FTC believed to be investigating Apple's anti-Flash stance

1246718

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 348
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,285member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CraigAppleW View Post


    ClicktoFlashers are no different than software pirates: Entitled, sophmoric, selfish, and shortsighted.



    See, now you are insulting pirates. If they are going to steal something, they would at least steal something that works and doesn't lock up your browser.



    I hate flash because 99% of the time my browser locks up, it's flash! If I kill flash in activity monitor, my computer leaps back to life - until some page re-loads flash again



    I'd be more interested in what Adobe had to claim about flash if it didn't absolutely suck on Mac OSX vs Windows!



    This is the crux of Apple's position - not that we hate Adobe, or even we hate flash. It's that they don't want Adobe to not focus on flash for the iOS when the next shiny thing comes along (ooh! Android!) and let the iOS languish with a sucky end user experience that they have no way to fix.



    And I am with them! If Adobe seemed as interesting in making the Mac OS X and heck, Linux too, versions of Flash as optimized as Windows there would be less of a concern. I am concerned (and so is Apple) because Adobe has a long history of 2nd rate support for all but their chosen platform - and the difference in performance of their chosen platform and everyone else is a WIDE gap. And as others in the thread have pointed out, look at what is happening with WebOS and BlackBerry vs. Android for mobile flash. Exactly what Apple was worried about and cited as the chief reason for excluding flash is happening. Gee wiz, who would have thunk it?



    Adobe has no one to blame but themselves. So far Apple has been the only one willing or able to call Adobe on their uneven treatment of platforms and say "enough is enough - were not interested!" Also Jobs has stated that if Adobe ever did get their act together with flash they aren't opposed to it. You would think that Adobe would be throwing themselves at proving Jobs wrong - if not with the iOS, than with Android, Blackberry, WebOS - something! Anything!



    So Adobe, where's the beef? Who's the real villain here?
  • Reply 62 of 348
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SHOBIZ View Post


    you have metrics for your side of the party?



    No; I didn't make an assertion like Monstrosity did.





    I'm simply asking a question people; settle down.
  • Reply 63 of 348
    2 cents2 cents Posts: 307member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Enforcing laws, you mean.



    Puleeze! The US government is doing everything possible to make the teabaggers actually look sane with their anti-government rants. Feds, stay out of this petty crap! Nobody cares if apple uses flash or not and if they do, there are other options for consumers. Fer chrisakes!
  • Reply 64 of 348
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Hint: Flash is not the only way to advertise on the web. Advertisers are free to use any other version of advertising if they want their ads to be seen. Instead, they choose to use Flash, even knowing that a lot of people can't see it).



    100% correct



    The thing about web advertising is that the responsibility for the success of the ad is divided among various entities, none of whom care about each other.



    Company with product or service

    Ad Agency

    Designers

    Media Distribution

    Website Operator



    That is why they still try to deliver Flash ads to users with Click to Flash and iOS devices. No one wants to go to any effort to make the whole supply chain work together. If they had some conditional code that just checked the device and had a a few different file formats to display, we would all be viewing a lot more ads.
  • Reply 65 of 348
    sendmesendme Posts: 567member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadash View Post


    And surfing on the Incredible can suck compared to my old iPhone because of the crappy Flash ads that are displayed. Why do we want that on our phones?





    We don't want anything by Adobe on any of our devices. It is used for porno. That is why Steve won't let Adobe put their horrible software on his iPhones - Adobe is lazy and their software makes things crash too much.
  • Reply 66 of 348
    paulmjohnsonpaulmjohnson Posts: 1,380member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    I'd be more interested in what Adobe had to claim about flash if it didn't absolutely suck on Mac OSX vs Windows!



    Totally agree with that. When I watch YouTube videos on my Macbook Pro, it feels like it's going to catch fire.



    Actually, that could be a hit on YouTube - Computer Catches Fire Playing YouTube!
  • Reply 67 of 348
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by g3pro View Post


    Some Flash apps are bad. Some iOS apps are bad.



    Some Flash apps are good. Some iOS apps are good.



    It has nothing to do with quality.



    Apple could have plenty of awesome cross-platform apps that still go through quality control, but Apple doesn't want that. Apple wants control.



    Apple is using non-competitive tactics.





    and Adobe is trying to take over an otherwise healthy platform (in terms of development). At least Apple is trying to control THEIR OWN product.
  • Reply 68 of 348
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Websites don't have to do anything for Apple, however they have every right to ignore Apple customers, it's up to them to choose whether they want to support Adobe monopolising access to web content.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    I don't care if flash lives or dies. What I care about is websites having to accommodate to Apple, all because Apple doesn't want to work with Adobe like Microsoft did (even then I don't REALLY care because I'm not a web developer )



    Apple not only needs to show that html5 can do what flash can do, but they also need to show what it can do that flash CAN'T do. Why spend money converting a website when the html5 version will work the exact same? To reach a small percentage of viewers? Add to the fact that Safari seems to be the only capable browser for html5 right now and it's an uphill battle for Apple.



    As far as keeping it off mobile devices for battery and performance, I'll say that froyo looks like it has promise, but the performance needs some improvement!



