Wow, did you even read the article. This is about Apps that were originally written in flash, and they were converted to the iPhone through a process that converts the flash code to objective C, then complies it for the iPhone. There were tons of apps in the app store that were ported this way. What they means is they are NOT flash, but they were ported FROM flash. Apple has banned those. The fact of the matter is those apps were not flash, they ran well, but Apple is banning them anyway because the original source code was flash. There is no reason to ban the apps because they worked very well. Apple just dosn't want to allow flash on their phones, and having apps that were once flash opens the door for them to have to let flash on the devices. That would ruin their monopoly/jail of their App store. Honestly, I could care less if the iPhone has flash or not. I don't want a cool phone, I want a phone that can do everything I need it to do. So ban flash, fine, but SJ needs to keep his mouth shut with bashing Adobe because the other 95% of us in the world love flash and don't need SJ preaching untrue garbage just to undermine a competitor. It's one thing to say no to something, and another to say no and attack it as if what he has to say applies to every computer out there. If Apple's OS's were written better, maybe it would be more stable like on Windows machines.
How in the world would allowing ported flash apps open "the door for them to have to let flash on the devices"? This just doesn't make sense at all. Even if they allowed Adobe tools to create native iPhone apps, that in now way makes it more likely for them to allow native flash on the iPhone. As you yourself noted, CS5 was to create native apps from Flash apps.
As far as Apple being 'written better' to allow Flash to be 'more stable like on Windows machines' that again doesn't make much sense. Apple's OS X OSes are renown for their stability. Flash being crash prone on Macs would seem to more likely be an Adobe issue than the OS. When you put minimal resources into a product, as Adobe has done with their Mac products, that is often the case.
Apple isn't keeping Adobe from implementing Flash or associated products on other mobile platforms. It's merely setting the standard for how third-party apps are written for the iPhone OS.
This is Apple's privilege, right, and obligation.
I think the outcome of the Conde Nast publishing system for the iPad will be a key event affecting the future of Flash.
If one looks at this situation and considers the respective Flash and iPhone OS properties as peers, first of all, Apple has done ALL the legwork to develop its own iPhone system: its OS, its hardware, its third-party app developer system, its retail distribution system, its online store, its Applecare program, etc., etc., all of which represents a very major investment in time, talent, and money. Apple needs, therefore, to do everything in its power to foster, protect, and expand that system in order to ensure its continuing, desirability, viability and profitability.
Its amended policy prohibiting outside code is meant to foster the continuing smooth operation of its software/hardware system and to ensure that Apple is free to make changes and enhancements while remaining free of arbitrary third-party influences.
If Flash is indeed a worthy competitor, then let Abobe develop its own mobile platform around Flash to a similar degree that Apple has for its iPhone OS system.
Apple isn't suppressing competition. If anything, others like Adobe, should be grateful that Apple has created new markets and set good examples for others to follow.
All I've seen so far is laziness, idle envy, jealousy, and parasitic maneuverings. Pretty sad.
It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.
No ..Flash is inferior. It always has been on Macs regardless of what hardware runs beneath. It's a memory pig and eats up CPU cycles. It bloats applications more than Apple's standard tools because Adobe's packager is inefficient. On a mobile phone or tablet bandwidth is precious. Not every has an unlimited data package which means they don't want to be downloading "one size fits all" applications when their data is metered.
It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.
Seriously, you are calling the iPhone kernel 'clunky' compared to Android? Perhaps you would like to expand on why you feel xnu/mach/BSD is 'clunky' when compared to the linux kernel in Android. I'd be very interested.
No ..Flash is inferior. It always has been on Macs regardless of what hardware runs beneath. It's a memory pig and eats up CPU cycles. It bloats applications more than Apple's standard tools because Adobe's packager is inefficient. On a mobile phone or tablet bandwidth is precious. Not every has an unlimited data package which means they don't want to be downloading "one size fits all" applications when their data is metered.
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
Really...where are the glowing reports of Flash operating perfectly on other mobile platforms? Working "well" , which I have a hard time agreeing with, on the web is wholly different than working well as an iPhone development tool.
Yes Mac OS X is junk. We should all take druble's word on that because he's omniscient. Next.
I think it would depend on the reasons for Apple disallowing Flash. If Flash was considered a "peer" programming language to C/C++/Objective C etc then it would be harder for Apple to justify their motives but Flash is primarily a web based tool that can aid in developing basic apps but it's raison d'être is creating cross platform apps and I don't know what Gov expects to tell a company that they must work against their own best interests and aid their competition.
Apple has roughly 25% of the smartphone market. A far cry from a monopoly.
Two things are nebulous: The relevant market and the reasons for the anticompetitive behavior.
