I may be preaching to the choir here, but I don't get the big deal with having Flash on mobile devices. I was trying to convince some friends that even if you had the option of Flash, you probably would want it disabled. Security, resource hogging and stability issues are a given.
The whole point of this exercise is that Adobe employees will experience all the problems first hand, and rather than ignoring the issues, they will start working on fixes / designing future versions with the needs of touch and mobile in mind. Adobe don't want customers turning off or avoiding Flash. Consumers not using Flash on mobile devices is a serious threat to Adobe's future business.
The whole point of this exercise is that Adobe employees will experience all the problems first hand, and rather than ignoring the issues, they will start working on fixes / designing future versions with the needs of touch and mobile in mind. Adobe don't want customers turning off or avoiding Flash. Consumers not using Flash on mobile devices is a serious threat to Adobe's future business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamG
Admit? The current status {that there are no smart phones with a full version of Flash} is well known and in the news.
Except that there are still endless articles blaming Apple. Read the latest NPR article, for example - where not only the journalist, but 2/3 of the responses blame Apple -apparently forgetting that Adobe has not yet released a full version of Flash for ANY smart phone.
You may say it's well know, but Adobe's shills are going a great job of obscuring the facts.
The whole point of this exercise is that Adobe employees will experience all the problems first hand, and rather than ignoring the issues, they will start working on fixes / designing future versions with the needs of touch and mobile in mind. Adobe don't want customers turning off or avoiding Flash. Consumers not using Flash on mobile devices is a serious threat to Adobe's future business.
No. The point was to make a PR stunt.
Haven't Adobe employees been using Macs for years? And yet the Flash plug-in has been the majority cause of crashes and security vulnerabilities on the platform. BTW- As far as security issues, guess what the 2nd is? Adobe Acrobat.
You think this isn't propaganda, but rather a serious intent to focus on Adobe's part at a time that just happens to coincide with Jobs' public criticism?
Some have suggested "fixing" flash. Truth is .. it is a pile of bad code slapped together that can't be fixed. It needs to be buried.
Only good Flash is a Dead Flash.
Not if you are an Adobe stock holder. :-)
At the end of the day any decision made by a company is driven by the desire to make more money. Killing off Flash and moving to HTML5 might be better for users, but Adobe will make more profits if instead Flash dominates the mobile web. Therefore Adobe will try to push Flash as hard as possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by edelbrp
No. The point was to make a PR stunt.
Haven't Adobe employees been using Macs for years? And yet the Flash plug-in has been the majority cause of crashes and security vulnerabilities on the platform. BTW- As far as security issues, guess what the 2nd is? Adobe Acrobat.
You think this isn't propaganda, but rather a serious intent to focus on Adobe's part at a time that just happens to coincide with Jobs' public criticism?
Ummm kay.
Comparing Adobe software with their Windows equivalents I'm starting to believe most Adobe employee's are using Windows PCs.
There might be some PR element to this, but ultimately I believe Adobe realizes they must make Flash better suited for mobile devices or they are going to lose the battle for control of the web. Getting your employees to actively use your software is an important part of making your software better.
The same is often true of animgif ads, and there are plenty of nasty, ugly, or offensive static image ads. Adverts are all about desperately seeking attention, and being obnoxious is a great way to do that. Without Flash, they would just seek another technology to do the same thing.
Oof, it's the audio that bothers me. Web ads that yell at me "You've Won!" or "HI, I'm Amber!" bug the s**t out of me. I like to listen to iTunes and crank it up, and then later settle down.. relax... surf.. and "HI I'M AMBER!!"
Quote:
My experience with Android users is that they want all the features possible, even ones that they can't or shouldn't use (root shell access, for example), and that's what attracted them to Android over iPhone OS in the first place. I'm sure some would even get excited over the possibility of ActiveX support!
Yeah, well, I have to say as a Linux developer and kernel maintainer from way back when, I love my TiVo. It's Linux based. Do I want root on it? Nope, it's an appliance. Frankly I think of the iPhone and the iPad the same way. They work great as is. They are information appliances that do their job well.
Hey I found this Android phone running Flash in a bar. Anyone want to buy it?
Somehow I doubt anyone would be willing to pay anything for it. So many different types, its a wonder they haven't started giving them away free with a value meal at McDonalds.
