i'm going to get ready for a flood of poorly made games then
Like there aren't already...
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 Resume Work on Flash-to-iPhone Compiler
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Like there aren't already...
Choosing Flash on your phone does not have any chance of resulting in death or injury, like your analogy to shifting a car from drive to park can.
Seriously, think of something that at least comes close. You're way off base.
Being able to turn on/off Flash is exactly the same kind of option as most browsers have to allow us to turn on/off extras such as javascript, cookies, popups, images, videos, sound and other plugins.
Not sure how anyone can say having that kind of choice is bad.
Not sure how anyone can say having that kind of choice is bad.
I can't stop laughing from this whole bit.
Who is giving out awards for flash websites? Are they called the Adobies?
Flash is an okay tool to use to make components of a website. Anyone who makes a full website out of flash doesn't know what they are doing. There are so many reasons for this, they need not be expounded on here.
Any site like that is not a website at all, it is simply a plug-in. You can't have a website made of only flash because then it is not even a website any longer.
To me, anything that makes creating an app easier is a good thing. If someone has a great idea for an app and the only thing stopping them is either lack of programming knowledge or the money to pay someone to make it, how is it good that they can't make it?
Sure, there may be more crappy apps, but as has already been stated, there already are, and they'll end up getting bad reviews, anyway.
I wonder if some people simply don't like the idea of people without the training they have making apps, too. As if it cheapens their profession. To me, there will always be room for the pros and the amateurs. Digital video didn't make movies worse, it just made it easier for the amateur to make them.
Sure, there may be more crappy apps, but as has already been stated, there already are, and they'll end up getting bad reviews, anyway.
I wonder if some people simply don't like the idea of people without the training they have making apps, too. As if it cheapens their profession. To me, there will always be room for the pros and the amateurs. Digital video didn't make movies worse, it just made it easier for the amateur to make them.
BTW, you're speaking in circles and your comments show that you're rather clueless.
^ Agreed but sadly not enough people know what HTML is. Kinda scary because these people hire developers and ask questions like "Do you do HTML5?? I want some animations and stuff on my site!!!!!" /facepalm
A lot of those so called crappy apps were built without handcoding. They were made using the Interface Builder in Xcode.
This is the worst news ~~!!! I don't want to use flash apps.
Then don't, why is it the worst news ? This story is about how Adobe resumes work on the Flash to iOS compiler, not on how Adobe now has the right to go to your house and point a gun to your head to use Flash apps.
I'm pretty sure Apples' relaxed policy has very little to do with Adobe or appeasing the threats of government antitrust investigations...
It has everything to do with the jaw dropping game engines that are being built and licensed to third party developers.
It has everything to do with the jaw dropping game engines that are being built and licensed to third party developers.
adobe is safely behind
aside from the nuisance of being investigated by the government. apple has already proven its point that flash is crap on mobile devices so not danger in there. people will be smart enough to avoid developers who build crappy apps and if later on proven that these ported apps are bad then they die a natural death.
aside from the nuisance of being investigated by the government. apple has already proven its point that flash is crap on mobile devices so not danger in there. people will be smart enough to avoid developers who build crappy apps and if later on proven that these ported apps are bad then they die a natural death.
A second front
I think that most people forget that this will prolong the life of Flash. This is another way for Flash developers to make money. That means that it will take longer for them to give up their livelihood.
And that means that we still will have to suffer Flash on the Internet for a longer time than necessary.
I think that most people forget that this will prolong the life of Flash. This is another way for Flash developers to make money. That means that it will take longer for them to give up their livelihood.
And that means that we still will have to suffer Flash on the Internet for a longer time than necessary.
I have many clients who are using a WordPress theme built just for photographers or artists to show off a portfolio. Most are done without Flash (though Flash can be added if you must) All are easy for a non-designer to use, they are search engine and ADA and web standards compliant. And beautiful.
Please send me an message if you wish to be pointed in a direction, and the best thing is... you can see your site on your iPod.
Why? A bad app is bad regardless how it's written. If it's not planned and implemented properly and it's not unique then it will fail reagrdless of what language is used.
I'm happy Apple is allowing third party compiler support. If Apple would make Cocoa language indepent using LLVM JIT compilation similar to .NET then things would really get interesting. I definitely would like the option to use C++, C#, Java, Perl 6 etc... with Cocoa instead of Object C. For example in game develop especially on the iPhone/iPad or less powerfull hardware Object C isn't the best choice as it adds an extra overhead and performance suffers.
I can imagine the same with desktop apps with 3D apps, video/compositing apps etc... that need to support heavy rendering are not using object c for the heavy lifting.
Hopefully Apple will add more language support and unify development based on LLVM/clang/JIT it will definitely make things easier for developers and boost the availabilty of Mac software.
