Sh*t - tried to view on iPad and got the blue flash logo of death.
Think I'll wait for an Android tablet - that way I get to see all the nice things people have designed in Flash. Ahh the full internet at last.
With Android - things don't need to be like 1984.
I tried You Tube videos a gazillion times on the iPhone and more recently on the iPad, both wifi and 3G.
Your words here is evidence of your dishonesty. I bet you have not even touched and tried eiither the iPhone or the iPad. As others noted here, Google has converted its You Tube videos so that they may be viewed without Flash.
As to Android mobile phones working with Flash, here's a barrel of icewater for your bath, from the Flash master himself, while demoing that the beta version of Flash would work on Android:
"Here?s what happened: On his Mac, Ryan [Stewart, a Flash Platform evangelist at Adobe] pulled up a site called Eco Zoo. It is, seemingly, a pretty intense example of Flash development ? full of 3D rendering, rich interactions, and cute little characters. Then, he pulled up the same thing on his Nexus One. The site?s progress bar filled in and the 3D world appeared for a few seconds before the browser crashed. Ryan said (paraphrasing), ?Whoops! Well, it?s beta, and this is an intense example ? let?s try it again.? He tried it again and got the same result. So he said to the audience, ?Well, this one isn?t going to work, but does anyone have a Flash site they?d like to see running?? Someone shouted out ?Hulu.? Ryan said, ?Hulu doesn?t work,? and then wrapped up his demo, telling people if they wanted to try more sites they could find him later and he?d let them play with his Nexus One." -- Jeff Croft
You might want to read the comments there, including a justification by Ryan why he had to do the demo, even if he knew that Flash Player 10.1 is not ready yet for mobile phones. [At present, there is no mobile phone that is compatible with Flash.]
[Just another aside, I wish discourse here in Apple Insider or many other sites, is as civil as had been achieved in the comments in the linked article. You can actually learn about the Pros and Cons of Flash.]
The point that many readers pointed out is that if you do a demo, make sure that it works. This may or may not be emblematic of how Adobe address issues it had to confront.
In fairness, Ryan now has finally showed some sites that works with Flash:
Well and good. But would it work with every variant of Android which are sprouting like mushrooms. And, how would it affect battery life?
Most important, would Adobe be able to keep up with the updates for all the variants of Android, and for that matter all other mobile phones if it expects to be universal gatekeeper application?
From my own experience as a user of Adobe product, I invest money in one of their costly products, only to find out later on that they have not upgraded the product to the version of the operating system (OS) of my Mac computer, and no defined time frame, if they would do it at all. Some clients of Adobe are held hostage by their whims and their calculation whether it is profitable for them to upgrade for specific a OS.
The "magical crap" is called marketing. Whether you like it or not it works.
When you called the iPad flawed. What are you using for context. Are you comparing it to other tablet computers? Are you comparing to what the iPad will be in the future? Are you comparing it to using a different type of computing device?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
It's smartly done, and will sell a lot of iPads probably but I wish they'd stop with that "magical" crap. It's a totally 1.0 device and has many flaws. The "magical" version is still about five years away IMO. Where else is there to go once you've brought out superlatives like that?
I tried You Tube videos a gazillion times on the iPhone and more recently on the iPad, both wifi and 3G.
Your words here is evidence of your dishonesty. I bet you have not even touched and tried eiither the iPhone or the iPad. As others noted here, Google has converted its You Tube videos so that they may be viewed without Flash.
