Adobe Responds to Apple's Anti-Flash Stance With Comments on Openness, Ad Campaign

[MorphingDragon]

Check out the Flex SDK and the Eclipse integration. It's all free and Free (you're an open source guy right ?). It was used to make many of the Facebook apps, which are far from highly crippled.

I was talking about online apps. Games, Movie Streaming etc. Flex allows flash devs to feel the power of desktop application development. I know Objective-C and a little C# so I couldn't care about flex.

Honestly, there are a few opensource gems. (Linux Kernel, FreeBSD, Mozilla, KDE, Fedora Project, Android, Chrome, OpenSUSE, WebKit, VLC mainly) But a lot of it is tripe on a bike, especially compared to those 'evil' proprietary solutions.

Ignorance doesn't turn fantasy into reality.

Im sure you could take a lesson on that.

 

[John.B]

Like I said, I never had CS4 for Mac. I have CS3 Web Premium for Mac, CS4 Web Premium for Windows, and now I'm upgrading to CS5 Master Collection for one of the above.

I'd upgrade Photoshop only, except CS3 and Snow Leopard aren't very good friends... plus a lot of stuff happened between CS3 and CS4 in all the CS applications, especially on the UI side.

Unless you have an extra Ps CS(x) license lying about, I don't think you can "upgrade" from Web Premium to just Photoshop...

 

[Anuba]

How is it that ABC, MSNBC, Youtube, has no problem with html 5. Only Adobe. All these Adobe fanboys need to realize that Apple don't your phone or pad to break because of some poorly developed product and you go blaming apple for it.

When will people stop throwing these irrational "fanboy" accusations around? What the hell is a Flash "fanboy" and why would those exist? It's the content people are after, not the platform itself. Are there "paper fanboys" too? Do you automatically belong to a special paper fanclub because you read books and magazines?

Car drivers aren't "asphalt fanboys", but they'll still be p*ssed off if the car manufacturer removed the rubber tires, put steel wheels in their place and told buyers they can only drive on railroads from now on.

Also it seems we all forget another industry that requires the use of a specific language for developing for their products (The Gaming industry). Sony ain't crying that you can't develop Xbox games using their stuff. So why must adobe care? If they are sure about their Flash then should not bitch and completely ignore apple and concentrate on other devices.

Maybe they feel a duty to care because they owe some responsibility to the millions of first- and second hand customers who have invested billions in the Flash platform by buying Adobe's applications and server software, as well as Flash content from third parties? Adobe could be happy to abandon Flash for all we know, but it would look really irresponsible if they were to just shrug and go "whatever".

 

[BaldiMac]

They are big enough companies with deep enough pockets to create HTML5 versions for devices that can handle HTML5 video, while also continuing to support Flash versions for all the other devices. ABC, MSNBC, YouTube, etc are not choosing HTML5 over Flash. They're just providing a special version so that their content can also run on Apple iDevices.

Deep pockets aren't really that necessary with respect to video. Especially if the current flash video is already encoded in H.264. All we are really talking about is adding 3 or 4 lines of HTML to let the browser choose between playing the video natively or using flash.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I make actual flash apps.

Those 'other' flash creators are highly crippled.

I code in Flash as well- pretty deep stuff. And no not all flash creators are highly crippled. But we're not the mainstream anyway. Tools that make it easy for non-programmers to generate rich media allow a lot of people to not have to become programmers to enrich their website content with rich media (not just video). For them to do the same in HTML5 + H.264 + javascript right now means they would pretty much have to hire guys like me (and you?) to code the equivalent of what they can do now by hand. Great for me(us). Not great for them if money is tight.

I can definitely say that it is not necessary to pay Adobe a cent to still be able to produce some valuable, useful stuff in Flash. There is no monopoly on Flash such that we have to give money to Adobe to produce Flash content. Instead the Flash player is free, and there are plenty of alternatives to Adobe software that renders Flash that will play in that Free player.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Deep pockets aren't really that necessary with respect to video. Especially if the current flash video is already encoded in H.264. All we are really talking about is adding 3 or 4 lines of HTML to let the browser choose between playing the video natively or using flash.

