Halopend
macrumors member
Let's take every Lawsuit against Apple and lob them all together as baseless, because clearly the Psystar case is exactly the same as this one/sarcasm
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 sue Apple now?
- Thread starter netnothing
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let's take every Lawsuit against Apple and lob them all together as baseless, because clearly the Psystar case is exactly the same as this one/sarcasm
Steve Jobs reportedly hates TV from what I read. Go figure.
So that explains his TV failures completely, he just doesn't get it.
I hate FLASH, but HTML5 does not replace it right now as I type this.
Adobe will not win this suit, but I hope they embarrass Apple despite all the fanboy Flash hater responses here.
In the REAL WORLD, you just want the damn thing to WORK!
And the iPhone and iPad currently DON'T work properly on the internet because content is missing. It's just that simple.
All these developers clicked "agree" on an agreement which said that Apple could change these rules at any time without notice (see section 4.x). If they didn't want to take the risk that the agreement would change in some way not in their favor, then they didn't have to click agree, and they didn't have to sell their products in the App store.
Since they did agree that Apple could change the rules in this manner, they seem to have to no legal recourse.
(but IANAL)
*LTD*
macrumors G4
Mattie Num Nums
macrumors 68030
http://blog.iqinteractive.com/?p=338
Great article on the HTML5 v. Flash Debate
As for the iPad not working because it's missing content. I've had mine for 24 hours now and its a great toy. I like sitting around with it and surfing. The non Flash video sites are missing some functions that flash has and I know that not everything will be available because of licensing, but for what it is its cool. Its not MAGICAL thats for damn sure its just a big ass iPod touch, but thats exactly what I want. I still don't think the iPad is anything revolutionary. The iPod Touch was however. I am very lucky to have been issues my iPad by my company, but if not, don't think I would have paid as much as it is going for.
MorphingDragon
macrumors 603
Uh, not more people using Stock ownage as a weapon... Just because you buy your coffee form starbucks doesn't mean you can tell me where to buy my coffee.
---
IMO, if this lawsuit is really about removing cross-compilation through the licence agreement Adobe really need to get over themselves. They knew that the iPhone is a very closed platrom... with pink bunnies n' unicorns inside and gold seeps from the trees.
Actually, what's simple is that many of us aren't really missing flash. I have all the content I need. Calling people apple fanboys does nothing for the argument and is irrelevant. The fact is, I would love a good working version of flash on my iphone and ipad, but Apple chooses not to use it. It's their choice and it doesn't affect me. If it did, I would have every right to shop elsewhere.
Those aren't Apple's downloads. Those are mine! (and all the other app developers). I have my copyright notices on all my iPhone apps.
Apple is a tiny player in that app market. Apple's store only reaches about 15% of all smartphone app customers. It's not Apple's fault if the majority of customers in the market aren't buying apps for their (Symbian, RIM, webOS, PalmOS WM6, et.al.) smartphones.
Mattie Num Nums
macrumors 68030
Yeah this is going to be interesting. The only thing I could possibly think is that an agreement between the two companies was made and Apples current moves breached that agreement.
MorphingDragon
macrumors 603
But section 4 of the SDK agreement gives them the right to change it at whim.
Mattie Num Nums
macrumors 68030
Xibalba
macrumors 6502
you completely misread what i said. read it again. then you'll understand why your comment makes no sense...
Nebulance
macrumors 6502
I don't think Adobe could even come up with a relevant case. How can you get angry with a company that chooses what goes on their own products????
That's like Microsoft getting angry that Apple is based on UNIX and not DOS. But, Microsoft wrote their code in Apple's form so their products can get on. (MS Office, that is.) Not that difficult.
Note: MS Office is terrible, as compared to the wonders LaTeX can do 🙂
It may be some more effort to put the document together, but it looks great!
That's like Microsoft getting angry that Apple is based on UNIX and not DOS. But, Microsoft wrote their code in Apple's form so their products can get on. (MS Office, that is.) Not that difficult.
Note: MS Office is terrible, as compared to the wonders LaTeX can do 🙂
It may be some more effort to put the document together, but it looks great!
Attached themselves like a leach? As in, they're a software company providing software for a hardware company? This is now called being a leach? Give me a ****ing break. Adobe helped float Apple. Without them, you wouldn't have that Mac you're using. And Adobe isn't slating Apple. They're merely responding to the very public dissing Apple has been giving Adobe for a few years now.
If Apple decides to be only a gadget company, I'd have no use for them. Mobile technology is a shiny toy, but nothing seriously productive.
Adobe released Lightroom beta for the mac first, and then eventually released the windows beta.
No one is going to use their ipad for actual production work. This isn't changing the equation, this is no longer being a relevant hardware company to the content producers in the world.
Apple needs Adobe a lot more than you realize. In every institution I know of that uses Macs, Adobe is the software being used on them. If these computers no longer offered Adobe support, Apple would lose EVERY SINGLE institutional purchase in art and design programs. In every single nation. Apple would be smart not to **** with Adobe.
rhett7660
macrumors G5
You can't argue with him/her. They are anti-apple and any attempt at pointing out holes in the logic they presented will result in name calling such as "fanboy" or "kool aid drinker".....
The one thing I've learned about this website over the years is that apparently no one here goes to national news, sports, or weather sites or even local news as in TV stations, radio stations, etc., really almost ALL MEDIA SITES!
Otherwise, you'd all realize, almost ALL use FLASH! LOL
Yet people continually say here that they never need FLASH for any website they go to! Go figure.
Does that mean most MacRumors.com members don't follow the news, sports, or weather or hit media sites?
I dunno, but I do know all of the news sites I go to use FLASH in some way.
So I think the members of this site are not a very good representation of what people want to or do with an iPhone or iPad or even a Mac.
Either that or the Fanboys here just lie to religiously protect their hero Steve Jobs. Nothing would surprise me.
God forbid. I never claimed I was an attorney; so much for your legal "assumptions", "opinions" and "conclusion". I've hired litigators, great and small and as I did say, I've been involved in litigations from NY to CA over the last 30 years. Likley far more than you. This much I have learned - attorney's easily give opinions that are often "proven" wrong in a court of law before a Judge & Jury. As to the cause of action I believe we can safely "assume" if Adobe litigates, it will not be a frivolous case and there will be many causes of action.
Poll Smoker
macrumors 6502a
So a professional victim then? What do they call the people who fall down on icy store sidewalks for a living?
MorphingDragon
macrumors 603
That's the way I'm seeing it too. Many people went with Photoshop on Windows because it's 64 bit while the Mac version wasn't. It would have affected Mac sales.
Having your platform beholden to a third party who aren't reliable to come through with the goods so it affects sales is not a position I imagine Jobs would want to find himself in again with the iPhone/iPad and would wisely want to avoid any scenario he can envisage it would happen again. I would if I were him. So would anyone.
Anyway, many people here are talking about Apple having a monopoly, but I'm not seeing that. Firstly, Apple is a distant third in the smartphone market behind RIM and Symbian (who has the lion's share of 45%, Apple is only 18%). And Adobe can still produce and market their software for the iPhone just like anybody else. Apple's not stopping them at all. In fact they just released Adobe Ideas which I downloaded the other day. Apple has no competing drawing app they're using their control of the App Store to squeeze Adobe Ideas out for, so it's not at all like Microsoft using their control of Windows in squeezing out Netscape.