As to Android mobile phones working with Flash, here's a barrel of icewater for your bath, from the Flash master himself, while demoing that the beta version of Flash would work on Android:
"Here?s what happened: On his Mac, Ryan [Stewart, a Flash Platform evangelist at Adobe] pulled up a site called Eco Zoo. It is, seemingly, a pretty intense example of Flash development ? full of 3D rendering, rich interactions, and cute little characters. Then, he pulled up the same thing on his Nexus One. The site?s progress bar filled in and the 3D world appeared for a few seconds before the browser crashed. Ryan said (paraphrasing), ?Whoops! Well, it?s beta, and this is an intense example ? let?s try it again.? He tried it again and got the same result. So he said to the audience, ?Well, this one isn?t going to work, but does anyone have a Flash site they?d like to see running?? Someone shouted out ?Hulu.? Ryan said, ?Hulu doesn?t work,? and then wrapped up his demo, telling people if they wanted to try more sites they could find him later and he?d let them play with his Nexus One." -- Jeff Croft
You might want to read the comments there, including a justification by Ryan why he had to do the demo, even if he knew that Flash Player 10.1 is not ready yet for mobile phones. [At present, there is no mobile phone that is compatible with Flash.]
[Just another aside, I wish discourse here in Apple Insider or many other sites, is as civil as had been achieved in the comments in the linked article. You can actually learn about the Pros and Cons of Flash.]
The point that many readers pointed out is that if you do a demo, make sure that it works. This may or may not be emblematic of how Adobe address issues it had to confront.
In fairness, Ryan now has finally showed some sites that works with Flash:
Well and good. But would it work with every variant of Android which are sprouting like mushrooms. And, how would it affect battery life?
Most important, would Adobe be able to keep up with the updates for all the variants of Android, and for that matter all other mobile phones if it expects to be universal gatekeeper application?
From my own experience as a user of Adobe product, I invest money in one of their costly products, only to find out later on that they have not upgraded the product to the version of the operating system (OS) of my Mac computer, and no defined time frame, if they would do it at all. Some clients of Adobe are held hostage by their whims and their calculation whether it is profitable for them to upgrade for specific a OS.
CGC
Even though I *really* hate Flash, it's nice to see they at least have it working on Android now. The thing is though, that everything except the Eco Zoo site he showed can with 100% certainty be done just as easily with HTML5/CSS/Javascript, so why not do it the standards-based way? Also, the Eco Zoo site can probably be done with Canvas/WebGL(or whatever it's called)/Javascript, though I'm not sure about that. It will certainly be possible in the near future though. So it's really a question of whether we want to let a company with as spotty a record as Adobe have full control over the future of rich mobile web applications, or do we want the whole web community to be the driving force behind this development? I certainly vote for the latter.
Also, sure you can play lots of games in the browser with Flash - but you'd get a LOT more out of your battery if those games were available as native iPhone apps. And that goes back to the point I've made here before, that I disagree with Adobe's goals, which are to make it as easy as possible for the *developers* to do as little work as possible and thus sacrificing part of the end-user experience. I think a developer's (being one myself) job is to make the end-user experience as good as possible on each platform, and to do that you need to optimize for each platform and conform to each platform's interface guidelines. Sure, I realize that for some smaller companies that's not feasible. IMO those companies should then pick a platform and stick with it until they can bring their stuff to another platform.
I honestly believe there's a relatively good chance that Adobe will have hi-jacked and completely watered down every platform 15 years down the road if they are allowed to get everyone over to developing exclusively with Flash - which is bound to happen because it won't be economically feasible to do anything but develop for the lowest common denominator.
There's my reasoning for hating Flash. That, and of course the fact that every single browser crash I've experienced the last 3 years has been because of Flash sure doesn't help.
The "magical crap" is called marketing. Whether you like it or not it works.
When you called the iPad flawed. What are you using for context. Are you comparing it to other tablet computers? Are you comparing to what the iPad will be in the future? Are you comparing it to using a different type of computing device?
Well it's mostly just opinion, but for "flaws" I meant the usual things a 1.0 device has to deal with both in software and hardware.
It doesn't yet print for instance, and Pages (which is the program I'm most going to be using on it), doesn't work properly or even have it's basic feature set available yet, so it will be at least version 2.0 of Pages and 3.3 or 4.0 (or maybe higher), of the OS before you can actually use it for basic writing tasks as I want to do.
