I'm having a hard time squaring the story with the headline.
"Publishers", which suggests the top brass at big online media outlets, turns immediately, in the first sentence of the story, into the completely meaningless "members of the media" which within a few words is further downgraded to "contacts from various media outlets" which finally proves to be (at least as far as the AI story would have it) a Flash developer, an anonymous online producer and an anonymous designer.
OK, and now I've looked at the linked story and that really is pretty much it, save for one named ad agency guy. If that's "push back" from "publishers", it seems pretty low key.
Maybe a better headline would be "Valleywag manages to find a few critics of Apple's Flash stance."
Oh yeah, but that wouldn't be sufficiently click whore-ish.
Yeah, some astute observations there. I thought the sourcing was a bit thin too.....
"Using Flash for interactive graphics is irreplaceable," the producer "Not just slideshows, but special section graphics and interactive presentations can be embedded on story pages quickly and easily. Oh, sure, just use Javascript: well guess what, we don't have a bunch of code junkies in our newsroom. We do have some great designers who've picked up Flash and enough Actionscript to be very effective."
Another anonymous freelance interactive designer agreed with Jobs that Flash can be unstable and switching could be easy, but added that the switch is not as simple as the Apple co-founder suggested. The designer said developers have become accustomed to the ease of use and integration with Flash, which allows them to be more artistic and less technical.
"Where is my HTML5 development tool?" the designer reportedly said. "Perhaps he needs to try some Flash development first-hand to see what the big deal is."
Ditto those comments!
I don't even know what HTML5 looks like code wise yet and I don't have any dev tools yet to help with animation and interactivity... Are there any or do you have to hand code everything?
Where's Apple's Dreamweaver and Flash App alternatives.
You obviously can't disprove my comment- so you typically just dismiss it.
When a major Flash bug that causes Flash on OS X to crash is reported and doesn't get fixed in a public release for 14 months it speaks volumes. Flash on Mac is a resource hog. Not to mention Flash "doesn't" run "just fine" on netbooks. They become hot and the fans go crazy. And battery life is dramatically decreased. In this day and age little animated web games shouldn't make your computer seem like it wants to catch fire. You're comments assume none of use Windows machines to test your bullshit claims.
As I said recently, Flash served it's purpose and was good for what we needed it for. But a time will come when Flash is replaced by other web technologies, like HTML5. Apple made a choice not to include Flash, which is buggy and slow even on more higher end Macs. I'm glad too, cause these upcoming technologies will be far more "efficient". Disagree or not but Apple have changed the game. By websites not using Flash and switching to new open technologies they aren't getting in bed with Apple, they are getting out of bed with Adobe and leaving their house.
The comments from these publishers and designers really sound like: SJ might change his mind based on arguments (no matter if good or bad)... IMHO we will see an iPad with a floppy drive before we see one with Flash support. No Flash is a great feature to have, now somebody figure out how to write an ad blocker for the iPad.
Once upon a time in the Kingdom all King's Men, The Bean Counters, and Newspapers used Roman Numerals.
It was the way it had always been done, and according to the King's YesMen - it was also quick and easy.
Then one day, from the East, came a "New System" called the Hindu-Arabic Base 10.
It caused Great Confusion in the Kingdom and took 100's of years to sort out which "System" was truly the "best" and which would be the "Standard" in the Kingdom.
.
Now, let's jump forward about 1,000 years to Today.
And talk about DOS/Windows/UNIX/OSX/Flash/etc etc.
Starting to see how we can learn from History ?
Let'$ make $ure whatever "$tandard" we choo$e is becau$e it'$ truly the "be$t" and not ju$t the more "popular" at thi$ moment.
The comments from these publishers and designers really sound like: SJ might change his mind based on arguments (no matter if good or bad)... IMHO we will see an iPad with a floppy drive before we see one with Flash support. No Flash is a great feature to have, now somebody figure out how to write an ad blocker for the iPad.
Dont start with the ad blocker crap. Pay for what you use! If you don't want to pay, don't visit the site. You're already filtering all Flash, so you can't use that as an excuse.
There is currently a program called Live 3D CX by a company called Strata that totally runs on Java and allows for Flash-like capabilities without a plugin. It mainly deals in three dimensions, but it still allows for interactive content on web pages.
I would strongly suggest using this, and it costs the same amount of money as Flash. Go to www.strata.com for more details.
A huge chunk of the internet is built on Flash. It is a feature in some circumstances. It is a shame to see Apple taking yet another feature out because of its refusal to upgrade OS X underpinnings especially when even underpowered windows machines can run flash perfectly.
Dont start with the ad blocker crap. Pay for what you use! If you don't want to pay, don't visit the site. You're already filtering all Flash, so you can't use that as an excuse.
I do pay for what I use, if there is an option. I am not willing to be disturbed by moving, sounding, and whatever they will do next, advertising. I pay for ad-free TV channels, I buy movies and TV shows on iTunes for the very same reason.
