Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hmmm, even the companies that already support Flash fully on their phones are moving to HTML5 Web runtimes for that kind of app/widget....

Hmmm, except that Flash is used for much more than video..., even the two companies where Steve Jobs is the largest shareholder (Pixar and Disney) show off their new movie offerings in rich, wonderful, totally Flash sites. Not because Steve doesn't hate Adobe, but because Flash is the best tool in the business to achieve the results they want.

As to video, now we have truly OPEN and FREE HD video codec, WebM, courtesy of Google. Yet Apple has been mum about supporting it, and I don't see any of the "open"-minded Steve worshipers here clamoring for Safari support.

With youtube leading the way to the open and free WebM for HD material, and Apple refusing to support it, the Flash plugin might still be the only way Safari users can watch their videos.... :rolleyes: Because Flash supports WebM, of course.

Oh, and in a year or two from now, when every other mobile device fully supports Flash, there will be very little incentive for many companies to spend the resources to cater to the 5 iPhone users left. LOL.
 
Adobe are pathetic

"They've chosen to keep their system closed and we'd rather work with partners who are interested in working with us."

They've certainly chosen to keep the system closed to software with persistent long term bug issues. But bluntly you can only work with partners who are interested in working with you. That's not a choice, it's being rejected.

"We believe in open systems. We believe in the power of the internet and in customers making choices and I think a lot of the controversy was about their decision at that point. They've made their choice. We've made ours and we've moved on."

They spend a lot of time on dishonest self justification for someone who's moved on.

"It's a business decision. With the energy and innovation that our company has, we'd rather focus on people who want to deliver the best experience with Flash and there are so many of them."

Wheras Apple would rather focus on people who want to deliver the best experience with video, for which Flash could once have been an option, but Adobe's serial failure to deliver quality software in realistic timescales has made irrelevant.

Grow up Adobe. Accept that you've been rejected, and move on.
 
Which makes the released standard useless for well over half of what Flash is used for. Its like Microsoft releasing a DirectX standard but doesn't release the part that interacts with the Kernel and Drivers.

50% of sites using Flash somehow use the DRM server ? Really ? :rolleyes:

And the DRM server is as uselful as interacting with the kernel ? So really, Gnash doesn't work at all going by your indications, because if DirectX couldn't talk to the drivers, nothing would come out of your speakers or show up on screen.

Seriously, why do you post up such ridiculous comments is beyond me. The DRM server is useful only for paid content, like Hulu or Youtube's pay streaming. This is a minuscule portion of the content on the Web. And there's a reason behind not releasing the information, because the DRM can and will be cracked, since it uses security through obscurity (and it has been cracked and reverse engineered. Anyone who cares can re-implement it).

...which is the very big reason to keep supporting Flash (as opposet to HTML5 only), according to YouTube/Google.

The bottom line is: the 'open spec' Flash is no better than the video tag.

I didn't know the video tag could do programmable vector graphics that can be used for animations/menus/interactive content/games. Oh right it can't.

DO you actually know what OPEN means? Just curious. :rolleyes:

Being a Linux user for over 10 years ? I think I have a good idea. This is as open as OpenGL ES, because I know you'll say that since the spec is under the control of 1 entity, it means it is closed, even though it is a published spec that can be used to re-implement it, just like OpenGL ES, which is a published spec under the control of the Khronos Group.

There are varying levels of open. Shades of grey.
 
Contradiction

...Yet Apple has been mum about supporting it... ...and Apple refusing to support it ...

Make you mind up.

Also, a truly open standard, needs to be a standard, which is something that has been accepted by the community. And to be truly open, the community should have had a truly open input into it's definition.

This is not a truly open standard, whether or not, it's open now.
 
Meanwhile the consumer can get Android phones from tens of thousands of stores around the world, and Symbian phones from hundreds of thousands of stores...

You can not try the Android or Symbian phones in almost all the stores.
 
50% of sites using Flash somehow use the DRM server ? Really ? :rolleyes:

Considering most flash sites containing flash are video sites or used for advertising, then yes.

And the DRM server is as uselful as interacting with the kernel ? So really, Gnash doesn't work at all going by your indications, because if DirectX couldn't talk to the drivers, nothing would come out of your speakers or show up on screen.

GDI doesn't require DirectX or Drivers to work.

Seriously, why do you post up such ridiculous comments is beyond me.

Same could be said for you.
 
Believe in open system? Nothing is more closed that adobe flash. Make it open source and then speak.
 
Flash is a closed source product. Adobe needs to acknowledge that they bought a dying product and cut losses. While flash has its uses still - html 5...

There is a long way to go before HTML5 is fully supported as a leading web technology.

And yes, Flash is a closed product (as are most Adobe products) but the same goes for Apple, by far. I'd even go to argue that Apple is more closed off than Adobe but then it would not be a fair comparison as Apple does alot more than just software.
Grow up Adobe. Accept that you've been rejected, and move on.

Isn't that the main point of this article?
 
Considering most flash sites containing flash are video sites or used for advertising, then yes.

Uh ? video sites don't all use the DRM server components. Only paid streaming sites. And ads ? What are you on about ? Do you even have a clue what it is you're talking about ?

GDI doesn't require DirectX or Drivers to work.

Isn't it like afternoon in New Zealand ? Haven't had your coffee since this morning ? What are you talking about here ? GDI ?

You made an analogy. You said Flash with the DRM components is like Direct X without kernel or driver access.

