Adobe Bringing Flash to the iPhone

[MattInOz]

Pardon me if this has been brought up before but how is the iPhone able to view YouTube videos right now if Flash is not currently installed?

The YouTube app streams H.264 codec video, instead of flash,
which is supported by the hardware.

 

[asleitz]

Bring it on

Great. The iPhone is missing so much content from the web without flash support. I'm glad to see Adobe develop flash support for the iPhone. It just makes my browsing experience that much better. That's my 2 cents.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Apple has ever right to reject apps as they see fit. If you don't like it, you can still develop your app for Safari on the iPhone.

I don't foresee any lawsuits against Apple on this. Honestly, if anyone did try to sue Apple over this, they will lose.

This is very different then developing for a console or desktop system. Apple is under contract obligations to protect AT&T and other carrier networks. Its a very different world.

Personally, I think you're wrong. I think if taken to the Supreme Court, Apple (and any other company including Nintendo inside the US) will lose their shirt in regards to this matter of restricting what can run on a publicly available platform. In other words, it comes down to if it's my computer, I can run whatever I want on it. PERIOD. Contracts, protecting $$$ partners, etc. is irrelevant. It's a publicly available platform. It's a computer (even if a mobile one). Software runs on computers. No company has the right to restrict software on a publicly available platform. If they don't want someone to run software on it, they should NOT release it for sale to the public. It's THAT SIMPLE.

If you don't agree or don't like it, I don't care. It WILL be fought sooner or later and they will lose because SOCIETY is ultimately what matters and countries like the US are SUPPOSED to protect the citizens of their country, NOT legal entities like corporations. And that will continue to come to the forefront as people get sick and tired of corporations controlling their lives, getting tax perks to move jobs overseas and generally ruin people's lives over making more profits for a select few shareholders. If the Supreme Court does their job and protects "We The People" and NOT "We the privileged few" then Apple would LOSE. Imagine if all the printing presses refused to print anything except what some big corporation wanted. Imagine if the Internet only allowed select people to have access or WRITE data (e.g. post mesages, host sites, etc.) Imagine trying to justify that because some companies own the ISPs and all agree you shouldn't have access unless you're on their approved list. Imagine if that approved list didn't includes certain ethnic groups, certain political affiliations or certain financial classes. But it's OK because they own the servers you use. They don't HAVE to allow you to use it! That's called discrimination and it's ILLEGAL. I don't see not allowing software on a publicly available platform as being one bit different. If I buy a product, it's my right to use it as I see fit. And that's a fair use issue that is going to continue to get worse as time goes on and companies try to force you to do only what they want as part of the contract or license agreement. Things like copyrights are privileges. They exist so someone can make money off their ideas. They were never designed so companies can control every aspect of your life.

It should not matter whether the software is Windows or MacOSX or PalmOS. If it's sold to the public for public usage, it should be open to the public for public usage. It's one thing to charge to use something like AT&T's network. It's quite another to say certain people aren't ALLOWED to use their network because they're not on our 'approved list'. And THAT is what Apple is doing. They can say we don't want certain apps on OUR STORE, but they cannot then in turn say you can ONLY USE OUR STORE. That's then discrimination and it should be fought, IMO. And no, I don't think someone like Nintendo should be able to do that either. Ultimately, Apple will have problems as they get more popular because they are trying to control both the software AND the hardware. Microsoft keeps getting into trouble for just ONE of those. It's only a matter of time, really....

 

[JackAxe]

In my opinion the best version of flash was ver. 4. That is when all the interactive stuff really took off, but wasn't so complicated that web designers could do simple programming.

Wasn't flash 4 licensed into quicktime (I know at least ver. 3 was)? I assume that quicktime can still play flash movies before a certain version?

Okay I searched the web: They disabled flash playback in 7.3:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=307176

because:

I think that apple could probably work around this? The actually supported all the way up to flash ver. 5: http://www.simnet.is/klipklap/quicktime/

In the end, I just think that jobs doesn't want crappy and bloated flash on his elegant, and simple (in a good way) device. And I don't think he likes adobe.

