What he did say was that the software currently wasn't usable on the phone. That's very different. At one point, when asked, he did say that Flash was possible sometime.
And let's not forget that Adobe exists today because of Apple, how could Adobe have become Adobe if not for the GUI brought fourth by Apple? And what would MS have done without it either?
Haaaa, but yes, the oposing argument is that Apple really didn't create anything new and is not really directly responsible for Adobe's existence because somewhere, somehow, by some inevetably chances of this and that, with some bla-bla's thrown in just to prove that Apple did nothing really, this GUI innovation would have made it's way into the computer world anyway. I'm sure!
None of this is really that important, I just find interesting that a company whose existance was brought fourth by another now finds alright to diss that very same company. Ain't life sweet.
It's also been said that if it weren't for Adobe and Aldus, the Mac would have died, and that's likely true as well.
And if the Mac had died, the way the Apple III and Lisa did, would Apple be here today?
What he did say was that the software currently wasn't usable on the phone. That's very different. At one point, when asked, he did say that Flash was possible sometime.
You're right.
Steve did not say QUOTE(it ain't happening)UNQUOTE
I said he basically said it ain't happening.
I didn't say he said "It Ain't Happening".
I'll stick with my point.
Steve said the current version out today for Flash, is NOT coming to the iPhone.
Period.
If you have a quote where he said the current version of Flash IS IN FACT, coming to the iPhone I'll listen.
I think people who BELIEVE Apple is about to reverse course and build a Flash addon into their iPhone version on that screen for Flash have zero clue about the culture at Apple.
They aren't MicroSoft, they aren't going to bend their sensbilities to third party software that can melt your cpu and drain your battery.
I'll sit back and wait for the quote from Steve that says it's coming......
(*taps foot, rolls eye, waits.... and waits..... and waits.....*)
Steve did not say QUOTE(it ain't happening)UNQUOTE
I said he basically said it ain't happening.
I didn't say he said "It Ain't Happening".
I'll stick with my point.
Steve said the current version out today for Flash, is NOT coming to the iPhone.
Period.
If you have a quote where he said the current version of Flash IS IN FACT, coming to the iPhone I'll listen.
I think people who BELIEVE Apple is about to reverse course and build a Flash addon into their iPhone version on that screen for Flash have zero clue about the culture at Apple.
They aren't MicroSoft, they aren't going to bend their sensbilities to third party software that can melt your cpu and drain your battery.
I'll sit back and wait for the quote from Steve that says it's coming......
(*taps foot, rolls eye, waits.... and waits..... and waits.....*)
I see that you're now trying to hedge your bets, and are misquoting me. I never said that the "current" version of Flash was coming to the iPhone. in fact, I said that Jobs said that the two current versions were "not" coming to the iPhone.
What I did say, is that Jobs made it pretty clear that it was the performance of the current versions that was keeping them off the phone. He NEVER said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. Never!
He had said earlier, that while Java would not come to the iPhone (as opposed to Javascript, which IS on the iPhone), Flash might, though he couldn't say when. I wish I could find that interview, but it was around the time of the iPhone announcement.
He, or someone else from Apple, also said right after the March 6th event, that is, in the hall where the event was just held, in response to a question, that Flash might come to the phone.
People are so blinded by their hatred for this that they aren't paying attention.
Find where Jobs said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. You can't, because he never said it!
At some point, I will find one of those interviews, and bookmark it.
I see that you're now trying to hedge your bets, and are misquoting me. I never said that the "current" version of Flash was coming to the iPhone. in fact, I said that Jobs said that the two current versions were "not" coming to the iPhone.
What I did say, is that Jobs made it pretty clear that it was the performance of the current versions that was keeping them off the phone. He NEVER said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. Never!
That's exactly what he said.
Flash. This Flash. The way Flash works.
This Flash working this way is never going to run on this phone.
That's what he said.
Can't, it's a performance problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
He had said earlier, that while Java would not come to the iPhone (as opposed to Javascript, which IS on the iPhone), Flash might, though he couldn't say when. I wish I could find that interview, but it was around the time of the iPhone announcement.
He, or someone else from Apple, also said right after the March 6th event, that is, in the hall where the event was just held, in response to a question, that Flash might come to the phone.
People are so blinded by their hatred for this that they aren't paying attention.
Find where Jobs said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. You can't, because he never said it!
At some point, I will find one of those interviews, and bookmark it.
I'm not hedging my bets, or anyone esles.
Apple is on record, that Flash... the flash out there now, the flash we all understand when we say "Flash" is not going to run on the iPhone. (and clearly, it would melt the cpu and drain the battery)
And I listen to underlings carefully say they may support Flash if things change.
I say carefully, because if you parse their words, you'll see they are saying when Flash works really well and won't cook their phone, of course they'd support it.
But that's not Flash.
That's some new product to replace Flash.
And when some new product comes out, that isn't such garbadge, it will be more successful.
(even might cause browsers makers to stop making features to diable it!)
Flash is not going to come to the iPhone until something Drastic happens.
And the people running the show at Flash central are so clueless they actually announced they could use the iPhone SDK to implement a solution.
Can't, won't.
And if you really think Apple is "going to support it soon" as you seem to say, how in the world do you think they can stand up and make such a big deal about not going down that ugly path?
You'll know a solution to the problem is on th way when the APple folks start working behind the scenes on how flash works.
Since they have enough to do, and Flash support is about 47th on the list of things that are really important for improving in their portable device platform business unit.... don't hold your breath.
This Flash working this way is never going to run on this phone.
That's what he said.
Can't, it's a performance problem.
I don't know what your argument is then, you're not disagreeing with me. Possibly you aren't aware of that?
Quote:
I'm not hedging my bets, or anyone esles.
Apple is on record, that Flash... the flash out there now, the flash we all understand when we say "Flash" is not going to run on the iPhone. (and clearly, it would melt the cpu and drain the battery)
And I listen to underlings carefully say they may support Flash if things change.
