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

[Jimmy James]

I am at the point right now where I do not watch many videos. especially since; if I have one I want to download... the quality of the downloaded video really stinks compared to how it is displayed on a website. usually the downgraded quality are ones that are in FLV format. the ones that are in MOV or another format (for the few sites that allow these), display the same as the online quality.

The "stinky quality" downloaded videos you criticize probably look great when played on a windows computer. But since they look terrible on OS X (i.e. avi, flv) you have decided you no longer want to watch them and therefore you Mac computers meet your needs. This is terrible, circular logic.

 

[niuniu]

"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."

I agree 100%.

Apple's iPhone and iPad allow you to watch pedophilia and real life executions. But you can't run Flash on it.

It's ridiculous to censor us from doing what we want. If I want to play a Flash game, I should be able to play it. If it crashes, that's fine. I'll whine and restart the browser and hope that it improves someday, meanwhile enjoying the experience which is for the most part very good.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Let's say that Apple allows a Flash Player on the iPhone. Web site developers can say, "we don't have to update our site now", so they don't. Web application developers can say, "we don't have to create an HTML version of our app", so they don't. After all, the easiest thing in the world to do is nothing at all. Pretty soon that "optional" Flash player becomes essential to seeing the web on an iPhone.

I don't dispute that a Flash Player today would make the web more usable on an iPhone. But the major thing that's driving adoption of HTML5 is the lack of that plugin. It's painful and frustrating, but in the long run, I think it does make the web a better place for users. That's why I said originally that it's not about denying users the choice, but rather that it's by denying users the choice that they discourage developers from building content that doesn't work well on the iPhone.

I can appreciate that argument. Apple's Intel Macs include an Apple-supported option for users to choose to run Windows on their Macs. Can't we all easily argue that Windows is "more buggy" than OS X, "crashes my computer" more often than OS X, maybe even "burns my battery faster" than when I'm in OS X mode too, etc. (die Windows die, abomination, etc) yet it is a user OPTION- a user CHOICE- that Apple supports. Do software developers then decide that since all modern Macs can optionally run Windows, there's no reason to create OS X versions of their software? No, they still create OS X versions anyway.

This is no different. Will some developers decide that the Flash version is "good enough" since it would also run on iDevices (if iDevice owners had the option of a free Flash player)? Yes. But those may be the same developers that decide that a Windows-only version of their software is good enough, since Macs can now run Windows software too. However, those that see the advantage of an HTML5, etc version- much like those that see an advantage for an OS X version of some software- will code for it.

Or, more applicably, those that have a budget to code for 97% of the world's computers via Flash as well as 8% of the world's computers (capable of displaying) in HTML5 today, etc will do both.

Everybody involved wins with the user OPTION of a free Flash player. No one has it forced upon them if they don't want to take that OPTION. But those that want it- or even need it- who also want the many other benefits of Apple iDevices could get what they want and have a fantastic, good, neutral, bad, or terrible experience through that option on their own iDevice if they so choose.

 

[FCDP]

Again...ignorance.... Have you tired the Flash Player "Gala" Preview Release? I'm not trying to defend Adobe here... I just hate misinformation.

What a crime isn't it? And Apple is charging over $1000 dollars for a core2dou in their notebooks with their recent half-assed update? How come you don't see that?

RT2020, stop trying to bring rational thought into this argument!! They just skip those posts and proceed to write these ones:

I'm all for choice, but Adobe needs to spend some of that marketing money and improve Flash resource utilization. I thought Uncle Steve was making much ado about nothing until I saw for myself how terrible MBP battery life is when Flash videos are playing.

Wow. Less complaining, more innovation Adobe. Thanks. FTW

They don't bother to read into the fact that Adobe has finally gained the access needed to provide hardware acceleration on Macs, and Apple was withholding it, or even the demonstration of Flash 10.1 running on Android 2.2 flawlessly.

But don't worry, there are a few here who actually understand that $$$ is the basis for all decisions at Apple. Why else would there be "84 Positives" on this news story here?

The only reason Apple doesn't want flash on its products is because most ads are made in flash and Apple wants a monopoly on advertisements on its platform. Neither company will admit it, but it's all about advertising.

Make no mistake Apple is not protecting us from Flash. They're just a business, nothing more.