Hardware-wise, it incorporates *none* of the many patents Apple developed over the last five years or so for various "magical" solutions related to the problems of tablet computing and is, (as a lot of people are prone to say lately), functionally just a big iPod touch as a result. The bezels on the side are so huge for instance that you can really only thumb type on it if you have very large hands and thus it fails to solve the problem of how to write on a tablet efficiently while actually mobile. You have to lay it down on a table for it to be useful or curl up on the couch. Also, David Hockney aside, there is of course a need in some situations for a stylus. Styli have been around since the beginning of civilisation in every culture, no matter what Steve Jobs says, there are situations where you absolutely need one.
These are problems that I believe will be solved, and judging by Apple's patent library, they believe so too. They just won't be solved in a 1.0 version. As the ad itself says, this is just the beginning (of basically a whole new platform).
So while I think it's a fantastic little device and I've already ordered one, for these reasons and many more I see it as a mass market, "get-grandma-used-to-it" kind of 1.0 device and I predict much more capable hardware and software in the near future.
Regardless of what Apple does with the iPad five years down the road, there will always be people (and you know who you are) that will whine till the end of time that they will NEVER buy an iPad unless it has <insert lame feature here>. Just the way it is.
Until Apple let's you actually do things with it rather than just observe content yes there will always be people that won't buy. But hats off to the beta buyers.
The "magical crap" is called marketing. Whether you like it or not it works.
Why can't the "magical" iPad view the "magical" World of Disney flash website?
I just bought a 13" MBP and the first thing I did in the store was test to see if all the flash ( and there is mega flash on that website's home page- shame on you SJ) loaded up and it past the test.
Best Apple ad in many, many years. No more "foofarah foo foo happy woo playful whimsy" stuff. It's like, "**** YOU B**CHES, YOU KNOW YOU WANT THIS. JUST ADMIT IT, SHUT UP and GET IT."
Reminds me of kids who are so full of life, sharing with you so excitedly what caught their attention at the time.
It reminds me also of a very close friend while in school, when I first arrived in the US, who was so full of adventure and mischief and spontaneity. With him, our group did things we might not do on our own. Gone to places we might have never considered. And more.
He always predicated his thoughts in superlatives. It's the best [product, time, adventure, etc.] in the world!
I was like a kid again. Knowing people like him enabled me to tolerate all the bigots and intolerant people, thereafter.
Why can't the "magical" iPad view the "magical" World of Disney flash website? ...
Because there's a mobile HTML version of the site that iPad visitors are redirected to, through the magic of the user agent identity.
It's really pathetic that people read something about this somewhere on the web and, with no actual knowledge of what they are talking about, go around doing their sad little troll thing with it.
When you called the iPad flawed. What are you using for context. Are you comparing it to other tablet computers? Are you comparing to what the iPad will be in the future? Are you comparing it to using a different type of computing device?
Agree.
The Mac, desktop and notebook versions, are still flawed. But I'm glad I bought one in 1984 and 1998 and 2008. If I'd adopted a philosophy of waiting for a "not flawed" product, I'd still be computer-less and waiting 26 years later.
My 2008 BMW is flawed (as the 2010 Bimmers are improved). But it was certainly nice for transporting me from place to place for the last 2 years (instead of walking), and one heck of a lot better than even a Toyota.
Comments
Sh*t - tried to view on iPad and got the blue flash logo of death.
Think I'll wait for an Android tablet - that way I get to see all the nice things people have designed in Flash. Ahh the full internet at last.
With Android - things don't need to be like 1984.
I tried You Tube videos a gazillion times on the iPhone and more recently on the iPad, both wifi and 3G.
Your words here is evidence of your dishonesty. I bet you have not even touched and tried eiither the iPhone or the iPad. As others noted here, Google has converted its You Tube videos so that they may be viewed without Flash.
