Given the fact that Adobe got their start with Mac People, why would they suddenly turn on Adobe? Mac People must be mentally unstable.
Where in the world did that come from. I said that Mac users have a legitimate complaint with Adobe, so there is no implication of Mac users being mentally unstable.
good one, actually. It seems fanboysm does tend to distort reality field even further
The difference is one of momentum.
While Apple loves to laud the 185k or so apps they have in the store they've become more and more aggressive about weeding out the garbage (explicit stuff recently ) and now they are pre-emptively attacking "tribble" like spawning of "me too" apps created with cookie cutter meta platforms.
The app store is not a Democracy and for that i'm glad.
no. i'm not saying that. i said that if adobe had been more pro-active in getting flash on osx up to snuff years ago, there would have been a much better chance in getting flash on the iphone.
we were all speculating if flash would be part of the iphone in 2007, and at the time there was no definite 'no. never. not ever.' coming from apple (iirc). i think steve jobs' comments (resource hog, battery life, cpu killer) didn't surface until later, probably after adobe showed them work in progress (admittedly pure speculation on my part).
i seem to recall that jobs was dismissing flash lite pretty much right away as 'useless'. maybe we read too much into it at the time, but adobe was talking a lot about bringing a full flash version for mobiles out. it was just around the corner. and has been for three years now.
we have to remember also that at the time of the iphone launch, nobody could have predicted it to be a runaway success. i'm sure that apple is more confident now than they were back then and have adjusted their roadmap accordingly. three years of no-flash iphone sales do prove that apple doesn't need flash.
if adobe pulls it off, they might want it at some point. time will tell. i wouldn't bet money on it.
What you say is true, but much of that is water under the bridge. Woulda, coulda, shoulda so to speak.
I was talking about right now, given the state of affairs, Adobe may not see much of a point in trying to pull it off.
As to whether Apple does not need it, we shall see. People buy the iPhone for lots of reasons, and few of them involve Flash. However, the iPad is being billed as a media consumption device and the "perfect" way to browse the web. Initial sales have been excellent, but I remember reading something to the extent that sales were mostly from Apple owners. The question is what happens when none Apple owners start to buy the iPad (if they do) and see that Flash does not work.
I think Flash on desktop is a good indicator for the same crap on phone.
You are kidding yourself if you say that flash is working great for you, whether you are on mac, windows or linux.
Do you have any clue what you're talking about or are you here just saying things that "go along" with what you think everyone at a site like this should say or think?
Please show me these flash sites that don't work great for ANYONE.
Where in the world did that come from. I said that Mac users have a legitimate complaint with Adobe, so there is no implication of Mac users being mentally unstable.
but you seems to think that it's ok for Adobe to keep not give a crap about Mac People.
On the other hand keep whining about how Apple tell them to go F themselves.
You can't have it both ways ....
unless of course you are b .... l and having a t.......e......
Maybe I am in the bizarro world. I need to wake up.
What you say is true, but much of that is water under the bridge. Woulda, coulda, shoulda so to speak.
I was talking about right now, given the state of affairs, Adobe may not see much of a point in trying to pull it off.
As to whether Apple does not need it, we shall see. People buy the iPhone for lots of reasons, and few of them involve Flash. However, the iPad is being billed as a media consumption device and the "perfect" way to browse the web. Initial sales have been excellent, but I remember reading something to the extent that sales were mostly from Apple owners. The question is what happens when none Apple owners start to buy the iPad (if they do) and see that Flash does not work.
i think we're on the same page. i don't really see flash ever happen on the iWhatever. what i think will happen though is that the content providers are going to drop flash for video delivery (that's what you're really talking about, right), or will at least provide alternate solutions. it's not in their interest to stick with flash if fairly big parts of a choice demographic can't consume their offerings. for them it's about eyeballs, not about technology. whether or not it's feasible for them is another question. i'd say that's their issue to sort out. some won't i'm sure. the big boys will and have started to.
as far as 'most are from apple users' goes - the same was predicted about the ipod, then the iphone... only time will tell i guess. the window of opportunity is certainly smaller than it was with the iphone.
Flash 9 and Flash 10 already run on mobile devices FAR BETTER than anything in HTML5 and Canvas which you probably don't know is ONLY A DRAFT! Dude, you guys are pimping something that's not even adopted or finalized! When Flash Player 10.1 hits all the android, symbian, windows, and rim devices, the cheese will stand alone.