I say carefully, because if you parse their words, you'll see they are saying when Flash works really well and won't cook their phone, of course they'd support it.
But that's not Flash.
That's some new product to replace Flash.
And when some new product comes out, that isn't such garbadge, it will be more successful.
(even might cause browsers makers to stop making features to diable it!)
Flash is not going to come to the iPhone until something Drastic happens.
And the people running the show at Flash central are so clueless they actually announced they could use the iPhone SDK to implement a solution.
Can't, won't.
And if you really think Apple is "going to support it soon" as you seem to say, how in the world do you think they can stand up and make such a big deal about not going down that ugly path?
You'll know a solution to the problem is on th way when the APple folks start working behind the scenes on how flash works.
Since they have enough to do, and Flash support is about 47th on the list of things that are really important for improving in their portable device platform business unit.... don't hold your breath.
You think it's coming soon?
You're wrong, you'll see.
All you're saying now, with a great many words, is what several of us have been saying, which, as I again will repeat, is that the two versions of Flash out there will not be coming to the iPhone. That Adobe (possibly with Apple's help or encouragement), will need to write a Flash product that is more able to meet the needs of Apple's, and possibly other's, devices.
If Apple is working behind the scenes with Adobe on this, we will NOT know that, until they are ready to produce a product.
This is all we've been saying, and is pretty much what Jobs has been saying as well.
I never said that it would be soon. We don't know how long it might be. It could take 6 months, it could take a year. Possibly, it will not happen at all. We'll just have to wait and see.
I don't know what your argument is then, you're not disagreeing with me. Possibly you aren't aware of that?
All you're saying now, with a great many words, is what several of us have been saying, which, as I again will repeat, is that the two versions of Flash out there will not be coming to the iPhone. That Adobe (possibly with Apple's help or encouragement), will need to write a Flash product that is more able to meet the needs of Apple's, and possibly other's, devices.
If Apple is working behind the scenes with Adobe on this, we will NOT know that, until they are ready to produce a product.
This is all we've been saying, and is pretty much what Jobs has been saying as well.
I never said that it would be soon. We don't know how long it might be. It could take 6 months, it could take a year. Possibly, it will not happen at all. We'll just have to wait and see.
Since you're clearly being impossible, I'll leave this alone.
First you say we're basically agreeing, and then you say it could take 6 months... maybe a year.
You will not see flash on the iPhone in the next year.
And Adobe can't come up with something new to call flash in that time.
You need a lot longer timeframe, and the idea that Apple would lend any resources to help Adobe when they clearly don't need flash, well, it's just silly.
Steve said flash won't perform and that's why it's not on the phone.
If and when it does, it could go on the phone.
It can't, it won't, forget it.
They were late on Leopard because of the iPhone.
They were late on the SDK, because it's a lot.
They are still late, because it's not ready.
If anyone thinks they're going to put "Flash" of all things, ahead of iPhone enterprise features, of the devlopers community on the iPhone, you're adsly mistaken.
The only effort that could keep the flash movement alive for the iPhone has to come from Adobe. They clearly don't know what they're doing so forget it......
It's also been said that if it weren't for Adobe and Aldus, the Mac would have died, and that's likely true as well.
And if the Mac had died, the way the Apple III and Lisa did, would Apple be here today?
Huh? What a mind twist.
First... Sure, Apple, or any group, person or entity for that matter, is dependent not only upon self for it's survival but also upon others. What's your point? What does that have to do with Adobe's lack of friendliness towards the Mac specially when Adobe owes it's very existence to the Mac community in the first place? Yes, I can understand that Adobe had to survive therefore seek a market outside of the Mac OS, but why go so far as to alienate us? Why go so far as to abandon the ideology of the Mac and replace it with a Windows centric ideology? Adobe has abonded the Mac user long ago. Back in the days when honor meant something this would have been classified as betrayal. But apperently this in meaningless now days.
Second, the Mac evolved from the products you mention. Neither did the Apple III nor Lisa "die", they evolved into the Mac. What does Apple's evolutionary product history have to do with the discussion at hand?
First you say we're basically agreeing, and then you say it could take 6 months... maybe a year.
You will not see flash on the iPhone in the next year.
And Adobe can't come up with something new to call flash in that time.
You need a lot longer timeframe, and the idea that Apple would lend any resources to help Adobe when they clearly don't need flash, well, it's just silly.
Steve said flash won't perform and that's why it's not on the phone.
If and when it does, it could go on the phone.
It can't, it won't, forget it.
They were late on Leopard because of the iPhone.
They were late on the SDK, because it's a lot.
They are still late, because it's not ready.
If anyone thinks they're going to put "Flash" of all things, ahead of iPhone enterprise features, of the devlopers community on the iPhone, you're adsly mistaken.
The only effort that could keep the flash movement alive for the iPhone has to come from Adobe. They clearly don't know what they're doing so forget it......
My position has been very clear.
Reading what Jobs has said, shows that he never said that Flash would not be coming at some point in time, and at one time, though I can't find it now, he said that while JAVA was out, Flash might show up.
His complaints about Flash have been carefully limited to the current products. The full Flash product, according to him, not being able to be run properly with current handheld devices, and Flash Lite not giving a proper internet experience.
Therefore, I believe that there is a possible role for Flash on the iPhone/itouch. If, and when Adobe, possibly in cooperation with Apple, has a product that alleviates Job's concerns, we might very well see Flash on Apple's devices.
How long could that take? I don't know, nor does anyone else here. I'm saying that it could take 6 months to a year, based on the size of the program, which would not be large, and is not something that is totally new to Adobe after all.
Maybe, it will never happen. That's possible as well.
But Jobs doesn't seem to be opposed to it in principle, he just doesn't seem to feel that the current products are useable, or useful.
You said that the current products would never arrive on the iPhone, and I agreed.
But, you are making a lot of assumptions here. Most of them are not verifiable, and some are even fishy.