I don't even think Flash is relevant. The ban on cross-compiled apps is relevant.
So let's imagine that Apple is eventually forced to allow Flash on the iPhone and iPad. It's a lose-lose for Apple. The probability that Flash will run properly and quickly on these devices is almost 0%. Then the same "let ME choose what I put on my device" crowd will be bashing Apple, not Adobe, all over the internet. Forums will be started, polls will be taken, open letters to Steve Jobs will appear. Personally, I think Steve Jobs is much more willing to take the heat over not allowing Flash than trying to explain or defend the crappy performance of iPhones and iPads hobbled by Flash.
It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.
<When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.>
you already have the answer. go get an android. it is far superior so you say. now you have nothing to complain about as you have been shown the path to goodness.
As stated, no version of Flash is available and the specs of the iPhone are below the 10.1, so it's hard for Apple to ban something non-existant.
"It will focus on whether the policy, which took effect last month, kills competition by forcing programmers to choose between developing apps that can run only on Apple gizmos or come up with apps that are platform neutral, and can be used on a variety of operating systems, such as those from rivals Google, Microsoft and Research In Motion."
Ok, so it blocks one specific method of app creation, but we have a list of several viable alternatives. When there are a number of viable alternatives, how the hell is there an antitrust concern?
Ok so currently they are banning the incredibly shitty, incomplete Flash Lite? Boo hoo. Most cell phones don't support that program either. Apple is hardly alone here. Until 10.1 is relased, there is no full fledged version of Flash in the mobile arena
Why no such inquiries about developers being force to choose developing for OS X/linux/Win etc ?
Apple isn't suppressing competition. If anything, others like Adobe, should be grateful that Apple has created new markets and set good examples for others to follow.
But those new markets cannot be accessed unless your iPhone development work gets duplicated for all the rest of the platforms.
This is a major barrier to entry. I don't know if it is a violation or not.
I don't think you have to worry about people copying it. Apple is already copying others, except Apples equipment will not stack up to what is currently out there. Don't expect amazing things. I hear it is going to get a giant ipod, and you will be limited to the app store for programs. What a world without walls, try an existing slate such as this one that is just as sexy in appearance as anything apple would make:
[QUOTE=druble;1625288]Wow, did you even read the article. This is about Apps that were originally written in flash, and they were converted to the iPhone through a process that converts the flash code to objective C, then complies it for the iPhone. There were tons of apps in the app store that were ported this way. What they means is they are NOT flash, but they were ported FROM flash. Apple has banned those.
According to the CEO of Adobe, there are just over 100 apps currently in the app store that were ported from Flash. Out of how many hundreds of thousands? I would hardly call that a ton. Here is a link.
I just downloaded the flash cs5 trial from adobe.com, got a simple animation with critters running around. So I compiled it to the iPhone, it does not go through XCode but creates object files, assembly files during build time. It does create ARM code.
I then copied the app and ran it to my iPhone and boy it was laggy. I rebooted and still was laggy around 10fps and stops for a few milliseconds in between. I launched Instruments to test CPU and app analysis. To my observation, there are way way too many libSystem.dylib calls just to draw one frame.
As an iPhone developer, I never seen something so highly unoptimized even if is AOT compiled in arm.
Also, the actual Flash IDE app is not well written. I have Geektool running polling for system.log and running Flash CS5 gives me tons of NSAutoreleasePool warnings every second. NSAutoreleasepool manages object memory/garbage collection and prevents memory leak. Now I know why adobe apps crashes upon quit!
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
So, umm, you know that Flash on the Mac is a distinct (though much is shared) codebase written to a different platform and set of APIs? If it runs well on Windows (which it really doesn't, but let's ignore that) you should automatically expect it run well on Macs?
No, it couldn't have anything to do with Adobe allocating minimal resources to porting the product to Mac OS X.
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
If you are a developer please stop developing for OS X or iPhone. Apps coded by such s***d f**k cannot be any good.
I thought part of the changes in wording were also related to upcoming iPhone OS changes...specifically multitasking. Ported apps would not be able to communicate status changes, etc.
Apple can certainly make the arugument that ported apps will make the user experience suffer...which I believe they (Apple) already has. Apple hasn't cornered the smartphone market, and the tools the are supporting are open to all developers...where's the fire?
Probably something along those lines, seeing as Google just bought one of the dominant advertisers on the iPhone App platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaarrrgggh
Apple should have nothing to worry about on this one. The iAD issue though is likely to be considered monopolistic behavior though, since they are using dominance in one area (mobile devices) to dominate a separate space (mobile advertising). Wonder what their lawyers and PR people have planned to say...
