I think both of these companies have their customer's interests in mind.
Apple's customers are the folks who own iPhones, iPod Touches, and iPads. Apple wants to give them the best possible user experience. That means decoding videos in hardware rather than software to greatly extend battery life. That means avoiding software tools that code for the lowest common denominator. It means putting product quality first.
Adobe's customers are the developers who want to develop once and run everywhere. To please these customers, Adobe must give them a set of cross-platform development tools enabling them to produce one size fits all software that can run identically on every platform.
The two customer groups have opposing interests. You can't please one without displeasing the other.
Like in any war innocent bystanders are always caught in the crossfire. In addition to consumers being forced to choose sides, developers are also penalized if they have customers on each side of the conflict.
It's a lose, lose situation.
Worst case scenarios:
Adobe quits updating CS5 for Mac.
Microsoft never supports the canvas tag
Firefox does not support H.264
Every other smart phone supports Flash
Apple get sued by Feds
iAd become the nuisance that is now Flash banner ads
AAPL crashes
I don't know if you know this but MAC software is approximately 50% of Adobe's revenue. So, you can add to your scenario, Adobe drops revenue by 50% and stock crashes!!!! :-)
Apple just wants to control the development toools "just" for Apple iPhone OS. THAT'S IT!! However, Adobe wants to control the development tools for ALL PLATFORMS. So I ask " Who really wants to have complete control". Plus Flash sells more "highly expensive" Creative Suite software which makes Adobe very happy!!
By the way, it's obvious that a bunch of the people on these forums do NOT know the history of Adobe, and how they absolutely have NOT supported Apple throughout the years. It was actually the other way around. Here's one great article on the history of Adobe:
Apple needs to do things better. Adobe stood by them when they were dying. Now, they repay the favor by trying to kill Adobe. Eh?
The Adobe Creative suite is one of the only reasons people buy Macs. Most artists like Macs due to their style and the CS is a good fit for the OS versus Windows. However, if Adobe simply decides to stop updating the CS for Mac, Apple will be in bigger trouble than they realize.
you need to read up on your history dude. adobe stood by apple? it's all about style?
if adobe decides to stop updating CS for the mac, their shareholders are going to have their hides. that's where half of adobe's money comes from. frankly, with adobe's position in the graphic design market, i think that would be an anti trust case that could go somewhere.
yeah you gotta use 19th century tactics to fight a 19th century technology , common Adobe get over it .
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTBlomberg
Adobe is sounding more and more desperate every day. Stop sitting around crying and fix your stupid products.
Maybe if Adobe spent 1/10 as much time fixing Flash as they spend attacking Apple, maybe they'd have Flash that works on a mobile device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie
More Lynch quotes:
"We have already done a great job - technically - of getting Flash applications to run on the iPhone,"
Nice misdirection. Adobe STILL (3 years after release of the iPhone) have a full version of Flash that works on ANY mobile device. None.
Yes, they've created a hybrid monster that limps along on the iPhone after compiling and breaking all the SDK rules. Not to mention that Adobe clearly has no concept of how GOOD apps work. Those apps won't support any of the new features of iPhone OS 4.0 and, if history is any lesson, it will take Adobe 4 years to add support.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghostface147
Both just need to come together and fix it once and for all. It can be done, but egos are always going to get in the way. No matter what anyone thinks, Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Please explain how Apple is supposed to fix Adobe crapware that doesn't run on ANY mobile platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by martformac
And didn't I read somewhere that there are already a few hundred apps that were compiled through the Adobe app? That's a pretty small percentage of the over 200,000 apps on the store already. Seems as if a few programmers were able to create their apps without the help of Adobe.
The reported number is that 100 apps have been made using Adobe's flash compilation technology. The problem is that they won't support the new features in iPhone OS 4.0, nor do they meet Apple's standards for quality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko
Hard to argue with Adobe on this.
