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

[KnightWRX]

So what? Why there's no Flash on the iPhone is not important, only the fact that there isn't.

Nobody is being forced to buy an iPhone. If people wanted Flash, they'd buy another phone.

Why there's no Flash on the iPhone is why we're discussing this, so it's relevant to your question of why are people keeping the discussion alive. Especially since some people bought their iPhone OS device BEFORE Apple became complete jerks about Flash.

If you don't like this discussion, feel free to follow your own advice, don't click on the thread title. At least this discussion didn't change mid-way in the thread, the tittle is still very clear what this is about.

 

[BaldiMac]

What about them ?

They are not part of the published spec. You claimed that Adobe published the full spec. They have not.

 

[satcomer]

So what? Why there's no Flash on the iPhone is not important, only the fact that there isn't.

Nobody is being forced to buy an iPhone. If people wanted Flash, they'd buy another phone.

When Flash actually plays well on the other phones. Show me someone playing Farmville on a cell phone and I know every kid will buy one. Plus Flash Lite sucks battery like crazy and can't play most Flash sites!!!

 

[KnightWRX]

They are not part of the published spec. You claimed that Adobe published the full spec. They have not.

Oh really. Care to back that up with evidence ? Which DRM mechanics are they using ?

You can continue to claim and scream all you want, to date, only Anuba came forth with any solid info, and what he basically said is that a Video codec is not the spec, but guess what, that's outside the scope of the spec to begin with.

If you can provide any info about the Hulu DRM, we can then judge if it's outside the scope of the spec or not and then see if it is included or not. For now, all you're doing is spreading FUD.

 

[BaldiMac]

Oh really. Care to back that up with evidence ? Which DRM mechanics are they using ?

You can continue to claim and scream all you want, to date, only Anuba came forth with any solid info, and what he basically said is that a Video codec is not the spec, but guess what, that's outside the scope of the spec to begin with.

If you can provide any info about the Hulu DRM, we can then judge if it's outside the scope of the spec or not and then see if it is included or not. For now, all you're doing is spreading FUD.

Maybe you should spend a few moments and google "Flash DRM" if you would like more information rather than accusing people of screaming and spreading FUD.

http://www.macworld.com/article/151171/2010/05/flashaccess2.html

http://arstechnica.com/software/new...ash-streaming-protocol-keeps-drm-a-secret.ars

 

[KnightWRX]

Maybe you should spend a few moments and google "Flash DRM" if you would like more information rather than accusing people of screaming and spreading FUD.

http://www.macworld.com/article/151171/2010/05/flashaccess2.html

http://arstechnica.com/software/new...ash-streaming-protocol-keeps-drm-a-secret.ars

Wait, you make claims which I should google ? No. You make claims, you are responsible for backing them up.

I'll read through your links tomorrow to find a rebuttal.

 

[BaldiMac]

Wait, you make claims which I should google ? No. You make claims, you are responsible for backing them up.

I don't have issues with you asking me to back up my claim. I did that.

I do have issues with you accusing me of screaming and spreading FUD. Those are claims that you made without backing them up.

I'll read through your links tomorrow to find a rebuttal.

Because there is no chance that you will agree with them?

 

[Zc456]

Oh really. Care to back that up with evidence ? Which DRM mechanics are they using ?

You can continue to claim and scream all you want, to date, only Anuba came forth with any solid info, and what he basically said is that a Video codec is not the spec, but guess what, that's outside the scope of the spec to begin with.

If you can provide any info about the Hulu DRM, we can then judge if it's outside the scope of the spec or not and then see if it is included or not. For now, all you're doing is spreading FUD.

Wow, I don't mean to barge in. However, I couldn't help but overhear this converation. Most notably your constant inability to accept the fact the Flash does have DRM. I dunno... maybe you too should get a clue? -> http://www.adobe.com/products/flashaccess/

Yes. Hulu, and even YouTube, are backed by DRM when uploaded by studios. Just trry to download a TV Show or Movie off of either site.

 

[KnightWRX]

Wow, I don't mean to barge in. However, I couldn't help but overhear this converation. Most notably your constant inability to accept the fact the Flash does have DRM. I dunno... maybe you too should get a clue? -> http://www.adobe.com/products/flashaccess/

I did not deny Flash had DRM. I just didn't accept Baldimac's comments that it wasn't part of the published spec at face value without any backup of his claims.

Youtube doesn't have DRM contrary to Hulu, it just doesn't have direct links to the movie files. There are Youtube downloaders that'll get the movies and save them locally without any problems.

I do have issues with you accusing me of screaming and spreading FUD. Those are claims that you made without backing them up.

For 2 pages you had made claims about Flash without backing them up. That is FUD. I was pointing out that fact, not throwing accusations your way. Next time, don't wait for people to call you out before backing up your statements.

 

[BaldiMac]

For 2 pages you had made claims about Flash without backing them up.

By two pages, you mean 3 posts for a total of 5 short sentences.

That is FUD.

It's not FUD if it is true. Your claim was false. Mine was not.

I was pointing out that fact, not throwing accusations your way.

No, you accused me of screaming and spreading FUD without backing up your statements.

Next time, don't wait for people to call you out before backing up your statements.

I guess this should be filed under "Do as I say, not as I do."

I initially did not feel the need to backup my claim, because I figured that it was pretty obvious. There was a post on the front page of this site about how Hulu uses content protection two days before. Since "open spec" and DRM is incompatible, my conclusion was fairly logical. When you asked for more information, I provided it.

 

[Dolorian]

Apart from Photoshop freaks and lazy developers, NOBODY cares about you. So shut up and get lost.

ADOBE IS DEAD.

Quite the emotional outburst this one. Some people seem to have trouble separating Flash's issues (on Mac and mobile devices) from Adobe as a whole. Just because one dislikes Flash it doesn't means one has to hate Adobe and the rest of it's products.

Applications like Photoshop, InDesign and Illustrator are hands down the best professional tools available in their respective areas of design. They are hardly the tools for mere "freaks" and "lazy" people. Alleged "alternatives" sush as Pixelmator, GIMP, Acorn and DrawIt, good Mac apps as some of them are, don't even compare with Adobe's apps on a profesional level.

Apple & Adobe should kiss and make up (yesterday).

Yes, please!

Flash issues aside, I think that for their part, Adobe should setup a separate division for Mac development of their applications in a effort to make them more optimized, stable and "Mac like". Right now, they all feel like Adobe built them for Windows and only ported them to OS X. It would be nice if Adobe did something like what Microsoft does for Office, a separate division with Mac developers working on the applications. I would not mind it at all if the cost of this is that the Mac version of the Adobe CS is released a little bit after the Windows version.

I LOVE Adobe and all its apps, but their "Windowish" nature is kind of annoying.

I tried out the bugfest known as YouTube HTML5/H.264 beta program, and spent about a day there before I reverted to the Flash based version...

I had the same experience. Joined the YouTube HTML5 beta but the playback was terrible and so I switched back to Flash. A friend of mine was also having playback issues in YouTube with his iPad and it was because of HTML 5. We were able to see the same video on my computer using Flash with no problems.

 

[Zc456]

I did not deny Flash had DRM. I just didn't accept Baldimac's comments that it wasn't part of the published spec at face value without any backup of his claims.

Youtube doesn't have DRM contrary to Hulu, it just doesn't have direct links to the movie files. There are Youtube downloaders that'll get the movies and save them locally without any problems.

I never said Hulu helped YouTube with DRM. I said they both use the same DRM scheme provided by Adobe. While you can download user made videos and a few from sponsors on YouYutbe, it's nearly impossible to do the same for those uploaded by major studios such as MGM.