Because Apple first criticized THEM for a product that doesn't exist.
Instead of giving it a chance then deciding from there, they pushed out misinformation to justify not ever even attempting to make it work. Wouldn't you be mad if you were Adobe? Especially now that Android 2.2 has been shown to run it just fine?
From what I read about the flash demo on an Android phone could not be defined as "just fine" The phone was kept plugged into a power supply for the whole demo most likely to disguise Flash power drain, and there were crashes. All of this on a high end high powered device that very few phones could match in hardware specs.
Especially now that Android 2.2 has been shown to run it just fine?
Right, which is why it crashes on Android 2.2...not just fine. Also, if you noticed the demo...the phone was plugged in. Personally, I like the idea that the iPhone is mobile which means I can be out and about for extended times. Suspect that Android was plugged in so the demo didn't show the battery drain. If they didn't have anything to hide, they would have shown it mobile like a phone should be.
Perhaps that's what Adobe is considering getting into...the huge battery pak business. By a huge battery pak to keep Flash operating while you take your cell phone mobile. Would love to see that media campaign.
Awesome! Does that mean we're gonna get a desktop flash browser that doesn't crash every 3rd page I look at, or cook my genitals when I'm watching video?
That's the biggest feature missing from the iPad in my opinion.. I was watching a video on it the other morning and it was a bit chilly. I thought to myself "If only this thing would get hot enough to burn my genitalia, then it would be truly magical".
Postulant- dude I have no idea what you're talking about.
So are you saying that Apple supports Flash for the web now and just not for mobile devices?
So, you will have an idea what they are talking about. Big big hint: The link.
Many of us sometimes fall victim to such human frailty, myself included.
To others who are familiar with the technology: Has the New York Times completely forsaken Flash, or it just offers alternatives? As such, if it detects say an iPad, it will automatically play the non-Flash version.
I tried it again on Tuesday, because I am having issues with the NY Times in my old iBook (never had so much issues with it before. However, in the iPad using Safari browser (not the NYT Apps which I have not seen nor tried yet, if already available), the NY Times was very fast loading. I did not see any "blue regions" in the front page.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yesiCan
Really ?.., porn most definitely hasn't .
Again, if you are well read enough, there is an article that explored how the porn industry has adapted to the no-flash iPhone OS ecosystem. The porn business cannot ignore the "85 million and growing" iPhone OS ecosystem. When Apple deleted X-rated Apps, they may still be viewed in iPhone mobile devices via the internet (browser based) through non-flash alternatives.
And, if you ever visited any porn site lately, you will find that many offer alternatives video forms so that they could be viewed in multiple devices. some including the iPhone OS. As noted by others, there is a device detection now that will then automatically play the appropriate, in this case X-rated video,
"We believe open markets that allow developers, publishers, and consumers to make their own choices about how they create, distribute, and access content are essential to progress,"
It is cute how they like to claim they are "Open" -- that claim actually only regarding marketing (apparently) and having no connection to Open Standards. The Open they want is to have everyone Open to using there technology. Apple is not interested in supporting a CPU hogging technology that is not available to the public -- and I am not interested in using it.
The bottom line is they can see the possibility that large amounts of people may see the light when they look into alternatives for development and I am sure it scares the snot out of them.
I defy anyone to install a flash blocker and at the end of a week tell me their browsing experience is anything but improved. Gone are the scream jumping 'hey look at me' ads polluting every page, and gone are the hack-written sites that make you stop for 5 minutes to play their inane artistic vision with no navigational options.
I've watched Hulu all week long and haven't had a crash yet? I even love the Hulu desktop.
interesting thing is that Shantanu has been shunted aside and the big guns, Chuck Geschke and John Warnock, have been brought out to defend Adobe.
Signs of desperation?
I'm not trying to defend Adobe here, but isn't it simply appropriate for these guys to respond to Steve Jobs? I mean, Steve Jobs is the CEO of Apple after all.
I saw your ads, it was thoughtful of you to make them non-Flash, today I used a HTC magic running Android 1.6, I went to your site and tried to download your Flash Player, it said my platform wasn't supported.
Why Adobe, WHY are you denying me my freedom to experience the vision of the Internet that you wish to share?
It is so unfair, you took away my choice.
I feel mindful to start a class action on behalf of all unsupported device owners (except for Apple one's).
I've watched Hulu all week long and haven't had a crash yet? I even love the Hulu desktop.
Tell me -am I doing something wrong? \
did you watch it on a mobile device? We are talking the future of flash ... not flash today. We get it that flash is the 800 lb gorilla on desktop non-touch machines.
Apple has sold 85 million iPhones and Touches to people who knew in advance those devices didn't support flash. I think the people have spoken emphatically how they feel about flash and its relevancy. We can tally up the iPad sales at the end of the year.
Comments
You guys thought I was crazy when I said iphone would get multitasking but look what happened. Now I'm saying it will get Flash some day.
Yeah, it'll definitely get flash, an LED flash.
You say ...
"No company -- no matter how big or how creative -- should dictate what you can create, how you create it, or what you can experience on the web."
.
So ...
Now you'll release ALL your Software for FREE ?
.
.
Because Apple first criticized THEM for a product that doesn't exist.
Instead of giving it a chance then deciding from there, they pushed out misinformation to justify not ever even attempting to make it work. Wouldn't you be mad if you were Adobe? Especially now that Android 2.2 has been shown to run it just fine?
From what I read about the flash demo on an Android phone could not be defined as "just fine" The phone was kept plugged into a power supply for the whole demo most likely to disguise Flash power drain, and there were crashes. All of this on a high end high powered device that very few phones could match in hardware specs.
