The web must be open and therefore we need to get rid of Flash. If you think their implementation on the Mac is lousy you haven't seen their implementation on Linux. On other platforms it just doesn't even exist! Windows will go one day and it's important that those alt. oses don't continue the old trend of supporting some closed technology.
if it was for the linux people , the web was nothing more than a maze of text and people would not even use GUI but only typing commands.
Ie. Adobe's admitted they've been lazy the last few years keeping the OS X version of flash up to date, and are now regretting it, because they won't be first to the show in the new greatest gadget out there.
As one person said, these Mac deserters deserve what they get.
Why must the web be open? You have a problem with Flash being closed but OSX is closed? Strange...just strange.
Talk about apples and oranges! The OS is something you can pick. You can't choose which internet you use. Imagine if somone told you that because you drove a cetain type of car you can to take the slow, pot-holed back roads, while drivers of other cars got to take the 4-lane superhighway. All this despite the fact that your taxes went towards constructing the highway!
Because Flash is prorietary, each OS/browser vendor can't decide what level of support to include in their OS/browser to benefit their customers and distinguish their product. They are at the mercy of the Adobe traffic cop.
Adobe has the right to make their products as proprietary as they wish. But the internet itself should be based as much on open standards as possible to allow fair use by anyone who wants to drive on it without a 3rd party playing traffic cop.
BTW: I don't think OS X is nearly as closed as you think it is. Sure the lines of code themselves are proprietary (except the open sourced Darwin parts), but the interfaces, data standards (ie, iCal events, contacts, etc), directory services, etc are largely based on using open standards.
I get upset when web sites dont fully work because of either flash or someother plugin doesnt work on my iPhone....It supposed to be the "real internet on your phone" correct? So then what gives....Mr. Jobs give us the full internet, just like you say....thats all.
so what about the huge section of the web that is flash based (like my own website)?
will it just be ignored?
Will I need to produce a new website in a different app just so it can be viewed on an iPhone?
they are not only screwing adobe but a huge amount of people who chose flash as a platform for their websites.
I am all for open source but this is going to cost a lot of people a lot of time, money and resources
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
BTW: I don't think OS X is nearly as closed as you think it is. Sure the lines of code themselves are proprietary (except the open sourced Darwin parts), but the interfaces, data standards (ie, iCal events, contacts, etc), directory services, etc are largely based on using open standards.
in a way the same thing can be said about Flash. the code is proprietary but you can make whatever you want look like whatever you want, and say whatever you want...
So when Flash comes to the iPhone, and you make the mistake of hitting the back button in your browser off a Flash-heavy page, and the system hangs (as it will, half the time,) can you Force-Quit just Safari, or do you have to cold-boot the whole thing?
(Steve: please, please, please keep this abomination off the iPhone!)
I get upset when web sites dont fully work because of either flash or someother plugin doesnt work on my iPhone.
I get upset when [Internet browsers] dont fully work because of either flash or some other plugin doesnt work [correctly] on my [OS].
It's a two way street. This effort that Adobe has apparently been paying to Flash on the iPhone is proof that they finally get the hint. I guess the multi-year coffee break is over for their OS X development team.
The defacto standard for web video is flash, it's not a great thing, but it's a reality. So until the iPhone supports flash, it doesn't have the "real internet" like Stevo thinks it does. I'd trade exchange support for flash is a heartbeat.
Sheldon
The problem is that you don't NEED Flash to play a video and you shouldn't either. It's more layers than necessary simply to play a video. And more than anything else, it's not really hardware accelerated either. When plenty of web video would bode well to be in H.264 or any other format that can be hardware accelerated (especially on mobile devices), they pick some silly software container format, stick it in a Flash player and have the CPU waste cycles because power is oh-so abundant.
Just like all those websites out there that are optimized for IE7 -- because IE7 is the defacto internet since everybody is using it.
Apple is really screwing them, too. The iPhone should work with IE7 optimized websites.
First of all, optimizing a web site for a particular browser is a web development no-no.
Second, not everyone is using IE7 and it doesn't have true web standards support. Even on my windows machine at home and work - I use Firefox. On Mac, I use Safari. Pretty much everyone at work who is forced to use XP Pro machines (that crash once a day - no joke) are using Firefox. they all hate IE7.
Third, the iPhone should pay fair across the board - handling web standards correctly - and it does!