That's right, but I also made the point that Flash is not just video. If we're talking about just video, then it's pretty easy to embrace HTML5 versions to serve up to Apple iDevices (while still keeping your Flash version going to serve the 92% of the world that can't work well (yet) with HTML5 standards).

But as soon as you consider the rest of what Flash can do, it's no longer "just 3 or 4 lines of code", and there aren't any major tools to simplify the creation of that non-video rich media remotely on par with what people use every day to render rich media in Flash. (and by this, I'm not talking about just software from Adobe).

 

[bobborries]

An open and closed case

Over 40 organizations are working on HTML5, anyone can help and here's a short list, Apple, AT&T, Ericson, Google, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Mozilla, Nokia, Samsung, Sony, Boeing, Stanford, Oxford, the general public and of course Adobe.

Whose crafting Flash? Just Adobe.

 

[John.B]

Instead the Flash player is free, and there are plenty of alternatives to Adobe software that renders Flash that will play in that Free player.

Let's not oversell the value proposition here. That "free" Flash player is the penultimate insecure web-based plug-in, behind only Adobe's "free" PDF reader.

 

[MorphingDragon]

I code in Flash as well- pretty deep stuff. And no not all flash creators are highly crippled. But we're not the mainstream anyway. Tools that make it easy for non-programmers to generate rich media allow a lot of people to not have to become programmers to enrich their website content with rich media (not just video). For them to do the same in HTML5 + H.264 + javascript right now means they would pretty much have to hire guys like me (and you?) to code the equivalent of what they can do now by hand. Great for me(us). Not great for them if money is tight.

I can definitely say that it is not necessary to pay Adobe a cent to still be able to produce some valuable, useful stuff in Flash. There is no monopoly on Flash such that we have to give money to Adobe to product Flash content. Instead the Flash player is free, and there are plenty of alternatives to Adobe software that renders Flash that will play in that Free player.

I have no interest in going any further in Internet Development or Design.

I only know flash because its part of one of my papers. I only know HTLM and CSS because my High School taught it. We being a part time web designer was totally not intentional.

 

[Anuba]

Over 40 organizations are working on HTML5, anyone can help and here's a short list, Apple, AT&T, Ericson, Google, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Mozilla, Nokia, Samsung, Sony, Boeing, Stanford, Oxford, the general public and of course Adobe.

Whose crafting Flash? Just Adobe.

Who's crafting OS X? Just Apple. But there are dozens of organizations working on Linux, anyone can help. Let's all switch OS right now, because the quantity of entities working on an OS is a guarantee that it's superior in terms of quality, stability, performance and compatibility.

Oh wait...

 

[rish]

What a total joke

We all know the future does not stand still especialy a tech future yet here we have a company holding on with knuckles white trying to fight the inevitable tide that affects any company in the tech industry for failing to continue to deliver a product fit for the future and low power hardware.

Gruber pointed out that despite the attempted spin on showing that Flash works fine on touch enabled devices it clearly crashed.

Flash should be repackaged as Crash. Crashing out of the future.

 

[KnightWRX]

I was talking about online apps. Games, Movie Streaming etc. Flex allows flash devs to feel the power of desktop application development. I know Objective-C and a little C# so I couldn't care about flex.

So wait, Farmville isn't an online app now ?

Seriously, quit it. Steve Jobs can be and is wrong. You're just making yourself look bad, especialy after claiming to be a flash developper.

 

[iLunar]

I code in Flash as well- pretty deep stuff. And no not all flash creators are highly crippled. But we're not the mainstream anyway. Tools that make it easy for non-programmers to generate rich media allow a lot of people to not have to become programmers to enrich their website content with rich media (not just video). For them to do the same in HTML5 + H.264 + javascript right now means they would pretty much have to hire guys like me (and you?) to code the equivalent of what they can do now by hand. Great for me(us). Not great for them if money is tight.

