Another nail in Flash's coffin

[Fernandez21]

Apple made it very clear that Flash would not be on iOS devices. Also, consumers are spending over $500 on iPads. For most people, that's not just chump change. It's a substantial amount of money it's consumers' responsibility to do their due diligence before buying the iPad. If only a few thousand people had bought the iPad knowing it doesn't have Flash, then it could be said that that is too small of a sample size. One can argue that those few thousand people are a special case and one can't extrapolate what the general consensus is. But 25 million buyers is a substantial number by any standards. If 25 million people still bought the iPad knowing that it doesn't have Flash, what do you say to that?

Right now, the iPad and iPhone are much superior than everything out there, so people will buy it despite it not having flash. I want to be able to use flash, but I still bought the iPad and iPhone because everything else it does, it does better than everything out there right now.

But, if flash doesn't completely die off soon, things could get interesting as the competition catches up. Webos is already a superior ui, it just doesn't have the hardware or app support, and windows will be a strong alternative as their ui is on the same level as apples, it just whether you prefer a list view or grid view on your phone/tablet that differentiates them. And when windows 8 comes out and ties together windows phone/tablet/and desktop thing could get really interesting fast.

Flash alone won't get anybody to switch platforms, but if the competing platform preforms just as well AND has flash support while apple doesn't, than you can see people begin to choose the other platforms over apple's.

 

[palpatine]

Apple made it very clear that Flash would not be on iOS devices. Also, consumers are spending over $500 on iPads. For most people, that's not just chump change. It's a substantial amount of money it's consumers' responsibility to do their due diligence before buying the iPad. If only a few thousand people had bought the iPad knowing it doesn't have Flash, then it could be said that that is too small of a sample size. One can argue that those few thousand people are a special case and one can't extrapolate what the general consensus is. But 25 million buyers is a substantial number by any standards. If 25 million people still bought the iPad knowing that it doesn't have Flash, what do you say to that?

what do i say to that? the ipad is so spectacular in other regards that it outweighs any of its quirky deficiencies.

if apple keeps churning out the best products on the market, then even i (who chafes under steve's rigid rules) will keep buying them. even if steve comes up with another technological windmill he wants to dismember i will stick around and lend my unwilling support to his bullying. i do hope that other os developers will step up, though, and combine their consumer-choice-friendly policies with a better os environment. at the very least, their presence might get us little things from apple like a toggle switch. sadly, they remain far behind (in my opinion).

EDIT: well-said fernandez.

 

[vvswarup]

Right now, the iPad and iPhone are much superior than everything out there, so people will buy it despite it not having flash. I want to be able to use flash, but I still bought the iPad and iPhone because everything else it does, it does better than everything out there right now.

But, if flash doesn't completely die off soon, things could get interesting as the competition catches up. Webos is already a superior ui, it just doesn't have the hardware or app support, and windows will be a strong alternative as their ui is on the same level as apples, it just whether you prefer a list view or grid view on your phone/tablet that differentiates them. And when windows 8 comes out and ties together windows phone/tablet/and desktop thing could get really interesting fast.

Flash alone won't get anybody to switch platforms, but if the competing platform preforms just as well AND has flash support while apple doesn't, than you can see people begin to choose the other platforms over apple's.

Smartphones have been around for years. The things people can do with smartphone can justify its cost. But I disagree on tablets. The iPad has been around for only a year and a half. It didn't even exist a couple of years ago. How have tablets become as important as smartphones all of a sudden?

 

[chown33]

App Store profits are not inconsequential to Apple's bottom line.

As of July 7, Apple says they've paid out over $2.5B to App Store developers.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/07/07Apples-App-Store-Downloads-Top-15-Billion.html

"Apple has paid developers over $2.5 billion to date."​

Since the developer gets 70% and Apple gets 30%, that works out to a total of about $1B in revenues for Apple, to date. That's over the entire lifetime of the App Store.

In the most recently reported quarter, Apple's total quarterly revenues were about $25B.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/20Apple-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results.html

That's revenues for one quarter.

So if you just do some basic math and approximations, and say Apple averaged only $20B per quarter, that's $80B per year.

