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

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

Apple does not control the web, it just has a phone where battery life and quality are what they sell.

Can't believe adobe is saying that Apple is controlling the web, its absurd! An iPhone is just another phone, is not like the PCs architecture or the Television standards.

Way out of proportion, adobe may have another intension beside just pressing for flash. A bad publicity for iPhone, and Google, Microsoft and HTC wins. mmm
 
lewchenko said:
I just want my iPhone and iPad to play Flash material IF I CHOOSE to look at it. Not exactly too much to ask is it.
Click to expand...

It's not about user choice. It's about developer choice. Apple doesn't want developers to choose to use Flash because in their view, Flash represents an inferior experience on the iPhone. And because there are legions more Flash developers than Cocoa developers, if Apple did allow developers to choose Flash you can be sure they would, perhaps overwhelmingly so.

And that is exactly what Apple wants to avoid. With Cocoa and HTML5, Apple can manage the risk of a crappy application. With a third party platform -- any third party platform -- they can't.
 
Adobe SHOULD be scared ....

Apple doesn't have enough market-share to directly hurt Adobe by saying "Our devices won't support Flash." - but they wield a lot of influence. The rest of the personal computer industry is keeping a close watch on what Apple does, and they're copying a lot of it.

Look at how quickly the Internet Explorer team from Microsoft came out with a pro HTML5 stance, right after this all started with Apple.

Furthermore, Adobe is on shaky ground anyway with this buggy, outdated product. Flash became entrenched NOT because developers loved it - but because they were in the right place, at the right time with it as broadband became common and people demanded a richer multimedia experience from web pages. Everyone knew Flash crashed regularly and had all sorts of issues, but it still got the job done and worked on multiple platforms.

Alternatives are emerging now that make more sense, and Flash is becoming a dinosaur. Apple is just ahead of the curve in declaring it so (as they were with the 3.5" floppy disk).


MacLawyer said:
I think they're scared.
Click to expand...
 
What's stopping adobe from wring an app that allows you to see a list of all flash on a site and choose what to play? The url can be cut and pasted from safari. Get away from the plugin mentality. They let opera as an app. If apple says no, then take out the ads. Do the work first, put the ball in apples court.
 
OK, umm... while I'm Adobe's side in the Steve vs. Flash war, "WE LOVE CHOICE" might not be the best choice of words for a company that bought their only real competitor (Macromedia) in order to establish a de-facto monopoly on the creative professionals market. They might as well say "WE LOVE CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK" in this case. As a graphic designer, how do I un-choose Adobe? Use Gimp? CorelDraw? Pen and paper? Right..
 
lewchenko said:
As a Mac and PC user I support Adobe's view.

I just want my iPhone and iPad to play Flash material IF I CHOOSE to look at it. Not exactly too much to ask is it.

And having seen flash running on Android devices (quite easily too), I cant help but think Apple is simply being this way because they want to control everything.... and that is insane.

Really leaves a sour taste in the mouth to be honest.

I personally think Steve's recent rant about Flash was nothing but a crock of PR horse sh**. Maybe Im immune to the infamous 'reality distortion' field that seems to infect most users on this website judging by the replies to this story so far.
Click to expand...

once again, iPhone is an Apple product. They can choose to use whatever software/hardware they want on it. Hell, if they want, they could code in Fortran -- who cares?
 
Mr Skills said:
The h.264 licence is renewed every 5 years, and is guaranteed never to increase more than 10% at each renewal.
Click to expand...

Here is the citation that backs up the above claim.

h.264 should not be considered "open". It is a patented technology. Flash is also patented. Really, Apple and Adobe are on equal footing on the video codec level (FLV vs h.264). It's the container level (flash vs html5 video tag) where Apple can claim openness and Adobe can not.
 
Wow, they are really desperate to cling on to flash.

Very arrogant company, Adobe, haven't come out well at all through their handling of this. Starting with the farcical “live blog” interview with the CEO who clearly hadn't take the time to think through and consider the points raised.

I don't think Apple should dignify this with a response.

To me Adobe is quickly losing credibility.
 
