PDA

View Full Version : Flash Plug-in For iPhone Coming Soon?




MacRumors
Jul 5, 2007, 09:51 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Walt Mossberg answers (http://mailbox.allthingsd.com/20070705/questions-about-apples-iphone/) a number of common iPhone questions but also suggests that a Flash plug-in will be coming soon from Apple.

At launch, the iPhone version of the Safari browser is missing some plug-ins needed for playing common types of Web videos. The most important of these is the plug-in for Adobe’s Flash technology. Apple says it plans to add that plug-in through an early software update, which I am guessing will occur within the next couple of months.

Adobe's Flash plug-in is required to play Flash content which is commonly used in certain aspects of web design and web-hosted videos. Apple managed to get around this requirement with Youtube by converting Youtube content into h.264, which the iPhone supports natively.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/05/flash-plug-in-for-iphone-coming-soon/)



Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 09:53 AM
This would be awesome, now i cna actually watch my espn movies and such. Now if they could add a windows media player add on, that would be truly amazing because i cant listen to internet radio...

mrkramer
Jul 5, 2007, 09:55 AM
That would be great, I hope that they can do it without majorly affecting the battery life.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 09:58 AM
That would be great, I hope that they can do it without majorly affecting the battery life.

oh yea, i never even thought of that.. lol

dr_lha
Jul 5, 2007, 10:02 AM
That would be great, I hope that they can do it without majorly affecting the battery life.
Unless Apple themselves are working on a super optimised version of Flash for the iPhone I doubt it. Full Flash is pretty bad at eating CPU cycles, especially if your CPU is <1Ghz.

Fwink!
Jul 5, 2007, 10:02 AM
Wait, so it was a better plan to get YouTube to re-encode it's whole library, than for Apple to get a flash plug-in working in the first place?

I will venture a guess that this is mostly to enable small beans developers to get into the game. Flash is a lot easier to work with than WEB 2.0. Especially for simple games and such.

Rojo
Jul 5, 2007, 10:03 AM
While cool, it seems odd they would suddenly do this. Apple seemed adamant that Flash was a drain on battery life, and they went out of their way to get YouTube to recode all their videos to not be Flash.

So why suddenly add Flash now? Why not have it there all along?
Something doesn't seem right with this rumor -- unless they're just caving in to all the complaints of the iPhone not supporting Flash. But Apple doesn't seem like the kind of company to cave in...

slffl
Jul 5, 2007, 10:04 AM
Apple wasn't trying to 'get around' having a flash plugin. It's the fact that h.264 looks A LOT better than flash video!

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 10:06 AM
While cool, it seems odd they would suddenly do this. Apple seemed adamant that Flash was a drain on battery life, and they went out of their way to get YouTube to recode all their videos to not be Flash.

So why suddenly add Flash now? Why not have it there all along?
Something doesn't seem right with this rumor -- unless they're just caving in to all the complaints of the iPhone not supporting Flash. But Apple doesn't seem like the kind of company to cave in...

i agree, normally they cave in to nothing, but i think they make a special exemption because people complain too much...

HOWEVER LOOK AT MY APPL STOCK SHOOT THROUGH THE ROOF!!!

I love :apple:

ciaw525
Jul 5, 2007, 10:07 AM
Getting YouTube to convert to H.264 was more about the video quality on :apple:TV.

joelk
Jul 5, 2007, 10:07 AM
While cool, it seems odd they would suddenly do this. Apple seemed adamant that Flash was a drain on battery life, and they went out of their way to get YouTube to recode all their videos to not be Flash.

So why suddenly add Flash now? Why not have it there all along?
Something doesn't seem right with this rumor -- unless they're just caving in to all the complaints of the iPhone not supporting Flash. But Apple doesn't seem like the kind of company to cave in...

or perhaps a revamped leaner flash wasn't ready for production at the time

crees!
Jul 5, 2007, 10:11 AM
Wait, so it was a better plan to get YouTube to re-encode it's whole library, than for Apple to get a flash plug-in working in the first place?

I will venture a guess that this is mostly to enable small beans developers to get into the game. Flash is a lot easier to work with than WEB 2.0. Especially for simple games and such.

Flash uses software/cpu to run. h.264 is hardware-based and consumes less power.

Apple wasn't trying to 'get around' having a flash plugin. It's the fact that h.264 looks A LOT better than flash video!

For video, yes, but for interaction and programming, no.

Fwink!
Jul 5, 2007, 10:13 AM
Flash uses software/cpu to run. h.264 is hardware-based and consumes less power.

Well, I still think this is about 2 issues.
1. Ad's not rendering on web pages.
2. Games

And not so much about video, we all know h.264 is high Q.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 10:13 AM
Flash uses software/cpu to run. h.264 is hardware-based and consumes less power.

do you know of a less powe consuming version of flash?

dicklacara
Jul 5, 2007, 10:14 AM
I hope that Apple and Adobe work together to implement an efficient Safari/Flash plugin tailored to the iPhone... it would be to the advantage of both...

I did some measurements, a while back, and the Flash plugin for Safari sucked from a performance standpoint-- often using over 10% CPU while doing nothing, and in the 60% CPU range doing simple tasks (on an iMac G5 2.1 GHz).

It was so bad that I suggested that they (then MacroMedia) change their Flash promotional from "Rich and Reach" to "Rich, Reach and Retch":)

michelle21
Jul 5, 2007, 10:14 AM
yes this is what I suspected, if you read the flash player licensing agreement there is specific language on what platforms require additional licensing.

When I saw the safari limitation I suspected Apple was negotiating with adobe but would not have it in time for the release.

Here's some other stuff I would not be surprised/hoping to see..

rstp streaming

native itunes client

Bonjour support

Digitalclips
Jul 5, 2007, 10:14 AM
Wait, so it was a better plan to get YouTube to re-encode it's whole library, than for Apple to get a flash plug-in working in the first place?


I guess the answer is, um ... er ... YES! I think Apple know exactly what they are doing every step of the way.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 10:15 AM
Well, I still think this is about 2 issues.
1. Ad's not rendering on web pages.
2. Games

And not so much about video, we all know h.264 is high Q.

hey dont forget popups... those popups are mostly flash/java based.. :mad:

Peace
Jul 5, 2007, 10:17 AM
do you know of a less powe consuming version of flash?

Yes.The version coming out in a couple of weeks.;)

NightStorm
Jul 5, 2007, 10:19 AM
A lot of people aren't realizing that it isn't as simple as using the existing Safari Flash plug-in; the iPhone uses an ARM CPU that would require Adobe to port their code to run properly, and Apple ensuring that it does so with as little impact on battery life as possible.

It'll happen eventually, I'm pretty sure of that, but it isn't something that can happen overnight.

iStrat
Jul 5, 2007, 10:20 AM
The quote says they are expecting it in an early update within the next couple of months. I wouldn't get too excited just yet. It might be a long way off. At least that gives them plenty of time to perfect the implementation.

SirOmega
Jul 5, 2007, 10:23 AM
Yea, I'm not entirely sure I want a flash plugin.

I've seen newegg banner ads that suck up 100% of my CPU because they're flash and done poorly. Why bother run my battery down because some jerk cant use flash.

iSee
Jul 5, 2007, 10:24 AM
While cool, it seems odd they would suddenly do this. Apple seemed adamant that Flash was a drain on battery life, and they went out of their way to get YouTube to recode all their videos to not be Flash.

So why suddenly add Flash now? Why not have it there all along?
Something doesn't seem right with this rumor -- unless they're just caving in to all the complaints of the iPhone not supporting Flash. But Apple doesn't seem like the kind of company to cave in...

I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.

Hattig
Jul 5, 2007, 10:28 AM
Flash will come, but it won't have Flash video support.

The CPU in the iPhone simply isn't powerful enough to decode it on its own ... although it does have a vector floating point unit that might help. The iPhone is optimised for decoding H.264 without eating battery too quickly, and flash video simply wouldn't be able to do that. Maybe if the decoder was rewritten specifically for the hardware in the iPhone...