The App Store has been going for what, 3 years now? So compare $1B over 3 years to $80B per year.

Based on that, I'd say Apple's App Store profits are, for all practical purposes, inconsequential to their bottom line.

 

[vvswarup]

what do i say to that? the ipad is so spectacular in other regards that it outweighs any of its quirky deficiencies.

if apple keeps churning out the best products on the market, then even i (who chafes under steve's rigid rules) will keep buying them. even if steve comes up with another technological windmill he wants to dismember i will stick around and lend my unwilling support to his bullying. i do hope that other os developers will step up, though, and combine their consumer-choice-friendly policies with a better os environment. at the very least, their presence might get us little things from apple like a toggle switch. sadly, they remain far behind (in my opinion).

EDIT: well-said fernandez.

How exactly is Steve bullying anybody. Did he force you to buy an iPad? Did he force people to develop for the iPad?

 

[palpatine]

How exactly is Steve bullying anybody. Did he force you to buy an iPad? Did he force people to develop for the iPad?

the dust up between steve and adobe is well-documented and it is clear from his extensive comments and business practices that he is seeking to force it to either conform to his vision of the future (it cannot and still remain flash) or keep it from penetrating into the mobile market. he is also forcing site owners to redo everything in order to play in the apple miniverse. i call this bullying. he isn't bullying consumers. i did not mean to imply that.

i wouldn't care about spats between companies, except that part of his strategy involves restricting my access to content on the internet, and the end result is a content-creation market manipulated by apple (through the design of their devices) and a concomitant loss of consumer choice (access to content created in the past). unfortunately, by purchasing an ipad i am basically funding his war. in essence, i am voting with my wallet to have my experience of the internet and the ipad micromanaged by steve. i find that unpalatable.

as i said, i am hoping competitors will step up this year.

 

[Ronnoco]

Right now in the tablet world, Steve is The Man and there are always people that want to "stick it to The Man" (the one who controls the user experience as they do not like being "controlled" by one with so much alleged "power")...
Hey, I get that there are some that are not happy with what the iPad can and can't do (and they are perfectly within their rights to object and complain about this or that or to purchase a competing product) but judging by the ENORMOUS sales success of the iPad, apparently they are a small minority of iPad purchasers...
The mp3 player road is strewn with the carcasses of "iPod Killaz", some that could do things the iPod couldn't but the overall user experience is why the iPod, iPhone and iPad are so dominant in market share and Apple is smart not to deviate from that model...

 

[Ronnoco]

as i said, i am hoping competitors will step up this year.

Are you hoping this so that you can finally get what you want in a tablet, or are you hoping this to show Apple that it is wrong to try and control their products user experience the way they think best?

 

[BergerFan]

the dust up between steve and adobe is well-documented and it is clear from his extensive comments and business practices that he is seeking to force it to either conform to his vision of the future (it cannot and still remain flash) or keep it from penetrating into the mobile market. he is also forcing site owners to redo everything in order to play in the apple miniverse. i call this bullying. he isn't bullying consumers. i did not mean to imply that.

i wouldn't care about spats between companies, except that part of his strategy involves restricting my access to content on the internet, and the end result is a content-creation market manipulated by apple (through the design of their devices) and a concomitant loss of consumer choice (access to content created in the past). unfortunately, by purchasing an ipad i am basically funding his war. in essence, i am voting with my wallet to have my experience of the internet and the ipad micromanaged by steve. i find that unpalatable.

as i said, i am hoping competitors will step up this year.

Well, for the most part, competitors are currently failing to gain significant traction, because they're always perceived to be playing catchup, rather than driving innovation themselves. Perception, in this case, mirrors reality.

 

[vladi]

Flash has ability to play videos and audio. But that is not its sole purpose.

Don't think once flash video and audio gets replaced by html5 that it will be dead. Flash is all about ultimate user experience and presentations, something that still cant be achieved by html5 and it wont be achieved for at least another 3-5 years.

Flash will live as long as it takes care of itself and its customers.