You have no idea how long it could take Adobe to do this product. It isn't a big product, and some code from current products would be reusable. You can't assume that Apple won't help. They may, and they may not.
Jobs says that 10.5 was late because of the iPhone, possibly that's true in the strict sense. But it really just shows that Apple didn't have the proper number of people working on the projects in the first place, and even, possibly, that they were having problems with BOTH products. something that seems very probable, looking at the problems with both when they first came out.
I said, many times, from the very beginning, reinforced by quotes from Jobs, that I thought Apple was going to come out with an SDK, though I didn't know when. The fact that a very big project like this might be late isn't surprising. But, other than the beta being a bit late, we really don't know if Apple intended for it to arrive in February, full sprung. I doubt that very much, considering how much work is being done on it. I'm pretty sure that the developers conference was the intended date.
Who said that Apple was going to put Flash ahead of the other solutions? I didn't. End of June is when those solutions will be available. As far as my arithmetic goes, 6 months comes 3 months later, and that's just a guess about the earliest possible date.
It's nice that you know so much that you can so easily say that Adobe doesn't know what they are doing. I guess your developers skills are vast, and your inside knowledge of their operations are so detailed that they can allow such an opinion.
First... Sure, Apple, or any group, person or entity for that matter, is dependent not only upon self for it's survival but also upon others. What's your point? What does that have to do with Adobe's lack of friendliness towards the Mac specially when Adobe owes it's very existence to the Mac community in the first place? Yes, I can understand that Adobe had to survive therefore seek a market outside of the Mac OS, but why go so far as to alienate us? Why go so far as to abandon the ideology of the Mac and replace it with a Windows centric ideology? Adobe has abonded the Mac user long ago. Back in the days when honor meant something this would have been classified as betrayal. But apperently this in meaningless now days.
Second, the Mac evolved from the products you mention. Neither did the Apple III nor Lisa "die", they evolved into the Mac. What does Apple's evolutionary product history have to do with the discussion at hand?
It's not a mind twist at all. It's the truth. There has been much writing about how each company supported the other. Without Apple, it's possible that Aldus and Adobe wouldn't have gone anywhere. It's also true that their products shored up the faltering Mac line, which, after several high profile failures from Apple, was the future of the company.
What I'm saying is that one company can't look back to some rosy past, and out of the kindness of its heart, throw large amounts of money down, what looks to be an endless hole.
At the end of 1995, after the fiasco by Michael Spindler, many companies, both large and small, were getting rid of their Macs by the thousands. To much of the outside world, it looked as though Apple had a short time left.
Adobe, Quark, and many other Mac only companies quickly ported their software over. This is something they had to do as a matter of survival.
As more users moved to the PC platform, these companies began to put more resources into that side of it. Again, that's natural.
At the nadir of Apple's low point, only 27% of Adobe's customers for the imaging products were Mac users.
While Apple did come out with some technologies during the late 90's, they were confused, poorly implemented, and often withdrawn as soon as third parties began to come out with products for them. Corel was a big supported of Apple's object oriented additions to their OS, and was severely burned. These third parties learned to stay away from Apple's "innovations", because they rarely lasted more than a year or two. Remember Game Sockets?
During that time, Apple tried to kill Adobe's cash cow, the Type 1 font technology, in conjunction with MS. They succeeded to a large extent.
Nevertheless, during that period, having used both Adobe's PC product, and their Mac product, I never felt as though Adobe was putting more resources into the PC versions.
In fact, the Mac versions always maintained a better usability factor.
I don't find any "unfriendliness" toward Apple's lines from Adobe. What you are expecting is that Adobe put more effort into products for the Mac than they do for the PC, but thats not sensible at this time. If, sales to Mac users ever gain a very large percentage of their business, we may see more of that, but otherwise no.
We've seen Adobe products for the Mac being discontinued, and that's sad. But it is directly related to sales. If a product's sales fall below what's required to make a profit, it gets discontinued. Then people howl. but most of them never bought the product in the first place, and the number of those who did, clearly wasn't enough to support it.
I really don't see how you can argue with what I've said.
What I'm saying is that one company can't look back to some rosy past, and out of the kindness of its heart, throw large amounts of money down, what looks to be an endless hole.
This is probably the only part we can agree on.
There is no way Apple is going to look back on Adobe and throw any cash down that hole, let alone use any of Apple's strapped resources to fix flash.
Again, they were late on Leopard because they had to redirect resources.
Then, the iPhone work was delayed as they pushed Leopard through after the iPhone was out.
You're expecting Apple to have some kind of quiet effort going on behind the scenes to help Adobe figure out how to fix ther "performance problem" Jobs described that keeps flash off the phone.
That's just stupid.
For Apple to "lend" or help out Adobe when they have so much more valuable things for those resources to work on makes no sense at all.
And as you said, looking back at some way they helped each other in some other time-frame just won't happen.
This is busness, and flash performs badly and Adobe either can't figure out how to fix the problem or doesn't think it's important enough.
Clearly, the iPhone won't suffer at all if flash is never fixed.
And Adobe has shown in recent statements that THEY KNOW NOTHING! (as cramer would say) about the iPhone.
So if they don't want to deal with their performance problems, and make it public knowledge they have no idea how the iPhone works, then clearly Apple isn't going to try to resolve the problem despite Adobe's lack of capability to deal with it.
As you said, looking back at prior history at a happier time makes no sense.
There is no way Apple is going to look back on Adobe and throw any cash down that hole, let alone use any of Apple's strapped resources to fix flash.
Again, they were late on Leopard because they had to redirect resources.
Then, the iPhone work was delayed as they pushed Leopard through after the iPhone was out.
You're expecting Apple to have some kind of quiet effort going on behind the scenes to help Adobe figure out how to fix ther "performance problem" Jobs described that keeps flash off the phone.
That's just stupid.
