And people say Flash is dying...

[vrDrew]

I really don't understand the Android (and Flash) worshippers way of thinking.

Its amazing how often they tell us (perfectly happy) iPad owners how "deprived" we are because the iPad doesn't run Flash. That Flash is being withheld because of some evil scheme on the part of "$Teve Job$" etc.

But if anyone ever points out that there are 60,000 or so iPad apps available (versus a tiny handful for Android tablets) - then they blow it off with "It's not all about the apps..."

Well, I'm sorry - but that is B/S.

Flash-only content makes up a relatively tiny part of the web. Many times the content is available elsewhere in a non-Flash format. And if, for whatever reason, one simply has to look at Flash material - it's pretty easy for us to use the regular desktop or laptop computers all of us iPad owners already own. I've seen Flash-running web sites. Some of them are interesting, compelling, and engaging. Most of them aren't. Some of them are downright malicious. But not a one of them is something I can't live without.

The iPad's App model, however, is a completely different way of interacting with Internet data. And in 99 cases out of a hundred - its much, much better than seeing the same data on a generic webpage. The New York Times; The Weather Channel; Bloomberg; Major League Baseball. Take your pick.

If you haven't spent some time using an iPad app, then quite frankly - you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Lets also get something straight: Nobody NEEDS 60,000 apps. Or 10,000. Or even a hundred Apps on a single device. What you NEED is the four of five apps that meet your specific desires. And I'll tell you what: Its much easier to do that when you've got a catalog of tens of thousands to choose from. Rather than a handful.

So: the iPad will never run Flash. Stop hoping it will, or whining that Steve Jobs doesn't let you. You are wasting everybody's time.

If you want to claim that the ability to run Flash on a mobile device is sometimes desirable - fine, thats probably true. But you also need to concede that having access to tens of thousands of Apps is far, far superior than having access to less than a hundred.

 

[Jcoz]

If Flash can be turned off, thus not impact battery life, why is everyone opposed to us having an option for Flash?

Do you really think that since you don't like Flash, everyone else must unequivocally also not like Flash?

Me personally?

I have no use for it. I've had an iphone since the original and have only been blocked from one site, and that was recently. Lack of flash seemingly just does not affect anything I do.

I understand the reasons for keeping it out, however hardware+flash improvements(if realized) should make those reasons much less relevant moving forward.

I would agree that at this point, it may be hard to justify refusing to offer the choice.

 

[spacepower7]

But Flash is optimised...just look at the Playbook, Xoom and Touchpad. They all have Flash on Cortex-A9 chips, and from demos it works beautifully. The battery life for these iPad is amazing not because it doesn't use Flash, but because it uses ARM chips which are several folds more efficient than x86 chips.

Even the new more powerful Cortex-A9 (vs the iPads Cortex-A8) has better battery life (as shown in the Xoom) than the current iPad.

I don't think battery life is an issue as big as Apple has presented it to be...

Flashing is not shipping on any of these tablets, yet

I hate flash and if you use it on your website, I won't be coming back.

 

[Piggie]

Flashing is not shipping on any of these tablets, yet

I hate flash and if you use it on your website, I won't be coming back.

The thing is, the vast majority of people don't hate flash.
The vast majority of people probably don't really even know what flash is.
The vast majority of people get their new computer, go to a web page and it says something about needing to install this Adobe thing to view it. They click it, they press ok, they can then see the web page and they get on with their lives.

That's probably the most, most normal people know, or care about Flash, and till perhaps 18 months ago, all I knew or cared about it. I installed it, I forgot about it and everything works.

End off.

The only people any of this hurts are the typical non technical consumers who don't understand why they can't see some web sites.

 

[darngooddesign]

Me personally?

I have no use for it. I've had an iphone since the original and have only been blocked from one site, and that was recently. Lack of flash seemingly just does not affect anything I do.

I understand the reasons for keeping it out, however hardware+flash improvements(if realized) should make those reasons much less relevant moving forward.

I would agree that at this point, it may be hard to justify refusing to offer the choice.

Most people don't understand the real reason for keeping it off. Apple doesn't want to leave a major part of the internet experience in someone (Adobe) else's hands.

1. If Flash mobile sucks, which it has until Apple shamed them, regular people aren't going to blame Adobe, they are going to blame the device they are using, they are going to blame Apple.

