Adobe started this war. WHY didn't they quietly work on this. Work with Apple at a high level. Why did they go public with the midget-evangelist-hit men who started throwing tantrums?
This is a SERIOUS corporate issue for Adobe and they have been totally clueless how to deal with this. You WORK with a company, especially when you are the smaller, weaker one.They seemed thrilled to go public and have a hissy fit like an upset 3 year old.
Adobe is responsible for this reply. They needed to chill. RIght now, what's wisest for them is to keep quiet and actually ship a decent Flash mobile product. But stop the war.
How can you say Apple shouldn't respond to what has amounted to months of antagonism from the Adobe and their minion (usually employed by Adobe).
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMHut
As a professional designer who has used and relied upon to earn my living, a version of every computer Apple has made since 1985 (except the home oriented "performa" line) and almost every Adobe product for the same amount of time, I REALLY wish Jobs would stop taking such an antagonistic stance against Adobe. Without Adobe, there would have been no Mac as we know it. Without Apple, there would have been no Adobe as we know it.
We get it, Jobs doesn't like Flash. Push Adobe to improve it. Push them to improve their design products. But for Pete's sake, I wish he'd stop poking them in the eye so publicly every chance he gets. All that will do is put their professional design customers in the middle of an unnecessary beef.
Not sure what you base your claims on. Just your minds dull rumblings when you awake each afternoon? It's a nice collection of completely unsubstantiated guesses. But I like your ability to vent while offering no usefulness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn
The truth is Apple is going down a road of producing underpowered devices with less features with huge margins and is attempting to convert the entire web to fit their business model.
Steve Jobs published this letter (which just aired on CNBC right now) to keep the war going in the media spotlight as to generate attention for itś device and to get websites to make iPad versions.
Steve is attempting to break a potential gridlock, where customers wont buy iPads because they wont be able to access so many websites based on Flash and web site owners wont bother coding a iPad friendly version because the hit traffic from the iPad is not enough to warrant the change.
Apple fully intends to produce more low powered, high margin devices in the future (laptops) and thus in order to do this they intend to reduce the features of the web itself by leveraging their minority market share and raising media attention.
The fact that over the last year Apple has removed all but one MacBook and introduced a line of flimsy under featured and overpriced iPads is proof of their intentions.
Apple had to release the kernel as open source. They stole it from FreeBSD!
Nice token open source reference. Here's the truth:
"With the release of Mac OS X for x86 processors, Apple has chosen to not release source to key components of the OS, such as the kernel and all drivers. This means Darwin/x86 is dead in the water, Darwin/ppc has many closed source components and is a deprecated architecture. One has to wonder why Apple even bothers to release non-GPL'd source at all, if it is unwilling to cooperate with external developers to increase their return on investment and accept external bug fixes and features. Even worse, one has to wonder why people would want to donate their time to such a fruitless and pointless cause. "
Yea, your link to the alternative Flash Players was priceless. Apparently you didn't read it before you posted it. Even Stallman says that alternatives are not as good as Adobe's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert
You don't need adobe to exist to keep flash rolling
Except you do. You didn't mention Flash Media Server. Anybody can put a flash file onto their website, but if you need to do heavy duty media serving (like YouTube or Vimeo), video conferencing or live streaming, you need Flash Media Server.
Nobody but geeks will even know the letter exists. This is hardly national news.
mmmm. I wouldn't be so sure. SJ is already established as the top CEO on Planet Earth so just maybe this will get commented on in the WSJ, NYT, CNN etc. ... be worth checking to see over the next few days.
Bad form Steve. Part of your new job as "the man" is that once you've gone on a head kicking mission you can't turn back. You're not the "good guy" anymore, nor can you ever be again.
Just go back to making good products and leave the commentary to those with some credibility.
Apple doesn't need to tell developers how to write apps. Let the USERS decide the winners and losers as far as apps on the iPhone goes. If developers use inferior tools and produce inferior apps, compared to apps written with proper tools leveraging all the APIs, they will be rejected by users. This is how it ought to be IMO.
Photoshop is unique in that it has no competitors and has been allowed by Adobe to languish on the Mac platform. I don't think that'll happen with the iPhone because the app environment is too competitive. How many iPhone apps have no competitor?
Telling developers how to write their apps just pisses them off. It may have the undesired effect of driving them to other platforms.