I can definitely say that it is not necessary to pay Adobe a cent to still be able to produce some valuable, useful stuff in Flash. There is no monopoly on Flash such that we have to give money to Adobe to produce Flash content. Instead the Flash player is free, and there are plenty of alternatives to Adobe software that renders Flash that will play in that Free player.

You're talking about a rich multi-media experience. Fine, Flash will continue to dominate that section. However, NOT all websites need to be done in a rich multi-media experience, and if they are, the content of those sites need to be delivered in other formats for accessibility. It is just lazy web designers/developers that DO NOT deliver their content in as many media as possible.

It becomes about usability. No one is taking Flash away from developers. However, if a developer wants their content to be seen in mobile platforms, is Flash really the best delivery platform? Even IF Adobe released a flash player that was okay to use on a mobile device (and they have yet to do so, btw), would you as a designer think it is the best platform to deliver your content? I seriously doubt it.

I get so sick of the rich-media arguments, because those websites should only be designed for a specific audience. Car companies have no excuses for not having a mobile website. Nike has no excuse for not having a mobile website. That is the responsibility of the designer/developer, to use the necessary tools for all platforms available. Adobe/Apple can piss-off for all I care, but web designers need to realize how/where/when their content is being viewed. I am speaking as a web designer.

 

[seashellz]

HTML 5. H.364. 'nuff said

 

[BaldiMac]

That's right, but I also made the point that Flash is not just video. If we're talking about just video, then it's pretty easy to embrace HTML5 versions to serve up to Apple iDevices (while still keeping your Flash version going to serve the 92% of the world that can't work well (yet) with HTML5 standards).

But as soon as you consider the rest of what Flash can do, it's no longer "just 3 or 4 lines of code", and there aren't any major tools to simplify the creation of that non-video rich media remotely on par with what people use every day to render rich media in Flash. (and by this, I'm not talking about just software from Adobe).

What you said was:

"They are big enough companies with deep enough pockets to create HTML5 versions for devices that can handle HTML5 video..."

I do not agree that deep pockets are required for the video part.

I agree that the rest of Flash functions will require more expense. HTML5 is not even ready to replace those functions except in the most basic uses. Jobs acknowledged that when he presented the app store as an alternative to flash games rather than HTML5.

 

[pubwvj]

Flash Sucks CRU

Cripes. Instead of fixing Flash Adobe is trying to bully their way to get vendors to allow the usage of a crippled product. Fact is Flash is garbage. Flash is for advertising and glitz. Flash is a memory, processor and bandwidth hog. Flash sucks CRU. I've been running with Flash turned off 99% of the time for years. Flash is permanently off on our family iPods and iPads, of course, and we certainly don't miss it. If Adobe wants to get their products used they should try actually producing quality products.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Let's not oversell the value proposition here. That "free" Flash player is the penultimate insecure web-based plug-in, behind only Adobe's "free" PDF reader.

John B. It seems your mind is extraordinarily made to favor only one stance in this debate. You've both made up support and quoted info that only loosely might support such a stance. I respect that you feel as you do toward Flash. But, just because YOU consider it as you do, does not mean that ALL others should feel the same, nor your view of how bad it is makes it equally bad for all others.

I would guess just about every person that reads such a comment probably has the free Flash player installed on their computer(s). I would guess that many of them use it in spite of its apparent or actual shortcomings, fast or slow speed, reliable or buggy performance, battery burning or efficient qualities, and so on. Whether it is or is not insecure, buggy, an abomination, the worst thing ever created by man, etc, there are still those who would rather have it as an option for THEIR own purposes than to have Apple decide for them that they shall not have it. I'm in this camp.

