I'm no software engineer, but why is it so difficult for Adobe to adhere to the rules that all the other dev's follow that engineer Apps for Apples store products?
When it comes to allowing Flash apps to be compiled cross-platform, including for iPhone, I am 100% with Apple on this one. Reliance on 3rd party development tools is why it took for-freakin-ever for Adobe's apps to come to Mac OS X. And it's why so many of the basic freebie OS X features that Cocoa apps can tap into didn't exist in Adobe apps forever (and still don't in some cases). And it's why it took them years again to transition their apps to Intel processors, where had they listened to Apple four years before that when they were highly recommending everyone build their apps with xCode, it would have been a relatively quick and painless transition.
When Apple rolls out new iPhone/iPad APIs like multitasking, I don't want to have to wait 18 months before any of my apps can use it because it takes 12 months for the 3rd party tools they depend on to implement the APIs.
Apple introduces new features at a keynote, and the developer tools are available that afternoon. I'd prefer it stayed that way.
I'm no software engineer, but why is it so difficult for Adobe to adhere to the rules that all the other dev's follow that engineer Apps for Apples store products?
We're not talking about apps. Apps ain't got nothing to do with the situation.
that isn't rue based on adobe's recent -public- beta of flash player for mac, which runs extremely well.
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.
And try asking Linux users about Adobe's support for their platform.
Any time any company ever trots out the phase "this is about freedom for our customer" or any slight variation thereof, you have to turn in the opposite and run away. It is a lie, plain and simple, and a cynical one to boot.
Additionally, Adobe is the same company that (for its reasons) killed off Framemaker on the Mac, forcing people who use it on a daily basis initially to run it in Classic. CLASSIC. This farce went on for some time until the product completely disappeared. Those who use it were not given the "freedom of choice" between it and InDesign: they were *forced* into the freedom of using InDesign.
Just saw Abobe's self-serving ad on the back page of today's L.A. Times Business section. Just for yuks I went to the web address they published. As I suspected there was no way for me to respond there. The meta message is this: listen to what we are telling you, we don't want to hear what you have to say back.
As for the so-called freedom of choice they espouse: I choose to use Apple products because they are free from cheap-ass one size fits all apps that you promote with your "code only once" philosophy.
If you don't like the rules in Apple's game, play a different game.
Let the marketplace decide who's ultimately right and wrong in this debate.
funny, there are taking away my rights the experience the web!... need i mention xp64,vista64, windows7 64bit plugins?... where are they? (and how about the full plugin on any other phone product?)
if we are to trust adobe to honour "the freedom to produce, view and experience" the web GODs that are adobe... I WANT THE 64 BIT PLUGINS... if adobe can not do that they should fade and blow away!
btw the only thing worth while for flash is "farm ville" the rest is video (x263) (which i'm sure adobe wants a fee from apple if it was placed on the pod devices...
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.
And try asking Linux users about Adobe's support for their platform.
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.
Any time any company ever trots out the phase "this is about freedom for our customer" or any slight variation thereof, you have to turn in the opposite and run away. It is a lie, plain and simple, and a cynical one to boot.
Additionally, Adobe is the same company that (for its reasons) killed off Framemaker on the Mac, forcing people who use it on a daily basis initially to run it in Classic. CLASSIC. This farce went on for some time until the product completely disappeared. Those who use it were not given the "freedom of choice" between it and InDesign: they were *forced* into the freedom of using InDesign.
Puh-leeze.
oh yeah like that's kinda like when apple bought eMagic and said scrw you peecee users, getta mac or eat it.
In it Adobe is accusing Apple of restricting people's "freedom" by not "allowing" Flash on their mobile devices, thus not enabling them the "choice" to access Flash content on the Internet.
Did you read my open letter?
In it I detailed my failed attempt to download Adobe's Flash Player software to an Android 1.6 device (HTC Magic) due to the platform being unsupported by Adobe.
Now if Adobe is accusing Apple of denying people "freedom" and "choice" by not allowing the Flash Player software on iPhone OS, what's Adobe doing by not allowing the Flash Player on my Android 1.6 device?
Aren't they denying me my "freedom" and "choice" under their own definition?
Remember it was Adobe defining these things in their letter.
Android 2.1+ devices will be flash capable. Updates are slowly coming out, but they're coming out for those older android devices to bring them up on the new android releases. It's not a great system, but it's better than no flash ever which is the system apple's playing by.
I'm game. I fully accept any new standard that wants to step up to the plate, and that companies are willing to make an effort to make work on mobile. The fact remains, however, the web as it is today makes use of flash a lot, so ultimately a mobile device supporting it seamlessly is ideal for a "full web experience."