    In the end, Apple control's their OS, and if they don't want it, nobody should force them. That's just wrong.



  • Reply 69 of 348
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,285member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CraigAppleW View Post


    This is ANTITRUST, ANTICOMPETITIVE behavior here, and it's appropriately getting investigated.



    (apologies to Inigio Montoya) You keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.



    ANTITRUST (hey, I can shout too!)

    Quote:

    opposing or intended to restrain trusts, monopolies, or other large combinations of business and capital, esp. with a view to maintaining and promoting competition: antitrust legislation.



    ANTICOMPETATIVE



    Quote:

    business or government practices that prevent or reduce competition in a market (see restraint of trade).



    Apple isn't a monopoly. They certainly aren't colluding with anyone. They don't have enough market share to force other vendors to not install flash (if it were available - ha!).



    So how exactly is Apple preventing Adobe from putting flash on WebOS, Android or Blackberry?



    They aren't! Adobe is free to do whatever they want with vendors other than Apple. If you want flash, knock yourself out. There are lots of other alternatives... er, wait...



    To lay this at Apple's feet is hilarious. The FTC investigation will go no where. They would be laughed out of court. Instead of throwing around a bunch of big words that you obviously don't understand, why don't you ask Adobe what's take them so long with the other mobile platforms? If you use flash on your Droid X and it whacks your battery life in half, I suppose this will be Apples fault too?
  • Reply 70 of 348
    sendmesendme Posts: 567member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post


    If they can prove it works reliably and doesn't drain the battery too easily, what will Apple say now?





    Apple supports only open standards. Flash is proprietary. Apple will say "Thanks, but we prefer HTML5 because it is open and free".
  • Reply 71 of 348
    sendmesendme Posts: 567member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster View Post


    Add to the fact that Safari seems to be the only capable browser for html5 right now and it's an uphill battle for Apple..







    Flash is dying very quickly. Every website is converting. It is not an uphill battle, it is a change of tide. And Flash is being dragged out to sea. Buh Bye, Flash!
  • Reply 72 of 348
    paulmjohnsonpaulmjohnson Posts: 1,380member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    Websites don't have to do anything for Apple, however they have every right to ignore Apple customers, it's up to them to choose whether they want to support Adobe monopolising access to web content.



    And I suspect that is what will kill Flash. Websites aren't going to ignore Apple users who I seem to remember reading studies have shown are generally wealthier than the norm. Just the people you want.
  • Reply 73 of 348
    sendmesendme Posts: 567member
    .....
  • Reply 74 of 348
    I think the FTC is holding it wrong...



    (...runs and hides behind a tree)
  • Reply 75 of 348
    sendmesendme Posts: 567member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CraigAppleW View Post


    The best advertising is Flash based





    Nope. The best is iAds.
  • Reply 76 of 348
    ihxoihxo Posts: 562member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Habañero View Post


    About half the people posting here are confused about what this case is about.



    It isn't about the Flash Player browser plug-in being left out of Mobile Safari (as several have pointed to Silverlight, Java, et al as a comparison)



    It's about Apple deciding to prohibit Apps from the App Store that have been built with the ActionScript language and then compiled into a Objective-C runtime.



    If they can prove such compiled apps run less efficiently, Apple has a case.

    If they can't, Adobe has a case (their case being "what does the authoring IDE have to do with anything as long as the App functions and meets other App store requirements")



    Until someone shows that performance is consistently worse, I agree with Adobe.



    A Sample of Flash "cross-compiled" game

    http://itunes.apple.com/app/fickleblox/id330996323?mt=8



    First of all, I don't think Adobe built a cross-compiler for the iOS, what they did is most likely just bundling a Flash file with Flash run-time hence the unnecessarily bloated package.



    Second of all, Even if they REALLY built a cross-compiler, why do they feel like they have the right to build cross-compiler for a controlled/closed platform, and expect full approval? There was never any invitation sent to anyone letting anyone do that. Well you can do that just don't expect apps built with it to get approved for the App Store.
  • Reply 77 of 348
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Actually, it wasn't compatible with the original SDK license. People were reading into it what they wanted to.



    Please enlighten us: Which clause(s) of the SDK 3.0 license was CS5 Flash not compliant with?
  • Reply 78 of 348
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    Enforcing laws, you mean.



    No - private interests most definitely. Law maybe if you mean unwritten which is often the case. Private interests and corporations run this country. It's a shame. This United States 'experiment' is a failure. It's time to vote out these interests for the sake of Americans and for our government to take care of it's people. We waste too much time. Time for change. We are young yes. But time to grow up.
  • Reply 79 of 348
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chronster


    Add to the fact that Safari seems to be the only capable browser for html5 right now and it's an uphill battle for Apple.



    Any WebKit-based browser that keeps updated with the latest developments would be equally compatible as Safari, including Google Chrome and the web browsers of Android, BlackBerry (as of OS version 6), and WebOS.
  • Reply 80 of 348
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    He's grasping at SOMETHING. That's why his posts are so loony - it's hard to type with one hand on the keyboard.



    More random personal attacks in the absence of substance from the man who insists that "gross profit" is not a form of profit.



    You just don't know when to quit....
Sign In or Register to comment.