There is no such thing as "Flash 9" and "Flash 10" on mobile devices. There is currently no working flash on mobile devices. 10.1 (when it leaves beta) will be the first. i.e. - you got it completely backwards.
Also, just as general food for thought .... Apple has a history of having closed systems and platforms at first, and then gradually opening them up as they gain traction. The reason to leave Flash off of the iPhone is it sucks, a mobile version didn't even exist, and it's proprietary. Apple has made some significant progress in getting others to agree with them and remove Flash content from the web.
If on the other hand, 4 or 5 years after platform introduction, it turns out there *is* a mobile version of Flash, that it *does* work on other platforms and it also gains in popularity, Apple will put Flash on the iPhone quick as a wink.
They aren't stupid, and the fight is not as ideological as many people think. It's a highly practical goal to get the web off of Flash, but if it starts to interfere with their products and acceptance of same, they will swivel right around.
Ummmm, no! What has ruined the PC gaming market is Microsoft's entry into the game console market: The XBox and XBox 360. Consoles have always been around, but the current crop of high powered consoles combined with 1080P HDTV's and Microsoft's ignoring of PC gaming to foster the XBox has all but ruined the PC gaming market.
No, not really. Original Xbox was completely marginal. 360 is doing great, but thinking of it, there's only a handful of 360 exclusives not available on PC - games like Fable, GOW1, Halo 1 and 2... did appear on PC, though some did with delay.
As it is, MS is trying to strike some sort of balance - no matter how 360 platform is important for them gaming wise, "Games for Windows" business is also important. Without healthy Windows gaming, many of MS allies will suffer (as games are strong motive for home users to purchase new hardware) and whole MS home market share might suffer as well as there is number of people sticking with Windows at their homes primarily because of games. Without games, OSX platform would be much more competitive to Windows platform for home users.
I think that Sony and Nintendo are hurting PC gaming much more than MS - their exclusives remain their exclusives for lifetime. We might see GOW2 and Halo3 on PC at some point, but Gran Tourismo, God of War or any Mario game we will never see.
But at the end of the day, what hurts Windows gaming most are... gamers. Much as I recall, majority of multiplatform games will sell better on consoles than on PC. Pirating does have impact, but it's not only that. Gaming on consoles is more casual and more social as well. Playing FIFA10 with your mate in your living room, from sofa, on big screen beats the crap out of playing FIFA with your mate in study, sitting on chairs and squeezing in front of 24" monitor. Even gaming alone, living room is much more relaxing than sitting at the desk - especially if you sit at the desk most of your work time. Plus, no one cheats on console online games (major reason for me).
I have more than decent PC, yet since I got PS3 for Christmas, I purchased 24 PS3 games and only 1 PC game (Mass Effect 2). I haven't even downloaded any PC game in the meantime - heck, I haven't even played PC game I've purchased yet. In time, as the technology gap will spread between PC and PS3, I will get more into PC gaming, but at present numbers are obvious.
I honestly had no clue. My God. Ok, my position just changed: Adobe shouldn't bring flash to the iphone because obviously the OS can't handle it.
(4 youtube vids playing, 21% cpu utilization. Intel C2D at 3 ghz, 2gb of ram.)
The issue is that Windows is perfectly okay with having a web plug-in have direct access to hardware acceleration. You know, the way things used to be done in 1991?
If you call that an OS "handling it" your dreaming. No decent OS would allow it.
What's this hulu thing? Remember 96% of the worlds population doesn't care about a restricted US product. At the moment the local TV streaming available here is still Flash, and while flash is a resource hog, a massive resource hog, a damn pig of a resource hog, it seems to be a lot more reliable than HTML5 via Safari on Youtube
No, but in 2015 when everyone is using h.264 what happens when the mpeg-la starts passing the hat around?
actually - being in canada, i don't have access to hulu myself, it just seems to be brought up as a talking point every time flash video is discussed....
i obviously don't know what will happen in five years. but h264 is not the only codec available. the members of mpeg-la will have to determine if this is about licensing fees or standards. then again - this is also going to be an issue for any h264 that's being wrapped in flash right now, isn't it?
but you seems to think that it's ok for Adobe to keep not give a crap about Mac People.
