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

Adobe Officially Ends Flash Support, Recommends Uninstalling Immediately

I think Adobe deserved this. For all of their software that Apple users sat and waited for updates and bug fixes. I thought it odd that Steve Jobs said that, but after waiting how long for Adobe software updates after Apple updated the OS, ended up wholeheartedly agreeing with him. Keep Flash off anything mobile, and let Flash die.

And speaking of old crapware, what happened to Shockwave? (Mac EOL March 2017, PC April 2019) And didn't they have something else called 'Air' at one point? (It seems to be a 'stable' product, still available. Usable?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
Serban55 said:
People trash apple again like they did with flash in 2007-2008 , but now about no charger and this fall about no port iphone
And after 10 years nobody will care anymore and everybody will be on the same boat
Apple is the only one who can make this bold moves and take the trash talking after
Thank you Apple no matter what other says
Click to expand...
They do lead in so many areas, and funny how the slanderers are dropping chargers too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
jinnj said:
This quote is a stupid at the idiots that complain that the Commodore 64 is still the best computer because it was instant on. Flash is a resource hog. Quit comparing to other frameworks React/Angular are popular but no where near the plain HTML levels.
Click to expand...
Most people don't write in plain HTML. Most of the web is written with JS-based frameworks, and the result is a lot less efficient than the old ways with Flash. I don't want Flash to come back, just want the replacements to be actually faster like people claim they are. They clearly aren't, and there's no reason to get defensive about it.
 
Last edited:
  • Angry
  • Disagree
Reactions: jinnj and NetMage
DailySlow said:
...Like that (cannot remember the name) early "html" tool - by Adobe that was amazing and cool in days of hand coding html - cool for using fonts, images, background colors, blah blah but when you were done editing/creating it the output was a grid of jpgs and/or gifs so that your page was a table of images! that was uneditable unless you had the software.
Click to expand...
Sounds like ImageReady. Used for sites like this from 1999ish. I was so proud for how well it was optimized at the time.
 
Last edited:
hot-gril said:
Most people don't write in plain HTML. Most of the web is written with JS-based frameworks, and the result is a lot less efficient than the old ways with Flash. I don't want Flash to come back, just want the replacements to be actually faster like people claim they are. They clearly aren't, and there's no reason to get defensive about it.
Click to expand...
HTML5?
 
DailySlow said:
Like ShockWave, it had its day and Adobe made it very easy for developers to deploy it - meanwhile sucking up lots of info on users. Like that (cannot remember the name) early "html" tool - by Adobe that was amazing and cool in days of hand coding html - cool for using fonts, images, background colors, blah blah but when you were done editing/creating it the output was a grid of jpgs and/or gifs so that your page was a table of images! that was uneditable unless you had the software. I was hired to "fix and update" a website that used it and had to re-create it in plain html since I did not have the Adobe tool and couldn't scrounge it, meanwhile the client asking why can't you just type in new text? LOL. . Adobe did a lot of stuff good and bad - taking over Macromedia was not a good one. But postscript fonts (vector, not bitmapped) enabled so much.
Click to expand...
Dreamweaver?

I was using it when it was from MacroMedia. It was pretty good, but I still sometimes needed to tweak some small bits to keep websites working, polish the code. The software barfed out really bloated HTML code, but that's not a surprise either to experienced programmers I'm sure.

I still have a MacroMedia Dreamweaver backpack I got with the last update from MacroMedia before they were assimilated by Adobe, and went down the toilet.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: amartinez1660
Wasn't as bad as realplayer, but it was bad. It was the choice of malware developers all over the world.

Now just to rid ourselves of silverlight and anything else still lingering that isn't using HTML 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
DailySlow said:
Like that (cannot remember the name) early "html" tool - by Adobe that was amazing and cool in days of hand coding html - cool for using fonts, images, background colors, blah blah but when you were done editing/creating it the output was a grid of jpgs and/or gifs so that your page was a table of images!
Click to expand...
macdisciple said:
Sounds like ImageReady. Used for sites like this from 1999ish. I was so proud for how well it was optimized at the time.
Click to expand...
I think it was Adobe GoLive.
 
