I rarely use Flash and I don't really like it. But it's unacceptable for a hardware and OS manufacturer to tell users or developers what applications they can and cannot run. This needs to stop.
You mean like how you can no longer use Linux on a PS3?
Or how an Xbox with an upgraded hard drive can no longer acess Xbox live?
Adobe not just tried to kill FreeHand to keep their monopoly, they did the same with FrameMaker, a most excellent product, which they bought and then kept around only for a tiny niche, discontinuing Mac support, etc.
Thanks to Adobe, there's no decent technical publishing platform on the Mac other than TeX, which is about as user friendly as the the shell.
Adobe is constantly afraid of competing in the marketplace and rather competes buy buying and then killing competing products.
Adobe is also lazy. In more than ten years, and despite Apple's constant emphasis that developers should not make any assumptions about the file system on which the OS runs, Adobe's CS5 STILL doesn't run or install on a case-sensitive file system like HFSX, even though it has been with Mac OS X since about the 10.2 days, and before that there was UFS which also was case-sensitive.
Their whining about Flash being open is intolerable. Flash brought all my computers to their knees, until there was finally a tool like ClickToFlash, which saves my computer's sanity. Hopefully Flash dies a quick and miserable death.
It's not a question of "supporting"; Apple is actively preventing Adobe from delivering Flash to iPhone. And it's not like there aren't plenty of inefficient and buggy applications on iPhone already. Apple isn't worried about Flash being bad, Apple is worried about Flash being good enough so that many people will start using it.
But Apple isn't just keeping Flash off the iPhone, they are also keeping native applications that happen to have been developed with Adobe's Flash development environment off the iPhone. Those native applications are not using Flash, they are full Objective-C apps; they simply allow Flash developers to use the expertise that they already have instead of learning Apple's iPhone APIs.
I rarely use Flash and I don't really like it. But it's unacceptable for a hardware and OS manufacturer to tell users or developers what applications they can and cannot run. This needs to stop.
Two points of contention here:
1) Adobe's CEO stated that Flash apps for the iPhone use a runtime... that's a no-no
2) It is the iPhone's frameworks, APIs and development tools that provide and preserve the consistent UX... why would Apple want to cede that to anyone else (all other considerations aside)?
Great article Danny, the amount of distorted shit the run of the mill pc tec pundits through apple's way, the adobe soap opera included, in unbelievable.
I wouldn't install flash on any of our phones (Blackberry, HTC with WinMo 6.5). No thanks. On the Macbook sure. My daughter plays all the Disney games that are in Flash.
Steve could convince Disney to support HTML5 on their kids sites if he really wanted to see it fade into history. I doubt that will happen though. Flash will be around for some time to come.
I can't believe the number of people that are responding with "nice article." It is horribly distorted and inaccurate.
Apparently the goal was a "history repeats itself" type story, truth be dammed.
Wow, very informative reasoning on why you make this claim... oh wait...
Sorry man but you've done nothing to add to the discussion (except prove that you don't know the correct use of the word "dammed"). Prove why this article is false when clearly there is infinitely more logic, reasoning, and historical proof than what you provided.
Go back to your bridge you troll. I'm pretty sure you didn't read the article and just read the name (it's a start I guess) and then made your brilliant expose on how wrong Dan was... oh wait...
The real reason Apple is using "Display PDF" is because using Postscript in the window server was a mess. It gave nice output, but it was the wrong level of abstraction for a window system.
But actually, "Display PDF" is a misnomer. Quartz these days is a run-of-the-mill window server, not significantly different from (and actually more limited than) X11. What remains of "PDF" in there as far as most applications are concerned is just the basic graphics and compositing concepts, but they are widely used in industry anyway.
Horse****. Xorg is still 3-5 years behind Quartz. Compositing is a kludge and a constant dog chasing it's tail issue with GNOME, KDE 4.x and Nvidia, let alone AMD.
