Flash is on it's way out and has been for a very long time. Designers don't want to use it, it's expensive for small shops to invest in (think independants) and has a huge learning curve, on top of that updating the files can be pain for people that have smaller sites with heavy flash nav / content etc., they have to pay someone to update it.
Flash is great for an art gallery to have a 'cool' site, but then people are just clicking things to see the interaction more than actually paying attention to or caring about the content on the site.
If the biggest knock against the iPad is that there is no flash support, well that really doesn't mean too much, the same arguement is made over and over, "no flash no sale", "but I can't watch hulu!". These same people are the ones that will bitch about and dump Hulu before you can blink when they go to a full pay subscription model. So then what will their arguement against the iPad be?
Flash is on it's way out and has been for a very long time. Designers don't want to use it, it's expensive for small shops to invest in (think independants) and has a huge learning curve, on top of that updating the files can be pain for people that have smaller sites with heavy flash nav / content etc., they have to pay someone to update it.
By that logic Porsches and Ferraris should be on the way out as well. People who don't like Flash should just uninstall it and not complain when they can't see content designed to be delivered in Flash.
Steve Jobs is far too meticulous in preparing his presentations to have "accidentally" opened a website with Flash that the iPad can't display. I have to believe that he knew full well what he was doing, and it was intentional.
It was a message to web developers, and it said: "We've sold millions and millions of iPhones without Flash and made so much money we can't even count it all. We intend to do the same with this new device. And if you want your websites to work properly on our shiny new toy, you need to stop using Flash."
later this year when flash 10.1 ships, more cell phones will have it than there are iphones
Flash is on it's way out and has been for a very long time. Designers don't want to use it, it's expensive for small shops to invest in (think independants) and has a huge learning curve, on top of that updating the files can be pain for people that have smaller sites with heavy flash nav / content etc., they have to pay someone to update it.
Flash is great for an art gallery to have a 'cool' site, but then people are just clicking things to see the interaction more than actually paying attention to or caring about the content on the site.
If the biggest knock against the iPad is that there is no flash support, well that really doesn't mean too much, the same arguement is made over and over, "no flash no sale", "but I can't watch hulu!". These same people are the ones that will bitch about and dump Hulu before you can blink when they go to a full pay subscription model. So then what will their arguement against the iPad be?
most networks still let you watch the last episode or two for free via a flash window. i used to watch Terminator Chronicles and BSG directly from the websites like that. and even if Hulu starts charging, there will always be free limited episodes available. on almost every device except the iphone and iPad that is
I agree, and I wonder how long it will be before Adobe responds with a lawsuit or simply pulling it programs off the Mac.
Looking at the iPad, the future of locked down, dumbed down, no choice but what Steve says sort of computing, that Steve would be very happy if Adobe did pull their programs off the Mac.
Jesus, what the hell has gotten into him?
.
He's keeping malware off his products.
A lawsuit for a company to force another company to use and support it's products.
Wow - you have a great handle on law. Remind me to run away from you if I ever have to go to court.
It's to the point of stupid not to support flash in the iPad... Unless of course it cant actually run it!
The marketing message to the average consumer:
The device is not capable.
You can't access most of the multimedia available on most every website.
Your web browsing experiencing is impotent....you're impotent..
Was I just taken by this company.
Build in a default Clicktoflash implementation, get your point across to Adobe, block the spam, empower the user, don't instill the feeling of impotence in the users web browsing experiencing your selling..
If you really wanted to have Flash on an iPhone you could try to get an iPhone app approved that could interpret Flash and then by Implementing Custom URL Schemes in your app, info.plist and code your web page to launch your custom app to render the content outside of the web page just like YouTube links do.
Like it or not, but Flash is a reality on the Internet. In the promo video, Apple repeatedly talks about the iPad as the best way to surf the web.
People may have accepted missing Flash on the smaller screen of the iPhone, but I think it will not be accepted on the iPad, a full-size web device.
/Daniel
I agree completely! When I tell potential iPad buyers that it will not let them use Pandora and Facebook at the same time...let alone browse sites that rely on flash, You should see their interest in the iPad shut off! they aren't interested in the politics between Apple and Adobe or the hardware needed to run Flash and /or multitask. It should "just work" and be the "Internet in their Hands". Pretty weird Apple.
