Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe Has 'Moved On' in Dispute With Apple Over Flash on iOS Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Shantanu Narayen sure is blunt. But he's honest and right. What else could Apple have expected? Both companies will be fine without Apple supporting Flash in iOS.
Agreed. There are solid reason why Apple doesn't support Flash, and those reasons are a spectrum. Since Jobs took the initiative to influence and move the titan monolith of the computer hardware/software industry, Adobe should be honest about their product and move toward the necessities of the future hardware/function.
Jobs is merely the sting-warning of movement within the industry that Adobe didn't foresee. Thus the whining and thrashing, but they've finally come to acceptance on some level.
Every sentence this guy uses has the word "closed" or "open" in it, and sadly he cannot understand the difference between the two.
AMEN! I have been saying this for soo long now! It is literally like watching history repeat itself! But this time Apple has learned its lessons, and there is more than one Microsoft haha!
BB and Symbian will fade, Android will stay, and probably WP7. To me WebOS with HP/Palm is the real wild card and potential competitor to the iOS platform!
Adobe: "We believe in open systems."
I am SOO SICK of their BS propaganda! FLASH IS CLOSED, stop trying to turn the argument back at Apple by twisting the truth because they didn't want to waste time supporting your crappy tech!
To tell you the truth -- I don't think Apple has learned. They need to get a move-on. As much as I hate my Droid, Android is becoming so widespread. And to top it off, AT&T reps aren't recommending people buy the iPhone 4.
I talked to a client of mine who went to the AT&T store to get a new phone. He wanted an iPhone. The rep said, "Oh, you shouldn't buy that. Those are on recall. Here's a Droid." How ridiculous.
I don't think its this cut and tried, and I don't think the analogy is valid.
First, Apple has a point, Flash is not a good mobile technology. Maybe one day it will become one, but Apple has succeeded not in being *first* to market, but *best* to market (in terms of experience for the user). Sure, you could argue that a lack of Flash is a "user experience issue", but certainly the world is not perfect and here Apple is making the choice between not having support for poor technologies and offering credible alternatives and future technology paths (that many in the marketplace are moving to) or continuing to support a poor technology that in and of itself is a poor user experience that just creates more problems (battery life, stability, etc).
Second, Adobe is *NOT* an open platform, either. This isn't about Apple locking down their platform as much as it is about Apple knowing how to create a good user experience and developer ecosystem. Flash on iOS has its upsides, but I don't see of any of them outweighing the downsides - whether you are a user, a developer (unless all you do is Flash/are Adobe, in which case you have bigger problems...diversify!), a business person, or Apple.
Third, Flash encourages designers to create user experiences that just don't work with mobile and multi-touch. Sure, you can slap on some mobile interface adjuncts in to Flash, but its lipstick on a pig. Flash well-implemented on a desktop device is rare, taking that same mediocre body of applications and trying to make it work on a environment that is fundamentally different in terms of user interface, experience, and hardware/software is not going to make things any better. Quite the opposite.
Finally, Flash is obselete. Sure, it is still very, very commonplace, but what application-level stuff does Flash do that other technologies don't? And technical differences like codecs, etc, etc aren't answers to that question - the question here is what application of the technology would Flash provide and provide in a more suitable/stable/better UX manner than the newer, more efficient technologies that are widely available? The answer is very few to none. Flash doesn't do anything really well, it does a bunch of things pretty poorly - it is good at a few things - but nothing other technologies can't do better, cheaper, and faster.
This isn't about Apple ruling a roost (well, kind of it is, but that's not the real problem here), this is about Adobe needing to deal with a dead technology and create a business model that doesn't rely on Flash.
The death knells for Apple have been called so many times, by so many pundits, on so many more serious issues. Sure, this is a hiccup, people are upset iOS devices won't eat Flash - but they'd also be upset with their iOS device "just didn't work" not because the device was poorly built/designed, but because it deigned itself to accept poor technology in the name of being "open" with Adobe (it makes me chuckle to see Adobe claim they're an open standards/technology company...not buying it).
First, Apple has a point, Flash is not a good mobile technology. Maybe one day it will become one, but Apple has succeeded not in being *first* to market, but *best* to market (in terms of experience for the user). Sure, you could argue that a lack of Flash is a "user experience issue", but certainly the world is not perfect and here Apple is making the choice between not having support for poor technologies and offering credible alternatives and future technology paths (that many in the marketplace are moving to) or continuing to support a poor technology that in and of itself is a poor user experience that just creates more problems (battery life, stability, etc).