Anyone spouting off rhetoric about how crappy flash is and how they don't want it anywhere near their devices is just playing right into Apple's hands. Which is fine. I'm sure Apple would love to sell you some more expensive crap you don't need.

 

[tkatz]

Good point. I was equating Open standard with Open source. Thanks for the links!

Sure thing! and, thank you for acknowledging the clarification (for lack of better words at the moment

I believe the largest issue is just the confusion in terminology. As was pointed out earlier, "Open Standard" might not have been the best terminology to have been created, as by itself it just sounds more like Open Source and even the term "open" seems like it would be "free." (Or at least, the term Open Source has made many to think/equate Open with Free).

 

[Earendil]

Each Companies motivations aside, Adobe isn't handling this very well as a company. Steve has made a few behind closed doors comments, that made it out into the public, and then he went and made a solid "here is what we're thinking, and why". Whether Apple is write or wrong is irrelevant. The truth is that after his leaked comments, that was the right thing to do, to explain to people what Apple was thinking.

However the response that Adobe needs to make is one in which they SHOW Apple that they are wrong. They need to court Apple personally, not try and get costumers pissed at Apple. That certainly won't do anything.

 

[Mirice]

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.

So would I, a choice would be amazing, but we all know that Apple does not give you choices, they just tell you what you can and can't do with a device.

I am doing a bunch of travel planning to Oahu and Maui and most of the sites are in flash making the iphone and ipad useless to me.

 

[macsmurf]

Listen, I love Adobe.. I really do. I'm as big of a Photoshop fan as I am an Apple one. I just think they're kinda full of it on this one. Flash is a closed platform; only Adobe products can write to Flash. So who the hell are they to complain about another company making closed products?!

However, some of the Adobe products that can write to Flash are open source and free.

 

[elppa]

The only reason Apple doesn't want flash on its products is because most ads are made in flash and Apple wants a monopoly on advertisements on its platform. Neither company will admit it, but it's all about advertising.

That's the most stupid thing I've read since I've been on Macumours.

[1] Apple has been in the advertising business for a matter of months and they won't even have a platform to show them on until this Summer.
[2] Most adverts on the internet are simple text ads served up by Google

We love Apple... that's why we didn't switch to Cocoa for our software until we were forced to.

I seem to remember that being portrayed by Adobe PR as being all Apple's fault as well. Is a theme appearing here…?

 

[John.B]

Millions for marketing, but where are the so-called "full internet" Flash players for mobile devices, Adobe? We're still waiting...

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Listen, I love Adobe.. I really do. I'm as big of a Photoshop fan as I am an Apple one. I just think they're kinda full of it on this one. Flash is a closed platform; only Adobe products can write to Flash. So who the hell are they to complain about another company making closed products?!

You might want to look around. There are tons of free and paid software- including a good deal of native Mac OS X software that renders in Flash. One doesn't have to buy ANYTHING from Adobe to generate some pretty impressive output in Flash.

On the flipside, what would be great is to find a lot of great, user-friendly tools for those who don't code by hand to render rich Flash-like media (not just video) in HTML5 + h.264 + javascript. There are many great tools out there in use by people who have no concept of Actionscript that render great stuff (like the majority of online interactive e-learning courses) in Flash. As far as I know, there are currently NO equivalents of such tools (for non-hand-coders) that can output comparable rich media in HTML5 + h.264 + javascript. And even when there is such tools (hopefully soon!), the output still runs on only a tiny subset of computers today, which means they'll still need to make a Flash version anyway to serve the world using browsers beyond (mostly) Safari & Chrome.

 

[snowmen]

Has anyone who claim Flash is slow and drain battery on iDevice actually play a HTML5 games on their iDevice???

If Flash is really slow and drain battery a lot in comparison with HTML5, then I guess Nexus One is more powerful and incredible large battery in comparison with iPhone 3GS and iPad.

 

[John.B]

However, some of the Adobe products that can write to Flash are open source and free.

No, key parts of Flash are not open sourced. Partly to do with verification services and DRM'ed content, IIRC.

And Flash Professional CS5 is now $700. (Same price as Photoshop.)