On the other hand keep whining about how Apple tell them to go F themselves.
You can't have it both ways ....
unless of course you are b .... l and having a t.......e...........
Maybe I am in the bizarro world. I need to wake up.
First off, the ad hominem rhetoric is completely unnecessary.
Second, at a certain level it is ok for Adobe not to give Mac people optimized software, just as I think it is ok for Apple to bar Flash on the iPhone.
In both instances, the companies are making decisions about their products, and as such it is ok.
Do I agree with Adobe's position. No, I think it is stupid, but it is their product and they can do with it as they please.
The point I am making is that behavior has its consequences. Adobe put out crappy software for a long time, and pissed Mac users off. Behavior and consequences.
Likewise, being barred from the iPhone platform and the vitriolic posts of Mac users, could have the effect of decreasing any incentive that Adobe may have to change.
There is no such thing as "Flash 9" and "Flash 10" on mobile devices. There is currently no working flash on mobile devices. 10.1 (when it leaves beta) will be the first. i.e. - you got it completely backwards.
SNIP
i thought so too, but somebody corrected me: there is a version of flash 9 that works on nokia's maemo platform on the Nsomethingorother. doesn't work with all files though. close - but no cigar.
HTML5 is free. Flash requires a license, and therefore it's Adobe's way of having control over the web (or something.)
What Adobe needs to do is highlight what flash can do that html5 can't.
To be perfectly honest, I think most people don't even care beyond watching videos on the web. I like to play a ren and stimpy fart cannon game every once in a while lol.
Isn't it the other way around? Since Flash was here before HTML5, shouldn't Apple (or HTML5 people) need to highlight what HTML5 can do that Flash can't? Why should whole industry replace one existing, wide-spread standard for another - that just does the same (and is not even fully standardised yet)?
First off, the ad hominem rhetoric is completely unnecessary.
Second, at a certain level it is ok for Adobe not to give Mac people optimized software, just as I think it is ok for Apple to bar Flash on the iPhone.
In both instances, the companies are making decisions about their products, and as such it is ok.
Do I agree with Adobe's position. No, I think it is stupid, but it is their product and they can do with it as they please.
The point I am making is that behavior has its consequences. Adobe put out crappy software for a long time, and pissed Mac users off. Behavior and consequences.
Likewise, being barred from the iPhone platform and the vitriolic posts of Mac users, could have the effect of decreasing any incentive that Adobe may have to change.
the difference of course is that a big chunk of adobe's bottom line depends on mac users. their responsibility to their shareholders should theoretically influence their decision making.
as far as 'vitriolic posts from mac users' - cranky users on their respective soapbox (guilty as charged at times, i admit) are one thing - company officials spouting vitriolic rhetoric like 'screw apple' is quite another.
I think Flash on desktop is a good indicator for the same crap on phone.
You are kidding yourself if you say that flash is working great for you, whether you are on mac, windows or linux.
My apologies, but it works fine on all my Windows machines - even single core P4 at the office. I can't recall any issue I had with Flash content recently, say last 2 years or so (since I moved to Vista and 7 later on). Likewise everyone else in my office and at home.
I can't even recall getting any support call from our clients that turned out to be Flash related. But then again, we don't have Apple clients. \
While Apple loves to laud the 185k or so apps they have in the store they've become more and more aggressive about weeding out the garbage (explicit stuff recently ) and now they are pre-emptively attacking "tribble" like spawning of "me too" apps created with cookie cutter meta platforms.
The app store is not a Democracy and for that i'm glad.
I will start respecting them more once they weed out garbage based on it's content, and not only on platform it is made with.
Of course that would cripple some of their PR efforts, so it's unlikely to happen any time soon.
Comments
Given the fact that Adobe got their start with Mac People, why would they suddenly turn on Adobe? Mac People must be mentally unstable.
Where in the world did that come from. I said that Mac users have a legitimate complaint with Adobe, so there is no implication of Mac users being mentally unstable.
The difference is one of momentum.
While Apple loves to laud the 185k or so apps they have in the store they've become more and more aggressive about weeding out the garbage (explicit stuff recently ) and now they are pre-emptively attacking "tribble" like spawning of "me too" apps created with cookie cutter meta platforms.
