Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Adobe CEO Responds to Steve Jobs' 'Thoughts on Flash'

parapup said:
Jobs is ******* hilarious - he talks about Flash being proprietary and closed when Flash itself really is a open, unencumbered specification which Apple could take for free and implement their own Flash player that works well on the Mac.
Click to expand...

Instead of making their own Flash player, they are implementing web standards that accomplish the same thing.

Then he goes on to crow that Apple's own products being proprietary is somehow completely justified. Then he goes on to applaud open standards for the Web and in the same breath talks about H.264 - it could NOT get any worse than that.
Click to expand...

H.264 is an open standard.

Then he goes on and talks BS about Technical drawbacks in Flash - when it took Apple *years* to just make an f*cking API available that can be used to accelerate video - that API works on few but not all Macs. This when his own Mac OS X engineers are not yet able to put out frikkin TRIM support.
Click to expand...

Years? Hardware acceleration didn't even come to the Windows version until Flash Player 10 in Oct 2008.

Then he completely ignores that Adobe is not asking Jobs to write the iPhone OS in Flash and goes on and BSes about Flash being bad battery killer with security holes. Shut up and be a man - just give the users an option and let them decide with a swipe of a button whether or not to use Flash. Make Flash an optional download and move on with it. Are you telling me you think for your users without knowing their needs?
Click to expand...

No, he's telling his users what he would like to sell them. They can determine on their own if it fits their needs.
 
@BaldiMac - BRAVO!!
BaldiMac said:
Instead of making their own Flash player, they are implementing web standards that accomplish the same thing.



H.264 is an open standard.



Years? Hardware acceleration didn't even come to the Windows version until Flash Player 10 in Oct 2008.



No, he's telling his users what he would like to sell them. They can determine on their own if it fits their needs.
Click to expand...
 
BaldiMac said:
Instead of making their own Flash player, they are implementing web standards that accomplish the same thing.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Flash != Video.

H.264 is an open standard.
Click to expand...
HA! Your definition on "Open" seems to be "Whatever suits Apple's Agenda" - Read the link I posted. Learn about patents and royalties. Learn about open. Learn that HTML5 is open because no one pays anyone to use it.

Years? Hardware acceleration didn't even come to the Windows version until Flash Player 10 in Oct 2008.
Click to expand...
We are talking API here - Microsoft had DXVA (DirectX Video Acceleration) APIs in Windows 2000!

No, he's telling his users what he would like to sell them. They can determine on their own if it fits their needs.
Click to expand...
Agreed on that one - but why does it take "Support of Open Standards" crap to justify it? They can say "No nothing - just everything that makes *us* money" and that would be fine. But in the name of open standards when they themselves are closed and proprietary to their core? That doesn't make any sense.
 
Earendil said:
How in the world does that follow?
Click to expand...

I am a mobile application developer with existing investment in a Windows laptop that allows me to develop for the Android and Palm devices. Google made no money from me in giving me the development environment and neither did Palm.

Think for yourself.
 
parapup said:
...

PS - the same Jobs rejected Ogg/Theora a truly open standard for the web video to prefer H264 a patent encumbered non-open codec for the web. Google bought On2 and released Vp8 as free codec.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I guessed I missed the announcement that Google had released VP8. Can you post the location of a news article that says this? AFAIK, this is just speculation at this point.

Several articles have speculated that if Google tried to place VP8 in the public domain, there would be immediate claims that VP8 embodies various patents. Difficult to prove or disprove in a short time and without millions in legal fees. Perhaps Google has some other strategy in mind.

Incidentally, Ogg/Theora seems to be very good in my tests. Bit for bit, it seems to have equal or better resolution than H.264, but with perhaps slightly less accurate colors...
 
liavman said:
Let us be a bit careful and make a distinction between trashing Flash and trashing Adobe. There are a lot of Adobe loyalists who are also Apple loyalists. And we need not personalize this to the two CEOs. As SJ said, the two companies go a long way back in terms of growing up together.
Click to expand...

Huh? After reading most of these forums I would say at least 90% of people here hate Adobe and all of their products. Now outside of this forum the percentage might be different, but around here anything Adobe is considered garbage since this little spat has begun.
 
jnpy!$4g3cwk said:
Hmm. I guessed I missed the announcement that Google had released VP8. Can you post the location of a news article that says this? AFAIK, this is just speculation at this point.