Ideals, and hopes for "ultimately" or "eventually" are well and good ... if the reality support them. Or, if the history of the company provides any guidance that it will be so. I doubt that may become the case for Adobe.
One reality. How long had mobile devices been around? How come until now Adobe has not yet created a Flash that by now should have been already optimized for mobile devices?
If I understood the reports correctly, Adobe had been working on a mobile version of Flash that should come out in 2009. If I have to speculate, this move by Adobe was prompted mainly by the decision of Apple/Steve Jobs to exclude Flash completely. Before that obviously, Adobe completely ignored the research and innovations to create Flash that would work with mobile devices. That would mean writing the script for the ARM technologyl something that supposedly has not done more than likely prior to Apple's gambit.
Now, trying furiously to catch up for its neglect, Adobe;s Flash for mobile devices has been delayed again, perhaps later this year, and that may be a big if. They are still in beta version. The long delay in upgrades, if it will do it at all is typical of Adobe. I should know, I am a victim of such neglect by Adobe. Many Mac users have their own stories to shares, albeit anecdotally.
You bet Steve Jobs and Apple have issues with Adobe and its conscious neglect of the needs of Apple productsl; simply because it was not big enough for Adobe which concentrated its effort on Wintel compatibility and upgrades. If it ever created or upgraded any of its Mac-centric products, they were at best suited for second-class citizens.
Steve Jobs is determined not to be at the mercy of Adobe again, especially now that Apple has the upperhand. It is a risky gambit that Apple/Steve Jobs is playing. If it fails, Apple may again suffer the fate it had with the desktop computing.
But, if Steve Jobs had to choose between "Control" and "market share", it will always choose more "Control" to steer the direction Apple had to navigate, from hereon. And so far, even if it is a significant but still a "minority" (as opposed to a monopoly), Apple remains the game changer in every market it has entered so far, since Steve Jobs came back to Apple.
As such, Apple can and will try to define how the direction of mobile computing and consumer products in the near future, at least. So far, the companies and movers in the industries that matter seem to be following or at least conceding to Apple's/Steve Job's view. This time, it is either for Adobe to follow the rules or be left behind. Adobe cannot dictate, as it seems it is trying to do.
And contrary to your assertion that beta version when demonstrated in public by the Adobe evangelist himself crashed the Android Nexus One. He could have chosen a better example, or even better chosen several example; but was not prepared for such a possibility. This may be emblematic of how Adobe, or at least some of its staff, an evangelist at that tackle the challenges they must deal with.
One more thing, Adobe Flash is not universal as being bandied. The mobile phones and other mobile computing devices are a good subset of where it is not at present, not a participant. Even in browser-based internet, many sites do not employ Flash. And, to reiterate, many of the more influential sites are gradually conceding to provide alternatives to Flash -- because Steve Jobs/Apple mobile computing devices (customers) mandated that it be so.
Is it fair? Steve Jobs and many Mac users believe so.
And for many companies, including the porn industry, and developers, the main question they had to ask was: Is it profitable? Many acted accordingly.
Obviously, companies that would wish to derail Apple are trying their best to come up with a counter strategy. If Adobe will serve their goal to derail Apple, they will grasp this option to do so.
However, let us not delude ourselves into thinking that companies like Google, plan to provide Flash for reason of fairness, openness or some other more altruistic reasons. Very convincing argument: Google and many tech companies did not even blink to trample on the rights of many Chinese and citizens of other countries -- to be abke to do business in these countries. If Google changed its mind recently and shut down its internet offices in China, it is most likely not because of seeing the light. for one thing, it still maintains its offices in Hongkong, which is still China, not just mainland China,
It's not crashing. Android gives you a dialog when an app crashes.
Here's the reviewer's comment (I really don't see why he would be lying):
*Update: Just wanted to clarify, flash didnt crash here, I just accidentally hit the home button while I was really trying to hit the back button. Android users know that you get an error message if an app crashes, I know because I have a Nexus One. Theres hidden home,back, and power buttons (on the side of the prototype) u do not see in the videos/photos, sorry if that confused any readers.
The fanboi has no motive to fabricate his own version of truth after the entire webz laughed at him? Seriously?
Comments
Here is how to deal with Flash.
iPhone/iPad = no worries no Flash (STFU)
Mac Book = install click to flash or uninstall Flash plugin (STFU)
Mac Pro = see above (STFU)
Windows = no problem (STFU)
Android = go to the AndroidInsider website (STFU)
[Disney] just redirect you to a version that doesn't need flash to operate. Just like ANY decent site should do.
