Adobe to sue Apple now?

[vmacintyre]

DING DING DING!

This thread has just won the 2010 Award for Most "Fanboyistic" comments! ​

​

Personally, I hate FLASH, but it's hysterically funny to watch lemming after lemming support Steve Jobs in crippling the iPad's usefulness on the internet, along with the iPhone.

Most iPad buyers probably don't even know what FLASH is when they bought it.

But when that QUESTION MARK comes up on all their favorite website pages, they will feel like they've been had by Apple.

I think Steve Jobs has finally crossed the line in his arrogance towards his long-time customers and developers. Jobs is seriously testing the limits of his Pied Piper skills.

My 2011 prediction is that there will be a BREACH in his famed Reality Distortion Field and Captain Picard will have to be brought in to save the day! LOL

Oh, almost forgot, the lawsuit! Do I think Adobe will win? NOPE!​

But I don't think that's the purpose. The purpose is to draw negative publicity to Apple within the development community and the general public to show up Steve Jobs' iPad demo and marketing as basically fraudulent.
This lawsuit will bring mainstream media in for a closer look and I think that's the ONLY reason it will be filed.

In much the same way that people revolted and stopped buying iPhones and iPod Touches when they noticed the lack of Flash, right?

 

[vmacintyre]

Might as well sue Playstation3, Nintendo, and Xbox for excluding Flash capabilities. They are similarly engineered for proprietary components and operating software.

Actually, PS3 does have a Flash plugin. I can't speak for Nintendo/MS

 

[bcotten]

I firmly believe that if Adobe came out with a working flash plug for mac since 10.4
Apple and Adobe would be in good standings.
But thats not the case.

Adobe does nothing but bitch and complain and now Apple just ignores them and goes with another and better solutions.
I love when Adobe tries to get customer to go against Apple.

Like when CS4 came out
The douche CEO Adobe,completely blame Apple for their program only being 32 bit and not 64 bit cause Apple only updated Cocoa to 64 bit and not Carbon.
But instead of pushing CS4 to have 64 bit,they state it would takes 'years' to convert their broken code to Cocoa.

Also I believe that if Adobe had a working flash plug for the iPhone when it came out.The iPhone would have flash right now.
Apple knew how important flash was when their launch the iPhone
I do believe their produce a plug-in that was horrible on power and crashed alot.
Apple waited but Adobe instead of producing a plug-in that works, they bitch to apple and even had surveys and websites to stated iPhone customer want flash and should feedback and complain to Apple and not Adobe.
By then it was too late,Apple launches the app store which was a 2nd thought for Apple and lay Adobe in their waste.

Look at the Opera app for the iPhone.Here you have a company that instead of bitching and complaining over Apple,they produce a great app and it got approved from Apple.
Great tech companies always plan ahead to be ahead of everyone.
They don't wait for other crappy companies to get their act together.
If you wait,you'll be behind everyone else in the field.
And if your a company produces nothing,you will get pass for a another solution

You're full of crap

 

[vmacintyre]

Another way Adobe can get back at Apple. Stop making programs for the Macs. Macs are known mostly for photo and video editing. And Adobe is by far the leader there. Make CS6, 7, etc., Windows only and people will be go back to windows. That will get Apple there too.

HA! That'll happen. Adobe definitely wants to alienate it's customers! That'll *really* make Apple look bad. And it won't cost them HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS IN REVENUES at all.

 

[mags631]

There is likely damages for changing development terms after the company invested millions into making development terms for the platform.

Than there is the general anti competitive behavior, you don't have to be a monopoly to get smacked with that.

I hope apple will be forced to open up the platform in the future. The world of computing will be as bleak as cable television if this trend takes place.

I'm all for open standards and net neutrality.

All apple needs to do is to let users install their own apps as they please. Make the store exclusive to apple approved apps.

You got the whole package with the deal: the benefits and the limitations. If you didn't like that you shouldn't have bought the product. It's not like Apple tricked you into buying it or has unreasonable position (granted, you may disagree with it, but it doesn't seem unreasonable or burdensome).

Also, Adobe has been well aware of Apple's complaints against flash. They may not like Apple's decision, but any investment on the part of Adobe in Flash on the iPhone was a risk that they took.