The problem is that you don't NEED Flash to play a video and you shouldn't either. It's more layers than necessary simply to play a video. And more than anything else, it's not really hardware accelerated either. When plenty of web video would bode well to be in H.264 or any other format that can be hardware accelerated (especially on mobile devices), they pick some silly software container format, stick it in a Flash player and have the CPU waste cycles because power is oh-so abundant.
That's not the point, there are lots better ways to deal with a lot of the content on the web. The point is that a big chunk of the web IS flash and Apple has said the iPhone gives you the "Real internet" which it doesn't. Then to rub salt in the wounds, the T&C's of the developing on the phone say that Flash cannot ever be developed as a plug-in for safari. So there is only two choices, the most obvious is for apple to wake up and include it, the second is for another undoubtably shittier browser to spring up that actually handles flash. Both are more likely than the entire dearth of websites to suddenly wake up and decide to throw Flash away and develop a new format that will work better.
The bottom line is Flash is dumb for video, but it's what's out there, not just for video but also for lots of other sites. I want my "Real Internet"
I don't understand this hostility towards Adobe Flash/Flex. I am a Mac convert and also a Flex developer. I haven't seen a single hickup in the Flash implementation on the Mac (including heavy debugging of code). Instead of just bashing away at Flash and making claims that it doesn't work correctly on the Mac: why not just list a few sites that crash a browser on the Mac?
- Flash/Flex is NOT just about video! Instead, video is just a small part of a tremendously powerful application development environment for all sorts of Web 2.0 applications
- yes, I've read the 3 "Flash Wars" articles and they're full of false facts and wrong conclusions! In fact, some claims in there are so wrong that it almost sounds like propaganda!
I for one couldn't be happier working on my Mac and writing Web 2.0 apps (a few even include video ;-) in Adobe Flex! Macs are great and so is Flash/Flex -- why not just let them coexist?
- yes, I've read the 3 "Flash Wars" articles and they're full of false facts and wrong conclusions! In fact, some claims in there are so wrong that it almost sounds like propaganda!
What?! Dan Dilger not being objective?! Say it isn't so. What ever is the world coming to?
FWIW, there are very few objective macintosh writers.
I'm sorry, I just don't see it that way. At least 90-95% of the Flash I see is advertisements. I realize that site need the ad revenue to keep going, but the vast majority of the ads I see could be accomplished with animated GIFs (ok, I jest, but you get the point). The rest of the Flash is useful (speaking as a user, not as a developer), but Flash isn't the only, or even the best, option to create that functionality. But hey, I don't spend all day on Facebook, YouTube, etc, so maybe I'm just not going to the "hip" sites that use all the cool Flash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisGot
I don't understand this hostility towards Adobe Flash/Flex. I am a Mac convert and also a Flex developer. I haven't seen a single hickup in the Flash implementation on the Mac (including heavy debugging of code). Instead of just bashing away at Flash and making claims that it doesn't work correctly on the Mac: why not just list a few sites that crash a browser on the Mac?
While I don't have problems with Flash crashing Safari, it is a HUGE resource hog. I shouldn't need to have 4 GB of RAM in my MacBook Pro just to prevent the hard drive from trashing every time I load more than a couple of tabs in Safari with Flash on them! Not everyone has a quad-core Mac Pro with 8 GB RAM and multi-terabyte RAIDs.
How do you know that 90-95% are ads? Do you check all sites and advertisements to see what they're written in? I for one (and many other Flex/Flash developers I know) have written lots of sites and apps, but not a single advertisement (and never will)! Sure there are other good development tools out there, but none offer quite the same possibilities as Flex/Flash. OTOH, did it ever matter to you if that desktop app you downloaded was written in C++, Pascal, Visual Basic, etc.? Probably not.
There's also no need for 4GB of RAM or a quad-core Mac Pro to run Flash, nor does Flash have anything to do with your harddisk trashing. It simply loads the plugin for the browser (which is quite small) and the program comes via your Internet connection. So why blame Flash when your harddisk goes wild?
flash bogs down a computer with slower processor, iphone has a "phone" slower processor and most of flash is those crappy ads i don't want to see anyway, why use up my processor for that junk. good riddance to flash. i thought macworld had a big discussion of flash and how open source was better and that flash is too bloated, SJ has a reason not to let flash fill his iphone with sucking flash ads
i don't want it.....not on the new mobile platform.
