Adobe resumes development of Packager for iPhone tool

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Do you realize that this is BS or do you actually believe the nonsense you continually post on this forum?



    Funny it appears most people believe what you post is nonsense. In fact there are members recommending you get a good doctor. You are dreaming if you think Flash is going anywhere anytime soon, even more so now that the newest Android based phones support 10.1.



    Your rants have simply become a joke. Try running some benchmarks before typing so you actually have a clue what you are talking about.
  • Reply 62 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Newtron View Post


    You don't understand. Apple users account for almost 5% of web page hits.



    If Apple devices won't work with Flash, every content provider will invest however many millions of dollars it takes to reach those users. Or so say some...



    I know a 5% what a major hit for Adobe.... With Windows users not having a care about Flash and Android users waning Android 2.2 so they can run Flash 10.1 I can certainly see how Mouse thinks its going away in two years. Makes perfect sense.
  • Reply 63 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ArchAngel21x View Post


    Seriously? Run that statement by anyone who manages an IT dept, and prepare to get an earful about continuous updates for bugs and security holes.



    Don't have too I work for IBM.
  • Reply 64 of 86
    ibillibill Posts: 392member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    Also, I do not think Apple specially did this for Adobe, in reality they probably change the language to allow other companies to do things they want done and there was no way of disallowing adobe and allow everyone else.




    Fully agree with this comment. I think it wound up to be a case of "throwing out the baby with the bath water". I believe Apple would still prefer not to allow apps that are cross compiled from Flash, but realized, very quickly, that these restrictions were much further reaching, and especially including games development.



    If there were any influence from the FTC, I believe that would be related to the Admob situation.



    As for third party development tools, I think Apple is simply making trade-offs here. With the allowance of cross compiled apps from Flash, there will be a subset of iOS app developers whose API's will essentially be determined by Adobe. This is not good for Apple, but I suspect had they tweaked the restrictions to omit Flash tools and not other third party tools, they likely would have been flagged by the FTC for restraint of trade.



    My guess is moving forward that there will likely be apps that break periodically when Apple updates iOS or their hardware, or that this phenomenon will be more prevalent than in the past.
  • Reply 65 of 86
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DrFreeman View Post


    A few notes:

    Why do we have to put Apple engineers at Intel headquarters! Intel processors use x86 architecture, iOS does not use x86 architecture, A4 is not a x86 system!



    So even Apple customers are forgetting that Apple still makes Macs.
  • Reply 66 of 86
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Does this mean that people who want to create iOS applications will no longer need to use a Mac or Xcode at all?
  • Reply 67 of 86
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    You know until Jobs point out the fact that Flash is the number one reason Mac's have crashed. I could not figure out from time to time why Safari locked up and sum time getting the you must shut down now warning message or worse yet the kernel panics with black and white text all over the screen.



    After that comment was made I paid much more attention to what was going on at the time when these odd events happened and Jobs was right. I was on a website that had flash running on it for some stupid advertising and 9 out of 10 time Safari would lock up. I could reproduce it buy going to that sight again and is the same ad came up since the random place ads in front of you so some developers of flash ads are more hackers then others but it would cause the mac all sort of problems.



    Since I have figure this out, I use Saft to block these ad sites so not to ever load their content in Safari.



    Also, I do not think Apple specially did this for Adobe, in reality they probably change the language to allow other companies to do things they want done and there was no way of disallowing adobe and allow everyone else.



    I hope someone comes out with an app like Saft for the mac that allows you to block ads. I also hope the developers of little snitch make and app for iOS so i can block out going information.



    To everyone complaining about Flash crashing Safari: Do any of you know whether Safari in Snow Leopard really is "Crash resistant" to plugins as Apple claims? Has this feature actually worked for any of you?



    http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/safari.html
  • Reply 68 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SinisterJoe View Post


    Not looking forward to a tidal wave of shoddy ports but it seems Apple has very clearly reserved the right to reject applications for bad interfaces so I suppose that covers my biggest concern.



    Flash Packager-originated apps have no internationalization story and no accessibility story, so it's a big screw-you to non-English speakers and those with visual and hearing impairments.



    Thanks, Adobe!
  • Reply 69 of 86
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,218moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by djsherly View Post


    Most people seem to think that html+js is a viable alternative to flash now that html5 is around.



    Additionally, there are some things that are harder to do in Flash than in HTML + JS. Integrating with server-side scripting for accessing database content for one as well as Javascript and the DOM.



    Take the example of browser ball:



    http://www.chromeexperiments.com/detail/browser-ball/



    When you spawn a window, you can throw the ball from one window to another seamlessly. This can probably be done in Flash too but you'd need to create local connections between multiple swf instances:



    http://www.ahrooga.com/entry/how-to-...calconnection/



    DOM referencing is way easier than that. Integrating Flash with Javascript has browser issues and you have to override a standard function call and process your events through it but create an IE-specific function to make it work properly and you continually have to jump from the browser back to the Flash IDE, compile, clear the browser cache and reload to test it. It's a horrible workflow.



