Then AIR is the poster boy for LCD middleware that Steve feared... All of a sudden we have a 3rd-party setting the bar for Apple app features, UI, UX, performance.
I am surprised That Apple allowed/allows this!
Wasn't it because they had to allow for game engines and interrupters, which opened the door for Adobe and others. I think if Apple cherry picked those that would be allowed it could be considered anti-competitive and fall under Refusal to deal,
Press release:
Quote:
The App Store℠ has revolutionized the way mobile applications are developed and distributed. With over 250,000 apps and 6.5 billion downloads, the App Store has become the world's largest mobile application platform and App Store developers have earned over one billion dollars from the sales of their apps.
We are continually trying to make the App Store even better. We have listened to our developers and taken much of their feedback to heart. Based on their input, today we are making some important changes to our iOS Developer Program license in sections 3.3.1, 3.3.2 and 3.3.9 to relax some restrictions we put in place earlier this year.
In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they want, while preserving the security we need.
In addition, for the first time we are publishing the App Store Review Guidelines to help developers understand how we review submitted apps. We hope it will make us more transparent and help our developers create even more successful apps for the App Store.
The App Store is perhaps the most important milestone in the history of mobile software. Working together with our developers, we will continue to surprise and delight our users with innovative mobile apps.
Do you still want to tell me that killing mobile flash was just a matter of timing and not a matter of competition.
Timing? Really?
Timing, maybe in light of Steve's passing. Adobe knew Steve would be the only person that could throw them a lifeline to resurrect Flash on iOS. Which was never going to happen anyway, so actually I have to bl**dy idea what Adobe is thinking.
Like Samsung, Google, Moto, Microsoft... everyone's losing the plot!
I open up AppleInsider, see Steve's picture, and then it hits me, he's not around. I was always comforted somehow in the past few years that no matter what, he was always tinkering on something despite being more and more in the background.
Anyway, to repeat myself, clearly Adobe has given up all hope that anyone at Apple post-Steve would be bothered with Flash anymore.
And more vindication for Steve not pre-loading Flash on new Macs.
Wasn't it because they had to allow for game engines and interrupters, which opened the door for Adobe and others. I think if Apple cherry picked those that would be allowed it could be considered anti-competitive and fall under Refusal to deal
Yeah, and there was Unreal Engine for iOS which is a big, big deal. As mentioned, in a few years with Unreal Engine 4 higher-spec than PS3 and Xbox360 on iPad 4 and 5... Opening up to other engines/compilers will be well worth it.
Wasn't it because they had to allow for game engines and interrupters, which opened the door for Adobe and others. I think if Apple cherry picked those that would be allowed it could be considered anti-competitive and fall under Refusal to deal,
Press release:
Yes, I suspect that is exactly what happened...
Unfortunately, that opened the door for the Flash crapware...
Unfortunately, that opened the door for the Flash crapware...
I guess, you accept the bad to get the good.
Sigh!
I think iOS is better for it. I'm not a gamer (unless you count Word with Friends, Strategery and Angry Birds) but the demos I've seen are mighty impressive.
Looking at this from a business perspective, which fortunately, or unfortunately, is the way I look at about every thing, I think Adobe is making the right decision. Why waste R&D and assets on a technology that obviously is changing. To look at the opposite of this, look at RIM. They are continuing to waste valuable dollars on the playbook, and NOW they are saying they are going to continue their flash development. I am not much of an Adobe fan, and I was a longtime Blackberry user (and still prefer their wonderful physical keyboard), but technology moves on, and RIM is still making the same mistakes. Adobe....they are moving on. I guess we can say the same about Logitech and Google TV.
Looking at this from a business perspective, which fortunately, or unfortunately, is the way I look at about every thing, I think Adobe is making the right decision. Why waste R&D and assets on a technology that obviously is changing. To look at the opposite of this, look at RIM. They are continuing to waste valuable dollars on the playbook, and NOW they are saying they are going to continue their flash development. I am not much of an Adobe fan, and I was a longtime Blackberry user (and still prefer their wonderful physical keyboard), but technology moves on, and RIM is still making the same mistakes. Adobe....they are moving on. I guess we can say the same about Logitech and Google TV.
If Adobe's mobile Flash wasn't a piece of crap, Apple would never have banned it from their mobile devices in the first place!
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
I don't think the app explanation works because web site flash objects aren't apps. I don't think people would download an app for every web site they randomly visit. I don't think a web site flash object is an equivalent or replacement to an app, or vise versa. Besides, most apps for web sites are free.