I can appreciate it's shortcomings, and I can appreciate that some people feel as passionately as you do that it is a big pile of ____, but it still has it's place in the world, has for a very long time, and will have for a very long time to come. Guys like you can post a million maximum bashes against it in threads like this, but until the rest of the world (about 92% strong) decides to upgrade or switch to hardware and software that can actually play HTML5 + H.264 + javascript rich media, Flash remains THE way to reach the vast majority of the world with rich media beyond what HTML4 can handle.

In many ways, I could easily argue with you against Adobe and Flash, but the fact is that a whole lot of the web serves up rich media in Flash, and I- for one- would rather have ways to access such media- if I wish to do so- rather than have any entity decide that I shall not even have the OPTION to do that, if I otherwise want to own and use that entities products for their many other benefits. Batteries, security, browser crashes, et all be d*mned if that is what I would like to do with a device that I own.

 

[iLunar]

I can appreciate it's shortcomings, and I can appreciate that some people feel as passionately as you do that it is a big pile of ____, but it still has it's place in the world, has for a very long time, and will have for a very long time to come. Guys like you can post a million maximum bashes against it in threads like this, but until the rest of the world (about 92% strong) decides to upgrade or switch to hardware and software that can actually play HTML5 + H.264 + javascript rich media, Flash remains THE way to reach the vast majority of the world with rich media beyond what HTML4 can handle.

In many ways, I could easily argue with you against Adobe and Flash, but the fact is that a whole lot of the web serves up rich media in Flash, and I- for one- would rather have ways to access such media- if I wish to do so- rather than have any entity decide that I shall not even have the OPTION to do that, if I otherwise want to own and use that entities products for their many other benefits. Batteries, security, browser crashes, et all be d*mned if that is what I would like to do with a device that I own.

But that is YOUR personal preference. I'd much rather have a consistent website that can be displayed on my desktop and mobile browser than anything else. If I want a rich-media experience, that is what the App Store is for or Flash on a desktop browser.

Has Adobe provided a way to get rich-media on mobile devices that is something I can actually install and test myself today? If not, the entire argument for rich-media on mobile devices is moot.

 

[Anuba]

We all know the future does not stand still especialy a tech future yet here we have a company holding on with knuckles white trying to fight the inevitable tide

You're making it sound like Adobe was some old dinosaur trying to convince everyone to stick with vinyl records after the CD format had arrived.

That's not even close to the situation here. When technology paradigm shifts occur, say VHS>DVD>Blu-ray or NMT>GSM>3G, it's because the new alternative is so unquestionably superior from every conceivable point of view that only a luddite would resist it.

But the alternative to Flash isn't what DVD was to VHS, it's just another VCR format and the recorders are still prototypes with wires hanging out of them. There's still a long way to go before it's an established standard that content providers can trust to deliver, as intended, WYSIWYG wise. HTML5/Canvas can currently not do everything that Flash can do, it's not yet ready for prime time, heck it's not even supported by IE which holds over 60% of the browser market. Yes, unlike Flash, HTML5 is "open", but if you think that's a great sales pitch you must also think that Linux holds an amazing competitive edge over OS X and Windows.

It's great to be in a hurry to future shores and all, but jumping off the boat a few miles off shore won't get you to the future any faster, it will only get you wet.

 

[MorphingDragon]

So wait, Farmville isn't an online app now ?

Seriously, quit it. Steve Jobs can be and is wrong. You're just making yourself look bad, especialy after claiming to be a flash developper.

Thats so like you, distorting the context of the argument.

My comments were aimed at the Flash Professional Clones (What looked like everybody else was talking about). Not Flex. I couldn't care for flex.

---

Anything to make farmville die is a good thing.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

You're talking about a rich multi-media experience. Fine, Flash will continue to dominate that section. However, NOT all websites need to be done in a rich multi-media experience, and if they are, the content of those sites need to be delivered in other formats for accessibility. It is just lazy web designers/developers that DO NOT deliver their content in as many media as possible.