 

[jragosta]

Not a chance

Why is everyone getting worked up? The author made up some ridiculous hypothesis as flame bait. There's no way in the world that Adobe would sue Apple.

Let's get a few facts straight:

1. There are NO mobile platforms (webos, symbian, winmob, or any others) that currently have a full working Flash version. How could Adobe go after Apple when NO ONE carries Flash?

2. The proximate issue is the Flash to iPhone converter. But since there are no Flash plugins that work on mobile devices, how could anyone in their right mind think that adding ANOTHER layer between the flash code and the hardware would make it any better?

3. The Flash to iPhone converter isn't even available in the market, so Adobe wouldn't have any grounds to sue, anyway. Adobe said that it would be available next year. Even so, early reports are that it's slow and choppy, even on simple menus.

4. Apple doesn't have a monopoly by any stretch of the imagination. They're about 25% of smart phones and about 8% of cell phones overall. The rest of statistics people are using are purely fabricated (For example, Apple says that 64% of mobile downloads are via the iPhone family, NOT the 99.4% quoted here).

5. Even if Apple DID have a monopoly, they don't have to allow everyone to clutter their platform. Even with a monopoly, they would only have to allow equal access - but since NONE of these runtime environments are allowed, there's nothing Adobe could do to force them.

6. Flash is just not suited for mobile devices (which is part of the reason no one else uses it, either (see above)). Even the vaunted Flash 10.1 is limited and won't work with all Flash sites. AND, it's not available at this point as a final product. AND it will only work on a tiny percentage of cell phones - Cortex A8 or higher (http://pocketnow.com/tech-news/flash-101-limited-by-hardware-requirement)) so the iPhone doesn't even meet Adobe's requirements. Adobe is going to sue Apple because Flash 10.1 requires a Cortex A8 and Apple only uses a slower processor in the iPhone? Dream on.

It's not going to happen - there's absolutely no legal grounds for it. The author is getting paid by the hit and that's the reason he made the whole thing up.

 

[iZac]

if this is true, it kinda reminds me of the whole Internet Explorer - Netscape Navigator debacle.

 

[Sellihca]

So... Apple has one monopoly (the AppStore distribution method of selling apps for iPhones) and they want to leverage that to affect another market (web video codecs / video delivery systems) by implementing anti-competitive rules in their own marketplace/monopoly of the AppStore. Seems perfectly legit for Adobe to sue, and even have a shot at winning.

WOW - Please take a look at the monopoly that adobe has before posting statements like the one above - last time I checked, flash was in 90% of the web.

 

[vmacintyre]

Apple already does this; Aperture directly competes with Lightroom.

As a person who has used both extensively, let me tell you: Adobe knows a whole lot more than Apple in this area.

I've never used Lightroom. You may be right, though. I'm not saying Adobe is bad, I LOVE Dreamweaver. I use it daily. It is easily the best software to edit websites that I have ever come across. There is also no GOOD alternative to PS (GIMP, only counts if you're on Linux and CAN'T run PS) or AE - yet.

 

[oldwatery]

This is as dumb as they come.
I better call my lawyer cos Adobe might sue me for not installing the Flash plug-in on my Mac.
Adobe need to spend more time making their software work straight out of the box instead of these mega expensive upgrades which just introduce more problems than they solve. When is the last time they issued a real free upgrade/fix for the last several versions of CS suites rather than make us spend hundreds of dollars on a new version?
I really wish apple or someone else would come out with a Photoshop alternative. I'd kiss Adobe goodbye in a heart beat.

 

[meecect]

12 months before Apple goes all Final Cut Pro on Photoshop, imo.

It won't be as good, but it will be good enough for a lot of people. And it will be cheap.

As a result, price of the CS suite will drop. And then Adobe can understand what competition is all about.

They should buy Pixelmator. It's already pretty close, IMO, but lacking a handful of key features. It would not take long AT ALL for an Apple dev team to make it competitive with PS. They would need to add:

* better color profile support
* Layer blend properties
* save to web dialog that exported HTML

I mean, how much is PS these days? Adobe must be smoking crack.

Plus, I wonder if Apple has something even bigger up their sleeves. They demo'd that Toy Story 3 iAd and pointed out that it was all HTML5. I wonder if they have a tool to make those ads? Seems like they could woo away a LOT of small Flash design shops with a tool like that.

