As far as what does business have to do with the web...
All major networks, news and entertainment are on the web. They are businesses and they drive what will be the standards.
You miss the context in which Apple is in the drivers seat.
The mobile device is the fastest growing way for people to access the web. The iPhone/ iPod Touch dominate over 60% of the mobile web market share.
News and media companies don't care what technology they use to deliver their content, they only care about their content being able to reach the consumers.
Right now webkit dominates mobile web browsing. Webkit supports HTML5 and does not support Flash. News and media companies are going to use the technology that gets its content to the consumer.
Quote:
You're processor testing is flawed. Run the same test on a PC and you'll get different results. The same applies for what browser you run it in.
You stated their was no proof that HTML5 uses less resources than Flash. I give you an example that shows it can be tested. You say the test is flawed unless its run on a PC, as though running the test on a Mac does not count. Chrome is the only browser you can even test both Flash and HTML5 with.
Quote:
You have to log into Vimeo, I can do the same thing with much more relevant content on Hulu or a major network running flash without a log in.
OH HAPPY (potential) DAY!!! That would kinda be the nail in the coffin as far as a few of my friends are concerned. If reliable, this is some wonderful news.
You miss the context in which Apple is in the drivers seat.
The mobile device is the fastest growing way for people to access the web. The iPhone/ iPod Touch dominate over 60% of the mobile web market share.
News and media companies don't care what technology they use to deliver their content, they only care about their content being able to reach the consumers.
Right now webkit dominates mobile web browsing. Webkit supports HTML5 and does not support Flash. News and media companies are going to use the technology that gets its content to the consumer.
I usually don't unnecessarily promote people I agree with, but you make a good point...
Hulu isn't a Flash company, it's a video company*. Same with ABC, CNN, and FOX ? they're media companies, not Flash companies. They'll get their products out in ways that their customers can consume them.
AngusYoung, here is a great example of how well Apple has thought this through.
Hulu already has its video encoded in H.264. Hulu already has its video encoded in variable bit rates. Hulu is already set up for HTTP Live Streaming to the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. HTTP Live Streaming is an open technology that any mobile browser is capable of using.
Hulu only has to build its HTTP Streaming infrastructure once and it can provide the service to any mobile device that supports it.
My problem with your argument, if I'm reading it correctly, is that you're conflating not supporting Flash with "Apple will never support Free Streaming," or more generally that Apple is against forms of media consumption that are available through means other than the iTunes store. I believe that the creation of HTTP live streaming and HTML 5 video point to the fact that Apple is open to other services providing content.
This "myth" that Apple has shunned Flash on their mobile platforms because it "competes" with iTMS needs to be debunked. It's so bogus that it really doesn't even rise to the level of myth. It's FUD, pure and simple. The only people who would actually believe it are either ignorant or stupid. The only ones that write it have an agenda, and are mostly trolls and astroturfists.
There are any number of factors that could be cited that cast dispersion on the validity of this "theory", but the simple fact that Google has for some time now been converting the YouTube archive over to H.264 format, and Apple's obvious support for that effort, ought to suffice as evidence enough.
The only reason Flash exists and has such a big tie in to the web is because Internet Explorer sucks. Time for a change. Apple is pushing for an open standard HTML5. Plugins are stupid.
Given that most people will watch TV content on their HDTV, it would have made sense for Apple to have a dock that connects the iPad to one and could output 720p. It seems it can only output 576p and 720p video is the highest it can decode.
The iphone 3GS was supposed to be able to decode 1080p though and I'd expect the iPad is better hardware so maybe it's just disabled.
Rather than complain that their Mac or iPod can't handle it- YES. Don't blame Flash that your Mac drains the CPU because it poses no problem on any PC. If you not going to fix the OS - then stop complaining about Flash. I've never heard anyone with a PC or a MAC desktop ever complain about FLash- ever.
You must have a very small circle of people then. I have seen flash hogtie Macs, Windows, and Linux systems at one time or another. Most of the time, there is no rhyme to the reason. It boils down to Flash programming more often than not IMO. Also, if a laptop is not suitable for Flash (as you stated earlier and is laughable BTW), wouldn't that confirm why it is not on the iPhone, Touch, or iPad?? My four year old MBP does fine with Flash for the most part. Issues normally arise after an update with Flash or website change. 99.9% of the time, the issues are gone after another Flash update. Point being, it is MOSTLY (but not all of the time) a Flash issue (i.e bad or lazy programmers), not an Apple issue.