Cross-platform tools are the real monopoly risk. If they get established they can control the APIs for an entire market, but the iPhone API can only ever effect the iPhone.
Comments
Wow, did you even read the article. This is about Apps that were originally written in flash, and they were converted to the iPhone through a process that converts the flash code to objective C, then complies it for the iPhone. There were tons of apps in the app store that were ported this way. What they means is they are NOT flash, but they were ported FROM flash. Apple has banned those. The fact of the matter is those apps were not flash, they ran well, but Apple is banning them anyway because the original source code was flash. There is no reason to ban the apps because they worked very well. Apple just dosn't want to allow flash on their phones, and having apps that were once flash opens the door for them to have to let flash on the devices. That would ruin their monopoly/jail of their App store. Honestly, I could care less if the iPhone has flash or not. I don't want a cool phone, I want a phone that can do everything I need it to do. So ban flash, fine, but SJ needs to keep his mouth shut with bashing Adobe because the other 95% of us in the world love flash and don't need SJ preaching untrue garbage just to undermine a competitor. It's one thing to say no to something, and another to say no and attack it as if what he has to say applies to every computer out there. If Apple's OS's were written better, maybe it would be more stable like on Windows machines.
How in the world would allowing ported flash apps open "the door for them to have to let flash on the devices"? This just doesn't make sense at all. Even if they allowed Adobe tools to create native iPhone apps, that in now way makes it more likely for them to allow native flash on the iPhone. As you yourself noted, CS5 was to create native apps from Flash apps.
As far as Apple being 'written better' to allow Flash to be 'more stable like on Windows machines' that again doesn't make much sense. Apple's OS X OSes are renown for their stability. Flash being crash prone on Macs would seem to more likely be an Adobe issue than the OS. When you put minimal resources into a product, as Adobe has done with their Mac products, that is often the case.
This is Apple's privilege, right, and obligation.
I think the outcome of the Conde Nast publishing system for the iPad will be a key event affecting the future of Flash.
If one looks at this situation and considers the respective Flash and iPhone OS properties as peers, first of all, Apple has done ALL the legwork to develop its own iPhone system: its OS, its hardware, its third-party app developer system, its retail distribution system, its online store, its Applecare program, etc., etc., all of which represents a very major investment in time, talent, and money. Apple needs, therefore, to do everything in its power to foster, protect, and expand that system in order to ensure its continuing, desirability, viability and profitability.
Its amended policy prohibiting outside code is meant to foster the continuing smooth operation of its software/hardware system and to ensure that Apple is free to make changes and enhancements while remaining free of arbitrary third-party influences.
If Flash is indeed a worthy competitor, then let Abobe develop its own mobile platform around Flash to a similar degree that Apple has for its iPhone OS system.
Apple isn't suppressing competition. If anything, others like Adobe, should be grateful that Apple has created new markets and set good examples for others to follow.
All I've seen so far is laziness, idle envy, jealousy, and parasitic maneuverings. Pretty sad.
It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.
No ..Flash is inferior. It always has been on Macs regardless of what hardware runs beneath. It's a memory pig and eats up CPU cycles. It bloats applications more than Apple's standard tools because Adobe's packager is inefficient. On a mobile phone or tablet bandwidth is precious. Not every has an unlimited data package which means they don't want to be downloading "one size fits all" applications when their data is metered.
It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.
Seriously, you are calling the iPhone kernel 'clunky' compared to Android? Perhaps you would like to expand on why you feel xnu/mach/BSD is 'clunky' when compared to the linux kernel in Android. I'd be very interested.
No ..Flash is inferior. It always has been on Macs regardless of what hardware runs beneath. It's a memory pig and eats up CPU cycles. It bloats applications more than Apple's standard tools because Adobe's packager is inefficient. On a mobile phone or tablet bandwidth is precious. Not every has an unlimited data package which means they don't want to be downloading "one size fits all" applications when their data is metered.
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
Really...where are the glowing reports of Flash operating perfectly on other mobile platforms? Working "well" , which I have a hard time agreeing with, on the web is wholly different than working well as an iPhone development tool.
Yes Mac OS X is junk. We should all take druble's word on that because he's omniscient. Next.
I think it would depend on the reasons for Apple disallowing Flash. If Flash was considered a "peer" programming language to C/C++/Objective C etc then it would be harder for Apple to justify their motives but Flash is primarily a web based tool that can aid in developing basic apps but it's raison d'être is creating cross platform apps and I don't know what Gov expects to tell a company that they must work against their own best interests and aid their competition.
Apple has roughly 25% of the smartphone market. A far cry from a monopoly.
Two things are nebulous: The relevant market and the reasons for the anticompetitive behavior.