If I were Adobe, I would get off my butt, make every CS5 app export to HTML5 (as an option), fire my legal staff, and drop my prices by 20%.

Or they can keep doing what they're doing now....just ask Palm how that worked out.

 

[jmulder]

Another tactic...

What about the possibility that Adobe's going to dust off some old patent concerning photo editing (like Aperture) or Non-Linear Editing (like Final Cut Studio) and using a patent infringement lawsuit as leverage in order to force Apple to allow flash in return for dropping the lawsuit?

 

[oldwatery]

Why is everyone getting worked up? The author made up some ridiculous hypothesis as flame bait. There's no way in the world that Adobe would sue Apple.

Let's get a few facts straight:

1. There are NO mobile platforms (webos, symbian, winmob, or any others) that currently have a full working Flash version. How could Adobe go after Apple when NO ONE carries Flash?

2. The proximate issue is the Flash to iPhone converter. But since there are no Flash plugins that work on mobile devices, how could anyone in their right mind think that adding ANOTHER layer between the flash code and the hardware would make it any better?

3. The Flash to iPhone converter isn't even available in the market, so Adobe wouldn't have any grounds to sue, anyway. Adobe said that it would be available next year. Even so, early reports are that it's slow and choppy, even on simple menus.

4. Apple doesn't have a monopoly by any stretch of the imagination. They're about 25% of smart phones and about 8% of cell phones overall. The rest of statistics people are using are purely fabricated (For example, Apple says that 64% of mobile downloads are via the iPhone family, NOT the 99.4% quoted here).

5. Even if Apple DID have a monopoly, they don't have to allow everyone to clutter their platform. Even with a monopoly, they would only have to allow equal access - but since NONE of these runtime environments are allowed, there's nothing Adobe could do to force them.

6. Flash is just not suited for mobile devices (which is part of the reason no one else uses it, either (see above)). Even the vaunted Flash 10.1 is limited and won't work with all Flash sites. AND, it's not available at this point as a final product. AND it will only work on a tiny percentage of cell phones - Cortex A8 or higher (http://pocketnow.com/tech-news/flash-101-limited-by-hardware-requirement)) so the iPhone doesn't even meet Adobe's requirements. Adobe is going to sue Apple because Flash 10.1 requires a Cortex A8 and Apple only uses a slower processor in the iPhone? Dream on.

It's not going to happen - there's absolutely no legal grounds for it. The author is getting paid by the hit and that's the reason he made the whole thing up.

Excellent post....well done!

 

[soup4you2]

For what?

Apple can run whatever it wants in it's own hardware/software.

Besides, why would we want the INTERNET be COMPLETELY controlled by ONE COMPANY's technology "FLASH"??? Why is that a good thing??

It's not in either company's determination weather the internet is controlled by flash or not. It's in the developers of that site and what they choose.

They pick the language that suites them best. However apple refusing to allow 3rd parties to have content on their products does hurt sales, and apple is trying to push the internet to use what they see fit and nothing else.

Adobe has tried to contact Apple in order to work with them on these issues, only to be completely denied the chance. Adobe has also stated a while ago about it's working on a method to export flash applications to iPhone applications, and apple waits right until the release of the product to change their terms and say Nope, not going to happen. Thats a pretty big smack in the face.. If apple would have notified Adobe about this in the beginning there would not have be a ton of wasted resources and dollars that Adobe has used trying to create this product.

Whats after flash, "we wont support divx because it's not our own Quicktime H264"?

And if Adobe should feel like dropping support for Macs, sure it will hurt their sales, but it will also hurt apple sales also. Apple seems to be pissing on everybody who has stood by them throughout the years even at their worst times.

 

[topmounter]

If Flash is so awesome and indispensable, then who in their right mind is going to buy a device that doesn't support Flash?

I think Adobe should just let Apple dig their own grave by not embracing the awesome and indispensable Flash.

 

[kettle]

Probably what Apple should do is allow Flash but make it a point to explain that they do not recommend it during trouble shooting sessions. Telling the customer to remove flash should be the first step in diagnosing most problems.