Several articles have speculated that if Google tried to place VP8 in the public domain, there would be immediate claims that VP8 embodies various patents. Difficult to prove or disprove in a short time and without millions in legal fees. Perhaps Google has some other strategy in mind.

Incidentally, Ogg/Theora seems to be very good in my tests. Bit for bit, it seems to have equal or better resolution than H.264, but with perhaps slightly less accurate colors...
Click to expand...

I thought I had read it on Google's blog but turns out it is an unofficial Google blog that I read it on and it too mentioned about Google's 'plans' not release. But it was on Ars and many believe Google will make it happen. (VP3)

But you are right about Ogg/Theora - it is already starting to look very promising. Google and Mozilla invested in it if I am not mistaken.
 
Kaiju

This is like watching Godzilla and Gamera duke it out!!! Which is which? Who will win? My head is spinning.:D
 
parapup said:
Wrong. Flash != Video.
Click to expand...

I never said anything about video. Apple is using web standards to accomplish the same things that the Flash player does. The includes animations, games and video.

HA! Your definition on "Open" seems to be "Whatever suits Apple's Agenda" - Read the link I posted. Learn about patents and royalties. Learn about open. Learn that HTML5 is open because no one pays anyone to use it.
Click to expand...

And your definition is whatever suits your agenda. The point is that there are different definitions of "open standards." H.264 is openly licensed and is controlled by a committee rather than any one company. Here is a definition that fits:

http://fsfe.org/projects/os/def.en.html

We are talking API here - Microsoft had DXVA (DirectX Video Acceleration) APIs in Windows 2000!
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought the topic was Flash. Maybe I misread the thread title.

Agreed on that one - but why does it take "Support of Open Standards" crap to justify it?
Click to expand...

Who said anything about justification? Jobs was just explaining their reasons for not allowing the Flash player (which is closed and proprietary) on the iPhone OS. They have made a decision to go with open standards when it comes to the web.

They can say "No nothing - just everything that makes *us* money" and that would be fine. But in the name of open standards when they themselves are closed and proprietary to their core? That doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Apple is not closed and proprietary to the core. They contribute to hundreds of open source projects. How about Adobe?

JackAxe said:
Accomplish "some" of the same things. No, HTML + jS + CSS is not remotely as capable as Flash and it's much slower overall.
Click to expand...

It is currently slower for some functions, but what can you do with Flash that you can't do with web standards?

Since when?
Click to expand...

Since it was released in 2003.
 
it's pretty obvious that this guys don't talk to each other, the two companies are way off communications parameters and the only way to talk about personal/business issues are in a public forum as a blog or letters.

Flash is going to died not because Apple says so, just because it feels old. I rememeber when Flash websites were so amazing that everyone wanted to have a flash page instead of a html webpage. Today, lots of people ask for css simple pages, html with embeded content and lots of wannabes use the free blogs services around the world wide web.

This girly fights needs to end. Prices need to be lower in time economy, and people will choose what to buy even if S.Jobs tell us what he hate or not.

Apple vs Adobe is wrong... but again, there's a lot of apps aout there that are so great that this expensive apps as Photoshop don't feel as great as they were. Pixelmator anyone? anyway... Screw Apple, Screw Adobe and long live UBUNTU! (I am kidding)
 
parapup said:
I am a mobile application developer with existing investment in a Windows laptop that allows me to develop for the Android and Palm devices. Google made no money from me in giving me the development environment and neither did Palm.

Think for yourself.
Click to expand...

wtf? Honestly, I do not think you are actually replying to me. That, or you are so wrapped up in your own mission here on this forum that you can't read what I write without trying to twist it into something that you can reply to.

That's awesome that Android and Palm don't make a business out of selling you an IDE. Neither does Apple. What is your point? Because as it stands, you said nothing relevant to MY points, and because of that, I'm having a really hard time figuring out what you are getting at. And if I can't figure out what you are getting at, I can't steer you back on course, and help you better understand my own points. So again, wtf?

And I do think for myself, thank you very much. I dare say that insulting me directly by suggesting I don't think was not one of your stronger argument points.