Or it could be cash-pinched budgets with demands for reaching the biggest possible audience.

Or it could be a teacher who has a tool for creating her interactive elearning course and rendering it in Flash for her students, with no such tool to do the same render in HTML5 + h.264 + javascript.

Or it could be...

I appreciate the Apple bias (I like Apple too). I also appreciate the "lazy" argument from a web programmer who makes his money coding (I do some of that too). But there is a ton of web content that is produced by people that does not lean on programmers, and no tools of substance that I know of that lets those people do the same in HTML5 + h.264 + javascript. That doesn't change just because Apple says "Flash is bad".

I get so sick of the rich-media arguments, because those websites should only be designed for a specific audience.

And I get tired of either-or arguments, such as many on this site. Programmers cannot choose HTML5 over Flash right now, unless they are coding almost entirely for just Apple devices. Yet plenty of people think that is the choice: either HTML5, etc OR Flash. Since Apple is currently anti-Flash, the choice is only HTML5.

But, if you develop, you know that developers can't choose only HTML5 if they want their content to work on computers beyond Apple's and those using Chrome. Yet post after post reflects the bias, and lots of them apparently reflect an uninformed perception that HTML5 can completely supplant Flash, which, at best could only be realized quite a long ways into the future. In the meantime (and I mean years), we are to live without it if we want to enjoy the many other benefits of owning an Apple iDevice. And there are plenty here that argues that even a user OPTION is bad... even when such an option would not effect them at all.

 

[deannnnn]

All these Adobe fanboys need to realize that Apple don't your phone or pad to break because of some poorly developed product and you go blaming apple for it.

Adobe fanboys? lol.

 

[iLunar]

But, if you develop, you know that developers can't choose only HTML5 if they want their content to work on computers beyond Apple's and those using Chrome. Yet post after post reflects the bias, and lots of them apparently reflect an uninformed perception that HTML5 can completely supplant Flash, which, at best could only be realized quite a long ways into the future. In the meantime (and I mean years), we are to live without it if we want to enjoy the many other benefits of owning an Apple iDevice. And there are plenty here that argues that even a user OPTION is bad... even when such an option would not effect them at all.

Fine, but show me the option. Where is the Adobe plugin for mobile platforms browsers? Forget Apple, what about other mobile platforms? Where is Adobe's Flash player for those right now?

 

[bobborries]

Who's crafting OS X? Just Apple. But there are dozens of organizations working on Linux, anyone can help. Let's all switch OS right now, because the quantity of entities working on an OS is a guarantee that it's superior in terms of quality, stability, performance and compatibility.

Oh wait...

Since when is Flash an operating system? Anyways here's 10 more reason to avoid the flash plug-in.

1. Takes up lots of RAM and CPU horsepower

2. Can't use Google's search

3. Can't bookmark within the site

4. Can't save images

5. No right clicking or touch gestures

6. Inconsistent interface from different flash sites

7. Not all text can be copied and pasted

8. Cannot link within the site

9. Flash on mobile devices (if available) isn't stable.

10. Browser’s back and forward button doesn’t work

 

[deannnnn]

When will people stop throwing these irrational "fanboy" accusations around? What the hell is a Flash "fanboy" and why would those exist? It's the content people are after, not the platform itself. Are there "paper fanboys" too? Do you automatically belong to a special paper fanclub because you read books and magazines?

Car drivers aren't "asphalt fanboys", but they'll still be p*ssed off if the car manufacturer removed the rubber tires, put steel wheels in their place and told buyers they can only drive on railroads from now on.

Maybe they feel a duty to care because they owe some responsibility to the millions of first- and second hand customers who have invested billions in the Flash platform by buying Adobe's applications and server software, as well as Flash content from third parties? Adobe could be happy to abandon Flash for all we know, but it would look really irresponsible if they were to just shrug and go "whatever".

Very well said.