Tablets that dont support flash are actually pushing users to download application equivalent of the site they want to visit which is nothing but web recycled content. I don't understand how those that have flash also have crippled experience when all iOS users have to download BMW app first in order to get basic info because going to bmw.com tough the browser will take you to super lackluster mobile site.

 

[palpatine]

Are you hoping this so that you can finally get what you want in a tablet, or are you hoping this to show Apple that it is wrong to try and control their products user experience the way they think best?

good question. i am definitely hoping to get what i want. that part is easy.

i would like it if apple saw the error of its ways and stopped being so prescriptive about the digital experience.

but, if they do make changes, it will only be in tiny incremental steps. in addition, they will phrase it in a way that makes it clear they did not change it because consumers like me requested it, and they did not do it because of competition, so i'll never get the ultimate satisfaction of jobs admitting that he was wrong to micromanage.

i cannot really argue with success. this is his style. we all know that. i buy the ipad despite my abiding discomfort with apple's policies.

personally, i attribute the success of the ipod to other factors (responding here to your earlier post), but that is probably grist for another thread.

going back to the original poster's comments, i find it difficult to join in his glee, because i think that consumers are losing out. i hope other business aren't planning to try similar approaches, but i am pretty sure that they will imitate him and try similar stunts.

 

[Fernandez21]

Smartphones have been around for years. The things people can do with smartphone can justify its cost. But I disagree on tablets. The iPad has been around for only a year and a half. It didn't even exist a couple of years ago. How have tablets become as important as smartphones all of a sudden?

I'm talking about platforms (iOS, webos, windows) not just tablets. I agree with you that smartphones are more important than tablets, in fact I believe the iPad wouldn't be anywhere near as popular as it is now if it wasn't for the iPhone. The problem with all tablets in the past and even present to some extent as that most people view them as a downgrade to their current computer.

If the iPhone was never released, most people would look at the iPad as a downgrade to their macosx computers with an added touchscreen. People would look more closely to what the iPad can't do when compared to their macs and not purchase it.

But because of the iPhone, most people view the iPad as an enhancement of their iPhone. They enjoy what the iPhone can do and look towards the iPad as it can do those things better along with some added capabilities. Steve said that they were originally developing iOS for a tablet devise, but that he decided to go with a smartphone first, which may have been the most important descision he has made while at apple.

 

[Carouser]

Don't think once flash video and audio gets replaced by html5 that it will be dead. Flash is all about ultimate user experience and presentations, something that still cant be achieved by html5 and it wont be achieved for at least another 3-5 years.

iOS supporting Flash because of the existing Flash-based websites is a reasonable argument, even though I don't agree with it.

However, I have seen very few sites where Flash is an optimal solution for the delivery of content. Whatever BMW wishes to accomplish (unless their goal is exactly 'use Flash') they can do it well without using Flash, and in so doing, make their website more accessible, and not just to iOS users, but to those with special requirements like TTS. Niche animations, displays, and other requirements should be in Apps, not the other way around.

 

[spiderman0616]

As of July 7, Apple says they've paid out over $2.5B to App Store developers.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/07/07Apples-App-Store-Downloads-Top-15-Billion.html

"Apple has paid developers over $2.5 billion to date."​

Since the developer gets 70% and Apple gets 30%, that works out to a total of about $1B in revenues for Apple, to date. That's over the entire lifetime of the App Store.

In the most recently reported quarter, Apple's total quarterly revenues were about $25B.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/20Apple-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results.html

That's revenues for one quarter.

So if you just do some basic math and approximations, and say Apple averaged only $20B per quarter, that's $80B per year.

The App Store has been going for what, 3 years now? So compare $1B over 3 years to $80B per year.

Based on that, I'd say Apple's App Store profits are, for all practical purposes, inconsequential to their bottom line.

I think you've lost some perspective here. Find me one successful company that would be willing to give up $1 billion or would be willing to write it off as just a convenience for providing a service. $1 billion is a lot of money. It's a small chunk of the overall profit Apple makes, yes, but I bet Steve Jobs does not call $1 billion inconsequential. I guess that's why he's running a large company and.....well......none of us armchair internet analysts are.