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
This is the sort of delusional spin that comes from people who have no idea what they are talking about. Addressing your "points" in order...
1. Steve Jobs liked things that worked well. Flash wasn't one of those things. To get things to work well, there has to be some measure of control: anarchy and working well are generally in opposition.
2. Apple likes making great products. Great products make money. See above.
3. This has already been addressed and dismissed, which pretty much dismisses your entire "argument".
I'm not sure how you'd objectively "measure" performance, but Flash works smoothly and quickly on my Droid. Video is smooth. I'm not a Flash expert or anything, but I'm pretty happy with it.
It works decently on OS X, too. Although lately I've seen the plugin "crash" a few times with the sad face in Safari. However, it does what it is supposed to do. It's a good interactive content platform. Take the alternative. On iOS, every web page has to have a special "app" for iOS or have a special version, because the full web just doesn't work. Flash is very, very popular. A lot of sites are 100% Flash. No plugin, no dice.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
I'm not sure how you'd objectively "measure" performance, but Flash works smoothly and quickly on my Droid. Video is smooth. I'm not a Flash expert or anything, but I'm pretty happy with it.
It works decently on OS X, too. Although lately I've seen the plugin "crash" a few times with the sad face in Safari. However, it does what it is supposed to do. It's a good interactive content platform. Take the alternative. On iOS, every web page has to have a special "app" for iOS or have a special version, because the full web just doesn't work. Flash is very, very popular. A lot of sites are 100% Flash. No plugin, no dice.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
To address your "argument 3": Soooo many people forget the crap Apple got when the iPhones debuted because it didn't issue (and stated that it didn't plan to but you never know about that) an SDK for 3rd party apps and wanted only web apps. Apple even had a little "store" which was basically a section on its website for them. This is a big reason (IMO) that it put so many resources into web kit and advocated HTML5 (since it would eventually provide local storage). Flash apps never were a threat to this so-called "money" Apple is rolling in from the App Store (which didn't even exist at that time). If you look at the revenue Apple makes from hardware compared to any kind of software/service combined (of course including this veritable cash cow called the App Store), you would see that the App Store's revenue much less profits is peanuts to Apple. If Adobe had a workable solution that ran well on the iPhone (or any other mobile device for that matter), Apple would have been more than happy to have flash apps running on its devices since it would only sell even more device (HINT: even MORE money) and possibly there would be no Apple App Store and instead Adobe App World/Store/Depot/What-have-you.
An Adobe product manager has pointed to the fact that Apple had refused to support Flash on iOS as a major reason for the company's decision to halt development of the Flash Player for mobile devices.
This is just stupid. You produce a shoddy product and then blame the folks that don't want to buy it for it being of poor quality?
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
While it's really nice of you to refer to Steve in the present tense (as if he were still alive and running Apple), you're jumping to conclusions. Apple doesn't try control the web. Unlike Microsoft and Adobe, who have tried to tie the web to their platforms (Windows and Flash) through plug-ins (ActiveX/Silverlight, Flash), Apple is doing quite the opposite by staunchly taking sides with open standards like HTML5, H.264 video, and their refusal to allow plug-ins of any kind on mobile Safari. They open-source Webkit so that other mobile platforms can have comparable HTML5 support. Apple has long encouraged and supported developers who wanted to create Web apps for iOS--it even pre-dates the availability of native iOS apps on the App Store. Apple makes no money from, nor exerts any control over Web apps, and yet they support fully it. All they want is for Web developers to use open standards like HTML5 instead of Adobe's Flash. Saying that it's all about the money is a hollow argument because they've never discouraged app developers from creating Web apps using HTML5.
Well that's the issue isn't it. All the tech pundits, Fandroids, and anti-Apple bloggers predicted the opposite. They predicted the lack of Flash on iOS would damage Apple badly and cause the ultimate failure of the platform. Now they want to blame Apple for mobile Flash's demise. They simply can't have it both ways.
Meanwhile, if you read the Isaacson biography, you will find out that Adobe pissed Jobs off long before mobile Flash became an issue. I remember how long it took Adobe to port Photoshop to OS X and even longer to release the OS X Intel version. Something went wrong between Adobe and Apple and they've had a lukewarm relationship ever since.
Check with DED for a useful summery of the Apple vs Adobe 'dispute:
I'm not sure how you'd objectively "measure" performance, but Flash works smoothly and quickly on my Droid. Video is smooth. I'm not a Flash expert or anything, but I'm pretty happy with it.