    You can't debug Flash either without building a debug panel into the Flash movie yourself. Then there's the problem of standard UI support and scroll-wheel actions not supported in the Mac version of Flash nor the behaviour of the scroll bar and images that can't be dragged from say a Flash gallery to your desktop.



    There's just so many things it doesn't do well by design that to fix them would be like beating a dead horse. Just bury it and get a new horse - HTML 5 + JS is that new horse. Sure it rides a bit unevenly just now but it will catch up soon - everyone needs to get on the same page and realise that Flash has fulfilled its role to provide a stopgap for missing browser functionality but that role no longer needs to be filled or at least most of the duties required are no longer required to be done by a plugin.



    Adobe make great content creation software and that won't be affected when Flash has no online relevance. Once people start switching embedded video to HTML 5, the most important function it currently provides will be no more. Then goes the quirky animation content and in 5 years, it's just a vague memory. Internet Explorer is moving this way (finally) and scored highly on the Acid test and has GPU accelerated HTML 5. With IE pushing ahead with this, it's just going to take a site like Youtube to pull the plug once the functionality is there.
  • Reply 70 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Haggar View Post


    To everyone complaining about Flash crashing Safari: Do any of you know whether Safari in Snow Leopard really is "Crash resistant" to plugins as Apple claims? Has this feature actually worked for any of you?



    http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/safari.html



    I would not know, I am not on Snow Leopard on my main Mac. All I know by blocking links to cite that create Flash based ads I eliminated most all the crashes.
  • Reply 71 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post


    Funny it appears most people believe what you post is nonsense. In fact there are members recommending you get a good doctor. You are dreaming if you think Flash is going anywhere anytime soon, even more so now that the newest Android based phones support 10.1.



    Your rants have simply become a joke. Try running some benchmarks before typing so you actually have a clue what you are talking about.



    Blah blah blah. The same old tired litany.



    And exactly what percentage of Android phones can run Flash, and what percentage of mobile devices is that? A meaningless percentage.



    And what do benchmarks have to do with your absurd claim that Windows users experience zero problems with Flash?
  • Reply 72 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Not Java, but apps are allowed to use Webkit. The rules have been changed a few times but at one point if you used a web browser like interface in your app that downloaded HTML/JS then it was considered adult content. The difference with this new clause is probably in reference to compiled code. HTML/JS is not compiled and runs in a sandbox. Compiled code can potentially do a lot of damage if the programmer had some malicious intent.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post


    My instant reaction to that comment was "no, that's different"... but when you get down to it the example you gave (i.e. an application using HTML\\Javascript) is quite similar to other cross-compiled solutions. The main difference is that in the case of HTML\\Javascript Apple control the interpreter (e.g. Webkit\\Safari) so they are able to control what the interpreted application can and cannot access on the phone.



    If we assume "code" means "a set of instructions that tell an application how to behave" then basically any application that supports complex file formats with some level of scripting could potentially be blocked under this clause.



    I wouldn't be surprised if Apple left the definition intentionally ambiguous so the blocking of an application could be left up to their discretion.



    Thanks for the explanations. I understood most of it, I think. I agree, the ambiguity could well be intentional, but of course if Apple ever denies listing an app for technical reasons that seem questionable (and you know they will), then we'll hear the same old refrain all over again.
  • Reply 73 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Blah blah blah. The same old tired litany.



    And exactly what percentage of Android phones can run Flash, and what percentage of mobile devices is that? A meaningless percentage.



    And what do benchmarks have to do with your absurd claim that Windows users experience zero problems with Flash?



    Uh no Mouse you can run some benchmarks in OSX. I know the concept is a bit much for you. If you want to get really creative you can run some benchmarks using Safari for Windows and then do the same in OSX.



    Anything that is meaningless is only because you want it to be that way in your own mind.



    I know you would rather just bitch and moan and talk about Google and their morals or the deep meaning of competition rather then actually have some hard data to back up anything you might say.



    All of these benchmarks are well documented and can be duplicated with little to no effort.
  • Reply 74 of 86
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,017member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    Additionally, there are some things that are harder to do in Flash than in HTML + JS. Integrating with server-side scripting for accessing database content for one as well as Javascript and the DOM....<snip>..



    These are all good points - you've obviously put your mind to the question.



    My comments specifically were about performance on iPhone (and like devices), though, and comments like flash would run like a dog on iphone may be true, but a little bit of honesty about the matter would see people admit that the same content is just as likely to run as poorly using HTML5+js.
  • Reply 75 of 86
    jfanningjfanning Posts: 3,390member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    You know until Jobs point out the fact that Flash is the number one reason Mac's have crashed. I could not figure out from time to time why Safari locked up and sum time getting the you must shut down now warning message or worse yet the kernel panics with black and white text all over the screen.



