As far as I'm concerned, if a ship date hasn't been at least publicly confirmed, then it's still in the realm of "speculation" and "could be". Heck, even your first paragraph above was caveated with "appears to be", "most likely", and "I'd say". These qualitative assertions of probability may be good enough for YOU, but I've seen too many slipping ship dates in the tech world - not to mention unexpected plug pulls - to put much credence in this kind of data. FWIW, I'm similarly skeptical of "leaks", "rumors", and "specs" related to unannounced Apple products as well. That even includes the Gizmodo "iPhone prototype"... although I must confess that the circumstances surrounding that particular story are far more compelling than your standard Apple scoop. :-)
Bottom line: whatever scarce info you can currently point to about the HP Slate doesn't really go very far in terms of proving the point that I was responding to, namely that Flash works just fine on the HP Slate without draining its battery. We really don't know that. There are plenty of existing devices that we can test on though. So why bother appealing to a "leak"?
Thompson
You know this started really simply. You said you doubted the Slate was even coming out and wondered what the battery life would be like.
"You mean the product that Ballmer kind of demonstrated but that isn't going to hit the market now? Wonder why? Wonder what the battery life would have been like on that thing."
Then I pointed out that its leaked specs from an internal presentation (most companies aren't in the business of lying to their own employees) listed it as having a 5 hour battery life. If HP would make official announcements about it I would link to that. You were wondering, so I supplied the current information available on the web. I appeal to a leak b/c the leaked device is the one being discussed. We could talk all day about how well Flash works on current netbooks and tablets, but that would still have no bearing on the Slate.
Other people brought the Slate up as a topic. I never stated that was proof of how well it would work, but at one point someone else on this thread had said the Slate would probably only have 1/5th the battery life of the iPad, which would be 2 hours. If their battery is rated for 5 hours, that would mean only 40%, which is extremely rare. If you don't like leaks, fine. I don't care really. I was just providing you with the currently stated information that people have been discussing for a month now. Personally, even if it does launch w/the stats provided, I doubt it will do half as well as the iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
my iphone gets horrible battery life. Whatever you're attempting to imply, it's failing.
my iphone gets horrible battery life. Whatever you're attempting to imply, it's failing.
The iPhone is toward the top of battery life ratings, yet you still complain about it and still want Flash on the iPhone despite it making the battery suffer even more. Do you not see this helps supports Flash not coming to the iPhone and completely dissolves your argument?
Yea, your link to the alternative Flash Players was priceless. Apparently you didn't read it before you posted it. Even Stallman says that alternatives are not as good as Adobe's.
Except you do. You didn't mention Flash Media Server. Anybody can put a flash file onto their website, but if you need to do heavy duty media serving (like YouTube or Vimeo), video conferencing or live streaming, you need Flash Media Server.
red5 is open source and handles 95% of the media server needs. what now?
The iPhone is toward the top of battery life ratings, yet you still complain about it and still want Flash on the iPhone despite it making the battery suffer even more. Do you not see this helps supports Flash not coming to the iPhone and completely dissolves your argument?
you're buying into the lie that flash reduces battery life which it's proven not to. also, my iphone is being replaced by a 4G EVO from sprint, a company not supersaturated with traffic and a phone that's not limited by a narrow view of what a phone should mean to the bottom line of a company.
OK. So it's not 'pretend'. It's only vaporware. Let me know when it ships.
More importantly, let me know when they ship a version that EVEN ADOBE thinks will run on a 600 MHz processor like the iPhone 3GS or 400 MHz like the iPhone 3G.
...
Certainly not there yet. You may already be aware of this, however, regarding OSX HW acceleration for H.264 (HW decoder), Adobe's Tinic Uro outlines the status and limitations (including the frame stuttering) in the beta that was released yesterday here.
Quote:
Tinic: We are well aware that we need to accelerate the display and scaling of video. CAOpenGLLayer is the vehicle for that. We are looking at how we can get this implemented soon, but it?s simply too late to include this into Flash Player 10.1.
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. Neither Apple nor Adobe is an "open" company, but both have elements of an open platform in their closed business model - Adobe in the fact that it's not platform specific, and there's no "big brother" watching what you do with their product a la Apple, while Apple supports a few open standards (but not in the realm of Audio. In that area, they only support their own proprietary format + mp3s.)
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec, Steve is highlighting HTML5, since that's the "future", at least that's what he wants us to believe. I remember when XHTML2.0 was the future?
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
This is the most informed and savvy post i've read on this whole troll spam filled thread
You know this started really simply. You said you doubted the Slate was even coming out and wondered what the battery life would be like.
Well, fair enough. My apologies. This is one of those things that happen on message boards sometimes. You see, from my perspective, that post is NOT how it started. But now I can more easily see where you are coming from, since that's where you jumped in.
