They have to run QuickTime in iTunes. Not one major site uses QuickTime to stream video.
The fact that YouTube has to encode their video format specifically for the iPhone once again shows the closed loop that Apple users have to live in.
H.264 is based on MPEG-4 which is based on the QuickTime container format (Microsoft's proposal to base it on WMV was rejected). So every site using H.264 is using QuickTime technologies, if not the QuickTime player itself. Google does not encode content specifically for the iPhone - they can save a lot of bandwidth if they play H.264 via Flash as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NonVendorFan
Even Disney & Pixar use Flash and not QuickTime. What the hell does that tell you since Jobs has more than an interest in both companies.
Disney and Pixar use Flash for what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by X38
(Is the HTML 5 battle between H.264 & Ogg Theora (Mozilla?) decided then?)
No, but Google holds a lot of power in this area after purchasing On2 this year. On2 originally developed the VP3 codec, which was then released into the public domain and turned into Ogg Theora. It is old technology that cannot compete with a modern codec like H.264 but Google, if it so wished (and assuming no patent complications), could make public the more advanced VP7 codec and turn it into a viable open source competitor to H.264.
Flash doesn't suck on OS X because Apple pissed off Adobe. It runs badly because Adobe doesn't have decent software engineering talent. Why do you think Flash isn't 64 bit yet?
it may be, but in that case apple should share some resources like they do with other companies and giving them a hand and a couple of apple engineers. clearly, with adobe, they never wanted that.
lack of x64 is just a point of no interest. if they were able to make photoshop x64, and it's extremely fast, i believe they could make flash player x64 if they wanted to. the big problem they don't want to yet.
Interesting article. After reading the debate going on here, let me preface the following question with the disclaimer that I have no technical computer expertise and am doing my best to understand the general concepts of this article.
It sounds like the main point of this story is the strategic importance (to each of the companies involved) of control over the future internet standards for video. It also sounds like RealPlayer and WMV are assumed to be dead ends and the battle is between Silverlight (MS), Flash (Adobe), and H.264 (Apple & Google?). (Is the HTML 5 battle between H.264 & Ogg Theora (Mozilla?) decided then?) With Flash having the current lion's share of the market by default but Silverlight & H.264 being newer & better and fighting to be the contender?
Somebody correct me if I misunderstand please.
Is so, then my question is why doesn't Apple just buy Adobe and end future development of Flash in favor of H.264? (Wouldn't it also be good for them to own Display Postscript out right anyway since it is at the core of OS/X?) Not that I understand corporate finances either, but it looks like Apple has 10 times the market value as Adobe and could just buy Adobe with cash and still have a pile in the bank.
What a boon it would be if Apple bought Adobe and drag this neandothal company into the 21st century. They killed Macromedia and ever since have contrived to constrain progress whenever they could. Imagine what Apple could do with Acrobat et al. Mouth-watering.
It's purely speculation and a poor one that isn't backed up with any data. And it's also very poorly written.
What were you tired of getting your ass handed to you in MacRumors as LTD regarding Google Voice and came back here to to sound important? They were calling Bull Shit on you over there and I'm calling Bull Shit on you in AI.
This article is a very poorly written history of HTML that ends with speculation that the adoption of HTML 5 is going to be magically adopted overnight and that Adobe is going to make more money by supporting it rather than Flash.
And Apple didn't lie to the FCC either. Right /sarcasm.
I always read Solipsism's posts here with great pleasure. Just saying.
NonVendorFan has successfully monopolised this discussion with his nonsense. Who is concerned about grammar? Why does he disagree with EVERYTHING? What kind of chip does he carry on his shoulder?
I think we can expect to see NonVendorFan carried off by the men in white coats any minute now...
The guy (NonVendorFan) has no clue about which he spouts such aggressive nonsense (and since some of the more informed AI users have appeared he has disappeared...)
He is right about the multiple topics in the single post though - I just don't like that.
Guys, it's LTD. And yes, I post on Macrumors as well.
