Adobe ships Flash 10.1 to mobile device makers

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 148
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    I have never seen a group of people so happy to NOT have something. At least a choice for something.



    I don't know how important Flash will be on mobiles but on desktops, it's big. I don't know what everyone else is doing with the Net for business but I've seen numerous industries, consulting services, engineering, education, internal use, media industry, geospatial applications, government, etc. etc. that absolutely rely on Flash to deploy applications over the Net. Flash is not going away any time soon. It may actually start to be bad for Apple if they don't let Adobe create Flash for iPhone. They should have it as a downloadable options perhaps while it gets tuned up, and not on it by default. That way people who don't want it, don't have it. I don't understand why people hate Flash. How else do people propose deploying interactive maps, video with ads (those are needed to pay for TV) like Hulu, and interactive websites? Although Adobe certainly has to get get serious about Flash player on Macs. It does suck on Macs. Perhaps Steve should let them experiment with it on iPhone and it can be approved by Apple when it is up to Apple's performance standards.
  • Reply 62 of 148
    balsakbalsak Posts: 17member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    Can you explain what you mean? HTML5 is rendered directly in the browser, browser can make use of machine resources.?



    HTML 5 is whats called an interpreted computer language. HTML is received as code and must be read like a script while running. Flash on the other hand is a compiled computer language. A compiled computer language is in machine code, ready to be executed by the machine.



    Compiled languages require the code to be recompiled each time to edit it but are faster, smaller, and in the case of Flash is more consistent across browsers. While HTML can be "half correct" and displays differently depending on what browser you use.



    Flash player is a program and has the same access to the hardware that the browser does. An exception would be OS X where Apple has tighter controls over what 3D and 2D hardware acceleration programs can use, resulting in flash having less tools than Safari which has full access to hardware acceleration. But other wise both the browser and the flash player has access to hardware acceleration if it exist.



    Because flash is compiled, in rich content like apps and games, flash will always be more efficient than HTML 5. Flash also offers more functionality of HTML and is more consistent across different browsers and platforms. HTML 5 is simply an upgrade to current HTML and does not compete with flash. In fact many of Apple's HTML 5 demo's do not demonstrate HTML 5 but CSS and JavaScript which are both interpreted also.



    There is no Open Source competitor to flash.



    Apple could (if they wanted) open up the iphone for Adobe to make a highly efficient version of flash for the iPhone. They chose not too but can still change their mind. Apple always has tighter control over what software developers can do on their platform. Without Apple opening up their device to Adobe theres no way Adobe could of ever made an efficient flash player. However Jobs could simply come out and say "though we still support open standards some us unfortunately need flash" and release an Apple flash, and give benchmarks that show its faster. Adobe's flash on android can be efficient because they have all access to the open source software.



    Its not like you can't support HTML5 and open standards and support flash, Google does. If iAd is successful its not like lost App Store revenue would matter.
  • Reply 63 of 148
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post


    I have never seen a group of people so happy to NOT have something. At least a choice for something.



    I don't know how important Flash will be on mobiles but on desktops, it's big. I don't know what everyone else is doing with the Net for business but I've seen numerous industries, consulting services, engineering, education, internal use, media industry, geospatial applications, government, etc. etc. that absolutely rely on Flash to deploy applications over the Net. Flash is not going away any time soon. It may actually start to be bad for Apple if they don't let Adobe create Flash for iPhone. They should have it as a downloadable options perhaps while it gets tuned up, and not on it by default. That way people who don't want it, don't have it. I don't understand why people hate Flash. How else do people propose deploying interactive maps, video with ads (those are needed to pay for TV) like Hulu, and interactive websites? Although Adobe certainly has to get get serious about Flash player on Macs. It does suck on Macs. Perhaps Steve should let them experiment with it on iPhone and it can be approved by Apple when it is up to Apple's performance standards.



    And yeah we get that a lot of coincidentally important stuff is run thru Flash - mostly because it was cheaper and easier than coding it from the ground up. But its the content delivered that is the critical part, not the delivery mechanism.