If you want more context, go back and look what I was responding to at that point. "SpotOn" had just offered the HP Slate as PRESENT TENSE evidence that Flash is not a problem. You came in just in time for my facetious response, and I (mistakenly) took your information as a continuation of the earlier debate. I honestly thought you were holding up the HP Slate as a valid example of a mobile device that suffered no performance degradation from Flash. I couldn't fathom that conclusion from the evidence you offered, but there it was (or so I thought).
Note: FWIW, I still have my doubts about the HP Slate hitting the market any time soon, if ever, and I also question how good its battery life REALLY will be under the load of Windows and Flash. HP has to realize that if the battery life is only 5 hours and the OS is too "filesystem like", that it will get laughed out of the contest just like earlier tablets have been.
And, note to self: don't be facetious in print. It doesn't come through.
you're buying into the lie that flash reduces battery life which it's proven not to.
Show us this proof that using more power doesn't require power. We'll all be waiting right here in reality for you to return.
You can test this yourself so lying isn't going to win any favour. Unplug a laptop, any laptop, then open up Chrome or Safari. Play a YouTube video using HTML5. Check the battery time remaining. Then play that same YouTube video using Flash. Check the battery time remaining. Repeatable, empirical evidence.
Show us this proof that using more ]power]doesn't require power. We'll all be waiting right here in reality for you to return.
You can test this yourself so lying isn't going to win any favour. Unplug a laptop, any laptop, then open up Chrome or Safari. Play a YouTube video using HTML5. Check the battery time remaining. Then play that same YouTube video using Flash. Check the battery time remaining. Repeatable, empirical evidence.
Mr Gilbert's mind is made up, don't distract him with the facts.
This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained.
Here we go again. What we have is a carefully edited video of some prototype that doesn't actually exist in the retail channel, and, isn't our stuff going to be sooooo cool someday in the future?
And, of course, we're all waiting for the Palm/WebOS version, you know, since HP is now "all in" with that technology.
An analyst asked what HP would be doing with its iPad-rival. HP's Todd Bradley responded, "We haven't made roadmap announcements," but that HP will explain its Slate plans in more detail when the Palm deal closes.
That's at least a few months away: HP expects the deal to close during its fiscal third quarter, which ends at the end of July. And building Palm's WebOS operating system into HP tablets could take much longer -- perhaps even a year or more.
Quote:
HP's slate, previously destined to use Microsoft Windows, was demoed by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer in early January, several weeks before Apple introduced the iPad. The following month, HP indicated that it was refining the final specs of the slate in response to the iPad and looking to price it competitively with Apple's tablet device.
We're told that on Wednesday, Microsoft execs informed the internal team that had been working on the tablet device that the project would no longer be supported. Courier had never been publicly announced or acknowledged as a Microsoft product.
The cancellation was confirmed in a response from a Microsoft representative, who noted that it Courier was one of the company's creative explorations of new form factors and interfaces, but that it is not planned to go into production. The Courier concept offered two touch-sensitive screens in a foldable format and incorporates touch, stylus, and handwriting recognition input.
I think I am going to print some copies of this document and take it with me to the Apple store. So when people are looking at the iPad and talk trash about it not supporting Flash I can educate them with it.
Flash for Windows is actually not half bad. Flash on the Mac has, for a long time, been terrible. Very recently (under a year) Adobe began ramping up the speed of development for mac with flash 10.1 and Gala apple is getting some pretty good Flash builds for the first time. This is, of course, mostly because Adobe is finally feeling the heat.
That said, if h.264 becomes the standard it should be licensed for free for organizations like Opera and Mozilla, and if possible free for all. The tools to code and manipulate h.264 could be sold for a fee, but the distribution and playback should become absolutely free. Only then we can start talking about a free and open web. If you want to have flash, and if flash lets you do something html tags don't let you do, or don't do as easily go ahead, but the standards should be free and open (at least for playback).
So you think that Adobe's flash is the ONLY developer tool excluded by the new Apple SDK agreement? And then accuse me of not being knowledgeable?
That's rich. And totally uninformed.
Are you really a software developer?
I thought you were speaking to the plight of Adobe's Flash hopes for iPhone (because that is the topic of this thread). But since you were being more inclusive, let's just be honest: neither of us can get exact numbers. But I am certain that the lion's share of the Apps available at the App Store were written using the iPhone SDK in XCode. And for those Apps that were created some other way, everything I said before holds true: it is simple enough to write them using XCode, and if they really have a market, they will be rewritten. (And no, not by me.)