There is no basis for a suit because the image in the promo materials doesn't show the Flash image as "loading," as you suggest. It simply shows an image on a web page. Nowhere does the promo attest that the iPad is Flash-capable. Only a fool would see the loaded page on the promo and then navigate to that page on a computer, see that there is Flash on it and then make a purchase based on that determination.
This would be akin to a lawsuit based on the fake images on televisions in Best Buy Sunday circulars.
It would be different if the promo were a movie that showed the Times page loading Flash. "Loading" means the URL is typed in and the page loads live in view of the consumer.
Like others have said above, Jobs deliberately viewed MORE THAN ONE page with Flash content. His message was not "this device is not a capable device." His message was "F U Adobe and F U all the whiners who think we need Flash." Not saying he is wrong or right--but there's no way he didn't know the non-loading content would be there for all to see.
Given SJ is always so well prepared I have to believe he was intentionally showing Flash not loading. He also was clearly not phased at this even lingering on pages showing it without so much as a comment.
I smell a class action law suit coming.... although not exactly sure how it would be written.
Simple: "Apple made a product that failed to do everything we thought it should, then compelled us to buy it with their Jedi mind tricks. This clearly amounts to fraud."
The iPad is BETTER because it does not include flash.
I might be the only one but I do care about flash. My kids visit pbskids.com, playhousedisney.com and nickjr.com just to mention a few and all the games are flash. My company creates interactive online content that requires flash (and would be very hard, if not impossible, to create any other way.) Are flash ads annoying? Yes, but at least there are ways to turn it off. If those same ads were created in HTML 5, are there tools available to block them too? Is it is a resource hog and run less efficiently on a Mac than PC, yes but where is a widely adopted alternative that I could use right now that offers all the benefits of flash without any of the downsides?
By the way there is a very interesting article for those of you into the whole flash debate here:
I might be the only one but I do care about flash. My kids visit pbskids.com, playhousedisney.com and nickjr.com just to mention a few and all the games are flash. My company creates interactive online content that requires flash (and would be very hard, if not impossible, to create any other way.) Are flash ads annoying? Yes, but at least there are ways to turn it off. If those same ads were created in HTML 5, are there tools available to block them too? Is it is a resource hog and run less efficiently on a Mac than PC, yes but where is a widely adopted alternative that I could use right now that offers all the benefits of flash without any of the downsides?
By the way there is a very interesting article for those of you into the whole flash debate here:
I might be the only one but I do care about flash. My kids visit pbskids.com, playhousedisney.com and nickjr.com just to mention a few and all the games are flash. My company creates interactive online content that requires flash (and would be very hard, if not impossible, to create any other way.) Are flash ads annoying? Yes, but at least there are ways to turn it off. If those same ads were created in HTML 5, are there tools available to block them too? Is it is a resource hog and run less efficiently on a Mac than PC, yes but where is a widely adopted alternative that I could use right now that offers all the benefits of flash without any of the downsides?
By the way there is a very interesting article for those of you into the whole flash debate here:
I think you may be mistaken, but I'm not positive. If you look at the pictures they both appear to be in Safari.
Stevie you may be right about these particular shots. On one of the images, the one showing Scott Roeder's trial there's a section which says Front Page Podcast for Jan 29 which is definitely not on my Mac's version of today's paper in Safari. I don't see even the Scott Roeder article on today's paper on the web on my Mac's Safari (and today is Jan 29 which is the date shown in the screen grab.
We won't know for certain until we see what the NYTimes app looks like vis a vis iPad Safari. On the other hand, what I do remember seeing when the NYTimes people came on stage to demo their new iPad App was that all the things the Times use Flash for were shown as working and one has to presume that like YouTube it was H.264. Since Flash can be a wrapper for H264 it won't be hard for the Times to encode in H.264 and then multipurpose their video content depending on the app that's hitting the page.
Strange. It works fine on every PCs I own and no problems yet on my mobile device. Don't tell me a huge company like Apple can't figure out Flash -- if there's a will, there's a way.
See. This is a reason why Apple fans have bad rep: some Apple fans are blinded by their love for the company and, moreover, they spread fallacies and FUD in an attempt to support their tainted opinion.
You do know that Flash works on Macs right?