For Apple to "lend" or help out Adobe when they have so much more valuable things for those resources to work on makes no sense at all.
And as you said, looking back at some way they helped each other in some other time-frame just won't happen.
This is busness, and flash performs badly and Adobe either can't figure out how to fix the problem or doesn't think it's important enough.
Clearly, the iPhone won't suffer at all if flash is never fixed.
And Adobe has shown in recent statements that THEY KNOW NOTHING! (as cramer would say) about the iPhone.
So if they don't want to deal with their performance problems, and make it public knowledge they have no idea how the iPhone works, then clearly Apple isn't going to try to resolve the problem despite Adobe's lack of capability to deal with it.
As you said, looking back at prior history at a happier time makes no sense.
So.... Apple has moved on.
You should too.....
We obviously have very different views on this, so we should just leave it at that, and part as friends.
Just curious what kind of developing iPeon and wbrasington do? Are you just consumers expressing your opinion or do you really have a point to make? Melgross is bringing up some good points and you guys are turning fanboi on him... It seems like every argument fanboys get involved in there is some comparison to Microsoft in the argument...
I really don't see how you can argue with what I've said.
I don't disagre with you on this. What I disagree with is this: If you have used Adobe's apps from back in the days when the Mac was the only platform they coded for, and I know you have based on your postings, you will notice a big change. Today Adobe's apps have taken on a flovor of a Windows like paradigm (an example serving as a model; pattern.) Bloated, buggy, incomplete, with UI elements that comes from a Windows like paradigm.
That was my point. Now, this view-point is defenetely a subjective view-point. Some get what I'm saying, some won't. Some don't see the diference between Windows and the Mac. "It's just a computer, and they both do the same thing.", one often reads in these forums. Truth is, there's a HUGE diference between the two in how work gets done and what we Mac users expect from an app is very much diferent than what a Windows user expects from an app.
Do I feel confident that Adobe knows what they are doing? Hell no. That's all I'm saying.
I don't disagre with you on this. What I disagree with is this: If you have used Adobe's apps from back in the days when the Mac was the only platform they coded for, and I know you have based on your postings, you will notice a big change. Today Adobe's apps have taken on a flovor of a Windows like paradigm (an example serving as a model; pattern.) Bloated, buggy, incomplete, with UI elements that comes from a Windows like paradigm.
That was my point. Now, this view-point is defenetely a subjective view-point. Some get what I'm saying, some won't. Some don't see the diference between Windows and the Mac. "It's just a computer, and they both do the same thing.", one often reads in these forums. Truth is, there's a HUGE diference between the two in how work gets done and what we Mac users expect from an app is very much diferent than what a Windows user expects from an app.
Do I feel confident that Adobe knows what they are doing? Hell no. That's all I'm saying.
I understand what you're saying. I don't think it's exactly what's happened though,
Over the years, programs tend to get bigger as they add features and capabilities. You might call this bloat, but it isn't.
The same thing happens to all programs. If you look at FCP, you'll see what I mean. When I first used it in ver. 1.0, it was a fairly lean machine. Now it's pretty complex, part of a suite that MUST be purchased, unlike before, and one might even say—bloated!
Of course there will be those here, who will, because it's an Apple program, deny that, but it's true. I'm not saying that it's bad, but many have bitterly complained about having to buy the whole thing when they don't want to.
So it's not really Adobe's fault. They are giving the majority of their customers what they want, like Apple is, and at the same time making some unhappy. That's the way of the world.
I you don't need all of PS, then there are options from Adobe. You can buy Lightroom, or Elements 6.
I also don't find them to be any buggier than any other programs, and usually less buggy. But the bigger programs get, the more bugs they tend to have. look at Apple's OS. The past two versions were riddled with bugs compared to earlier versions.
Look at Aperture. It was a disaster when it first came out, and took months to become usable in any serious way. Over time, you'll see Apple continue to add features until several years from now, assuming its still around, it will be twice the size.
As far as the Windows UI elements, well, Apple has taken some of those for itself as well. All companies "borrow" from others. Aperture just took several significant features from CR 4. But I don't see anyone here protesting.
Adobe QA and user friendliness has dropped of the face of the earth. Sure CS3 streamlined the UI and now most of the apps really work well together, but the Install process takes longer thna an OS install, and the update process is TEH FAIL. Add to that unpublicized updates for things like the DWG/DXF plugin--only available through a forum post, and the manually installed by dragging into the plugins folder. Won't even discuss the Catastrophic License Failure issue. Nice software to use, utter crap to maintain.
Adobe QA and user friendliness has dropped of the face of the earth. Sure CS3 streamlined the UI and now most of the apps really work well together, but the Install process takes longer thna an OS install, and the update process is TEH FAIL. Add to that unpublicized updates for things like the DWG/DXF plugin--only available through a forum post, and the manually installed by dragging into the plugins folder. Won't even discuss the Catastrophic License Failure issue. Nice software to use, utter crap to maintain.
The install will take some time vbecause there are a number of programs to install. I would be surprised if it didn't rake some time.
As for the updates, they always go smoothly, I just did the latest early this evening, and as usual, there was no problem.
As for some plug-ins and other small add-ons that most people won't be wanting, sure, you have to take the entire minute it takes to install them, if you really want them. I thought you were a pro. You're using pro apps. You can't take a bit of time to install something that just a few people will want?
The install will take some time vbecause there are a number of programs to install. I would be surprised if it didn't rake some time.
As for the updates, they always go smoothly, I just did the latest early this evening, and as usual, there was no problem.
As for some plug-ins and other small add-ons that most people won't be wanting, sure, you have to take the entire minute it takes to install them, if you really want them. I thought you were a pro. You're using pro apps. You can't take a bit of time to install something that just a few people will want?
that's a silly response. admin a lab or two full of CS3 and manual install of plugins is TEH FAIL. Also if you check the Adobe forums update failure is NOT trivial. Sorry, but for the importance and cost of the suite, and its prevalence in large companies this kind of install and maintenance behavior is pathetic.
