Apple Blocks Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone Compiler in Latest SDK Agreement

[Salacion]

Excuse me? Your post is vague and awkwardly phrased. I'm not asking for exact specificity, just a little more coherence.

Oops. I mixed threads and thought your post had to do with the Keynote.

Major fail for me...

 

[PeterQVenkman]

everytime people bitch and whine about something, it usually ends up working out real well (but it's so far after the fact that no one bothers to say "I told you so").

Yes, the iAd network is going to be SO AWESOME.

Nah, I used to worry about this too, but in reality, Apple could fund and produce photoshop and illustrator replacement in about 9 months, that's my guess.

I won't debate your points about CS4 being a dog, but I wouldn't hold my breath for Apple to whip up a CS4 replacement in 9 months. Where are those 64-bit, grand central version of FCS right now? Nowhere.

Where is shake? Gone.

Apple would just buy Adobe and drop support for window's users. No real threat there from Adobe. Adobe needs Apple a lot more than Apple needs Adobe.

I'm not familiar with how publicly traded companies work, but can Apple just straight up buy Adobe if they don't agree to it?

It's hilarious/pathetic to note that the same "free and open" people foaming at the mouth about Apple's proprietary nature are the same people foaming at the mouth about Jobs turning his back on Flash (proprietary) and pushing HTML5 (free and open).

Apple wasn't pushing it for open standards, they were pushing it to help establish their exclusive ad network that will do all the things people hate about Flash ads.

It's hilarious/pathetic to note that the same people bitching about intrusive Flash ads now get their very own Apple made equivalent through iAd delivered to their hand held devices- that they can't turn off! Oops!

 

[LagunaSol]

Its ironic that Apple is pushing for an open platform, when everything else they do is so locked down

It's ironic that those who are constantly raging against Apple's locked-down ways are now excoriating Apple for fighting Flash and pushing HTML5.

 

[dante@sisna.com]

Most consumers won't wait for Apple to "pull it off"; they'll move on. Especially the pros who NEED this sort of software for their work. The question is will Adobe ever get the nerve to start fighting back. I don't think they have it in them, to be honest. But it would be interesting if they yanked everything from OSX.

How dare you insult Adobe. Imagine a world without masterful animated classics like this.

That link was classic!

Thanks for the laugh.

And you are probably right, most pros would move on. Especially large production houses.

 

[whitingrj]

Oops. I mixed threads and thought your post had to do with the Keynote.

Major fail for me...

Don't worry! It's okay.

 

[dante@sisna.com]

I won't debate your points about CS4 being a dog, but I wouldn't hold my breath for Apple to whip up a CS4 replacement in 9 months. Where are those 64-bit, grand central version of FCS right now? Nowhere.

Where is shake? Gone.

You make good points.

I am getting off my soapbox now and signing off. I stand corrected.

 

[Peace]

Yes, the iAd network is going to be SO AWESOME.



I won't debate your points about CS4 being a dog, but I wouldn't hold my breath for Apple to whip up a CS4 replacement in 9 months. Where are those 64-bit, grand central version of FCS right now? Nowhere.

Where is shake? Gone.



I'm not familiar with how publicly traded companies work, but can Apple just straight up buy Adobe if they don't agree to it?



Apple wasn't pushing it for open standards, they were pushing it to help establish their exclusive ad network that will do all the things people hate about Flash ads.

It's hilarious/pathetic to note that the same people bitching about intrusive Flash ads now get their very own Apple made equivalent through iAd delivered to their hand held devices- that they can't turn off! Oops!

Ever consider going to the anti-Google discussions and complaining about all of Google's ads ?

 

[ddrueckhammer]

That link was classic!

Thanks for the laugh.

And you are probably right, most pros would move on. Especially large production houses.

Haha!

Sorry it took so long to respond but I was having a seizure...

 

[bdkennedy1]

Well, I'm definitely no fan of Flash, but I can see this going to court.

