Adobe Executive Kevin Lynch Discusses Flash on Mac, iPhone, and iPad

[inkswamp]

The reaction from Apple regarding Adobe is the pure definition of hypocrisy:

1. They say "we don't wan't flash because they are lazy and we're forward thinking with HTML5" [...]
2. They say "they are ahead of the game and just making a move others will do after" [...]
3. They say "we don't need flash today thanks to HTML5, for exemple on Youtube"> [...]
3. They say "Flash is obsolete and is buggy" [...]
4. They say "We already have youtube and the appstore, especially for ebook" [...]

First off, nice numbering system you got there. The last time I was that confused by a series of numbers was on the last episode of Lost.

Second, when you say "they say," who do you mean exactly? Phil Schiller? Steve Jobs? Scott Forstall? The entire company? Who is "they"? Can you provide some quotes and/or references to show us who "they" at Apple are and when they've made these statements? And surely, you wouldn't be naive enough to attribute to Apple officially what was reported secondhand on a number of websites. Even if those reports are accurate in its quotes, they are still entirely out of context.

 

[MorphingDragon]

I go yes HTML5 beta and most movies are still playing in flash.

 

[Frobozz]

85%? Remove the ads and re-calculate that number, plz!

Saying that Flash is on 85% of top websites, and then stating that you don't experience the whole web without it, is COMPLETELY DISINGENUOUS. Disregard the criteria of what counts as "top." Even an 8 year old knows that is a term that can be used to support nearly any conclusion you want.

It's about advertising.

We all know that 99% of ADVERTISING on the web is Flash. But when you actually look at how many web sites rely on Flash as the primary interface for their content, it is exceedingly small. While I do not have numbers, I would guess it to easily be under 10%, and probably much smaller.

Consider that, even when using video content, Flash is NOT required. The content is typically H.264 content in a Flash wrapper. Remove the wrapper and-- voila!

Of the "top" web sites with Flash-only content sections, many have produced versions of their site or specialized apps formatted for the iPhone. Soon they will do so for the iPad, too. Case in point: The New York Times, Major League Baseball, and others.

So while I agree that Flash content can be compelling and useful, HTML5 really IS an open standard that can do everything Flash can. It will eventually erode Flash's dominance in the Rich Media Application space, and instead of a third party controlling the rendering pipeline like Flash, the browser will. This is precisely where Apple and most smart application platform developers want to be.

Is it annoying I can't see some content on my iPhone? Yup. But Adobe is not negotiating from a point of strength on this one.

 

[rstansby]

I'd like to know who the "top websites" are, and how many there are of which 85% use flash. It seems a bit of a throw away statement.

From my experience most of the sites that use flash only use it for a "flashy" animation at the entrance. These sites are just useful without flash. Of course there are sites that use flash for games and video, but for the most part flash is used for those stupid intros that I always skip.

 

[JackAxe]

Well watch the Sublime HTML 5 video and see if it performs as well on your Macs as it did on my Mac Pro.

Under Tiger(10.4.11) in Safari(4.04), that video eats up a constant 160% CPU on my 2.3 Ghz Core 2 MBPro.

 

[JackAxe]

From my experience most of the sites that use flash only use it for a "flashy" animation at the entrance. These sites are just useful without flash. Of course there are sites that use flash for games and video, but for the most part flash is used for those stupid intros that I always skip.

I hate intros also, but I'll admit that I've built my share of them for clients and my own sites about a decade back. Anyways, I thought they were long dead, then ended up seeing them pop up on AJAX sites the other year.

I doubt they'll ever go away and now that basic HTML guys will have a bit more control, I'm sure we'll only see more of this cheese. Hopefully they'll have the courtesy to at least put in a skip option and also remember a user's visit, so that it will only displays once.

 

[globalhemp]

2 words: Flash Video; Fight for QuickTime

All of this comes down to Apple's original -- an ongoing -- complaint about Flash VIDEO.

Apple has no problem with Flash until Flash Video came along. Then, Apple openly opposed Flash and became VERY upset at Adobe for using Flash outside its "normal" uses.

Fast-forward to the present. One-half, yes 50%, of ALL Internet traffic is video. Do you know which video format is KING? Its Flash. Not QuickTime and not Windows Media.

Before you complain about quality -- this is not about which format is the BEST. We all know that MPEG-4 is based on QuickTime.

QuickTime is Apple's baby ... and argued in Microsoft's antitrust trial regarding how Microsoft told Apple to stop producing QuickTime. Apple's response was that was asking them to "knife the baby."

Apple wants the marketshare that Flash has for online video and has not been successful at doing so. Apple and Google are now going to war with one another -- even if its a "cold war" in the sense that they "officially" are not at war with one another.