WOW. First you go on to state that Flash 4 is the best version, only to end your post with the crappy and bloated comment. You do realize that Flash 4 is pretty much responsible for most of the crappy bloated content. And why is this...

That is when all the interactive stuff really took off, but wasn't so complicated that web designers could do simple programming.

Do you see the connection now!

Simple, as in billions of loops, buggy script, vector animations that were so unbelievably complex, that it would bring most CPUs to a crawl -- especially back then. Vector art that was so complex, that it was not only a CPU drain, but larger in file size than if it had just been a bitmap.

For reference, Adobe's latest players are the farthest thing from bloat and crap. Of course this doesn't stop a "designer" from finding components on the web and created more bloated crap. But at least their animations will be cached via the GPU and not hit the CPU as much -- given they use Flash's bitmap effects, or know to cache their content as a bitmap.. AND more importantly, there are plenty of peeps now days with the know how to program and optimize their content, so instead of bloat, you'll get tiny highly efficient content. That's what happens when a program matures.

<]=)

 

[SheriffParker]

How will it know when your cursor is moving over an object?

 

[cschulz]

If Adobe does successfully develop a version of flash for Safari on the iPhone, which I doubt will happen because of the rules Apple has put in place, and it is available for free, because I would darn well never pay for it, I plan to keep it off of my phone. I have no use for it. In the entire time I've had my phone I've only ever been to one or two pages and thought "man, I wish I had Flash for this". I also definitely don't want banners showing up, which not having flash installed does a good job of blocking those. And it would be bad for battery life, which considering how much I use my iPhone is extremely valuable to me. It's just something I don't think I would ever use or need, although it's obvious that many people would like to have it.

If they did develop Flash I would think that it would be good to have it turned off by default, and then if you want a flash object to load, maybe you could hold down on that particular flash object and after a few seconds it would load only that box. So if there are flash banners on the top of the page, and then a separate flash object in the middle of the page, hold down on the flash object in the center of the page and it will load only that particular one, and not the banners. This way you're only using flash when you need it (better battery life and faster page loading) but you still have the option of using it when necessary, and only on the Flash objects that you actually want. Just an idea...

 

[OS X Dude]

Yay! (nobody can whine ANYMORE!)

famous last words

 

[Chaszmyr]

How will it know when your cursor is moving over an object?

I suspect that it will probably handle flash rollovers the same way iPhone Safari handles things like rollover dropdown menus. The first tap acts as if you have rolled over, and the second tap acts as a click.

 

[JackAxe]

How will it know when your cursor is moving over an object?

The same way it does on the Pocket PC, Clié, and other touch screen devices that have shipped with Flash support.

If Flash does get ported, Adobe will hopefully add an API for the multi-touch feature. But as is, even ActionsScript 2 is capable of doing what Chaszmyr mentioned.

<]=)

 

[MaTiCeK]

Yeah, now we are talking!

If it works well, I'll ditch my N95 iPod Touch combo and buy the next iPhone.


I can see though why Apple didn't want to include Flash Lite 3. The new fw for the Nokia N95 has FlashLite 3 and this thing doesn't work with half of flash things out there. And apart from that it's slow and clumsy.

Let's hope Adobe get this done well!

 

[Krizoitz]

I think if taken to the Supreme Court, Apple (and any other company including Nintendo inside the US) will lose their shirt in regards to this matter of restricting what can run on a publicly available platform.

Based on what law? Based on what legal precedent? If its that simple why hasn't anyone sued Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, etc so far? Because short of violating anti-trust law they can do whatever they want in terms of restricting what can and can't be done on their products.

In other words, it comes down to if it's my computer, I can run whatever I want on it. PERIOD.