Signed,
A Windows SE
 
I really am siding with Adobe on this matter (the same arguments for killing Flash could be applied to Acrobat/PDF, and Apple is more than happy to keep using that even though the security holes in it are even bigger - actually, half of Apple's anti-Flash arguments would easily apply to their own software e.g. FCP still using Carbon).

But Adobe's PR on all this is AWFUL. They're doing very very badly in the media. Apple + Steve Jobs are masters of spin. It's pretty scary to watch, I reckon.
 
dub3000 said:
I really am siding with Adobe on this matter (the same arguments for killing Flash could be applied to Acrobat/PDF.
Click to expand...

Except that PDF is an ISO standard and is no longer proprietary. Been that way for years now. Flash is still proprietary and not an open standard.
 
Earendil said:
wtf? Honestly, I do not think you are actually replying to me. That, or you are so wrapped up in your own mission here on this forum that you can't read what I write without trying to twist it into something that you can reply to.

That's awesome that Android and Palm don't make a business out of selling you an IDE. Neither does Apple. What is your point? Because as it stands, you said nothing relevant to MY points, and because of that, I'm having a really hard time figuring out what you are getting at. And if I can't figure out what you are getting at, I can't steer you back on course, and help you better understand my own points. So again, wtf?

And I do think for myself, thank you very much. I dare say that insulting me directly by suggesting I don't think was not one of your stronger argument points.

Signed,
A Windows SE
Click to expand...
Oops - the think for yourself was not really meant to be insulting - believe me. All I intended was think about the rest of that argument which was kind of obvious.

Sorry if that came across as insulting.
 
Veri said:
If your browser crashes because of some interaction with a plugin then, yes, your browser definitely has a problem. Whether the plugin has a problem depends on whether the plugin is stable and correctly written to published API spec.
Click to expand...

I find the 'Browser protection' hype for plugins is similar to the Driver protection in Microkernel operating systems like Minix. Works in a controlled environment, not in real life.
 
Missed the point again

baryon said:
This is pointless and it isn't going anywhere. Both CEOs stick aggressively to their definitions. I'm not sure what "closed" and "open" means anymore, all I know is that they aren't talking about the same thing.

Just because Android will have Flash doesn't mean that Flash on Android won't suck. Maybe it's going to drain the battery life very fast, or that it's going to be super slow. That's not a solution, but we've yet to see what it's going to be like.

Flash is closed in the sense that Flash Player can only be updated if Adobe wants it to be. Flash is open in the sense that anyone can use it and there is no approval system, you can do whatever you want with it and use it on multiple platforms. The meaning of Open and Closed isn't obvious. Who cares about whether Flash is open or closed: it has worked very well so far on computers, but it won't work on mobile devices no matter what. Flash isn't designed for mobile platforms and that's obvious. You can't have ONE solution for ALL. Maybe HTML5 will sort of be the solution for all, but there will still be areas where HTML5 won't replace Flash.

I'm sure Macs crash due to a combination of badly written Flash and a bad way that the OS handles Flash. It's not that obvious, once again.

However, I think Steve's letter made lots of sense and was very honest in terms of numbers and facts. Narayen on the other side is just defending Flash with the usual stuff that companies say about their products.
Click to expand...

Flash is the very definition of closed source. You give away the client to every user in the world that wants it, you charge the developer for the best tools to develop flash content. Now I know that you can develop flash with free tools, but lets be honest, the company that came up with the standard tools is usually the best. But what everyone is missing, is that to serve flash content from your server in any meaningful way, you have to pay Adobe or another company big $$$$'s. So, what about this is so open and available to all. HTML has been the web standard from the beginning, and runs on Apache (open source web server). Adobe's CEO is amused about flash not beginning an open standard because he knows it isn't, and he knows if flash continues it's death spiral Adobe is going to loose a lot of revenue.
 
ayeying said:
Flash makes my battery life from :) to :(

And i'm using Adobe's newest 10.1 RC.

However, running Flash on Windows doesn't make my battery life drop at all.

Explain that Adobe. And no, I don't want to buy a new computer.
Click to expand...



Apple never really allowed time for complete Flash integration since its switch to the Intel processors. They basically need to build it from the ground up and it won't happen until the two companies can play nice.

Obviously that has not happened and it will not happen anytime soon...

so... yeah... if you have a laptop like me... it will run its fans on max every time you have a Flash game on...

It's a shame though, because I love Flash... and I was really excited about the new CS5 compiler....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back