Solipsism is more or less correct about MR, though. I've gotten several PMs over there asking me to please please oh please stop voicing my lack of interest in GV because if I continue to do that, I'll be preventing the supporters from ever getting it. And they really want it. Despite the fact that no one off these Mac sites cares about it or has even heard of it. Yes, that's right. I've gotten PMs asking me to stop posting because it'll make it harder for them to get it.
H.264 is based on MPEG-4 which is based on the QuickTime container format (Microsoft's proposal to base it on WMV was rejected).
I think you are mixing up MPEG-4 part 10 (AVC), the video standard, with MPEG-4 part 14, the container format specified by MPEG and which is heavily based on, but not identical to, mov.
Dwindling group of Flash designers? What do you have to back that claim up with.
This is another AI article that is clearly biased and very poorly written. Read the last paragraph it sounds like a Sarah Palin Speech.
Flash doesn't work for most mobile computing platforms and isn't always the same on every PC. It is also block on nearly every government computer (millions of computers I might add) because of the security threat. Active content is not a good thing, though it might appear slick, it's an opportunity for Cybercriminals. I hope and pray for its demise. Otherwise, I agree the article was really too detailed for this medium, it's like the guy took a chapter from his book and dropped into AI. <yawn>
There is a big difference between supporting it and actual usage by developers.
There is a global recession right now and I don't see a lot of companies coding for something that doesn't display properly across all web browsers. Flash will be here for a long, long time.
What does the recession have to do with HTML5? LOL your logic belies the argument, you have no idea what you are talking about. flash is clunky and slow even on PC. You simply can't compare the power of an 80 KB HTML, CSS and javascript document to the same 5MB document created in flash. Yes flash will continue to be around for a while but as time passes the need for it will dwindle as the for-mentioned standards evolve. I suppose you're one of those guys that believes Cold Fusion will beat out PHP as well. Forget it. are you even a programmer? If not why are you arguing a pint you know nothing about? My programmers despise proprietary tech and almost for no other reason that is why Adobe's model will have to change. Flash is slowly a dying model. Anyone who designs for the web (not just mac "fanboys" LOL your such a tool to even bring that up) will be able to do so much more with open source and streamlined standards like HTML5 Flash will not be needed.
Your argument that "everyone" uses flash is weak at best. Sure most computers have it installed but the application of flash is generally such that it could be replaced in about 5 min's with similar HTML5, CSS, etc. How many all flash site are out there? hardly any. and how about flash stores? even fewer. The most flash get used for is video, photos/ slideshows and annoying splashpages. trust me no one is married to flash especially web developers.
Flash isn't just used on YouTube. Almost every major Television network and News Media Web site uses Flash as the standard for providing Video content.
Hulu has become one of the most popular video content providers and they use Flash to stream media as well.
Only Mac users don't like Flash because it runs like shit on all OS's of Apple OS. It runs extremely well on PC's.
If Apple didn't piss off another major Vendor than Adobe would probably put more time into making it run better on the Mac.
You'll probably see Google apps to start being resource hogs here soon as Apple did a great job of screwing up that partnership.
Get over it. Flash is here and will be here for Years to come.
So funny that people are getting worried about Flash going away.
I have to say I hate Flash based video. Often it doesn't even work properly, scrolling through Flash video sucks, you typically can't download it. Overall, it's a terrible user experience.
In a free system, when something is available, standard, open, and works better, it will inevitably become the norm. We should be rejoicing. Personally I can't wait, literally, I don't have Flash on my computers and I don't miss it at all.
They have to run QuickTime in iTunes. Not one major site uses QuickTime to stream video.
The fact that YouTube has to encode their video format specifically for the iPhone once again shows the closed loop that Apple users have to live in.
Even Disney & Pixar use Flash and not QuickTime. What the hell does that tell you since Jobs has more than an interest in both companies.
