Jobs has it right regarding Flash but I think that if there was a thought that blu-ray would fail, guess again.
Blu-ray is superior to downloading HD content on several levels and appeals to people who like to collect things. Buy a movie on a professionally-prepped blu-ray disk and you have a secure medium with a long life span. Get the file digitally and you get a compressed version of the file and then have to deal with storing it in a stable manner. If you want an impressive-looking collection, good luck making much of an impression by hauling out your digital library.
Apple certainly is right to turn its back on Flash. Within the next couple of years, the Internet will have left Flash behind. But at some point, like it or not, Apple will have to incorporate blu-ray support into its products.
I think it's sad, really, that there was an attempt by Microsoft to kill blu-ray with Apple standing on the sidelines, pretty much letting it happen.
I thought it was puzzling at the time that we had the HD-DVD vs. blu-ray battle but it became obvious later on that Microsoft's intent in being a major backer of HD-DVD was to cripple the adoption of blu-ray as the next generation of optical storage. This has been shown by the fact that Microsoft appears to have no intention of making blu-ray a part of the xBox eco-system, arguing that digital downloads will render blu-ray irrelevant. Nonsense. Blu-rays will flourish and now that pricing has reached reasonable levels, they literally can't make them fast enough.
So while I have no problem with Apple choosing to shut down Flash, I do think that Jobs' position on blu-ray needs to shift. I now have a decent number of blu-ray titles and I'd love to watch them on a very good recent-vintage Cinema Display. It's not that I think having files stored on Optical discs is for everyone but on the other hand, if it is a part of how many of us have chosen to purchase our movies, surely there is something rather insidious about refusing to at least allow for someone to set up to enjoy that material on an Apple system. Even if the future, as envisioned by Jobs, is computers not including a built-in drive, software support would allow the rest of us to plug in an external drive if we so choose.
Forcing the Internet to drop Flash is one thing but refusing to support a format that consumers are going to embrace, whether Jobs likes it or not, is another matter entirely.
By the way, lately I've been buying blu-rays for a lot less money than it would cost me to purchase a quasi-HD version off of Apple via iTunes. What's wrong with this picture?
That's the danger of getting what you wish for. So many people on here have been clamoring for the death of Flash. But the advertisers aren't going to give up so instead of using a plug-in that can be disabled, you'll be stuck with HTML5 ads that can't be disabled.
Most people don't know what HTML5 actually is. Javascript and CSS they mistakenly call HTML5. There are some new tags in HTML5 but none of them are at all related to moving things around on the screen as in Flash-like animations.
You forgot the part in the progress where some hacker figures out how to create a html5 ad block.
As for the main article, I was rather hoping that Adobe would stick to their guns a while longer. I do hate Flash but was a little proud of them for having the balls to flip Jobs the finger. And I was really hoping they would make Flash work to shut up the naysayers. This just feels like Jobs was right along and they are too lazy to do it right so they are giving up.
Maybe it just doesn't make business sense for them to do it.
You forgot the part in the progress where some hacker figures out how to create a html5 ad block.
As for the main article, I was rather hoping that Adobe would stick to their guns a while longer. I do hate Flash but was a little proud of them for having the balls to flip Jobs the finger. And I was really hoping they would make Flash work to shut up the naysayers. This just feels like Jobs was right along and they are too lazy to do it right so they are giving up.
Its great to stick to your guns when you are able to handle the guns without shooting yourself in the foot. Unfortunately, not only did they react badly (and rightly so - they didn't take Apple guidance seriously) to Steve losing patience with their lack of prioritizing Flash for "smart" mobile but then they cobble together Flash 10.1 and throw that at the Android platform as their solution in order to show Apple they aren't the boss of Adobe. Some ridiculous semi-adolescent behavior which demonstrates the simple fact they don't take the paradigm shift to mobile seriously.
Seeing as how Action Script doesn't carry over... it makes this pretty much pointless, as every time I've designed a flash piece on a site I've USED ACTION SCRIPT to make damn near anything happen. Back to the drawing board Adobe.
well actionscripting does not work with touch-based systems, and have been saying this for years. We used to use Director for touch-based kiosks. Flash was designed web-centric with an input device....
Yea i have asked all these fandroids how you use a flash WEBSITE on a touch-based systems. All they ever talk about are flvs, even a fandroid insulting for me for bringing up a .swf for being old technology, yet he didnt realize that anything with flash animation and scripting involves a .swf to view on the web or even locally....
This is how misinformed these people supporting android is. They want freedom to be trapped in a proprietary format that does not even work in the world of touch. Flash's older brother Director is more capable of handling touch-based systems and kiosks.
Yet all these punks think flash is only .flv, which means all they do is youtube and redtube and have no idea what was intended for, or how it is properly implemented.
Flash's older brother Director is more capable of handling touch-based systems and kiosks.
Lingo is not even close to being as full featured as today's Actionscript. You can do anything you want with Actionscript with the exception of writing files to disk which Lingo can do, but that has nothing to do with programming a touch capable interface.