OK. Adobe's position seems to be that they've had 3 years to produce a version of Flash that works on mobile devices and they have been unable to do it. They have been unable to produce a version of Flash for Macs (which have 10 times the processing power) that use less than 100% CPU power. After 3 years and multiple delays, they now have a BETA of a version of Flash that will run on 0.1% of existing smart phones (maybe), NOT including any iPhone out there. And, the beta is still reported to be a CPU and battery hog (not to mention choppy).
On top of that, developers are switching to html 5 in droves. Some of the top sites in the world are already offering html versions or have publicly announced them (YouTube, Hulu, NYT, and lots more). The people responsible for these large sites obviously realize that Adobe is never going to have a useful version of Flash for mobile devices.
So you agree that all of that is reasonable and Apple should just bend over?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko
Ypple needs to do things better. Adobe stood by them when they were dying. Now, they repay the favor by trying to kill Adobe. Eh?
That's one of the craziest statements I've seen in this entire conversation.
When Apple was having trouble, Adobe stabbed them in the back - over and over. They offered discounts for people to switch from Mac to Windows (but not the other way). They publicly stated that they would be developing for Windows first and porting to the Mac. They took forever to use Apple-specific technologies -- and badly implemented most of them. The Mac versions were consistently late and under-featured (64 bit Photoshop is nearly half a decade later on the Mac than on Windows). And they did all of these things even though Macs were 40-50% of Adobe's revenue.
Adobe standing by Apple when they were 'dying'? Nothing could be further from the truth.
probably the wrong crowd to be asking. But did anyone read Atlas Shrugged?
It was the Rearden Steel that forged new train tracks that allowed trains (built by Taggart Transcontinental) to travel much faster. All of the other Steel companies and railways got pissed and demanded government intervention. They limited the production of Rearden steel, and they also imposed a law that said that trains traveling on Rearden Steel must go the same speed as all other trains... otherwise it wouldn't be fair right?
The way I see it, the train tracks isn't a good analogy Adobe. Maybe, Adobe built the tracks 75% of the world uses, but those tracks never get updated. Apple comes along and they build airplanes... which of course won't work on tracks. I see this as a better analogy. Flight is the future of travel in this scenario, but in this case Adobe wants to be able to slap some train wheels on a plane and keep it grounded.
Amazing. The iPhone came out in 2007. It is now 2010. Adobe has now FINALLY got a beta of their amazing Flash plug-in. What the hell? Apple was supposed to work with a bloated alpha or something? And doesn't the plugin require a minimum of something like an 800mhz processor to show the content? Complete crap. Until the Adobe CEO shows half a dozen phones on-stage running their glorious plugin, this is all talk of NOTHING.
have they even released a beta? i don't think so.
like everything with adobe lately, it's 'just around the corner...'
The last time Adobe gave you this much Shit and turned you down for a home movie editing application you created iMovie which eventually became iLife suite. Screw these punks and give us your own "Creative Suite". Your more than halfway there: iLife, Final Cut, Final Cut Express, Aperature, Logic Studio, etc. Again "Screw Adobe" just like they screwed you!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4 html5 fail and slow. flash 10.1 really needs to be done soon. html5 canvas is too taxing to the cpu. other than that html5 is good lol.
I'm not going to spend eight minutes watching some random bloke drone on. If you have a point, make it AS WELL AS citing your source.
<canvas> is interesting in that it's very dependent on the implementation. There's nothing about it that's fundamentally slow, in fact its design is well optimised for 2D hardware acceleration since (unlike SVG) it doesn't care about how the image was built once it hits the frame buffer. As long as you have a reasonably quick Javascript implementation (as opposed to Adobe's Actionscript implementation - I don't know how quick that is by comparison, someone should benchmark it!) and hardware acceleration, you'll have quick <canvas>, but I don't think that any of the current implementations, unlike Flash on Windows, have 2D hardware acceleration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie
It was badly misquoted. He said:
"The technology issue that Apple has with us is not that Flash doesn't work on the iPhone, but that it does work. You can actually make a great Flash app that runs across operating systems, and they don't like that."