"Iphone running hot or clunky? We don't recommend flash. Remove that for a while and see how it goes. Get back to us if you still have problems."

yeah but we're talking about a product that gets bad press because people can't think that putting an iPhone in a pocket with keys might cause it to become scratched. People will blame the iPhone for 'running hot' and 'crashing a lot'.

Adobe deserve a wake up call. I hope this is it. I'm sick to death of the quality of their CS suite too. I hope Apple have a few more apps up their sleeves for when share value gives Adobe a kicking.

I would be happy if Apple bought a de valued Adobe and released some cocoa apps under the adobe stable's names.

 

[mizzouxc]

It's really stupid that Adobe thinks they can sue Apple because Apple doesn't want to support Adobe's code. This used to be a free country where you weren't forced legally to support other vendor's software.

Adobe is just throwing a fit because Apple doesn't want to support Flash. Apple users aren't large in quantity, but I'd bet that they're a good advertising (read: flash advertisement) target.

Kudos to Steve for standing up for clean code and a good user experience for iPhone/iPad users.

 

[iansilv]

This is not about facts, it's about PR. The issue is ethical, not legal. Apple is being accused of changing the rules for submitting apps to it's store specifically to block the efforts of Adobe.
This wont go very far in the courts, but the media and technocracy will eat this up and further sour Apple's image.

Yeah- I can see the riots in the streets over two computer companies feuding over some BS issue while people's houses are being foreclosed on.

 

[baleensavage]

Why is everyone getting worked up? The author made up some ridiculous hypothesis as flame bait. There's no way in the world that Adobe would sue Apple.

As much as I think that Apple banning compilers in their license agreement is a total crock, I tend to agree with this statement. Adobe may be a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them. They aren't going to sue until they can be darn sure that they have a leg to stand on. The last thing Adobe needs right now is to ruin their public image with a failed lawsuit.

 

[Havas]

Go Adobe Go! I know Objective C but I much prefer the Java syntax of AS3 and I just want to code in Flex because I loooove it more

 

[SteveSparks]

Android does not prevent you from using another compilers nor does RIM so those arguments are pointless. Apple could solve all the problems by allowing 3rd party app stores.

I think the point is that Adobe has other ways to sell there services, and if they so decided could create their own product.

Video Game Console makers do the same as Apple all the time, You can't put a title on the PSP without Sony's approval.

 

[orbital]

I love how this evangelist is saying go screw yourself apple. Well then whats the issue, adobe doesn't want to be involved on apples devices, oh wait yea you do bc your loosing money boo hoo.

~A Flash Dev

BTW - SteveSparks makes a really good point. Thats why these devices are devices and not personal computers.

 

[iansilv]

In much the same way that people revolted and stopped buying iPhones and iPod Touches when they noticed the lack of Flash, right?

Ding dong! This post wins the "best use of historical, factually verifiable information" award. In contrast with people bitching about things they don't understand, you have pointed out a market force that works in Apple's favor.

Well done sir.

(And I hope that did not sound sarcastic- I agree with you. )

 

[hellodon]

If Flash is so awesome and indispensable, then who in their right mind is going to buy a device that doesn't support Flash?

I think Adobe should just let Apple dig their own grave by not embracing the awesome and indispensable Flash.

As I said earlier, it wasnt something I really cared about on my iPhone but once I started using my iPad to browse the internet instead of my laptop, i started to realize how often it's used and how restricted I was. Its pretty disappointing, honestly.

On my phone, I realize it's a phone and 9 times out of 10 I'm just using the internet quickly to look something up - but on the iPad, the plan was to "have the web in my hands" and really use it as a primary web surfing device. Sadly, I've realized a lot is missing without flash. One thing in particular I mentioned is that I'm shopping for a new car. I wanted to go to a few of the car websites and I couldnt use any of the ones I tried. Had to go get my laptop and I dunno...that sucks

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I am amazed at how fast the fanboys will turn this entire thing in to it is all about flash.

FOR THE LAST TIME THE LAW SUIT IS NOT ABOUT FLASH. The law suit would be about using a middleware to compile software written in another language (for example C#, .net, Flash, Python, ect) to iPhone format. It is not about putting flash on the iPad/iPhone. it is about coding languages.

Really learn what it is about before you go off and say that it is all about flash for web pages. This is about app coding. Adobe just happen to make something that can take something coded in flash and compile it to run on an iPad/Phone/Pod