Comments
What?
Steve never said what?
What you said:
and Steve basically said it ain't happening.
What he did say was that the software currently wasn't usable on the phone. That's very different. At one point, when asked, he did say that Flash was possible sometime.
And let's not forget that Adobe exists today because of Apple, how could Adobe have become Adobe if not for the GUI brought fourth by Apple? And what would MS have done without it either?
Haaaa, but yes, the oposing argument is that Apple really didn't create anything new and is not really directly responsible for Adobe's existence because somewhere, somehow, by some inevetably chances of this and that, with some bla-bla's thrown in just to prove that Apple did nothing really, this GUI innovation would have made it's way into the computer world anyway. I'm sure!
None of this is really that important, I just find interesting that a company whose existance was brought fourth by another now finds alright to diss that very same company. Ain't life sweet.
It's also been said that if it weren't for Adobe and Aldus, the Mac would have died, and that's likely true as well.
And if the Mac had died, the way the Apple III and Lisa did, would Apple be here today?
What you said:
What he did say was that the software currently wasn't usable on the phone. That's very different. At one point, when asked, he did say that Flash was possible sometime.
You're right.
Steve did not say QUOTE(it ain't happening)UNQUOTE
I said he basically said it ain't happening.
I didn't say he said "It Ain't Happening".
I'll stick with my point.
Steve said the current version out today for Flash, is NOT coming to the iPhone.
Period.
If you have a quote where he said the current version of Flash IS IN FACT, coming to the iPhone I'll listen.
I think people who BELIEVE Apple is about to reverse course and build a Flash addon into their iPhone version on that screen for Flash have zero clue about the culture at Apple.
They aren't MicroSoft, they aren't going to bend their sensbilities to third party software that can melt your cpu and drain your battery.
I'll sit back and wait for the quote from Steve that says it's coming......
(*taps foot, rolls eye, waits.... and waits..... and waits.....*)
You're right.
Steve did not say QUOTE(it ain't happening)UNQUOTE
I said he basically said it ain't happening.
I didn't say he said "It Ain't Happening".
I'll stick with my point.
Steve said the current version out today for Flash, is NOT coming to the iPhone.
Period.
If you have a quote where he said the current version of Flash IS IN FACT, coming to the iPhone I'll listen.
I think people who BELIEVE Apple is about to reverse course and build a Flash addon into their iPhone version on that screen for Flash have zero clue about the culture at Apple.
They aren't MicroSoft, they aren't going to bend their sensbilities to third party software that can melt your cpu and drain your battery.
I'll sit back and wait for the quote from Steve that says it's coming......
(*taps foot, rolls eye, waits.... and waits..... and waits.....*)
I see that you're now trying to hedge your bets, and are misquoting me. I never said that the "current" version of Flash was coming to the iPhone. in fact, I said that Jobs said that the two current versions were "not" coming to the iPhone.
What I did say, is that Jobs made it pretty clear that it was the performance of the current versions that was keeping them off the phone. He NEVER said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. Never!
He had said earlier, that while Java would not come to the iPhone (as opposed to Javascript, which IS on the iPhone), Flash might, though he couldn't say when. I wish I could find that interview, but it was around the time of the iPhone announcement.
He, or someone else from Apple, also said right after the March 6th event, that is, in the hall where the event was just held, in response to a question, that Flash might come to the phone.
People are so blinded by their hatred for this that they aren't paying attention.
Find where Jobs said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. You can't, because he never said it!
At some point, I will find one of those interviews, and bookmark it.
I see that you're now trying to hedge your bets, and are misquoting me. I never said that the "current" version of Flash was coming to the iPhone. in fact, I said that Jobs said that the two current versions were "not" coming to the iPhone.
What I did say, is that Jobs made it pretty clear that it was the performance of the current versions that was keeping them off the phone. He NEVER said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. Never!
That's exactly what he said.
Flash. This Flash. The way Flash works.
This Flash working this way is never going to run on this phone.
That's what he said.
Can't, it's a performance problem.
He had said earlier, that while Java would not come to the iPhone (as opposed to Javascript, which IS on the iPhone), Flash might, though he couldn't say when. I wish I could find that interview, but it was around the time of the iPhone announcement.
He, or someone else from Apple, also said right after the March 6th event, that is, in the hall where the event was just held, in response to a question, that Flash might come to the phone.
People are so blinded by their hatred for this that they aren't paying attention.
Find where Jobs said that Flash would never come to the iPhone. You can't, because he never said it!
At some point, I will find one of those interviews, and bookmark it.
I'm not hedging my bets, or anyone esles.
Apple is on record, that Flash... the flash out there now, the flash we all understand when we say "Flash" is not going to run on the iPhone. (and clearly, it would melt the cpu and drain the battery)
And I listen to underlings carefully say they may support Flash if things change.
I say carefully, because if you parse their words, you'll see they are saying when Flash works really well and won't cook their phone, of course they'd support it.
But that's not Flash.
That's some new product to replace Flash.
And when some new product comes out, that isn't such garbadge, it will be more successful.
(even might cause browsers makers to stop making features to diable it!)
Flash is not going to come to the iPhone until something Drastic happens.
And the people running the show at Flash central are so clueless they actually announced they could use the iPhone SDK to implement a solution.
Can't, won't.
And if you really think Apple is "going to support it soon" as you seem to say, how in the world do you think they can stand up and make such a big deal about not going down that ugly path?
You'll know a solution to the problem is on th way when the APple folks start working behind the scenes on how flash works.
Since they have enough to do, and Flash support is about 47th on the list of things that are really important for improving in their portable device platform business unit.... don't hold your breath.
You think it's coming soon?
You're wrong, you'll see.
That's exactly what he said.
Flash. This Flash. The way Flash works.
This Flash working this way is never going to run on this phone.
That's what he said.
Can't, it's a performance problem.