I'll ignore your general ignorance about the nature of Fash, Video in general, QuickTimeand how it works with codecs, etc. and just provide this link to the movie presentation page at Pixar:
Flash is just a bunch of highly optimized C++ code that's more optimized on Windows than other OS's. It's a CPU hog on Mac and the #1 cause of OS X crashes (not browser crashes, total OS X crashes).
wow... you drank the whole punchbowl of apple kool-aid. jobs wants you to believe this is all about cpu cycles, that while a chumby can run flash, his iphone can't (ha). the fact is that flash being a resource hog is due to poor flash development (memory leaks, etc) and not the flash player. yes the flash player runs better (is more optimized) on a winblows box, but on a properly developed site, it runs very well on a mac. yes, adobe is guilty of giving us mac users a substandard flash player... i would agree there.
jobs excuses are merely causing a distraction to the real problem, he doesn't want applications to be run on the iphone that threaten his 30% markup (and control over distribution), plain and simple. this is about money not cpu resources.
html 5 and css 3 are very interesting and offer up some promise in the years to come, but do you really think that it mysteriously doesn't use any cpu resources? when poorly developed sites start popping up, you think that all those memory leaks won't hit the processor --- maybe even worse than flash??? one thing is for sure, getting all browsers to display html5/css3 content will never happen with the same code, developers will have to hack their code to look the same across all browsers (welcome back to 1998).
Flash doesn't work for most mobile computing platforms and isn't always the same on every PC. It is also block on nearly every government computer (millions of computers I might add) because of the security threat. Active content is not a good thing, though it might appear slick, it's an opportunity for Cybercriminals. I hope and pray for its demise. Otherwise, I agree the article was really too detailed for this medium, it's like the guy took a chapter from his book and dropped into AI. <yawn>
I found the article very informative, especially things like:
...American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore...
Where else but America, could a person, alone, fund an entire government agency (on the salary of a public servant)?
Comments
They have to run QuickTime in iTunes. Not one major site uses QuickTime to stream video.
The fact that YouTube has to encode their video format specifically for the iPhone once again shows the closed loop that Apple users have to live in.
H.264 is based on MPEG-4 which is based on the QuickTime container format (Microsoft's proposal to base it on WMV was rejected). So every site using H.264 is using QuickTime technologies, if not the QuickTime player itself. Google does not encode content specifically for the iPhone - they can save a lot of bandwidth if they play H.264 via Flash as well.
Even Disney & Pixar use Flash and not QuickTime. What the hell does that tell you since Jobs has more than an interest in both companies.
Disney and Pixar use Flash for what?
(Is the HTML 5 battle between H.264 & Ogg Theora (Mozilla?) decided then?)
No, but Google holds a lot of power in this area after purchasing On2 this year. On2 originally developed the VP3 codec, which was then released into the public domain and turned into Ogg Theora. It is old technology that cannot compete with a modern codec like H.264 but Google, if it so wished (and assuming no patent complications), could make public the more advanced VP7 codec and turn it into a viable open source competitor to H.264.
Flash doesn't suck on OS X because Apple pissed off Adobe. It runs badly because Adobe doesn't have decent software engineering talent. Why do you think Flash isn't 64 bit yet?
it may be, but in that case apple should share some resources like they do with other companies and giving them a hand and a couple of apple engineers. clearly, with adobe, they never wanted that.
lack of x64 is just a point of no interest. if they were able to make photoshop x64, and it's extremely fast, i believe they could make flash player x64 if they wanted to. the big problem they don't want to yet.
Interesting article. After reading the debate going on here, let me preface the following question with the disclaimer that I have no technical computer expertise and am doing my best to understand the general concepts of this article.
It sounds like the main point of this story is the strategic importance (to each of the companies involved) of control over the future internet standards for video. It also sounds like RealPlayer and WMV are assumed to be dead ends and the battle is between Silverlight (MS), Flash (Adobe), and H.264 (Apple & Google?). (Is the HTML 5 battle between H.264 & Ogg Theora (Mozilla?) decided then?) With Flash having the current lion's share of the market by default but Silverlight & H.264 being newer & better and fighting to be the contender?
Somebody correct me if I misunderstand please.