The flash plugin will do all of the classic flash stuff though - the games, adverts, etc.

iSee
Jul 5, 2007, 10:29 AM
Yea, I'm not entirely sure I want a flash plugin.

I've seen newegg banner ads that suck up 100% of my CPU because they're flash and done poorly. Why bother run my battery down because some jerk cant use flash.

Yeah, Ideally, the player would not be active on a page until you the user taps the flash movies area. And perhaps it could stop when you tap elsewhere or maybe it's paused even if its just scrolled off screen.

sjo
Jul 5, 2007, 10:30 AM
The quote says they are expecting it in an early update within the next couple of months. I wouldn't get too excited just yet. It might be a long way off. At least that gives them plenty to perfect the implementation.

I just hope that they concentrate on getting Leopard out of the door before moving on to develop the next version of iphone osx... It seems like there is a lot to do in squashing the bugs in the beta, I'd hate to see another delay on Leopard because of iphone.

dicklacara
Jul 5, 2007, 10:32 AM
I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.

In my 29 years of dealing with Apple, the above is pretty much the way they negotiate-- from a position of strength.

If Adobe caved, then the tipping point was the alacrity with which YouTube agreed to convert to h246.

KingofAwesome
Jul 5, 2007, 10:33 AM
I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.

Sounds about right... plus, adding a new feature like flash will be a powerful tool to regenerate iPhone hype after the initial hype starts to die down.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 10:38 AM
I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.

this is hilarious i bet they(adobe) are feeling really stupid for not giving it to them for free...

Porchland
Jul 5, 2007, 10:39 AM
Here's some other stuff I would not be surprised/hoping to see..

rstp streaming

native itunes client

Bonjour support

I would really, REALLY like to see an iPod/iPhone version of iTunes that would allow you to buy tracks over WiFi and sync your other iTunes database remotely. In other words, if I download the new Ryan Adams album from an iPhone or WiFi iPod, my iTunes at home should automatically download it on the next launch.

I absolutely love the way Exchange keeps my email synced from Treo to Outlook to OWA, and I could see a lot of interest in having iTunes run the same way.

dashiel
Jul 5, 2007, 10:41 AM
While cool, it seems odd they would suddenly do this. Apple seemed adamant that Flash was a drain on battery life, and they went out of their way to get YouTube to recode all their videos to not be Flash.

So why suddenly add Flash now? Why not have it there all along?
Something doesn't seem right with this rumor -- unless they're just caving in to all the complaints of the iPhone not supporting Flash. But Apple doesn't seem like the kind of company to cave in...

apple was not adamant about no flash. the company line has always been "we're not sure"

specifically here's a direct quote from jobs immediately following the keynote in january:

Markoff: “And what are you thinking about Flash and Java?”

Jobs: “Java’s not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. It’s this big heavyweight ball and chain.”

Markoff: “Flash?”

Jobs: “Well, you might see that.”


http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/ultimate-iphone-faqs-list-part-2/


there are two obvious reasons for no flash from the beginning:

1) it was a third party app that has its own APIs and interaction methods. apple was eliminating all the "unknowns" for launch. safari, pdf*, quicklook, etc... are all internally controlled

2) because flash has a unique interaction layer, getting it to work properly with the iphone's multitouch display will prove tricky. for example there are no mouseover/mouseout events supported in flash, and i'd say 95% of sites that use flash rely on mouseover/mouseout events.


*pdf is an open standard and apple wrote their own pdf viewer.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 10:42 AM
I would really, REALLY like to see an iPod/iPhone version of iTunes that would allow you to buy tracks over WiFi and sync your other iTunes database remotely. In other words, if I download the new Ryan Adams album from an iPhone or WiFi iPod, my iTunes at home should automatically download it on the next launch.

I absolutely love the way Exchange keeps my email synced from Treo to Outlook to OWA, and I could see a lot of interest in having iTunes run the same way.

unless they are able to make the iphone data transfer over to the computer, which currently on my macbook, i cant, then it aint happenin. Plus, the wireless system could kill your battery life.

w00master
Jul 5, 2007, 10:43 AM
Well, I still think this is about 2 issues.
1. Ad's not rendering on web pages.
2. Games

And not so much about video, we all know h.264 is high Q.

3. Basic navigation on flash based sites
4. Flash video


Again, without flash a browser isn't a complete browser. Complain all you want about how this is supposedly "not true." Sorry, it is. 98% of *all* users have the flash plugin, and *no* "real" browser would be complete without it. Until flash support comes, the iPhone does *not* display "the real internet" it's still a "kinda-sorta internet."

Before you claim otherwise, think again: Imagine if safari for Macs and Windows did *not* have flash support. Imagine if IE did *not* have flash support. Imagine if Firefox did *not* have flash support. Would you call *any of those browsers* "real browsers? Nope.

w00master

yoman
Jul 5, 2007, 10:46 AM
Hopefully there will be an option to turn it off. I mostly see flash as a nuisance than a feature.

fishkorp
Jul 5, 2007, 10:50 AM
3. Basic navigation on flash based sites
4. Flash video


Again, without flash a browser isn't a complete browser. Complain all you want about how this is supposedly "not true." Sorry, it is. 98% of *all* users have the flash plugin, and *no* "real" browser would be complete without it. Until flash support comes, the iPhone does *not* display "the real internet" it's still a "kinda-sorta internet."

Before you claim otherwise, think again: Imagine if safari for Macs and Windows did *not* have flash support. Imagine if IE did *not* have flash support. Imagine if Firefox did *not* have flash support. Would you call *any of those browsers* "real browsers? Nope.

w00master

i call it a real browser. i block all flash in firefox and don't notice a difference on a single site i go to.

yzp
Jul 5, 2007, 10:58 AM
flash, okay, but when does 3G will be announced???

hottyson
Jul 5, 2007, 10:59 AM
So these could be some of the reasons flash was not included but will be.

Better battery life and specs for launch.
Adobe wanting steep licensing money.
Less hacks at launch.
Competing products can show flash based web pages.

Fotek2001
Jul 5, 2007, 10:59 AM
Seems to me they'll end up using Flash Lite as this is designed specifically for mobile devices:

http://www.adobe.com/products/flashlite/

dr_lha
Jul 5, 2007, 11:00 AM
A lot of people aren't realizing that it isn't as simple as using the existing Safari Flash plug-in;
No, I think most people fully understand this, but thanks for underestimating everyone's intelligence anyway.

bignumbers
Jul 5, 2007, 11:01 AM
Here's some other stuff I would not be surprised/hoping to see..

rstp streaming

native itunes client

Bonjour support

I'm not expecting RTSP streaming. RTSP requires a lot of back-and-forth between client and server. EDGE (and even 3G) has too long a latency. Possible over WiFi, but I don't see them introducing a feature that would work over WiFi but not over EDGE. I wasn't happy when I learned it was gone (I develop sites that include a lot of RTSP streaming), but once I thought about it, it makes sense that it's gone.

On the iPhone you can jump around quicktime movies anyway, which solves one of the downsides of not having RTSP support. I'll be happy when that feature comes to the Mac...

I'd love native Bonjour, for iChat, printing (nobody's even discussed printing), and who knows what else. Wouldn't it be cool to have skype-like capabilities over WiFi within an office?

Not sure about native iTunes. I do think they'll add the capability to buy songs online.

KingofAwesome
Jul 5, 2007, 11:07 AM
i call it a real browser. i block all flash in firefox and don't notice a difference on a single site i go to.

Sure, from an academic standpoint, it's still a real browser. But you don't notice a single difference with flash blocked? Come on, if you want to give your point of view, let's discard the exaggerations. If you really don't see a difference, then you aren't viewing many sites that are popular among the general population (that means I'm not counting digg, slashdot, etc.). Otherwise, you're ignoring the differences. A grey box with a "missing plugin" icon looks far different than the flash content intended for that space.