I said if Direct X doesn't have access to the kernel, that is the equivalent of Flash not displaying anything at all on screen or outputting sound. Obviously, all those parts are in the Flash spec. Your analogy was bad, I was pointing it out. I wasn't talking about Flash using Direct X over GDI or anything like that...

Jesus, your analogy managed to confused you ? Seriously, stop replying unless you can even follow your own string of replies. You're just all over the place and really mixed up.

Believe in open system? Nothing is more closed that adobe flash. Make it open source and then speak.

http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/

People are confused. Open doesn't mean Open source. Something can be opened and close source at the same time. There are 2 things here, standards/specifications and implementations.

You can have a closed source implementation of an open standard/specification.
 
Speaking of moving on from Adobe Flash, I really wonder is Apple very close to publicly releasing its Gianduia framework for writing Rich Internet Apps. If Apple can make Gianduia work under Google Chrome 5.0 and later, Microsoft Internet Explorer 9.0 (due early in 2011), and Mozilla Firefox 4.0 (due December 2010), we may have the first really viable alternative to Flash--one that is Apple-developed and will with in Windows Vista/7, MacOS X 10.5 to 10.6 variants, and iOS 4.0, meaning what you see on the iPad will be same as what you see on the Mac and on Windows.
 
Maybe you should actually read the message I was responding to before you make an ignorant comment.

I did read the message you responded to. It was true.

The open standard alternative to Flash that people are discussing is HTML5 and related technologies. Not iOS.
 
I didn't know the video tag could do programmable vector graphics that can be used for animations/menus/interactive content/games. Oh right it can't.

Why would you use the video tag for something the canvas tag does so well?
You know animations/interactive content/games...


Video Tag for Video.
Canvas Tag for Animations and Games.
CSS for Menu's

Use the right tool for the job, if you must use Flash or Silverlight where DRM'ed content is needed.
 
Wheras Apple would rather focus on people who want to deliver the best experience with video, for which Flash could once have been an option, but Adobe's serial failure to deliver quality software in realistic timescales has made irrelevant.

Grow up Adobe. Accept that you've been rejected, and move on.

I don't understand the problem people have with Flash. On Windows it functions quite well with little hit on performance, even on my laptop. It's a hog on the Mac, but I attribute that more to Apple's controlling nature through their terribly NOT OPEN API.

You see, Apple sets companies like Adobe up on their own platform. They make it so they have the advantage, so that they are the ones that can directly access hardware, etc. It allows them to create software that can blow away other Mac developers in speed, etc and gives them total control.

How's about Apple gives Adobe a more complete access like the Windows API does?

And the funny thing is that Apple can't seem to use the Windows API very well or they can't port to save their lives. iTunes is a horrible hog on Windows that is good at stopping the system. Safari is terrible.

It seems Apple can only make good software when they make all the rules that they play by. Same with hardware. If Apple did something akin to variety available in the Windows market then they'd make Microsoft's past problems look light in comparison.

Apple is all about control. They want your life to revolve around them and they will limit your ability to do things in order to benefit them. They only push HTML 5 because Flash exposes the flaws in their iOS development and issues with their hardware and software.

Apple doesn't really develop software anyways. They find someone else that developed software and buy them up. Unlike MS, they didn't build their own operating system. They built a shell for Unix.

And while they can predict how Flash is dying, they also don't know if Adobe has anything in the offing.

So, I will agree that Adobe's own claims of being "open" aren't true either, Apple painting themselves as being forward thinking or bailing on Flash because they see the future clearly is ridiculous. I betcha they can't implement it successfully on their iOS products because of poor design and so they came up with an excuse.

The prudent thing to do would have been to give Flash support for the time being but announce a push to move towards HTML5. The fact that they didn't do that leads me to believe that they couldn't. They rushed their hardware and software designs because of public pressure (iPad) and pressure from competition (iPhone because Android is doing quite well). The truth is that Apple's products probably would be exposed for the mediocre machines they are if they supported Flash. How bad would it look if an Android phone could blow away the iPhone in a Flash benchmark? So you might as well eliminate that as a benchmark and claim you're just trying to be "open".
 
You mean like iOS?

So what? iOS is for running apps, not for running publicly served Internet content. It makes sense for publicly served content to be open. It's not necessary to run apps on a privately developed platform.
 
Žalgiris;10856391 said:
What does that mean?

Something can be open without being open source.

This is a common misconception with laymen, they don't understand the nuance between open source, and just open spec.

Why would you use the video tag for something the canvas tag does so well?
You know animations/interactive content/games...

I was responding to a poster that was suggesting that, not suggesting it myself. *sigh*.

And for your information, the Canvas tag can't do vector graphics on its own, your browser needs SVG support. And SVG is one of those 10 year old web standard that never caught on thanks to that little known company in Redmond, Washington.

Flash is much more than what just HTML5 can replace. It has much larger scope. Not everything in Flash is yet standardized elsewhere or if it is, well supported by the browsers.

Use the right tool for the job, if you must use Flash or Silverlight where DRM'ed content is needed.

Something I've been saying all along. Also something that requires vendors to not actively put effort into banning the right tools...
 
Hmm I smell a repeat in history :p

Yes. If Apple would admit they're a software company and not a hardware company, they could win the war, and not just a few battles. Every HP, Sony, Dell could license the OS. Or make all your software for Windows too. Your market potential increases 95%! Allow OSX to run on all PCs and dual boot. Sokol many people would buy a copy. Then a copy of iLife. And all of Apples software. I have to figure this is part of the backup plan put into place when they went to Intel hardware.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.