Which means phones which wont and dont support HTML5 anyway will get something that gives them HTML5 like features on their non HTML5 phones. What's your problem?
I don't think I have a problem, I was just pointing out that if your device is updated to Android 2.2, that doesn't automatically mean you'll be able to run Flash when it's released.
As far as HTML5 features go, I guess that's dependent on what version of webkit the browser is built upon..
All a phone needs to support the majority of HTML5 is an HTML5 compliant browser. Hardware specs don't matter so much. The only hardware intensive functions are Canvass and video playback.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
Which means phones which wont and dont support HTML5 anyway will get something that gives them HTML5 like features on their non HTML5 phones. What's your problem?
what i love most about that is that you couldn't do that if all the ads were in html4/5 with js
You don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Adblockers block the source.
Ads have to be verified, which makes self-contained, self-hosted ads basically impossible (nobody would trust your "hits" count).
If you host the ads from someplace that allows the advertisers to track usage, it becomes blockable. Even HTML ads. Even webbugs. Even transparent Flash containers.
oh now you're going to tell us adobe is a criminal. First we heard that adobe is against choice and is forcing you, to something, not sure what, and now we're comparing them to a criminal.
Well certainly adobe has been pretty lazy in regards to the mac platform. If people don't want to give them another shake, well, that's their choice.
it's called uninstall the plugin. clap your hands, yer done.
SIGH... I wasn't trying to say that they are a criminal, I was pointing out that recent behavior doesn't wipe out their history. And Adobe hasn't just been bad at supporting the Mac platform, they have a bad history of supporting anyone besides Windows. So the notion that they are now going to maintain all of the mobile platforms as well is one that I'll believe when I see it.
As for CHOICE... if Adobe is all about choice then they should encourage web developers to offer up different ways to access their content depending on which device is asking for it, instead of locking everything important on that site up in flash. If Adobe was for choice then they should publish the FULL swf spec so open source players could play content that requires verification.
that isn't rue based on adobe's recent -public- beta of flash player for mac, which runs extremely well.
A little premature for that claim, and what does it matter if they add one platform out of all the unsupported. There's still a big hole in their support and claims.
did you read the thread? There are several posts suggesting that adobe is against choice. So that infers, that you are being forced to do or use something. Or, if that's not what is meant, perhaps you can provide a better more detailed explanation of what is meant by adobe being against choice.
Then quote what you are replying to, otherwise, there's no way to know if your response is relevant or not, unless you prefer it that way.
Despite the media blitz about Apple's mobile devices not supporting flash, said devices are still flying off shelves. No one can keep the iPad in stock.
I'm ready for my 4th gen iPhone. No flash, no problem.
Actually they did give it a chance. Back when the iPhone first came out Jobs said that they tried to work with Adobe on getting Flash to work and it didn't work. Adobe has taken too long and Apple has moved on to bigger and better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
Because Apple first criticized THEM for a product that doesn't exist.
Instead of giving it a chance then deciding from there, they pushed out misinformation to justify not ever even attempting to make it work. Wouldn't you be mad if you were Adobe? Especially now that Android 2.2 has been shown to run it just fine?
The whole web isn't going to change to HTML5 because of Steve Jobs, it'll change because of Flash. Flash has been a bad choice since the start of it, just because the ease of use. But Flash is bad to the client, it works horrible with the machine resources and Adobe haven't done anything to optimize it, maybe because it is impossible to make it better just because of its core malfunction. I guess Flash will never work well in mobile devices. It worked horrible in Desktops from 800MHZ under, complete machines with video cards, more RAM and capabilities than those in the Smartphones of today. The Adobe Flash intentions are just an utopia, they can't make it work, and even if they release a full mobile version it will be buggy, crashy and a big drainer, a big bad experience for the end user. And above all that you have that Flash content isn't possible to be indexed, and the efforts to do it are very dissapointing, on the other hand HTML5 content is almost full indexable, and that is a really big plus. If I was Adobe I better re-create Flash as the best HTML5 animation compiler, to create banners and export is as HTML5 with JavaScript, that's the job they must have to do RIGHT NOW. Any time they expend trying to justify Flash on the Web is a waste. What could happen is that Apple creates a HTML5 Banner Creator Suite or something like that. Then, Adobe will REALLY, REALLY CRY OUT. Or maybe Apple decides to buy Adobe to straighten things up, who knows, but I don't think so, Adobe represents too many distractions for Apple. Anyway, forget about Flash, the time to begin a switch has come to a start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
LOL! Good article. Things are heating up between the two companies.
I personally see merit in both sides, but what I don't think is wise is for Steve to have dismissed flash as a possibility in the future of iphone.
Think of it. Is the WHOLE web going to change to html5 JUST because of Steve Jobs? The fact is, if these devices get advanced enough so the experience on a mobile device is as good as on a computer, then it'll be the iphone that doesn't have the full internet.
You guys thought I was crazy when I said iphone would get multitasking but look what happened. Now I'm saying it will get Flash some day.
The basis is what we've seen so far and Adobe's history. On what basis do you dispute them?
Wishful thinking perhaps.
Ipads, which lack flash, are flying off the shelves. Netbooks, which support flash, are dust collectors. In fact, Best Buy is currently hiring for an associate with dusting experience - coincidence?
I just hope the next version of Adobe's Flash Catalyst and InDesign allow exporting to HTML 5 animation instead of Flash. That would solve a lot of problems for me, I think.
If a criminal reforms, does that erase all of his past crimes? Adobe's recent work on the Mac version seems to be in response to all the negative attention it's gotten lately. Their development history has been terrible. Just read the comments from users on software download sites. ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groovetube
oh now you're going to tell us adobe is a criminal. First we heard that adobe is against choice and is forcing you, to something, not sure what, and now we're comparing them to a criminal. ...