I don't know what your argument is then, you're not disagreeing with me. Possibly you aren't aware of that?
I'm not hedging my bets, or anyone esles.
Apple is on record, that Flash... the flash out there now, the flash we all understand when we say "Flash" is not going to run on the iPhone. (and clearly, it would melt the cpu and drain the battery)
And I listen to underlings carefully say they may support Flash if things change.
I say carefully, because if you parse their words, you'll see they are saying when Flash works really well and won't cook their phone, of course they'd support it.
But that's not Flash.
That's some new product to replace Flash.
And when some new product comes out, that isn't such garbadge, it will be more successful.
(even might cause browsers makers to stop making features to diable it!)
Flash is not going to come to the iPhone until something Drastic happens.
And the people running the show at Flash central are so clueless they actually announced they could use the iPhone SDK to implement a solution.
Can't, won't.
And if you really think Apple is "going to support it soon" as you seem to say, how in the world do you think they can stand up and make such a big deal about not going down that ugly path?
You'll know a solution to the problem is on th way when the APple folks start working behind the scenes on how flash works.
Since they have enough to do, and Flash support is about 47th on the list of things that are really important for improving in their portable device platform business unit.... don't hold your breath.
You think it's coming soon?
You're wrong, you'll see.
All you're saying now, with a great many words, is what several of us have been saying, which, as I again will repeat, is that the two versions of Flash out there will not be coming to the iPhone. That Adobe (possibly with Apple's help or encouragement), will need to write a Flash product that is more able to meet the needs of Apple's, and possibly other's, devices.
If Apple is working behind the scenes with Adobe on this, we will NOT know that, until they are ready to produce a product.
This is all we've been saying, and is pretty much what Jobs has been saying as well.
I never said that it would be soon. We don't know how long it might be. It could take 6 months, it could take a year. Possibly, it will not happen at all. We'll just have to wait and see.
I don't know what your argument is then, you're not disagreeing with me. Possibly you aren't aware of that?
All you're saying now, with a great many words, is what several of us have been saying, which, as I again will repeat, is that the two versions of Flash out there will not be coming to the iPhone. That Adobe (possibly with Apple's help or encouragement), will need to write a Flash product that is more able to meet the needs of Apple's, and possibly other's, devices.
If Apple is working behind the scenes with Adobe on this, we will NOT know that, until they are ready to produce a product.
This is all we've been saying, and is pretty much what Jobs has been saying as well.
I never said that it would be soon. We don't know how long it might be. It could take 6 months, it could take a year. Possibly, it will not happen at all. We'll just have to wait and see.
Correct.
Flash is not coming to the iPhone.
Don't be looking for it......
Correct.
Flash is not coming to the iPhone.
Don't be looking for it......
Since you're clearly being impossible, I'll leave this alone.
Since you're clearly being impossible, I'll leave this alone.
First you say we're basically agreeing, and then you say it could take 6 months... maybe a year.
You will not see flash on the iPhone in the next year.
And Adobe can't come up with something new to call flash in that time.
You need a lot longer timeframe, and the idea that Apple would lend any resources to help Adobe when they clearly don't need flash, well, it's just silly.
Steve said flash won't perform and that's why it's not on the phone.
If and when it does, it could go on the phone.
It can't, it won't, forget it.
They were late on Leopard because of the iPhone.
They were late on the SDK, because it's a lot.
They are still late, because it's not ready.
If anyone thinks they're going to put "Flash" of all things, ahead of iPhone enterprise features, of the devlopers community on the iPhone, you're adsly mistaken.
The only effort that could keep the flash movement alive for the iPhone has to come from Adobe. They clearly don't know what they're doing so forget it......
It's also been said that if it weren't for Adobe and Aldus, the Mac would have died, and that's likely true as well.
And if the Mac had died, the way the Apple III and Lisa did, would Apple be here today?
Huh? What a mind twist.
First... Sure, Apple, or any group, person or entity for that matter, is dependent not only upon self for it's survival but also upon others. What's your point? What does that have to do with Adobe's lack of friendliness towards the Mac specially when Adobe owes it's very existence to the Mac community in the first place? Yes, I can understand that Adobe had to survive therefore seek a market outside of the Mac OS, but why go so far as to alienate us? Why go so far as to abandon the ideology of the Mac and replace it with a Windows centric ideology? Adobe has abonded the Mac user long ago. Back in the days when honor meant something this would have been classified as betrayal. But apperently this in meaningless now days.
Second, the Mac evolved from the products you mention. Neither did the Apple III nor Lisa "die", they evolved into the Mac. What does Apple's evolutionary product history have to do with the discussion at hand?
First you say we're basically agreeing, and then you say it could take 6 months... maybe a year.
You will not see flash on the iPhone in the next year.
And Adobe can't come up with something new to call flash in that time.
You need a lot longer timeframe, and the idea that Apple would lend any resources to help Adobe when they clearly don't need flash, well, it's just silly.
Steve said flash won't perform and that's why it's not on the phone.
If and when it does, it could go on the phone.
It can't, it won't, forget it.
They were late on Leopard because of the iPhone.
They were late on the SDK, because it's a lot.
They are still late, because it's not ready.
If anyone thinks they're going to put "Flash" of all things, ahead of iPhone enterprise features, of the devlopers community on the iPhone, you're adsly mistaken.
The only effort that could keep the flash movement alive for the iPhone has to come from Adobe. They clearly don't know what they're doing so forget it......
My position has been very clear.
Reading what Jobs has said, shows that he never said that Flash would not be coming at some point in time, and at one time, though I can't find it now, he said that while JAVA was out, Flash might show up.
His complaints about Flash have been carefully limited to the current products. The full Flash product, according to him, not being able to be run properly with current handheld devices, and Flash Lite not giving a proper internet experience.
Therefore, I believe that there is a possible role for Flash on the iPhone/itouch. If, and when Adobe, possibly in cooperation with Apple, has a product that alleviates Job's concerns, we might very well see Flash on Apple's devices.