The app store is not a Democracy and for that i'm glad.
no. i'm not saying that. i said that if adobe had been more pro-active in getting flash on osx up to snuff years ago, there would have been a much better chance in getting flash on the iphone.
we were all speculating if flash would be part of the iphone in 2007, and at the time there was no definite 'no. never. not ever.' coming from apple (iirc). i think steve jobs' comments (resource hog, battery life, cpu killer) didn't surface until later, probably after adobe showed them work in progress (admittedly pure speculation on my part).
i seem to recall that jobs was dismissing flash lite pretty much right away as 'useless'. maybe we read too much into it at the time, but adobe was talking a lot about bringing a full flash version for mobiles out. it was just around the corner. and has been for three years now.
we have to remember also that at the time of the iphone launch, nobody could have predicted it to be a runaway success. i'm sure that apple is more confident now than they were back then and have adjusted their roadmap accordingly. three years of no-flash iphone sales do prove that apple doesn't need flash.
if adobe pulls it off, they might want it at some point. time will tell. i wouldn't bet money on it.
What you say is true, but much of that is water under the bridge. Woulda, coulda, shoulda so to speak.
I was talking about right now, given the state of affairs, Adobe may not see much of a point in trying to pull it off.
As to whether Apple does not need it, we shall see. People buy the iPhone for lots of reasons, and few of them involve Flash. However, the iPad is being billed as a media consumption device and the "perfect" way to browse the web. Initial sales have been excellent, but I remember reading something to the extent that sales were mostly from Apple owners. The question is what happens when none Apple owners start to buy the iPad (if they do) and see that Flash does not work.
I think Flash on desktop is a good indicator for the same crap on phone.
You are kidding yourself if you say that flash is working great for you, whether you are on mac, windows or linux.
Do you have any clue what you're talking about or are you here just saying things that "go along" with what you think everyone at a site like this should say or think?
Please show me these flash sites that don't work great for ANYONE.
Where in the world did that come from. I said that Mac users have a legitimate complaint with Adobe, so there is no implication of Mac users being mentally unstable.
but you seems to think that it's ok for Adobe to keep not give a crap about Mac People.
On the other hand keep whining about how Apple tell them to go F themselves.
You can't have it both ways ....
unless of course you are b .... l and having a t.......e......
Maybe I am in the bizarro world. I need to wake up.
What you say is true, but much of that is water under the bridge. Woulda, coulda, shoulda so to speak.
I was talking about right now, given the state of affairs, Adobe may not see much of a point in trying to pull it off.
As to whether Apple does not need it, we shall see. People buy the iPhone for lots of reasons, and few of them involve Flash. However, the iPad is being billed as a media consumption device and the "perfect" way to browse the web. Initial sales have been excellent, but I remember reading something to the extent that sales were mostly from Apple owners. The question is what happens when none Apple owners start to buy the iPad (if they do) and see that Flash does not work.
i think we're on the same page. i don't really see flash ever happen on the iWhatever. what i think will happen though is that the content providers are going to drop flash for video delivery (that's what you're really talking about, right), or will at least provide alternate solutions. it's not in their interest to stick with flash if fairly big parts of a choice demographic can't consume their offerings. for them it's about eyeballs, not about technology. whether or not it's feasible for them is another question. i'd say that's their issue to sort out. some won't i'm sure. the big boys will and have started to.
as far as 'most are from apple users' goes - the same was predicted about the ipod, then the iphone... only time will tell i guess. the window of opportunity is certainly smaller than it was with the iphone.
keeps it interesting though, eh?
SNIP
Please show me these flash sites that don't work great for ANYONE.
http://flashcrash.dempsky.org/
sorry. i couldn't resist.
then again - now that i think about it - i guess it DOE'S work for everybody...
Flash 9 and Flash 10 already run on mobile devices FAR BETTER than anything in HTML5 and Canvas which you probably don't know is ONLY A DRAFT! Dude, you guys are pimping something that's not even adopted or finalized! When Flash Player 10.1 hits all the android, symbian, windows, and rim devices, the cheese will stand alone.
There is no such thing as "Flash 9" and "Flash 10" on mobile devices. There is currently no working flash on mobile devices. 10.1 (when it leaves beta) will be the first. i.e. - you got it completely backwards.