    Adobe failed to deliver to Apple and then went into panic mode when SJ called them on it. What you see when you see them calling for "choice" is actually them calling for monetization of a tool they tried to kill following their acquisition of Macromedia. But - it turned out, a lot of people were using it, so they ended up supporting it - with less staffing than any other toolset they produce. So now as they realize that Apple is sitting on a huge pile of money in the mobile space they are whining for their share. Period. This isn't ideological, it isn't even philosophical, its ALL ABOUT THE MONEY! It's what Adobe wants, its what Google wants and lookie there Apple has built a successful ecosystem that is highly monetized and hugely profitable. But Adobe pissed around on solving the runtime issues for Flash (finally devoting enough staff and resources to produce Flash 10) for the Mac platform - demonstrating conclusively to Apple that they couldn't prioritize their way out of a wet paper sack. So who the heck would want as much content as Flash delivers dependent on a poorly managed company like Adobe?

  • Reply 64 of 148
    masternavmasternav Posts: 442member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    HTML 5 is whats called an interpreted computer language. HTML is received as code and must be read like a script while running. Flash on the other hand is a compiled computer language. A compiled computer language is in machine code, ready to be executed by the machine.



    Compiled languages require the code to be recompiled each time to edit it but are faster, smaller, and in the case of Flash is more consistent across browsers. While HTML can be "half correct" and displays differently depending on what browser you use.



    Flash player is a program and has the same access to the hardware that the browser does. An exception would be OS X where Apple has tighter controls over what 3D and 2D hardware acceleration programs can use, resulting in flash having less tools than Safari which has full access to hardware acceleration. But other wise both the browser and the flash player has access to hardware acceleration if it exist.



    Because flash is compiled, in rich content like apps and games, flash will always be more efficient than HTML 5. Flash also offers more functionality of HTML and is more consistent across different browsers and platforms. HTML 5 is simply an upgrade to current HTML and does not compete with flash. In fact many of Apple's HTML 5 demo's do not demonstrate HTML 5 but CSS and JavaScript which are both interpreted also.



    There is no Open Source competitor to flash.



    Apple could (if they wanted) open up the iphone for Adobe to make a highly efficient version of flash for the iPhone. They chose not too but can still change their mind. Apple always has tighter control over what software developers can do on their platform. Without Apple opening up their device to Adobe theres no way Adobe could of ever made an efficient flash player. However Jobs could simply come out and say "though we still support open standards some us unfortunately need flash" and release an Apple flash, and give benchmarks that show its faster. Adobe's flash on android can be efficient because they have all access to the open source software.



    Its not like you can't support HTML5 and open standards and support flash, Google does. If iAd is successful its not like lost App Store revenue would matter.



    That is such crap Balsak. Adobe sat on their thumbs for YEARS with minimal staffing AND assistance from Apple, making lame excuses for why they needed access to the calls they wanted. They didn't want to do it any other way because it worked just fine in Windows that way. Adobe can't innovate, and they are running scared because Apple is suddenly in the superior position and they were caught sleeping while mobile devices became popular. The best they could do was the lame and crippled Flash Lite for feature phones. Hello - they realized that they had a tool they could leverage millions out of, but for the fact that they weren't throwing any money or staffing at it. Perhaps Apple is working on a better solution. Perhaps they are using the rhetoric to light a fire under Adobe to see if they can produce. I personally don't think that Adobe management has the fortitude to really bring forward Flash to be a truly mobile platform utility and delivery mechanism. But I am willing to be proven wrong. All I have to do is wait and see how this all shakes out.

  • Reply 65 of 148
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    HTML 5 is whats called an interpreted computer language. HTML is received as code and must be read like a script while running. Flash on the other hand is a compiled computer language. A compiled computer language is in machine code, ready to be executed by the machine.



    Compiled languages require the code to be recompiled each time to edit it but are faster, smaller, and in the case of Flash is more consistent across browsers. While HTML can be "half correct" and displays differently depending on what browser you use.



    Flash player is a program and has the same access to the hardware that the browser does. An exception would be OS X where Apple has tighter controls over what 3D and 2D hardware acceleration programs can use, resulting in flash having less tools than Safari which has full access to hardware acceleration. But other wise both the browser and the flash player has access to hardware acceleration if it exist.



    Because flash is compiled, in rich content like apps and games, flash will always be more efficient than HTML 5.



    Then maybe you can explain why my system goes to 120% CPU usage when accessing a Flash site, but not any html sites. The facts don't fit your theory - I'll stick with the facts.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post


    I have never seen a group of people so happy to NOT have something. At least a choice for something.