Is so, then my question is why doesn't Apple just buy Adobe and end future development of Flash in favor of H.264? (Wouldn't it also be good for them to own Display Postscript out right anyway since it is at the core of OS/X?) Not that I understand corporate finances either, but it looks like Apple has 10 times the market value as Adobe and could just buy Adobe with cash and still have a pile in the bank.
What a boon it would be if Apple bought Adobe and drag this neandothal company into the 21st century. They killed Macromedia and ever since have contrived to constrain progress whenever they could. Imagine what Apple could do with Acrobat et al. Mouth-watering.
Just watch Microsoft do it first.
It's purely speculation and a poor one that isn't backed up with any data. And it's also very poorly written.
What were you tired of getting your ass handed to you in MacRumors as LTD regarding Google Voice and came back here to to sound important? They were calling Bull Shit on you over there and I'm calling Bull Shit on you in AI.
This article is a very poorly written history of HTML that ends with speculation that the adoption of HTML 5 is going to be magically adopted overnight and that Adobe is going to make more money by supporting it rather than Flash.
And Apple didn't lie to the FCC either. Right /sarcasm.
I always read Solipsism's posts here with great pleasure. Just saying.
Flash is a disease, a cancer on body of the web. HTML will excise it.
I think we can expect to see NonVendorFan carried off by the men in white coats any minute now...
"Most of the paragraphs are very long sentences. Use a period every now and then and it will make the reading a lot easier.
You're chart gives no links to support it (as has been the case in most AI articles of late)."
Well, if you are going to be so critical you need to go to basics yourself my friend. Learn the difference between 'You are'; 'your'; and: 'you're'.
Numbnuts.
He is right about the multiple topics in the single post though - I just don't like that.
The writer of the article needs some serious grammer lessons as do the proof readers (if there are any) before they are posted.
Post #37
HTML 5 may be Apple's akiles heal.
Who cares about grammar? I am just glad they don't struggle with spelling in this day of auto correction and instant dictionary look up.
Solipsism is more or less correct about MR, though. I've gotten several PMs over there asking me to please please oh please stop voicing my lack of interest in GV because if I continue to do that, I'll be preventing the supporters from ever getting it. And they really want it. Despite the fact that no one off these Mac sites cares about it or has even heard of it. Yes, that's right. I've gotten PMs asking me to stop posting because it'll make it harder for them to get it.
Anyway, enjoy the HTML 5 thread.
H.264 is based on MPEG-4 which is based on the QuickTime container format (Microsoft's proposal to base it on WMV was rejected).
I think you are mixing up MPEG-4 part 10 (AVC), the video standard, with MPEG-4 part 14, the container format specified by MPEG and which is heavily based on, but not identical to, mov.
HTML5 is being solidly promoted by Apple and is opposed by Adobe.
The money and power behind shaping standards is in development tools.
There will undoubtedly be pressure on Apple to built an HTML5 app that takes on Dreamweaver.
Clearly Flash isn't working? Flash is on 99% of all internet enabled computers as of June 2009.
http://www.adobe.com/products/player...s/flashplayer/
Dwindling group of Flash designers? What do you have to back that claim up with.
This is another AI article that is clearly biased and very poorly written. Read the last paragraph it sounds like a Sarah Palin Speech.
Flash doesn't work for most mobile computing platforms and isn't always the same on every PC. It is also block on nearly every government computer (millions of computers I might add) because of the security threat. Active content is not a good thing, though it might appear slick, it's an opportunity for Cybercriminals. I hope and pray for its demise. Otherwise, I agree the article was really too detailed for this medium, it's like the guy took a chapter from his book and dropped into AI. <yawn>
There is a big difference between supporting it and actual usage by developers.
There is a global recession right now and I don't see a lot of companies coding for something that doesn't display properly across all web browsers. Flash will be here for a long, long time.