Really? Which ones...porn most definitely hasn't .
sadface
NY TImes still uses Flash on the web:
http://video.nytimes.com/video/playl...115/index.html
and you were trying to say?
I'm enjoying rich HTML5 content on my iPad from the NY Times website - exactly as I stated. Nice attempt at deflection, though.
Especially now that Android 2.2 has been shown to run it just fine?
Right, which is why it crashes on Android 2.2...not just fine. Also, if you noticed the demo...the phone was plugged in. Personally, I like the idea that the iPhone is mobile which means I can be out and about for extended times. Suspect that Android was plugged in so the demo didn't show the battery drain. If they didn't have anything to hide, they would have shown it mobile like a phone should be.
Perhaps that's what Adobe is considering getting into...the huge battery pak business. By a huge battery pak to keep Flash operating while you take your cell phone mobile. Would love to see that media campaign.
Really ? Which one's- Virgin airlines?
Hulu hasn't , NY Times hasn't, porn most definitely hasn't .
You really are clueless aren't you.
Awesome! Does that mean we're gonna get a desktop flash browser that doesn't crash every 3rd page I look at, or cook my genitals when I'm watching video?
That's the biggest feature missing from the iPad in my opinion.. I was watching a video on it the other morning and it was a bit chilly. I thought to myself "If only this thing would get hot enough to burn my genitalia, then it would be truly magical".
NY TImes still uses Flash on the web:
http://video.nytimes.com/video/playl...115/index.html
and you were trying to say?
NY Times also does video without Flash on the web:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/29/i...ideo-ipad-app/
and you were trying to say?
You got to love wars between companies
Well... shit, oh dear!
The Bickersons!
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/the...-2/id264482800
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bickersons
.
Exactly... and its called HTML5.
There is nothing critical to the web experience done by Flash that can't now be done with standards-based methods.
I am not yet sure about html5 to the things I do in flash. I'm definately fine for it playing the videos.
Postulant- dude I have no idea what you're talking about.
So are you saying that Apple supports Flash for the web now and just not for mobile devices?
So, you will have an idea what they are talking about. Big big hint: The link.
Many of us sometimes fall victim to such human frailty, myself included.
To others who are familiar with the technology: Has the New York Times completely forsaken Flash, or it just offers alternatives? As such, if it detects say an iPad, it will automatically play the non-Flash version.
I tried it again on Tuesday, because I am having issues with the NY Times in my old iBook (never had so much issues with it before. However, in the iPad using Safari browser (not the NYT Apps which I have not seen nor tried yet, if already available), the NY Times was very fast loading. I did not see any "blue regions" in the front page.
Really ?.., porn most definitely hasn't .
Again, if you are well read enough, there is an article that explored how the porn industry has adapted to the no-flash iPhone OS ecosystem. The porn business cannot ignore the "85 million and growing" iPhone OS ecosystem. When Apple deleted X-rated Apps, they may still be viewed in iPhone mobile devices via the internet (browser based) through non-flash alternatives.
And, if you ever visited any porn site lately, you will find that many offer alternatives video forms so that they could be viewed in multiple devices. some including the iPhone OS. As noted by others, there is a device detection now that will then automatically play the appropriate, in this case X-rated video,
CGC
"We believe open markets that allow developers, publishers, and consumers to make their own choices about how they create, distribute, and access content are essential to progress,"
It is cute how they like to claim they are "Open" -- that claim actually only regarding marketing (apparently) and having no connection to Open Standards. The Open they want is to have everyone Open to using there technology. Apple is not interested in supporting a CPU hogging technology that is not available to the public -- and I am not interested in using it.
The bottom line is they can see the possibility that large amounts of people may see the light when they look into alternatives for development and I am sure it scares the snot out of them.
I defy anyone to install a flash blocker and at the end of a week tell me their browsing experience is anything but improved. Gone are the scream jumping 'hey look at me' ads polluting every page, and gone are the hack-written sites that make you stop for 5 minutes to play their inane artistic vision with no navigational options.
I've watched Hulu all week long and haven't had a crash yet? I even love the Hulu desktop.
Tell me -am I doing something wrong?
Exactly... and its called HTML5.
There is nothing critical to the web experience done by Flash that can't now be done with standards-based methods.
Except crash your mac. The open standards can't do that. SO THERE!
However, in the iPad, the NY Times was very fast loading. I did not see any "blue regions" in the front page.
CGC
You mean like this:
interesting thing is that Shantanu has been shunted aside and the big guns, Chuck Geschke and John Warnock, have been brought out to defend Adobe.
Signs of desperation?
I'm not trying to defend Adobe here, but isn't it simply appropriate for these guys to respond to Steve Jobs? I mean, Steve Jobs is the CEO of Apple after all.
I saw your ads, it was thoughtful of you to make them non-Flash, today I used a HTC magic running Android 1.6, I went to your site and tried to download your Flash Player, it said my platform wasn't supported.
Why Adobe, WHY are you denying me my freedom to experience the vision of the Internet that you wish to share?
It is so unfair, you took away my choice.
I feel mindful to start a class action on behalf of all unsupported device owners (except for Apple one's).
Yours sincerely
A happy iPhone owner.
I've watched Hulu all week long and haven't had a crash yet? I even love the Hulu desktop.
Tell me -am I doing something wrong?
did you watch it on a mobile device? We are talking the future of flash ... not flash today. We get it that flash is the 800 lb gorilla on desktop non-touch machines.
A happy iPhone owner.
Apple has sold 85 million iPhones and Touches to people who knew in advance those devices didn't support flash. I think the people have spoken emphatically how they feel about flash and its relevancy. We can tally up the iPad sales at the end of the year.