Wow, that was a bad misquote. And makes much more sense, although strictly speaking the idea that Flash could work on the iPhone is a business issue for them; the only real technology issues (ie, problems with the actual implementation) are the alleged poor performance and alleged battery drain. Anyway, it's certainly true that all OS makers have a reason to dislike Flash apps running on all OSs.
While Apple has kept Flash off of its Web browsers...
Apple has not kept Flask off all of it's browsers, just off the iPhone version of Safari.
Does Palm, Blackberry, Nokia, Motorola, etc. and Verizon, AT&T, Sprint etc. have to allow whatever software users or developers want on their phones? Does Adobe have to allow open access to it's software so other developers and users can do whatever they want?
If we are going to claim the gander should be open then the goose better be more open first. But then we know Adobe's revised claim is indeed just a red herring, an attempt to over simplify and to generate public support.
Some of us will get caught up in the debate, but the bottom line is we can relatively easily choose a competitors product if we want.
(This is directly analogous to why we don't have high-speed trains in the U.S.--our tracks are not able to handle more than about 125MPH which is why the TGV kicks Acela's butt.)
Just as an odd aside, I think Alstom made both trains, though each was co-developed with another entity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevetim
Adobe' is losing the PR war here. Their only chance is to execute well on Flash for Android and Apple will be forced to include it in Safari. All this talk is getting them no-where. They need to create a working product.
Check out Daring Fireballs link to the new mobile device that plays flash. Just as presenter says he is glad he didn't get ipad because it doesn't have flash ... he clicks a utube video and crashes out of the browser
YouTube is a bad example anyway. There is a native YT app on iOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EGlasheen
Instead of fixing Flash and proving it works great on the iPhone and iPad, Lynch rambles about the 1900's railroad system????
That's the best Adobe's CTO can do?
Can I apply for his job? He's clueless.
Saber rattling is probably about all he can do in the short term.
Adobe is SO SCARED. Flash is on the down and Adobe knows that a huge percent of it's customer base are Mac users. And we all know how Mac users are loyal to Apple and Adobe knows this!! And let's face it Apple has the resources and engineers to create there own alternative to Adobe's CS5 and trust me Mac users will buy it even if it is a little buggy at first. For one like I said, Mac users are VERY loyal to Apple and second I guarantee it will be at least half the price of Adobe's Creative Suite! So you don't think for once Adobe is scared. You bet they are. Steve would have no problem taking them out of business!!
Notice how well the presenter handles the browser crash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwklam
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4 html5 fail and slow. flash 10.1 really needs to be done soon. html5 canvas is too taxing to the cpu. other than that html5 is good lol.
Adobe is SO SCARED. Flash is on the down and Adobe knows that a huge percent of it's customer base are Mac users. And we all know how Mac users are loyal to Apple and Adobe knows this!! And let's face it Apple has the resources and engineers to create there own alternative to Adobe's CS5 and trust me Mac users will buy it even if it is a little buggy at first. For one like I said, Mac users are VERY loyal to Apple and second I guarantee it will be at least half the price of Adobe's Creative Suite! So you don't think for once Adobe is scared. You bet they are. Steve would have no problem taking them out of business!!
You make a point here and I do agree - I think Adobe is scared. However, I don't think it is in a Mac user's best interests to have everything coming from Apple. Apple users need and should have other specialized companies making products. It is of course debatable these days how Adobe is doing with the quality level. I've used PhotoShop since 1994 and find the $800 upgrade fee for CS5 a shock for sure...
I have yet to read a single compelling argument from Adobe's side regarding any of this - again from a product that technically still does not exist to consumers. A YouTube video does not count for me...
You make a point here and I do agree - I think Adobe is scared. However, I don't think it is in a Mac user's best interests to have everything coming from Apple. Apple users need and should have other specialized companies making products. It is of course debatable these days how Adobe is doing with the quality level. I've used PhotoShop since 1994 and find the $800 upgrade fee for CS5 a shock for sure...