WRONG. Its not a computer. Its a new device entirely. You are right that you can TRY and run whatever you want on it, but Apple is under no obligation to help you do so, help the other person get it running, or help you after you FUBAR your phone. Apple is under no obligation whatsoever to allow development on the iPhone. None. Zero. Zilch. They have decided to allow limited development subject to certrain restrictions. If you want to develop for the iphone, you follow their rules, otherwise you develop hackily or you develop for another platform. THAT is what the courts would tell you.

and they will lose because SOCIETY is ultimately what matters and countries like the US are SUPPOSED to protect the citizens of their country, NOT legal entities like corporations. And that will continue to come to the forefront as people get sick and tired of corporations controlling their lives,

Right because your life is being ruined by the lack of Flash on the iPhone. There is a very simple choice you have. If you don't like Apple's approach you can buy from someone else. Android, Windows Mobile, Symbian, Motorola, Blackberry, etc. There are a not insignifcant number of mobile phone makers out there. You have the wonderful thing called FREEDOM TO CHOOSE. Excercise your power as a consumer. Lawsuits trying to force Apple to do something they dont' want (and would make the phone much less reliable) are 10x worse than the supposed "harm" you are suffering because you can't play the latest flash game on your iphone.

Imagine if all the printing presses refused to print anything except what some big corporation wanted.

This would be illegal under anti-trust law, or you would have other people create printing presses. The situation is not analogous.

Imagine if the Internet only allowed select people to have access or WRITE data (e.g. post mesages, host sites, etc.) Imagine trying to justify that because some companies own the ISPs and all agree you shouldn't have access unless you're on their approved list. Imagine if that approved list didn't includes certain ethnic groups, certain political affiliations or certain financial classes. But it's OK because they own the servers you use. They don't HAVE to allow you to use it! That's called discrimination and it's ILLEGAL.

Actually it wouldn't be ok because it violates the constitution. No where does the constitution mention your inalienable right to run Flash on your iPhone. Really, trust me, its not there.

I don't see not allowing software on a publicly available platform as being one bit different. If I buy a product, it's my right to use it as I see fit. And that's a fair use issue that is going to continue to get worse as time goes on and companies try to force you to do only what they want as part of the contract or license agreement. Things like copyrights are privileges. They exist so someone can make money off their ideas. They were never designed so companies can control every aspect of your life.

And you are free to use it as you see fit. Apple is under no obligation, as i stated above, to enable you to do something with it it wasn't intended to do. You can TRY and get it to do that, but you do so at your OWN risk. And again this is NOT controlling every aspect of your life. Your hyperbole is going off the charts here.

It should not matter whether the software is Windows or MacOSX or PalmOS. If it's sold to the public for public usage, it should be open to the public for public usage. It's one thing to charge to use something like AT&T's network. It's quite another to say certain people aren't ALLOWED to use their network because they're not on our 'approved list'. And THAT is what Apple is doing. They can say we don't want certain apps on OUR STORE, but they cannot then in turn say you can ONLY USE OUR STORE.

Um, yes they can, because they aren't obligated to allow anyone to develop for it in the first place! You do NOT have a God given or legal right to have an iPhone that allows extra applications to run on it. NONE. Apple could just as easily say "we aren't going to allow 3rd party development on the iPhone PERIOD". And they would have every right to do so. And you could buy a phone and try and hack it. And thats ok, but Apple no longer has to support you, and they don't have to HELP you hack it.

That's then discrimination and it should be fought, IMO. And no, I don't think someone like Nintendo should be able to do that either. Ultimately, Apple will have problems as they get more popular because they are trying to control both the software AND the hardware. Microsoft keeps getting into trouble for just ONE of those. It's only a matter of time, really....

Please spend some time with some law books and study case law to understand the difference between this situation and the Microsoft anti-trust issues. Of significant import is the fact that the iPhone, while popular, controls a small fraction of the worldwide cellphone market.