You just keep finding little things to nitpick to extend your argument. The fact is that I have experienced the very pain that Steve talked about at the end of his missive. Third-party developer tools prevent rapid response to technology changes, especially if they have ties to multiple platforms. You present the flip-side of the argument, but you have not once demonstrated that you even understand THIS side of the argument, let alone given a decent rebuttal to it.
I wish I could line up all the "Ha ha this vaporware I saw on the gadget site will totally kick Apple's ass game over man LOL" folks and just slap 'em. They never learn, and lunge at every concept video and leak as if it were shipping hardware. People have been talking about Courier like it made the iPad irrelevant, and pointing out that it wasn't anything more than rendered concept videos didn't seem to dissuade them.
Not that any of this will shut 'em up next time someone has some pretty pictures to peddle...... I really like that Apple doesn't do "concepts." They do shipping products.
It's going too far for a U turn. I'd really hoped this would get sorted... As the spec of handsets gets better and better they're far more able to run flash easily
That's a worthless argument. Adobe has had almost 3 years to make Flash usable on mobile devices (more if you count pre-iPhone time). Why should Apple base their plans on Adobe's oft-delayed promises?
In addition, 'our software is slow, but hardware will catch up' has NEVER been a winning strategy. Software tends to bloat at a rate comparable to CPU improvements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMHut
We get it, Jobs doesn't like Flash. Push Adobe to improve it. Push them to improve their design products. But for Pete's sake, I wish he'd stop poking them in the eye so publicly every chance he gets. All that will do is put their professional design customers in the middle of an unnecessary beef.
Adobe has had years and hasn't fixed Flash. Apple was happy to let it go at that, but have you seen all the Anti-Apple sentiment being drummed up and all the whining from Flash developers and Adobe? Does 'screw you, Apple' ring a bell?
Then look at these forums. Dozens of people who never posted to the forum before suddenly show up defending Adobe - even though most of them don't know anything about Macs or Mac OS X. Can you say 'Adobe shill'?
The noise was getting loud enough that Apple was right to defend itself by getting some facts on the table to try to counteract all the lies being spread. As just one simple example, how many times have you heard that Apple blocked Flash on the iPhone? Hundreds? Thousands? More? And, yet, there IS no version of Flash that is capable of running on the iPhone. NONE. And it's not just the iPhone - it's EVERY mobile device. There are no mobile devices that run full versions of Flash today - and even the beta only runs on the tiniest percentage of current phones. Yet Apple is being accused of blocking Flash. It was about time for Apple to set the record straight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac
Apple doesn't need to tell developers how to write apps.
Apparently, they do. Some 'Developers' are apparently content to make crappy apps that don't work well. I believe I read that the largest reason for AppStore rejection was apps that just wouldn't run - something like 30% of rejections. Now, that's not all of them. There are some great developers - but they're already using Obj-C and don't have any complaints.
Apple's users expect a certain quality and want Apple to deliver it. If something works badly and their phone has a short battery life, Apple gets the blame - so Apple is entirely within its rights to set standards. You may not like the standards, but that's too bad. Go build your own mobile device. It's more important to Apple to keep CUSTOMERS happy than the small number of whiny developers who can't be bothered to learn any more than Flash scripting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn
The truth is Apple is going down a road of producing underpowered devices with less features with huge margins and is attempting to convert the entire web to fit their business model.
I wonder what planet you've been living on. When the iPhone 3GS came out, it was widely regarded as the fastest phone available. Some of the new Droid phones are starting to catch up, but side-by-side tests say that they're not ahead. And Apple has a new phone coming out in a month or so.
Less features is partially true, I guess. Apple focuses on the user experience. They made an iPad to be light, efficient and usable. If you think that a tablet is better with 4 USB ports, SD slot, CF slot, a few more memory card slots, VGA, DVI, parallel port, maybe a serial port, full blown desktop OS, and 3 pound battery, go ahead and buy one. That's not the objective for Apple. Apple is focused on providing the best user experience - and sometimes that does mean less features - so it's not a negative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
PM me your username and login and I will play the game to test it. Otherwise link to an example that doesn't require payment to view. The demo is Flash with a lot of animations. Your first statement was that the page used NO animations, So does the game use animations or not?
You've already proven that you're a liar by claiming to have run the application when you didn't. Why should I give you my daughter's ID - so that she can find her entire platform erased?
You're making up lies again. I said that the page uses no animations - which is true. But the demo is quite different than testing it on the real thing. For example, my daughter's Webkinz world has 85 different animals and thousands of items in nearly 100 different rooms. Obviously, that's going to be a little different than running a demo. I guess the fact that you don't understand that means that you're incompetent - as well as a liar.