How do you know that 90-95% are ads? Do you check all sites and advertisements to see what they're written in? I for one (and many other Flex/Flash developers I know) have written lots of sites and apps, but not a single advertisement (and never will)! Sure there are other good development tools out there, but none offer quite the same possibilities as Flex/Flash. OTOH, did it ever matter to you if that desktop app you downloaded was written in C++, Pascal, Visual Basic, etc.? Probably not.
There's also no need for 4GB of RAM or a quad-core Mac Pro to run Flash, nor does Flash have anything to do with your harddisk trashing. It simply loads the plugin for the browser (which is quite small) and the program comes via your Internet connection. So why blame Flash when your harddisk goes wild?
You are right, I don't "know" that estimate. I make the assumption that most of the animated ads I see are Flash based. I could be wrong. I also stop going to sites that are bogged down with ads. Weather.com is a good example. That site has locked up and crashed Safari on occasion. I assume most of the superfluous crap on that site is Flash. Again, I could be wrong. But it's a prime example of ads run amok and a web designer doing things just because they can, not because it's useful. (Note, I've also noticed that any sites that load the Flip4Mac plugin also bog down my MBP and peg one of the cores of the CPU to 100% within a few minutes of loading, so some of the effects I see could also be due to that.) Having a few of those ad laden sites open caused constant hard drive access until I increased RAM from 2 GB to 4 GB. Do I know for certain the Flash plugin is responsible? No, but it's a pretty strong causal relationship.
I also don't frequent many sites that require complex interactions that Flash allows. So no online gaming and such and the reason my %'s are perhaps skewed. Mostly news sites, message boards, etc (again, lots of ads, not but interactivity). I occasionally visit YouTube, but I put that in the category of "things that could be done with open standards." And a month or so ago in one of these Flash debates someone pointed to an entirely Flash based web site as a good example of use of Flash. In my opinion it was a mediocre site. It was as if the developer used Flash exclusively simply because they didn't know of lick of HTML and Flash was the only tool in their toolkit!
Like any tool, Flash has it's place, when used appropriately. But it's too often abused (surely by nobody here ), either for gratuitous purposes or because inability/unwillingness to use other tools. For my needs it has far more negatives then positives, so I'd just as soon be rid of it.
As far as do I care what my desktop apps are written in? No, I don't. But if it's a slow, cumbersome app that bogs down my computer (MS Word 6.0, anyone?), you can bet that I'll stop using it and switch to something more efficient.
It seems like every discussion of Flash always brings out one Flash developer who can't understand why people are so down on it. I don't doubt their sincerity, or that they themselves don't write any of these horrible Flash pages, but really, they must spend so much time writing web pages that they never have any time to browse web pages. Well, for my sins, I do. Most of the misery associated with the internet can be attributed to Flash (and to a slightly lesser extent, Java.) Flash may have been all right before Adobe got their greasy paws on it, but now it is, like all their apps, a bloated, semi-functional monstrosity. Ads aren't even the worst part. The worst Flash-heavy website that I access all the time is nasa.gov. If you forget where you are and accidentally hit the back button, it will inevitably beachball and you'll have to Force Quit Safari. At first I believed all the people who said this was Safari's fault, so I tried Firefox. Same thing, only much, much slower, of course.
Comments
The web must be open and therefore we need to get rid of Flash. If you think their implementation on the Mac is lousy you haven't seen their implementation on Linux. On other platforms it just doesn't even exist! Windows will go one day and it's important that those alt. oses don't continue the old trend of supporting some closed technology.
if it was for the linux people , the web was nothing more than a maze of text and people would not even use GUI but only typing commands.
As one person said, these Mac deserters deserve what they get.
Why must the web be open? You have a problem with Flash being closed but OSX is closed? Strange...just strange.
Talk about apples and oranges! The OS is something you can pick. You can't choose which internet you use. Imagine if somone told you that because you drove a cetain type of car you can to take the slow, pot-holed back roads, while drivers of other cars got to take the 4-lane superhighway. All this despite the fact that your taxes went towards constructing the highway!
Because Flash is prorietary, each OS/browser vendor can't decide what level of support to include in their OS/browser to benefit their customers and distinguish their product. They are at the mercy of the Adobe traffic cop.
Adobe has the right to make their products as proprietary as they wish. But the internet itself should be based as much on open standards as possible to allow fair use by anyone who wants to drive on it without a 3rd party playing traffic cop.
