Instead, you'll say hello to full page HTML5 ads which automatically start to play media to mask whatever you are trying to do.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe to End Development on Flash-to-iPhone Compiler in Wake of Apple License Change
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Instead, you'll say hello to full page HTML5 ads which automatically start to play media to mask whatever you are trying to do.
There are some really stupid comments in this thread, especially the ones that say something to the effect of...
"Consumers keep buying iPhones and iPads which don't support Flash, so obviously consumers don't want Flash."
This is some of the blindest Apple fanboy nonsense I've ever heard. Maybe I'm missing something, but I've never heard anyone say, "I'm so glad my iPad doesn't support Flash!" In fact, reviews I've read have only stated the contrary.
Why would you want to intentionally limit your accessible content, high quality or not?
Even if it's obviously impossible, what if the iPad refused to display all images created using Photoshop? Would you be praising Apple for that, too?
"Consumers keep buying iPhones and iPads which don't support Flash, so obviously consumers don't want Flash."
This is some of the blindest Apple fanboy nonsense I've ever heard. Maybe I'm missing something, but I've never heard anyone say, "I'm so glad my iPad doesn't support Flash!" In fact, reviews I've read have only stated the contrary.
Why would you want to intentionally limit your accessible content, high quality or not?
Even if it's obviously impossible, what if the iPad refused to display all images created using Photoshop? Would you be praising Apple for that, too?
I still think its interesting how Flash works great on my Unibody Macbook Pro, but it runs like crap on my Octa-Core Mac Pro. I think its an issue of hardware and software. Apple and Adobe need to kiss and make up. Problem is Steve burns bridges. Its sad because Apple really is force feeding us. I bet that 1984 commercial wouldn't fly these days.
To this day Adobe hasn't fixed the case-sensitive problem with Photoshop.
With CS2 we could at least correct the misspelled words ourselves.
Since then Adobe has just patched the installer to prevent installation.
3+ years, and they can't fix ~60 misspelled files.
Not only is that lazy, it's retarded.
I'm just waiting for the complaints a few years from now when all those things you hate in Flash are being made in HTML, canvas and svg. Those will be just as buggy, harder to block (especially if they're just made in straight HTML and Javascript), and more likely to crash the site you're looking at (and not just crash a plug-in).
But hey, it's popular to think the problem is Flash and not poorly written, overly intrusive ads (and sites), so have at it.
But hey, it's popular to think the problem is Flash and not poorly written, overly intrusive ads (and sites), so have at it.
Why, again? Greasemonkey and etc aren't going to cease to exist when Flash does.
The majority of PC users don't even know what the underlying technology behind the content they view is. They don't use Flash by choice, they use it by default. As Windows users migrate to Chrome for example they will start to have Flash content served in HTML5. The same applies to for Internet Explorer. I just made a video heavy site that serves HTML5 video in browsers that recognize it and Flash in all others. Automatically the day an IE8 user upgrades to IE9 this site will serve him video in the HTML5 method.
Flash will die because web developers will begin to use it as the fallback method and not the primary method.
i'm not a designer, i'm a developer. read my post titled "i'm a developer..."
i'm not interested in a pissing match, as it's clear that you didn't read my post nor understand what Flash is or what it's actually capable of in competent hands.
Well said. Added to the flawed "Consumers keep buying iPhones and iPads which don't support Flash, so obviously consumers don't want Flash." argument. You could say that consumers keep buying PCs And Virus Protection so obviously consumers don't want MACs.
Newsflash - not everyone that buys an iPhone or iPad knows it doesn't work with flash.
And even the most techies of techies don't know everything a device can or can't do before or even after they purchase it. Want proof - look at these message boards. Here you supposedly have some of the more "educated" consumers for "all things apple" - yet there are countless threads asking for advice, how-to's, product specs, etc.
People aren't buying these devices BECAUSE it doesn't have flash. People, most people, weigh pros and cons and "accept" shortcomings based on their usage. That's not the same as not wanting a feature.
Again - look at these message boards. People are buying iPhones and iPads - without native printing, a unified inbox (until 4.0), feature x, y and z. That doesn't mean they don't WANT these features. In fact, these message boards are filled with complaints, no?
http://esoterictechie.com/tech-news/planning-for-the-future-html-5-or-the-flash-platform/
Great article written by a Flash developer who isn't ranting and raving about how perfect Flash is.
Can HTML5 be used to write interactive media at high-functioning level? No. You don't understand what Flash or HTML 5 is.