Apple can make it work. Apple just chooses to forbid Flash on the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad.
I suggest you read the link I provided earlier in this thread. There's no reason for me to re-type that. Can you figure out how to find older posts?
Comments
I smell a class action law suit coming..
Class action suit about what?
Flash is great for an art gallery to have a 'cool' site, but then people are just clicking things to see the interaction more than actually paying attention to or caring about the content on the site.
If the biggest knock against the iPad is that there is no flash support, well that really doesn't mean too much, the same arguement is made over and over, "no flash no sale", "but I can't watch hulu!". These same people are the ones that will bitch about and dump Hulu before you can blink when they go to a full pay subscription model. So then what will their arguement against the iPad be?
... And yeah, YouTube is Flash too, so care to explain yourself?
YouTube is also available as h264 content. It's just not the default.
Flash is on it's way out and has been for a very long time. Designers don't want to use it, it's expensive for small shops to invest in (think independants) and has a huge learning curve, on top of that updating the files can be pain for people that have smaller sites with heavy flash nav / content etc., they have to pay someone to update it.
By that logic Porsches and Ferraris should be on the way out as well. People who don't like Flash should just uninstall it and not complain when they can't see content designed to be delivered in Flash.
Steve Jobs is far too meticulous in preparing his presentations to have "accidentally" opened a website with Flash that the iPad can't display. I have to believe that he knew full well what he was doing, and it was intentional.
It was a message to web developers, and it said: "We've sold millions and millions of iPhones without Flash and made so much money we can't even count it all. We intend to do the same with this new device. And if you want your websites to work properly on our shiny new toy, you need to stop using Flash."
later this year when flash 10.1 ships, more cell phones will have it than there are iphones
Spread the word!
Flash is on it's way out and has been for a very long time. Designers don't want to use it, it's expensive for small shops to invest in (think independants) and has a huge learning curve, on top of that updating the files can be pain for people that have smaller sites with heavy flash nav / content etc., they have to pay someone to update it.
Flash is great for an art gallery to have a 'cool' site, but then people are just clicking things to see the interaction more than actually paying attention to or caring about the content on the site.
If the biggest knock against the iPad is that there is no flash support, well that really doesn't mean too much, the same arguement is made over and over, "no flash no sale", "but I can't watch hulu!". These same people are the ones that will bitch about and dump Hulu before you can blink when they go to a full pay subscription model. So then what will their arguement against the iPad be?
most networks still let you watch the last episode or two for free via a flash window. i used to watch Terminator Chronicles and BSG directly from the websites like that. and even if Hulu starts charging, there will always be free limited episodes available. on almost every device except the iphone and iPad that is
I agree, and I wonder how long it will be before Adobe responds with a lawsuit or simply pulling it programs off the Mac.
Looking at the iPad, the future of locked down, dumbed down, no choice but what Steve says sort of computing, that Steve would be very happy if Adobe did pull their programs off the Mac.
Jesus, what the hell has gotten into him?
.
He's keeping malware off his products.
A lawsuit for a company to force another company to use and support it's products.
Wow - you have a great handle on law. Remind me to run away from you if I ever have to go to court.
It just works!
It's to the point of stupid not to support flash in the iPad... Unless of course it cant actually run it!
The marketing message to the average consumer:
The device is not capable.
You can't access most of the multimedia available on most every website.
Your web browsing experiencing is impotent....you're impotent..
Was I just taken by this company.
Build in a default Clicktoflash implementation, get your point across to Adobe, block the spam, empower the user, don't instill the feeling of impotence in the users web browsing experiencing your selling..
Class action suit about what?
About his stamping nerd feet over something no one cares about and many don't even want.
Like it or not, but Flash is a reality on the Internet. In the promo video, Apple repeatedly talks about the iPad as the best way to surf the web.
People may have accepted missing Flash on the smaller screen of the iPhone, but I think it will not be accepted on the iPad, a full-size web device.
/Daniel
I agree completely! When I tell potential iPad buyers that it will not let them use Pandora and Facebook at the same time...let alone browse sites that rely on flash, You should see their interest in the iPad shut off! they aren't interested in the politics between Apple and Adobe or the hardware needed to run Flash and /or multitask. It should "just work" and be the "Internet in their Hands". Pretty weird Apple.