I'm am a bit surprised that Wallaby does absolutely zero Actionscript since the language is almost identical to Javascript.
Most people don't know what HTML5 actually is. Javascript and CSS they mistakenly call HTML5. There are some new tags in HTML5 but none of them are at all related to moving things around on the screen as in Flash-like animations.
Actually you are wrong. HTML5 is HTML, Javascript, CSS3, and several other technologies.
Couple other points of interest is that it makes use of SVG for a lot of functionality. SVG is somewhat problematic when it comes to Windows servers, since by default Windows does not include the mime type. No big deal if you have Administrator access to the IIS manager, but many people will not be able to configure their server to actually serve SVG files created by Wallaby.
One of the major differences between Flash and HTML is that Flash has much better text rendering with all kinds of nice typography features like ligature, glyphs, kerning pairs, type on a path etc etc. For obvious reasons none of that is supported either.
Actually you are wrong. HTML5 is HTML, Javascript, CSS3, and several other technologies.
It does integrate MathML, XML (XHTML), Unicode and describes implementations for hooking into CSS, however both JS and CSS are separate specifications and not included in the current HTML5 draft. HTML5 is Hypertext Markup only.
What I don't understand is why Adobe isn't creating their own "full-blown HTML 5 authoring tool", as this should be right in their wheelhouse...
Flash is a virtual monopoly for Adobe. Very few companies have the foresight or nerve to develop products that challenge their own monopoly. Furthermore, strictly speaking, HTML5 specification is not official final yet. It's one thing to release a free browser to support features that might or might not be official. It's another thing to sell an authoring product that may produce HTML5 code/features that may change.
What I don't understand is why Adobe isn't creating their own "full-blown HTML 5 authoring tool", as this should be right in their wheelhouse...
OTOH, it wouldn't be the first time hubris got in the way of a prime business opportunity.
It takes time to do something like that and if Adobe recently conceded that Flash is going to be replaced, they haven;t had time enough to properly develop such software. No doubt it's on their radar now, though.
Comments
I can't believe they haven't done this yet. They're touting html5 but without tools, how do they expect it to take off?
Coda, TextMate and others all support HTML 5 editing just fine.
Blu-ray is superior to downloading HD content on several levels and appeals to people who like to collect things. Buy a movie on a professionally-prepped blu-ray disk and you have a secure medium with a long life span. Get the file digitally and you get a compressed version of the file and then have to deal with storing it in a stable manner. If you want an impressive-looking collection, good luck making much of an impression by hauling out your digital library.
Apple certainly is right to turn its back on Flash. Within the next couple of years, the Internet will have left Flash behind. But at some point, like it or not, Apple will have to incorporate blu-ray support into its products.
I think it's sad, really, that there was an attempt by Microsoft to kill blu-ray with Apple standing on the sidelines, pretty much letting it happen.
I thought it was puzzling at the time that we had the HD-DVD vs. blu-ray battle but it became obvious later on that Microsoft's intent in being a major backer of HD-DVD was to cripple the adoption of blu-ray as the next generation of optical storage. This has been shown by the fact that Microsoft appears to have no intention of making blu-ray a part of the xBox eco-system, arguing that digital downloads will render blu-ray irrelevant. Nonsense. Blu-rays will flourish and now that pricing has reached reasonable levels, they literally can't make them fast enough.
So while I have no problem with Apple choosing to shut down Flash, I do think that Jobs' position on blu-ray needs to shift. I now have a decent number of blu-ray titles and I'd love to watch them on a very good recent-vintage Cinema Display. It's not that I think having files stored on Optical discs is for everyone but on the other hand, if it is a part of how many of us have chosen to purchase our movies, surely there is something rather insidious about refusing to at least allow for someone to set up to enjoy that material on an Apple system. Even if the future, as envisioned by Jobs, is computers not including a built-in drive, software support would allow the rest of us to plug in an external drive if we so choose.
Forcing the Internet to drop Flash is one thing but refusing to support a format that consumers are going to embrace, whether Jobs likes it or not, is another matter entirely.
By the way, lately I've been buying blu-rays for a lot less money than it would cost me to purchase a quasi-HD version off of Apple via iTunes. What's wrong with this picture?
That's the danger of getting what you wish for. So many people on here have been clamoring for the death of Flash. But the advertisers aren't going to give up so instead of using a plug-in that can be disabled, you'll be stuck with HTML5 ads that can't be disabled.
Most people don't know what HTML5 actually is. Javascript and CSS they mistakenly call HTML5. There are some new tags in HTML5 but none of them are at all related to moving things around on the screen as in Flash-like animations.
You forgot the part in the progress where some hacker figures out how to create a html5 ad block.
As for the main article, I was rather hoping that Adobe would stick to their guns a while longer. I do hate Flash but was a little proud of them for having the balls to flip Jobs the finger. And I was really hoping they would make Flash work to shut up the naysayers. This just feels like Jobs was right along and they are too lazy to do it right so they are giving up.
Maybe it just doesn't make business sense for them to do it.