 

[BaldiMac]

yes. apple's app empire would crumble, he-who-shall-not-be-named would rise up to suck the life out of everyone's battery, and flash would destroy the world as we know it...if apple gave us a toggle option

come on. seriously? you think the ability to turn on flash when necessary would have an adverse effect on other consumers?

Yes, I'm serious. Can you have a serious discussion without the ridiculous hyperbole?

For example, I don't use Flash. I haven't used Flash in more than 5 years. Well before the iPhone existed. A year or two before I bought my first Mac. Because of Apple's stance against Flash, I now have access to a huge amount of content that I would not have had otherwise. The amount of web video available in non-Flash format has gone up from around 20% to around 70%.

Instead, Apple has accelerated the creation and adoption of web standards that are open and outside the control of any one company. That's a benefit.

I'm not one of those militant Flash-is-dead posters. It's a great technology for cross platform applications, if you require that sort of thing. It is and will continue to be for many years to come a much more powerful medium that HTML5 and related technologies. Flash's biggest struggle will be to define a purpose as open technologies infringe on its most common use cases.

 

[anjinha]

I think you've lost some perspective here. Find me one successful company that would be willing to give up $1 billion or would be willing to write it off as just a convenience for providing a service. $1 billion is a lot of money. It's a small chunk of the overall profit Apple makes, yes, but I bet Steve Jobs does not call $1 billion inconsequential. I guess that's why he's running a large company and.....well......none of us armchair internet analysts are.

It's 1 billion over 3 years. Yes, it is inconsequential. Specially because that 1 billion is not profit, it's revenue. From that revenue you have to subtract all the costs of running the App Store, salaries, etc. The total profit from the App Store is a lot less.

 

[BaldiMac]

I think you've lost some perspective here. Find me one successful company that would be willing to give up $1 billion or would be willing to write it off as just a convenience for providing a service. $1 billion is a lot of money. It's a small chunk of the overall profit Apple makes, yes, but I bet Steve Jobs does not call $1 billion inconsequential. I guess that's why he's running a large company and.....well......none of us armchair internet analysts are.

Again, that's only Apple's share of the revenue over three years. Not profit. They operate the iTunes Store "a bit over break even."

 

[spiderman0616]

It's 1 billion over 3 years. Yes, it is inconsequential. Specially because that 1 billion is not profit, it's revenue. From that revenue you have to subtract all the costs of running the App Store, salaries, etc. The total profit from the App Store is a lot less.

Fair enough, but I guarantee you that the main reason behind no Flash in iOS is money related. $1 billion in revenues isn't anything to sneeze at either. If it's so inconsequential to Apple's operation, maybe they should just pay 100% out to developers? They can cover all the overhead, since $1 billion is such an unimportant amount.

No flash=no free web apps that use flash=I will just go buy that app on the app store. And the more I get on the app store, the more tied into the ecosystem I am. And the more tied into the ecosystem I am, the more hardware I will buy from Apple. When the original iPhone came out, the App Store was already in the works and Apple knew what this was going to mean. They didn't just come up with it one day and then launch it the next day.

Again, I don't mind not having Flash, because it's becoming less and less important in my computing needs, but I don't believe for a second that Steve Jobs is freeing me from the chains of Flash out of the kindness of his heart.

I will repeat: if you want the truth, follow the money.

 

[BaldiMac]

Fair enough, but I guarantee you that the main reason behind no Flash in iOS is money related.

Of course it is money related. It just has very little to do with Flash games. Apple thinks they will sell more iOS device without Flash than with Flash. Simple.

$1 billion in revenues isn't anything to sneeze at either. If it's so inconsequential to Apple's operation, maybe they should just pay 100% out to developers? They can cover all the overhead, since $1 billion is such an unimportant amount.

They are paying almost all the revenue to developers and overhead. That's what is meant by "a bit over break even."

I will repeat: if you want the truth, follow the money.

The problem is that you are following 450 million from all of last year that leads to empty profits when you have $15 billion dollars walking down the middle of the street announcing to the world that it is going to pick up $5 billion in profits each quarter.