2. Adobe has a history of not putting Apple on the same level of importance as Microsoft. The last time this happened Apple created Final Cut Pro because Adobe said they would develop Premier first for PCs.

 

[Jcoz]

Most people don't understand the real reason for keeping it off. Apple doesn't want to leave a major part of the internet experience in someone (Adobe) else's hands.

1. If Flash mobile sucks, which it has until Apple shamed them, regular people aren't going to blame Adobe, they are going to blame the device they are using, they are going to blame Apple.

2. Adobe has a history of not putting Apple on the same level of importance as Microsoft. The last time this happened Apple created Final Cut Pro because Adobe said they would develop Premier first for PCs.

Oh I agree, and know those reasons, just saying that hardware and software involved may be coming to a head in that regard.

 

[darngooddesign]

I really don't understand the Android (and Flash) worshippers way of thinking...

And by using the word worshiper you have eliminated any credibility your opinion might have carried.

Following up with "$Teve Job$" just reinforces how little we should pay attention to what you say.

 

[NT1440]

Cortex-A9 processors can easily handle Flash without draining batteries...implement it Apple!

Thats funny, my core2duo can't without putting a significant drain on the battery...or any modern processors really. Flash sucks battery life out the window.

 

[Johns12]

My wife has a bunch of sites she goes to that use flash. Can't see it on her IPad. I don't care about this whole flash/no flash debate, but she grabs my Macbook to view these websites. That pisses me off

 

[spinedoc77]

I really don't understand the Android (and Flash) worshippers way of thinking.

Its amazing how often they tell us (perfectly happy) iPad owners how "deprived" we are because the iPad doesn't run Flash. That Flash is being withheld because of some evil scheme on the part of "$Teve Job$" etc.

But if anyone ever points out that there are 60,000 or so iPad apps available (versus a tiny handful for Android tablets) - then they blow it off with "It's not all about the apps..."

Well, I'm sorry - but that is B/S.

Flash-only content makes up a relatively tiny part of the web. Many times the content is available elsewhere in a non-Flash format. And if, for whatever reason, one simply has to look at Flash material - it's pretty easy for us to use the regular desktop or laptop computers all of us iPad owners already own. I've seen Flash-running web sites. Some of them are interesting, compelling, and engaging. Most of them aren't. Some of them are downright malicious. But not a one of them is something I can't live without.

The iPad's App model, however, is a completely different way of interacting with Internet data. And in 99 cases out of a hundred - its much, much better than seeing the same data on a generic webpage. The New York Times; The Weather Channel; Bloomberg; Major League Baseball. Take your pick.

If you haven't spent some time using an iPad app, then quite frankly - you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Lets also get something straight: Nobody NEEDS 60,000 apps. Or 10,000. Or even a hundred Apps on a single device. What you NEED is the four of five apps that meet your specific desires. And I'll tell you what: Its much easier to do that when you've got a catalog of tens of thousands to choose from. Rather than a handful.

So: the iPad will never run Flash. Stop hoping it will, or whining that Steve Jobs doesn't let you. You are wasting everybody's time.

If you want to claim that the ability to run Flash on a mobile device is sometimes desirable - fine, thats probably true. But you also need to concede that having access to tens of thousands of Apps is far, far superior than having access to less than a hundred.

Hilarious! I don't think Android users care about you being deprived on your ipad. The reality is your general consumer who can't get the "internet" as they see it on their mobile device. If you don't feel deprived that is awesome, but for someone else who does they are going to ask the company why that is, or maybe even walk away from buying the product or it's successors. I understand it's a for profit business, but that's exactly why it should be a concern to Apple.

 

[DeathChill]

I thought that other post with that picture may have been an odd issue until I tried it myself. I'm not railing against Flash or anything, just thought it was interesting.

 

[darngooddesign]

I thought that other post with that picture may have been an odd issue until I tried it myself. I'm not railing against Flash or anything, just thought it was interesting.

Mine wasn't nearly as bad as yours.

This is the thing that bothers me. People trying to prove how bad Flash is either focus on video or resource heavy sites, which might be coded poorly, to show how much it ramps up the CPU. However, if you go to something like thevortexbarandgrill.com, which is far more indicative of the majority of Flash sites, my CPU hits maybe 2%.

 

[DeathChill]

How come mine doesn't show a separate Flash player and groups it under Safari? I updated Flash just now but usage actually went up. To be fair it's a 1.83 GHz Core 2 Duo; waiting until June to see what (if any) the new MacBook Air brings.