    That ought to tell you just how bad Flash is.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    So far no review of Flash running on any Android phones have reported consistent performance that was that good.



    Can you explain what you mean? HTML5 is rendered directly in the browser, browsers can make use of machine resources.



    Steve Jobs has said a couple of times that he asked Adobe to give Apple something that works well and they never have.



    If it works perfectly fine. Why is it only on one phone of one operating system?



    It doesn't work perfectly fine. On Macs, it stinks. On Linux, it stinks. On Windows, it's marginally acceptable. On mobile devices, it's essentially non-existent.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    Apple has "limited resources" ?? This is same company that said they have $40 billion they could liquidate in a day!! Plus they have $20-$30 billion in pure cash on hand! "Limited Resources"?? HA



    Either Apple's resources are limited or they're unlimited. Are you arguing that their resources are unlimited? That would be foolish.



    While Apple does have very extensive resources, much of their success in recent years has been due to the efficiency of their R&D effort - and their acting like resources are miniscule. Jobs is sending a message internally as well as externally - Apple succeeds by getting maximum return from minimum R&D effort.



    Not to mention, of course, that it's not Apple's job to fix Adobe's crappy code. I doubt if Adobe would let them even if they asked.
  • Reply 66 of 148
    maximaramaximara Posts: 409member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    HTML 5 is whats called an interpreted computer language. HTML is received as code and must be read like a script while running. Flash on the other hand is a compiled computer language. A compiled computer language is in machine code, ready to be executed by the machine.



    Compiled languages require the code to be recompiled each time to edit it but are faster, smaller, and in the case of Flash is more consistent across browsers. While HTML can be "half correct" and displays differently depending on what browser you use.



    This is mainly because people do not understand HTML was never intended as a WYSIWYG format and yet for some insane insipid dumber than a hunk of concrete they treat it as such. It certainly didn't help that lazy HTML writer exploited bugs in browsers and then cry rivers of tears when the next update broke their website 24 ways to next Sunday.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    Because flash is compiled, in rich content like apps and games, flash will always be more efficient than HTML 5.



    Snort giggle, cackle, ROFLOL. Ok, I am... snort giggle, cackle, ROFLOL. Excuse me but I... BAHAHAHAHA. This guy is totally clueless.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    There is no Open Source competitor to flash.



    Ajax Animator, UIRA, SWF files created via swfmill, SWFTools, MTASC, and Ming library (C, PHP, C++, Perl, Python, and Ruby. haXe) come to mind. Just what rock has this guy been under?
  • Reply 67 of 148
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CIM View Post


    Too late, Adobe! Flash on mobile devices is unneeded and unwanted. Most sites have switched to HTML5. Games are freely available in app stores.



    Remind me why Flash is necessary? Anyone?



    Banner Ads... Oh, wait...
  • Reply 68 of 148
    povilaspovilas Posts: 473member
    OMG! Full web experience in your pocket
  • Reply 69 of 148
    jetzjetz Posts: 1,293member
    I played around with it last night. When you change the browser setting for Flash to "on demand" both browser and system performance improve markedly, since it's now essentially click2flash. So the webpage lagginess is gone.



    That said, any page where you are running lots of Flash particularly video does slow everything down. Essentially some user management is called for if you are running Flash.
  • Reply 70 of 148
    groovetubegroovetube Posts: 557member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    So far no review of Flash running on any Android phones have reported consistent performance that was that good.







    Can you explain what you mean? HTML5 is rendered directly in the browser, browsers can make use of machine resources.







    Steve Jobs has said a couple of times that he asked Adobe to give Apple something that works well and they never have.



    If it works perfectly fine. Why is it only on one phone of one operating system?



    do you think anyone would listen, or care if someone did report it ran well? It's the man bites dog vs dog bite man thing.



    I've had it run very well, not any choppier than I've seen stuff run on my iphone, and don't see the battery or performance issues a few blogs point to. I hear the same thing from the other developers I know. But, I and my peers ain't the whole world so it doesn't say much, other I think those few blogs know full well that the click throughs on their "damning reports" on flash running horribly will pay off well for them. And certainly, speaking of er, "shills", lots will promote them for free, happily.