Flash brought at lot of great things at the turn of the millennium. Strongbad e-mails were a weekly thing during college for me. But just like me through college the web grew up and said that Flash doesn’t need to be part of its adult life. I’ll remember those days (mostly) fondly but I will not miss them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WigWag Workshop
hot-gril said:
They do, and of course you can write a game with anything, but it's hard. Flash made it much easier back then than it is today with modern tools, and there was a huge abundance of Flash games. Even middle/high school kids could make decent stuff with it.
Click to expand...
Speak for yourself. I found working with Flash much more difficult that writing Direct X games - let alone HTML 5 games.
 
hot-gril said:
Flash used, like, 1/1024 the CPU that many modern websites like Facebook and Twitter do with their heavy JS. Why, cause CPUs were that much slower back then. Not defending the use of Flash on sites, always disliked that too, but the web is still trash.
Click to expand...
Its ads. I have just a few sites I visit and the ads are a killer to the enjoyment of the site. Not only does it take up a MASSIVE amount of screen real estate on some sites even at 4K resolution, but it makes scrolling and just navigation sluggish. I prefer sites like Macrumors that lets me pay for a membership to avoid the ads, because I just need to use Brave browser to avoid ads elsewhere!
 
xWhiplash said:
Its ads. I have just a few sites I visit and the ads are a killer to the enjoyment of the site. Not only does it take up a MASSIVE amount of screen real estate on some sites even at 4K resolution, but it makes scrolling and just navigation sluggish. I prefer sites like Macrumors that lets me pay for a membership to avoid the ads, because I just need to use Brave browser to avoid ads elsewhere!
Click to expand...
But it's sluggish even with the ads blocked. The new FB layout is peak awfulness, both on the eyes and on the CPU. The MR forums site is unusually clean in both those respects, always has been, which I appreciate.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
Adobe still makes flash the developer tool though don’t they?
So will they (or have they already) stripped it from exporting flash files?
just using HTML5 and other export formats.
 
The browser plugins served their role in the early days, when browser/HTML technology did not have enough power and functionality, but at the same time they got overused and exploited by the same designers, advertisers, hackers, companies, etc that now want us to believe that we live in happy and safe days with Javascript.
 
Finally!

Now for Opus and AV1 to replace proprietary/royalty formats like AAC and H.265.
 
Agent47 said:
Good riddance to Flash, RealPlayer, Divx, SilverLight, and all of the other crap codecs and plug-ins that made early multimedia such a catastrophe. Some of it may have been necessary, but in the end it seem to serve everyone except the end-user.
Click to expand...
My workplace still uses a Silverlight application they launched 3 years ago....
 
eRondeau said:
A little perspective...

Flash was released by Macromedia 25 years ago, which was purchased by Adobe in 2005. At that time the web was in an uncomfortable transition from a text-based environment to a multimedia environment. The demand for rich content was strong except nobody knew quite how to do it. The eventual winner (HTML-5) was still years away, so for a decade Flash was about the only reliable way to get video & multimedia online. Flash dominated "Web 2.0" for years and professional Flash websites were stunningly impressive indeed. Its downfall is well-documented in Steve Jobs' open letter and elsewhere, but in the years before many young adults reading this were born -- Flash was ubiquitous online and in many ways was the backbone of the public internet.
Click to expand...
It’s an interesting history for sure. We used Macromind Director for multimedia product development around 1990, which was the precursor to Macromind, Flash and eventually Adobe’s acquisition. While Flash has been problematic in recent years, its usage across three decades of rapid technology change is remarkable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
JCCL said:
Why - most people are pushing for USB-C....the lightning port is one of the most hated things of an iPhone. I could do with only having wireless as I barely every use the lightning port since my iPhone X.....only for the occasional fast charge when I forgot charging earlier and need to leave in a hurry. But that's being solved with faster wireless charging. Not a fan of the propietary mag-safe charger either tough.
Click to expand...
I use the lightning port for HDMI out whilst traveling or when we want to watch something that is from my iTunes library at a friends and they don't have an Apple TV to airplay to.

The lightning port is useful, personally can't see myself buying a new phone that doesn't have an answer to that. Yeah, I can use my iPad also but sometimes I don't have that with me, it's a rare use but I can't see myself spending large sums of money on something that does less than the device I'm replacing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
TheRealNick said:
The issue with the lightning port is that I’d have to carry a bigger charger everywhere with me in comparison to the lightning plug.

in addition, no one, not even Apple has managed to create wireless headphones that don’t sound terrible and/or disconnect every 5-10 minutes. When those issues are fixed I’ll embrace removing the lightning port.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. I bought Bose Quiet Comfort earbuds that just came out and to me they sound great and really no signal drop outs as long as I stay with reasonable range of iPhone or MacBook Pro. I do however understand your stated concerns because even as much as I love these, I know they will never sound as well as my Sennheiser HD600’s I have though I will also admit that they (Sennheiser) do not get used as much because of that lightning to 3.5mm cable keeps wearing out after a while. So much so I have more drop outs with that then I do with the Bose QC earbuds. Just my opinion.
 
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