BTW: I don't think OS X is nearly as closed as you think it is. Sure the lines of code themselves are proprietary (except the open sourced Darwin parts), but the interfaces, data standards (ie, iCal events, contacts, etc), directory services, etc are largely based on using open standards.
will it just be ignored?
Will I need to produce a new website in a different app just so it can be viewed on an iPhone?
they are not only screwing adobe but a huge amount of people who chose flash as a platform for their websites.
I am all for open source but this is going to cost a lot of people a lot of time, money and resources
BTW: I don't think OS X is nearly as closed as you think it is. Sure the lines of code themselves are proprietary (except the open sourced Darwin parts), but the interfaces, data standards (ie, iCal events, contacts, etc), directory services, etc are largely based on using open standards.
in a way the same thing can be said about Flash. the code is proprietary but you can make whatever you want look like whatever you want, and say whatever you want...
(Steve: please, please, please keep this abomination off the iPhone!)
I get upset when web sites dont fully work because of either flash or someother plugin doesnt work on my iPhone.
I get upset when [Internet browsers] dont fully work because of either flash or some other plugin doesnt work [correctly] on my [OS].
It's a two way street. This effort that Adobe has apparently been paying to Flash on the iPhone is proof that they finally get the hint. I guess the multi-year coffee break is over for their OS X development team.
The defacto standard for web video is flash, it's not a great thing, but it's a reality. So until the iPhone supports flash, it doesn't have the "real internet" like Stevo thinks it does. I'd trade exchange support for flash is a heartbeat.
Sheldon
The problem is that you don't NEED Flash to play a video and you shouldn't either. It's more layers than necessary simply to play a video. And more than anything else, it's not really hardware accelerated either. When plenty of web video would bode well to be in H.264 or any other format that can be hardware accelerated (especially on mobile devices), they pick some silly software container format, stick it in a Flash player and have the CPU waste cycles because power is oh-so abundant.
they are not only screwing adobe but a huge amount of people who chose flash as a platform for their websites.
I am all for open source but this is going to cost a lot of people a lot of time, money and resources
Just like all those websites out there that are optimized for IE7 -- because IE7 is the defacto internet since everybody is using it.
Apple is really screwing them, too. The iPhone should work with IE7 optimized websites.
The iPhone should work with IE7 optimized websites.
How about, IE7 should work like the rest of the universe?
F**k Microsoft!
Just like all those websites out there that are optimized for IE7 -- because IE7 is the defacto internet since everybody is using it.
Apple is really screwing them, too. The iPhone should work with IE7 optimized websites.
First of all, optimizing a web site for a particular browser is a web development no-no.
Second, not everyone is using IE7 and it doesn't have true web standards support. Even on my windows machine at home and work - I use Firefox. On Mac, I use Safari. Pretty much everyone at work who is forced to use XP Pro machines (that crash once a day - no joke) are using Firefox. they all hate IE7.
Third, the iPhone should pay fair across the board - handling web standards correctly - and it does!
The problem is that you don't NEED Flash to play a video and you shouldn't either. It's more layers than necessary simply to play a video. And more than anything else, it's not really hardware accelerated either. When plenty of web video would bode well to be in H.264 or any other format that can be hardware accelerated (especially on mobile devices), they pick some silly software container format, stick it in a Flash player and have the CPU waste cycles because power is oh-so abundant.
That's not the point, there are lots better ways to deal with a lot of the content on the web. The point is that a big chunk of the web IS flash and Apple has said the iPhone gives you the "Real internet" which it doesn't. Then to rub salt in the wounds, the T&C's of the developing on the phone say that Flash cannot ever be developed as a plug-in for safari. So there is only two choices, the most obvious is for apple to wake up and include it, the second is for another undoubtably shittier browser to spring up that actually handles flash. Both are more likely than the entire dearth of websites to suddenly wake up and decide to throw Flash away and develop a new format that will work better.
The bottom line is Flash is dumb for video, but it's what's out there, not just for video but also for lots of other sites. I want my "Real Internet"
Sheldon
BTW ...
- Adobe Flex (which produces Flash SWF files) IS an open source and can be downloaded and used free of charge at http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitle...m?e=flex3email
- Flash/Flex is NOT just about video! Instead, video is just a small part of a tremendously powerful application development environment for all sorts of Web 2.0 applications
- yes, I've read the 3 "Flash Wars" articles and they're full of false facts and wrong conclusions! In fact, some claims in there are so wrong that it almost sounds like propaganda!
