Well I have to disagree with most of this, As far as Evil Flash Developers exploiting the Address Book: If this were possible Adobe would have had their feet held to the fire a long time ago. You are going to have to point to some credible evidence for this to be at all believable. I'm pretty sure this would fall into the category of complete hogwash.
It's not hogwash. Address book supplies lots of info to Safari's auto fill feature which in-turn can be exploited. My mac users don't even realize the problem with auto fill. What happens if a Flash movie object runs an applescript? If a program can write to the hard disk anythings possible. Flash is an open door to the Mac OS by allowing executables without proper permissions. You want evidence just read the manuals on these technologies. The fact that malware developers aren't exploiting it, (or are they?) doesn't mean they can or won't. Marketing is using it to spy on my browsing habits now and that's enough for me.
They may be able to get away without it on the iphone. Not this thing. Its not a phone, you cant make phone calls with it. Its a mini computer and Flash is too much part of the web to do without. Whatever they do, they better do something.
It is highly unlikely that Apple will ever approve Flash. Suggest reading John Gruber's "Daring Fireball" blog entry from a couple weeks ago as to why. He carefully lays out the technical reasons and the possible political ones as to why Apple can't/won't accomodate Flash
So someone at Apple will see this and the ad will be changed. Big deal.
Or perhaps the NYT is about to go Flash free in return for the heavy product placement?
I would suggest downloading the presentation as I did. Sure to be a collector's item especially if Apple digitally corrects it as well. That point in the presentation could definitely wind up as the point when Apple "jumped the shark".
"This device has not yet been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained."
Yeah, that's a good point you've got there. Probably the FCC will inexplicably reject Apple's application, for no reason whatsoever, and then Apple will really have egg on their face then!
Good catch!
Sigh. Given the tenor of things around here as of late, I guess I have to actually say that I'm being sarcastic.
But h.264 is proprietary. You have to license it from MPEG, which If I recall than spreads out those royalities to several different creators who created portions of the technology which might even include Apple.
But its not noble, and the article is incorrect. Yes HTML5 is 'open source' and a great standard but h.264 is not. I actually support Opera and Firefox in this.
Also HTML5 does not solve Flash Games, but as in the daringfireball article that goes against the desire for Apple to profit of its AppStore (minus the fact that most flash games are free).
So no offence, but all the fanbois are just bending over on this one. I think the platform should be more open. I think Apple is wrong if they think Business will switch from current tablets to theirs (as Corporate America is probably the biggest buyers of Windows Tablets, and yes Apple is targeting them with iWork). Those corporations want control of their own hardware and will probably want to load in house software that has no need or want to be on the AppStore.
But I also won't delude myself in thinking this product will fail because of these problems or that Flash will come to the iPad.
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?
Yeah, get Flash out, that is fine, until then my computer is the best internet browsing experience because I get so much more free video. And for the ipad folks, it really doesn't matter what Hulu, or Disney, or NFL.com, or CNN, or NY Times does, because you won't get their video. Best internet experience with an asterisk - if you don't care for video.
My argument with it not loading while he was showing off the iPad was the page wasn't fully loaded as you can tell by the bar in Safari it wasn't 80% done and we all know that Flash is the last thing to load in Safari.
LOL NO.... Didn't you see the blue cube PLUGIN place holder? That means the plugin is not available. It cannot load the content. Has nothing to do with page loads.
It crashes, it's slow, it maxes out the processor, it causes machines to over heat.
Fact.
The flash plug in is a proprietary piece of software developed by a third party, not by Apple.
Fact.
So - and I'm going out on a limb here - maybe if Adobe FIXED the plug in, made it work better, it would be welcomed.
Conjecture.
But Adobe aren't even trying, at least not in public. I don't want my iPad to crash everytime i hit another spank the monkey advert. I've got click2flash installed on Safari, safari no longer crashes. Youtube works just fine, and the video quality is massively superior to the flash version.
So ADOBE - fix flash. What Flash can do is great, the potential is fantastic. That it's an unstable piece of crap on all but top end wintel machines is Adobe's issue, not Apple's.
Also - who is to say that this thing can't run flash, and SJ simply blocked it to make a little statement? I don't believe Apple's marketing people are stupid enough to open themselves us to a false claim quite this big. Let's wait eight weeks and see.
I believe it is a Catch 22 situation: AAPL can't fix Adobie's code, and AAPL won't open its api to Adobe.
What's up with Steve always plugging the New York Times?
It's been bankrupt and living on life support from Carlos Slim, it's not a beacon of success.