And in a perfect world, that would be the case. I totally agree with the ideal of letting the users decide what apps succeed. The tools shouldn't matter. Except that Apple has previously been the position of being dependent on third parties for the success of their platform and products. MS has held Office as a kludge over Apple for years. That means that MS has direct influence over the success of the Mac. Similarly, and perhaps more importantly, the development tools used by developers gives direct influence over the direction of the iPhone platform to third parties. Apple could create the perfect IDE and give it away for free. But if for reasons of convenience, habit or comfort, many devs instead choose to use an alternative product, then Apple would have to rely on those third parties to keep up with the API changes and feature additions. Modern mobile platforms are rapidly evolving and their success hinges on developers having access to and taking advantage of the platform as it evolves. A dependancy on third parties in this case means delayed adoption and showcasing of the platform as it evolves.
Still, what can you say about HTML5 and CSS and Javascript? Those are open, non-proprietary formats.
Flash is not "Open". Steve is right! He never said H.264 was open or free, he just said it was an industry Standard and Modern. If its a standard, and they support the playback of it, with no plugin required, then what is your problem?
Flash uses up to 120% - just opening a page with no animation and no video.
Exaggerate much? Flat out lie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Now, what are these great features that REQUIRE Flash?
Nothing requires Flash just as nothing requires HTML5- you won't die without having them. Flash is a luxury. I have offered examples of my own Flash applications in previous threads. There are numerous functions in Flash that have no corresponding equivalent in Javascript. Bottom line is that Flash development tools allow rapid app development where as Javascript offers nothing even close to my knowledge.
Thank you for the letter. I hope we see more communication of this type and more of Apple's PR team. There is a lot of misinformation out there and I think Apple is better served when they communicate clearly.
I hope the media reads this and stops spreading lies.
Apple is the number 3 company in the U.S., a company that 100's of millions of people own either stock or product. Steve is the face of the company (Can you picture the CEO of Exxon? Does Ballmer show up on Time Magazine when WinPhone7 is released?
Geeks 'care' about this letter, however, 'everyone' in the U.S. will be exposed to the news about this letter.
Should it be national news. no (is the catfight between 2 companies a big deal, when AZ is effectively legislating racial profiling?, U.S. soldiers are dying in Afghanistan?, Tea Partiers are attracting racist and militarist elements, in the name of 'taking our country back' [from whom? the people whose majority vote elected the current congress and president?].
Perhaps, but Steve Jobs claiming H.264 is "open" is an absolute falsehood. It is nothing of the sort. That's why Firefox and Opera are not adopting it.
"H.264 is neither free nor open-source. If...you want to use H.264 to serve HTML5 video in your browser, you need to pay MPEG LA, the owners of the codec, a $5 million licensing fee. This has raised some eyebrows by the likes of Mozilla Firefox, who want HTML5?s video compression standard to be the free, open-source Ogg Theora. Their argument, summarized, is it?s foolish to build the next decade?s internet video standards upon the back of a licensed codec when there?s a free alternative that works nearly as well."
Consumers choose Apple because of the gorgeous hardware, interface, software/App synergy with said hardware, and the spit and polish of the unit as a whole, and not for some internet video spec.
Flash is way, way overrated, pushed mostly by tech-heads who are out of touch with the market.
Flash is just not a factor in buying decisions when it comes to Apple products.
You managed to reply to my comment without confronting its central thesis. Steve Jobs claims that Adobe's Flash technology is proprietary. This is a fact. Flash IS proprietary. However, Steve also claims that HTML5 (which includes H.264 for video playback) is an "open standard". His words:
"...we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards."
This is undeniably false. H.264 is a proprietary codec which must be licensed from MPEG LA. It is not "open" in any sense whatsoever. Steve Jobs is, therefore, a liar.
You will note that he did not include H.264 in your selective quote. H.264 is not a part of HTML5. HTML5 just supports it, as it supports many other standards, some of which are not open, but freely available. Even your lowly JPEG is a widely available standard that is not open. Same thing.
Personally, I think agl82 has gotten all the info on this topic that he can possibly get. If he doesn't a difference between open web standards and Adobe Flash at this point I doubt he never will.
So, back on topic, what is the reasoning behind this letter. The last letter Jobs scribed was to get the music labels to drop DRM. Remember the Warner CEO saying what a stupid idea it was just to go in with Amazon DRM free a couple months later?
There is an agenda here and it comes the day after Adobe has made some real changes to Flash for Mac OS X, and rather quickly too boot. What is the next move for Adobe and Apple?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Fearing
And you are on a Mac forum - why?