Keep telling yourself Xorg is just as good. I'm using it at the moment. Linux has two gripes for years they've wanted for FREE from Apple:
Display PDF/Quartz/Quartz2D and QuickTime as if Apple is going to give it away when they've been offered billions for it and still turned it down.
The area Apple has been slacking on is keeping current with OpenGL. Ironically, they are no more than 6 months behind and yet Xorg has spent the past 10 years trying to mimic all that Apple's display technology does, not the least of which is wishing Linux had Colorsync.
Thanks! I know just the person to forward this story to!
Long read. But honestly, isn't Apple becoming the new Microsoft or greed mentality? Example, macs used to be cheaper and working for Apple even in retail, paid well. Today we still don't have flash nor dvr on Apple TV and neither do we have a ProSumer desktop i7 with 4-8 cores but instead just pro workstations made with some server parts and the harsh reality is the ProSumer market, less direct x, but for musicians and rising editor, the iMac can't cut it as it lacks the express slot for the ProSumer hardware devices like the fatso or high end reverbs on chips that takes a huge chunk of processing off the CPU. You buy the express device for around $400 and it come with dime plug INS. Fatso hardware is $2000, the plug in that you could buy seperate and add is about $495. Then Apple could make pci express hardware helping the CPU drain cause the way GPU will one day. OT Was at Apple today. An Apple friend said he was thinking of getting an iMac, selling his MacBook pro and getting an ipad. He is the 3rd person I know that's doing this. You have to wonder how many are going to do this. At the same time a MacBook with 4 cores isn't going to run that long.
Some will also argue it has nothing to do with glitches but everything to do with gaming thus no flash and certainly no shockwave.
I see Apple growing but they are missing those that they once targeted 100% and now rather cater to mom and pop iLife users. Heck, iWeb could be a killer program if they put sone time into it but I read the logic staff is tiny and Shake? Well that's over and it's to bad. Apple has the money to do both and I wish they would. Look at Pro Tools/Avid, they were smart enough to pick up maudio as prosumer hardware and software is big business. Gaming I read here is supposedly bigger than DVD and music combined. Hmm
So what? A similarly themed story could have been written about Apple, Microsoft, EA, UBI Soft and a long list of corporations with their huge pile of crap. And they all have the same rotten smell.
HTML5 is not a replacement for Flash ... yet. Content providers all over the world are not going to, overnight, fire all their Flash developers and hire, what... people to write code? For a "standard-based" platform that's in draft spec?
You are correct. HTML5 is not, in its current form, a replacement for Flash. Neither is Flash Lite.
Long read. But honestly, isn't Apple becoming the new Microsoft or greed mentality? Example, macs used to be cheaper and working for Apple even in retail, paid well. Today we still don't have flash nor dvr on Apple TV and neither do we have a ProSumer desktop i7 with 4-8 cores but instead just pro workstations made with some server parts and the harsh reality is the ProSumer market, less direct x, but for musicians and rising editor, the iMac can't cut it as it lacks the express slot for the ProSumer hardware devices like the fatso or high end reverbs on chips that takes a huge chunk of processing off the CPU. You buy the express device for around $400 and it come with dime plug INS. Fatso hardware is $2000, the plug in that you could buy seperate and add is about $495. Then Apple could make pci express hardware helping the CPU drain cause the way GPU will one day. OT Was at Apple today. An Apple friend said he was thinking of getting an iMac, selling his MacBook pro and getting an ipad. He is the 3rd person I know that's doing this. You have to wonder how many are going to do this. At the same time a MacBook with 4 cores isn't going to run that long.
Some will also argue it has nothing to do with glitches but everything to do with gaming thus no flash and certainly no shockwave.