Steve is a lefty. Lefties support the NYT. Simple. Moreover, many who aren't lefties still imagine the NYT is the fount of honesty and good reporting; other sites are generally shuned as wacko and extremist.
In the big picture, it spells the end of freedom and beginning of total control. But that's the 5-15 year plan.
War is peace.
html 5 is an open standard. Adobe Flash is completely closed. So how is Apple's support of html 5 over Flash the end of freedom and beginning of total control?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman
I like Apple and respect Jobs a lot, but not having Adobe Flash on the iPhone, touch, and iPad are plain silly. HTML-5 will be great, but it's not ready for prime time and won't be for probably 3-5 years as browsers and developers get up to speed. If you have the technology at your finger-tips that works and will give users a full experience, it's pure ego and stubbornness not to use it.
Yes and in the 1990s, Apple was stupid to drop floppies and serial ports.
Apple has a history of not supporting things that are on the way out and instead supporting things that represent the future. This situation is no different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman
Yet almost every other smart phone and tablet has Flash and it works.
For a sufficiently low definition of 'works'. Flash is buggy, causes crashes, creates security holes, and eats batteries like jelly beans.
Quote:
Originally Posted by al_bundy
later this year when flash 10.1 ships, more cell phones will have it than there are iphones
In 1998 more computers had floppies and serial ports than there were iMacs. So?
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
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."
First of all, no one has purchased it, so no one can prove any harm. Second, since it is widely known that Flash doesn't work - (even the people filing the law suit know that Flash doesn't work - 2 months before they could buy an iPad), they are free not to buy the iPad if they want Flash.
Furthermore, there's no evidence of false advertising. How do you know that the Times won't be using a Flash-free version before the iPad comes out? If the Times told Apple that they'd drop Flash in favor of html 5 and gave Apple access to a beta page, then there's nothing wrong with showing a prerelease product - as long as Apple believes it will be ready.
Or, perhaps you were looking at the NY Times iPad app.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Or perhaps the NYT is about to go Flash free in return for the heavy product placement?
Very likely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sranger
Well,
At least one person already filed a FTC complaint agains Apple for false advertising.....
Imagine how mad people who actually buy one will be.....
They're idiots. First, they can't show harm since they haven't purchased one. Second, there's no evidence that Apple was lying. Most likely explanation is that NY Times gave Apple early access to a Flash-free beta of their web site.
Adobe has had years to get Flash working on the Mac, and it still crashes routinely when merely playing videos. One of the added features of Snow Leopard was that Flash crashes would no longer bring down Safari.
Adobe had its chance and failed. I think that Apple is right to push the web away from the plague of Flash.
Those poor non-tech consumers are going to start pulling their hair out when they see pages filled with the Lego Block of Ambiguity. Apple needs a work around for that by using something similar to ClickToFlash which would show a nice empty block saying "Move on, nothing here to see". Apple has put itself on the hot seat as being the only mobile platform refusing to support Flash. It might be a mistake holding to principle considering Apple is not going to have any backing whatsoever. Most of the internet browsing world loves Flash including those consumers who see Flash as cute animations. I'd prefer GIF animations, but the rest of the world has moved on. Apple will likely lose this battle and consumers are going to lose out.
Don't get me wrong. I think Apple should try to further usage of HTML5 standards or whatever replaces Flash, but I don't think they can sway any Flash developers from leaving that platform.
Yes, It's got a lotta issues, I actually HATE it when my PC at work crashes with it, and when I get the beach ball, then crash, with Firefox AND safari on my imac, all with the latest versions.
I hate all the ads that litter sites, etc., but there is plugins on FireFox that allow you to only load the flash you click on, so it's manageable.
Enter HTML5.
The 'flashy' websites will NOT disappear, sites will be just as 'rich' as they are today (although I think online games, etc. will still use flash), and ads zooming around web pages will NOT disappear, the only difference is that you won't be able to disable them in anyway.
I can't believe that HTML5 will not consume resources, and therefore battery life.
And ... I'm not so sure the experience across platforms/browsers would be identical, yet with Flash, it pretty much just is.
What WOULD be nice is if Flash had a multi-teered plugin, that a developer in their publishing settings could determine if a 'minimal' player or the full player was required.
Then they should optimize the CRAP out of it.
I hate the performance issues around flash, but at work, we've used flash to do some pretty neat things AND the main thing is a LOT of corporations are still running I.E. 6, let alone I.E. 8 and when do you think developers will make websites specifically in HTML5.
Not for a LONG time.
Bottom line, If the iPad (or ANY other device) is touted as a web browser, it needs to browse the web. The consumer should demand it, and Apple is so stuck on it's path, their products suffer and competitors have easy ins.