How long could that take? I don't know, nor does anyone else here. I'm saying that it could take 6 months to a year, based on the size of the program, which would not be large, and is not something that is totally new to Adobe after all.
Maybe, it will never happen. That's possible as well.
But Jobs doesn't seem to be opposed to it in principle, he just doesn't seem to feel that the current products are useable, or useful.
You said that the current products would never arrive on the iPhone, and I agreed.
But, you are making a lot of assumptions here. Most of them are not verifiable, and some are even fishy.
You have no idea how long it could take Adobe to do this product. It isn't a big product, and some code from current products would be reusable. You can't assume that Apple won't help. They may, and they may not.
Jobs says that 10.5 was late because of the iPhone, possibly that's true in the strict sense. But it really just shows that Apple didn't have the proper number of people working on the projects in the first place, and even, possibly, that they were having problems with BOTH products. something that seems very probable, looking at the problems with both when they first came out.
I said, many times, from the very beginning, reinforced by quotes from Jobs, that I thought Apple was going to come out with an SDK, though I didn't know when. The fact that a very big project like this might be late isn't surprising. But, other than the beta being a bit late, we really don't know if Apple intended for it to arrive in February, full sprung. I doubt that very much, considering how much work is being done on it. I'm pretty sure that the developers conference was the intended date.
Who said that Apple was going to put Flash ahead of the other solutions? I didn't. End of June is when those solutions will be available. As far as my arithmetic goes, 6 months comes 3 months later, and that's just a guess about the earliest possible date.
It's nice that you know so much that you can so easily say that Adobe doesn't know what they are doing. I guess your developers skills are vast, and your inside knowledge of their operations are so detailed that they can allow such an opinion.
Huh? What a mind twist.
First... Sure, Apple, or any group, person or entity for that matter, is dependent not only upon self for it's survival but also upon others. What's your point? What does that have to do with Adobe's lack of friendliness towards the Mac specially when Adobe owes it's very existence to the Mac community in the first place? Yes, I can understand that Adobe had to survive therefore seek a market outside of the Mac OS, but why go so far as to alienate us? Why go so far as to abandon the ideology of the Mac and replace it with a Windows centric ideology? Adobe has abonded the Mac user long ago. Back in the days when honor meant something this would have been classified as betrayal. But apperently this in meaningless now days.
Second, the Mac evolved from the products you mention. Neither did the Apple III nor Lisa "die", they evolved into the Mac. What does Apple's evolutionary product history have to do with the discussion at hand?
It's not a mind twist at all. It's the truth. There has been much writing about how each company supported the other. Without Apple, it's possible that Aldus and Adobe wouldn't have gone anywhere. It's also true that their products shored up the faltering Mac line, which, after several high profile failures from Apple, was the future of the company.
What I'm saying is that one company can't look back to some rosy past, and out of the kindness of its heart, throw large amounts of money down, what looks to be an endless hole.
At the end of 1995, after the fiasco by Michael Spindler, many companies, both large and small, were getting rid of their Macs by the thousands. To much of the outside world, it looked as though Apple had a short time left.
Adobe, Quark, and many other Mac only companies quickly ported their software over. This is something they had to do as a matter of survival.
As more users moved to the PC platform, these companies began to put more resources into that side of it. Again, that's natural.
At the nadir of Apple's low point, only 27% of Adobe's customers for the imaging products were Mac users.
While Apple did come out with some technologies during the late 90's, they were confused, poorly implemented, and often withdrawn as soon as third parties began to come out with products for them. Corel was a big supported of Apple's object oriented additions to their OS, and was severely burned. These third parties learned to stay away from Apple's "innovations", because they rarely lasted more than a year or two. Remember Game Sockets?
During that time, Apple tried to kill Adobe's cash cow, the Type 1 font technology, in conjunction with MS. They succeeded to a large extent.
Nevertheless, during that period, having used both Adobe's PC product, and their Mac product, I never felt as though Adobe was putting more resources into the PC versions.
In fact, the Mac versions always maintained a better usability factor.
I don't find any "unfriendliness" toward Apple's lines from Adobe. What you are expecting is that Adobe put more effort into products for the Mac than they do for the PC, but thats not sensible at this time. If, sales to Mac users ever gain a very large percentage of their business, we may see more of that, but otherwise no.
We've seen Adobe products for the Mac being discontinued, and that's sad. But it is directly related to sales. If a product's sales fall below what's required to make a profit, it gets discontinued. Then people howl. but most of them never bought the product in the first place, and the number of those who did, clearly wasn't enough to support it.
I really don't see how you can argue with what I've said.
What I'm saying is that one company can't look back to some rosy past, and out of the kindness of its heart, throw large amounts of money down, what looks to be an endless hole.
This is probably the only part we can agree on.
There is no way Apple is going to look back on Adobe and throw any cash down that hole, let alone use any of Apple's strapped resources to fix flash.
Again, they were late on Leopard because they had to redirect resources.
Then, the iPhone work was delayed as they pushed Leopard through after the iPhone was out.
You're expecting Apple to have some kind of quiet effort going on behind the scenes to help Adobe figure out how to fix ther "performance problem" Jobs described that keeps flash off the phone.
That's just stupid.
For Apple to "lend" or help out Adobe when they have so much more valuable things for those resources to work on makes no sense at all.
And as you said, looking back at some way they helped each other in some other time-frame just won't happen.
This is busness, and flash performs badly and Adobe either can't figure out how to fix the problem or doesn't think it's important enough.
Clearly, the iPhone won't suffer at all if flash is never fixed.
And Adobe has shown in recent statements that THEY KNOW NOTHING! (as cramer would say) about the iPhone.
So if they don't want to deal with their performance problems, and make it public knowledge they have no idea how the iPhone works, then clearly Apple isn't going to try to resolve the problem despite Adobe's lack of capability to deal with it.