Here we have some reviews of the latest mobile flash on the New HTC Incredible just released Thursday
Quote:
It should also be noted that the browser on these phones is equipped with Flash lite, though we had lots of trouble getting videos to play on many of the sites we visited (Engadget included). If someone was hoping to convince us that Flash could work on a device like this, consider the job unfinished.
Why not install flash on an actual iPhone, even if it is jailbroken?
Apple is not against Flash (sites) on the iPhone (if you read Jobs post on Apple website), Jobs wrote Apple did not hold its breath.
I am just growing a resentment about this Adobe's Flash vs Apple's iPhone brouhaha. And you see News agencies showing their ignorance and impartiality, BBC is an example of impartiality, but it is no a surprise.
Although I agree with you that most of the coverage has been at the intellectual level of a 14 year old running in from the playground and shouting ?fight!? and then running back out to watch and take bets, I looked at the BBC website and didn't see anything particularly better with its coverage. It didn't actually analyze anything that was said by either party. It just had a few Jobs quotes, followed by Adobe remarks that were mainly ?he's full of it? caliber.
Oof, it's the audio that bothers me. Web ads that yell at me "You've Won!" or "HI, I'm Amber!" bug the s**t out of me. I like to listen to iTunes and crank it up, and then later settle down.. relax... surf.. and "HI I'M AMBER!!"
"CONGRATULATIONS! You've won a FREE Nintendo Wii! To claim your free Nintendo Wii just go to..."
My experience with Android users is that they want all the features possible, even ones that they can't or shouldn't use (root shell access, for example), and that's what attracted them to Android over iPhone OS in the first place. I'm sure some would even get excited over the possibility of ActiveX support!
Hilarious. That sums it up nicely, though. I don't know any iPhone users who would want an Android OS phone, and vice-versa. They're different OSs for different people.
I don't want flash on my iPhone, if for no reason other than the ads. Even if the UI were 'optimized' for mobile devices, the security issues addressed, and stability problems resolved. We still have those ads.
But I don't understand what Adobe hopes to accomplish by this. Presumably (hopefully) their employees believe in the products they are producing. They shouldn't need convincing. It isn't likely to convince any of us who don't want flash. It's not going to change Apple's stance on this. Jobs has a settled disposition that flash needs to be sunset. I agree. I hate it on computers, and I don't want it on my phone-even as an option.
My experience with Android users is that they want all the features possible, even ones that they can't or shouldn't use (root shell access, for example), and that's what attracted them to Android over iPhone OS in the first place. I'm sure some would even get excited over the possibility of ActiveX support!
[/snip]
Well if they want root access, that voids their warranty, just like the iPhone...
And if they don't root their phones, worse yet, they can only run apps written in Java
A Nokia N900 is a better fit for those types of people....and it's had Flash for a lot longer....
Oh, and the Palm Pre...that's also got an easy way to turn on the root shell, no warrany issues either....
I think they only like Android because it's "not Apple"....
1) Video. Almost all video uses some sort of Flash player. Some articles continue to tout that since 90% of video uses Flash, it therefore won't work on mobile devices without Flash. I did some testing on my iPhone and was pleasantly surprised to find that all the video sites I could think of simply work great on the phone as it downgraded gracefully to a native format that uses hardware decoding.
Um.....
YouTubes internet video market share is around 75%
I do not used Flash and have no problem watching any video on YouTube.
So, if YouTube has 75% market share, how does Flash have a 90% market share?
Adobe should take WebKit, make a mobile browser for iPhone, have mobile Flash and distribute via Cydia for Jailbroken iPhones.
Adobe has been screwing over users for years doing shit like not updating Camera RAW for older versions of Photoshop. They force you to spend hundres of dollars for the newest Photoshop which becomes obsolete in following years when newer cameras come out.
If Adobe wants to fight Apple they should develop Photoshop for Linux to spank Apple's marketshare for machines out there. Crybaby bitches.
Comments
I may be preaching to the choir here, but I don't get the big deal with having Flash on mobile devices. I was trying to convince some friends that even if you had the option of Flash, you probably would want it disabled. Security, resource hogging and stability issues are a given.