 

[fertilized-egg]

If Flash can be turned off, thus not impact battery life, why is everyone opposed to us having an option for Flash?

Do you really think that since you don't like Flash, everyone else must unequivocally also not like Flash?

I have a phone with Flash and I almost always have it turned off, not even "tab to enable" because it's a pain in the neck if I accidentally turn it on. But in any case, Jobs' purpose, as he clearly outlined in his essay, was basically to force developers to provide more optimized iOS experience to users. I don't necessarily agree with him 100% but he's probably right that as soon as you give developers the dream of "cross platform Flash app," that develop will try get cheap by going that route even though it's at the expense of the user experience.

Personally I need Silverlight more than Flash for the sites I visit but no Android supporter would tell me why they are so enthusiastic about Flash-enabled "full web experience" while ignoring the poor Silverlight.

 

[Maagus]

Not sure what the Flash buzz is about. I have yet to see a useful Flash website or app.

 

[darngooddesign]

I have a phone with Flash and I almost always have it turned off, not even "tab to enable" because it's a pain in the neck if I accidentally turn it on...

What's peculiar is that when I set Flash to On Demand on my Droid, tapping an flash element only turns on that element not every bit of flash. Any other Flash items aren't loaded unless I tap them specifically.

 

[BaldiMac]

whether it's the financial ties Apple enjoys with HTML5 or it really is that Jobso has a personal vendetta.

What financial ties does Apple enjoy with HTML5? (The completely free open standard.)

In the end the question I propose we ask is why don't we have the choice. Ok take yourself, you say Flash is bad, but if you had the choice to turn it off on your ipad browser what impact would it make on you?

You do have a choice. Buy a device that supports Flash or don't. A similar question to yours would be, why doesn't Apple have a choice.

As far as why Apple doesn't offer the option of Flash instead of not allowing it at all, the answer is simple. If you provide the option, developers will use it as a crutch that will slow the development of HTML5 and related technologies as alternatives to Flash.

I have disabled Flash since before the iPhone even existed, so I'm all for anything that promotes alternatives to Flash. That way I have access to more content.

I thought at their last earnings statement they said it was a billion in profit, or was that just the iTunes Store ? Isn't the App store part of the iTunes store? I don't know what type of accounting practices they use. So maybe the App store part of it was break even. Anyone know for sure ?

The entire iTunes Store had around $1.4 billion in revenue last quarter, not profit. Apple does not break profits down by product area. But they have maintained that they are operating the iTunes Store "a bit over breakeven" during financial calls.

You can say market share is Apple's on tablets, but we've seen this story twice before now (Macs, iPhone) and we know where they'll end up (non-majority share, high margin).

Macs never had a market share lead. And neither has the iPhone (which is still growing market share). So, we've actually seen it twice with Apple (iPods, Paid Music downloads). How did those end up?

Amazing how people can rewrite history to fit their argument.

I've been using Macs for years and I've never experienced all of these "flash crashed my computer" stuff all SJ worshippers seem cry about.

Your personal anecdotes aside, the actual statistics said that Flash was the most frequent cause of crashes on the Mac.

I guess your right, that's why we see flash being widely supported and flawlessly executed on so many non-apple mobile devices now.....

Works perfectly on my Captivate. From my own consumer point of view it's been ready for mobile devices for quite some time.

Do people really think hyperbole helps this argument?

If Flash can be turned off, thus not impact battery life, why is everyone opposed to us having an option for Flash?

Do you really think that since you don't like Flash, everyone else must unequivocally also not like Flash?

I can't speak for everyone, but, as I said earlier, I'm opposed to the option because a lack of Flash on iOS devices means more developers supporting alternatives to Flash.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about Flash. I don't support it because it is a roadblock to a web based on open standards, and because of the lack of respect for user privacy and user preference shown by Macromedia and then Adobe.

 

[spinedoc77]

What financial ties does Apple enjoy with HTML5? (The completely free open standard.)

H.264 isn't royalty free, it is currently free to the end user but there is no reason that couldn't change, especially if you consider the strategy of becoming widely used for free then being pay for view like some formats have been. It's interesting that WebM is royalty free though. It's the wild west out there and we don't know how any of this is going to shake out.

You do have a choice. Buy a device that supports Flash or don't. A similar question to yours would be, why doesn't Apple have a choice.