That is just MacTripper trolling under a new alias.
The difference, of course, is that iTunes uses between 0.1 and 10% CPU time, depending on what it's doing.
Flash uses up to 120% - just opening a page with no animation and no video.
Sometimes, results DO matter.
Except that this entire comment has nothing to do with what the poster asked. The question was essentionally, why does Jobs make a big deal about Adobe taking a decade to fully adopt cocoa, when Apple itself has not (a point Jobs' letter made an effort to separate from the performance/stability issue which it seems some people didn't notice, i.e. he asked about point 6 and you brought up point 3...huh?).
So, to ask again, why would Jobs bring up Adobe's slow adoption of Cocoa (separately from Flash's performance issues) as an issue, if Apple themselves still haven't fully adopted it for their apps. i.e Jobs says Adobe is the last major developer to go all Cocoa, but in fact the last major developer to do so is Apple itself.
You're forgetting . . . He admits that they keep a tight lock on the platform, but this is the web he's talking about. Despite what people think, you don't have to be totally for open technology everywhere.
H.264 isn't exactly open, and Apple helped create it...what do you think will happen once they begin charging for royalties again? Apple is attempting to control how content is shared/distributed; if Flash dies, it benefits them, they want to be the MS of web content, just Google wants to the MS of web portals.
Competition is good, but blindly supporting one company over another is bad. None of these companies are your friends, there's money at stake, that's what they all want.
I have no problem with Flash; HW acceleration works great on my PC, while HTML5 videos may eventually catch on, it's not ready yet, and there's nothing standard or open about H.264, not to mention that there is no GPU acceleration for it yet in a browser. So you still need a beefy CPU in order to have something like HTML5 YT vids playback smoothly at full-screen. I'll have no problem with H.264/HTML5, once it actually matures and becomes viable, and supports GPU acceleration, but in the meantime, Flash is current and working now.
And Adobe just released a beta of Flash that supports the GPU's of some of the newer Nvidia GPU's in Safari and FF. After less than a week of the H.264 GPU API's being available...who was being lazy? Not Adobe, give them an inch, and they'll take it.
SJ sounds a whiny kid, and I wish he would just STFU already.
Comments
This is a SERIOUS corporate issue for Adobe and they have been totally clueless how to deal with this. You WORK with a company, especially when you are the smaller, weaker one.They seemed thrilled to go public and have a hissy fit like an upset 3 year old.
Adobe is responsible for this reply. They needed to chill. RIght now, what's wisest for them is to keep quiet and actually ship a decent Flash mobile product. But stop the war.
How can you say Apple shouldn't respond to what has amounted to months of antagonism from the Adobe and their minion (usually employed by Adobe).
As a professional designer who has used and relied upon to earn my living, a version of every computer Apple has made since 1985 (except the home oriented "performa" line) and almost every Adobe product for the same amount of time, I REALLY wish Jobs would stop taking such an antagonistic stance against Adobe. Without Adobe, there would have been no Mac as we know it. Without Apple, there would have been no Adobe as we know it.
We get it, Jobs doesn't like Flash. Push Adobe to improve it. Push them to improve their design products. But for Pete's sake, I wish he'd stop poking them in the eye so publicly every chance he gets. All that will do is put their professional design customers in the middle of an unnecessary beef.
Hmmmm...
Which iPhone is he using where there is 10 hours of video playing?
I suspect he meant iPad which can do that for sure as i did it. But I agree no iPhone I have including 3Gs can last that long.
The truth is Apple is going down a road of producing underpowered devices with less features with huge margins and is attempting to convert the entire web to fit their business model.
Steve Jobs published this letter (which just aired on CNBC right now) to keep the war going in the media spotlight as to generate attention for itś device and to get websites to make iPad versions.
Steve is attempting to break a potential gridlock, where customers wont buy iPads because they wont be able to access so many websites based on Flash and web site owners wont bother coding a iPad friendly version because the hit traffic from the iPad is not enough to warrant the change.
Apple fully intends to produce more low powered, high margin devices in the future (laptops) and thus in order to do this they intend to reduce the features of the web itself by leveraging their minority market share and raising media attention.
The fact that over the last year Apple has removed all but one MacBook and introduced a line of flimsy under featured and overpriced iPads is proof of their intentions.
The droid ad in the beginning my not be simply and act of random irony.
Apple had to release the kernel as open source. They stole it from FreeBSD!