And what exactly does that confession imply? They're obviously not sweating to the oldies trying to get it "properly developed " for Macs when it works just fine on 90% of the world's computers. What is their incentive? Has Apple offered to pay them to fix it? It benefits Apple more than Adobe to fix it. Apple should put up the chump change now with their money bags or stop whining.
Apple should fix a software, which their do not own, Hmmm I see brains of Britain is here again!
Why did Adobe confess their sins and say they will fix it. You not making any sense and the article about their confessions was posted on AI. please explain that article to me.
What about the argument that even if Flash were allowed on the iPad (and iPhone / iPod touch), that it might in many cases offer a "not what the designer intended" experience since there are no mouse-overs to trigger actions like there are with a typical computer and mouse cursor?
There are no controls yet, though with other touch screen devices coming out, it's inevitable (very likely?) it will have some type of mouseless controls added to future versions.
The truth is that if Apple opens the door to Flash on the iPhone, it would undermine the iPhone SDK itself. It is Apple right to defend their turf.
In the long run, Apple and users are better served with HTML5 instead of Flash. Developers much prefer an open standard like HTML 5 than a proprietary one (Flash).
One would argue that Apple's SDK is a closed platform but who cares, it's their phone.
If publishers are not happy and don't want to write Apps for the iPhone because of this reason then they are doing themselves a disservice. The average customer does not care about Flash vs HTML. They just want content. Publishers should simply not have web designers write Apps instead of developers !
I'm the biggest Apple fan boy, but I think SB is making a huge mistake here..... I think it's an issue that really divides people... give me a ClickToFlash type tool and let ME decide what content I can access....The problem (as the article states) is the divide between devs and designers.... Designers know Photoshop, illustrator, Flash, etc... There needs to be some kind of authoring environment for HTML5... I know Wookie Boy will disagree and have links to tutorials.... But until the majority of existing Flash content is replaced with HTML5 content, users will be unhappy with this. Until the iPad can offer a better experience, I'm sticking with my 3GS and my laptop.
FLASH runs just fine on any low-end PC even Netbooks.
You need to do you research much more. Flash's failures have nothing to do with OSX and Flash for that matter even bogs down crappy low market pc's too.
Might as well stop reading right now. This thread is guaranteed to head downhill in no time. The troglodytes will be out in force......
There really isn't any reason for there to be any emotional response to this entire topic. The simple fact is Adobe let Flash go to shit but they have made marked improvements with Flash 10.1.
If Adobe and Apple could leave the past in the past they would work together to make Flash a decent option on any Apple product by simply accessing the correct API's and invoking hardware acceleration via the GPU. This is why Safari on OSX uses 37% CPU and Safari for Windows uses less then 8%.
Comments
Yet publishers are getting behind the iPad and some very big names are transitioning to HTML5.
for whoever is complaining, their loss. This is 2010, and if your web/ebook/app content doesn't play well with Apple products, you're doing it wrong.
The music industry had similar concerns and complaints. Eventually they saw the light. Same thing will happen here.
I'm having a hard time squaring the story with the headline.
"Publishers", which suggests the top brass at big online media outlets, turns immediately, in the first sentence of the story, into the completely meaningless "members of the media" which within a few words is further downgraded to "contacts from various media outlets" which finally proves to be (at least as far as the AI story would have it) a Flash developer, an anonymous online producer and an anonymous designer.
OK, and now I've looked at the linked story and that really is pretty much it, save for one named ad agency guy. If that's "push back" from "publishers", it seems pretty low key.
Maybe a better headline would be "Valleywag manages to find a few critics of Apple's Flash stance."
Oh yeah, but that wouldn't be sufficiently click whore-ish.
Yeah, some astute observations there. I thought the sourcing was a bit thin too.....
"Using Flash for interactive graphics is irreplaceable," the producer "Not just slideshows, but special section graphics and interactive presentations can be embedded on story pages quickly and easily. Oh, sure, just use Javascript: well guess what, we don't have a bunch of code junkies in our newsroom. We do have some great designers who've picked up Flash and enough Actionscript to be very effective."
Another anonymous freelance interactive designer agreed with Jobs that Flash can be unstable and switching could be easy, but added that the switch is not as simple as the Apple co-founder suggested. The designer said developers have become accustomed to the ease of use and integration with Flash, which allows them to be more artistic and less technical.
"Where is my HTML5 development tool?" the designer reportedly said. "Perhaps he needs to try some Flash development first-hand to see what the big deal is."
Ditto those comments!
I don't even know what HTML5 looks like code wise yet and I don't have any dev tools yet to help with animation and interactivity... Are there any or do you have to hand code everything?
Where's Apple's Dreamweaver and Flash App alternatives.
You obviously can't disprove my comment- so you typically just dismiss it.
When a major Flash bug that causes Flash on OS X to crash is reported and doesn't get fixed in a public release for 14 months it speaks volumes. Flash on Mac is a resource hog. Not to mention Flash "doesn't" run "just fine" on netbooks. They become hot and the fans go crazy. And battery life is dramatically decreased. In this day and age little animated web games shouldn't make your computer seem like it wants to catch fire. You're comments assume none of use Windows machines to test your bullshit claims.