I'm happy Apple is allowing third party compiler support. If Apple would make Cocoa language indepent using LLVM JIT compilation similar to .NET then things would really get interesting. I definitely would like the option to use C++, C#, Java, Perl 6 etc... with Cocoa instead of Object C. For example in game develop especially on the iPhone/iPad or less powerfull hardware Object C isn't the best choice as it adds an extra overhead and performance suffers.
I can imagine the same with desktop apps with 3D apps, video/compositing apps etc... that need to support heavy rendering are not using object c for the heavy lifting.
Hopefully Apple will add more language support and unify development based on LLVM/clang/JIT it will definitely make things easier for developers and boost the availabilty of Mac software.
Please stop top posting, it's annoying having to first scroll down to see what you are responding to in order to have a context in which to read your posts then having to scroll back to actually read it.
Now, on to your post. You are mixing quite a lot of things here. Just in Time compilation means that there is a final compilation at run-time and that your binary executable is not machine code, but a form of bytecode. This has nothing to do with the language it was coded in, nor with using multiple languages to produce the bytecode or link to the frameworks. It's a buzzword, and its mostly useful for languages that will run in a sort of VM, like Java does, or for interpreted languages that want an extra boost in performance on execution. Xcode and the Apple toolchain compiles directly to machine code, there is no need for JIT compilation.
Next is the implication that LLVM would give the ability to use Cocoa from literally dozens of languages. That is not so. You can't #include C/C++/Objective-C headers in a language like Perl or Java or Python. The compiler won't understand the prototypes and definitions, even if it is LLVM. The compiler choice doesn't automagically fix this. Things like .NET work with multiple languages because the framework is made in a way that it is easy to create what is called language bindings and Microsoft have done just so for the languages they ship (C#, Managed C++, VB.NET). Basically, for Perl for examples, you'd need an appropriate Cocoa Perl Module that would contain a helper wrapper probably written in C or Objective-C to translate the calls. You'd then require Cocoa; which would load Cocoa.pm at runtime (since Perl is interpreted).
You need to read up a bit on compiler/languages in order to make informed comments in this arena. There are a lot of buzzwords flying around in that industry, and if you don't understand the intricacies of it all, it's very easy to make uninformed comments.
Yeah, so many web developers are really stupid.
Which GUI tool do you use to make complex animations and interactions for HTML5 that beats the productivity of Flash?
Application Labeling of "Ingredients"
With this change, I'd like to see Apple require all developers to label their applications with what development tools were used in its creation, so I can know which ones are Flash based and which are not. This notice should be in the first line of the app's description. That way I can choose whether or not to buy an app based on how it was made.
With this change, I'd like to see Apple require all developers to label their applications with what development tools were used in its creation, so I can know which ones are Flash based and which are not. This notice should be in the first line of the app's description. That way I can choose whether or not to buy an app based on how it was made.
With this change, I'd like to see Apple require all developers to label their applications with what development tools were used in its creation, so I can know which ones are Flash based and which are not. This notice should be in the first line of the app's description. That way I can choose whether or not to buy an app based on how it was made.
Which is a dumb choice to make in the first place. How about basing your choice on the app itself rather than the tools that were used to make it ?
If the app is good, what does it matter what language its written in ?
Which is a dumb choice to make in the first place. How about basing your choice on the app itself rather than the tools that were used to make it ?
If the app is good, what does it matter what language its written in ?
this, this, a thousand times this.
if this brings more developers to the platform, with more cool new apps, then its a good thing.
if it looks native, performs native, then who CARES how it's made??
On this site it's seems to be people without training that objects the loudest.
There are good developers and bad developers, training or not. Good developers use the right tools for whatever product they want to make (if they have the luxury of choice). Bad developers make bad products in any and all development environments.
Choice is only bad for people who don't know what to base their decision on.
Well gee? Ya THINK?
As a graphic designer, who pretty much HAS to have Adobe apps to be professionally relevant, I am not happy with the current spat. But on the other hand, FLASH is my least favorite of the Adobe apps to work in. And it IS a frakkin' dog in Firefox or Safari.
different things and more than likely different teams working on it.
Flash-to-iPhone compiler has very little to do with flash on OSX.
The flash plug in for OSX has some problem which I think a lot of it traces back to Apple not Abobe.
Flash to iphone Compiler just takes flash code and converts it to native iPhone code. Very different than a flash plug in.
More likely their hand was forced by a desire to use actually good systems like the Unreal Engine (used for Epic Citadel) and knew they would have hell to pay if they actually singled out a particular tech. So whether they like it or not, they had to open the doors to everyone.
My guess is that, if this complier lives up to Jobs fears, the apps will get so many 'this is crap' reviews that they will crash and burn. The developers that actually care about quality will start over from scratch and the rest will just die off. Providing of course that they actually survive the review process and don't get rejected for quality issues