content, users will be unhappy with this. Until the iPad can offer a better experience, I'm sticking with my 3GS and my laptop.
I agree that someone needs to develop a visual non-Flash interactivity authoring solution. Ironically, Adobe seemed to be moving in that direction, until they acquired Macromedia. Personally, I think it would have been great if ImageReady transitioned to an animation tool that allowed you to export an SVG/HTML solution for animation and interactivity. But, alas. ImageReady is dead.
Anywho. Other than SOUND support, I wish the Gordon JS runtime blossomed into a more viable solution for people to present "Flash" on a web page without the Flash plugin.
Gordon: JS runtime (no Flash on the following pages):
And what exactly does that confession imply? They're obviously not sweating to the oldies trying to get it "properly developed " for Macs when it works just fine on 90% of the world's computers. What is their incentive? Has Apple offered to pay them to fix it? It benefits Apple more than Adobe to fix it. Apple should put up the chump change now with their money bags or stop whining.
one thing is positively obvious. by not adopting the solutions recommended by your constant bs, it made a bunch of people very happy as apple just made an all time high. this is as opposed to your solution suggestions that are still wallowing around for some better enlightenment.
Comments
I don't see a problem here. This is business.
P.S. Please stop quoting posts from TECHSTUD.
Flash has its issues and I don't have a problem with the iPad not supporting it.
Most of Steve Jobs's arguments I have a lot of sympathy for.
But I think he might have been wiser not to suggest to publishers that dumping Flash was 'trivial'. The major publishers who want to deliver compelling digital content have a lot of Flash talent in-house, that would normally generate the very kind of material we - consumers - would want to see on a tablet. But they can't. Their skills are simply not directly applicable to the iPad. And the publishers won't have a significant pool of talent just ready and waiting with an alternative. We're talking about retraining, hiring, reorganisation and, in the interim, placing greater demands on available resources. It can be done, especially by the kinds of corporations Steve and co have spent so much time wooing recently. But it is, I would suggest, at least a little disingenuous to argue that dropping Flash is trivial.
I base my argument on over twenty years of having worked for major media companies, online and offline, as well as knowing and working closely with developers from many different disciplines, from AS to Objective C.
But, despite my regret that Steve chose that particular - and in my opinion - contentious word to make his argument (because I think it makes him vulnerable to a line of criticism he could have mitigated by adopting a different tone), I still think that, when the dust settles, the iPad is going to seriously change the way we think about designing and consuming digital media. By gum, that was a long sentence for online. Better stop.
Microsoft have just powered there phone with Silverlight which is often seen as an alternative to Flash. If HTML5 really is an alternative why is the iPhone running on Objective C and not just pure HTML5 all the way through.
Second problem is that the flash plugin is written using the interfaces provided by os x provided through the browser vendors. Because of that, it's limited to a slower set of interfaces for drawing things on MOST browsers. I think the only exception to this currently is FireFox, which will receive a noticeable speed bump with the next iteration of the flash plugin (version 10.1 which is in beta).
When other browser vendors provide access to the latest interfaces provided from OS X, flash will perform better on browsers. When Adobe fixes the plugin so it stops trying to constantly recycle memory when there is no need to recycle memory, people will stop complaining all together with because they wont even notice the difference between pc and mac performance.
That's my 2 cents.
I use a 3 year old Core 2 iMac and Flash runs perfectly fine because I souped up the video RAM.
Where Macs are concerned I was referring to notebooks. You also had to upgrade the RAM for the internet to run "just fine", interesting. Flash is used on the web, "open" "far more efficient" technologies are on their way and people are beginning to embrace them. Apple just brought to attention what was already happening, and the public attention is walking other up too.
You never responded to my netbook comment.
Read here.
You're seriously out of your depth.
I never make mistakes. Once I thought I did, but I was wrong.
I liked your sig so much that I updated mine!
A huge chunk of the internet is built on Flash. It is a feature in some circumstances. It is a shame to see Apple taking yet another feature out because of its refusal to upgrade OS X underpinnings especially when even underpowered windows machines can run flash perfectly.
I recently installed Clicktoflash on my old Powerbook G4 because the fan would constantly scream even when just running Safari. Happily, the issue has been resolved and my own confirmation that Flash and Macs react as near polar opposites, has been revealed--at least on older machines. In addition, I now see how much of the internet truly relies on Flash.. Like you said, it's everywhere. The internet on the Ipad will be crippled without Flash, period. Anyone saying otherwise is living in a fantasy land.
Regardless of what SJ says or thinks about Flash, even some Flash developers don't think Flash is a good idea for the iPad.
Read here.
