Adobe abandons development of Flash-to-iPhone porting software
A change in Apple's developer agreement has caused Adobe to halt development of technology that allows Flash applications to be ported natively to the iPhone and iPad, though it will still be included in the forthcoming Creative Suite 5.
Writing on his blog, Mike Chambers, project manager for Adobe Flash, revealed this week that his company is not planning additional investments in the software feature. Chambers noted that Adobe complied with Apple's licensing terms during the development cycle of Flash CS5.
"However, as developers for the iPhone have learned, if you want to develop for the iPhone you have to be prepared for Apple to reject or restrict your development at anytime, and for seemingly any reason," he wrote.
Chambers suggested that Apple's changes to the developer agreement were meant to specifically target Adobe and developers who might port software from Flash to the iPhone.
"It is our belief that Apple will enforce those terms as they apply to content created with Flash CS5," he wrote. "Developers should be prepared for Apple to remove existing content and applications (100+ on the store today) created with Flash CS5 from the iTunes store."
He also said that he does not believe the development of the iPhone packager included in CS5 was a waste of time for Adobe, as it proved that there isn't a technical reason Flash cannot run on the iPhone. He also argued that it proved developers can create content that performs well and is interesting for the iPhone through Flash.
The knowledge and experience gamed from the iPhone compiler, Chambers said, aided in the development of Flash Player 10.1 and Adobe AIR 2.0 for other mobile operating systems. He specifically named Google's Android platform -- along with the Motorola Droid, Nexus One, and forthcoming Android-based tablets -- as an alternative. "Fortunately, the iPhone isn't the only game in town," he said.
Weeks ago, when Apple introduced the forthcoming iPhone OS 4, the company also added a clause to the developer license agreement that specifically prohibits the development of applications using "an intermediary translation or compatibility or layer tool." That addition means software originally written for Adobe's Flash, Sun's Java, or Microsoft's Silverlight/Mono and ported to Apple's iPhone OS would be against the terms of its developer agreement. The iPhone OS powers the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad.
The changes inspired a considerable amount of debate, with one Adobe supporter suggesting Apple timed the announcement to hurt sales of CS5.
Apple co-founder Steve Jobs himself got into the discussion earlier this month, when he allegedly responded an e-mail from a developer who was upset over the changes to the developer agreement. Jobs argued that "intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform."
Even before the change was revealed, Apple has been under fire for its iPhone developer agreement for some time. In March, the Electronic Frontier Foundation posted the agreement in its entirety, and criticized the Cupertino, Calif., company for terms that it feels stifle innovation. It accused the iPhone maker of partaking in actions akin to a "jealous and arbitrary feudal lord."
Writing on his blog, Mike Chambers, project manager for Adobe Flash, revealed this week that his company is not planning additional investments in the software feature. Chambers noted that Adobe complied with Apple's licensing terms during the development cycle of Flash CS5.
"However, as developers for the iPhone have learned, if you want to develop for the iPhone you have to be prepared for Apple to reject or restrict your development at anytime, and for seemingly any reason," he wrote.
Chambers suggested that Apple's changes to the developer agreement were meant to specifically target Adobe and developers who might port software from Flash to the iPhone.
"It is our belief that Apple will enforce those terms as they apply to content created with Flash CS5," he wrote. "Developers should be prepared for Apple to remove existing content and applications (100+ on the store today) created with Flash CS5 from the iTunes store."
He also said that he does not believe the development of the iPhone packager included in CS5 was a waste of time for Adobe, as it proved that there isn't a technical reason Flash cannot run on the iPhone. He also argued that it proved developers can create content that performs well and is interesting for the iPhone through Flash.
The knowledge and experience gamed from the iPhone compiler, Chambers said, aided in the development of Flash Player 10.1 and Adobe AIR 2.0 for other mobile operating systems. He specifically named Google's Android platform -- along with the Motorola Droid, Nexus One, and forthcoming Android-based tablets -- as an alternative. "Fortunately, the iPhone isn't the only game in town," he said.
Weeks ago, when Apple introduced the forthcoming iPhone OS 4, the company also added a clause to the developer license agreement that specifically prohibits the development of applications using "an intermediary translation or compatibility or layer tool." That addition means software originally written for Adobe's Flash, Sun's Java, or Microsoft's Silverlight/Mono and ported to Apple's iPhone OS would be against the terms of its developer agreement. The iPhone OS powers the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad.
The changes inspired a considerable amount of debate, with one Adobe supporter suggesting Apple timed the announcement to hurt sales of CS5.
Apple co-founder Steve Jobs himself got into the discussion earlier this month, when he allegedly responded an e-mail from a developer who was upset over the changes to the developer agreement. Jobs argued that "intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform."
Even before the change was revealed, Apple has been under fire for its iPhone developer agreement for some time. In March, the Electronic Frontier Foundation posted the agreement in its entirety, and criticized the Cupertino, Calif., company for terms that it feels stifle innovation. It accused the iPhone maker of partaking in actions akin to a "jealous and arbitrary feudal lord."
Comments
Even before the change was revealed, Apple has been under fire for its iPhone developer agreement for some time. In March, the Electronic Frontier Foundation posted the agreement in its entirety, and criticized the Cupertino, Calif., company for terms that it feels stifle innovation. It accused the iPhone maker of partaking in actions akin to a "jealous and arbitrary feudal lord."
It's all baloney at this point. Apple's numbers tell the tale.
Jobs argued that "intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform."
People familiar with Apple's history will give much value to this statement.
Well this wasn't unexpected.
It's all baloney at this point. Apple's numbers tell the tale.
The EFF sometimes has some good points on issues, but, unfortunately, their zeal sometimes interferes with their reason, and they have trouble recognizing which are real issues and which are not.