Apple is not thinking about us users. They are being selfish and tyrant. Not cool...
Actually, the exact opposite is true IMO. They are protecting us from crappy buggy Flash generated apps.
Which is why Apple is doing so badly in the market.
Oops, they aren't.
People that buy Apple products want hassle free reliability in a mobile device and Apple provides that. People are as well free to buy Androids or anything else for that manner. That would be what you call freedom of choice.
I am writing you down on the Freedom of Choice side.
Guess that means you have pretty much finished up your mission here...
on the other hand
Despite my previous post where I said Apple foolishly cut off cross-compile tools (it really is a bonehead move), I do applaud them for not allowing the Flash plugin on iDevices. And in a bit of 'retaliation mood' I say Adobe deserves that for arrogantly neglecting their Mac apps for so many years. So there.
On to other things - I do hope HTML5 displaces Flash. I am a huge fan of open standards. I didn't say 'free', I said open standards. Free is good too, but open standards are better than free. They can encompass free and fee and everything in between. We all benefit from open standards. If Flash tools evolve and generate HTML5 code, that would be just fine too.
Despite my previous post where I said Apple foolishly cut off cross-compile tools (it really is a bonehead move), I do applaud them for not allowing the Flash plugin on iDevices. And in a bit of 'retaliation mood' I say Adobe deserves that for arrogantly neglecting their Mac apps for so many years. So there.
On to other things - I do hope HTML5 displaces Flash. I am a huge fan of open standards. I didn't say 'free', I said open standards. Free is good too, but open standards are better than free. They can encompass free and fee and everything in between. We all benefit from open standards. If Flash tools evolve and generate HTML5 code, that would be just fine too.
Considering I'm a web developer I think I understand very well what both Flash and HTML5 are. Thanks for being a complete ass though.
...
And be ready to say hello to HTML5 ads we can't block!
Ah and therein lies the real motivation, perhaps -- advertising, and the megabucks associated with it. How long till iAd makes an appearance on the desktop, too??
I think you're giving Apple too much credit. It's a business move, not a move to protect users. There are plenty of crappy, buggy native apps on the iPhone.
We should all fear iAd. Especially when it is integrated on a system level like it is on the iPhone OS!
If Adobe was in lean, fighting shape - that's exactly what CS5 should have encompassed.
Google integrated Flash into Chrome like no other browser has. I think it's a move to make Apple angry, but that's just IMO.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/03/google-flash-chrome-browser/
Anyone that seriously believe ads are going to start popping up in the iPhone OS is naive. iAds is just about keeping an emerging market out of Google's hands. There are ads in free apps now and there will be ads in free apps with iAds ... what's the big deal. You seriously believe that if you buy an app like Things it will suddenly be plastered with ads? For every app with ads there will be someone willing to make an ad free version and sell it.
Wow. You sound like you just arrived from 1998. The difference being that back then the naysayers said there wasn't anything to replace the floppy! The CD was too big, too fragile, not enough people had CD burners, etc.
Since you obviously missed my earlier post and it's links showing some of what can be done already with HTML 5, here you are again:
http://www.craftymind.com/2010/04/20...into-3d-space/
http://www.kesiev.com/akihabara/
http://jilion.com/sublime/video
Your taking this too literal. No iPhone sales do not mean consumers do not want flash. But it DOES mean they are willing to do without it to have an iPhone. Second everyone saying this, mentions the users want the content, not the delivery method. When Youtube, CNN, NBC, HULU all move to HTML5 for video, most people will never know flash isn't on the iPhone. Third, yes, some people didn't know the iPhone didn't support flash when they bought their first one. Explain the second one. Explain their plans to buy the next one in July.
That's just political bs ... Flash is already bundled on every computer that's sold. It's just a move to try and make it seem relevant. It really means nothing aside from Chrome checking to see if you have the latest version and upgrading you if you don't
It doesn't affect anything on the development end, and I can say that I for example am focusing on using HTML5. Any website I make from here on out starts with video being rendered as HTML5. Chrome because it supports HTML5 tags and supports h264 will by default play any h264 video I embed. As a fall back for older browsers I use Javascript to replace the video tag with a Flash player, which uses the same h264 file.
Thinking forward this means that as browsers move to support HTML5 and h264 they will start to see this content in HTML instead of Flash, as I pointed out when IE9 comes out it will (without me editing anything) play the videos in HTML5.