The whole point of this exercise is that Adobe employees will experience all the problems first hand, and rather than ignoring the issues, they will start working on fixes / designing future versions with the needs of touch and mobile in mind. Adobe don't want customers turning off or avoiding Flash. Consumers not using Flash on mobile devices is a serious threat to Adobe's future business.
The whole point of this exercise is that Adobe employees will experience all the problems first hand, and rather than ignoring the issues, they will start working on fixes / designing future versions with the needs of touch and mobile in mind. Adobe don't want customers turning off or avoiding Flash. Consumers not using Flash on mobile devices is a serious threat to Adobe's future business.
Admit? The current status {that there are no smart phones with a full version of Flash} is well known and in the news.
Except that there are still endless articles blaming Apple. Read the latest NPR article, for example - where not only the journalist, but 2/3 of the responses blame Apple -apparently forgetting that Adobe has not yet released a full version of Flash for ANY smart phone.
You may say it's well know, but Adobe's shills are going a great job of obscuring the facts.
Only good Flash is a Dead Flash.
The whole point of this exercise is that Adobe employees will experience all the problems first hand, and rather than ignoring the issues, they will start working on fixes / designing future versions with the needs of touch and mobile in mind. Adobe don't want customers turning off or avoiding Flash. Consumers not using Flash on mobile devices is a serious threat to Adobe's future business.
No. The point was to make a PR stunt.
Haven't Adobe employees been using Macs for years? And yet the Flash plug-in has been the majority cause of crashes and security vulnerabilities on the platform. BTW- As far as security issues, guess what the 2nd is? Adobe Acrobat.
You think this isn't propaganda, but rather a serious intent to focus on Adobe's part at a time that just happens to coincide with Jobs' public criticism?
Ummm kay.
Some have suggested "fixing" flash. Truth is .. it is a pile of bad code slapped together that can't be fixed. It needs to be buried.
Only good Flash is a Dead Flash.
Not if you are an Adobe stock holder. :-)
At the end of the day any decision made by a company is driven by the desire to make more money. Killing off Flash and moving to HTML5 might be better for users, but Adobe will make more profits if instead Flash dominates the mobile web. Therefore Adobe will try to push Flash as hard as possible.
No. The point was to make a PR stunt.
Haven't Adobe employees been using Macs for years? And yet the Flash plug-in has been the majority cause of crashes and security vulnerabilities on the platform. BTW- As far as security issues, guess what the 2nd is? Adobe Acrobat.
You think this isn't propaganda, but rather a serious intent to focus on Adobe's part at a time that just happens to coincide with Jobs' public criticism?
Ummm kay.
Comparing Adobe software with their Windows equivalents I'm starting to believe most Adobe employee's are using Windows PCs.
There might be some PR element to this, but ultimately I believe Adobe realizes they must make Flash better suited for mobile devices or they are going to lose the battle for control of the web. Getting your employees to actively use your software is an important part of making your software better.
The same is often true of animgif ads, and there are plenty of nasty, ugly, or offensive static image ads. Adverts are all about desperately seeking attention, and being obnoxious is a great way to do that. Without Flash, they would just seek another technology to do the same thing.
Oof, it's the audio that bothers me. Web ads that yell at me "You've Won!" or "HI, I'm Amber!" bug the s**t out of me. I like to listen to iTunes and crank it up, and then later settle down.. relax... surf.. and "HI I'M AMBER!!"
My experience with Android users is that they want all the features possible, even ones that they can't or shouldn't use (root shell access, for example), and that's what attracted them to Android over iPhone OS in the first place. I'm sure some would even get excited over the possibility of ActiveX support!
Yeah, well, I have to say as a Linux developer and kernel maintainer from way back when, I love my TiVo. It's Linux based. Do I want root on it? Nope, it's an appliance. Frankly I think of the iPhone and the iPad the same way. They work great as is. They are information appliances that do their job well.
Hey I found this Android phone running Flash in a bar. Anyone want to buy it?
Somehow I doubt anyone would be willing to pay anything for it. So many different types, its a wonder they haven't started giving them away free with a value meal at McDonalds.