Comments
Well I have to disagree with most of this, As far as Evil Flash Developers exploiting the Address Book: If this were possible Adobe would have had their feet held to the fire a long time ago. You are going to have to point to some credible evidence for this to be at all believable. I'm pretty sure this would fall into the category of complete hogwash.
It's not hogwash. Address book supplies lots of info to Safari's auto fill feature which in-turn can be exploited. My mac users don't even realize the problem with auto fill. What happens if a Flash movie object runs an applescript? If a program can write to the hard disk anythings possible. Flash is an open door to the Mac OS by allowing executables without proper permissions. You want evidence just read the manuals on these technologies. The fact that malware developers aren't exploiting it, (or are they?) doesn't mean they can or won't. Marketing is using it to spy on my browsing habits now and that's enough for me.
Where does apple state it plays flash? Where? Its not like Jobs got up and stated,"One more thing....It now supported flash".
No where in the keynote does this state this fact.
Good God amighty, has everybody signing up for this site had their sense of humor surgically excised?
http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash
Suggest reading his current psots as well re the iPad and Flash issues.
This is a bit lame isn't it?
So someone at Apple will see this and the ad will be changed. Big deal.
Or perhaps the NYT is about to go Flash free in return for the heavy product placement?
I would suggest downloading the presentation as I did. Sure to be a collector's item especially if Apple digitally corrects it as well. That point in the presentation could definitely wind up as the point when Apple "jumped the shark".
^Apple doesn't even know if it can sell iPad yet without FCC approval, let alone being sued!
Read the fine print: http://www.apple.com/ipad/
"This device has not yet been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained."
Yeah, that's a good point you've got there. Probably the FCC will inexplicably reject Apple's application, for no reason whatsoever, and then Apple will really have egg on their face then!
Good catch!
Sigh. Given the tenor of things around here as of late, I guess I have to actually say that I'm being sarcastic.
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/n...dec-debate.ars
Also I do agree that sadly Apple will probably never support Flash on the iPhone/iPad: http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash
But its not noble, and the article is incorrect. Yes HTML5 is 'open source' and a great standard but h.264 is not. I actually support Opera and Firefox in this.
Also HTML5 does not solve Flash Games, but as in the daringfireball article that goes against the desire for Apple to profit of its AppStore (minus the fact that most flash games are free).
So no offence, but all the fanbois are just bending over on this one. I think the platform should be more open. I think Apple is wrong if they think Business will switch from current tablets to theirs (as Corporate America is probably the biggest buyers of Windows Tablets, and yes Apple is targeting them with iWork). Those corporations want control of their own hardware and will probably want to load in house software that has no need or want to be on the AppStore.
But I also won't delude myself in thinking this product will fail because of these problems or that Flash will come to the iPad.
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?
Yeah, get Flash out, that is fine, until then my computer is the best internet browsing experience because I get so much more free video. And for the ipad folks, it really doesn't matter what Hulu, or Disney, or NFL.com, or CNN, or NY Times does, because you won't get their video. Best internet experience with an asterisk - if you don't care for video.
HTML5.
Youtube's already transitioning to it. So is Vimeo.
They better start improving the quality of it as YouTube looks terrible in it.
My argument with it not loading while he was showing off the iPad was the page wasn't fully loaded as you can tell by the bar in Safari it wasn't 80% done and we all know that Flash is the last thing to load in Safari.
LOL NO.... Didn't you see the blue cube PLUGIN place holder? That means the plugin is not available. It cannot load the content. Has nothing to do with page loads.
http://9elements.com/io/projects/html5/canvas/
C.
...which come from the 30 million or so porn sites. This could well be one of the reasons of Apples policy and if so, I fully support it.
In fact, it is those same porn sites which drove adoption of Flash in the first place. Flash is the leading cause of Safari crashes according to AAPL.
The flash plug in for the Mac is a nightmare.
Fact.
It crashes, it's slow, it maxes out the processor, it causes machines to over heat.
Fact.
The flash plug in is a proprietary piece of software developed by a third party, not by Apple.
Fact.
So - and I'm going out on a limb here - maybe if Adobe FIXED the plug in, made it work better, it would be welcomed.
Conjecture.
But Adobe aren't even trying, at least not in public. I don't want my iPad to crash everytime i hit another spank the monkey advert. I've got click2flash installed on Safari, safari no longer crashes. Youtube works just fine, and the video quality is massively superior to the flash version.
So ADOBE - fix flash. What Flash can do is great, the potential is fantastic. That it's an unstable piece of crap on all but top end wintel machines is Adobe's issue, not Apple's.