Nice token open source reference. Here's the truth:
"With the release of Mac OS X for x86 processors, Apple has chosen to not release source to key components of the OS, such as the kernel and all drivers. This means Darwin/x86 is dead in the water, Darwin/ppc has many closed source components and is a deprecated architecture. One has to wonder why Apple even bothers to release non-GPL'd source at all, if it is unwilling to cooperate with external developers to increase their return on investment and accept external bug fixes and features. Even worse, one has to wonder why people would want to donate their time to such a fruitless and pointless cause. "
http://www.synack.net/~bbraun/writing/oshistory.html
Apple only embraces open source when it benefits them. They are truly the most proprietary company on the face of the planet.
Apple failing to understand open source
http://www.oreillynet.com/mac/blog/2...rstand_op.html
Love all these pro Adobe new members here all of a sudden. Isn't the Adobe coffee break over yet?
You don't need adobe to exist to keep flash rolling
Except you do. You didn't mention Flash Media Server. Anybody can put a flash file onto their website, but if you need to do heavy duty media serving (like YouTube or Vimeo), video conferencing or live streaming, you need Flash Media Server.
Nobody but geeks will even know the letter exists. This is hardly national news.
mmmm. I wouldn't be so sure. SJ is already established as the top CEO on Planet Earth so just maybe this will get commented on in the WSJ, NYT, CNN etc. ... be worth checking to see over the next few days.
Just go back to making good products and leave the commentary to those with some credibility.
I disagree with this.
Apple doesn't need to tell developers how to write apps. Let the USERS decide the winners and losers as far as apps on the iPhone goes. If developers use inferior tools and produce inferior apps, compared to apps written with proper tools leveraging all the APIs, they will be rejected by users. This is how it ought to be IMO.
Photoshop is unique in that it has no competitors and has been allowed by Adobe to languish on the Mac platform. I don't think that'll happen with the iPhone because the app environment is too competitive. How many iPhone apps have no competitor?
Telling developers how to write their apps just pisses them off. It may have the undesired effect of driving them to other platforms.
And in a perfect world, that would be the case. I totally agree with the ideal of letting the users decide what apps succeed. The tools shouldn't matter. Except that Apple has previously been the position of being dependent on third parties for the success of their platform and products. MS has held Office as a kludge over Apple for years. That means that MS has direct influence over the success of the Mac. Similarly, and perhaps more importantly, the development tools used by developers gives direct influence over the direction of the iPhone platform to third parties. Apple could create the perfect IDE and give it away for free. But if for reasons of convenience, habit or comfort, many devs instead choose to use an alternative product, then Apple would have to rely on those third parties to keep up with the API changes and feature additions. Modern mobile platforms are rapidly evolving and their success hinges on developers having access to and taking advantage of the platform as it evolves. A dependancy on third parties in this case means delayed adoption and showcasing of the platform as it evolves.
Still, what can you say about HTML5 and CSS and Javascript? Those are open, non-proprietary formats.
Flash is not "Open". Steve is right! He never said H.264 was open or free, he just said it was an industry Standard and Modern. If its a standard, and they support the playback of it, with no plugin required, then what is your problem?
Thank you! Was this guy even reading the article.
Flash uses up to 120% - just opening a page with no animation and no video.
Exaggerate much? Flat out lie.
Now, what are these great features that REQUIRE Flash?
Nothing requires Flash just as nothing requires HTML5- you won't die without having them. Flash is a luxury. I have offered examples of my own Flash applications in previous threads. There are numerous functions in Flash that have no corresponding equivalent in Javascript. Bottom line is that Flash development tools allow rapid app development where as Javascript offers nothing even close to my knowledge.
I hope the media reads this and stops spreading lies.
Nobody but geeks will even know the letter exists. This is hardly national news.
BusinessWeek/Bloomberg http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...-update1-.html
AP http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...qNrvgD9FCPK8O2
within an hour of posting on Apple.
Apple is the number 3 company in the U.S., a company that 100's of millions of people own either stock or product. Steve is the face of the company (Can you picture the CEO of Exxon? Does Ballmer show up on Time Magazine when WinPhone7 is released?
Geeks 'care' about this letter, however, 'everyone' in the U.S. will be exposed to the news about this letter.
Should it be national news. no (is the catfight between 2 companies a big deal, when AZ is effectively legislating racial profiling?, U.S. soldiers are dying in Afghanistan?, Tea Partiers are attracting racist and militarist elements, in the name of 'taking our country back' [from whom? the people whose majority vote elected the current congress and president?].