 

[Anuba]

Let's say that Apple allows a Flash Player on the iPhone. Web site developers can say, "we don't have to update our site now", so they don't. Web application developers can say, "we don't have to create an HTML version of our app", so they don't. After all, the easiest thing in the world to do is nothing at all. Pretty soon that "optional" Flash player becomes essential to seeing the web on an iPhone.

You're not making a very compelling argument against Flash. What you're saying is essentially that the only incentive to move away from Flash is peer pressure. That the alternative to Flash isn't better, or faster, or [insert superlative here]. Aren't they supposed to migrate to from Flash to other alternatives simply because they're superior? And if the alternatives aren't superior, why should anyone migrate? Because someone's holding a gun to their head for no particular reason? Is your faith in HTML5 really so low that the only option you see is to throw web developers in Gulags and not let them out until they obey Steve's command?

Also, where do you get the idea that web site developers are the ones who will be hurt by a forced exodus from Flash? They'll be ecstatic, of course! It means that all those companies and corporations who spent billions on making web developers build Flash content for them, will now have to come back and ask them to redo everything from scratch for a new platform! That's great for web designers and developers, not to mention Adobe who are the #1 supplier of web design tools. $$$$$$$$ for everyone, new IT boom! Except of course for the end customers, because the steep costs of porting billions worth of Flash content to HTML5 will be payed by them in the end.

 

[Stridder44]

Way to work around the actual problem Adobe. "Fix our products!? No no no, that will never work. What we need is an ad campaign!"

 

[whooleytoo]

Each Companies motivations aside, Adobe isn't handling this very well as a company. Steve has made a few behind closed doors comments, that made it out into the public, and then he went and made a solid "here is what we're thinking, and why". Whether Apple is write or wrong is irrelevant. The truth is that after his leaked comments, that was the right thing to do, to explain to people what Apple was thinking.

However the response that Adobe needs to make is one in which they SHOW Apple that they are wrong. They need to court Apple personally, not try and get costumers pissed at Apple. That certainly won't do anything.

It might be too late. Apple is very likely to win this battle because Adobe need Apple now more than Apple need Adobe. It's hard to see what Adobe can do to entice Apple.

Even offering to open Flash up entirely might be too late.

These debates always become very social, with the technical arguments being overshadowed by the public perceptions (and misconceptions). If people view Flash as being outdated, and yesterday's technology, it'll be very hard for Adobe to save it, regardless of how it actually stacks up against HTML5.

Way to work around the actual problem Adobe. "Fix our products!? No no no, that will never work. What we need is an ad campaign!"

There have been substantial improvements in Flash 10.1; they're not just ignoring the software and conducting a PR campaign.

 

[AllGaussian]

It's a no win for Adobe...

I'm sure others have said this but, if Flash succeeds with getting onto mobile (and I think they will, eventually); Apple can just say they forced the issue on them.

I think the accompanying documents from Adobe are much more interesting.

http://www.adobe.com/choice/flash.html

Seeing 10.1 mentioned at least 3 times (maybe 5). I guess we wait a little longer for Beta -> Release.

P

 

[John.B]

Has anyone who claim Flash is slow and drain battery on iDevice actually play a HTML5 games on their iDevice???

My kids play App store games all the time on my iPhone (there are TONS of games, some are better than Nintendo's games for the dedicated DS platform, go figure). They can also play any Flash games all they want on my Mac as long as its plugged in. (And my son officially loves Steam for OSX). No, games are not a huge issue for iPad or iPhone users because there are plenty of alternatives.

Only Adobe has problems with this, and some Flash "developers" (the ones who can't write actual code).

If Flash is really slow and drain battery a lot in comparison with HTML5, then I guess Nexus One is more powerful and incredible large battery in comparison with iPhone 3GS and iPad.

I'm sorry, did Adobe actually get around to shipping a release version of Flash for the Nexus One? Or any Android phone? No? Really? Still? But they hired a marketing company and paid for a bunch of ads instead?

 

[macsmurf]

No, key parts of Flash are not open sourced. Partly to do with verification services and DRM'ed content, IIRC.

And Flash Professional CS5 is now $700. (Same price as Photoshop.)

...And Flex SDK is free and open source under the Mozilla Public License. This doesn't mean that everything is free and OS.

That's the 4th time on twice as many pages I'd had to debunk that you have to pay money for tools in order to create Flash apps. I guess you guys never learn.