Regardless, the average user doesn't care about the academic distinction between the web browser and the plugins - they're two parts of a whole package that most users don't care to separate, and if you were a business that relied on its users noticing and caring about that distinction, you'd soon be out of business.

Sai Zelion
Jul 5, 2007, 11:10 AM
While cool, it seems odd they would suddenly do this. Apple seemed adamant that Flash was a drain on battery life, and they went out of their way to get YouTube to recode all their videos to not be Flash.

So why suddenly add Flash now? Why not have it there all along?
Something doesn't seem right with this rumor -- unless they're just caving in to all the complaints of the iPhone not supporting Flash. But Apple doesn't seem like the kind of company to cave in...

Rojo, Apple is by no means caving in. There's no logical way in hell that they would not support Flash. It could be that they are working with Adobe to develop some an optimized version that will suite iphone's needs. Just as many have mentioned here, Flash can be intensive on CPU resources and battery life. Through research and development, Apple already knows that 96% of all computers online can view flash content, which means there's no way they can ignoring implementing this sort of feature for the iPhone.

We have a lot to be excited about and to look forward to, think about it; For the first time in history there's been a mobile device released by a company who cares about its product and is in complete control of it's OS. We all can look forward to some killer apps and updates from Apple!
________________________________________________
iPhone, iGotOne, iDidNotWaitInLine! HA HA!

lou2000
Jul 5, 2007, 11:10 AM
[QUOTE=iSee;3876612]I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

I think that's exactly right. Also I heard thru the grapevine that Apple was all ready pissed at Adobe for something and broke off negotiations for the iphone flash plug in.

Has anyone got any idea about java support?

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 11:11 AM
Hopefully there will be an option to turn it off. I mostly see flash as a nuisance than a feature.

its a nuisance, but sometimes it can be very critical, like reviewing my espn videos and such...

neven
Jul 5, 2007, 11:14 AM
If you really don't see a difference, then you aren't viewing many sites that are popular among the general population (that means I'm not counting digg, slashdot, etc.).

I understand that Flash is big on the web, but I'd like to hear some examples of major websites whose core functionality depends on Flash. I'm a user of above-average technical knowledge and I haven't run into a website yet on my iPhone where the lack of Flash was a problem. I'm not saying they're not out there, I'm just asking for some examples.

neven
Jul 5, 2007, 11:15 AM
Has anyone got any idea about java support?

I'm betting $100 that Java never, ever makes it to iPhone. It's a dead-and-buried technology as far as Steve is concerned.

tj8212
Jul 5, 2007, 11:18 AM
If you want to be using third party apps on the iPhone, you should be rejoicing with this news. As a Flash Developer i can tell you that Flash developers will create the most amazing web apps for your iPhone that will not only match but sometimes exceed the ui experience you see now on the iPHone

lazyrighteye
Jul 5, 2007, 11:25 AM
I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.

Hehe.

KingofAwesome
Jul 5, 2007, 11:27 AM
I understand that Flash is big on the web, but I'd like to hear some examples of major websites whose core functionality depends on Flash. I'm a user of above-average technical knowledge and I haven't run into a website yet on my iPhone where the lack of Flash was a problem. I'm not saying they're not out there, I'm just asking for some examples.

I'm not saying major functionality, but I am saying that it is ridiculously unlikely that any user wouldn't notice a difference between using a browser with flash and using one without it.

However, the Volkswagen site (http://www.vw.com) seems to be entirely flash-based. It's not a major website necessarily, but it's a very well-known brand and tends to have that same cultish appearance that Apple has (to outsiders).

RodThePlod
Jul 5, 2007, 11:33 AM
I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

I think that's exactly right. Also I heard thru the grapevine that Apple was all ready pissed at Adobe for something and broke off negotiations for the iphone flash plug in.

Hmmm... that's a very interesting angle to look at it.

It's also very "Steve-Jobsian"...

:)

Rod.

djmyogi
Jul 5, 2007, 11:36 AM
A friend of mine works in the FLASH unit of Adobe and has since it was Macromedia. He told me the other night (while playing with my new iPhone) that Apple is putting a lot pressure on Adobe to build a flash plug-in for the iPhone and that Adobe should have something out soon.

Evidently Apple would not give Adobe an early release of the iPhone to get a jump start on it, but he said their lab was getting one this week after the 4th holiday.

cliffjumper68
Jul 5, 2007, 11:36 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Walt Mossberg answers (http://mailbox.allthingsd.com/20070705/questions-about-apples-iphone/) a number of common iPhone questions but also suggests that a Flash plug-in will be coming soon from Apple.



Adobe's Flash plug-in is required to play Flash content which is commonly used in certain aspects of web design and web-hosted videos. Apple managed to get around this requirement with Youtube by converting Youtube content into h.264, which the iPhone supports natively.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/05/flash-plug-in-for-iphone-coming-soon/)
I think the edge network is much more of a concern with flash than the iphone's hardware. The transfer speeed is so slow that it would take forever to download a decent flash stream.

izzle22
Jul 5, 2007, 11:37 AM
I understand that Flash is big on the web, but I'd like to hear some examples of major websites whose core functionality depends on Flash. I'm a user of above-average technical knowledge and I haven't run into a website yet on my iPhone where the lack of Flash was a problem. I'm not saying they're not out there, I'm just asking for some examples.

Weather.com. You can't view the map in motion screen without Flash. I use this feature all the time at home and would come in very handy on my iPhone.

twoodcc
Jul 5, 2007, 11:38 AM
good news. i'm sure we'll see a lot of updates to the iPhone this year

xelphy
Jul 5, 2007, 11:45 AM
I hope they release a software upgrade soon because my iPhone has crashed a number of times. I'm happy to hear about these important software additions, and can list about 100 I'd like to see -- starting w/VoIP -- but the software's a bit buggy. All is part of being an early adopter I suppose -- but we have to be treated right, as we're paying $100 more to be the guinea pigs for Apple

iCe Cube
Jul 5, 2007, 11:48 AM
Perhaps by releasing a flash plugin so soon after Apple release the iPhone is a marketing ploy. By missing out flash, some people started to see the value of it, and then by releasing a flash plugin NOW, people will maybe be impressed about this "new feature". Also, it would perhaps make Apple look like a company that listens to complaints and then does something about it.

Just speculation :p, who knows

w00master
Jul 5, 2007, 11:51 AM
i call it a real browser. i block all flash in firefox and don't notice a difference on a single site i go to.

Perhaps *YOUR* school of sites, and *YOUR* personal choice. But for most 98% of us, without flash it ain't the *REAL INTERNET*.

w00master

EagerDragon
Jul 5, 2007, 11:52 AM
This sounds like logical but pure speculation on his part.

ajhill
Jul 5, 2007, 11:55 AM
Along with Flash video support, Flash brings to the iPhone everything that is wrong with the internet. I'm so tired of going to a mainstream website only to have commercials and "flashing" ads distracting me. Not to mention things that fly across the screen for no apparent reason.

I say, keep flash off the iPHone. It's the the creepy hawkers who used to stand outside strip clubs trying to entice customers inside. Tacky and tasteless. Let's hope that it never happens.

EagerDragon
Jul 5, 2007, 11:56 AM
While cool, it seems odd they would suddenly do this. Apple seemed adamant that Flash was a drain on battery life, and they went out of their way to get YouTube to recode all their videos to not be Flash.

So why suddenly add Flash now? Why not have it there all along?
Something doesn't seem right with this rumor -- unless they're just caving in to all the complaints of the iPhone not supporting Flash. But Apple doesn't seem like the kind of company to cave in...

They maybe caving in to Universal if they don't sign the contract soon.

EagerDragon
Jul 5, 2007, 12:00 PM
I hope that Apple and Adobe work together to implement an efficient Safari/Flash plugin tailored to the iPhone... it would be to the advantage of both...