Adobe said:
In the end, we believe the question is really this: Who controls the World Wide Web? And we believe the answer is: nobody -- and everybody, but certainly not a single company.
Click to expand...
Right now, Adobe is trying to control the web via Flash.

This ad campaign is utter bullcrap and needs to be called out as such.

The only people who really care about this is Adobe, and the scriptkiddies who confuse what they do using actionscript and timelines as though it was actual programming.

The worst part of this for Adobe is that it only continues the rancorous public debate that "Adobe Flash sucks". In the end, this will only generate more bad PR for Adobe. Shantanu Narayen has too much hubris to realize the harm he is inflicting on on his own company's image.
 
Honestly, I don't buy either Apple's or Adobe's arguments on Flash. Both companies are overpricing their products.

Because of this fight, I'm forced to do double or triple work on the same pay if the client insists on everything. I can cut corners but I will lose my clients eventually. This really sucks.

On the Flash side, I have to deal with ActionScript. On HTML5, I have to look into it because I'm new to it. Adobe doesn't have a proper HTML5 software tool. I have to go thru hoops to get a HMTL5 site done. Now, I have to plan for two version of the same site to cater for computers and mobile devices. And since iPhone and iPad are popular, I have to look into them harder because Flash doesn't run on them. WTF?!

I think all manufacturers other than Apple sucked. Really puzzled me why a dozen of companies can even compete with a single company. If all these manufacturers work together, I'm sure Apple would be pressured to join in.

I know developers won't abandon the iPhone OS platform because they are making money. They wouldn't care less about this Adobe/Apple fight. Apple doesn't need to grow its market because whatever they have now could make them profitable for at least seven years. Unless Apple screwup badly.
 
everyone who wants flash says "let me have flash if i want it. if it sucks i'll uninstall it myself!" except apple knows that if Flash sucks on an iPhone you're stupid enough to blame the iPhone. it's better to eliminate you as a customer now than listen to your whining later.
 
I think the reason Apple does not want Flash on the iPhone or iPad has more to do with the following:

Techie: "Arg Flash has just crashed my iPhone again."
Average User: "WTF my phone has crashed again, piece of ****."

With Apple its all about user experience, at least that's what it seems like to be. Sure native apps crash sometimes but if you go on Adobe's track record on OS X flash based apps / websites would lead to more crashes. Adobe's Gala Preview is a step in the right direction when it comes to CPU usage but it is still taking my browser down occasionally :(.
 
I don't think most people really care. I personally don't care. It's more important that I have a great experience using my iPad than get worked about Flash's exclusion based on some ideological basis.

If Flash gets onto a mainstream mobile browser that is a final release and offers an experience that is demonstrably better than on mobile safari I suspect most people would migrate - myself included. That's what Adobe needs to focus on.

Adobe should have a Screw iPhone OS mentality. Since they don't it seems apparent that they are in a very weak position in this fight.
 
Here's what I don't get: Flash Player doesn't make Adobe any money. It's distributed for free with Windows and Mac OS X. Flash CS5 does make Adobe money. Now, it's pretty clear that HTML5 and Flash Player are both capable of supporting roughly the same functionality, so why doesn't Adobe create tools that target HTML5 as a runtime instead of Flash? Instead of writing a compiler that compiles ActionScript to Objective-C, why not emit JavaScript instead?

This tells me that Adobe isn't interested in compatibility or user experience or any other of that touchy feely crap in their open letter. They're interested in control. If the Flash Player runs on the iPhone OS, Apple -- admittedly a company of control freaks -- will have ceded a big portion of their control over their own platform to Adobe -- another company of control freaks. This is never, ever going to happen.
 
It's true. Apple wants to keep everyone in their walled garden.

Adobe just wants to sell creation apps, be they for Flash, HTML, CSS, etc. They don't make money off the Flash player...

Bottom line: This war of words is no good for consumers. Apple and Adobe need to work this out together.
 