Let us not forget that Google owns YouTube ... and Flash Video is the video format. So, mark several more "battle scars" for Apple in their struggle with Google:

- Chrome Web Browser to Apple's Safari
- YouTube's use of Flash Video to Apple's QuickTime
- Chrome OS to Apple's Mac OS X (and Embedded Mac OS X)
- Android phone to Apple's iPhone
- Android "device" to Apple's iPad (and more)

So, once more the bottom line is Adobe's use and market dominance of Flash for VIDEO.

 

[globalhemp]

Flash for Games

Reason #2 would be Flash as a Gaming Platform.

 

[macUser2007]

Apple has decided not to, and users don't care.

If you're using Flash to publish media, it's time to consider other options.

Flash is dead. The iPad is its tombstone.

My green friend. I am an Apple user, and I DO CARE.

I have always been a Mac user, I own more Apple products than I can count, but if Apple dropped Flash on its desktops, I'll boot into Windows 7 and will not look back. The same if Adobe stopped developing for the Mac.

I am a prime potential buyer for the iPad. But, without Flash, I am looking to the upcoming Android tablets.

When I replace my two iPhones 3G S, if there is no Flash on the new iPhones, I will be looking hard at the Androids as well (like the HTC Bravo, which among other things, does 720p video capture).

The fact that a few farm boys, or some pimply geeks "hate" Flash is irrelevant to most of the world. Flash is ubiquitous, because most people like what it does, and most sites use it because it is robust, it can be deployed efficiently, and be accessed by virtually everyone in the world.

Only a simpleton would assume that if HTML5 became as ubiquitous as Flash, advertisers would not start coding ads in HTML5.

The only reason ads are in Flash now, is because advertisers know that everyone can see them, except for a few nerdy losers, who are not even a blip on the radar.

 

[Squid7085]

It almost seems like Adobe is trying to make its Flash player relevant, most of these "comments" involve something that is trying to convince us that Flash is a part of the internet. That's not a good sign.

 

[ReyesJonathan]

I'd like to know who the "top websites" are, and how many there are of which 85% use flash. It seems a bit of a throw away statement.

i second that motion

 

[macUser2007]

i second that motion

Why don't you try to find something that contradicts it, then?

Or better yet, try for yourself.

Begin with two companies where Jobs is the largest shareholder: Disney.com and Pixar.com.

Mucho Flash, baby, mucho Flash....

 

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

That Wired demo looked great

 

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

My green friend. I am an Apple user, and I DO CARE.

I have always been a Mac user, I own more Apple products than I can count, but if Apple dropped Flash on its desktops, I'll boot into Windows 7 and will not look back. The same if Adobe stopped developing for the Mac.

I am a prime potential buyer for the iPad. But, without Flash, I am looking to the upcoming Android tablets.

When I replace my two iPhones 3G S, if there is no Flash on the new iPhones, I will be looking hard at the Androids as well (like the HTC Bravo, which among other things, does 720p video capture).

The fact that a few farm boys, or some pimply geeks "hate" Flash is irrelevant to most of the world. Flash is ubiquitous, because most people like what it does, and most sites use it because it is robust, it can be deployed efficiently, and be accessed by virtually everyone in the world.

Only a simpleton would assume that if HTML5 became as ubiquitous as Flash, advertisers would not start coding ads in HTML5.

The only reason ads are in Flash now, is because advertisers know that everyone can see them, except for a few nerdy losers, who are not even a blip on the radar.

What a genius post!

I agree 100% with everything you said...

Cudos to you sir

 

[Bytor65]

The only reason ads are in Flash now, is because advertisers know that everyone can see them, except for a few nerdy losers, who are not even a blip on the radar.

Dubious.

I remember flash ads nearly as long as there has been flash, it was the big reason for me blocking flash since Firefox 1.0 had it, and using Opera with plug ins off before that.

Flash is used in ads because it is the equivalent of turning up the volume during commercials. It is annoying and meant to grab your attention.

Flash doesn't only annoy nerds, it annoys everyone, computer illiterates perhaps don't know how to stop, or don't know the cause, is the only real difference.

 

[totoum]

Let us not forget that Google owns YouTube ... and Flash Video is the video format. So, mark several more "battle scars" for Apple in their struggle with Google:

- Chrome Web Browser to Apple's Safari
- YouTube's use of Flash Video to Apple's QuickTime

But youtube are testing HTML5 so maybe they're not all that pleased with flash either?

http://www.youtube.com/html5

 

[Journojulz]

The only reason ads are in Flash now, is because advertisers know that everyone can see them, except for a few nerdy losers, who are not even a blip on the radar.

Advertisers are fickle - they go where the money is.

And as the number of nerdy losers with disposable income rises, advertisers will start asking what flash is doing to the bottom line.