I did some measurements, a while back, and the Flash plugin for Safari sucked from a performance standpoint-- often using over 10% CPU while doing nothing, and in the 60% CPU range doing simple tasks (on an iMac G5 2.1 GHz).

It was so bad that I suggested that they (then MacroMedia) change their Flash promotional from "Rich and Reach" to "Rich, Reach and Retch":)

Im fine either way, flash is not that important to me. However flash does offer the oportunity to play Dofus on the phone and that would be a plus for me, Hehe.

dicklacara
Jul 5, 2007, 12:01 PM
unless they are able to make the iphone data transfer over to the computer, which currently on my macbook, i cant, then it aint happenin. Plus, the wireless system could kill your battery life.

Mmmm... If you take photos with the iPhone camera, the next time you plug the iPhone into your computer, the iPhone is treated like a camera by iPhoto-- you can crossload the iPhone photos to iPhoto (where, they, in turn, can be synched to the iPhone).

If Apple were to allow ITMS downloads to the iPhone, i don't think it would be too difficult to synch them with iTunes on your computer.

Personally, i would seldom download directly to the iPhone...
rather I would like to browse the ITMS from the iphone and order (songs/TV/eBooks/Movies) that get downloaded to iTunes on a computer at home. Later these could be synched to the iPhone.

In fact, it would not be too difficult to run a server from your home computer-- running an app that would let you to browse your home iTunes library and play them directly to your iPhone over WiFi.

Aside: Since I got my iPhone, I can no longer type on a regular (computer) keyboard... Anyone else notice this??

EagerDragon
Jul 5, 2007, 12:04 PM
hey dont forget popups... those popups are mostly flash/java based.. :mad:

I would lose ZERO sleep if ads and flash popups don't work on the phone. Somehow those are very low in my list.

crees!
Jul 5, 2007, 12:14 PM
do you know of a less power consuming version of flash?

I assume Flash Lite. I have not worked with it myself, but I'm sure there are initial reason why Apple didn't incorporate any bit of Flash from the start.

Fwink!
Jul 5, 2007, 12:17 PM
Certainly many tech savvy people could do without Flash ads, but advertisers, Goolge, etc. Would sure appreciate it if their adds showed up. And Apple does have a strong tie to google. And ads are a source of revenue for sites.

As far as pop-ups, doesn't the iPhone version of safari block pop-ups? It's always been a set it and forget it option for me, haven't seen a pop-up in years. Can't say I've ever noticed a performance difference with Flash/Non Flash sites. It's primarily a vector format with small file sizes.

Scottgfx
Jul 5, 2007, 12:18 PM
Perhaps *YOUR* school of sites, and *YOUR* personal choice. But for most 98% of us, without flash it ain't the *REAL INTERNET*.

w00master

You claim to speak for 98% of the entire Internet? How megalomaniacal of you.

EagerDragon
Jul 5, 2007, 12:19 PM
Since I got my iPhone, I can no longer type on a regular (computer) keyboard... Anyone else notice this??

Tempting, but no, no comment, ROFLMAO.:D

dopeytree
Jul 5, 2007, 12:22 PM
Unless Apple themselves are working on a super optimised version of Flash for the iPhone I doubt it. Full Flash is pretty bad at eating CPU cycles, especially if your CPU is <1Ghz.

How does the psp do? it handles flash doesnt it?

bignumbers
Jul 5, 2007, 12:23 PM
Weather.com. You can't view the map in motion screen without Flash. I use this feature all the time at home and would come in very handy on my iPhone.

http://apple.accuweather.com/widget/iphone1/iphone.html

It's not perfect, but quite nice for something that came out within a few days of the iPhone.

cliffjumper68
Jul 5, 2007, 12:24 PM
http://apple.accuweather.com/widget/iphone1/iphone.html

It's not perfect, but quite nice for something that came out within a few days of the iPhone.

Thanks for the url.

veneficuss
Jul 5, 2007, 12:25 PM
Wait, so it was a better plan to get YouTube to re-encode it's whole library, than for Apple to get a flash plug-in working in the first place?

I will venture a guess that this is mostly to enable small beans developers to get into the game. Flash is a lot easier to work with than WEB 2.0. Especially for simple games and such.

They didnt encode their whole library. My friend asked me to pull up a youtube video that was posted months ago and the iphone could not find it using the youtube button. However, when I went to youtube.com, the video was easily found, but of course not playable.

If youtube offered a streaming download for every video like google videos does then you could watch them using the iPhone's native movie player. If you go to google video, find a video you want to watch (not many of them) and then choose download in ipod format, the video will start to play.

gifford
Jul 5, 2007, 12:25 PM
I hope Apple come out with their own 'flash killer' , like microsoft has with flashlight. Not to actually kill flash, but to provide some sort of dumbed down way of writing powerfull app's that run in a sandbox and on osx.
I know, I know, they keep harping on about Web 2, but it doesn't cut it IMO. It's a loose collection of technologies with no decent WYSIWYG timeline based way of programing them (that I'm aware of?). It just seems like a quick bridge to something they have up their sleeve which we wont see until leopard is out.
Flash has never been optimized very well for the mac, and i doubt they (Adobe) are gonna start now the iPhone is out. It's an area I feel Apple need to take control of themselves.
Xcode lite!
I dont know much about it but I'm hoping Core Animation has a role to play in this somewhere?? From what i have read it certainly sounds like it is setting the foundations for this to become reality.

EagerDragon
Jul 5, 2007, 12:31 PM
As far as I know, AJAX is here to provide for a rich client, lots of developers are looking into it. I could be wrong, but AJAX may take over some of the flash usage.

I hardly ever go to sites that use flash with my computer or phone. I would not miss it either way.

I would instead prefer they work on the big issues like:
1) Get a GPS chip in there and integrate it with the apps. Off most of the time to conserve battery.
2) Add video to the camera
3) Turn the camera around so people can do video ichat (porn industry would love this one)
4) Make more applications take advantage of the horizontal and let me use horizontal keyboard.
5) Support multiple calendars / todo lists
6) Drag and drop for images and other info from one app to another or background or implement a "send to application".
7) Bonjour support for printing and connecting to file shares.
8) Remote control to access my computers at home
9) SSH/SCP for those not supporting remote control or for something quick and dirty.

George Bailey
Jul 5, 2007, 12:34 PM
[Dramatic reenactment]


Great post! Funny and insightful.

bignumbers
Jul 5, 2007, 12:35 PM
They didnt encode their whole library. My friend asked me to pull up a youtube video that was posted months ago and the iphone could not find it using the youtube button. However, when I went to youtube.com, the video was easily found, but of course not playable.

If youtube offered a streaming download for every video like google videos does then you could watch them using the iPhone's native movie player. If you go to google video, find a video you want to watch (not many of them) and then choose download in ipod format, the video will start to play.

Apple and YouTube long-ago announced the full library conversion would be complete by this fall. This was announced in regards to the AppleTV, but has the same impact on the iPhone.

Ah, here's the PR:

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/06/20youtube.html

I think a lot of this is due to the Google buyout of YouTube. Google is rather open to multiple formats.

bignumbers
Jul 5, 2007, 12:44 PM
I hope Apple come out with their own 'flash killer' , like microsoft has with flashlight. Not to actually kill flash, but to provide some sort of dumbed down way of writing powerfull app's that run in a sandbox and on osx.

Apple could have done this, even pre-empted Flash. Quicktime has offered interactivity ("wired sprites") for eons. They never picked up on this as a tool for the internet, and never gave wired sprites very much functionality. You can jump to another URL, move around within an movie, but not much else. Quicktime even supports vector graphics although I've never seen anyone use them.

Quicktime really is an amazing format. It's too bad Apple never pushed its flexibility. Most people think of it as just a video format, but it's quite a bit more.

Scottgfx
Jul 5, 2007, 12:53 PM
Quicktime really is an amazing format. It's too bad Apple never pushed its flexibility. Most people think of it as just a video format, but it's quite a bit more.