As to Android mobile phones working with Flash, here's a barrel of icewater for your bath, from the Flash master himself, while demoing that the beta version of Flash would work on Android:
On the Android Flash demo at FlashCamp Seattle
http://jeffcroft.com/blog/2010/may/0...hcamp-seattle/
"Here?s what happened: On his Mac, Ryan [Stewart, a Flash Platform evangelist at Adobe] pulled up a site called Eco Zoo. It is, seemingly, a pretty intense example of Flash development ? full of 3D rendering, rich interactions, and cute little characters. Then, he pulled up the same thing on his Nexus One. The site?s progress bar filled in and the 3D world appeared for a few seconds before the browser crashed. Ryan said (paraphrasing), ?Whoops! Well, it?s beta, and this is an intense example ? let?s try it again.? He tried it again and got the same result. So he said to the audience, ?Well, this one isn?t going to work, but does anyone have a Flash site they?d like to see running?? Someone shouted out ?Hulu.? Ryan said, ?Hulu doesn?t work,? and then wrapped up his demo, telling people if they wanted to try more sites they could find him later and he?d let them play with his Nexus One." -- Jeff Croft
You might want to read the comments there, including a justification by Ryan why he had to do the demo, even if he knew that Flash Player 10.1 is not ready yet for mobile phones. [At present, there is no mobile phone that is compatible with Flash.]
[Just another aside, I wish discourse here in Apple Insider or many other sites, is as civil as had been achieved in the comments in the linked article. You can actually learn about the Pros and Cons of Flash.]
The point that many readers pointed out is that if you do a demo, make sure that it works. This may or may not be emblematic of how Adobe address issues it had to confront.
In fairness, Ryan now has finally showed some sites that works with Flash:
Examples of Flash Content Running on Android
Well and good. But would it work with every variant of Android which are sprouting like mushrooms. And, how would it affect battery life?
Most important, would Adobe be able to keep up with the updates for all the variants of Android, and for that matter all other mobile phones if it expects to be universal gatekeeper application?
From my own experience as a user of Adobe product, I invest money in one of their costly products, only to find out later on that they have not upgraded the product to the version of the operating system (OS) of my Mac computer, and no defined time frame, if they would do it at all. Some clients of Adobe are held hostage by their whims and their calculation whether it is profitable for them to upgrade for specific a OS.
CGC
The ad didnt work for me. The coarse tone of the voice over didnt mesh with the visuals. I know what they were going for but I think they missed.
I agree.
Also, it's too busy. Could have been better to chop it into functionality pieces, and make them a series.
When you called the iPad flawed. What are you using for context. Are you comparing it to other tablet computers? Are you comparing to what the iPad will be in the future? Are you comparing it to using a different type of computing device?
It's smartly done, and will sell a lot of iPads probably but I wish they'd stop with that "magical" crap. It's a totally 1.0 device and has many flaws. The "magical" version is still about five years away IMO. Where else is there to go once you've brought out superlatives like that?
Sh*t - tried to view on iPad and got the blue flash logo of death.
I tried You Tube videos a gazillion times on the iPhone and more recently on the iPad, both wifi and 3G.
Your words here is evidence of your dishonesty. I bet you have not even touched and tried eiither the iPhone or the iPad. As others noted here, Google has converted its You Tube videos so that they may be viewed without Flash.
As to Android mobile phones working with Flash, here's a barrel of icewater for your bath, from the Flash master himself, while demoing that the beta version of Flash would work on Android:
On the Android Flash demo at FlashCamp Seattle
http://jeffcroft.com/blog/2010/may/0...hcamp-seattle/
"Here?s what happened: On his Mac, Ryan [Stewart, a Flash Platform evangelist at Adobe] pulled up a site called Eco Zoo. It is, seemingly, a pretty intense example of Flash development ? full of 3D rendering, rich interactions, and cute little characters. Then, he pulled up the same thing on his Nexus One. The site?s progress bar filled in and the 3D world appeared for a few seconds before the browser crashed. Ryan said (paraphrasing), ?Whoops! Well, it?s beta, and this is an intense example ? let?s try it again.? He tried it again and got the same result. So he said to the audience, ?Well, this one isn?t going to work, but does anyone have a Flash site they?d like to see running?? Someone shouted out ?Hulu.? Ryan said, ?Hulu doesn?t work,? and then wrapped up his demo, telling people if they wanted to try more sites they could find him later and he?d let them play with his Nexus One." -- Jeff Croft
You might want to read the comments there, including a justification by Ryan why he had to do the demo, even if he knew that Flash Player 10.1 is not ready yet for mobile phones. [At present, there is no mobile phone that is compatible with Flash.]