What does the recession have to do with HTML5? LOL your logic belies the argument, you have no idea what you are talking about. flash is clunky and slow even on PC. You simply can't compare the power of an 80 KB HTML, CSS and javascript document to the same 5MB document created in flash. Yes flash will continue to be around for a while but as time passes the need for it will dwindle as the for-mentioned standards evolve. I suppose you're one of those guys that believes Cold Fusion will beat out PHP as well. Forget it. are you even a programmer? If not why are you arguing a pint you know nothing about? My programmers despise proprietary tech and almost for no other reason that is why Adobe's model will have to change. Flash is slowly a dying model. Anyone who designs for the web (not just mac "fanboys" LOL your such a tool to even bring that up) will be able to do so much more with open source and streamlined standards like HTML5 Flash will not be needed.
Your argument that "everyone" uses flash is weak at best. Sure most computers have it installed but the application of flash is generally such that it could be replaced in about 5 min's with similar HTML5, CSS, etc. How many all flash site are out there? hardly any. and how about flash stores? even fewer. The most flash get used for is video, photos/ slideshows and annoying splashpages. trust me no one is married to flash especially web developers.
Flash isn't just used on YouTube. Almost every major Television network and News Media Web site uses Flash as the standard for providing Video content.
Hulu has become one of the most popular video content providers and they use Flash to stream media as well.
Only Mac users don't like Flash because it runs like shit on all OS's of Apple OS. It runs extremely well on PC's.
If Apple didn't piss off another major Vendor than Adobe would probably put more time into making it run better on the Mac.
You'll probably see Google apps to start being resource hogs here soon as Apple did a great job of screwing up that partnership.
Get over it. Flash is here and will be here for Years to come.
So funny that people are getting worried about Flash going away.
I have to say I hate Flash based video. Often it doesn't even work properly, scrolling through Flash video sucks, you typically can't download it. Overall, it's a terrible user experience.
In a free system, when something is available, standard, open, and works better, it will inevitably become the norm. We should be rejoicing. Personally I can't wait, literally, I don't have Flash on my computers and I don't miss it at all.
They have to run QuickTime in iTunes. Not one major site uses QuickTime to stream video.
The fact that YouTube has to encode their video format specifically for the iPhone once again shows the closed loop that Apple users have to live in.
Even Disney & Pixar use Flash and not QuickTime. What the hell does that tell you since Jobs has more than an interest in both companies.
I'll ignore your general ignorance about the nature of Fash, Video in general, QuickTimeand how it works with codecs, etc. and just provide this link to the movie presentation page at Pixar:
http://www.pixar.com/shorts/bdn/theater/index.html
(Note the QuickTime nameplate)
Flash is just a bunch of highly optimized C++ code that's more optimized on Windows than other OS's. It's a CPU hog on Mac and the #1 cause of OS X crashes (not browser crashes, total OS X crashes).
wow... you drank the whole punchbowl of apple kool-aid. jobs wants you to believe this is all about cpu cycles, that while a chumby can run flash, his iphone can't (ha). the fact is that flash being a resource hog is due to poor flash development (memory leaks, etc) and not the flash player. yes the flash player runs better (is more optimized) on a winblows box, but on a properly developed site, it runs very well on a mac. yes, adobe is guilty of giving us mac users a substandard flash player... i would agree there.
jobs excuses are merely causing a distraction to the real problem, he doesn't want applications to be run on the iphone that threaten his 30% markup (and control over distribution), plain and simple. this is about money not cpu resources.
html 5 and css 3 are very interesting and offer up some promise in the years to come, but do you really think that it mysteriously doesn't use any cpu resources? when poorly developed sites start popping up, you think that all those memory leaks won't hit the processor --- maybe even worse than flash??? one thing is for sure, getting all browsers to display html5/css3 content will never happen with the same code, developers will have to hack their code to look the same across all browsers (welcome back to 1998).
Flash doesn't work for most mobile computing platforms and isn't always the same on every PC. It is also block on nearly every government computer (millions of computers I might add) because of the security threat. Active content is not a good thing, though it might appear slick, it's an opportunity for Cybercriminals. I hope and pray for its demise. Otherwise, I agree the article was really too detailed for this medium, it's like the guy took a chapter from his book and dropped into AI. <yawn>
I found the article very informative, especially things like:
...American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore...
Where else but America, could a person, alone, fund an entire government agency (on the salary of a public servant)?
*
It definitely turns me off.