Also, just as general food for thought .... Apple has a history of having closed systems and platforms at first, and then gradually opening them up as they gain traction. The reason to leave Flash off of the iPhone is it sucks, a mobile version didn't even exist, and it's proprietary. Apple has made some significant progress in getting others to agree with them and remove Flash content from the web.
If on the other hand, 4 or 5 years after platform introduction, it turns out there *is* a mobile version of Flash, that it *does* work on other platforms and it also gains in popularity, Apple will put Flash on the iPhone quick as a wink.
They aren't stupid, and the fight is not as ideological as many people think. It's a highly practical goal to get the web off of Flash, but if it starts to interfere with their products and acceptance of same, they will swivel right around.
I have recent (and continued) personal experience that shows that Flash is, in fact, a resource hog on a Mac.
I had run a couple of YouTube Flash videos... all had completed... only one open window had a Flash player in it... the Flash player was not running:
This was run on a 2.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo iMac 24 with 4GB RAM
This person, agrees with this Jobs truth, because it is consistent with my own experience.
.
I honestly had no clue. My God. Ok, my position just changed: Adobe shouldn't bring flash to the iphone because obviously the OS can't handle it.
(4 youtube vids playing, 21% cpu utilization. Intel C2D at 3 ghz, 2gb of ram.)
Ummmm, no! What has ruined the PC gaming market is Microsoft's entry into the game console market: The XBox and XBox 360. Consoles have always been around, but the current crop of high powered consoles combined with 1080P HDTV's and Microsoft's ignoring of PC gaming to foster the XBox has all but ruined the PC gaming market.
No, not really. Original Xbox was completely marginal. 360 is doing great, but thinking of it, there's only a handful of 360 exclusives not available on PC - games like Fable, GOW1, Halo 1 and 2... did appear on PC, though some did with delay.
As it is, MS is trying to strike some sort of balance - no matter how 360 platform is important for them gaming wise, "Games for Windows" business is also important. Without healthy Windows gaming, many of MS allies will suffer (as games are strong motive for home users to purchase new hardware) and whole MS home market share might suffer as well as there is number of people sticking with Windows at their homes primarily because of games. Without games, OSX platform would be much more competitive to Windows platform for home users.
I think that Sony and Nintendo are hurting PC gaming much more than MS - their exclusives remain their exclusives for lifetime. We might see GOW2 and Halo3 on PC at some point, but Gran Tourismo, God of War or any Mario game we will never see.
But at the end of the day, what hurts Windows gaming most are... gamers. Much as I recall, majority of multiplatform games will sell better on consoles than on PC. Pirating does have impact, but it's not only that. Gaming on consoles is more casual and more social as well. Playing FIFA10 with your mate in your living room, from sofa, on big screen beats the crap out of playing FIFA with your mate in study, sitting on chairs and squeezing in front of 24" monitor. Even gaming alone, living room is much more relaxing than sitting at the desk - especially if you sit at the desk most of your work time. Plus, no one cheats on console online games (major reason for me).
I have more than decent PC, yet since I got PS3 for Christmas, I purchased 24 PS3 games and only 1 PC game (Mass Effect 2). I haven't even downloaded any PC game in the meantime - heck, I haven't even played PC game I've purchased yet. In time, as the technology gap will spread between PC and PS3, I will get more into PC gaming, but at present numbers are obvious.
I honestly had no clue. My God. Ok, my position just changed: Adobe shouldn't bring flash to the iphone because obviously the OS can't handle it.
(4 youtube vids playing, 21% cpu utilization. Intel C2D at 3 ghz, 2gb of ram.)
The issue is that Windows is perfectly okay with having a web plug-in have direct access to hardware acceleration. You know, the way things used to be done in 1991?
If you call that an OS "handling it" your dreaming. No decent OS would allow it.
What's this hulu thing? Remember 96% of the worlds population doesn't care about a restricted US product. At the moment the local TV streaming available here is still Flash, and while flash is a resource hog, a massive resource hog, a damn pig of a resource hog, it seems to be a lot more reliable than HTML5 via Safari on Youtube
No, but in 2015 when everyone is using h.264 what happens when the mpeg-la starts passing the hat around?
actually - being in canada, i don't have access to hulu myself, it just seems to be brought up as a talking point every time flash video is discussed....
i obviously don't know what will happen in five years. but h264 is not the only codec available. the members of mpeg-la will have to determine if this is about licensing fees or standards. then again - this is also going to be an issue for any h264 that's being wrapped in flash right now, isn't it?
but you seems to think that it's ok for Adobe to keep not give a crap about Mac People.