Regardless, it has now been established that you are a liar. You said that you ran the Webkinz game when all you did was run a game. Yet you used that silly 'test' to accuse me of lying because you only got 58% CPU usage (on a more powerful system than mine) when I got 120% running the full game. Sounds like you need to collect your check from Adobe and crawl back into your hole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKWalsh4
I would like everyone to read Adobe's CEO response to this:
While Steve is confident in his company, this guy just sounds arrogant. There is a difference.
He's not just arrogant, he's dishonest and slimy. A company the size of Adobe should be embarrassed to have him making that kind of response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac
I've no gripe with keeping Flash off the iPhone.
I simply contend that the new SDK agreement, limiting the way apps are developed, is wrong. Some tools which are used to develop good iPhone apps are excluded which may lead to some good apps being rejected.
I don't doubt that.
But it will keep a much larger number of crappy apps off the platform. If 99% of Flash apps are crap, I don't mind losing the 1 good app in order to keep the 99 lousy ones off the platform. Especially since the good app developer is free to write his app in code that will work even better than the Flash code. If he wants to make money off the app store, he will do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
you're buying into the lie that flash reduces battery life which it's proven not to.
OK, then maybe you can explain to me how Adobe managed to break the laws of physics.
When I run Safari and stay away from Flash sites or use clicktoflash, my computer never gets hot and CPU usage for Safari is 10-20% max. As soon as I go to a Flash site, the CPU usage shoots over 100% and the bottom of the computer gets very hot.
Now, if the computer is getting hot and the CPU is doing much more work, where is that coming from if not from the battery? I'm really interested in the mechanism they're using to create heat and power CPU cycles that doesn't use the battery.
I thought you were speaking to the plight of Adobe's Flash hopes for iPhone (because that is the topic of this thread). But since you were being more inclusive, let's just be honest: neither of us can get exact numbers. But I am certain that the lion's share of the Apps available at the App Store were written using the iPhone SDK in XCode. And for those Apps that were created some other way, everything I said before holds true: it is simple enough to write them using XCode, and if they really have a market, they will be rewritten. (And no, not by me.)
There are 600 games developed using Unity. Will they pass mustard (muster) under the new SDK? It seems like that is still unknown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thompr
You just keep finding little things to nitpick to extend your argument. The fact is that I have experienced the very pain that Steve talked about at the end of his missive. Third-party developer tools prevent rapid response to technology changes, especially if they have ties to multiple platforms. You present the flip-side of the argument, but you have not once demonstrated that you even understand THIS side of the argument, let alone given a decent rebuttal to it.
Thompson
I have given a rebuttal but you refuse to acknowledge and/or understand it. For the last time, Apple do not have to restrict the tools developers use. They just need to make tools available that leverage the strengths of iPhone OSX. Developers aren't stupid. If Apple's tools are the best, ( and produce the best apps), then developers will naturally gravitate to them. If Apple's tools produce apps that leverage new technologies that result in better apps, users will buy them. The iPhone platform is very robust and shitty apps written for the 'lowest common denominator' (SJ's words) simply will not survive.
The current SDK prevents developers from suing Flash to develop iPhone apps. It also prevents, at least under the strictest interpretation, developers from using Unity and monotouch or other assembly languages. At least that is the fear that developers have who use those tools.
I have faith that developers will try to make the best apps that they can and therefore will use the proper tools for the job. Maybe not every developer, but enough that the platform will continue to flourish. Developers have to remember that if they don't utilize the latest and greatest technologies that Apple promotes for the iPhone platform, someone else will. The barriers to entry for developing iPhone apps are very low. A single person can and has developed successful iPhone apps. This isn't like developing for the Mac where apps tend to be more complicated, have different HW to support, more complicated testing is usually needed and there are hurdles for distribution to overcome.
I also have faith that users will support the best app available for a given task.
Comments
As far as I'm concerned, if a ship date hasn't been at least publicly confirmed, then it's still in the realm of "speculation" and "could be". Heck, even your first paragraph above was caveated with "appears to be", "most likely", and "I'd say". These qualitative assertions of probability may be good enough for YOU, but I've seen too many slipping ship dates in the tech world - not to mention unexpected plug pulls - to put much credence in this kind of data. FWIW, I'm similarly skeptical of "leaks", "rumors", and "specs" related to unannounced Apple products as well. That even includes the Gizmodo "iPhone prototype"... although I must confess that the circumstances surrounding that particular story are far more compelling than your standard Apple scoop. :-)
Bottom line: whatever scarce info you can currently point to about the HP Slate doesn't really go very far in terms of proving the point that I was responding to, namely that Flash works just fine on the HP Slate without draining its battery. We really don't know that. There are plenty of existing devices that we can test on though. So why bother appealing to a "leak"?
Thompson
You know this started really simply. You said you doubted the Slate was even coming out and wondered what the battery life would be like.