Is it natinal news. definitely.
You believe Flash is open? Really?
You think any of the Flash phones are going to have anything approaching acceptable battery life for a phone? Really?
Tell me about it man...these people are crazy
Perhaps, but Steve Jobs claiming H.264 is "open" is an absolute falsehood. It is nothing of the sort. That's why Firefox and Opera are not adopting it.
"H.264 is neither free nor open-source. If...you want to use H.264 to serve HTML5 video in your browser, you need to pay MPEG LA, the owners of the codec, a $5 million licensing fee. This has raised some eyebrows by the likes of Mozilla Firefox, who want HTML5?s video compression standard to be the free, open-source Ogg Theora. Their argument, summarized, is it?s foolish to build the next decade?s internet video standards upon the back of a licensed codec when there?s a free alternative that works nearly as well."
http://www.cultofmac.com/h-264-will-...ugh-2016/28982
Too bad Steve Jobs never said H.264 is "open". I guess you do not know how to read.
Flash is way, way overrated, pushed mostly by tech-heads who are out of touch with the market.
Flash is just not a factor in buying decisions when it comes to Apple products.
You managed to reply to my comment without confronting its central thesis. Steve Jobs claims that Adobe's Flash technology is proprietary. This is a fact. Flash IS proprietary. However, Steve also claims that HTML5 (which includes H.264 for video playback) is an "open standard". His words:
"...we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards."
This is undeniably false. H.264 is a proprietary codec which must be licensed from MPEG LA. It is not "open" in any sense whatsoever. Steve Jobs is, therefore, a liar.
You will note that he did not include H.264 in your selective quote. H.264 is not a part of HTML5. HTML5 just supports it, as it supports many other standards, some of which are not open, but freely available. Even your lowly JPEG is a widely available standard that is not open. Same thing.
So, back on topic, what is the reasoning behind this letter. The last letter Jobs scribed was to get the music labels to drop DRM. Remember the Warner CEO saying what a stupid idea it was just to go in with Amazon DRM free a couple months later?
There is an agenda here and it comes the day after Adobe has made some real changes to Flash for Mac OS X, and rather quickly too boot. What is the next move for Adobe and Apple?
And you are on a Mac forum - why?
That is just MacTripper trolling under a new alias.
The difference, of course, is that iTunes uses between 0.1 and 10% CPU time, depending on what it's doing.
Flash uses up to 120% - just opening a page with no animation and no video.
Sometimes, results DO matter.
Except that this entire comment has nothing to do with what the poster asked. The question was essentionally, why does Jobs make a big deal about Adobe taking a decade to fully adopt cocoa, when Apple itself has not (a point Jobs' letter made an effort to separate from the performance/stability issue which it seems some people didn't notice, i.e. he asked about point 6 and you brought up point 3...huh?).
So, to ask again, why would Jobs bring up Adobe's slow adoption of Cocoa (separately from Flash's performance issues) as an issue, if Apple themselves still haven't fully adopted it for their apps. i.e Jobs says Adobe is the last major developer to go all Cocoa, but in fact the last major developer to do so is Apple itself.
See the difference?
You're forgetting . . . He admits that they keep a tight lock on the platform, but this is the web he's talking about. Despite what people think, you don't have to be totally for open technology everywhere.
H.264 isn't exactly open, and Apple helped create it...what do you think will happen once they begin charging for royalties again? Apple is attempting to control how content is shared/distributed; if Flash dies, it benefits them, they want to be the MS of web content, just Google wants to the MS of web portals.
Competition is good, but blindly supporting one company over another is bad. None of these companies are your friends, there's money at stake, that's what they all want.
I have no problem with Flash; HW acceleration works great on my PC, while HTML5 videos may eventually catch on, it's not ready yet, and there's nothing standard or open about H.264, not to mention that there is no GPU acceleration for it yet in a browser. So you still need a beefy CPU in order to have something like HTML5 YT vids playback smoothly at full-screen. I'll have no problem with H.264/HTML5, once it actually matures and becomes viable, and supports GPU acceleration, but in the meantime, Flash is current and working now.
And Adobe just released a beta of Flash that supports the GPU's of some of the newer Nvidia GPU's in Safari and FF. After less than a week of the H.264 GPU API's being available...who was being lazy? Not Adobe, give them an inch, and they'll take it.
SJ sounds a whiny kid, and I wish he would just STFU already.