I seem to remember Apple adding the ability to play Flash inside of Quicktime at one point. I wonder what happened to that?

slffl
Jul 5, 2007, 12:53 PM
Perhaps *YOUR* school of sites, and *YOUR* personal choice. But for most 98% of us, without flash it ain't the *REAL INTERNET*.

w00master

Where did you pull that figure from?

bignumbers
Jul 5, 2007, 12:59 PM
I seem to remember Apple adding the ability to play Flash inside of Quicktime at one point. I wonder what happened to that?

Yes - Quicktime can play Flash. But it's an old version of Flash, and as of a recent Quicktime update it's off by default. System Preferences->Quicktime->Advanced.

This was really nice if only because Mac users didn't need a separate Flash plugin, and any Quicktime-aware app could open/play a .swf file.

Much Ado
Jul 5, 2007, 01:00 PM
Where did you pull that figure from?

The answer to that question is doubtless rude and quite crude ;)

bignumbers
Jul 5, 2007, 01:06 PM
Perhaps *YOUR* school of sites, and *YOUR* personal choice. But for most 98% of us, without flash it ain't the *REAL INTERNET*.

Flash is a necessary evil for the iPhone.

I develop web sites, and many are Flash-only (or Flash-centric) at the client's demand. I used to be able to convince clients to create a non-Flash mirror site, but the best I can do these days is a single non-Flash page. I wish it wasn't true, but it is. (Funny thing is they eventually come around when they find their lame non-Flash page is what shows up in the search indexes...) Flash has become a de-facto standard internet format. Not a formal standard mind you.

I'm hoping a decent Flash plugin for the iPhone will come out soon. I'm also hoping people realize Flash is used for many idiotic purposes and stop using it just because it's there.

Weezy
Jul 5, 2007, 01:07 PM
my iPhone actually came about an hour ago, i ordered online on apple's website, it was shipped on the fourth and reached here only a day later, but my dad wont allow me open the box he still isn't sure if he's gonna allow me to keep it.....:(

....and he happens to be in a bad mood

w00master
Jul 5, 2007, 01:19 PM
You claim to speak for 98% of the entire Internet? How megalomaniacal of you.

Apologies if I sounded a bit "megalomanical," but seriously, flash is so much more than just "ads" which is what the "I don't care about flash" camp keep harping about. Many sites just do not function without Flash. In addition because of the widespread use of the flash plugin (98% remember), *most* users *especially* the target audience of the iPhone simply do not separate flash from the browser. It's simply a part of the overall web experience.

Again, I believe Walt Mossberg's story. I'm almost certain flash is coming for the iPhone, but it should have been there from the beginning.

w00master

paulpet
Jul 5, 2007, 01:19 PM
Wait, so it was a better plan to get YouTube to re-encode it's whole library, than for Apple to get a flash plug-in working in the first place?

I remember hearing somewhere that Youtube is moving to H.264 because it supports high-def video at better compression rates than flash.

If apple didn't help nudge them along I think they may have done it anyway.

docc
Jul 5, 2007, 01:22 PM
Check it out...

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/mossberg-iphone-flash-support-in-next-couple-of-months/10662

TheAnswer
Jul 5, 2007, 01:26 PM
Check it out...

http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/news/comments/mossberg-iphone-flash-support-in-next-couple-of-months/10662

We did...in this main page article (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/07/05/flash-plug-in-for-iphone-coming-soon/). It's being discussed here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=325676).

pascalpp
Jul 5, 2007, 01:32 PM
Apologies if I sounded a bit "megalomanical," but seriously, flash is so much more than just "ads" which is what the "I don't care about flash" camp keep harping about. Many sites just do not function without Flash. In addition because of the widespread use of the flash plugin (98% remember), *most* users *especially* the target audience of the iPhone simply do not separate flash from the browser. It's simply a part of the overall web experience.

here's some figures for you, straight outta my arse: 50% of people don't know they have the flash plug-in installed on their computers and wouldn't care if it wasn't there. 90% of websites don't use flash for anything crucial to the experience.

meanwhile, somebody get w00master a flash plug-in for his damn phone so he'll shut the hell up about it.

love, another web developer who hates flash

mdntcallr
Jul 5, 2007, 01:33 PM
Flash is great.

My prayers are for a slingbox viewer on the iphone.

pascalpp
Jul 5, 2007, 01:34 PM
If you want to be using third party apps on the iPhone, you should be rejoicing with this news. As a Flash Developer i can tell you that Flash developers will create the most amazing web apps for your iPhone that will not only match but sometimes exceed the ui experience you see now on the iPHone

oo, more figures: 1% of flash apps are amazing. 99% of them suck and will not compare well to the iphone UI.

mashoutposse
Jul 5, 2007, 01:39 PM
Without flash, Youtube has a monopoly on streaming video on the iPhone. Sometimes I want to browse Break or any of the other streaming video sites.

aria505
Jul 5, 2007, 01:39 PM
Flash is a necessary evil for the iPhone.

I develop web sites, and many are Flash-only (or Flash-centric) at the client's demand. I used to be able to convince clients to create a non-Flash mirror site, but the best I can do these days is a single non-Flash page. I wish it wasn't true, but it is. (Funny thing is they eventually come around when they find their lame non-Flash page is what shows up in the search indexes...) Flash has become a de-facto standard internet format. Not a formal standard mind you. I'm hoping a decent Flash plugin for the iPhone will come out soon. I'm also hoping people realize Flash is used for many idiotic purposes and stop using it just because it's there.


What types of websites did those people want? I find that the majority of flash-only websites are those that serve the perpose of just identifying a business or being a protfolio website. It seemed that flash-only websites had faded away but in the past few years they seem to have come back. I don't know why. Maybe it is that the last of the old small businesses are finally getting on the web and they remember seeing some "cool" interactive flash site like 7 years ago, and they want theirs to look like that too.

I truly don't know of any useful flash-only websites that supply a service, such as news, social networking, or e-commerce. Most useful web applications are "Web 2.0" and don't use flash.

I don't think many people are going to browse to the types of sites that tend to be flash-only on their iPhone edge network.

Where it would make a big difference is for people who want to play flash games and watch videos that use a flash player. Many sites have switched to using flash video files to display their video content because the flash-plugin to have a larger install base than windows media player or quicktime. They only have to supply one video format (.flv) as compared to two or three.

And some sites only use flash for their menu navigation on their website, which is just sad and distasteful. I don't feel bad for those websites at all.

But hey, I'm all for adding more stuff to the iPhone. Even if Apple does add a Flash-plugin, I'm sure they will give you an option to disable it. Just like they let you disable javascript. So for those of you who don't care about flash, don't sweat it. I would just turn it on if I was at a website that had a flash video that i wanted to watch. Then I would turn it back off afterwards.

oxygen8
Jul 5, 2007, 01:58 PM
I assume Flash Lite. I have not worked with it myself, but I'm sure there are initial reason why Apple didn't incorporate any bit of Flash from the start.

yeah, to keep your links off the iphone for as long as possible.

digiguy23
Jul 5, 2007, 02:07 PM
What types of websites did those people want? I find that the majority of flash-only websites are those that serve the perpose of just identifying a business or being a protfolio website. It seemed that flash-only websites had faded away but in the past few years they seem to have come back. I don't know why. Maybe it is that the last of the old small businesses are finally getting on the web and they remember seeing some "cool" interactive flash site like 7 years ago, and they want theirs to look like that too.

I truly don't know of any useful flash-only websites that supply a service, such as news, social networking, or e-commerce. Most useful web applications are "Web 2.0" and don't use flash.

I don't think many people are going to browse to the types of sites that tend to be flash-only on their iPhone edge network.

Where it would make a big difference is for people who want to play flash games and watch videos that use a flash player. Many sites have switched to using flash video files to display their video content because the flash-plugin to have a larger install base than windows media player or quicktime. They only have to supply one video format (.flv) as compared to two or three.