I see Apple growing but they are missing those that they once targeted 100% and now rather cater to mom and pop iLife users. Heck, iWeb could be a killer program if they put sone time into it but I read the logic staff is tiny and Shake? Well that's over and it's to bad. Apple has the money to do both and I wish they would. Look at Pro Tools/Avid, they were smart enough to pick up maudio as prosumer hardware and software is big business. Gaming I read here is supposedly bigger than DVD and music combined. Hmm
my 0.8811 cents. (Grin).
What? I'm sorry but I couldn't follow anything you said. Coherent thought would be helpful.
Steve could convince Disney to support HTML5 on their kids sites if he really wanted to see it fade into history. I doubt that will happen though. Flash will be around for some time to come.
Actually, Disney has a site that works on my iPad, so they're already apparently working on it. Their games don't work, but it's a start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avidfcp
Long read. But honestly, isn't Apple becoming the new Microsoft or greed mentality? Example, macs used to be cheaper and working for Apple even in retail, paid well.
I quit reading after this because you're obviously imagining things.
When were Macs EVER cheaper than PCs. Comparable to similar quality PCs, sometimes, but never significantly cheaper.
Or maybe you mean that they were cheaper than they are now. Nope, that's not true either. My IIsi was an entry level machine when I bought it - at $2500. I just bought a $599 Mini.
When did Apple pay more in retail than they do today?
Adobe not just tried to kill FreeHand to keep their monopoly, they did the same with FrameMaker, a most excellent product, which they bought and then kept around only for a tiny niche, discontinuing Mac support, etc.
I used to be a huge Director and Lingo fan and I still prefer its interface to Flash. Adobe should have rolled the two into a single product. Now Director languishes in some backwater page.
It's funny how some of the "exciting new features" of AI CS5 are things that appeared in FreeHand eight years ago. And the selection tool in AI are STILL as clunky and annoying as ever. FreeHand's intelligent tools feature was a huge time saver - tools that could figure out what you wanted to do and switch tools automatically (eg, move the object cursor over a point and it turned into a tool for selecting points - a bit of simple imagination that was and still is lacking at Adobe.) Despite its strengths, Illustrator is still as much as a decade behind FreeHand in many areas.
Two other examples worthy of note: When the top two Mac magazines (MacUser (US) and MacWorld) were both on the scene there was a lot of material every month for mainstream Mac users. Then MW bought MU and killed it. This might have slimmed down the competition, but it was a great disservice to Mac users.
Another example is Maya. Alias used to promote the heck out of it and it was the top application of its kind, then AutoDesk bought Alias and, while AD continues to tweak Maya, it does absolutely nothing to promote it (as with Adobe and Director). As a result sales dropped precipitously, just as with Adobe and Director. As for Maya, this is a mixed blessing. While you no longer have to pay $8 K for Unlimited, the value of Maya on a resume has been greatly diminished and it is extremely rare to see Maya on a job posting.
My IIsi was an entry level machine when I bought it - at $2500.
Not to be unfriendly, but the Si was not entry level but a couple of steps up. Cheaper deals were available from gray market sources, but as regarding the SRP, the LC was introduced that same year at a price of $2,500. The entry level machine would be the Mac Classic, which was available for $1,000, and $1,500 with options. The Si was introduced at $3,770 and a $4,570 version also available.
One thing that Apple has been very good at over the past decade has been in increasing performance, storage, RAM and other goodies while keeping the price the same or lower. For example, the original 15" Bondi iMac (233 MHz PowerPC, 32 MB RAM, 4.0 GB HD, CRT display, CD only) sold for $1,300. Today the baseline iMac (3.06GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB HD, 21.5" LED flat panel, superdrive) costs $1,199.
Comments
from: http://www.zeldman.com/2010/05/14/apple-responds/
It's not a question of "supporting";
I rarely use Flash and I don't really like it. But it's unacceptable for a hardware and OS manufacturer to tell users or developers what applications they can and cannot run. This needs to stop.
You mean like how you can no longer use Linux on a PS3?
Or how an Xbox with an upgraded hard drive can no longer acess Xbox live?