Mouse-overs aren't the issue though. The issue is it's slow, buggy and inefficient on the OS X (and not even efficient on Win). Adobe could come up with a solution for mouse-overs, but that wouldn't make Flash suitable for the iPad.
The truth is that if Apple opens the door to Flash on the iPhone, it would undermine the iPhone SDK itself. It is Apple right to defend their turf.
In the long run, Apple and users are better served with HTML5 instead of Flash. Developers much prefer an open standard like HTML 5 than a proprietary one (Flash).
One would argue that Apple's SDK is a closed platform but who cares, it's their phone.
If publishers are not happy and don't want to write Apps for the iPhone because of this reason then they are doing themselves a disservice. The average customer does not care about Flash vs HTML. They just want content. Publishers should simply not have web designers write Apps instead of developers !
HTML5 can't and wont do everything that flash does. Anyone who says otherwise is selling a lie for their own agenda or offering up their own uninformed biased opinion.
More like you can't swap the battery if Flash drains it.
Enough with your battery bs. It's sooooooooo old and tired.
It's like saying, "your shoes aren't too small, your feet are just too big."
Note for the future. A plug-in is supposed to be written for the platform, not the other way around.
It not because of FLASH, it's because of OSX.
FLASH runs just fine on any low-end PC even Netbooks.
NO- I upgraded the Ram for video editing and that was a trickle down benefit.
It runs on netbooks- the heating issue I don't know. I've only played with them in the store, Flash ran smoothly.
Right, so you didn't actually own one like me, my sister, my brother or my friend. This is telling.
You used one in a store. That's like saying I sat in the car in the showroom and the suspension felt good.
I'm having a hard time squaring the story with the headline.
"Publishers", which suggests the top brass at big online media outlets, turns immediately, in the first sentence of the story, into the completely meaningless "members of the media" which within a few words is further downgraded to "contacts from various media outlets" which finally proves to be (at least as far as the AI story would have it) a Flash developer, an anonymous online producer and an anonymous designer.
OK, and now I've looked at the linked story and that really is pretty much it, save for one named ad agency guy. If that's "push back" from "publishers", it seems pretty low key.
Maybe a better headline would be "Valleywag manages to find a few critics of Apple's Flash stance."
Oh yeah, but that wouldn't be sufficiently click whore-ish.
Yep. I thought the same thing.
...laughable.
Mouse-overs aren't the issue though. The issue is it's slow, buggy and inefficient on the OS X (and not even efficient on Win). Adobe could come up with a solution for mouse-overs, but that wouldn't make Flash suitable for the iPad.
Flash isn't buggy. The people who code it write buggy code. In 10.1 adobe even added a way to globally catch any and all errors that a flash app could throw, however it will be a while until it sees wide spread adoption, but it does hone in on the fact that they're working on a number of solutions to fix the holes in the user experience they're providing. They've got work left to do, but progress is being made
I'm the biggest Apple fan boy, but I think SB is making a huge mistake here..... I think it's an issue that really divides people... give me a ClickToFlash type tool and let ME decide what content I can access....The problem (as the article states) is the divide between devs and designers.... Designers know Photoshop, illustrator, Flash, etc... There needs to be some kind of authoring environment for HTML5... I know Wookie Boy will disagree and have links to tutorials.... But until the majority of existing Flash content is replaced with HTML5 content, users will be unhappy with this. Until the iPad can offer a better experience, I'm sticking with my 3GS and my laptop.
I agree that someone needs to develop a visual non-Flash interactivity authoring solution. Ironically, Adobe seemed to be moving in that direction, until they acquired Macromedia. Personally, I think it would have been great if ImageReady transitioned to an animation tool that allowed you to export an SVG/HTML solution for animation and interactivity. But, alas. ImageReady is dead.
Anywho. Other than SOUND support, I wish the Gordon JS runtime blossomed into a more viable solution for people to present "Flash" on a web page without the Flash plugin.
Gordon: JS runtime (no Flash on the following pages):
http://paulirish.com/work/gordon/demos/blue.html
http://paulirish.com/work/gordon/demos/trip.html
~ CB
And what exactly does that confession imply? They're obviously not sweating to the oldies trying to get it "properly developed " for Macs when it works just fine on 90% of the world's computers. What is their incentive? Has Apple offered to pay them to fix it? It benefits Apple more than Adobe to fix it. Apple should put up the chump change now with their money bags or stop whining.
one thing is positively obvious. by not adopting the solutions recommended by your constant bs, it made a bunch of people very happy as apple just made an all time high. this is as opposed to your solution suggestions that are still wallowing around for some better enlightenment.
Unfortunately, there's not an App allowed for that.
Are you now referring to your masturbation marathons?
Flash isn't buggy. The people who code it write buggy code.
Code "in it" you mean.