Obviously I have a choice, as do the consumers as evidenced by the very fast rise of the Android smartphone versus the iphone. Will Apple be hampered by medieval beliefs again and let the tablet market slip from under them? You are not understanding the question I'm putting it forth. Of course Apple has a choice, they have THE choice.

As far as why Apple doesn't offer the option of Flash instead of not allowing it at all, the answer is simple. If you provide the option, developers will use it as a crutch that will slow the development of HTML5 and related technologies as alternatives to Flash.

I have disabled Flash since before the iPhone even existed, so I'm all for anything that promotes alternatives to Flash. That way I have access to more content.

Flash isn't going away. I have no issue if you want to limit your internet experience, it's your business. But if you believe in the free market it will gravitate towards the best format on its own without Apples sham white knight rescue of us all from the evils of Flash, please.

Do people really think hyperbole helps this argument?

No, that's why you shouldn't use hyperbole to such an extent. I used anecdotal evidence, not hyperbole, which I only put forth as my own experience with a mobile device and Flash in 2010. On my PC's for the years and years I have run them I've never had an issue with Flash, and I don't have an issue with it on my Captivate.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about Flash. I don't support it because it is a roadblock to a web based on open standards, and because of the lack of respect for user privacy and user preference shown by Macromedia and then Adobe.

You could have fooled us. In the end it should be about choice, or if there is a lack of choice at the very least it should be about the web functioning fully on a device. This is a business decision and personally I think it will affect Apple as consumers browse for tablets and see the "this tablet has flash" signs. This whole fiasco has thrown it into the news and non tech people are becoming more and more aware of the lack of flash and how that impacts their internet experience.

 

[BaldiMac]

H.264 isn't royalty free, it is currently free to the end user but there is no reason that couldn't change, especially if you consider the strategy of becoming widely used for free then being pay for view like some formats have been. It's interesting that WebM is royalty free though. It's the wild west out there and we don't know how any of this is going to shake out.

H.264 isn't part of HTML5.

As far as H.264 goes, there is every reason to think that it will remain free to the end user, since the newest licensing terms guarantee that.

Obviously I have a choice, as do the consumers as evidenced by the very fast rise of the Android smartphone versus the iphone. Will Apple be hampered by medieval beliefs again and let the tablet market slip from under them? You are not understanding the question I'm putting it forth. Of course Apple has a choice, they have THE choice.

Medieval beliefs?

Flash isn't going away. I have no issue if you want to limit your internet experience, it's your business. But if you believe in the free market it will gravitate towards the best format on its own without Apples sham white knight rescue of us all from the evils of Flash, please.

I never claimed Flash is going away. My internet experience is not limited in any significant way. Apple's decision is part of the free market. It's not a "sham" that's outside the normal forces.

No, that's why you shouldn't use hyperbole to such an extent. I used anecdotal evidence, not hyperbole, which I only put forth as my own experience with a mobile device and Flash in 2010. On my PC's for the years and years I have run them I've never had an issue with Flash, and I don't have an issue with it on my Captivate.

I didn't use hyperbole. Anyone that claims Flash runs "perfectly" or "flawlessly" on a mobile device is.

You could have fooled us.

Fooled you into what? I don't believe Flash is going to die. I don't think it "sucks." I don't think it's useless.

In the end it should be about choice, or if there is a lack of choice at the very least it should be about the web functioning fully on a device.

I suppose that depends on your definition of "the web functioning fully." By which you probably just mean Flash.

This is a business decision and personally I think it will affect Apple as consumers browse for tablets and see the "this tablet has flash" signs. This whole fiasco has thrown it into the news and non tech people are becoming more and more aware of the lack of flash and how that impacts their internet experience.

Of course it will "affect Apple." The question is whether it will be good or bad in the short term or the long term. Seems to have been a good in the short term. And HTML5 and related technologies will be more competitive in the future in the long term. Flash will still have a big place on the internet, particularly in the delivery of DRM-protected content.

 

[fobfob]

So I was on Kotaku today on an iPad and came across this link about COD:MW3.

http://www.findmakarov.com/

The problem with Flash sites, and this site is a perfect example of this, is sound. It's on by default, and always ramped up to full volume.

When I click on a link, I don't want to be blasted with sound. Without exaggeration, as soon as I clicked on that link, I quickly closed the tab because of the freaking annoying sound. And when I did click it back, with sound adjusted so my brain wasn't rattled, it used 25% of my quad core i7 CPU (not counting hyperthreading potential). WTF? For a simple counter?!