"You mean the product that Ballmer kind of demonstrated but that isn't going to hit the market now? Wonder why? Wonder what the battery life would have been like on that thing."
Then I pointed out that its leaked specs from an internal presentation (most companies aren't in the business of lying to their own employees) listed it as having a 5 hour battery life. If HP would make official announcements about it I would link to that. You were wondering, so I supplied the current information available on the web. I appeal to a leak b/c the leaked device is the one being discussed. We could talk all day about how well Flash works on current netbooks and tablets, but that would still have no bearing on the Slate.
Other people brought the Slate up as a topic. I never stated that was proof of how well it would work, but at one point someone else on this thread had said the Slate would probably only have 1/5th the battery life of the iPad, which would be 2 hours. If their battery is rated for 5 hours, that would mean only 40%, which is extremely rare. If you don't like leaks, fine. I don't care really. I was just providing you with the currently stated information that people have been discussing for a month now. Personally, even if it does launch w/the stats provided, I doubt it will do half as well as the iPad.
my iphone gets horrible battery life. Whatever you're attempting to imply, it's failing.
Is it jailbroken and multi-tasking or stock?
my iphone gets horrible battery life. Whatever you're attempting to imply, it's failing.
It would be twice as bad with Flash... assuming that your main use case is web surfing.
Thompson
According to Adobe's CEO, about 100 out of 200,000. You are being overly dramatic.
So you think that Adobe's flash is the ONLY developer tool excluded by the new Apple SDK agreement? And then accuse me of not being knowledgeable?
That's rich. And totally uninformed.
Are you really a software developer?
my iphone gets horrible battery life. Whatever you're attempting to imply, it's failing.
The iPhone is toward the top of battery life ratings, yet you still complain about it and still want Flash on the iPhone despite it making the battery suffer even more. Do you not see this helps supports Flash not coming to the iPhone and completely dissolves your argument?
Yea, your link to the alternative Flash Players was priceless. Apparently you didn't read it before you posted it. Even Stallman says that alternatives are not as good as Adobe's.
Except you do. You didn't mention Flash Media Server. Anybody can put a flash file onto their website, but if you need to do heavy duty media serving (like YouTube or Vimeo), video conferencing or live streaming, you need Flash Media Server.
red5 is open source and handles 95% of the media server needs. what now?
The iPhone is toward the top of battery life ratings, yet you still complain about it and still want Flash on the iPhone despite it making the battery suffer even more. Do you not see this helps supports Flash not coming to the iPhone and completely dissolves your argument?
you're buying into the lie that flash reduces battery life which it's proven not to. also, my iphone is being replaced by a 4G EVO from sprint, a company not supersaturated with traffic and a phone that's not limited by a narrow view of what a phone should mean to the bottom line of a company.
OK. So it's not 'pretend'. It's only vaporware. Let me know when it ships.
More importantly, let me know when they ship a version that EVEN ADOBE thinks will run on a 600 MHz processor like the iPhone 3GS or 400 MHz like the iPhone 3G.
...
Certainly not there yet. You may already be aware of this, however, regarding OSX HW acceleration for H.264 (HW decoder), Adobe's Tinic Uro outlines the status and limitations (including the frame stuttering) in the beta that was released yesterday here.
Tinic: We are well aware that we need to accelerate the display and scaling of video. CAOpenGLLayer is the vehicle for that. We are looking at how we can get this implemented soon, but it?s simply too late to include this into Flash Player 10.1.
Steve Jobs talking about "Open Standards" is just a load of rhetoric. Neither Apple nor Adobe is an "open" company, but both have elements of an open platform in their closed business model - Adobe in the fact that it's not platform specific, and there's no "big brother" watching what you do with their product a la Apple, while Apple supports a few open standards (but not in the realm of Audio. In that area, they only support their own proprietary format + mp3s.)
Incidentally, Flash isn't competing with HTML5, since that's just a markup language. It's actually competing with h264. But, since that's an "old" codec, Steve is highlighting HTML5, since that's the "future", at least that's what he wants us to believe. I remember when XHTML2.0 was the future?
By denying Flash, Apple is eliminating the possibility of people writing apps in flash, and then porting them to both the iPhone and Android. Jobs knows that the strongest selling point of the iPhone is the app store, and he wants to protect it's exclusivity. Instead, he strategically makes it more difficult to write for both platforms at the same time.
I think the real kicker in Steve's essay is that he's implying the PC era is in the past, while the mobile era is the future... I guess that's why Apple has been shafting the professional end of the market with slow and toned down MacbookPro and MacPro updates... Slowly fazing out of computers and putting the emphasis on consumer electronics, I guess...
This is the most informed and savvy post i've read on this whole troll spam filled thread
You know this started really simply. You said you doubted the Slate was even coming out and wondered what the battery life would be like.