I have yet to read a single compelling argument from Adobe's side regarding any of this - again from a product that technically still does not exist to consumers. A YouTube video does not count for me...
And I too agree with you. Everything should not come from Apple. But let's be honest where is the competition to Adobe's CS? is that why we pay so much for it. Because Adobe can get away with it. And don't you see how something like Flash locks developers into using "Creative Suites"? Adobe needs competition. If not from Apple than who? Who would be more loyal to the Mac platform than Apple themselves?
Comments
Apple's customers are the folks who own iPhones, iPod Touches, and iPads. Apple wants to give them the best possible user experience. That means decoding videos in hardware rather than software to greatly extend battery life. That means avoiding software tools that code for the lowest common denominator. It means putting product quality first.
Adobe's customers are the developers who want to develop once and run everywhere. To please these customers, Adobe must give them a set of cross-platform development tools enabling them to produce one size fits all software that can run identically on every platform.
The two customer groups have opposing interests. You can't please one without displeasing the other.
Like in any war innocent bystanders are always caught in the crossfire. In addition to consumers being forced to choose sides, developers are also penalized if they have customers on each side of the conflict.
It's a lose, lose situation.
Worst case scenarios:
Adobe quits updating CS5 for Mac.
Microsoft never supports the canvas tag
Firefox does not support H.264
Every other smart phone supports Flash
Apple get sued by Feds
iAd become the nuisance that is now Flash banner ads
AAPL crashes
I don't know if you know this but MAC software is approximately 50% of Adobe's revenue. So, you can add to your scenario, Adobe drops revenue by 50% and stock crashes!!!! :-)
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/0...dobe-vs-apple/
Yep.
Apple needs to do things better. Adobe stood by them when they were dying. Now, they repay the favor by trying to kill Adobe. Eh?
The Adobe Creative suite is one of the only reasons people buy Macs. Most artists like Macs due to their style and the CS is a good fit for the OS versus Windows. However, if Adobe simply decides to stop updating the CS for Mac, Apple will be in bigger trouble than they realize.
you need to read up on your history dude. adobe stood by apple? it's all about style?
if adobe decides to stop updating CS for the mac, their shareholders are going to have their hides. that's where half of adobe's money comes from. frankly, with adobe's position in the graphic design market, i think that would be an anti trust case that could go somewhere.
yeah you gotta use 19th century tactics to fight a 19th century technology , common Adobe get over it .
Adobe is sounding more and more desperate every day. Stop sitting around crying and fix your stupid products.
Maybe if Adobe spent 1/10 as much time fixing Flash as they spend attacking Apple, maybe they'd have Flash that works on a mobile device.
More Lynch quotes:
"We have already done a great job - technically - of getting Flash applications to run on the iPhone,"
Nice misdirection. Adobe STILL (3 years after release of the iPhone) have a full version of Flash that works on ANY mobile device. None.
Yes, they've created a hybrid monster that limps along on the iPhone after compiling and breaking all the SDK rules. Not to mention that Adobe clearly has no concept of how GOOD apps work. Those apps won't support any of the new features of iPhone OS 4.0 and, if history is any lesson, it will take Adobe 4 years to add support.
Both just need to come together and fix it once and for all. It can be done, but egos are always going to get in the way. No matter what anyone thinks, Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Please explain how Apple is supposed to fix Adobe crapware that doesn't run on ANY mobile platform.
And didn't I read somewhere that there are already a few hundred apps that were compiled through the Adobe app? That's a pretty small percentage of the over 200,000 apps on the store already. Seems as if a few programmers were able to create their apps without the help of Adobe.
The reported number is that 100 apps have been made using Adobe's flash compilation technology. The problem is that they won't support the new features in iPhone OS 4.0, nor do they meet Apple's standards for quality.
Hard to argue with Adobe on this.