 

[JackAxe]

But youtube are testing HTML5 so maybe they're not all that pleased with flash either?

http://www.youtube.com/html5

But in the second half of this year, the Google phone will have Flash Player 10.1 and it will also run AIR applications, so what does that say?

Here, read this.

 

[Swift]

Steve Jobs holds a grudge

I really think that's the root of this. When Jobs came back to Apple, it was a dire time. He made the deal with Microsoft, and they kept them. One of the prices was that Carbon had to be created as an environment so that large code bases could be easily moved from OS 9 to X. When they would redo more of the code, they could use Cocoa. Office is now Cocoa. Much of Adobe still is not. Adobe products in general have stayed with the original code base, and prolonged Carbon for 7 years longer than originally planned. They were slow to switch to Intel. They were slow to switch -- haven't yet -- to 64 bit. They have the code blob from Macrovision, and they use Microsoft tools to program and then they move things to Carbon. Is there a future for flash? I doubt it. Maybe open sourced. It uses way too many CPU cycles, it causes security holes of its nature, and Adobe seems deathly slow to correct them. Witness the horrible security flaws that showed up in Acrobat and Acrobat Reader, that they took MONTHS to correct. They just don't want to invest sufficient time with Apple.

And then, there's the stab in the back motif. Like Avid and Microsoft, Jobs begged companies to help with the transition. Avid dropped development for the Mac, and got Final Cut Pro in revenge. Microsoft made its deal, and they got lots of Quicktime licenses, and we got Office 2000-2004-2008, etc. Adobe has been dragging its feet, making the Mac the red-headed stepchild in a business they wouldn't have had without the Mac. And they work better because Windows gives them direct hardware APIs. Apple gives them CoreVideo calls. They won't use them, because that means they rewrite in Cocoa. They're always complaining about the Mac costs them a disproportionate amount of time. Jobs might be thinking, "I'll save you time for your development costs."

I'm thinking there's a secret unit at Apple at work on some development tools for HTML5 and CSS. Mess with Jobs...

 

[Augure]

I disagree with a lot of your points. Personally, I think the issue is mainly that Adobe can't provide a quality product. Apple puts a lot of emphasis on the overall user experience, and as it stands right now, the poor quality of Flash hampers that experience. When was the last time your browser crashed and it wasn't caused by a Flash plugin?

HTML 5 will more than likely kill Flash if Adobe doesn't improve its quality very quickly. HTML5 is certainly not a replacement...but Flash has some very serious flaws (i.e. lack of SEO capabilities) that are going to make people look very closely at HTML5.

As I said, a lot of content is still in Flash so:
1. The thousands of developpers/artists who choose to use Flash shouldn't be forced in an other choice.

2. It really isn't about the Flash being sucky on the CPU, because obviously when HTML5 will be a 1) spread 2) standard, a lot of developpers will adopt it. For the moment it's about an hypocrit strategy from Apple and their will to impose Safari and it's web kit.

3. Because when you can't even display a proper internet page during a keynote and you have to fake ads for your product, when all the competitors that are not less innovative adopt it, is cleary an indicator that Apple is talking BS

4. In fact, the lack of Flash is not that bad on the small device that is the iPhone, since the jailbroken device is pretty good, and even good when it was released. The problem here is that the lack of Flash is only one of the many indicator Apple has become so hypocrit and obsessed about revenue, the iPad was a fiasco, so is the lateness in iPhone updates and innovation, the lateness in Macbook Pro updates, the lack of iTunes and Safari innovation, and all its closeness...

 

[diamond.g]

My green friend. I am an Apple user, and I DO CARE.

I have always been a Mac user, I own more Apple products than I can count, but if Apple dropped Flash on its desktops, I'll boot into Windows 7 and will not look back. The same if Adobe stopped developing for the Mac.

I am a prime potential buyer for the iPad. But, without Flash, I am looking to the upcoming Android tablets.

When I replace my two iPhones 3G S, if there is no Flash on the new iPhones, I will be looking hard at the Androids as well (like the HTC Bravo, which among other things, does 720p video capture).

The fact that a few farm boys, or some pimply geeks "hate" Flash is irrelevant to most of the world. Flash is ubiquitous, because most people like what it does, and most sites use it because it is robust, it can be deployed efficiently, and be accessed by virtually everyone in the world.

Only a simpleton would assume that if HTML5 became as ubiquitous as Flash, advertisers would not start coding ads in HTML5.

The only reason ads are in Flash now, is because advertisers know that everyone can see them, except for a few nerdy losers, who are not even a blip on the radar.

I agree with the bolded. I also kinda wish Apple would put their money where their mouth is and not include flash on the OS X platform at all. I mean if HTML5 is ready enough for primetime (unlike Blu-Ray) then Apple needs to move to it like they did USB...

 

[Journojulz]

Lack of flash doesn't seem to be a dealbreaker for iphone customers - and I think the ipad will not suffer that much either.