 

[Ronnoco]

good question. i am definitely hoping to get what i want. that part is easy.

i would like it if apple saw the error of its ways and stopped being so prescriptive about the digital experience.

but, if they do make changes, it will only be in tiny incremental steps. in addition, they will phrase it in a way that makes it clear they did not change it because consumers like me requested it, and they did not do it because of competition, so i'll never get the ultimate satisfaction of jobs admitting that he was wrong to micromanage.

i cannot really argue with success. this is his style. we all know that. i buy the ipad despite my abiding discomfort with apple's policies.

personally, i attribute the success of the ipod to other factors (responding here to your earlier post), but that is probably grist for another thread.

going back to the original poster's comments, i find it difficult to join in his glee, because i think that consumers are losing out. i hope other business aren't planning to try similar approaches, but i am pretty sure that they will imitate him and try similar stunts.

Fair enough...I respect your opinion...

 

[chown33]

No flash=no free web apps that use flash=I will just go buy that app on the app store.

You're omitting that many apps on the app store are free:
No flash=no free web apps that use flash=I will just go get that free app on the app store.

TFTFY.

 

[anjinha]

You're omitting that many apps on the app store are free:
No flash=no free web apps that use flash=I will just go get that free app on the app store.

TFTFY.

Also there are a lot of web apps made without flash.

 

[gatearray]

Only on MacRumors do you find people who actually prefer not to have a choice malware. It's pathetic quite sensible.

Now I like it.

 

[ajvizzgamer101]

I believe Pandora's days are numbered.. Especially with the huge cloud streaming service and the push by the subscription based streaming music services...

Nah, They will do just fine. They quick and free.

 

[vvswarup]

the dust up between steve and adobe is well-documented and it is clear from his extensive comments and business practices that he is seeking to force it to either conform to his vision of the future (it cannot and still remain flash) or keep it from penetrating into the mobile market. he is also forcing site owners to redo everything in order to play in the apple miniverse. i call this bullying. he isn't bullying consumers. i did not mean to imply that.

You have not answered my question. How did he force site owners to redo everything? As I see it, site owners made a determination that losing out on the readership of iOS users was not financially sound. How does that constitute bullying? What is stopping them from writing off iOS users and betting that iOS users will jump ship to something else so they can get access to those websites?

Also, Jobs has not forced Adobe to do anything. There's nothing preventing Adobe from simply betting against Apple and sticking to their guns. They've done that in the past.

Also, here's a tidbit involving Adobe and W3C (standards committee) that I have mentioned at least ten times. No one seem to care about this, yet they like to jump on Apple all the time.

Apple, Adobe, Microsoft, and Google are among the members of W3C, the committee in charge of HTML5. Adobe has been stalling W3C's work on HTML5, part of the reason why work has been so slow. Can you think of a reason why this is? The answer is quite simple. HTML5 is a threat to Flash, Adobe's cash cow. If HTML5 becomes a viable competitor to Flash, Adobe will lose its revenue stream from Flash royalties. I have mentioned this ten times and there hasn't been a murmur about Adobe on this forum. Not one person is willing to call out Adobe. Yet, when Apple does the exact same thing, which is to protect one of its businesses, people are up in arms.

I can understand some of it. No one roots for Goliath and Apple has become Goliath. I have seen this happen in how the media views Apple. But at least it's understandable with the media. They're looking for hits. I hoped that at least one person on these forums would be willing to apply a consistent set of standards. But obviously, people are content to apply one set of rules for David and another set of rules for Goliath.

i wouldn't care about spats between companies, except that part of his strategy involves restricting my access to content on the internet, and the end result is a content-creation market manipulated by apple (through the design of their devices) and a concomitant loss of consumer choice (access to content created in the past). unfortunately, by purchasing an ipad i am basically funding his war. in essence, i am voting with my wallet to have my experience of the internet and the ipad micromanaged by steve. i find that unpalatable.

as i said, i am hoping competitors will step up this year.

Who forced you to buy an iPad? As I see it, you made a determination as a consumer that the strengths of the iPad outweighed its deficiencies, one of those which was the lack of Flash. How was your "consumer choice" taken away?