OK. Adobe's position seems to be that they've had 3 years to produce a version of Flash that works on mobile devices and they have been unable to do it. They have been unable to produce a version of Flash for Macs (which have 10 times the processing power) that use less than 100% CPU power. After 3 years and multiple delays, they now have a BETA of a version of Flash that will run on 0.1% of existing smart phones (maybe), NOT including any iPhone out there. And, the beta is still reported to be a CPU and battery hog (not to mention choppy).
On top of that, developers are switching to html 5 in droves. Some of the top sites in the world are already offering html versions or have publicly announced them (YouTube, Hulu, NYT, and lots more). The people responsible for these large sites obviously realize that Adobe is never going to have a useful version of Flash for mobile devices.
So you agree that all of that is reasonable and Apple should just bend over?
Ypple needs to do things better. Adobe stood by them when they were dying. Now, they repay the favor by trying to kill Adobe. Eh?
That's one of the craziest statements I've seen in this entire conversation.
When Apple was having trouble, Adobe stabbed them in the back - over and over. They offered discounts for people to switch from Mac to Windows (but not the other way). They publicly stated that they would be developing for Windows first and porting to the Mac. They took forever to use Apple-specific technologies -- and badly implemented most of them. The Mac versions were consistently late and under-featured (64 bit Photoshop is nearly half a decade later on the Mac than on Windows). And they did all of these things even though Macs were 40-50% of Adobe's revenue.
Adobe standing by Apple when they were 'dying'? Nothing could be further from the truth.
It was the Rearden Steel that forged new train tracks that allowed trains (built by Taggart Transcontinental) to travel much faster. All of the other Steel companies and railways got pissed and demanded government intervention. They limited the production of Rearden steel, and they also imposed a law that said that trains traveling on Rearden Steel must go the same speed as all other trains... otherwise it wouldn't be fair right?
The way I see it, the train tracks isn't a good analogy Adobe. Maybe, Adobe built the tracks 75% of the world uses, but those tracks never get updated. Apple comes along and they build airplanes... which of course won't work on tracks. I see this as a better analogy. Flight is the future of travel in this scenario, but in this case Adobe wants to be able to slap some train wheels on a plane and keep it grounded.
Amazing. The iPhone came out in 2007. It is now 2010. Adobe has now FINALLY got a beta of their amazing Flash plug-in. What the hell? Apple was supposed to work with a bloated alpha or something? And doesn't the plugin require a minimum of something like an 800mhz processor to show the content? Complete crap. Until the Adobe CEO shows half a dozen phones on-stage running their glorious plugin, this is all talk of NOTHING.
have they even released a beta? i don't think so.
like everything with adobe lately, it's 'just around the corner...'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4 html5 fail and slow. flash 10.1 really needs to be done soon. html5 canvas is too taxing to the cpu. other than that html5 is good lol.
I'm not going to spend eight minutes watching some random bloke drone on. If you have a point, make it AS WELL AS citing your source.
<canvas> is interesting in that it's very dependent on the implementation. There's nothing about it that's fundamentally slow, in fact its design is well optimised for 2D hardware acceleration since (unlike SVG) it doesn't care about how the image was built once it hits the frame buffer. As long as you have a reasonably quick Javascript implementation (as opposed to Adobe's Actionscript implementation - I don't know how quick that is by comparison, someone should benchmark it!) and hardware acceleration, you'll have quick <canvas>, but I don't think that any of the current implementations, unlike Flash on Windows, have 2D hardware acceleration.
It was badly misquoted. He said:
"The technology issue that Apple has with us is not that Flash doesn't work on the iPhone, but that it does work. You can actually make a great Flash app that runs across operating systems, and they don't like that."
Wow, that was a bad misquote. And makes much more sense, although strictly speaking the idea that Flash could work on the iPhone is a business issue for them; the only real technology issues (ie, problems with the actual implementation) are the alleged poor performance and alleged battery drain. Anyway, it's certainly true that all OS makers have a reason to dislike Flash apps running on all OSs.