The internet's content should NOT be locked in a proprietary container. I do not insist that Flash disappear from the web.
I simply would like sites to stop insisting that I need [Flash] to view any of their content. Do they really want to reach me or not?
Fair point, maybe they're just a bunch of lazy buggers?
When Apple rolls out new iPhone/iPad APIs like multitasking, I don't want to have to wait 18 months before any of my apps can use it because it takes 12 months for the 3rd party tools they depend on to implement the APIs.
Apple introduces new features at a keynote, and the developer tools are available that afternoon. I'd prefer it stayed that way.
I'm no software engineer, but why is it so difficult for Adobe to adhere to the rules that all the other dev's follow that engineer Apps for Apples store products?
We're not talking about apps. Apps ain't got nothing to do with the situation.
That is the answer to your question.
that isn't rue based on adobe's recent -public- beta of flash player for mac, which runs extremely well.
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.
And try asking Linux users about Adobe's support for their platform.
Additionally, Adobe is the same company that (for its reasons) killed off Framemaker on the Mac, forcing people who use it on a daily basis initially to run it in Classic. CLASSIC. This farce went on for some time until the product completely disappeared. Those who use it were not given the "freedom of choice" between it and InDesign: they were *forced* into the freedom of using InDesign.
Puh-leeze.
As for the so-called freedom of choice they espouse: I choose to use Apple products because they are free from cheap-ass one size fits all apps that you promote with your "code only once" philosophy.
If you don't like the rules in Apple's game, play a different game.
Let the marketplace decide who's ultimately right and wrong in this debate.
wow this must be hurting adobe
funny, there are taking away my rights the experience the web!... need i mention xp64,vista64, windows7 64bit plugins?... where are they? (and how about the full plugin on any other phone product?)
if we are to trust adobe to honour "the freedom to produce, view and experience" the web GODs that are adobe... I WANT THE 64 BIT PLUGINS... if adobe can not do that they should fade and blow away!
btw the only thing worth while for flash is "farm ville" the rest is video (x263) (which i'm sure adobe wants a fee from apple if it was placed on the pod devices...
so just fade and blow away!.
You have no way of knowing what those people knew, or didn't know.
Your assertion is mere wishful thinking.
I think we can be pretty sure most of them knew. Most people aren't that stupid.
??? Meanwhile Steve Jobs' Disney website it chock full of FLASH.
Uhhh...Millions of people on Mac and Windows computers surf to Disney. It starts with the iPhone OS. PC's later.
You're the one guy Adobe has hired to work on Flash for Mac aren't you? Shouldn't you stop playing around on AI and go back to work? Hummm?
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.
And try asking Linux users about Adobe's support for their platform.
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.
wow this must be hurting adobe
This should be considered counter terrorism.
@Steve/chronster/Groovetube
You're the one guy Adobe has hired to work on Flash for Mac aren't you? Shouldn't you stop playing around on AI and go back to work? Hummm?
yeah see it all comes down to that doesn't it. When you can't discuss the issue head on, just either call them a liar, or adobe shill.
classic.
Any time any company ever trots out the phase "this is about freedom for our customer" or any slight variation thereof, you have to turn in the opposite and run away. It is a lie, plain and simple, and a cynical one to boot.
Additionally, Adobe is the same company that (for its reasons) killed off Framemaker on the Mac, forcing people who use it on a daily basis initially to run it in Classic. CLASSIC. This farce went on for some time until the product completely disappeared. Those who use it were not given the "freedom of choice" between it and InDesign: they were *forced* into the freedom of using InDesign.
Puh-leeze.
oh yeah like that's kinda like when apple bought eMagic and said scrw you peecee users, getta mac or eat it.
Did you read Adobe's letter?
In it Adobe is accusing Apple of restricting people's "freedom" by not "allowing" Flash on their mobile devices, thus not enabling them the "choice" to access Flash content on the Internet.
Did you read my open letter?
In it I detailed my failed attempt to download Adobe's Flash Player software to an Android 1.6 device (HTC Magic) due to the platform being unsupported by Adobe.
Now if Adobe is accusing Apple of denying people "freedom" and "choice" by not allowing the Flash Player software on iPhone OS, what's Adobe doing by not allowing the Flash Player on my Android 1.6 device?
Aren't they denying me my "freedom" and "choice" under their own definition?
Remember it was Adobe defining these things in their letter.