It works decently on OS X, too. Although lately I've seen the plugin "crash" a few times with the sad face in Safari. However, it does what it is supposed to do. It's a good interactive content platform. Take the alternative. On iOS, every web page has to have a special "app" for iOS or have a special version, because the full web just doesn't work. Flash is very, very popular. A lot of sites are 100% Flash. No plugin, no dice.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
JeffDM destroyed your point 3 by pointing out that it made no sense at all since Apple wasn't making any money off web sites. The rest of your "information" simply flies in the face of all objective appraisals of Flash on Android.
What's funny is that just a few months ago on AllThingsD, Adobe CEO Shantanu Narayen openly declared that Android would beat iOS in tablets just as they have beaten iOS in smartphones. He said that by year's end, "over 130 million devices" would support Flash. Mossberg's exact words in response were, "And I have yet to review a single one of them where Flash works well."
Those buggers at Adobe have no business putting any blame on iOS for Flash. They're the ones who bet against iOS, saying that their refusal to support Flash would be their undoing.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
There are a lot of free apps in the App Store. Apple has to bear the burden of supporting those apps, but they don't make a dime for Apple. As it stands, the App Store is running at break-even for Apple. And the new iCloud services with free storage for all iOS customers is, in the long run, going to cost them. I don't think you realize that Apple is a consumer electronics company--I would have said "hardware company" except that, after reading Walter Isaacson's bio of Steve Jobs, I learned that Apple doesn't separate hardware from software from services. It's all one big product. The App Store's "long tail" is a feature for selling iPhones and iPads. It's isn't a major source of profit for Apple. The third-party ISVs make the profits; Apple only gains ancillary benefits from selling these third-party apps.
If you want further evidence of Apple's focus, consider what Steve Jobs told the boys who started DropBox: you're a feature, not a product. iCloud file syncing, like the App Store, is a feature of the product, but not the product itself.
Comments
Does AIR use OpenCL or GCD... I doubt it.
Then AIR is the poster boy for LCD middleware that Steve feared... All of a sudden we have a 3rd-party setting the bar for Apple app features, UI, UX, performance.
I am surprised That Apple allowed/allows this!
Wasn't it because they had to allow for game engines and interrupters, which opened the door for Adobe and others. I think if Apple cherry picked those that would be allowed it could be considered anti-competitive and fall under Refusal to deal,
Press release:
The App Store℠ has revolutionized the way mobile applications are developed and distributed. With over 250,000 apps and 6.5 billion downloads, the App Store has become the world's largest mobile application platform and App Store developers have earned over one billion dollars from the sales of their apps.
We are continually trying to make the App Store even better. We have listened to our developers and taken much of their feedback to heart. Based on their input, today we are making some important changes to our iOS Developer Program license in sections 3.3.1, 3.3.2 and 3.3.9 to relax some restrictions we put in place earlier this year.
In particular, we are relaxing all restrictions on the development tools used to create iOS apps, as long as the resulting apps do not download any code. This should give developers the flexibility they want, while preserving the security we need.
In addition, for the first time we are publishing the App Store Review Guidelines to help developers understand how we review submitted apps. We hope it will make us more transparent and help our developers create even more successful apps for the App Store.
The App Store is perhaps the most important milestone in the history of mobile software. Working together with our developers, we will continue to surprise and delight our users with innovative mobile apps.
Hey Marvin
Do you still want to tell me that killing mobile flash was just a matter of timing and not a matter of competition.
Timing? Really?
Timing, maybe in light of Steve's passing. Adobe knew Steve would be the only person that could throw them a lifeline to resurrect Flash on iOS. Which was never going to happen anyway, so actually I have to bl**dy idea what Adobe is thinking.
Like Samsung, Google, Moto, Microsoft... everyone's losing the plot!
I open up AppleInsider, see Steve's picture, and then it hits me, he's not around. I was always comforted somehow in the past few years that no matter what, he was always tinkering on something despite being more and more in the background.
Anyway, to repeat myself, clearly Adobe has given up all hope that anyone at Apple post-Steve would be bothered with Flash anymore.
And more vindication for Steve not pre-loading Flash on new Macs.
Wasn't it because they had to allow for game engines and interrupters, which opened the door for Adobe and others. I think if Apple cherry picked those that would be allowed it could be considered anti-competitive and fall under Refusal to deal
Yeah, and there was Unreal Engine for iOS which is a big, big deal. As mentioned, in a few years with Unreal Engine 4 higher-spec than PS3 and Xbox360 on iPad 4 and 5... Opening up to other engines/compilers will be well worth it.