So they are feeling the heat, but instead of fixing the issues/making their stuff better, they start a marketing campaign?
 
longofest said:
Here is the citation that backs up the above claim.

h.264 should not be considered "open". It is a patented technology. Flash is also patented. Really, Apple and Adobe are on equal footing on the video codec level (FLV vs h.264). It's the container level (flash vs html5 video tag) where Apple can claim openness and Adobe can not.
Click to expand...

By the ITU-T definition, it is "open".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_standard#ITU-T_definition

In terms of patenting, its part of a patent pool of a group of companies, administered by the MPEG LA. Its not patented by a single company like Flash is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG_LA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_pool
 
This is such a joke.

Just look at this sentence: "we actively support technologies like HTML4, HTML5, CSS, and H.264, in addition to our own technologies."

Meaning: We can make a list of open technologies, but really want to make money from the use of our closed, proprietary technologies. Btw, I know h.264 isn't really "open," so spare me the nitpicking.

Adobe's products are not open just because they're "cross platform."
 
aduzik said:
Now, it's pretty clear that HTML5 and Flash Player are both capable of supporting roughly the same functionality, so why doesn't Adobe create tools that target HTML5 as a runtime instead of Flash?
Click to expand...

WRONG. So very wrong. You clearly don't understand what the difference is between Flash and HTML. But you are not alone, and Apple is taking advantage of people's lack of understanding between the two technologies to make their false arguments.
 
I have a petrol engined car, the car maker made it that way. Sure I'd like the milage of a diesel engine but i bought it knowing it was petrol. If BP started throwing a fit about the carmaker not allowing my car to run diesel it would be absurd. BP should come up with a new fuel to be able to run in my diesel engined car. Simple!

Adobe wants to own the web and that why its wants Flash on as many devices as possible. If they really are for 'choice' they wouldn't give a hoot.

BTW I use click2flash (and rarely click).
 
I'd like to see flash gone altogeather.

I recently built a HTPC which worked great. But, whenever I watched streaming Flash video it would overheat and shut down. I installed better cooling and it works fine now but this is a good example of how Flash is a resource hog.

I dislike those all Flash websites that replace content with glitz. I don't like all the little flash snippets in web pages that slow down my browser, especially with lots of tabs open.

In my opinion, the fact that Apple is causing the web to move away from Flash is a good thing. There seem to be other technologies that provide the same result with less drain on processor power and battery life. For now, I've installed Flash blocker software on all my Macs and PC's.
 
What Adobe don't seem to get, is that by having Flash as closed source, only THEY get to choose which platforms have Flash. At least Apple have stood up and said, why should YOU have that choice.

If Adobe want to save their product, then they only way is to open-source Flash NOW. Then any developer can port it onto any platform they want to, in an open-source manner. Then it is a consumer choice, not Adobes and not Apples.
 
aduzik said:
Here's what I don't get: Flash Player doesn't make Adobe any money. It's distributed for free with Windows and Mac OS X. Flash CS5 does make Adobe money. Now, it's pretty clear that HTML5 and Flash Player are both capable of supporting roughly the same functionality, so why doesn't Adobe create tools that target HTML5 as a runtime instead of Flash? Instead of writing a compiler that compiles ActionScript to Objective-C, why not emit JavaScript instead?

This tells me that Adobe isn't interested in compatibility or user experience or any other of that touchy feely crap in their open letter. They're interested in control. If the Flash Player runs on the iPhone OS, Apple -- admittedly a company of control freaks -- will have ceded a big portion of their control over their own platform to Adobe -- another company of control freaks. This is never, ever going to happen.
Click to expand...

This.

While I'm not adding anything to this argument. Its the same thing that I have been thinking for some time. Nice to see someone else finally pointing it out.

If Apple were to allow Flash onto their devices and it becomes the dominate way that "apps" are made/used, then all of a sudden Adobe controls Apple's product. There are many sites which, in a way, render all the great technology in today's browsers useless by creating full page flash sites. Why bother having browser competition if all the browser is doing is downloading a flash file and then yielding all control to it.
 
Free to Choose

If a buyer wants to access flash content on the web, they are free to purchase any number of devices that will allow them to do that. Apple owns their products and have every right to design them any way they want. If you don't like their design, don't buy it.

Like duh! This is all such a non-issue.
 
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