Well, fair enough. My apologies. This is one of those things that happen on message boards sometimes. You see, from my perspective, that post is NOT how it started. But now I can more easily see where you are coming from, since that's where you jumped in.
If you want more context, go back and look what I was responding to at that point. "SpotOn" had just offered the HP Slate as PRESENT TENSE evidence that Flash is not a problem. You came in just in time for my facetious response, and I (mistakenly) took your information as a continuation of the earlier debate. I honestly thought you were holding up the HP Slate as a valid example of a mobile device that suffered no performance degradation from Flash. I couldn't fathom that conclusion from the evidence you offered, but there it was (or so I thought).
Note: FWIW, I still have my doubts about the HP Slate hitting the market any time soon, if ever, and I also question how good its battery life REALLY will be under the load of Windows and Flash. HP has to realize that if the battery life is only 5 hours and the OS is too "filesystem like", that it will get laughed out of the contest just like earlier tablets have been.
And, note to self: don't be facetious in print. It doesn't come through.
Thompson
you're buying into the lie that flash reduces battery life which it's proven not to.
Show us this proof that using more power doesn't require power. We'll all be waiting right here in reality for you to return.
You can test this yourself so lying isn't going to win any favour. Unplug a laptop, any laptop, then open up Chrome or Safari. Play a YouTube video using HTML5. Check the battery time remaining. Then play that same YouTube video using Flash. Check the battery time remaining. Repeatable, empirical evidence.
Show us this proof that using more ]power]doesn't require power. We'll all be waiting right here in reality for you to return.
You can test this yourself so lying isn't going to win any favour. Unplug a laptop, any laptop, then open up Chrome or Safari. Play a YouTube video using HTML5. Check the battery time remaining. Then play that same YouTube video using Flash. Check the battery time remaining. Repeatable, empirical evidence.
Mr Gilbert's mind is made up, don't distract him with the facts.
See for yourself, two videos here, there is another floating around too.
http://h20435.www2.hp.com/t5/Voodoo-...C0ABD6FFD08BE8
This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained.
Here we go again. What we have is a carefully edited video of some prototype that doesn't actually exist in the retail channel, and, isn't our stuff going to be sooooo cool someday in the future?
And, of course, we're all waiting for the Palm/WebOS version, you know, since HP is now "all in" with that technology.
OMG, I'm prescient!
iPad Competitors Begin to Disappear Even Before Being Released
Silicon Alley Insider yesterday noted that HP appears to be putting its "slate" tablet computer on hold as it looks to complete its acquisition of Palm. The move appears to be related to HP needing to make decisions about how exactly it will integrate Palm's webOS smartphone operating system into its product roadmap.
An analyst asked what HP would be doing with its iPad-rival. HP's Todd Bradley responded, "We haven't made roadmap announcements," but that HP will explain its Slate plans in more detail when the Palm deal closes.
That's at least a few months away: HP expects the deal to close during its fiscal third quarter, which ends at the end of July. And building Palm's WebOS operating system into HP tablets could take much longer -- perhaps even a year or more.
HP's slate, previously destined to use Microsoft Windows, was demoed by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer in early January, several weeks before Apple introduced the iPad. The following month, HP indicated that it was refining the final specs of the slate in response to the iPad and looking to price it competitively with Apple's tablet device.
Today, Gizmodo reports that Microsoft has cancelled its own "Courier" booklet-style tablet device.
We're told that on Wednesday, Microsoft execs informed the internal team that had been working on the tablet device that the project would no longer be supported. Courier had never been publicly announced or acknowledged as a Microsoft product.
The cancellation was confirmed in a response from a Microsoft representative, who noted that it Courier was one of the company's creative explorations of new form factors and interfaces, but that it is not planned to go into production. The Courier concept offered two touch-sensitive screens in a foldable format and incorporates touch, stylus, and handwriting recognition input.
"SpotOn, please pick up the white courtesy phone."
Hmmmm...
Which iPhone is he using where there is 10 hours of video playing?
One that hasn't been released, just yet. Or the iPad? Or an unreleased iPod Touch?
That said, if h.264 becomes the standard it should be licensed for free for organizations like Opera and Mozilla, and if possible free for all. The tools to code and manipulate h.264 could be sold for a fee, but the distribution and playback should become absolutely free. Only then we can start talking about a free and open web. If you want to have flash, and if flash lets you do something html tags don't let you do, or don't do as easily go ahead, but the standards should be free and open (at least for playback).
So you think that Adobe's flash is the ONLY developer tool excluded by the new Apple SDK agreement? And then accuse me of not being knowledgeable?
That's rich. And totally uninformed.
Are you really a software developer?