As you said, looking back at prior history at a happier time makes no sense.
So.... Apple has moved on.
You should too.....
This is probably the only part we can agree on.
There is no way Apple is going to look back on Adobe and throw any cash down that hole, let alone use any of Apple's strapped resources to fix flash.
Again, they were late on Leopard because they had to redirect resources.
Then, the iPhone work was delayed as they pushed Leopard through after the iPhone was out.
You're expecting Apple to have some kind of quiet effort going on behind the scenes to help Adobe figure out how to fix ther "performance problem" Jobs described that keeps flash off the phone.
That's just stupid.
For Apple to "lend" or help out Adobe when they have so much more valuable things for those resources to work on makes no sense at all.
And as you said, looking back at some way they helped each other in some other time-frame just won't happen.
This is busness, and flash performs badly and Adobe either can't figure out how to fix the problem or doesn't think it's important enough.
Clearly, the iPhone won't suffer at all if flash is never fixed.
And Adobe has shown in recent statements that THEY KNOW NOTHING! (as cramer would say) about the iPhone.
So if they don't want to deal with their performance problems, and make it public knowledge they have no idea how the iPhone works, then clearly Apple isn't going to try to resolve the problem despite Adobe's lack of capability to deal with it.
As you said, looking back at prior history at a happier time makes no sense.
So.... Apple has moved on.
You should too.....
We obviously have very different views on this, so we should just leave it at that, and part as friends.
I really don't see how you can argue with what I've said.
I don't disagre with you on this. What I disagree with is this: If you have used Adobe's apps from back in the days when the Mac was the only platform they coded for, and I know you have based on your postings, you will notice a big change. Today Adobe's apps have taken on a flovor of a Windows like paradigm (an example serving as a model; pattern.) Bloated, buggy, incomplete, with UI elements that comes from a Windows like paradigm.
That was my point. Now, this view-point is defenetely a subjective view-point. Some get what I'm saying, some won't. Some don't see the diference between Windows and the Mac. "It's just a computer, and they both do the same thing.", one often reads in these forums. Truth is, there's a HUGE diference between the two in how work gets done and what we Mac users expect from an app is very much diferent than what a Windows user expects from an app.
Do I feel confident that Adobe knows what they are doing? Hell no. That's all I'm saying.
I don't disagre with you on this. What I disagree with is this: If you have used Adobe's apps from back in the days when the Mac was the only platform they coded for, and I know you have based on your postings, you will notice a big change. Today Adobe's apps have taken on a flovor of a Windows like paradigm (an example serving as a model; pattern.) Bloated, buggy, incomplete, with UI elements that comes from a Windows like paradigm.
That was my point. Now, this view-point is defenetely a subjective view-point. Some get what I'm saying, some won't. Some don't see the diference between Windows and the Mac. "It's just a computer, and they both do the same thing.", one often reads in these forums. Truth is, there's a HUGE diference between the two in how work gets done and what we Mac users expect from an app is very much diferent than what a Windows user expects from an app.
Do I feel confident that Adobe knows what they are doing? Hell no. That's all I'm saying.
I understand what you're saying. I don't think it's exactly what's happened though,
Over the years, programs tend to get bigger as they add features and capabilities. You might call this bloat, but it isn't.
The same thing happens to all programs. If you look at FCP, you'll see what I mean. When I first used it in ver. 1.0, it was a fairly lean machine. Now it's pretty complex, part of a suite that MUST be purchased, unlike before, and one might even say—bloated!
Of course there will be those here, who will, because it's an Apple program, deny that, but it's true. I'm not saying that it's bad, but many have bitterly complained about having to buy the whole thing when they don't want to.
So it's not really Adobe's fault. They are giving the majority of their customers what they want, like Apple is, and at the same time making some unhappy. That's the way of the world.
I you don't need all of PS, then there are options from Adobe. You can buy Lightroom, or Elements 6.
I also don't find them to be any buggier than any other programs, and usually less buggy. But the bigger programs get, the more bugs they tend to have. look at Apple's OS. The past two versions were riddled with bugs compared to earlier versions.
Look at Aperture. It was a disaster when it first came out, and took months to become usable in any serious way. Over time, you'll see Apple continue to add features until several years from now, assuming its still around, it will be twice the size.
As far as the Windows UI elements, well, Apple has taken some of those for itself as well. All companies "borrow" from others. Aperture just took several significant features from CR 4. But I don't see anyone here protesting.
Adobe QA and user friendliness has dropped of the face of the earth. Sure CS3 streamlined the UI and now most of the apps really work well together, but the Install process takes longer thna an OS install, and the update process is TEH FAIL. Add to that unpublicized updates for things like the DWG/DXF plugin--only available through a forum post, and the manually installed by dragging into the plugins folder. Won't even discuss the Catastrophic License Failure issue. Nice software to use, utter crap to maintain.
The install will take some time vbecause there are a number of programs to install. I would be surprised if it didn't rake some time.
As for the updates, they always go smoothly, I just did the latest early this evening, and as usual, there was no problem.
As for some plug-ins and other small add-ons that most people won't be wanting, sure, you have to take the entire minute it takes to install them, if you really want them. I thought you were a pro. You're using pro apps. You can't take a bit of time to install something that just a few people will want?
The install will take some time vbecause there are a number of programs to install. I would be surprised if it didn't rake some time.
As for the updates, they always go smoothly, I just did the latest early this evening, and as usual, there was no problem.
As for some plug-ins and other small add-ons that most people won't be wanting, sure, you have to take the entire minute it takes to install them, if you really want them. I thought you were a pro. You're using pro apps. You can't take a bit of time to install something that just a few people will want?
that's a silly response. admin a lab or two full of CS3 and manual install of plugins is TEH FAIL. Also if you check the Adobe forums update failure is NOT trivial. Sorry, but for the importance and cost of the suite, and its prevalence in large companies this kind of install and maintenance behavior is pathetic.