[Just another aside, I wish discourse here in Apple Insider or many other sites, is as civil as had been achieved in the comments in the linked article. You can actually learn about the Pros and Cons of Flash.]
The point that many readers pointed out is that if you do a demo, make sure that it works. This may or may not be emblematic of how Adobe address issues it had to confront.
In fairness, Ryan now has finally showed some sites that works with Flash:
Examples of Flash Content Running on Android
Well and good. But would it work with every variant of Android which are sprouting like mushrooms. And, how would it affect battery life?
Most important, would Adobe be able to keep up with the updates for all the variants of Android, and for that matter all other mobile phones if it expects to be universal gatekeeper application?
From my own experience as a user of Adobe product, I invest money in one of their costly products, only to find out later on that they have not upgraded the product to the version of the operating system (OS) of my Mac computer, and no defined time frame, if they would do it at all. Some clients of Adobe are held hostage by their whims and their calculation whether it is profitable for them to upgrade for specific a OS.
CGC
Even though I *really* hate Flash, it's nice to see they at least have it working on Android now. The thing is though, that everything except the Eco Zoo site he showed can with 100% certainty be done just as easily with HTML5/CSS/Javascript, so why not do it the standards-based way? Also, the Eco Zoo site can probably be done with Canvas/WebGL(or whatever it's called)/Javascript, though I'm not sure about that. It will certainly be possible in the near future though. So it's really a question of whether we want to let a company with as spotty a record as Adobe have full control over the future of rich mobile web applications, or do we want the whole web community to be the driving force behind this development? I certainly vote for the latter.
Also, sure you can play lots of games in the browser with Flash - but you'd get a LOT more out of your battery if those games were available as native iPhone apps. And that goes back to the point I've made here before, that I disagree with Adobe's goals, which are to make it as easy as possible for the *developers* to do as little work as possible and thus sacrificing part of the end-user experience. I think a developer's (being one myself) job is to make the end-user experience as good as possible on each platform, and to do that you need to optimize for each platform and conform to each platform's interface guidelines. Sure, I realize that for some smaller companies that's not feasible. IMO those companies should then pick a platform and stick with it until they can bring their stuff to another platform.
I honestly believe there's a relatively good chance that Adobe will have hi-jacked and completely watered down every platform 15 years down the road if they are allowed to get everyone over to developing exclusively with Flash - which is bound to happen because it won't be economically feasible to do anything but develop for the lowest common denominator.
There's my reasoning for hating Flash. That, and of course the fact that every single browser crash I've experienced the last 3 years has been because of Flash sure doesn't help.
it is "thin, beautiful, goes anywhere, and lasts all day."
So is my wife!
So is my wife!
Good one.
Now - can anyone tell me what the keyboard/music app in the advert is ? Please ?
The "magical crap" is called marketing. Whether you like it or not it works.
When you called the iPad flawed. What are you using for context. Are you comparing it to other tablet computers? Are you comparing to what the iPad will be in the future? Are you comparing it to using a different type of computing device?
Well it's mostly just opinion, but for "flaws" I meant the usual things a 1.0 device has to deal with both in software and hardware.
It doesn't yet print for instance, and Pages (which is the program I'm most going to be using on it), doesn't work properly or even have it's basic feature set available yet, so it will be at least version 2.0 of Pages and 3.3 or 4.0 (or maybe higher), of the OS before you can actually use it for basic writing tasks as I want to do.