You forgot the part in the progress where some hacker figures out how to create a html5 ad block.
As for the main article, I was rather hoping that Adobe would stick to their guns a while longer. I do hate Flash but was a little proud of them for having the balls to flip Jobs the finger. And I was really hoping they would make Flash work to shut up the naysayers. This just feels like Jobs was right along and they are too lazy to do it right so they are giving up.
Its great to stick to your guns when you are able to handle the guns without shooting yourself in the foot. Unfortunately, not only did they react badly (and rightly so - they didn't take Apple guidance seriously) to Steve losing patience with their lack of prioritizing Flash for "smart" mobile but then they cobble together Flash 10.1 and throw that at the Android platform as their solution in order to show Apple they aren't the boss of Adobe. Some ridiculous semi-adolescent behavior which demonstrates the simple fact they don't take the paradigm shift to mobile seriously.
Some ridiculous semi-adolescent behavior which demonstrates the simple fact they don't take the paradigm shift to mobile seriously.
Paradigm shift? You do realize that mobile accounts for almost 3% of web traffic?
Seeing as how Action Script doesn't carry over... it makes this pretty much pointless, as every time I've designed a flash piece on a site I've USED ACTION SCRIPT to make damn near anything happen. Back to the drawing board Adobe.
well actionscripting does not work with touch-based systems, and have been saying this for years. We used to use Director for touch-based kiosks. Flash was designed web-centric with an input device....
Yea i have asked all these fandroids how you use a flash WEBSITE on a touch-based systems. All they ever talk about are flvs, even a fandroid insulting for me for bringing up a .swf for being old technology, yet he didnt realize that anything with flash animation and scripting involves a .swf to view on the web or even locally....
This is how misinformed these people supporting android is. They want freedom to be trapped in a proprietary format that does not even work in the world of touch. Flash's older brother Director is more capable of handling touch-based systems and kiosks.
Yet all these punks think flash is only .flv, which means all they do is youtube and redtube and have no idea what was intended for, or how it is properly implemented.
I can't believe they haven't done this yet. They're touting html5 but without tools, how do they expect it to take off?
The iAd Producer is almost exactly that: an authoring tool for interactive/animated html 5 content.
I still believe Apple might extend iAd Producer and make a full-blown HTML 5 authoring tool out of it some day.
Flash's older brother Director is more capable of handling touch-based systems and kiosks.
Lingo is not even close to being as full featured as today's Actionscript. You can do anything you want with Actionscript with the exception of writing files to disk which Lingo can do, but that has nothing to do with programming a touch capable interface.
I'm am a bit surprised that Wallaby does absolutely zero Actionscript since the language is almost identical to Javascript.
In other words, "enough for annoying full-page Flash rollover ads."
Can't wait to see those on my iPhone, I'm sure that will enhance the mobile browsing experience.
I don't see why AdBlock won't be able to take care of HTML5 spam with some modifications.
The iAd Producer is almost exactly that: an authoring tool for interactive/animated html 5 content.
If you read the user agreement you are only allowed to make iAds with it and cannot use it for any other purpose.
Most people don't know what HTML5 actually is. Javascript and CSS they mistakenly call HTML5. There are some new tags in HTML5 but none of them are at all related to moving things around on the screen as in Flash-like animations.
Actually you are wrong. HTML5 is HTML, Javascript, CSS3, and several other technologies.
One of the major differences between Flash and HTML is that Flash has much better text rendering with all kinds of nice typography features like ligature, glyphs, kerning pairs, type on a path etc etc. For obvious reasons none of that is supported either.
Actually you are wrong. HTML5 is HTML, Javascript, CSS3, and several other technologies.
It does integrate MathML, XML (XHTML), Unicode and describes implementations for hooking into CSS, however both JS and CSS are separate specifications and not included in the current HTML5 draft. HTML5 is Hypertext Markup only.
A-D-O-B-E
What kind of misinformation is that?
I still believe Apple might extend iAd Producer and make a full-blown HTML 5 authoring tool out of it some day.
What I don't understand is why Adobe isn't creating their own "full-blown HTML 5 authoring tool", as this should be right in their wheelhouse...
OTOH, it wouldn't be the first time hubris got in the way of a prime business opportunity.
What I don't understand is why Adobe isn't creating their own "full-blown HTML 5 authoring tool", as this should be right in their wheelhouse...
Flash is a virtual monopoly for Adobe. Very few companies have the foresight or nerve to develop products that challenge their own monopoly. Furthermore, strictly speaking, HTML5 specification is not official final yet. It's one thing to release a free browser to support features that might or might not be official. It's another thing to sell an authoring product that may produce HTML5 code/features that may change.
What I don't understand is why Adobe isn't creating their own "full-blown HTML 5 authoring tool", as this should be right in their wheelhouse...
OTOH, it wouldn't be the first time hubris got in the way of a prime business opportunity.
It takes time to do something like that and if Adobe recently conceded that Flash is going to be replaced, they haven;t had time enough to properly develop such software. No doubt it's on their radar now, though.