Also - who is to say that this thing can't run flash, and SJ simply blocked it to make a little statement? I don't believe Apple's marketing people are stupid enough to open themselves us to a false claim quite this big. Let's wait eight weeks and see.
I believe it is a Catch 22 situation: AAPL can't fix Adobie's code, and AAPL won't open its api to Adobe.
What's up with Steve always plugging the New York Times?
It's been bankrupt and living on life support from Carlos Slim, it's not a beacon of success.
Steve is a lefty. Lefties support the NYT. Simple. Moreover, many who aren't lefties still imagine the NYT is the fount of honesty and good reporting; other sites are generally shuned as wacko and extremist.
Good God amighty, has everybody signing up for this site had their sense of humor surgically excised?
No more than most people these days - like common sense, having a sense of humor is becoming so yesterday in the US.
In the big picture, it spells the end of freedom and beginning of total control. But that's the 5-15 year plan.
War is peace.
html 5 is an open standard. Adobe Flash is completely closed. So how is Apple's support of html 5 over Flash the end of freedom and beginning of total control?
I like Apple and respect Jobs a lot, but not having Adobe Flash on the iPhone, touch, and iPad are plain silly. HTML-5 will be great, but it's not ready for prime time and won't be for probably 3-5 years as browsers and developers get up to speed. If you have the technology at your finger-tips that works and will give users a full experience, it's pure ego and stubbornness not to use it.
Yes and in the 1990s, Apple was stupid to drop floppies and serial ports.
Apple has a history of not supporting things that are on the way out and instead supporting things that represent the future. This situation is no different.
Yet almost every other smart phone and tablet has Flash and it works.
For a sufficiently low definition of 'works'. Flash is buggy, causes crashes, creates security holes, and eats batteries like jelly beans.
later this year when flash 10.1 ships, more cell phones will have it than there are iphones
In 1998 more computers had floppies and serial ports than there were iMacs. So?
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."
First of all, no one has purchased it, so no one can prove any harm. Second, since it is widely known that Flash doesn't work - (even the people filing the law suit know that Flash doesn't work - 2 months before they could buy an iPad), they are free not to buy the iPad if they want Flash.
Furthermore, there's no evidence of false advertising. How do you know that the Times won't be using a Flash-free version before the iPad comes out? If the Times told Apple that they'd drop Flash in favor of html 5 and gave Apple access to a beta page, then there's nothing wrong with showing a prerelease product - as long as Apple believes it will be ready.
Or, perhaps you were looking at the NY Times iPad app.
Or perhaps the NYT is about to go Flash free in return for the heavy product placement?
Very likely.
Well,
At least one person already filed a FTC complaint agains Apple for false advertising.....
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/ipad-flash
Imagine how mad people who actually buy one will be.....
They're idiots. First, they can't show harm since they haven't purchased one. Second, there's no evidence that Apple was lying. Most likely explanation is that NY Times gave Apple early access to a Flash-free beta of their web site.
Adobe had its chance and failed. I think that Apple is right to push the web away from the plague of Flash.
Don't get me wrong. I think Apple should try to further usage of HTML5 standards or whatever replaces Flash, but I don't think they can sway any Flash developers from leaving that platform.
Yes, It's got a lotta issues, I actually HATE it when my PC at work crashes with it, and when I get the beach ball, then crash, with Firefox AND safari on my imac, all with the latest versions.
I hate all the ads that litter sites, etc., but there is plugins on FireFox that allow you to only load the flash you click on, so it's manageable.
Enter HTML5.
The 'flashy' websites will NOT disappear, sites will be just as 'rich' as they are today (although I think online games, etc. will still use flash), and ads zooming around web pages will NOT disappear, the only difference is that you won't be able to disable them in anyway.
I can't believe that HTML5 will not consume resources, and therefore battery life.
And ... I'm not so sure the experience across platforms/browsers would be identical, yet with Flash, it pretty much just is.
What WOULD be nice is if Flash had a multi-teered plugin, that a developer in their publishing settings could determine if a 'minimal' player or the full player was required.
Then they should optimize the CRAP out of it.
I hate the performance issues around flash, but at work, we've used flash to do some pretty neat things AND the main thing is a LOT of corporations are still running I.E. 6, let alone I.E. 8 and when do you think developers will make websites specifically in HTML5.
Not for a LONG time.
Bottom line, If the iPad (or ANY other device) is touted as a web browser, it needs to browse the web. The consumer should demand it, and Apple is so stuck on it's path, their products suffer and competitors have easy ins.
Bring on flash (for now).