Or how my home office is unsuitable to develop for the WII -
If the iPad is just a "big iPod Touch" and not a real computer, then is it not unsurprising that it's not as "open" as a real computer.
Thanks to Adobe, there's no decent technical publishing platform on the Mac other than TeX, which is about as user friendly as the the shell.
Adobe is constantly afraid of competing in the marketplace and rather competes buy buying and then killing competing products.
Adobe is also lazy. In more than ten years, and despite Apple's constant emphasis that developers should not make any assumptions about the file system on which the OS runs, Adobe's CS5 STILL doesn't run or install on a case-sensitive file system like HFSX, even though it has been with Mac OS X since about the 10.2 days, and before that there was UFS which also was case-sensitive.
Their whining about Flash being open is intolerable. Flash brought all my computers to their knees, until there was finally a tool like ClickToFlash, which saves my computer's sanity. Hopefully Flash dies a quick and miserable death.
During the merger with Apple Adobe fixed the cost to Apple at $10/installed system of OS X to run Display Postscript.
When NeXTStep was $799 for user and $4999 for Developer that cost was not a problem.
When the Developer Tools went to $0 and the User is now $129 the $10/copy is massive.
The guys rewrote WindowServer and created Quartz for Display PDF and much more w/o Adobe involved and the rest is history.
Those are great points! Apple was adapting to the market, while Adobe chose to remain static to exploit an advantage (cash cow).
...mmmm... same old, same old!
.
It's not a question of "supporting"; Apple is actively preventing Adobe from delivering Flash to iPhone. And it's not like there aren't plenty of inefficient and buggy applications on iPhone already. Apple isn't worried about Flash being bad, Apple is worried about Flash being good enough so that many people will start using it.
But Apple isn't just keeping Flash off the iPhone, they are also keeping native applications that happen to have been developed with Adobe's Flash development environment off the iPhone. Those native applications are not using Flash, they are full Objective-C apps; they simply allow Flash developers to use the expertise that they already have instead of learning Apple's iPhone APIs.
I rarely use Flash and I don't really like it. But it's unacceptable for a hardware and OS manufacturer to tell users or developers what applications they can and cannot run. This needs to stop.
Two points of contention here:
1) Adobe's CEO stated that Flash apps for the iPhone use a runtime... that's a no-no
2) It is the iPhone's frameworks, APIs and development tools that provide and preserve the consistent UX... why would Apple want to cede that to anyone else (all other considerations aside)?
.
In case anybody has not seen this yet:
from: http://www.zeldman.com/2010/05/14/apple-responds/
Now that's funny....did you see the Adobe full page adv. today in the WSJ?
You should be a writer for Conan O'Brien!
In the end its the customers who will vote with their wallets. I'm betting on Apple
Steve could convince Disney to support HTML5 on their kids sites if he really wanted to see it fade into history. I doubt that will happen though. Flash will be around for some time to come.
I can't believe the number of people that are responding with "nice article." It is horribly distorted and inaccurate.
Apparently the goal was a "history repeats itself" type story, truth be dammed.
Wow, very informative reasoning on why you make this claim... oh wait...
Sorry man but you've done nothing to add to the discussion (except prove that you don't know the correct use of the word "dammed"). Prove why this article is false when clearly there is infinitely more logic, reasoning, and historical proof than what you provided.
Go back to your bridge you troll. I'm pretty sure you didn't read the article and just read the name (it's a start I guess) and then made your brilliant expose on how wrong Dan was... oh wait...
Apple caters to customer who are willing to pay more for a product that works better.
Products, like Flash, are therefore a threat to the Mac experience.
Therefore Adobe had to either improve Flash or be dumped.
Adobe chose poorly!
Hopefully this will be their wake up call.
The real reason Apple is using "Display PDF" is because using Postscript in the window server was a mess. It gave nice output, but it was the wrong level of abstraction for a window system.