Wasn't it because they had to allow for game engines and interrupters, which opened the door for Adobe and others. I think if Apple cherry picked those that would be allowed it could be considered anti-competitive and fall under Refusal to deal,
Press release:
Yes, I suspect that is exactly what happened...
Unfortunately, that opened the door for the Flash crapware...
I guess, you accept the bad to get the good.
Sigh!
Yes, I suspect that is exactly what happened...
Unfortunately, that opened the door for the Flash crapware...
I guess, you accept the bad to get the good.
Sigh!
I think iOS is better for it. I'm not a gamer (unless you count Word with Friends, Strategery and Angry Birds) but the demos I've seen are mighty impressive.
Looking at this from a business perspective, which fortunately, or unfortunately, is the way I look at about every thing, I think Adobe is making the right decision. Why waste R&D and assets on a technology that obviously is changing. To look at the opposite of this, look at RIM. They are continuing to waste valuable dollars on the playbook, and NOW they are saying they are going to continue their flash development. I am not much of an Adobe fan, and I was a longtime Blackberry user (and still prefer their wonderful physical keyboard), but technology moves on, and RIM is still making the same mistakes. Adobe....they are moving on. I guess we can say the same about Logitech and Google TV.
Adobe....they are moving on.
Apple takes full credit for Flash's demise
Good Riddance.
If Adobe's mobile Flash wasn't a piece of crap, Apple would never have banned it from their mobile devices in the first place!
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
I don't think the app explanation works because web site flash objects aren't apps. I don't think people would download an app for every web site they randomly visit. I don't think a web site flash object is an equivalent or replacement to an app, or vise versa. Besides, most apps for web sites are free.
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
This is the sort of delusional spin that comes from people who have no idea what they are talking about. Addressing your "points" in order...
1. Steve Jobs liked things that worked well. Flash wasn't one of those things. To get things to work well, there has to be some measure of control: anarchy and working well are generally in opposition.
2. Apple likes making great products. Great products make money. See above.
3. This has already been addressed and dismissed, which pretty much dismisses your entire "argument".
It works decently on OS X, too. Although lately I've seen the plugin "crash" a few times with the sad face in Safari. However, it does what it is supposed to do. It's a good interactive content platform. Take the alternative. On iOS, every web page has to have a special "app" for iOS or have a special version, because the full web just doesn't work. Flash is very, very popular. A lot of sites are 100% Flash. No plugin, no dice.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
I'm not sure how you'd objectively "measure" performance, but Flash works smoothly and quickly on my Droid. Video is smooth. I'm not a Flash expert or anything, but I'm pretty happy with it.
It works decently on OS X, too. Although lately I've seen the plugin "crash" a few times with the sad face in Safari. However, it does what it is supposed to do. It's a good interactive content platform. Take the alternative. On iOS, every web page has to have a special "app" for iOS or have a special version, because the full web just doesn't work. Flash is very, very popular. A lot of sites are 100% Flash. No plugin, no dice.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
To address your "argument 3": Soooo many people forget the crap Apple got when the iPhones debuted because it didn't issue (and stated that it didn't plan to but you never know about that) an SDK for 3rd party apps and wanted only web apps. Apple even had a little "store" which was basically a section on its website for them. This is a big reason (IMO) that it put so many resources into web kit and advocated HTML5 (since it would eventually provide local storage). Flash apps never were a threat to this so-called "money" Apple is rolling in from the App Store (which didn't even exist at that time). If you look at the revenue Apple makes from hardware compared to any kind of software/service combined (of course including this veritable cash cow called the App Store), you would see that the App Store's revenue much less profits is peanuts to Apple. If Adobe had a workable solution that ran well on the iPhone (or any other mobile device for that matter), Apple would have been more than happy to have flash apps running on its devices since it would only sell even more device (HINT: even MORE money) and possibly there would be no Apple App Store and instead Adobe App World/Store/Depot/What-have-you.
An Adobe product manager has pointed to the fact that Apple had refused to support Flash on iOS as a major reason for the company's decision to halt development of the Flash Player for mobile devices.
This is just stupid. You produce a shoddy product and then blame the folks that don't want to buy it for it being of poor quality?
I believe that is part of the reason. Flash a long time ago had serious performance issues and even still could use improvement. However, that is not the main reason. I think the main reason Apple opposed Flash was because 1) Steve likes control 2) Apple likes money 3) Flash apps would have cut Apple out of the 30% it gets from app sales. It's all about money. It's just business. Again I am partially agreeing with you, but I think the other points about the main reasons are often forgotten about here or at least under-appreciated.