Overall, this is a classic example of what's wrong with Flash: slow to load, annoying noise/music, high CPU usage, and low signal to noise ratio.

If you are saying that to enjoy the "full" web, because Flash is so wonderful, I now have to surf with no background music or TV playing, and with a finely calibrated sound system, just in case a site decides to bombard me with sound; then No thanks.

When I start an App on iOS I know it could get loud. I don't expect or want that for every html link I click.

Flash==fail. Do not want.

 

[wovel]

As I said...the point isn't about this specific website.

This happens way too often on way too many websites. I know Apple is trying to kill Flash, a noble effort indeed, but its coming at too big of a cost.

Maybe you should complain to the companies using proprietary technologies on their web sites instead of building them using standards?

You may have noticed that even if Apple wanted Flash on the iPad (which they thankfully don't), they would not have it (Take a look at the XOOM I can not even see my own website)..

 

[vvswarup]

Actually, Apple did two things:

• Mocked (yes, mocked) Adobe enough so that it motivated them to clean up their act and deliver Flash for multiple mobile devices and platforms (all competing with Apple)
• Created a hostile working relationship with Adobe such that iOS would be guaranteed to be locked out from being able to have a usable Flash plugin

This is not a smart way of going about things. If anything, Flash has continued to survive, because now Adobe IS delivering the goods to competitors (who also now seem to have dominating market share).

You can say market share is Apple's on tablets, but we've seen this story twice before now (Macs, iPhone) and we know where they'll end up (non-majority share, high margin).

The fact is, if you had Flash you would also have the option to turn it off if you didn't care for it. The point is, you don't have that option at all.

Flash isn't going anywhere. Android, webOS, etc. will ensure that.

If Adobe had to be mocked into cleaning up its act, then something is wrong with its CEO. A good CEO anticipates trends in the market that his/her company's products are a part of. For example, Bill Gates anticipated the need for a good desktop publishing package. He swooped in with MS Office.

Apple had a simple request to Adobe: Show us a low-powered device running Flash without affecting performance. Adobe so far hasn't delivered. Apple made this request before the first iPhone came out, in 2007.

Since you made the comment about market share, let me make things clear to you. It's certainly good to have market share so companies can boast about it, but that's all the good that high market share does. Market share is not going to pay a company's employees or pay research and development on a new product. Profits will do that. Apple has had less than 10% market share in computers, but it has always commanded the highest margins, but I digress.

Adobe has yet to show Flash working on a low-powered device without degrading performance.

 

[vvswarup]

Because Flash is a huge part of the internet experience, no matter how you slice and dice it. Apple is not altruistically banning Flash because of some knight in shining armor desire to make the world better. Consumers, especially non tech savvy consumers who are really the dirty masses with the money, are going to be asking "why can't I watch this video, why can't I view this webpage?".

I like Apple products, but I don't think they're a "knight in shining armor" nor do I even think they should be that. Apple is a business, and a business is supposed to make money.

The Apple brand, which gives Apple a reputation for having a good user experience, is very important to Apple. Apple wants to protect its brand. Flash has the potential to tarnish that brand. Therefore, Apple does not want Flash on iOS devices.

 

[vvswarup]

I stream hockey games on my phone all the time and flash works great. The only reason Apple forbids flash is to force people to use their app store to pay $.99 for the same flash game that can be played for free on the internet. But as they say a sucker is born every day.

HTML5 is an emerging web standard. In order to get it ready, a standards committee has to ratify all of the elements of it. Adobe, Microsoft, Apple and Google are among the companies on the standards committee overseeing HTML5. Did you know that Adobe has been doing everything it can to stall HTML5's development?

What do you think the answer to that is? Money, plain and simple. Adobe wants to protect its revenue stream from Flash. That's why Adobe wants Flash to exist.

I'm not denying that part of the reason Apple is excluding Flash is to protect its own revenue streams. But Adobe is no better. What I disagree with is the blatant double-standards applied to Apple. What Adobe is doing is no better than what Apple is doing, but everybody is taking up arms against Apple in defense of Adobe, even though Apple is doing exactly what Adobe is doing.

 

[mrochester]

Out of interest, here's the same flash site on a Windows 7 PC using Firefox

The flash plugin uses 100% of 1 CPU core.