Second, Adobe is *NOT* an open platform, either. This isn't about Apple locking down their platform as much as it is about Apple knowing how to create a good user experience and developer ecosystem. Flash on iOS has its upsides, but I don't see of any of them outweighing the downsides - whether you are a user, a developer (unless all you do is Flash/are Adobe, in which case you have bigger problems...diversify!), a business person, or Apple.
Third, Flash encourages designers to create user experiences that just don't work with mobile and multi-touch. Sure, you can slap on some mobile interface adjuncts in to Flash, but its lipstick on a pig. Flash well-implemented on a desktop device is rare, taking that same mediocre body of applications and trying to make it work on a environment that is fundamentally different in terms of user interface, experience, and hardware/software is not going to make things any better. Quite the opposite.
Finally, Flash is obselete. Sure, it is still very, very commonplace, but what application-level stuff does Flash do that other technologies don't? And technical differences like codecs, etc, etc aren't answers to that question - the question here is what application of the technology would Flash provide and provide in a more suitable/stable/better UX manner than the newer, more efficient technologies that are widely available? The answer is very few to none. Flash doesn't do anything really well, it does a bunch of things pretty poorly - it is good at a few things - but nothing other technologies can't do better, cheaper, and faster.
This isn't about Apple ruling a roost (well, kind of it is, but that's not the real problem here), this is about Adobe needing to deal with a dead technology and create a business model that doesn't rely on Flash.
The death knells for Apple have been called so many times, by so many pundits, on so many more serious issues. Sure, this is a hiccup, people are upset iOS devices won't eat Flash - but they'd also be upset with their iOS device "just didn't work" not because the device was poorly built/designed, but because it deigned itself to accept poor technology in the name of being "open" with Adobe (it makes me chuckle to see Adobe claim they're an open standards/technology company...not buying it).
Hey Adobe -- I've "moved on" too. I'm not buying any more of your crappy creative suite "upgrades" every 12 months....
The web has already moved on
And I've moved on too. Love Click-to-Flash, love YouTubes HTML5 and love my iPhone and iPad.
And I've moved on too. Love Click-to-Flash, love YouTubes HTML5 and love my iPhone and iPad.
Adobe: "We believe in open systems."
I am SOO SICK of their BS propaganda! FLASH IS CLOSED, stop trying to turn the argument back at Apple by twisting the truth because they didn't want to waste time supporting your crappy tech!
They said "open systems" not "open software"....
My comment was based more on the idea that this was just another sign of the analogy becoming true, rather than the determining factor. I don't like Flash nor the laggy Android OS (I went from an iPhone 3gs to Droid... ugh), and I wish iOS was in the hands of every consumer, but Google is singing the right tune with manufacturers.
Self Serving
Adobe clearly gave this we're so good, they're so bad, interview for the benefit of the European trade commission investigators, where Adobe has more hope of support than in U.S.
Adobe clearly gave this we're so good, they're so bad, interview for the benefit of the European trade commission investigators, where Adobe has more hope of support than in U.S.
The retail wonk will sell whatever he/she earns most commission on that week. If inventories of Android devices are up and supply for iPhone 4 is weeks out do you really think the salesperson is going to say "Sure, walk out the door and come back and see me in four weeks when I MIGHT have an iPhone 4 to sell you" to someone who is ready to plunk down their card for a phone that will get them a $100 commission and/or some bonus on moving inventory that didn't sell on its own merits? No, of course not, they're going to tell them that they don't want an iPhone 4 (insert BS reason like a "recall" or "antenna issues" here) and dangle another device that is high in inventory in front of them so they'll buy then and there. Besides, it would also be quite sensical to assume that the ATT regional/store managers would like to see inventory moved...so if there are Androids on the shelves, why wouldn't they encourage their sale especially when iPhone 4 is blowing out its targets and supply is constrained (either artificially or not) weeks if not months out?
AT&T reps are *NOT* not commending the iPhone 4, they're doing everything they can to maximize their take home (can you blame them?) and keep a customer from walking out the door.