Advertisers will look at where the money is and ask if the benefits of flash outweigh the cost of missing a growing market.

But its a great opportunity for flash developers to make new and fun apps.

 

[Nym]

I understand your logic, but it's just not LOGICAL.

Apple hates Flash because, as the Adobe CEO himself said, Flash doesn't run right on Apples.

Nice argument. It would be nice to see the reaction if Microsoft decided that you could not install iTunes on Windows since it runs like crap.

I'm really sick of the HTML5 mantra. Most of you spouting this don't even know what it means. HTML5 is not ready to replace Flash. Canvas and Video are the only tags even halfway ready right now, and the browser support for these is quite fragmented. What people call "HTML5" is a working group, and it is a slow, multi-year advancement towards a final standard. Javascript is ***** as a development platform -- they still haven't moved to Ecmascript 3.0 (which is what Flash's ActionScript 3 is based on), and the same slowness people complain about with Flash will be seen with complex "HTML5" sites using Canvas and Video and other things all compositing on top of each other. In fact, I'd wager that an "HTML5" site that replicates an advanced Flash site will be slower. Look at the Canvas tech demos out there. They have potential, but they are slow! Sure, videos..if you can get the browsers to agree on a standard, most videos could be played using the Video tag. But the other stuff, forget it. HTML5 is not ready, so stop trying to force it down everyone's throats.

Basically, most people when they speak of HTML5 and Flash have no ***** idea what they're talking about because they're not developers.

This.

I use Safari on Windows because my bookmarks are automatically synced through mobile me to my family's 4 macs. As soon as another browser allows that I'll switch.

Some browsers that do exactly that and so much more:

Chrome (using XMarks or the built-in bookmark sync)
Firefox (using XMarks add-on)
Internet Explorer (using XMarks)

And I have a feeling that the new Opera supports this too.

YouTube comes in just fine without Flash wrapping the video in a CPU heating element.

So, yeah, I think the "85%" figure comes from a very generous definition of "use" and "site".

Again, misinformation. So far HTML5 is also not showing spectacular performance results. Here, check for yourself:

http://exposureroom.com/staging/Videoplayers.aspx

Quoted from the article:

"There is virtually no difference in performance between the Flash Video player and the Html video players. Both players exhibit the same issues during the same passages in the video. Basically, they are unable to playback these videos without dropping frames and as a result cause a visual jitter in shots involving moving images such as pans/dollies, zoom-in/out. Basically any time the images changes a lot and the player has to virtually re-draw the entire frame.
The Full Screen performance of Html 5 video is pathetic at best. At the time of this writing only Firefox (version 3.6) supports full screen mode. You need to right click on the video and choose full screen from the context menu.

Html 5 video adds no value over Flash Video or the native video players. Keep in mind that Html 5 Video is really about free, unencumbered video codecs (H.264 does not qualify). Ogg Theora is the proposed video codec (Dirac is another codec and is supposedly better than Ogg Theora)."

 

[barberio]

Again, misinformation. So far HTML5 is also not showing spectacular performance results. Here, check for yourself:

http://exposureroom.com/staging/Videoplayers.aspx

Quoted from the article:

"There is virtually no difference in performance between the Flash Video player and the Html video players. Both players exhibit the same issues during the same passages in the video. Basically, they are unable to playback these videos without dropping frames and as a result cause a visual jitter in shots involving moving images such as pans/dollies, zoom-in/out. Basically any time the images changes a lot and the player has to virtually re-draw the entire frame.
The Full Screen performance of Html 5 video is pathetic at best. At the time of this writing only Firefox (version 3.6) supports full screen mode. You need to right click on the video and choose full screen from the context menu.

Html 5 video adds no value over Flash Video or the native video players. Keep in mind that Html 5 Video is really about free, unencumbered video codecs (H.264 does not qualify). Ogg Theora is the proposed video codec (Dirac is another codec and is supposedly better than Ogg Theora)."

Um... The quoted article seems to suggest that HTML5 will not use h.264. Which as far as I know, and in contradiction to the zealots blocking use of it in Firefox, is completely wrong.

Prodding at their test... I find something a bit odd... All the tests are on one page, switching between them by javascript. So the Flash Plugin stays resident there because it's still on the rendered page, just hidden when you switch to one of the other video types. In effect, they have all three render methods loaded concurrently because of this 'all on one page and switch by javascript' method. Obviously this is going to make a performance hit on all the video tests. "Slick Webdesign" trumps trying to make a clean test environment.

 

[pmz]

My iphone is great and actually prefer it to my laptop for web browsing. Mostly because touch is easier to use. The flash issue has been a non-issue for me.

You and some 75 million. Its a total non-issue, and the Flash apologists do nothing but harm to everyone else.

If you don't already use ClicktoFlash, start today, because you'll never look back.