Flash does for mobile platforms, what porcupine-quill suits do for the balloon folding industry.
Flash was designed before GPUs and hardware video playback, and all the other things that make fast, low power devices possible.
So it's just a bad technology for mobile.
If content vendors are serious about wanting to push their content to mobile users, they will have to come up with a way of getting around the roadblock that is Flash.
So now Microsoft is dropping Flash from Windows Mobile 7. The mobile Firefox team is dropping Flash from Maemo. I suspect that Chrome OS will not support Flash either.
And let's be very clear, even if Apple *did* implement Flash, it would still suck. Those keyboard and mouse games would still not work. Those pop-up ads would use up all available CPU resources.
If the content industry wants their content to get to mobile devices, then they will have to do it in a mobile friendly way. Which is exactly what we are now seeing - with all of these major vendors not dropping Flash, but providing an alternative delivery method.
Evidently, Flash performance on the OS X platform is so bad, that there are multiple browser plug-ins to help mitigate Flashes short comings. I don't know, I use 'no-script' in Firefox on my Mac, flash doesn't present a problem - I just avoid sites that require it.
Just because 'everyone' is doing something, doesn't make it right. :-)
Flash is bad on all platforms. At work I have to use a windows box and 'flash ad bombing' of some sites make it almost impossible to selects 'Tools -> Adbock -> Overlay Flash' to block it out. The browser on this 3 GHz system comes almost to a halt and the 'Hyper-threading' CPU is stretched to the max. (The instance its blocked the CPU returns to normal and the browser is responsive again. I didn't test this with 'Explorer' - but I expect a similar result - to just not ruin my day any further.)
If you (could) try this on a 600MHz CPU iPhone (etc.), the result would be devastating, even the iPad core would be knocked out.
Apple didn't made this up, they do a lot of testing judging from their own comments, and I'm certain this was one of the most worrying results they found. So technically it is not feasible to use flash in its current form on a < 1GHZ device. Especially a device that needs cycles to sustain calling, like the iPhone.
It might be possible to solve the app/daemon resource hog problem in the future. This can be done if processes and threads can be truly 'throttled', so that each process/thread gets a maximum of x CPU cycles (per second). But this is notorious difficult to do - as anyone who tinkered with Unix 'nice' and 'renice' might know - and not achievable with current Unixes. I suspect Apple is working on this, but adapting an OS to an embedded environment and overhauling the kernel at the same time is probably not wise and a bit of a stretch, even for Apple.
It is possible that Apple uses this throttling technique in its next major embedded OS X release. Rumors of "some kind of third party background app support" might be an indication.
It's interesting to draw parallels with the BBC iPlayer here in the UK. iPlayer is similar to Hulu in that it allows UK based users to view TV shows from the last 7 days (or whole series catchup for newer stuff where the licensing allows it).
The original iPlayer only worked on Windows and used some badly hacked together P2P client and DRM laden video (WMV, I seem to recall). Inevitably there was an outcry from non-PC types and the Beeb quickly hacked together a streaming Flash version -- ostensibly aimed at Mac users. The Flash version is now by far and away the most popular method of getting iPlayer, and is very similar to Hulu.
When the iPhone & iPod Touch were released, there was again an outcry that you couldn't get the iPlayer. Really very quickly the BBC put together a special iPhone version that detected the use of an iPhone and streamed the video as a MOV (containing H.264), at a resolution designed to match the iPhone. The nice thing about the MOV files is that they are DRM free.
You can get several apps for your Mac (and maybe Win PC) that pretend to be an iPhone that allow you to download the DRM free MOV files. They're a little too low res for use via Apple TV, but good for me on my commute in via the Tube (no wifi or 3G!). As usual, there are constant games between the BBC developers and the download app developers to block the download. Within a few days the app developers work out how to fool the iPhone iPlayer again...
So, there is little reason why Hulu couldn't do something similar. The only real difference is that the BBC content does not contain any adverts. This can't be an insurmountable problem though... The other issue might be the need for higher (TV equivalent) resolution for the iPad. This will make the DRM free MOVs significantly more attractive, so Hulu (and iPlayer) may need to take more of an interest in stopping spoof downloads.
Don't try and play your dumb ass games with me and change the meaning of my posting.
You or infamous for it and it's really pathetic.
