Adobe Flash player for iPhone due 'soon' if Apple approves

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 71
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 1,813member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    ... Who owns Atari? I think those games could be popular, too. I know that I'd buy Galaga for the iPhone in a heartbeat.



    Here is cool Videocast worthy of watching about the Fall of Atari (HD) and the French company who owns it right now.
  • Reply 62 of 71
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 1,813member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post


    They describe deploying flash as an app.

    They can't destribute their own browser to use it, as that would mean the flash app would have to run in the background. (not allowed)



    The only alternative, would be to distribute their own browser app that had flash directly built into it. That is not what they are describing.



    So..... what they are describing makes them sound like they don't know what they are talking about.



    Wouldn't Flash run as a Plugin in the iPhone's Safari browser? You can also have a standalone Flash app that runs Flash files from a private folder populated using similar code as in the Air Sharing app.
  • Reply 63 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    Wouldn't Flash run as a Plugin in the iPhone's Safari browser? You can also have a standalone Flash app that runs Flash files from a private folder populated using similar code as in the Air Sharing app.





    The flash player, would have to run in the background.

    Not allowed to do that.....
  • Reply 64 of 71
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 1,813member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post


    The flash player, would have to run in the background.

    Not allowed to do that.....



    If Apple has a plugin system for iPhone Safari then that wouldn't really count as running in the background. Also if Flash is running as a standalone app then the Flash files will not run as secondary apps they would run in the Flash player.
  • Reply 65 of 71
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post


    The flash player, would have to run in the background.

    Not allowed to do that.....



    It wouldn't 'have to' run in the background. What it sounds like Adobe is proposing is making Flash a plug-in that is called from Safari, which isn't allowed. But what me and others have mentioned is Adobe and others making an Adobe Browser as its own app that directly calls Flash and SDK-allowable WebKit with Adobe's own browser UI, which isn't forbidden by the SDK rules. Although, as mentioned, Apple may have other issues with it just because it's Flash.
  • Reply 66 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post


    If Apple has a plugin system for iPhone Safari then that wouldn't really count as running in the background. Also if Flash is running as a standalone app then the Flash files will not run as secondary apps they would run in the Flash player.



    The iPhone browser, isn't Safari.

    You can call it that if you want, but it's better to think of it as Apple's web browser for the iPhone built with Webkit.



    If you think of it that way, then you have to ask yourself why Apple would have built plug-in capability into it? And opf course, you'd have to show me where in the SDK it's explained, or anywhere else in Apple documentation.



    You can't, it can't, so it would have to run in the background.



    Now, it is possible Adobe could go to the trouble of building an App that is essentially a player that allows specifically built flash applications to run in it and therefore you could build flash apps that run on the iPhone.

    That of course is completely different than the expectation that websites that involve flash would work in any way in the browser on the iPhone.



    Of course, if someone wants to provide any support for the idea that Safari was "ported" to the iPhone and underneath maintains plug-in support.... have at, I'm listening.

    I await the links to information published on the web that say it's so.....

    I wait.......\
  • Reply 67 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    It's wouldn't 'have to' run in the background. What it sounds like Adobe is proposing is making Flash a plug-in that is called from Safari, which isn't allowed. But what me and others have mentioned is Adobe and others making Adobe Browser its own app that directly calls Flash and SDK-allowable WebKit with Adobe's own browser UI, which isn't forbidden by the SDK rules. Though as mentioned, Apple may have other issues with it just because it's Flash.







    I'm not sure I have any interest in having an App on the iPhone that is another browser.

    One from Apple, one from Adobe. I use the Adobe one when I want to go to websites that have flash, and I use Apple's when I want.... what?...... compatible fast browsing?

    Kind of like waiting for FF to come to the iPhone. I'm sure there are FF fans that think they would like that to happen, but somehow in a mobile world I just don't see the user interface issues of the menus being as important as the rendering and viewing experience.

    (which so far, I'd take Apple's developers over... say.... the crew from Adobe)



    So you may be right. Adobe may build an entire recreation of the iPhone's browser just to create an App from the sdk that includes a flash player. Kind of the long way around the tree if you know what I mean. Also, likely to be a real piece of shit, if how the flash player works is any indication. (JMO)



    If they do this, you're going to see someone do a top ten list of sites that drain your iPhone battery the fastest based on poorly written flash code on a website. Most people have seen sites that when you go there, your CPU maxs out. The toy CPU in a mobile device would probably melt.



    Just my feeling, Adobe and this article doesn't say "Adobe coming out with it's own browser that includes flash for the iPhone".

    They seem to say "bringing a flash app plugin using the sdk" which of course, they can't.

    It's more likely that the flash experience they are talking about has nothing to do with the web.

    The ability to write flash code, and render it in an app that is a player iteself for the iPhone makes more sense.



    Added This Part:Go back and reread this article assuming that is what they are doing.

    Everything they say, still apllies but has no conflicts with the SDK or Apple.

    That makes more sense to me.
  • Reply 68 of 71
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post


    I may be missing something, because this looks to me like the entire story is complete BS.



    So I'll let you guys fill me in.