Talk about straw men. It's very clear that he didn't call Adobe a criminal to anyone with even average intelligence. However, his analogy is entirely valid, even if pejorative.
AI need to take MAC address info from all members so a ban is a ban and no changing IDs possible unless they get another computer and after a while that will get old after a few!
Comments
Which means phones which wont and dont support HTML5 anyway will get something that gives them HTML5 like features on their non HTML5 phones. What's your problem?
I don't think I have a problem, I was just pointing out that if your device is updated to Android 2.2, that doesn't automatically mean you'll be able to run Flash when it's released.
As far as HTML5 features go, I guess that's dependent on what version of webkit the browser is built upon..
Unfortunately, the world is about image rather than actual substance.
Which means phones which wont and dont support HTML5 anyway will get something that gives them HTML5 like features on their non HTML5 phones. What's your problem?
what i love most about that is that you couldn't do that if all the ads were in html4/5 with js
You don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Adblockers block the source.
Ads have to be verified, which makes self-contained, self-hosted ads basically impossible (nobody would trust your "hits" count).
If you host the ads from someplace that allows the advertisers to track usage, it becomes blockable. Even HTML ads. Even webbugs. Even transparent Flash containers.
Adblock Plus and Safari Adblock, FTW.
oh now you're going to tell us adobe is a criminal. First we heard that adobe is against choice and is forcing you, to something, not sure what, and now we're comparing them to a criminal.
Well certainly adobe has been pretty lazy in regards to the mac platform. If people don't want to give them another shake, well, that's their choice.
it's called uninstall the plugin. clap your hands, yer done.
SIGH... I wasn't trying to say that they are a criminal, I was pointing out that recent behavior doesn't wipe out their history. And Adobe hasn't just been bad at supporting the Mac platform, they have a bad history of supporting anyone besides Windows. So the notion that they are now going to maintain all of the mobile platforms as well is one that I'll believe when I see it.
As for CHOICE... if Adobe is all about choice then they should encourage web developers to offer up different ways to access their content depending on which device is asking for it, instead of locking everything important on that site up in flash. If Adobe was for choice then they should publish the FULL swf spec so open source players could play content that requires verification.
that isn't rue based on adobe's recent -public- beta of flash player for mac, which runs extremely well.
A little premature for that claim, and what does it matter if they add one platform out of all the unsupported. There's still a big hole in their support and claims.
did you read the thread? There are several posts suggesting that adobe is against choice. So that infers, that you are being forced to do or use something. Or, if that's not what is meant, perhaps you can provide a better more detailed explanation of what is meant by adobe being against choice.
Then quote what you are replying to, otherwise, there's no way to know if your response is relevant or not, unless you prefer it that way.
I'm ready for my 4th gen iPhone. No flash, no problem.
what i love most about that is that you couldn't do that if all the ads were in html4/5 with js
Yet...
And as noted, John.B noted, if the source is blocked, it is blocked.
So unless a website wants to host all the ads on their own website (ain't gonna happen), should be relatively easy to block them.
... As fr the html5 wrangling, I believe adobe isn't the only one trying to pull and tug at things during the process, ...
"Pull and tug," is a disingenuous characterization of Adobe's attempts to torpedo HTML5 and particularly the Canvas element.
You have no basis for those statements. They are mere conjecture.
The basis is what we've seen so far and Adobe's history. On what basis do you dispute them?
Because Apple first criticized THEM for a product that doesn't exist.
Instead of giving it a chance then deciding from there, they pushed out misinformation to justify not ever even attempting to make it work. Wouldn't you be mad if you were Adobe? Especially now that Android 2.2 has been shown to run it just fine?
NY TImes still uses Flash on the web:
http://video.nytimes.com/video/playl...115/index.html
and you were trying to say?
Seems to be working pretty well...
LOL! Good article. Things are heating up between the two companies.
I personally see merit in both sides, but what I don't think is wise is for Steve to have dismissed flash as a possibility in the future of iphone.
Think of it. Is the WHOLE web going to change to html5 JUST because of Steve Jobs? The fact is, if these devices get advanced enough so the experience on a mobile device is as good as on a computer, then it'll be the iphone that doesn't have the full internet.
You guys thought I was crazy when I said iphone would get multitasking but look what happened. Now I'm saying it will get Flash some day.
... And try asking Linux users about Adobe's support for their platform.
What support?
The basis is what we've seen so far and Adobe's history. On what basis do you dispute them?
Wishful thinking perhaps.
Ipads, which lack flash, are flying off the shelves. Netbooks, which support flash, are dust collectors. In fact, Best Buy is currently hiring for an associate with dusting experience - coincidence?
If a criminal reforms, does that erase all of his past crimes? Adobe's recent work on the Mac version seems to be in response to all the negative attention it's gotten lately. Their development history has been terrible. Just read the comments from users on software download sites. ...
oh now you're going to tell us adobe is a criminal. First we heard that adobe is against choice and is forcing you, to something, not sure what, and now we're comparing them to a criminal. ...
Talk about straw men. It's very clear that he didn't call Adobe a criminal to anyone with even average intelligence. However, his analogy is entirely valid, even if pejorative.
Are you always uninformed, TechStud? Don't answer that, rhetorical question.
http://www.apple.com/ipad/ready-for-ipad/
AI need to take MAC address info from all members so a ban is a ban and no changing IDs possible unless they get another computer and after a while that will get old after a few!
oh yeah like that's kinda like when apple bought eMagic and said scrw you peecee users, getta mac or eat it.
It's not like it at all since Apple isn't falsely claiming it's the supporter of choice in cases where it's clearly not.