And some sites only use flash for their menu navigation on their website, which is just sad and distasteful. I don't feel bad for those websites at all.

But hey, I'm all for adding more stuff to the iPhone. Even if Apple does add a Flash-plugin, I'm sure they will give you an option to disable it. Just like they let you disable javascript. So for those of you who don't care about flash, don't sweat it. I would just turn it on if I was at a website that had a flash video that i wanted to watch. Then I would turn it back off afterwards.


http://www.stickam.com uses flash for the cam player.

bbcxx
Jul 5, 2007, 02:13 PM
Smart, we know it is not a "baby" version of the net... I can't belive he really said that...

bbcxx
Jul 5, 2007, 02:16 PM
What types of websites did those people want? I find that the majority of flash-only websites are those that serve the perpose of just identifying a business or being a protfolio website. It seemed that flash-only websites had faded away but in the past few years they seem to have come back. I don't know why. Maybe it is that the last of the old small businesses are finally getting on the web and they remember seeing some "cool" interactive flash site like 7 years ago, and they want theirs to look like that too.

I truly don't know of any useful flash-only websites that supply a service, such as news, social networking, or e-commerce. Most useful web applications are "Web 2.0" and don't use flash.

I don't think many people are going to browse to the types of sites that tend to be flash-only on their iPhone edge network.

Where it would make a big difference is for people who want to play flash games and watch videos that use a flash player. Many sites have switched to using flash video files to display their video content because the flash-plugin to have a larger install base than windows media player or quicktime. They only have to supply one video format (.flv) as compared to two or three.

And some sites only use flash for their menu navigation on their website, which is just sad and distasteful. I don't feel bad for those websites at all.

But hey, I'm all for adding more stuff to the iPhone. Even if Apple does add a Flash-plugin, I'm sure they will give you an option to disable it. Just like they let you disable javascript. So for those of you who don't care about flash, don't sweat it. I would just turn it on if I was at a website that had a flash video that i wanted to watch. Then I would turn it back off afterwards.

So...:confused: ....you don't visit a lot of sites, do you?

Stile
Jul 5, 2007, 02:19 PM
I agree that most uses of Flash on the Internet are not really needed and I hate ads as much as the next guy. But I would love to be able to create apps for the iPhone using Flex.

bignumbers
Jul 5, 2007, 02:29 PM
What types of websites did those people want? I find that the majority of flash-only websites are those that serve the perpose of just identifying a business or being a protfolio website. It seemed that flash-only websites had faded away but in the past few years they seem to have come back. I don't know why. Maybe it is that the last of the old small businesses are finally getting on the web and they remember seeing some "cool" interactive flash site like 7 years ago, and they want theirs to look like that too.

Most of the sites I work on are for the creative community - photographers, ad agencies, or those marketing to that category of business. Some narrow product categories, where demonstration of the product is significant. I can understand their reasons for wanting Flash, and that's fine. My biggest problem is there's the assumption that everyone has Flash, high-speed internet, etc. That isn't true. The first time they try accessing their sites from their nifty new iPhones I know I'll get phone calls.

I do think Flash has a good purpose, and is quite useful in many circumstances. Overused, definitely.

I'd much rather do most of these sites in HTML/AJAX/whatever, but it's either do the sites or let someone else take their money. I happen to be a good Flash programmer so business is good. (The worst part of the job is creating damned Flash banner ads. I feel like I'm selling my soul to the devil. And I'll never admin to a client I use ad blockers!)

flashy-cat
Jul 5, 2007, 02:31 PM
No, I think most people fully understand this, but thanks for underestimating everyone's intelligence anyway.

Sigh, some people are just so far up their own backside it's unreal...

troyallen
Jul 5, 2007, 02:35 PM
I agree that most uses of Flash on the Internet are not really needed and I hate ads as much as the next guy. But I would love to be able to create apps for the iPhone using Flex.

Needed or not. Unless you have flash installed, you cannot view the web page correctly. What's the point of spending $600 on this iPhone device with a full internet browser that Apple was advertising and you can't view embedded flash.

Apple took away some developers from the Leopard project and delayed it for the iPhone. And in the end, it's still missing featurers and capabilitities. Shame on you Apple!!!

ClimbingTheLog
Jul 5, 2007, 02:42 PM
I think it's possible to implement a VOIP application using Flash. :cool:

aria505
Jul 5, 2007, 02:44 PM
So...:confused: ....you don't visit a lot of sites, do you?

I visit tons of sites. I'm all for the iPhone getting flash support. I'm just trying to make the point that there are really only certian types of sites that tend to be flash-only. And those types of sites aren't the kind that most people would visit on their iPhone. I would love to see a list of popular sites that are flash-only that provide a service.

So please list them.

Most of the sites I work on are for the creative community - photographers, ad agencies, or those marketing to that category of business. Some narrow product categories, where demonstration of the product is significant. I can understand their reasons for wanting Flash, and that's fine. My biggest problem is there's the assumption that everyone has Flash, high-speed internet, etc. That isn't true. The first time they try accessing their sites from their nifty new iPhones I know I'll get phone calls.

I agree, this is my point. Flash-only sites tend to be for buiness indentity sites that have information about a product that a business sells or it is a portfolio site for for a creative artist (photographer, graphic designer, a band, a web designer's portfolio, etc.). These aren't sites that people need 24/7 access to on their iPhone.

troyallen
Jul 5, 2007, 03:06 PM
I visit tons of sites. I'm all for the iPhone getting flash support. I'm just trying to make the point that there are really only certian types of sites that tend to be flash-only. And those types of sites aren't the kind that most people would visit on their iPhone. I would love to see a list of popular sites that are flash-only that provide a service.

So please list them.


http://www.justin.tv/justin

http://www.stickam.com

akakillroy
Jul 5, 2007, 03:46 PM
I hope that Apple and Adobe work together to implement an efficient Safari/Flash plugin tailored to the iPhone... it would be to the advantage of both...

I lay odds that they are, probably making somthing that will integrate flash content with the H.264 hardware. Just a hunch.

Yankees 4 Life
Jul 5, 2007, 03:49 PM
hey guys dont get so riled up about flash support... we all know its very important to even view many of the most popular websites, however it gets rid of pop ups, which i hate hate hate....

I think it's possible to implement a VOIP application using Flash. :cool:

um not really... you truly need the actual application for skype to work... And why the hell would you want to use a free fone when you are already paying for the service. you might as well use it or use it at work...

whatever
Jul 5, 2007, 04:01 PM
I wasn't going to comment, but then I read the stupid "re-enactment" below and felt the need to.

I don't recall ever paying Adobe for the Flash Plugin. The reason the plugin is popular is that people make money on it. If Flash continues not to be supported on the iPhone, then developers would fine another method to make than banner ads viewable and then they would stop using Flash, because they would use whatever method that worked on the iPhone on regular sites.

So it's actually important for Adobe to make an ARM version of the Flash plugin.

I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.

whooleytoo
Jul 5, 2007, 04:14 PM
A lot of people aren't realizing that it isn't as simple as using the existing Safari Flash plug-in; the iPhone uses an ARM CPU that would require Adobe to port their code to run properly, and Apple ensuring that it does so with as little impact on battery life as possible.


Ultimately, until Apple publishes more technical details (which could be a while!) we have no idea how easy or difficult this could be. The fact that it uses an ARM processor simply means it requires a re-compile and probably re-optimising.

But without knowing what APIs/frameworks Apple has published for internal use, we've little idea how portable the Mac plugin code might be.

pyramid6
Jul 5, 2007, 04:32 PM
Some of us want Flash for Flex. Ajax is not a standard, Flex is a standard.

P6

iMichael72
Jul 5, 2007, 04:39 PM
Great news. Can't wait for the update.

MacTheSpoon
Jul 5, 2007, 04:54 PM
That'll be great when they add the Flash plug-in. It's going to be really fun, watching this product evolve... :)

HyperZboy
Jul 5, 2007, 05:47 PM
Flash will come, but it won't have Flash video support.