I thought you were speaking to the plight of Adobe's Flash hopes for iPhone (because that is the topic of this thread). But since you were being more inclusive, let's just be honest: neither of us can get exact numbers. But I am certain that the lion's share of the Apps available at the App Store were written using the iPhone SDK in XCode. And for those Apps that were created some other way, everything I said before holds true: it is simple enough to write them using XCode, and if they really have a market, they will be rewritten. (And no, not by me.)
You just keep finding little things to nitpick to extend your argument. The fact is that I have experienced the very pain that Steve talked about at the end of his missive. Third-party developer tools prevent rapid response to technology changes, especially if they have ties to multiple platforms. You present the flip-side of the argument, but you have not once demonstrated that you even understand THIS side of the argument, let alone given a decent rebuttal to it.
Thompson
OMG, I'm prescient!
iPad Competitors Begin to Disappear Even Before Being Released
"SpotOn, please pick up the white courtesy phone."
I wish I could line up all the "Ha ha this vaporware I saw on the gadget site will totally kick Apple's ass game over man LOL" folks and just slap 'em. They never learn, and lunge at every concept video and leak as if it were shipping hardware. People have been talking about Courier like it made the iPad irrelevant, and pointing out that it wasn't anything more than rendered concept videos didn't seem to dissuade them.
Not that any of this will shut 'em up next time someone has some pretty pictures to peddle...... I really like that Apple doesn't do "concepts." They do shipping products.
OMG, I'm prescient!
iPad Competitors Begin to Disappear Even Before Being Released
"SpotOn, please pick up the white courtesy phone."
OMG
OMG
YOU ARE
YOU ARE
How magnificent you must feel
Kudos and thanks for finding that, it's going to be a fun day for me, armed with that information
BTW it's the start of my day here 7:00am.
It's going too far for a U turn. I'd really hoped this would get sorted... As the spec of handsets gets better and better they're far more able to run flash easily
That's a worthless argument. Adobe has had almost 3 years to make Flash usable on mobile devices (more if you count pre-iPhone time). Why should Apple base their plans on Adobe's oft-delayed promises?
In addition, 'our software is slow, but hardware will catch up' has NEVER been a winning strategy. Software tends to bloat at a rate comparable to CPU improvements.
We get it, Jobs doesn't like Flash. Push Adobe to improve it. Push them to improve their design products. But for Pete's sake, I wish he'd stop poking them in the eye so publicly every chance he gets. All that will do is put their professional design customers in the middle of an unnecessary beef.
Adobe has had years and hasn't fixed Flash. Apple was happy to let it go at that, but have you seen all the Anti-Apple sentiment being drummed up and all the whining from Flash developers and Adobe? Does 'screw you, Apple' ring a bell?
Then look at these forums. Dozens of people who never posted to the forum before suddenly show up defending Adobe - even though most of them don't know anything about Macs or Mac OS X. Can you say 'Adobe shill'?
The noise was getting loud enough that Apple was right to defend itself by getting some facts on the table to try to counteract all the lies being spread. As just one simple example, how many times have you heard that Apple blocked Flash on the iPhone? Hundreds? Thousands? More? And, yet, there IS no version of Flash that is capable of running on the iPhone. NONE. And it's not just the iPhone - it's EVERY mobile device. There are no mobile devices that run full versions of Flash today - and even the beta only runs on the tiniest percentage of current phones. Yet Apple is being accused of blocking Flash. It was about time for Apple to set the record straight.
Apple doesn't need to tell developers how to write apps.
Apparently, they do. Some 'Developers' are apparently content to make crappy apps that don't work well. I believe I read that the largest reason for AppStore rejection was apps that just wouldn't run - something like 30% of rejections. Now, that's not all of them. There are some great developers - but they're already using Obj-C and don't have any complaints.
Apple's users expect a certain quality and want Apple to deliver it. If something works badly and their phone has a short battery life, Apple gets the blame - so Apple is entirely within its rights to set standards. You may not like the standards, but that's too bad. Go build your own mobile device. It's more important to Apple to keep CUSTOMERS happy than the small number of whiny developers who can't be bothered to learn any more than Flash scripting.
The truth is Apple is going down a road of producing underpowered devices with less features with huge margins and is attempting to convert the entire web to fit their business model.
I wonder what planet you've been living on. When the iPhone 3GS came out, it was widely regarded as the fastest phone available. Some of the new Droid phones are starting to catch up, but side-by-side tests say that they're not ahead. And Apple has a new phone coming out in a month or so.