On the other hand keep whining about how Apple tell them to go F themselves.
You can't have it both ways ....
unless of course you are b .... l and having a t.......e...........
Maybe I am in the bizarro world. I need to wake up.
First off, the ad hominem rhetoric is completely unnecessary.
Second, at a certain level it is ok for Adobe not to give Mac people optimized software, just as I think it is ok for Apple to bar Flash on the iPhone.
In both instances, the companies are making decisions about their products, and as such it is ok.
Do I agree with Adobe's position. No, I think it is stupid, but it is their product and they can do with it as they please.
The point I am making is that behavior has its consequences. Adobe put out crappy software for a long time, and pissed Mac users off. Behavior and consequences.
Likewise, being barred from the iPhone platform and the vitriolic posts of Mac users, could have the effect of decreasing any incentive that Adobe may have to change.
There is no such thing as "Flash 9" and "Flash 10" on mobile devices. There is currently no working flash on mobile devices. 10.1 (when it leaves beta) will be the first. i.e. - you got it completely backwards.
SNIP
i thought so too, but somebody corrected me: there is a version of flash 9 that works on nokia's maemo platform on the Nsomethingorother. doesn't work with all files though. close - but no cigar.
HTML5 is free. Flash requires a license, and therefore it's Adobe's way of having control over the web (or something.)
What Adobe needs to do is highlight what flash can do that html5 can't.
To be perfectly honest, I think most people don't even care beyond watching videos on the web. I like to play a ren and stimpy fart cannon game every once in a while lol.
Isn't it the other way around? Since Flash was here before HTML5, shouldn't Apple (or HTML5 people) need to highlight what HTML5 can do that Flash can't? Why should whole industry replace one existing, wide-spread standard for another - that just does the same (and is not even fully standardised yet)?
First off, the ad hominem rhetoric is completely unnecessary.
Second, at a certain level it is ok for Adobe not to give Mac people optimized software, just as I think it is ok for Apple to bar Flash on the iPhone.
In both instances, the companies are making decisions about their products, and as such it is ok.
Do I agree with Adobe's position. No, I think it is stupid, but it is their product and they can do with it as they please.
The point I am making is that behavior has its consequences. Adobe put out crappy software for a long time, and pissed Mac users off. Behavior and consequences.
Likewise, being barred from the iPhone platform and the vitriolic posts of Mac users, could have the effect of decreasing any incentive that Adobe may have to change.
the difference of course is that a big chunk of adobe's bottom line depends on mac users. their responsibility to their shareholders should theoretically influence their decision making.
as far as 'vitriolic posts from mac users' - cranky users on their respective soapbox (guilty as charged at times, i admit) are one thing - company officials spouting vitriolic rhetoric like 'screw apple' is quite another.
I think Flash on desktop is a good indicator for the same crap on phone.
You are kidding yourself if you say that flash is working great for you, whether you are on mac, windows or linux.
My apologies, but it works fine on all my Windows machines - even single core P4 at the office. I can't recall any issue I had with Flash content recently, say last 2 years or so (since I moved to Vista and 7 later on). Likewise everyone else in my office and at home.
I can't even recall getting any support call from our clients that turned out to be Flash related. But then again, we don't have Apple clients.
I know nothing of this Farmville, my fine fellow.
Nor I, but many of the Flash proponents say we can't live without it.
The difference is one of momentum.
While Apple loves to laud the 185k or so apps they have in the store they've become more and more aggressive about weeding out the garbage (explicit stuff recently ) and now they are pre-emptively attacking "tribble" like spawning of "me too" apps created with cookie cutter meta platforms.
The app store is not a Democracy and for that i'm glad.
I will start respecting them more once they weed out garbage based on it's content, and not only on platform it is made with.
Of course that would cripple some of their PR efforts, so it's unlikely to happen any time soon.
I will start respecting them more once they weed out garbage based on it's content, and not only on platform it is made with.
Of course that would cripple some of their PR efforts, so it's unlikely to happen any time soon.
there have been a few culls. have they been 'only on platform' or on content?
i think you know the answer to that...