But actually, "Display PDF" is a misnomer. Quartz these days is a run-of-the-mill window server, not significantly different from (and actually more limited than) X11. What remains of "PDF" in there as far as most applications are concerned is just the basic graphics and compositing concepts, but they are widely used in industry anyway.
Horse****. Xorg is still 3-5 years behind Quartz. Compositing is a kludge and a constant dog chasing it's tail issue with GNOME, KDE 4.x and Nvidia, let alone AMD.
Keep telling yourself Xorg is just as good. I'm using it at the moment. Linux has two gripes for years they've wanted for FREE from Apple:
Display PDF/Quartz/Quartz2D and QuickTime as if Apple is going to give it away when they've been offered billions for it and still turned it down.
The area Apple has been slacking on is keeping current with OpenGL. Ironically, they are no more than 6 months behind and yet Xorg has spent the past 10 years trying to mimic all that Apple's display technology does, not the least of which is wishing Linux had Colorsync.
For more information visit http://www.freefreehand.org
Thanks! I know just the person to forward this story to!
Long read. But honestly, isn't Apple becoming the new Microsoft or greed mentality? Example, macs used to be cheaper and working for Apple even in retail, paid well. Today we still don't have flash nor dvr on Apple TV and neither do we have a ProSumer desktop i7 with 4-8 cores but instead just pro workstations made with some server parts and the harsh reality is the ProSumer market, less direct x, but for musicians and rising editor, the iMac can't cut it as it lacks the express slot for the ProSumer hardware devices like the fatso or high end reverbs on chips that takes a huge chunk of processing off the CPU. You buy the express device for around $400 and it come with dime plug INS. Fatso hardware is $2000, the plug in that you could buy seperate and add is about $495. Then Apple could make pci express hardware helping the CPU drain cause the way GPU will one day. OT Was at Apple today. An Apple friend said he was thinking of getting an iMac, selling his MacBook pro and getting an ipad. He is the 3rd person I know that's doing this. You have to wonder how many are going to do this. At the same time a MacBook with 4 cores isn't going to run that long.
Some will also argue it has nothing to do with glitches but everything to do with gaming thus no flash and certainly no shockwave.
I see Apple growing but they are missing those that they once targeted 100% and now rather cater to mom and pop iLife users. Heck, iWeb could be a killer program if they put sone time into it but I read the logic staff is tiny and Shake? Well that's over and it's to bad. Apple has the money to do both and I wish they would. Look at Pro Tools/Avid, they were smart enough to pick up maudio as prosumer hardware and software is big business. Gaming I read here is supposedly bigger than DVD and music combined. Hmm
my 0.8811 cents. (Grin).
HTML5 is not a replacement for Flash ... yet. Content providers all over the world are not going to, overnight, fire all their Flash developers and hire, what... people to write code? For a "standard-based" platform that's in draft spec?
You are correct. HTML5 is not, in its current form, a replacement for Flash. Neither is Flash Lite.
Long read. But honestly, isn't Apple becoming the new Microsoft or greed mentality? Example, macs used to be cheaper and working for Apple even in retail, paid well. Today we still don't have flash nor dvr on Apple TV and neither do we have a ProSumer desktop i7 with 4-8 cores but instead just pro workstations made with some server parts and the harsh reality is the ProSumer market, less direct x, but for musicians and rising editor, the iMac can't cut it as it lacks the express slot for the ProSumer hardware devices like the fatso or high end reverbs on chips that takes a huge chunk of processing off the CPU. You buy the express device for around $400 and it come with dime plug INS. Fatso hardware is $2000, the plug in that you could buy seperate and add is about $495. Then Apple could make pci express hardware helping the CPU drain cause the way GPU will one day. OT Was at Apple today. An Apple friend said he was thinking of getting an iMac, selling his MacBook pro and getting an ipad. He is the 3rd person I know that's doing this. You have to wonder how many are going to do this. At the same time a MacBook with 4 cores isn't going to run that long.