Less features is partially true, I guess. Apple focuses on the user experience. They made an iPad to be light, efficient and usable. If you think that a tablet is better with 4 USB ports, SD slot, CF slot, a few more memory card slots, VGA, DVI, parallel port, maybe a serial port, full blown desktop OS, and 3 pound battery, go ahead and buy one. That's not the objective for Apple. Apple is focused on providing the best user experience - and sometimes that does mean less features - so it's not a negative.
PM me your username and login and I will play the game to test it. Otherwise link to an example that doesn't require payment to view. The demo is Flash with a lot of animations. Your first statement was that the page used NO animations, So does the game use animations or not?
You've already proven that you're a liar by claiming to have run the application when you didn't. Why should I give you my daughter's ID - so that she can find her entire platform erased?
You're making up lies again. I said that the page uses no animations - which is true. But the demo is quite different than testing it on the real thing. For example, my daughter's Webkinz world has 85 different animals and thousands of items in nearly 100 different rooms. Obviously, that's going to be a little different than running a demo. I guess the fact that you don't understand that means that you're incompetent - as well as a liar.
Regardless, it has now been established that you are a liar. You said that you ran the Webkinz game when all you did was run a game. Yet you used that silly 'test' to accuse me of lying because you only got 58% CPU usage (on a more powerful system than mine) when I got 120% running the full game. Sounds like you need to collect your check from Adobe and crawl back into your hole.
I would like everyone to read Adobe's CEO response to this:
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/04/...ith-adobe-ceo/
While Steve is confident in his company, this guy just sounds arrogant. There is a difference.
He's not just arrogant, he's dishonest and slimy. A company the size of Adobe should be embarrassed to have him making that kind of response.
I've no gripe with keeping Flash off the iPhone.
I simply contend that the new SDK agreement, limiting the way apps are developed, is wrong. Some tools which are used to develop good iPhone apps are excluded which may lead to some good apps being rejected.
I don't doubt that.
But it will keep a much larger number of crappy apps off the platform. If 99% of Flash apps are crap, I don't mind losing the 1 good app in order to keep the 99 lousy ones off the platform. Especially since the good app developer is free to write his app in code that will work even better than the Flash code. If he wants to make money off the app store, he will do that.
you're buying into the lie that flash reduces battery life which it's proven not to.
OK, then maybe you can explain to me how Adobe managed to break the laws of physics.
When I run Safari and stay away from Flash sites or use clicktoflash, my computer never gets hot and CPU usage for Safari is 10-20% max. As soon as I go to a Flash site, the CPU usage shoots over 100% and the bottom of the computer gets very hot.
Now, if the computer is getting hot and the CPU is doing much more work, where is that coming from if not from the battery? I'm really interested in the mechanism they're using to create heat and power CPU cycles that doesn't use the battery.
I thought you were speaking to the plight of Adobe's Flash hopes for iPhone (because that is the topic of this thread). But since you were being more inclusive, let's just be honest: neither of us can get exact numbers. But I am certain that the lion's share of the Apps available at the App Store were written using the iPhone SDK in XCode. And for those Apps that were created some other way, everything I said before holds true: it is simple enough to write them using XCode, and if they really have a market, they will be rewritten. (And no, not by me.)
There are 600 games developed using Unity. Will they pass mustard (muster) under the new SDK? It seems like that is still unknown.
You just keep finding little things to nitpick to extend your argument. The fact is that I have experienced the very pain that Steve talked about at the end of his missive. Third-party developer tools prevent rapid response to technology changes, especially if they have ties to multiple platforms. You present the flip-side of the argument, but you have not once demonstrated that you even understand THIS side of the argument, let alone given a decent rebuttal to it.
Thompson
I have given a rebuttal but you refuse to acknowledge and/or understand it. For the last time, Apple do not have to restrict the tools developers use. They just need to make tools available that leverage the strengths of iPhone OSX. Developers aren't stupid. If Apple's tools are the best, ( and produce the best apps), then developers will naturally gravitate to them. If Apple's tools produce apps that leverage new technologies that result in better apps, users will buy them. The iPhone platform is very robust and shitty apps written for the 'lowest common denominator' (SJ's words) simply will not survive.
The current SDK prevents developers from suing Flash to develop iPhone apps. It also prevents, at least under the strictest interpretation, developers from using Unity and monotouch or other assembly languages. At least that is the fear that developers have who use those tools.
I have faith that developers will try to make the best apps that they can and therefore will use the proper tools for the job. Maybe not every developer, but enough that the platform will continue to flourish. Developers have to remember that if they don't utilize the latest and greatest technologies that Apple promotes for the iPhone platform, someone else will. The barriers to entry for developing iPhone apps are very low. A single person can and has developed successful iPhone apps. This isn't like developing for the Mac where apps tend to be more complicated, have different HW to support, more complicated testing is usually needed and there are hurdles for distribution to overcome.
I also have faith that users will support the best app available for a given task.