I said that by the end of 2011 a mobile platform that doesn't support Flash will be dead.
That doesn't mean they will not continue to sell. Market share will be dwindled down to 4th or 5th place if you read any reliable source. BlackBerries are going to support Flash as well as Android, WinMo, Nokia.
You fail to admit that you belittle anyone that doesn't agree with you.
Wasn't it Apple that said if the iPhone didn't upgrade it's OS for X years the competitors would finally achieve what Apple has. Apple missed that date.
Tell Apple to worry about fixing it's current problems with latest Greatest Steve Jobs best Phone in the world and then worry about 1st changing the name of the iPad then working on a feature set that matches a NetBook because it currently can't handle anything not sold through iTunes.
You are a weak minded person that 99% of your postings can either be shown false by a simple Google search or incoherant due to some mind altering situation. Either case is disturbing.
Don't lecture me about what I can afford. I am very comfortable with the gadgets I purchase to amuse me. My education is first not relevant but a post grad in computer science with a math minor gets me by.
You obviously don't go to CNN, ESPN, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX etc on anything but an iPhone App because you won't get their video. They are all in Flash.
I read more than I listen to music. I watch the News and Sports more than I do the Disney Channel (currently in Flash).
Get out of your box and realize Steve Jobs is not the second coming of Christ and the iPhone is becoming the next RAZR and Apple is already considering lowering their prices before the iPad has made it to market.
By the way, I'm watching last nights episode of Lost on Hulu with my Windows 7 notebook hooked up to my HD TV because I deleted it off my PVR by mistake. It's Free, does that lower my intelect or my education level because I'm smart enough to take advantage of current technology?
Edit: My notebook has HDMI no reason for an adapter that I have to pay for.
You really have a chip on your shoulder about Apple and their products. Actually if you look at what I said, I can stream every channel I pay for from my Cable provider to my Iphone so that includes CNN, ESPN, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX. You are kidding yourself to think Android is the next great coming. As far as pricing goes, I think Apple as a company seems to do well with their pricing have you read their quarterly report?
Comments
As far as what does business have to do with the web...
All major networks, news and entertainment are on the web. They are businesses and they drive what will be the standards.
You miss the context in which Apple is in the drivers seat.
The mobile device is the fastest growing way for people to access the web. The iPhone/ iPod Touch dominate over 60% of the mobile web market share.
News and media companies don't care what technology they use to deliver their content, they only care about their content being able to reach the consumers.
Right now webkit dominates mobile web browsing. Webkit supports HTML5 and does not support Flash. News and media companies are going to use the technology that gets its content to the consumer.
You're processor testing is flawed. Run the same test on a PC and you'll get different results. The same applies for what browser you run it in.
You stated their was no proof that HTML5 uses less resources than Flash. I give you an example that shows it can be tested. You say the test is flawed unless its run on a PC, as though running the test on a Mac does not count. Chrome is the only browser you can even test both Flash and HTML5 with.
You have to log into Vimeo, I can do the same thing with much more relevant content on Hulu or a major network running flash without a log in.
You do not have to log into Vimeo to watch video.
You cannot test both Flash and HTML5 on Hulu.
You miss the context in which Apple is in the drivers seat.
The mobile device is the fastest growing way for people to access the web. The iPhone/ iPod Touch dominate over 60% of the mobile web market share.
News and media companies don't care what technology they use to deliver their content, they only care about their content being able to reach the consumers.
Right now webkit dominates mobile web browsing. Webkit supports HTML5 and does not support Flash. News and media companies are going to use the technology that gets its content to the consumer.
I usually don't unnecessarily promote people I agree with, but you make a good point...
Hulu isn't a Flash company, it's a video company*. Same with ABC, CNN, and FOX ? they're media companies, not Flash companies. They'll get their products out in ways that their customers can consume them.
* credit to John Gruber.
Hulu already has its video encoded in H.264. Hulu already has its video encoded in variable bit rates. Hulu is already set up for HTTP Live Streaming to the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. HTTP Live Streaming is an open technology that any mobile browser is capable of using.
Hulu only has to build its HTTP Streaming infrastructure once and it can provide the service to any mobile device that supports it.
My problem with your argument, if I'm reading it correctly, is that you're conflating not supporting Flash with "Apple will never support Free Streaming," or more generally that Apple is against forms of media consumption that are available through means other than the iTunes store. I believe that the creation of HTTP live streaming and HTML 5 video point to the fact that Apple is open to other services providing content.