The CPU in the iPhone simply isn't powerful enough to decode it on its own ... although it does have a vector floating point unit that might help. The iPhone is optimised for decoding H.264 without eating battery too quickly, and flash video simply wouldn't be able to do that. Maybe if the decoder was rewritten specifically for the hardware in the iPhone...

The flash plugin will do all of the classic flash stuff though - the games, adverts, etc.

Of all the people who've posted on this topic, you've hit on half of the battle.

Add to what you said the fact that AT&T's EDGE network is just not fast enough to handle FLASH content at this time and BINGO!

Plus, it would have been utterly embarrassing for both Apple AND AT&T to release the iPhone and not have it work properly. So instead, they'll add some type of limited FLASH support later with lots of fanfare.

That's the full answer as to why no FLASH support right now.

DanB91
Jul 5, 2007, 05:53 PM
A friend of mine works in the FLASH unit of Adobe and has since it was Macromedia. He told me the other night (while playing with my new iPhone) that Apple is putting a lot pressure on Adobe to build a flash plug-in for the iPhone and that Adobe should have something out soon.

Evidently Apple would not give Adobe an early release of the iPhone to get a jump start on it, but he said their lab was getting one this week after the 4th holiday.

pretty cool to hear if true

im surprised no one quoted u lol

propynyl
Jul 5, 2007, 07:16 PM
I cant wait for flash, but at least add MMS support apple! My mother's $99 cellphone has MMS, it is standard these days.

iSee
Jul 5, 2007, 07:52 PM
I wasn't going to comment, but then I read the stupid "re-enactment" below and felt the need to.

I don't recall ever paying Adobe for the Flash Plugin. The reason the plugin is popular is that people make money on it. If Flash continues not to be supported on the iPhone, then developers would fine another method to make than banner ads viewable and then they would stop using Flash, because they would use whatever method that worked on the iPhone on regular sites.

So it's actually important for Adobe to make an ARM version of the Flash plugin.

Adobe (usually) charges a per unit royalty to the OEM for the right to include the Flash Player on consumer electronic devices.

Link: http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer_sdk/productinfo/faq/#item-1-3

They are using their dominant position in desktop/laptop active web content (which they achieved, in part, by giving away the player) to make money from consumer electronic device sales.

It is a change of strategy for them from the desktop/laptop model where they make money only from sales of the authoring environment. Time will tell if this is a viable strategy. I'm guessing that the release of the iPhone is a critical point in determining the success of this strategy. If Apple pays, it's settled: everyone will have to pay. If Apple doesn't pay, next Nokia won't pay, etc. My guess is that Apple did not pay.

My "stupid" reenactment was just a fun way to say this.

Anyway, I think you're right that it's in Adobe's best interests to have the player on the iPhone, whether they get paid per unit or not. In fact, I think Adobe knows that too, which is why they ultimately gave in to Apple--but hey, they owe it to their shareholders to at least try to get paid extra, right?

It's just as well Adobe was stopped here. If not, how far would they go? Maybe try to grab a piece of the Internet ad business (pay per click or pay per host), or get consumers to pay directly after all with a "premium" version of the player (that let's you disable Internet ads!)

rocklobzter31
Jul 5, 2007, 07:53 PM
I just got my hands on an iPhone from the AT&T store. It is a lot smaller than I thought. Even though people have said this before I sort of just thought 'well duh it's small' but it's REALLY compact. I love it. The keys are small but i got used to it just with my 20 min. at the store. Case in point: I will never wash my hands again :)

robby818
Jul 5, 2007, 08:25 PM
I wasn't going to comment, but then I read the stupid "re-enactment" below and felt the need to.

I don't recall ever paying Adobe for the Flash Plugin. The reason the plugin is popular is that people make money on it. If Flash continues not to be supported on the iPhone, then developers would fine another method to make than banner ads viewable and then they would stop using Flash, because they would use whatever method that worked on the iPhone on regular sites.

So it's actually important for Adobe to make an ARM version of the Flash plugin.

PLUS I think it was forseeable that the iPhone was going to be a big hit. Adobe like everyone else saw it coming from a mile away, so the record sales numbers during the first weekend really didnt do anything to change Adobe's position with respect to flash & iPhone support.

jwa276
Jul 5, 2007, 11:16 PM
Needed or not. Unless you have flash installed, you cannot view the web page correctly. What's the point of spending $600 on this iPhone device with a full internet browser that Apple was advertising and you can't view embedded flash.

Apple took away some developers from the Leopard project and delayed it for the iPhone. And in the end, it's still missing featurers and capabilitities. Shame on you Apple!!!

Oh come now... The iPhone is already proving to be one of apple's greater technological achievements. No need to bash them for it. Personally, I trust that whatever they decide to do with the whole flash thing will be the smartest way to go. I hope they do release flash, though, because one could make some sickly fun website interfaces and/or web apps for iPhone!

Leopard will come, and it will be worth the wait- just like the iPhone was!

Go Apple! :)

Btw... Posting this from my iPhone..... Damn I love this keyboard!

zim
Jul 5, 2007, 11:41 PM
Some of us want Flash for Flex. Ajax is not a standard, Flex is a standard.

P6

Clarification: AJAX is a movement based on web standards, standards that have been around much longer then Flash. Flex is a recent development platform for creating RIAs. Flex is not a standard but can work with web standards as well as Flash. Flash is also not a web standard. Flash is an add on to the web experience.

zim
Jul 6, 2007, 12:04 AM
I'm betting $100 that Java never, ever makes it to iPhone. It's a dead-and-buried technology as far as Steve is concerned.

Which is sad because there is a lot of recent development in Java land. Processing (http://processing.org/) is one such example. Artists are doing amazing things with it, some of which is viewable by the web. None of it has any real use but it is fun and explorative, just as Flash was back during version 4 and 5, the good old days :)

I also wonder how not having Java effects google's AJAX web toolkit.. which is based on Java. Did google rework their toolkit?

bigjohn
Jul 6, 2007, 12:10 AM
I finally figured out how to make the iPhone into something I want...

take out the WiFi chip and replace it with a 3G chip... then repackage the WiFi chip into a dock-connectorable additional accessory (if it's really all about weight, let me decide what's heavy - sorry Mr. Jobs, I see you have feeble little arms). Also, v2 should have 8GB and 16GB of memory, at price points of $50 less per. That's right, you heard it here first...

iBookG4user
Jul 6, 2007, 12:20 AM
A flash plug-in would probably be handy for when I get my iPhone. Several of the sites I normally visit use Flash for at least some of their website.

glowingstar
Jul 6, 2007, 12:28 AM
Add to what you said the fact that AT&T's EDGE network is just not fast enough to handle FLASH content at this time and BINGO!

truly! it would be like trying to sell downloadable movies in 1995. pretty useless! :D

w00master
Jul 6, 2007, 01:59 AM
here's some figures for you, straight outta my arse: 50% of people don't know they have the flash plug-in installed on their computers and wouldn't care if it wasn't there. 90% of websites don't use flash for anything crucial to the experience.

meanwhile, somebody get w00master a flash plug-in for his damn phone so he'll shut the hell up about it.

love, another web developer who hates flash

Why the animosity? Does it take your own animosity to bring out so-called figures "outta [your] arse?" I'm just speaking directly to Apple's so-called claim of the "real internet." Sorry, but without flash, it ain't a real web browser.

Again, did I insult you in any manner?

All I'm saying is that flash should have been there for the beginning. Yet, you just turn around and begin insulting PURELY because I'm giving Apple some constructive criticism. LOOK at nearly *every* review talking about the iPhone's browser, almost *ALL* of them criticize the iPhone BECAUSE IT DOESN"T HAVE FLASH SUPPORT.

Are you such a fanboy/girl that you *CANNOT* accept *ANY* criticism in Apple? Please, get off your high horse AND COME BACK TO REALITY.