    1st, you CAN'T have flash be an app in the app store that you download.

    Adobe tried to describe what they were doing before like that, and it's complete bullshit.

    Flash is NOT an application.



    2nd Flash is something that needs to run from the browser, as you surf the web. (a plugin?)

    That means Adobe thinks they are developing something that they will destribute from the app store that would become part of the iPhone's O.S. that the web browser would use. So, Adobe thinks they are going to mess with the iPhone browser??????

    And they think all they have to do is wait for Apple to approve this?



    3rd They can't be supplying their own browser, as an app, that has flash capability as that would violate the SDK agreements as I understand them.



    Sorry if this has been covered by others in the thread and I missed it.

    BUt I'd love to hear how anyone else can see any way any of this could be true.

    This just looks to me like a more descriptive example of how Adobe has no frickin idea what they are talking about......



    Thats all very interesting, but I would think that the top people at Adobe understand more than you give them credit for. Just how sincere Jobs was when he stated that the reason why Flash was not on the phone because the software wasn't up to it YET, will be seen. He certainly didn't appear to oppose it. Just the opposite, he seemed to be telling Adobe to come out with something the iPhone could use.



    He could easily have said that like Java (unlike Java script, which IS on the phone), Flash won't be on the phone. He didn't say that at all.



    So we'll see.



    Apple could always add this software in an update to the iPhone OS. It doesn't have to go through the store.



    The truth is that we don't know what Adobe has done.
  • Reply 69 of 71
    xgmanxgman Posts: 150member
    Hmm . . lot of flash haters out there. They probably click on flash menus and links all the time and don't even realize it. Maybe they should just go back to electric typewriters. Clearly Flash is too advanced for them.
  • Reply 70 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Thats all very interesting, but I would think that the top people at Adobe understand more than you give them credit for.



    It is true I give them little credit.

    However, the first reaction that leaders at Adobe had to the SDK announcment from Apple was an announcement that they would shortly have their flash plug-in running for the iPhone using the SDK. They then, with a great deal of embarrassment, had to put out a retraction admitting they could not in fact use the SDK to do that. So they have a history of talking about that which they know not.



    Again, if you read this article with the idea that you're reading an article describing Adobe bring a flash player for playing flash apps built for the iPhone, as opposed to a plug-in that allows websites with flash.... to work on the iphone, if you read the article assuming that's what they intend then it makes sense.



    Again, without Apples support, it makes no sense to assume somehow they are talking about website flash support. And nothing in the article indicates anything from Apple.

    It's all in Adobe's court, and if that's the case then the only thing they CAN be doing is flash apps running on the iPhone and NOT web sites that have flash in them working from the iPhone.



    That's my take on what this all means.

    Of course, if Apple has some kind of completely quiet agreement with Adobe in the works based on great optimizations from Adobe development, then I'll be wrong.

    Since Adobe leaks like a rusty bucket, I can't believe they can keep that quiet so I don't see it coming anytime soon.
  • Reply 71 of 71
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,398member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post


    It is true I give them little credit.

    However, the first reaction that leaders at Adobe had to the SDK announcment from Apple was an announcement that they would shortly have their flash plug-in running for the iPhone using the SDK. They then, with a great deal of embarrassment, had to put out a retraction admitting they could not in fact use the SDK to do that. So they have a history of talking about that which they know not.



    Again, if you read this article with the idea that you're reading an article describing Adobe bring a flash player for playing flash apps built for the iPhone, as opposed to a plug-in that allows websites with flash.... to work on the iphone, if you read the article assuming that's what they intend then it makes sense.



    Again, without Apples support, it makes no sense to assume somehow they are talking about website flash support. And nothing in the article indicates anything from Apple.

    It's all in Adobe's court, and if that's the case then the only thing they CAN be doing is flash apps running on the iPhone and NOT web sites that have flash in them working from the iPhone.



    That's my take on what this all means.

    Of course, if Apple has some kind of completely quiet agreement with Adobe in the works based on great optimizations from Adobe development, then I'll be wrong.

    Since Adobe leaks like a rusty bucket, I can't believe they can keep that quiet so I don't see it coming anytime soon.



    Like I, and some others have been saying, Jobs didn't rule Flash out, the way he did with Java. He merely stated, now, quite a while ago, that current Flash software wasn't suitable for the iPhone. He said that if and when it was, it would be a different story.



    I see no reason to not believe that Apple is receptive to Flash.



    Perhaps not on the current models.



    If you read the new article in Ars about the SDK, and hardware, it looks as though Apple is leaving a number of things possible, including background apps. While they took some things out for the iPhone SDK, they, very interestingly, left others in.



    http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/iPhone-SDK.ars



    The assumption is that in a more powerful phone, much more is possible. This could be the situation with Flash as well.

    I hope so. It's pretty silly to say NO to software, if it's implemented properly. As has been suggested by myself, and others, the software could be turned on and off as desired.



    Even now, many sites that use Flash heavily ask if you want to see the Flash site, or the regular site. I'd rather have the option. My choice if the phone gets bogged down, not yours, as long as I can stop it.
Sign In or Register to comment.