As I said recently, Flash served it's purpose and was good for what we needed it for. But a time will come when Flash is replaced by other web technologies, like HTML5. Apple made a choice not to include Flash, which is buggy and slow even on more higher end Macs. I'm glad too, cause these upcoming technologies will be far more "efficient". Disagree or not but Apple have changed the game. By websites not using Flash and switching to new open technologies they aren't getting in bed with Apple, they are getting out of bed with Adobe and leaving their house.
Don't buy an iPad, and quit moaning moaner.
I think he was actually agreeing with me! (Or so I'd like to naively believe).
10000% AGREED, referring to the two consecutive post below yours.
Once upon a time in the Kingdom all King's Men, The Bean Counters, and Newspapers used Roman Numerals.
It was the way it had always been done, and according to the King's YesMen - it was also quick and easy.
Then one day, from the East, came a "New System" called the Hindu-Arabic Base 10.
It caused Great Confusion in the Kingdom and took 100's of years to sort out which "System" was truly the "best" and which would be the "Standard" in the Kingdom.
.
Now, let's jump forward about 1,000 years to Today.
And talk about DOS/Windows/UNIX/OSX/Flash/etc etc.
Starting to see how we can learn from History ?
Let'$ make $ure whatever "$tandard" we choo$e is becau$e it'$ truly the "be$t" and not ju$t the more "popular" at thi$ moment.
.
BC
The comments from these publishers and designers really sound like: SJ might change his mind based on arguments (no matter if good or bad)... IMHO we will see an iPad with a floppy drive before we see one with Flash support. No Flash is a great feature to have, now somebody figure out how to write an ad blocker for the iPad.
Dont start with the ad blocker crap. Pay for what you use! If you don't want to pay, don't visit the site. You're already filtering all Flash, so you can't use that as an excuse.
On your ignore list, yet you know their every move? Now that's rich.
Because others keep quoting them. Like I'm doing now.
There is currently a program called Live 3D CX by a company called Strata that totally runs on Java and allows for Flash-like capabilities without a plugin. It mainly deals in three dimensions, but it still allows for interactive content on web pages.
I would strongly suggest using this, and it costs the same amount of money as Flash. Go to www.strata.com for more details.
Dont start with the ad blocker crap. Pay for what you use! If you don't want to pay, don't visit the site. You're already filtering all Flash, so you can't use that as an excuse.
I do pay for what I use, if there is an option. I am not willing to be disturbed by moving, sounding, and whatever they will do next, advertising. I pay for ad-free TV channels, I buy movies and TV shows on iTunes for the very same reason.
And what exactly does that confession imply? They're obviously not sweating to the oldies trying to get it "properly developed " for Macs when it works just fine on 90% of the world's computers. What is their incentive? Has Apple offered to pay them to fix it? It benefits Apple more than Adobe to fix it. Apple should put up the chump change now with their money bags or stop whining.
Apple should fix a software, which their do not own, Hmmm I see brains of Britain is here again!
Why did Adobe confess their sins and say they will fix it. You not making any sense and the article about their confessions was posted on AI. please explain that article to me.
What about the argument that even if Flash were allowed on the iPad (and iPhone / iPod touch), that it might in many cases offer a "not what the designer intended" experience since there are no mouse-overs to trigger actions like there are with a typical computer and mouse cursor?
There are no controls yet, though with other touch screen devices coming out, it's inevitable (very likely?) it will have some type of mouseless controls added to future versions.
In the long run, Apple and users are better served with HTML5 instead of Flash. Developers much prefer an open standard like HTML 5 than a proprietary one (Flash).
One would argue that Apple's SDK is a closed platform but who cares, it's their phone.
If publishers are not happy and don't want to write Apps for the iPhone because of this reason then they are doing themselves a disservice. The average customer does not care about Flash vs HTML. They just want content. Publishers should simply not have web designers write Apps instead of developers !
It not because of FLASH, it's because of OSX.
FLASH runs just fine on any low-end PC even Netbooks.
You need to do you research much more. Flash's failures have nothing to do with OSX and Flash for that matter even bogs down crappy low market pc's too.
Brace yourselves for another long series (9 pages?) of Flash wars.
Isn't that spelled FLash Whores?
Flash? iPad?
Uh-oh.
Might as well stop reading right now. This thread is guaranteed to head downhill in no time. The troglodytes will be out in force......
There really isn't any reason for there to be any emotional response to this entire topic. The simple fact is Adobe let Flash go to shit but they have made marked improvements with Flash 10.1.
If Adobe and Apple could leave the past in the past they would work together to make Flash a decent option on any Apple product by simply accessing the correct API's and invoking hardware acceleration via the GPU. This is why Safari on OSX uses 37% CPU and Safari for Windows uses less then 8%.