I for one couldn't be happier working on my Mac and writing Web 2.0 apps (a few even include video ;-) in Adobe Flex! Macs are great and so is Flash/Flex -- why not just let them coexist?
- yes, I've read the 3 "Flash Wars" articles and they're full of false facts and wrong conclusions! In fact, some claims in there are so wrong that it almost sounds like propaganda!
What?! Dan Dilger not being objective?! Say it isn't so. What ever is the world coming to?
FWIW, there are very few objective macintosh writers.
Sheldon
The point is that a big chunk of the web IS flash
I'm sorry, I just don't see it that way. At least 90-95% of the Flash I see is advertisements. I realize that site need the ad revenue to keep going, but the vast majority of the ads I see could be accomplished with animated GIFs (ok, I jest, but you get the point). The rest of the Flash is useful (speaking as a user, not as a developer), but Flash isn't the only, or even the best, option to create that functionality. But hey, I don't spend all day on Facebook, YouTube, etc, so maybe I'm just not going to the "hip" sites that use all the cool Flash.
I don't understand this hostility towards Adobe Flash/Flex. I am a Mac convert and also a Flex developer. I haven't seen a single hickup in the Flash implementation on the Mac (including heavy debugging of code). Instead of just bashing away at Flash and making claims that it doesn't work correctly on the Mac: why not just list a few sites that crash a browser on the Mac?
While I don't have problems with Flash crashing Safari, it is a HUGE resource hog. I shouldn't need to have 4 GB of RAM in my MacBook Pro just to prevent the hard drive from trashing every time I load more than a couple of tabs in Safari with Flash on them! Not everyone has a quad-core Mac Pro with 8 GB RAM and multi-terabyte RAIDs.
There's also no need for 4GB of RAM or a quad-core Mac Pro to run Flash, nor does Flash have anything to do with your harddisk trashing. It simply loads the plugin for the browser (which is quite small) and the program comes via your Internet connection. So why blame Flash when your harddisk goes wild?
i don't want it.....not on the new mobile platform.
there has got to be a better way
How do you know that 90-95% are ads? Do you check all sites and advertisements to see what they're written in? I for one (and many other Flex/Flash developers I know) have written lots of sites and apps, but not a single advertisement (and never will)! Sure there are other good development tools out there, but none offer quite the same possibilities as Flex/Flash. OTOH, did it ever matter to you if that desktop app you downloaded was written in C++, Pascal, Visual Basic, etc.? Probably not.
There's also no need for 4GB of RAM or a quad-core Mac Pro to run Flash, nor does Flash have anything to do with your harddisk trashing. It simply loads the plugin for the browser (which is quite small) and the program comes via your Internet connection. So why blame Flash when your harddisk goes wild?
You are right, I don't "know" that estimate. I make the assumption that most of the animated ads I see are Flash based. I could be wrong. I also stop going to sites that are bogged down with ads. Weather.com is a good example. That site has locked up and crashed Safari on occasion. I assume most of the superfluous crap on that site is Flash. Again, I could be wrong. But it's a prime example of ads run amok and a web designer doing things just because they can, not because it's useful. (Note, I've also noticed that any sites that load the Flip4Mac plugin also bog down my MBP and peg one of the cores of the CPU to 100% within a few minutes of loading, so some of the effects I see could also be due to that.) Having a few of those ad laden sites open caused constant hard drive access until I increased RAM from 2 GB to 4 GB. Do I know for certain the Flash plugin is responsible? No, but it's a pretty strong causal relationship.
I also don't frequent many sites that require complex interactions that Flash allows. So no online gaming and such and the reason my %'s are perhaps skewed. Mostly news sites, message boards, etc (again, lots of ads, not but interactivity). I occasionally visit YouTube, but I put that in the category of "things that could be done with open standards." And a month or so ago in one of these Flash debates someone pointed to an entirely Flash based web site as a good example of use of Flash. In my opinion it was a mediocre site. It was as if the developer used Flash exclusively simply because they didn't know of lick of HTML and Flash was the only tool in their toolkit!
Like any tool, Flash has it's place, when used appropriately. But it's too often abused (surely by nobody here
As far as do I care what my desktop apps are written in? No, I don't. But if it's a slow, cumbersome app that bogs down my computer (MS Word 6.0, anyone?), you can bet that I'll stop using it and switch to something more efficient.
Adobe is the new Microsoft! Just Say No to Flash!