Android 2.1+ devices will be flash capable. Updates are slowly coming out, but they're coming out for those older android devices to bring them up on the new android releases. It's not a great system, but it's better than no flash ever which is the system apple's playing by.
I'm game. I fully accept any new standard that wants to step up to the plate, and that companies are willing to make an effort to make work on mobile. The fact remains, however, the web as it is today makes use of flash a lot, so ultimately a mobile device supporting it seamlessly is ideal for a "full web experience."
Ideals, and hopes for "ultimately" or "eventually" are well and good ... if the reality support them. Or, if the history of the company provides any guidance that it will be so. I doubt that may become the case for Adobe.
One reality. How long had mobile devices been around? How come until now Adobe has not yet created a Flash that by now should have been already optimized for mobile devices?
If I understood the reports correctly, Adobe had been working on a mobile version of Flash that should come out in 2009. If I have to speculate, this move by Adobe was prompted mainly by the decision of Apple/Steve Jobs to exclude Flash completely. Before that obviously, Adobe completely ignored the research and innovations to create Flash that would work with mobile devices. That would mean writing the script for the ARM technologyl something that supposedly has not done more than likely prior to Apple's gambit.
Now, trying furiously to catch up for its neglect, Adobe;s Flash for mobile devices has been delayed again, perhaps later this year, and that may be a big if. They are still in beta version. The long delay in upgrades, if it will do it at all is typical of Adobe. I should know, I am a victim of such neglect by Adobe. Many Mac users have their own stories to shares, albeit anecdotally.
You bet Steve Jobs and Apple have issues with Adobe and its conscious neglect of the needs of Apple productsl; simply because it was not big enough for Adobe which concentrated its effort on Wintel compatibility and upgrades. If it ever created or upgraded any of its Mac-centric products, they were at best suited for second-class citizens.
Steve Jobs is determined not to be at the mercy of Adobe again, especially now that Apple has the upperhand. It is a risky gambit that Apple/Steve Jobs is playing. If it fails, Apple may again suffer the fate it had with the desktop computing.
But, if Steve Jobs had to choose between "Control" and "market share", it will always choose more "Control" to steer the direction Apple had to navigate, from hereon. And so far, even if it is a significant but still a "minority" (as opposed to a monopoly), Apple remains the game changer in every market it has entered so far, since Steve Jobs came back to Apple.
As such, Apple can and will try to define how the direction of mobile computing and consumer products in the near future, at least. So far, the companies and movers in the industries that matter seem to be following or at least conceding to Apple's/Steve Job's view. This time, it is either for Adobe to follow the rules or be left behind. Adobe cannot dictate, as it seems it is trying to do.
And contrary to your assertion that beta version when demonstrated in public by the Adobe evangelist himself crashed the Android Nexus One. He could have chosen a better example, or even better chosen several example; but was not prepared for such a possibility. This may be emblematic of how Adobe, or at least some of its staff, an evangelist at that tackle the challenges they must deal with.
One more thing, Adobe Flash is not universal as being bandied. The mobile phones and other mobile computing devices are a good subset of where it is not at present, not a participant. Even in browser-based internet, many sites do not employ Flash. And, to reiterate, many of the more influential sites are gradually conceding to provide alternatives to Flash -- because Steve Jobs/Apple mobile computing devices (customers) mandated that it be so.
Is it fair? Steve Jobs and many Mac users believe so.
And for many companies, including the porn industry, and developers, the main question they had to ask was: Is it profitable? Many acted accordingly.
Obviously, companies that would wish to derail Apple are trying their best to come up with a counter strategy. If Adobe will serve their goal to derail Apple, they will grasp this option to do so.
However, let us not delude ourselves into thinking that companies like Google, plan to provide Flash for reason of fairness, openness or some other more altruistic reasons. Very convincing argument: Google and many tech companies did not even blink to trample on the rights of many Chinese and citizens of other countries -- to be abke to do business in these countries. If Google changed its mind recently and shut down its internet offices in China, it is most likely not because of seeing the light. for one thing, it still maintains its offices in Hongkong, which is still China, not just mainland China,
CGC
It's not crashing. Android gives you a dialog when an app crashes.
Here's the reviewer's comment (I really don't see why he would be lying):
*Update: Just wanted to clarify, flash didnt crash here, I just accidentally hit the home button while I was really trying to hit the back button. Android users know that you get an error message if an app crashes, I know because I have a Nexus One. Theres hidden home,back, and power buttons (on the side of the prototype) u do not see in the videos/photos, sorry if that confused any readers.
The fanboi has no motive to fabricate his own version of truth after the entire webz laughed at him? Seriously?