Not if you are an Adobe stock holder. :-)
Good luck stock holders:
It should also be noted that the browser on these phones is equipped with Flash lite, though we had lots of trouble getting videos to play on many of the sites we visited (Engadget included). If someone was hoping to convince us that Flash could work on a device like this, consider the job unfinished.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/19/d...edible-review/
:
The Droid Incredible also supports Flash Lite, but I had trouble playing Flash content. I also encountered this problem with the HTC Hero on Sprint.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36654326...h_and_gadgets/
SNIP
They added: "It's also not clear if this will be a perk just for developers or for the entire company... "SNIP
They added: "It's also not clear if this will be a perk."
fixed that for you.
Why not install flash on an actual iPhone, even if it is jailbroken?
Apple is not against Flash (sites) on the iPhone (if you read Jobs post on Apple website), Jobs wrote Apple did not hold its breath.
I am just growing a resentment about this Adobe's Flash vs Apple's iPhone brouhaha. And you see News agencies showing their ignorance and impartiality, BBC is an example of impartiality, but it is no a surprise.
Although I agree with you that most of the coverage has been at the intellectual level of a 14 year old running in from the playground and shouting ?fight!? and then running back out to watch and take bets, I looked at the BBC website and didn't see anything particularly better with its coverage. It didn't actually analyze anything that was said by either party. It just had a few Jobs quotes, followed by Adobe remarks that were mainly ?he's full of it? caliber.
Oof, it's the audio that bothers me. Web ads that yell at me "You've Won!" or "HI, I'm Amber!" bug the s**t out of me. I like to listen to iTunes and crank it up, and then later settle down.. relax... surf.. and "HI I'M AMBER!!"
"CONGRATULATIONS! You've won a FREE Nintendo Wii! To claim your free Nintendo Wii just go to..."
"bzzZzzZZzz.. Bzz. BzzzZzz."
My experience with Android users is that they want all the features possible, even ones that they can't or shouldn't use (root shell access, for example), and that's what attracted them to Android over iPhone OS in the first place. I'm sure some would even get excited over the possibility of ActiveX support!
Hilarious. That sums it up nicely, though. I don't know any iPhone users who would want an Android OS phone, and vice-versa. They're different OSs for different people.
I don't want flash on my iPhone, if for no reason other than the ads. Even if the UI were 'optimized' for mobile devices, the security issues addressed, and stability problems resolved. We still have those ads.
But I don't understand what Adobe hopes to accomplish by this. Presumably (hopefully) their employees believe in the products they are producing. They shouldn't need convincing. It isn't likely to convince any of us who don't want flash. It's not going to change Apple's stance on this. Jobs has a settled disposition that flash needs to be sunset. I agree. I hate it on computers, and I don't want it on my phone-even as an option.
[snip]
My experience with Android users is that they want all the features possible, even ones that they can't or shouldn't use (root shell access, for example), and that's what attracted them to Android over iPhone OS in the first place. I'm sure some would even get excited over the possibility of ActiveX support!
[/snip]
Well if they want root access, that voids their warranty, just like the iPhone...
And if they don't root their phones, worse yet, they can only run apps written in Java
A Nokia N900 is a better fit for those types of people....and it's had Flash for a lot longer....
Oh, and the Palm Pre...that's also got an easy way to turn on the root shell, no warrany issues either....
I think they only like Android because it's "not Apple"....
Dan
Should be lots of good Android deals on ebay coming up.
Good one!
I guess they'll need a second phone... since the first one's battery life will be so crappy.
Wonder if they will be allowed to keep their iPhones?
uh. The iphones is any better? Sorry Charlie. Own both. Would say the opposite is true.
Pathetic.
1) Video. Almost all video uses some sort of Flash player. Some articles continue to tout that since 90% of video uses Flash, it therefore won't work on mobile devices without Flash. I did some testing on my iPhone and was pleasantly surprised to find that all the video sites I could think of simply work great on the phone as it downgraded gracefully to a native format that uses hardware decoding.
Um.....
YouTubes internet video market share is around 75%
I do not used Flash and have no problem watching any video on YouTube.
So, if YouTube has 75% market share, how does Flash have a 90% market share?
Adobe has been screwing over users for years doing shit like not updating Camera RAW for older versions of Photoshop. They force you to spend hundres of dollars for the newest Photoshop which becomes obsolete in following years when newer cameras come out.
If Adobe wants to fight Apple they should develop Photoshop for Linux to spank Apple's marketshare for machines out there. Crybaby bitches.
OMG here we go again...
THIS IS SPARTA!!!
haha,
I registered just you made me laugh.