    Jobs was talking out his butt when he made that comment. Safari is the reason my Mac crashes, it will do it with or without any flash loaded
  • Reply 76 of 86
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,218moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by djsherly View Post


    My comments specifically were about performance on iPhone (and like devices), though, and comments like flash would run like a dog on iphone may be true, but a little bit of honesty about the matter would see people admit that the same content is just as likely to run as poorly using HTML5+js.



    The Flash demoes on Android devices generally run poorly and they would run poorly on an iPhone too. Some Adobe tests look quite good:



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJiqLivSUHE



    but you still see the impact Flash has on the browser when it comes to scrolling and battery life:



    http://blog.laptopmag.com/mobile-fla...ves-jobs-right

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367402,00.asp



    People keep getting into the mindset that Steve Jobs just had an idea that Flash sucks and he's just running with it. He clearly said they asked Adobe to deliver the player and in 3 years they never did and they still haven't produced a player that gives an overwhelmingly good experience. So do we just keep waiting?



    Do we just keep hoping they can fix security updates and improve performance over time? No, now is when we decide that content needs optimised for mobile devices so we have to pick the best technology to go forward and Flash isn't the right horse to bet on (because it's dead as mentioned previously).



    Yes an overloaded page with HTML 5 content will slow the browser down too but the browser developer has control over that.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Haggar


    To everyone complaining about Flash crashing Safari: Do any of you know whether Safari in Snow Leopard really is "Crash resistant" to plugins as Apple claims? Has this feature actually worked for any of you?



    It loads the Flash Player plugin in a separate process so if it crashes, it can't take down the browser. I had a Flash ad sucking up 100% CPU and all I did was go into the activity monitor and force quit the plugin and it changes all Flash areas in the whole browser to the blue lego block. If you reload a page with Flash, it restarts the plugin on all pages. It makes a huge difference to the performance when it's off though.



    It would be nice if they had that level of protection for all dynamic content though including HTML 5 and JS. At least they can do something with the crash reports when they get them.
  • Reply 77 of 86
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    I had a Flash ad sucking up 100% CPU and all I did was go into the activity monitor and force quit the plugin and it changes all Flash areas in the whole browser to the blue lego block. If you reload a page with Flash, it restarts the plugin on all pages. It makes a huge difference to the performance when it's off though.





    Damn. No wonder Macs sell so poorly. They really crash just from normal web browsing?
  • Reply 78 of 86
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,304member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by gedos View Post


    I think cross platform developers should proudly label their apps as 'Made With Flash', that way I will know which ones to avoid.



    At first I was worried about this too, but then I started to consider that this reversal was also made at the same time they released app store acceptance guidelines that warned things like "we don't need more fart apps" and that if you submit an app in a saturated category that brings nothing new to the table that they probably won't approve it, I'm less concerned.



    Also if someone releases an app that covers a new concept yet sucks performance wise, there is now an incentive for someone to write a version with native tools and out-compete them.



    I now think this is brilliant on Apples part - its put up or shut up time. It also gets them out if evaluating how the apps are made and resumes focus in what really mattters: how the program works for the end user. Not that this will stop people from whining, but it certainly removes lots of possible criticism.



    Apples message in their new guidelines are pretty clear - they want "customer delight". Poorly ported apps or apps that perform poorly are clearly not welcome. Just because you can now create crapware more easily, don't expect for it to get an automatic approval.



    And don't expect help from Apple if you are using one of these abstraction layers. It's not uncommon for Apple engineers to work with developers - I would imagine that just as jailbreaking voids your warranty, you are on your own if you use non-Apple tools.



    As it should be...
  • Reply 79 of 86
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,304member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Newtron View Post


    Damn. No wonder Macs sell so poorly. They really crash just from normal web browsing?



    I know you are just being a smart a$$, but you are actually proving Job's point about why they don't want Flash on the iPhone.



    The OP's issue isn't with Macs or OSX, but Adobe's crappy implementation of flash on OSX. And there is nothing Apple can do to fix it - yet most users are quick to make the conclusion that "surfing the web on a Mac sucks" - when a more accurate statement would be "surfing the web with Adobe crapware on a Mac sucks"
  • Reply 80 of 86
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,304member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by herbapou View Post


    Apple is in the business of selling hardware



    Hardware is one piece of their strategy, sure. But Apples primary business is selling the end user experience.



    That's why I guarantee Apple doesn't talk about any of the things in your post. Your in the techie weeds. Apple knows that if they delight their customers, all of the stuff you are focused on will take care if itself.



    This is why its so hard for other tech companies to compete with Apple. They focus (like you) on the tech and all the little moving peices, while Apple focuses on the end user and their ultimate use of the products.
Sign In or Register to comment.