Some will also argue it has nothing to do with glitches but everything to do with gaming thus no flash and certainly no shockwave.
I see Apple growing but they are missing those that they once targeted 100% and now rather cater to mom and pop iLife users. Heck, iWeb could be a killer program if they put sone time into it but I read the logic staff is tiny and Shake? Well that's over and it's to bad. Apple has the money to do both and I wish they would. Look at Pro Tools/Avid, they were smart enough to pick up maudio as prosumer hardware and software is big business. Gaming I read here is supposedly bigger than DVD and music combined. Hmm
my 0.8811 cents. (Grin).
What? I'm sorry but I couldn't follow anything you said. Coherent thought would be helpful.
Steve could convince Disney to support HTML5 on their kids sites if he really wanted to see it fade into history. I doubt that will happen though. Flash will be around for some time to come.
Actually, Disney has a site that works on my iPad, so they're already apparently working on it. Their games don't work, but it's a start.
Long read. But honestly, isn't Apple becoming the new Microsoft or greed mentality? Example, macs used to be cheaper and working for Apple even in retail, paid well.
I quit reading after this because you're obviously imagining things.
When were Macs EVER cheaper than PCs. Comparable to similar quality PCs, sometimes, but never significantly cheaper.
Or maybe you mean that they were cheaper than they are now. Nope, that's not true either. My IIsi was an entry level machine when I bought it - at $2500. I just bought a $599 Mini.
When did Apple pay more in retail than they do today?
Please feel free to join us in the real world.
Adobe not just tried to kill FreeHand to keep their monopoly, they did the same with FrameMaker, a most excellent product, which they bought and then kept around only for a tiny niche, discontinuing Mac support, etc.
I used to be a huge Director and Lingo fan and I still prefer its interface to Flash. Adobe should have rolled the two into a single product. Now Director languishes in some backwater page.
It's funny how some of the "exciting new features" of AI CS5 are things that appeared in FreeHand eight years ago. And the selection tool in AI are STILL as clunky and annoying as ever. FreeHand's intelligent tools feature was a huge time saver - tools that could figure out what you wanted to do and switch tools automatically (eg, move the object cursor over a point and it turned into a tool for selecting points - a bit of simple imagination that was and still is lacking at Adobe.) Despite its strengths, Illustrator is still as much as a decade behind FreeHand in many areas.
Two other examples worthy of note: When the top two Mac magazines (MacUser (US) and MacWorld) were both on the scene there was a lot of material every month for mainstream Mac users. Then MW bought MU and killed it. This might have slimmed down the competition, but it was a great disservice to Mac users.
Another example is Maya. Alias used to promote the heck out of it and it was the top application of its kind, then AutoDesk bought Alias and, while AD continues to tweak Maya, it does absolutely nothing to promote it (as with Adobe and Director). As a result sales dropped precipitously, just as with Adobe and Director. As for Maya, this is a mixed blessing. While you no longer have to pay $8 K for Unlimited, the value of Maya on a resume has been greatly diminished and it is extremely rare to see Maya on a job posting.
My IIsi was an entry level machine when I bought it - at $2500.
Not to be unfriendly, but the Si was not entry level but a couple of steps up. Cheaper deals were available from gray market sources, but as regarding the SRP, the LC was introduced that same year at a price of $2,500. The entry level machine would be the Mac Classic, which was available for $1,000, and $1,500 with options. The Si was introduced at $3,770 and a $4,570 version also available.
One thing that Apple has been very good at over the past decade has been in increasing performance, storage, RAM and other goodies while keeping the price the same or lower. For example, the original 15" Bondi iMac (233 MHz PowerPC, 32 MB RAM, 4.0 GB HD, CRT display, CD only) sold for $1,300. Today the baseline iMac (3.06GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB HD, 21.5" LED flat panel, superdrive) costs $1,199.