While it's really nice of you to refer to Steve in the present tense (as if he were still alive and running Apple), you're jumping to conclusions. Apple doesn't try control the web. Unlike Microsoft and Adobe, who have tried to tie the web to their platforms (Windows and Flash) through plug-ins (ActiveX/Silverlight, Flash), Apple is doing quite the opposite by staunchly taking sides with open standards like HTML5, H.264 video, and their refusal to allow plug-ins of any kind on mobile Safari. They open-source Webkit so that other mobile platforms can have comparable HTML5 support. Apple has long encouraged and supported developers who wanted to create Web apps for iOS--it even pre-dates the availability of native iOS apps on the App Store. Apple makes no money from, nor exerts any control over Web apps, and yet they support fully it. All they want is for Web developers to use open standards like HTML5 instead of Adobe's Flash. Saying that it's all about the money is a hollow argument because they've never discouraged app developers from creating Web apps using HTML5.
Well that's the issue isn't it. All the tech pundits, Fandroids, and anti-Apple bloggers predicted the opposite. They predicted the lack of Flash on iOS would damage Apple badly and cause the ultimate failure of the platform. Now they want to blame Apple for mobile Flash's demise. They simply can't have it both ways.
Meanwhile, if you read the Isaacson biography, you will find out that Adobe pissed Jobs off long before mobile Flash became an issue. I remember how long it took Adobe to port Photoshop to OS X and even longer to release the OS X Intel version. Something went wrong between Adobe and Apple and they've had a lukewarm relationship ever since.
Check with DED for a useful summery of the Apple vs Adobe 'dispute:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/0...dobe-vs-apple/
There were further problems in the 90s concerning Photoshop development being biased toward Windows as well.
Cheers
I'm not sure how you'd objectively "measure" performance, but Flash works smoothly and quickly on my Droid. Video is smooth. I'm not a Flash expert or anything, but I'm pretty happy with it.
It works decently on OS X, too. Although lately I've seen the plugin "crash" a few times with the sad face in Safari. However, it does what it is supposed to do. It's a good interactive content platform. Take the alternative. On iOS, every web page has to have a special "app" for iOS or have a special version, because the full web just doesn't work. Flash is very, very popular. A lot of sites are 100% Flash. No plugin, no dice.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
JeffDM destroyed your point 3 by pointing out that it made no sense at all since Apple wasn't making any money off web sites. The rest of your "information" simply flies in the face of all objective appraisals of Flash on Android.
Those buggers at Adobe have no business putting any blame on iOS for Flash. They're the ones who bet against iOS, saying that their refusal to support Flash would be their undoing.
And how is my argument 3 invalid? Of course Apple doesn't want competition with their money-making App store. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that business model. In fact it's brilliant. It's just not a product model that I am interested in at the moment. If iPhone eventually gains advantages in areas I care about over Android maybe I'll get one. But now it does not, and that in addition to the Apple philosophy for iOS keeps me away from iPhone. But again, do you see what I mean? Apple does not like that websites can get "app" like functionality with Flash and intentionally cut them out for this reason. At least, that I am guessing was a big reason in their doing so. I don't have inside info or anything, I'm just making an educated guess. Also, I think it is important to realize phone hardware has advanced a lot since Apple initially wrote Flash off, and Flash itself has advanced. Perhaps when Flash first came out on Android it really was crap. But I have only been using it for the past six months, and for me it works nicely. In fact it just got updated again today, to apparently allow users to grant Flash access to the phone camera to use as a webcam etc.
There are a lot of free apps in the App Store. Apple has to bear the burden of supporting those apps, but they don't make a dime for Apple. As it stands, the App Store is running at break-even for Apple. And the new iCloud services with free storage for all iOS customers is, in the long run, going to cost them. I don't think you realize that Apple is a consumer electronics company--I would have said "hardware company" except that, after reading Walter Isaacson's bio of Steve Jobs, I learned that Apple doesn't separate hardware from software from services. It's all one big product. The App Store's "long tail" is a feature for selling iPhones and iPads. It's isn't a major source of profit for Apple. The third-party ISVs make the profits; Apple only gains ancillary benefits from selling these third-party apps.
If you want further evidence of Apple's focus, consider what Steve Jobs told the boys who started DropBox: you're a feature, not a product. iCloud file syncing, like the App Store, is a feature of the product, but not the product itself.