This "myth" that Apple has shunned Flash on their mobile platforms because it "competes" with iTMS needs to be debunked. It's so bogus that it really doesn't even rise to the level of myth. It's FUD, pure and simple. The only people who would actually believe it are either ignorant or stupid. The only ones that write it have an agenda, and are mostly trolls and astroturfists.
There are any number of factors that could be cited that cast dispersion on the validity of this "theory", but the simple fact that Google has for some time now been converting the YouTube archive over to H.264 format, and Apple's obvious support for that effort, ought to suffice as evidence enough.
[CENTER]Did I Care? ...NOPE!
Have A Nice Day[/CENTER]
Centered, condescending posts.
[CENTER]You really are a drop-kick.[/CENTER]
Centered, condescending posts.
[CENTER]You really are a drop-kick.[/CENTER]
Banish him to the ignore list. I did.
The iphone 3GS was supposed to be able to decode 1080p though and I'd expect the iPad is better hardware so maybe it's just disabled.
Rather than complain that their Mac or iPod can't handle it- YES. Don't blame Flash that your Mac drains the CPU because it poses no problem on any PC. If you not going to fix the OS - then stop complaining about Flash. I've never heard anyone with a PC or a MAC desktop ever complain about FLash- ever.
You must have a very small circle of people then. I have seen flash hogtie Macs, Windows, and Linux systems at one time or another. Most of the time, there is no rhyme to the reason. It boils down to Flash programming more often than not IMO. Also, if a laptop is not suitable for Flash (as you stated earlier and is laughable BTW), wouldn't that confirm why it is not on the iPhone, Touch, or iPad?? My four year old MBP does fine with Flash for the most part. Issues normally arise after an update with Flash or website change. 99.9% of the time, the issues are gone after another Flash update. Point being, it is MOSTLY (but not all of the time) a Flash issue (i.e bad or lazy programmers), not an Apple issue.
Flash was designed before GPUs and hardware video playback, and all the other things that make fast, low power devices possible.
So it's just a bad technology for mobile.
If content vendors are serious about wanting to push their content to mobile users, they will have to come up with a way of getting around the roadblock that is Flash.
So now Microsoft is dropping Flash from Windows Mobile 7. The mobile Firefox team is dropping Flash from Maemo. I suspect that Chrome OS will not support Flash either.
And let's be very clear, even if Apple *did* implement Flash, it would still suck. Those keyboard and mouse games would still not work. Those pop-up ads would use up all available CPU resources.
If the content industry wants their content to get to mobile devices, then they will have to do it in a mobile friendly way. Which is exactly what we are now seeing - with all of these major vendors not dropping Flash, but providing an alternative delivery method.
C.
The mouse.
What did Apple do with the development of the mouse to make it an industry standard?
The GUI.
Technically this existed pre-Apple as well
The palm rest and keyboard arrangement of notebook PCs.
That isn't really an industry standard
Evidently, Flash performance on the OS X platform is so bad, that there are multiple browser plug-ins to help mitigate Flashes short comings. I don't know, I use 'no-script' in Firefox on my Mac, flash doesn't present a problem - I just avoid sites that require it.
Just because 'everyone' is doing something, doesn't make it right. :-)
Flash is bad on all platforms. At work I have to use a windows box and 'flash ad bombing' of some sites make it almost impossible to selects 'Tools -> Adbock -> Overlay Flash' to block it out. The browser on this 3 GHz system comes almost to a halt and the 'Hyper-threading' CPU is stretched to the max. (The instance its blocked the CPU returns to normal and the browser is responsive again. I didn't test this with 'Explorer' - but I expect a similar result - to just not ruin my day any further.)
If you (could) try this on a 600MHz CPU iPhone (etc.), the result would be devastating, even the iPad core would be knocked out.
Apple didn't made this up, they do a lot of testing judging from their own comments, and I'm certain this was one of the most worrying results they found. So technically it is not feasible to use flash in its current form on a < 1GHZ device. Especially a device that needs cycles to sustain calling, like the iPhone.
It might be possible to solve the app/daemon resource hog problem in the future. This can be done if processes and threads can be truly 'throttled', so that each process/thread gets a maximum of x CPU cycles (per second). But this is notorious difficult to do - as anyone who tinkered with Unix 'nice' and 'renice' might know - and not achievable with current Unixes. I suspect Apple is working on this, but adapting an OS to an embedded environment and overhauling the kernel at the same time is probably not wise and a bit of a stretch, even for Apple.