Hardware-wise, it incorporates *none* of the many patents Apple developed over the last five years or so for various "magical" solutions related to the problems of tablet computing and is, (as a lot of people are prone to say lately), functionally just a big iPod touch as a result. The bezels on the side are so huge for instance that you can really only thumb type on it if you have very large hands and thus it fails to solve the problem of how to write on a tablet efficiently while actually mobile. You have to lay it down on a table for it to be useful or curl up on the couch. Also, David Hockney aside, there is of course a need in some situations for a stylus. Styli have been around since the beginning of civilisation in every culture, no matter what Steve Jobs says, there are situations where you absolutely need one.
These are problems that I believe will be solved, and judging by Apple's patent library, they believe so too. They just won't be solved in a 1.0 version. As the ad itself says, this is just the beginning (of basically a whole new platform).
So while I think it's a fantastic little device and I've already ordered one, for these reasons and many more I see it as a mass market, "get-grandma-used-to-it" kind of 1.0 device and I predict much more capable hardware and software in the near future.
Regardless of what Apple does with the iPad five years down the road, there will always be people (and you know who you are) that will whine till the end of time that they will NEVER buy an iPad unless it has <insert lame feature here>. Just the way it is.
Until Apple let's you actually do things with it rather than just observe content yes there will always be people that won't buy. But hats off to the beta buyers.
I like the new Ad, very well done with a familiar voice over
An actual manly voice for a change- methinks Apple trying to preempt the Google/Verizon Steroid Slate?
The ad didnt work for me. The coarse tone of the voice over didnt mesh with the visuals. I know what they were going for but I think they missed.
as a fan of apple, i hate to say i agree 100%
The "magical crap" is called marketing. Whether you like it or not it works.
Why can't the "magical" iPad view the "magical" World of Disney flash website?
I just bought a 13" MBP and the first thing I did in the store was test to see if all the flash ( and there is mega flash on that website's home page- shame on you SJ) loaded up and it past the test.
Best Apple ad in many, many years. No more "foofarah foo foo happy woo playful whimsy" stuff. It's like, "**** YOU B**CHES, YOU KNOW YOU WANT THIS. JUST ADMIT IT, SHUT UP and GET IT."
Well... shit, oh dear!
.
So is my wife!
... can your wife do flash?!
It's SuperMagical!
Reminds me of kids who are so full of life, sharing with you so excitedly what caught their attention at the time.
It reminds me also of a very close friend while in school, when I first arrived in the US, who was so full of adventure and mischief and spontaneity. With him, our group did things we might not do on our own. Gone to places we might have never considered. And more.
He always predicated his thoughts in superlatives. It's the best [product, time, adventure, etc.] in the world!
I was like a kid again. Knowing people like him enabled me to tolerate all the bigots and intolerant people, thereafter.
Life is beautiful.
CGC
+++
The magic of the mind!
.
Why can't the "magical" iPad view the "magical" World of Disney flash website? ...
Because there's a mobile HTML version of the site that iPad visitors are redirected to, through the magic of the user agent identity.
It's really pathetic that people read something about this somewhere on the web and, with no actual knowledge of what they are talking about, go around doing their sad little troll thing with it.
... and it past the test ...
BTW, the correct word is 'passed'.
When you called the iPad flawed. What are you using for context. Are you comparing it to other tablet computers? Are you comparing to what the iPad will be in the future? Are you comparing it to using a different type of computing device?
Agree.
The Mac, desktop and notebook versions, are still flawed. But I'm glad I bought one in 1984 and 1998 and 2008. If I'd adopted a philosophy of waiting for a "not flawed" product, I'd still be computer-less and waiting 26 years later.
My 2008 BMW is flawed (as the 2010 Bimmers are improved). But it was certainly nice for transporting me from place to place for the last 2 years (instead of walking), and one heck of a lot better than even a Toyota.