Bottom line, ITS FREAKING FLASH! You are dragging up civil rights and corporate oppression? You sound ridiculous! Show some perspective for crying out loud.

 

[Phormic]

So Adobe are just as misguided as Sun. Sun wants Java on the iPhone, Adobe wants Flash on the iPhone and they're under the misguided assumption that Apple will just roll over and let them. Nuh uh. Just because you want your software on the Next Big Thing™ doesn't mean it's going to happen.

Actually I'd say that Adobe probably know this but just coming out and saying it is possible and necessary (contrary to the edict of The Great Jobs), they feel will pressure Apple into making it so due to public pressure.

Those gates into Nirvana are pretty well guarded though.

 

[AlexisV]

It's all pretty clear to me.

- Flash Mobile ISN'T good enough to use properly on the iPhone
- Adobe have no financial incentive to rework it
- Apple bring in SDK
- Adobe can now make money from it
- Apple sells iPhone Flash in iTunes and both Apple and Adobe cash in

 

[swingerofbirch]

How will this work--will it be a standalone Flash player? How will you get content from Safari to the Flash player unless the flash player somehow integrates into Safari?

Flash for Safari on a computer is an Internet plug-in, but I don't know if that's possible on an iPhone.

 

[The Phazer]

Sounds like it'll be a seperate player rather than a plug in for the time being.

But still, good news! Hopefully it will have full Flash 9 video support.

Phazer

 

[garty]

I'm rather enjoying my Flash Free™ corner of the interwebs®

 

[mac821]

iPhone is now complete!

 

[boer]

Personally, I think you're wrong. I think if taken to the Supreme Court, Apple (and any other company including Nintendo inside the US) will lose their shirt in regards to this matter of restricting what can run on a publicly available platform.

You mean like how everyone and their dog can write their own apps to Xbox and PS3? No wait...

 

[Chaszmyr]

iPhone is now complete!

I think we're getting a little ahead of ourselves there. Shouldn't we at least wait until the products in question... well, exist?

 

[IlluminatedSage]

This is going to get interesting, with the likes of Sun and Adobe attempting to fill gaps that were intentionally created by Apple.

Do guys like Adobe get assurances that their player will be allowed in the store? Creating the player isn't trivial, even with an existing code base. It isn't a weekend project.

If Apple starts rejecting apps, I smell law suits. The courts may end up having to decide what fits within the SDK agreement and what doesn't. Let us hope it doesn't come to that!

I am sure big companies like sun and adobe will play nice with apple. Java working within the SDK environment, running in a "safe" mode would be great.

similarly flash is a pretty safe environment if precautions are followed. so... the biggest issue to me is that flash requires alot of memory sometimes.

alot of website developers have been getting very piggy with their flash programming, which would require a fat broadband connection whether wifi or 3G

 

[BrownManUPS]

I don't know why Steve seems to be half submissive in his comments when it comes to Flash, you'd think a huge amount of people would die over the opportunity to take other video enabled websites, and other purely flash animated pages on the go. It is true there are problems, but at least Steve should come out and say that he supports what the CEO has now decided to do.

Why can't everyone be friends?

 

[stevearm]

Microsoft getting Flash... people here shout abuse and say it's stupid and they dpn't want it on the iPhone anyway.

iPhone gets Flash... and suddenly those same people are going on about how amazing it will be and getting excited.

 

[bytethese]

About effen time!

I love how the iPhone commercial talks about buying a car and looking up pricing on the iPhone. Well, half the manufacturers use Flash to "Build and Price" on their websites, maybe I don't want to go to cars.com. Would be nice to play some flash games too!

 

[diamond.g]

You mean like how everyone and their dog can write their own apps to Xbox and PS3? No wait...

For the 360 XNA says hi! Sadly can't speak to what Sony is doing. We all figure that Home will allow some sort of creation, but no one is sure to the full extent.

 

[AlexisV]

Ah, but the iPhone version of Flash will be better!