I don't even think Flash is relevant. The ban on cross-compiled apps is relevant.
It's not flash that is inferior, it is the iPhone. A clunky kernel and junk hardware are to blame for any instability issues. Adobe could very well work around the iPhones limitations like they did for their re-compilers, but Steve Jobs is so self-absorbed that he can't accept that his phone is not perfect like many of the users who will probably freak out about this post. I am not saying any product out there is perfect, because none are, but Steve and his half-crazy fanboys believe anything he says think so. When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.
<When you are ready for a real phone, get an Android. It comes with free handcuff keys so you can uncuff yourself from Steve Job's scrotum.>
you already have the answer. go get an android. it is far superior so you say. now you have nothing to complain about as you have been shown the path to goodness.
As stated, no version of Flash is available and the specs of the iPhone are below the 10.1, so it's hard for Apple to ban something non-existant.
"It will focus on whether the policy, which took effect last month, kills competition by forcing programmers to choose between developing apps that can run only on Apple gizmos or come up with apps that are platform neutral, and can be used on a variety of operating systems, such as those from rivals Google, Microsoft and Research In Motion."
Ok, so it blocks one specific method of app creation, but we have a list of several viable alternatives. When there are a number of viable alternatives, how the hell is there an antitrust concern?
Ok so currently they are banning the incredibly shitty, incomplete Flash Lite? Boo hoo. Most cell phones don't support that program either. Apple is hardly alone here. Until 10.1 is relased, there is no full fledged version of Flash in the mobile arena
Why no such inquiries about developers being force to choose developing for OS X/linux/Win etc ?
Bullshit, just bullshit
This will come to nothing.
There's no "there" there!
Agreed. Absolute waste of time and tax dollars.
Apple isn't suppressing competition. If anything, others like Adobe, should be grateful that Apple has created new markets and set good examples for others to follow.
But those new markets cannot be accessed unless your iPhone development work gets duplicated for all the rest of the platforms.
This is a major barrier to entry. I don't know if it is a violation or not.
I don't think you have to worry about people copying it. Apple is already copying others, except Apples equipment will not stack up to what is currently out there. Don't expect amazing things. I hear it is going to get a giant ipod, and you will be limited to the app store for programs. What a world without walls, try an existing slate such as this one that is just as sexy in appearance as anything apple would make:
http://www.windowsfordevices.com/c/a...and-Seline-10/
Well you were sorta right about the big iPod thing. Wrong about everything else. 1 million sales in 4 weeks means you lose.
I'm figuring you're wrong about Flash as well.
According to the CEO of Adobe, there are just over 100 apps currently in the app store that were ported from Flash. Out of how many hundreds of thousands? I would hardly call that a ton. Here is a link.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...okescreen.html
I then copied the app and ran it to my iPhone and boy it was laggy. I rebooted and still was laggy around 10fps and stops for a few milliseconds in between. I launched Instruments to test CPU and app analysis. To my observation, there are way way too many libSystem.dylib calls just to draw one frame.
As an iPhone developer, I never seen something so highly unoptimized even if is AOT compiled in arm.
Also, the actual Flash IDE app is not well written. I have Geektool running polling for system.log and running Flash CS5 gives me tons of NSAutoreleasePool warnings every second. NSAutoreleasepool manages object memory/garbage collection and prevents memory leak. Now I know why adobe apps crashes upon quit!
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
So, umm, you know that Flash on the Mac is a distinct (though much is shared) codebase written to a different platform and set of APIs? If it runs well on Windows (which it really doesn't, but let's ignore that) you should automatically expect it run well on Macs?
No, it couldn't have anything to do with Adobe allocating minimal resources to porting the product to Mac OS X.
hmurchison is right. Next.
That is just it. Flash is not working well on Apple products....not any other products.... What is so hard to understand about it works on everything else. How is the product flawed when it works so well for the majority of people. All of a sudden the same product dosnt work well on OSX, and you don't think OSX is the factor. It makes total sense that Flash runs great on everthing but OSX because OSX is the limiting factor. It runs like junk on Mac because OSX is junk.
If you are a developer please stop developing for OS X or iPhone. Apps coded by such s***d f**k cannot be any good.
Apple can certainly make the arugument that ported apps will make the user experience suffer...which I believe they (Apple) already has. Apple hasn't cornered the smartphone market, and the tools the are supporting are open to all developers...where's the fire?
Probably something along those lines, seeing as Google just bought one of the dominant advertisers on the iPhone App platform.
Apple should have nothing to worry about on this one. The iAD issue though is likely to be considered monopolistic behavior though, since they are using dominance in one area (mobile devices) to dominate a separate space (mobile advertising). Wonder what their lawyers and PR people have planned to say...