While Apple has kept Flash off of its Web browsers...
Apple has not kept Flask off all of it's browsers, just off the iPhone version of Safari.
Does Palm, Blackberry, Nokia, Motorola, etc. and Verizon, AT&T, Sprint etc. have to allow whatever software users or developers want on their phones? Does Adobe have to allow open access to it's software so other developers and users can do whatever they want?
If we are going to claim the gander should be open then the goose better be more open first. But then we know Adobe's revised claim is indeed just a red herring, an attempt to over simplify and to generate public support.
Some of us will get caught up in the debate, but the bottom line is we can relatively easily choose a competitors product if we want.
(This is directly analogous to why we don't have high-speed trains in the U.S.--our tracks are not able to handle more than about 125MPH which is why the TGV kicks Acela's butt.)
Just as an odd aside, I think Alstom made both trains, though each was co-developed with another entity.
Adobe' is losing the PR war here. Their only chance is to execute well on Flash for Android and Apple will be forced to include it in Safari. All this talk is getting them no-where. They need to create a working product.
Check out Daring Fireballs link to the new mobile device that plays flash. Just as presenter says he is glad he didn't get ipad because it doesn't have flash ... he clicks a utube video and crashes out of the browser
YouTube is a bad example anyway. There is a native YT app on iOS.
Instead of fixing Flash and proving it works great on the iPhone and iPad, Lynch rambles about the 1900's railroad system????
That's the best Adobe's CTO can do?
Can I apply for his job? He's clueless.
Saber rattling is probably about all he can do in the short term.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hqFTx8rLsg
Notice how well the presenter handles the browser crash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4 html5 fail and slow. flash 10.1 really needs to be done soon. html5 canvas is too taxing to the cpu. other than that html5 is good lol.
Adobe is SO SCARED. Flash is on the down and Adobe knows that a huge percent of it's customer base are Mac users. And we all know how Mac users are loyal to Apple and Adobe knows this!! And let's face it Apple has the resources and engineers to create there own alternative to Adobe's CS5 and trust me Mac users will buy it even if it is a little buggy at first. For one like I said, Mac users are VERY loyal to Apple and second I guarantee it will be at least half the price of Adobe's Creative Suite! So you don't think for once Adobe is scared. You bet they are. Steve would have no problem taking them out of business!!
You make a point here and I do agree - I think Adobe is scared. However, I don't think it is in a Mac user's best interests to have everything coming from Apple. Apple users need and should have other specialized companies making products. It is of course debatable these days how Adobe is doing with the quality level. I've used PhotoShop since 1994 and find the $800 upgrade fee for CS5 a shock for sure...
I have yet to read a single compelling argument from Adobe's side regarding any of this - again from a product that technically still does not exist to consumers. A YouTube video does not count for me...
Here is Flash 10.1 being demonstrated on a prototype Android tablet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hqFTx8rLsg
Notice how well the presenter handles the browser crash.
I know I saw it ... it is laugh out loud funny.
... glad I didn't get the ipad cause it don't have flash ...
... browser crash when trying to play flash ...
.... oh look at this cool contacts app
You make a point here and I do agree - I think Adobe is scared. However, I don't think it is in a Mac user's best interests to have everything coming from Apple. Apple users need and should have other specialized companies making products. It is of course debatable these days how Adobe is doing with the quality level. I've used PhotoShop since 1994 and find the $800 upgrade fee for CS5 a shock for sure...
I have yet to read a single compelling argument from Adobe's side regarding any of this - again from a product that technically still does not exist to consumers. A YouTube video does not count for me...
And I too agree with you. Everything should not come from Apple. But let's be honest where is the competition to Adobe's CS? is that why we pay so much for it. Because Adobe can get away with it. And don't you see how something like Flash locks developers into using "Creative Suites"? Adobe needs competition. If not from Apple than who? Who would be more loyal to the Mac platform than Apple themselves?