I guess Adobe realized that they weren't going to have any success with a lawsuit, though.
A change in Apple's developer agreement has caused Adobe to halt development of technology will allow Flash applications to be ported natively to the iPhone and iPad, though it will still be included in the forthcoming Creative Suite 5.
Writing on his blog, Mike Chambers, project manager for Adobe Flash, revealed this week that his company is not planning additional investments in the software feature. Chambers noted that Adobe complied with Apple's licensing terms during the development cycle of Flash CS5.
"However, as developers for the iPhone have learned, if you want to develop for the iPhone you have to be prepared for Apple to reject or restrict your development at anytime, and for seemingly any reason," he wrote.
Chambers suggested that Apple's changes to the developer agreement were meant to specifically target Adobe and developers who might port software from Flash to the iPhone.
"It is our belief that Apple will enforce those terms as they apply to content created with Flash CS5," he wrote. "Developers should be prepared for Apple to remove existing content and applications (100+ on the store today) created with Flash CS5 from the iTunes store."
He also said that he does not believe the development of the iPhone packager included in CS5 was a waste of time for Adobe, as it proved that there isn't a technical reason Flash cannot run on the iPhone. He also argued that it proved developers can create content that performs well and is interesting for the iPhone through Flash.
The knowledge and experience gamed from the iPhone compiler, Chambers said, aided in the development of Flash Player 10.1 and Adobe AIR 2.0 for other mobile operating systems. He specifically named Google's Android platform -- along with the Motorola Droid, Nexus One, and forthcoming Android-based tablets -- as an alternative. "Fortunately, the iPhone isn't the only game in town," he said.
Weeks ago, when Apple introduced the forthcoming iPhone OS 4, the company also added a clause to the developer license agreement that specifically prohibits the development of applications using "an intermediary translation or compatibility or layer tool." That addition means software originally written for Adobe's Flash, Sun's Java, or Microsoft's Silverlight/Mono and ported to Apple's iPhone OS would be against the terms of its developer agreement. The iPhone OS powers the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad.
The changes inspired a considerable amount of debate, with one Adobe supporter suggesting Apple timed the announcement to hurt sales of CS5.
Apple co-founder Steve Jobs himself got into the discussion earlier this month, when he allegedly responded an e-mail from a developer who was upset over the changes to the developer agreement. Jobs argued that "intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform."
Even before the change was revealed, Apple has been under fire for its iPhone developer agreement for some time. In March, the Electronic Frontier Foundation posted the agreement in its entirety, and criticized the Cupertino, Calif., company for terms that it feels stifle innovation. It accused the iPhone maker of partaking in actions akin to a "jealous and arbitrary feudal lord."
With all the problems Graphic Designers had with the Snow Leopard vs Adobe products when we all upgraded was an eye opener for me. Total crashes of Adobe products and this was after they (Adobe) said that their products weere compatible. HOGWASH.
Now my Illustrator version (CS3) will not work with SL and Adobe will not upgrade their product.
I am moving on? no more dollars for Adobe products/upgrades.
Flash is dead!
With all the problems Graphic Designers had with the Snow Leopard vs Adobe products when we all upgraded was an eye opener for me. Total crashes of Adobe products and this was after they (Adobe) said that their products weere compatible. HOGWASH.
Now my Illustrator version (CS3) will not work with SL and Adobe will not upgrade their product.
I am moving on… no more dollars for Adobe products/upgrades.
Flash is dead!
This has been one of the big arguments against Adobe all along. No regard for Mac users.
So just dump them. Apple and the rest of us are moving on. The more Adobe and old shiftless-Shantanu drag their feet with Mac products, the more incentive there is for other more enterprising developers to come up with alternatives (and the more incentive for Apple to move some of its $40 billion to help them.)
They are not fool to believe that Apple would have embarked on their game, to me this was planned to pitch Flash developers/publishers against Apple (Blackmail pure and simple), forcing Apple to bow.
I think this was the plan B, thought in advance.
Android and the rest of the me-too also-rans are perfect for Adobe.
If Adobe spent the time and effort to make it behave well instead of whining about how pervasive it happens to be then maybe they would have a case to make.
They would realize that this is a tremendous opportunity for them:
-- currently 85 million (est. 100 million by year end) Apple Mobile Devices that will never run full Flash.
-- currently 0 (est. ? by year end) other Mobile Devices that may or may not run Full Flash
-- many Flash apps won't run properly in a Touch environment (no mouseover)
-- general dissatisfaction among end users with Flash on any computer (resource hog, unstable, security risk, intrusive ads, non-blockable, etc.).
There's one helluvan' opportunity here to provide a better solution and sell the tools and services to implement it.
Who better than Adobe?
Adobe seems to be stuck on "Flash is the answer!"
They should focus on what is the question?
.
Well this wasn't unexpected.
It's all baloney at this point. Apple's numbers tell the tale.
McDonalds is doing pretty good too. Delicious food good for everyone I guess, right?
McDonalds is doing pretty good too. Delicious food good for everyone I guess, right?
Once you actually *qualify* the numbers (which some of us have done a long time ago) you'll see how absurd your statement is.
McDonalds is doing pretty good too. Delicious food good for everyone I guess, right?
Say what you like, I enjoy an occasional McDonalds hamburger!
Finally Adobe gets it. Apple does not want Flash on its iPhone platform. Period. Why all the attempts to get around Apple's declaration? Did they just think Apple was kidding? Jobs has too much of a mean streak to ever back down on a pledge.
I don't think they "get it" at all. I think Adobe is well on its way to becoming a cautionary tale, studied in business school.
McDonalds is doing pretty good too. Delicious food good for everyone I guess, right?
Great analogy. On account of how Apple is also in the lowest common denominator junk business, sold for a few dollars a pop from 30,000 stores, to people with metabolic cravings.