    Truthfully, it is indeed showtime for adobe. It's time for them to move from limited tests, demonstrations etc. It's time for the users to start using it, and time will tell.
  • Reply 71 of 148
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post


    I have never seen a group of people so happy to NOT have something. At least a choice for something. ...



    Not having Flash is a lot like testing negative for an STD.
  • Reply 72 of 148
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,716member
    Premise:



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    HTML 5 is whats called an interpreted computer language. HTML is received as code and must be read like a script while running. Flash on the other hand is a compiled computer language. A compiled computer language is in machine code, ready to be executed by the machine.



    Conclusion:



    Quote:

    Because flash is compiled, in rich content like apps and games, flash will always be more efficient than HTML 5.



    If flash content were compiled to machine code a) why would you need a player, and b) it wouldn't run on multiple platforms. (OK, he could almost be right if we take (b) as a defining test.)



    Your premise is false, your conclusion incorrect as well as unsupported, and you really shouldn't be writing about stuff you have no clue about. You aren't doing yourself or Flash any favors.
  • Reply 73 of 148
    groovetubegroovetube Posts: 557member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Premise:



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    HTML 5 is whats called an interpreted computer language. HTML is received as code and must be read like a script while running. Flash on the other hand is a compiled computer language. A compiled computer language is in machine code, ready to be executed by the machine.



    Conclusion:







    If flash content were compiled to machine code a) why would you need a player, and b) it wouldn't run on multiple platforms. (OK, he could almost be right if we take (b) as a defining test.)



    Your premise is false, your conclusion incorrect as well as unsupported, and you really shouldn't be writing about stuff you have no clue about. You aren't doing yourself or Flash any favors.



    speaking of people who write stuff about what they don't know anything about.



    Go do some research about flash and machine code.



    Now, I'm not wading into the html5/CSS3/javascript vs flash performance debate, but this whole looky I'm smart on a forum cause a read blog nonsense is just tiring.
  • Reply 74 of 148
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    I was very impressed. When I got flash about a month ago it completely changed the way I use my mobile device, it becomes closer to being a substation for a full blown computer every month. I think Apple is secretly refining it, and going to release is as a big feature of iOS 4.1 with really cool add features, that would be very Apple-like.



    Steve has poisoned the well. No Flash for us! Ever!
  • Reply 75 of 148
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post


    do you think anyone would listen, or care if someone did report it ran well? ...



    No, we wouldn't, because Flash is outdated technology that is holding back progress. It needs to die so the web can progress.



    This is a pattern repeated over and over again with technologies, just like fossil fuel technology needs to die so that energy technology can progress. Resistance to change isn't anything new, and changes can be uncomfortable, even painful, but they have to be put to rest so we can advance to something better.
  • Reply 76 of 148
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post


    speaking of people who write stuff about what they don't know anything about.



    Go do some research about flash and machine code.



    So you're claiming that Flash files are machine code?
  • Reply 77 of 148
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Balsak View Post


    have you had the chance to test it out yet?



    Most people here are content to believe it does not work. It cannot possibly be any good.



    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes
  • Reply 78 of 148
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CIM View Post




    Remind me why Flash is necessary? Anyone?



    To see the embedded videos in Google News. I wouldn't want to give that up.



    Not to mention all the other compelling video content that has not yet been (and never will be) converted.
  • Reply 79 of 148
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrtotes View Post


    Funny. I suspect the world would still be waiting for mobile Flash if SJ hadn't made such a public deal of it not being released.








    Wow. So the vast majority of smartphone users will be happy that the Apple minority was screaming about how sour the grapes were!



    Ironic, ain't it?
  • Reply 80 of 148
    groovetubegroovetube Posts: 557member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    No, we wouldn't, because Flash is outdated technology that is holding back progress. It needs to die so the web can progress.



    This is a pattern repeated over and over again with technologies, just like fossil fuel technology needs to die so that energy technology can progress. Resistance to change isn't anything new, and changes can be uncomfortable, even painful, but they have to be put to rest so we can advance to something better.



    Why because Steve told you so? Suggesting flash is holding back the internet is just moronic. Sorry. Technologies that remain relevant to developers and end users will continue. If they don't, they will fail without the help of a handful of forum know-it-alls and bloggers.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    So you're claiming that Flash files are machine code?



    I don't need to -claim- anything. Go do some research on the compiler. If you're going to jump all over someone, at least know what you're talking about k?
Sign In or Register to comment.