It is possible that Apple uses this throttling technique in its next major embedded OS X release. Rumors of "some kind of third party background app support" might be an indication.
J.
Technically this existed pre-Apple as well
ignore list.
Flash was designed before GPUs and hardware video playback, and all the other things that make fast, low power devices possible.
So it's just a bad technology for mobile.
Excellent comment!
The original iPlayer only worked on Windows and used some badly hacked together P2P client and DRM laden video (WMV, I seem to recall). Inevitably there was an outcry from non-PC types and the Beeb quickly hacked together a streaming Flash version -- ostensibly aimed at Mac users. The Flash version is now by far and away the most popular method of getting iPlayer, and is very similar to Hulu.
When the iPhone & iPod Touch were released, there was again an outcry that you couldn't get the iPlayer. Really very quickly the BBC put together a special iPhone version that detected the use of an iPhone and streamed the video as a MOV (containing H.264), at a resolution designed to match the iPhone. The nice thing about the MOV files is that they are DRM free.
You can get several apps for your Mac (and maybe Win PC) that pretend to be an iPhone that allow you to download the DRM free MOV files. They're a little too low res for use via Apple TV, but good for me on my commute in via the Tube (no wifi or 3G!). As usual, there are constant games between the BBC developers and the download app developers to block the download. Within a few days the app developers work out how to fool the iPhone iPlayer again...
So, there is little reason why Hulu couldn't do something similar. The only real difference is that the BBC content does not contain any adverts. This can't be an insurmountable problem though... The other issue might be the need for higher (TV equivalent) resolution for the iPad. This will make the DRM free MOVs significantly more attractive, so Hulu (and iPlayer) may need to take more of an interest in stopping spoof downloads.
Don't try and play your dumb ass games with me and change the meaning of my posting.
You or infamous for it and it's really pathetic.
I said that by the end of 2011 a mobile platform that doesn't support Flash will be dead.
That doesn't mean they will not continue to sell. Market share will be dwindled down to 4th or 5th place if you read any reliable source. BlackBerries are going to support Flash as well as Android, WinMo, Nokia.
You fail to admit that you belittle anyone that doesn't agree with you.
Wasn't it Apple that said if the iPhone didn't upgrade it's OS for X years the competitors would finally achieve what Apple has. Apple missed that date.
Tell Apple to worry about fixing it's current problems with latest Greatest Steve Jobs best Phone in the world and then worry about 1st changing the name of the iPad then working on a feature set that matches a NetBook because it currently can't handle anything not sold through iTunes.
You are a weak minded person that 99% of your postings can either be shown false by a simple Google search or incoherant due to some mind altering situation. Either case is disturbing.
Thanks for the 'tipping point'.
Just added you to my ignore list.
Buy a desktop then and enjoy the web- what did you expect? A laptop is never as powerful as a desktop no matter what SJ or anyone else tells you.
You are literally the worst poster, ever.
Don't lecture me about what I can afford. I am very comfortable with the gadgets I purchase to amuse me. My education is first not relevant but a post grad in computer science with a math minor gets me by.
You obviously don't go to CNN, ESPN, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX etc on anything but an iPhone App because you won't get their video. They are all in Flash.
I read more than I listen to music. I watch the News and Sports more than I do the Disney Channel (currently in Flash).
Get out of your box and realize Steve Jobs is not the second coming of Christ and the iPhone is becoming the next RAZR and Apple is already considering lowering their prices before the iPad has made it to market.
By the way, I'm watching last nights episode of Lost on Hulu with my Windows 7 notebook hooked up to my HD TV because I deleted it off my PVR by mistake. It's Free, does that lower my intelect or my education level because I'm smart enough to take advantage of current technology?
Edit: My notebook has HDMI no reason for an adapter that I have to pay for.
You really have a chip on your shoulder about Apple and their products. Actually if you look at what I said, I can stream every channel I pay for from my Cable provider to my Iphone so that includes CNN, ESPN, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX. You are kidding yourself to think Android is the next great coming. As far as pricing goes, I think Apple as a company seems to do well with their pricing have you read their quarterly report?
Apple has never set the industry standard for anything. They have never owned enough market share in anything to set a standard.
I remember the first iMac was sans floppy disc and was coming out party for USB.