This would be akin to a lawsuit based on the fake images on televisions in Best Buy Sunday circulars.
It would be different if the promo were a movie that showed the Times page loading Flash. "Loading" means the URL is typed in and the page loads live in view of the consumer.
Like others have said above, Jobs deliberately viewed MORE THAN ONE page with Flash content. His message was not "this device is not a capable device." His message was "F U Adobe and F U all the whiners who think we need Flash." Not saying he is wrong or right--but there's no way he didn't know the non-loading content would be there for all to see.
I smell a class action law suit coming.... although not exactly sure how it would be written.
Simple: "Apple made a product that failed to do everything we thought it should, then compelled us to buy it with their Jedi mind tricks. This clearly amounts to fraud."
I'm glad that the iPad does not support flash
Nobody cares about flash.
My grandmother doesn't even know what flash IS.
Flash would run down the battery.
The iPad is BETTER because it does not include flash.
I might be the only one but I do care about flash. My kids visit pbskids.com, playhousedisney.com and nickjr.com just to mention a few and all the games are flash. My company creates interactive online content that requires flash (and would be very hard, if not impossible, to create any other way.) Are flash ads annoying? Yes, but at least there are ways to turn it off. If those same ads were created in HTML 5, are there tools available to block them too? Is it is a resource hog and run less efficiently on a Mac than PC, yes but where is a widely adopted alternative that I could use right now that offers all the benefits of flash without any of the downsides?
By the way there is a very interesting article for those of you into the whole flash debate here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/01....html#comments
I might be the only one but I do care about flash. My kids visit pbskids.com, playhousedisney.com and nickjr.com just to mention a few and all the games are flash. My company creates interactive online content that requires flash (and would be very hard, if not impossible, to create any other way.) Are flash ads annoying? Yes, but at least there are ways to turn it off. If those same ads were created in HTML 5, are there tools available to block them too? Is it is a resource hog and run less efficiently on a Mac than PC, yes but where is a widely adopted alternative that I could use right now that offers all the benefits of flash without any of the downsides?
By the way there is a very interesting article for those of you into the whole flash debate here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/01....html#comments
Ditto!
I might be the only one but I do care about flash. My kids visit pbskids.com, playhousedisney.com and nickjr.com just to mention a few and all the games are flash. My company creates interactive online content that requires flash (and would be very hard, if not impossible, to create any other way.) Are flash ads annoying? Yes, but at least there are ways to turn it off. If those same ads were created in HTML 5, are there tools available to block them too? Is it is a resource hog and run less efficiently on a Mac than PC, yes but where is a widely adopted alternative that I could use right now that offers all the benefits of flash without any of the downsides?
By the way there is a very interesting article for those of you into the whole flash debate here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/01....html#comments
Great post and thanks for the link. Really excellent points in that article.
I think you may be mistaken, but I'm not positive. If you look at the pictures they both appear to be in Safari.
Stevie you may be right about these particular shots. On one of the images, the one showing Scott Roeder's trial there's a section which says Front Page Podcast for Jan 29 which is definitely not on my Mac's version of today's paper in Safari. I don't see even the Scott Roeder article on today's paper on the web on my Mac's Safari (and today is Jan 29 which is the date shown in the screen grab.
We won't know for certain until we see what the NYTimes app looks like vis a vis iPad Safari. On the other hand, what I do remember seeing when the NYTimes people came on stage to demo their new iPad App was that all the things the Times use Flash for were shown as working and one has to presume that like YouTube it was H.264. Since Flash can be a wrapper for H264 it won't be hard for the Times to encode in H.264 and then multipurpose their video content depending on the app that's hitting the page.
Strange. It works fine on every PCs I own and no problems yet on my mobile device. Don't tell me a huge company like Apple can't figure out Flash -- if there's a will, there's a way.
See. This is a reason why Apple fans have bad rep: some Apple fans are blinded by their love for the company and, moreover, they spread fallacies and FUD in an attempt to support their tainted opinion.
You do know that Flash works on Macs right?
Apple can make it work. Apple just chooses to forbid Flash on the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad.
I suggest you read the link I provided earlier in this thread. There's no reason for me to re-type that. Can you figure out how to find older posts?