This isn't about Apple learning - whether Flash makes it to iOS or not really won't make or break the iOS platform. In fact, if Android devices *do* get a full Flash implementation I'd love to see how users will react to 30 minutes of battery life, hard resets, and user interfaces that don't make sense with touch gestures (please, tell me and the millions of users out there - how exactly do you do a mouse-over event on a touchscreen - this event is one of the major UI elements in modern Flash designs....so either you hack in a "finger mouse mode" or your websites using Flash just don't work as designed. Neither is a good outcome - I'd rather have a greyed out puzzle piece/box than a menu that lies to me/strands me/obfuscates my input).
Flash being a poor technology is not Apple's fault and staying out of the quagmire of trying to make it work in an otherwise excellent user experience they've created is the right move - whether the market can see that in the short term or not remains to be seen, but I think this, like many other "Apple Death Knells" will, too, pass.
Who wins this war has *NOTHING* to do with technology. It has EVERYTHING to do with economics and delivering a user experience worth paying for if you're a user or playing in if you're a developer/partner.
Apple understands that - unfortunately Adobe and many others do not. Just take a look at their balance sheets and/or valuations to see which one is doing it wrong. It isn't Apple, guys.
AT&T reps are *NOT* not commending the iPhone 4, they're doing everything they can to maximize their take home (can you blame them?) and keep a customer from walking out the door.
This isn't about Apple learning - whether Flash makes it to iOS or not really won't make or break the iOS platform. In fact, if Android devices *do* get a full Flash implementation I'd love to see how users will react to 30 minutes of battery life, hard resets, and user interfaces that don't make sense with touch gestures (please, tell me and the millions of users out there - how exactly do you do a mouse-over event on a touchscreen - this event is one of the major UI elements in modern Flash designs....so either you hack in a "finger mouse mode" or your websites using Flash just don't work as designed. Neither is a good outcome - I'd rather have a greyed out puzzle piece/box than a menu that lies to me/strands me/obfuscates my input).
Flash being a poor technology is not Apple's fault and staying out of the quagmire of trying to make it work in an otherwise excellent user experience they've created is the right move - whether the market can see that in the short term or not remains to be seen, but I think this, like many other "Apple Death Knells" will, too, pass.
Who wins this war has *NOTHING* to do with technology. It has EVERYTHING to do with economics and delivering a user experience worth paying for if you're a user or playing in if you're a developer/partner.
Apple understands that - unfortunately Adobe and many others do not. Just take a look at their balance sheets and/or valuations to see which one is doing it wrong. It isn't Apple, guys.
The proprietary Adobe Flash(TM) is a necessary part of the "Open" Internet.
Google is not a for-profit corporation with a fiduciary duty to make greater profits for its shareholders.
Google Does No Evil.
Google and Verizon are huge proponents of the open "public" internet.
The above was not doublespeak.
Google is not a for-profit corporation with a fiduciary duty to make greater profits for its shareholders.
Google Does No Evil.
Google and Verizon are huge proponents of the open "public" internet.
The above was not doublespeak.
I couldn't care less... Because this ordeal made me decide to get an Android phone. I don't need big brother telling me what I can and can't install on my device. If I want to use crappy software, then that's my prerogative.
No Flash on my Android Phone
Why exactly is there trade investigations on Flash not on the Iphone. I mean is it on any phone at the moment really? I keep hearing I'm going to be getting it for my android phone, but so far no luck, and the demos of it running under 2.2 was underwhelming to say the least, so why exactly do they investigate apple, when that software wont run on any other mobile phones either.
-Tig
Why exactly is there trade investigations on Flash not on the Iphone. I mean is it on any phone at the moment really? I keep hearing I'm going to be getting it for my android phone, but so far no luck, and the demos of it running under 2.2 was underwhelming to say the least, so why exactly do they investigate apple, when that software wont run on any other mobile phones either.
-Tig
Sorry, I didn't make myself clear (again). What I meant was Apple didn't learn from the Macintosh vs Windows era in the sense that they need to innovate 10x harder in order to compete with the number of manufacturers on the other end.
My moot point is not necessarily connected to this Adobe vs Apple issue. It's more of a Apple vs Google+HTC+Motorola+etc...
It's a matter of Apple banning it - other manufacturers just "haven't gotten to it," I'd say. Or they know it'll kill battery life.