 

[John.B]

I'm sure others have said this but, if Flash succeeds with getting onto mobile (and I think they will, eventually); Apple can just say they forced the issue on them.

Jobs said that they have been waiting for Adobe to produce a Flash player for the iPhone with acceptable performance since the original iPhone shipped. Still waiting...

 

[dba7dba]

Something's a little off when you must run an ad campaign.

You couldn't have said it better!

It's the oil companies that advertise "We care about environment"

It's the airlines that advertise "We care about our passengers' comfort".

It's the politicians that advertise "We are for our constituents and the country".

NOT!

 

[Anuba]

It might be too late. Apple is very likely to win this battle because Adobe need Apple now more than Apple need Adobe. It's hard to see what Adobe can do to entice Apple.

What makes you so sure? In the US where Mac has a 10% marketshare it's evident that the Mac can hold its own even without the creative professionals, but over here in Europe, the only Mac users I know are musicians and graphic designers, the kind of customers who kept Apple afloat during the mid 90's when no one else would. Heck, I know people who switched to Windows during the short period when Adobe had ceased development of After Effects and Premiere for Mac, and they haven't switched back after Adobe did a 180 on that front. Software is just that important to a lot of people. Photoshop is literally the livelihood for millions of Mac users, if Adobe were to pull the Mac version tomorrow it would not be something Steve could shrug off and be cocky about. Unlike most software companies, Adobe's userbase is roughly 50/50 split between Windows and OS X. Yeah, that means Apple users are a very important business to Adobe, but it also means that the reverse is true.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Way to work around the actual problem Adobe. "Fix our products!? No no no, that will never work. What we need is an ad campaign!"

Sort of like AT&T deciding to fight the 3G Maps campaign, not by dramatically expanding 3G coverage, but by coming back with ad campaigns about how 97% of the U.S. is covered- even when most of that is Edge and not 3G?

I find that Flash runs well enough on my many Macs that I can see or do what I want to see or do that is served up as Flash media. Can Adobe make it better- even a lot better? ABSOLUTELY, but I could say the same about a lot of other software that runs on my Mac too- including a lot of software coded by Apple themselves. Relative to this thread, I still would prefer the OPTION of running Flash on these Macs, than not being able to even try. And if i owned an Apple iDevice, I would much prefer the option to burn my batteries faster if I so choose, rather than Apple decide that I should not even have the option.

I agree that a lot of web media in Flash is undesirable- even crap. But there's always other examples that are great, grand, even spectacular. There's even some stuff that can be essential for some users. I'd much rather have the option to access such stuff on my otherwise "wow" iDevice, rather than Apple deciding I shall not have that option for me (and you).

 

[John.B]

...And Flex SDK is free and open source under the Mozilla Public License. This doesn't mean that everything is free and OS.

That's the 4th time on twice as many pages I'd had to debunk that you have to pay money for tools in order to create Flash apps. I guess you guys never learn.

Isn't the raison d'être for Flash that you can "protect your content" (e.g. DRM)? But only if you pay $700 for Adobe Flash Professional CS5.

Those open source Flash kits are no more useful than the free Microsoft developer tool starter kits.

I don't know why that's so hard for you to understand.

 

[ikir]

Apple says they support open standards and all of that when it comes to HTML5, but they fail to mention that they mainly support HTML5 as a video layer, and that the encoding platform BEHIND that video layer that they are supporting is typically H.264, which is a proprietary codec set that may or may not suddenly have a licensing restriction placed upon it in the next 2 years, or any time in the future, without warning or legal recourse.

It's a bit ham-fisted of Apple to claim they oppose Flash because it isn't open, and at the same time every single video system they DO support has either the same sorts of restrictions (Quicktime) or ticking-time-bomb-types of licensing restrictions (h.264).

If flash sucks so much, vote with your browser and don't install it.

Just don't come crying to me when you can't play farmville or whatever.

Safari can play also Ogg theora if you install the plugin. right now h264 is the best option, but yes it is proprietary.
So Apple is totally right, and anyway Flash always sucked on mac and Linux.

Safari already support many HTML5 tecnologies, test it on www.html5test.com
And in the near future support will be better, HTML5 is still a moving target.

At the end: ADOBE HAS BEEN ALWAYS CRAP and they now deserve this. Don't worry about future, Flash will die anyway.