Maybe YOU don't like flash. Maybe YOU don't navigate to sites that use flash, but the MAJORITY of the users who use browser do use FLASH on a regular basis. It doesn't matter that these users (whether it's 50% as you claim) know whether or not a flash plugin was installed. That doesn't matter. What matters is that many users will notice that they're not getting the "full internets" on their iPhone browser.

Why you had to become INSULTING is beyond me. I am offering criticism. I want the iPhone to succeed. I guess YOU think Apple is perfect and God.

Get a life.

w00master

JellyFish
Jul 6, 2007, 07:54 AM
I'm not installing it if I can avoid it. I do not want flash on my iphone. I considered not having it to be a very good thing.

If I'm forced to install it, I will not be happy about it at all. :mad:

foniks2020
Jul 6, 2007, 09:33 AM
I'm not installing it if I can avoid it. I do not want flash on my iphone. I considered not having it to be a very good thing.

If I'm forced to install it, I will not be happy about it at all. :mad:

I think it would be really nice to have the option of viewing flash based sites... and have the option of turning off flash too.

Maybe the iphone could implement something like Microsoft did to avoid the EOLAS patent... when you encounter flash you see a plugin icon... if you want to view the flash you can touch it and it will play....

This would keep CPU use at a minimum, make adFlash-a-phobes happy and still let people view GOOD flash sites possible.

weing
Jul 6, 2007, 11:06 AM
I suspect there will be a penalty in iPhone performance when it gets added. Flash is such a waste of time and resource drain when not used properly . Which seems to be always!
Personally I feel anyone who embeds Flash content into their website,especially the opening page, should have their skull bashed in with a hammer.

LtrGtrMac
Jul 6, 2007, 01:03 PM
I suspect there will be a penalty in iPhone performance when it gets added. Flash is such a waste of time and resource drain when not used properly . Which seems to be always!
Personally I feel anyone who embeds Flash content into their website,especially the opening page, should have their skull bashed in with a hammer.



This (iPhone safari) was Apple's way of saying to the online world that Flash is done...it needs to go.

kirk26
Jul 6, 2007, 02:32 PM
You just bought an iPhone and come to a sad realization; cancel or allow?

El Capitano
Jul 6, 2007, 03:28 PM
Anyone who says that Edge is not fast enough to handle Flash knows nothing about SWF. SWF is one of the most optimised file formats known to man. Go look up the specs and see how tightly vector graphics are packed - it's insane. Pretty much everything is packed bitwise, co-ordinates included, so all the opcodes required to draw a square total about eight bytes or so. (I've handcoded SWFs without using the commercial Flash authoring system, it's kind of fun. Usually i use Ming, the truly awesome open-source SWF-generation library.)

Video takes up bandwidth, sure. But there's a lot more to SWF than video.

A useful website that requires Flash? Here's one I've done: the online map editor for www.openstreetmap.org (kind of like the Wikipedia of map data; you need to register to be able to use the editing function). About 2000 lines of open-source ActionScript. ActionScript's drawing API makes it a breeze to code and you're guaranteed it works the same on all systems.

As for "AJAX is a movement based on web standards" - well, maybe, but AJAX is also based on a feature (XMLHttpRequest) developed by Microsoft for Outlook Web Access. It's pretty cool, sure, but I don't think it's got many more "standards" brownie points than SWF - which is an open, published file format, albeit one where most future development is controlled by Adobe.

After all that, I would say: don't get your hopes up too high for Flash on iPhone. I mean, I really hope it comes and I hope Apple are developing it, but remember that Adobe still haven't managed to ship a 64-bit version of Flash Player... and porting it to ARM is a whole load more complex than that.

andrewh
Jul 6, 2007, 07:36 PM
Anyone who says that Edge is not fast enough to handle Flash knows nothing about SWF. SWF is one of the most optimised file formats known to man. Go look up the specs and see how tightly vector graphics are packed - it's insane. Pretty much everything is packed bitwise, co-ordinates included, so all the opcodes required to draw a square total about eight bytes or so. (I've handcoded SWFs without using the commercial Flash authoring system, it's kind of fun. Usually i use Ming, the truly awesome open-source SWF-generation library.)

Video takes up bandwidth, sure. But there's a lot more to SWF than video.

A useful website that requires Flash? Here's one I've done: the online map editor for www.openstreetmap.org (kind of like the Wikipedia of map data; you need to register to be able to use the editing function). About 2000 lines of open-source ActionScript. ActionScript's drawing API makes it a breeze to code and you're guaranteed it works the same on all systems.

As for "AJAX is a movement based on web standards" - well, maybe, but AJAX is also based on a feature (XMLHttpRequest) developed by Microsoft for Outlook Web Access. It's pretty cool, sure, but I don't think it's got many more "standards" brownie points than SWF - which is an open, published file format, albeit one where most future development is controlled by Adobe.

After all that, I would say: don't get your hopes up too high for Flash on iPhone. I mean, I really hope it comes and I hope Apple are developing it, but remember that Adobe still haven't managed to ship a 64-bit version of Flash Player... and porting it to ARM is a whole load more complex than that.

As a designer and Flash Developer I agree 100% with your comments. However I think the main reason Flash might not appear on the iPhone anytime soon is that the iPhone processor just isn't powerful enough to play back the kinds of things that have been developed for the web, when developers have had Flash 7,8, or 9 in mind. I think people who develop Flash websites and applications with mobile devices in mind really tone down the transitions and things that would cause the player to choke.

I played with the iPhone for about half an hour today in the apple store. Javascript performance is really not that impressive. For example, go to apple.com/mac and click on some of the accordion type javascript animations -- they barely work on the iPhone while going lightning fast on safari on Tiger. Not a scientific benchmark but I'm very skeptical. Plus you click on a quicktime movie in the page and safari transitions into the iPhone native video player instead of playing right in the page. Presumably to use the hardware based acceleration and codec.

A flash plugin could show eventually but it probably won't be until next year if at all. I hope I'm wrong though.

dennarda
Jul 8, 2007, 08:30 AM
My guess is the lack of flash comes down to timing. Flash players for portable devices are traditionally one version of flash behind the desktop version. Flash recently upgraded to version 9 on the content creation side, even though the flash 9 player has been out for desktop machines for quite a while. The best embed flash players are still stuck in Flash 7 land, including the player for windows mobile (which by the way is a fellow, albeit less elegant, ARM device). My guess is instead of working to port the old plug-in, the decision was made to work on the new one, and it just simply is not ready yet.

Also, the switch from Flash 8 to Flash 9 was almost entirely a performance optimization instead of a feature increase. As such, Adobe has been making great strides in the efficiency of their code, which should translate into better battery life if those optimizations make it to the iPhone flash player.

Flash would be ideal for the relatively slow edge network environment and would be an excellent platform to create iPhone specific content.

pascalpp
Jul 9, 2007, 12:29 AM
Why the animosity?...Why you had to become INSULTING is beyond me. I am offering criticism. I want the iPhone to succeed. I guess YOU think Apple is perfect and God.

Sorry for the animosity, dude. I was probably in a foul mood and I was put off by your insistence that Flash is a deal-breaker for the iPhone for 98% of users. I too want the iPhone to succeed, but I don't think lack of Flash support is going to keep it from succeeding. Regardless, if adding Flash is a step Apple takes in order to ensure that success, I for one hope that they take it one step further, by allowing users to disable Flash.

And yes, I get your semantic point that without Flash it's not the REAL internet. I just don't care. And I doubt 98% (or some significant majority) of iPhone buyers will care either. What they WILL care about is websites being slower to respond on their iPhone than they already are. Unless Adobe or Apple makes a considered effort to optimize and improve the Flash player, I think they've made the right decision to leave it off the iPhone.

Lastly, for the record, I'm a huge Apple fanboy. Anyone who spends time commenting on the MacRumors forums must face that reality. : )

No hard feelings, mang.