 

[AdrianWerner]

It's not just about Flash, it's about trying to force devs to develop exclusively for iPhone/iPad. Which will be a double edged sword. It will stop some iPhone devs from porting their apps to other platforms, but at the same time it will stop some devs from ever trying to make iPhone apps.

it could be especially destructive for iPad. Even if it's selling really well, there's just no way it will sell enough to create enough userbase for all the cool interactive magazines we see. For most magazines and publishers to do so something like that on regular basis they need to be able to deliver it not just for iPad, but for Windows, Android and pretty much every other platform they can. Print won't be replaced by digital if the replacement is limited to one platform, because no matter how popular it will be, it will never be popular enough compared to Print. If they will have to spend a lot more just to get it working outside Apple's ecosystem, then smaller publishers most likely won't be able to afford it, thus leaving the cool innovation only to the big boys (if even they will bother), while majority of reading content will just be a replication of webpages-like content, only formated to fit iPad's screen

 

[Peace]

Well, I'm definitely no fan of Flash, but I can see this going to court.

Huh ?

 

[petsounds]

Not quite. Translations can vary in quality by massive amounts (try passing some poetry in your native language through Google language tools a few times).

Someone looked inside the CS5 iPhone app's .ipa decoded bundle. The "app" included megabytes of cruft library code even for an extremely simple app, in addition to what was spit out by Adobe's dynamic translator. The resulting code looks like it calls the Cocoa Touch APIs eventually, but only after being messaged by tons of library code to make sure all the quirks and oddities of the flash environment are emulated down to the pixel. It's really easy to tell the result is an automatic translation by looking at the resulting object code (which Apple and jbreakers can easily do).

Executing all this extra stuff can do nothing but slow down responsiveness and eat battery life.

While I agree that publish-once-to-many-platform software is always more bloated than running platform-optimized code, I think you're overstating your case a bit. They're certainly not going to "eat battery life"...please. That's just sensationalism.

The fact is, the Flash IDE and Actionscript language is very powerful for creating sophisticated animation and complex interactions. That kind of framework just isn't readily available through a pure XCode, Objective-C environment. Sure, you can do it, but the time-to-market for replicating such things in pure Obj-C is much longer. Flash is just a much better rapid development tool for multimedia experiences. Cocoa Touch and UIKit are great UI frameworks, but they falter when you get into the realm of animation and multimedia manipulations and interactions.

It's a disservice to developers that Apple has removed this option simply because Apple needs time to build an alternative IDE to force developers to use (if that is even their goal). Flash->iPhone is not about creating shovelware (there's enough of that on the App Store already); it's about leveraging the really skilled multimedia developers to do some innovative apps which aren't being done right now because of the time/money investment of doing such apps in XCode. It's also about publishing to Android at the same time, which is good for the whole mobile community.

Let's remember this is a pretty significant initiative, and Adobe has a lot of room to optimize their 1.0 product. But it sounds like they'll never be able to do that because Steve wanted to take his toys and go home.

 

[BaldiMac]

Did you know that Adobe opened the SWF format, and that anyone can write their own player for the SWF format?

Did you know that Adobe only released parts of the spec? And that those parts are only available through a restrictive license?

I'm a huge fan Apple products, however, I believe they are asking for an anti-trust investigation in banning the use of Adobe's Flash-IPA converter tool and related development technologies. The isn't just spitting in the face of Adobe but all of the developers out there who don't have time in their busy work schedules to master Objective C just for one platform - there is nothing wrong with such code translators. My company (like many) has been building an iPhone/iPad app for months now in Flash for exportation with the Flash-to-ipa converter tool and, all of sudden, Apple renders it void out of spite towards Adobe. This would be like the US government banning the use of foreign language and interpreters in the US and only allowing citizens who speak native-level English to remain in the nation. Can you imagine the backlash? If a tech giant like Microsoft tried this on their platform, the courts would be all over this. Apple is taking it's ego too far in this decision and, for the first time, I hope someone steps in and slams them in court over their App Store approval practices (Adobe Converter Bans, Google Voice delay, Opera Mini delay, Web Albums HD pinch functionality, and many more). I don't understand how Apple has avoided litigation thus far.

Once again, Apple has avoided antitrust litigation because they are not a monopoly in the applicable markets. It is not illegal to chose to not sell something in a store.

 

[digitalbiker]

I'm not familiar with how publicly traded companies work, but can Apple just straight up buy Adobe if they don't agree to it?

In a short answer, YES!

It's called a hostile take-over if the board were against it. But I have a very strong suspicion that the board would readily approve of an Apple take-over. Especially if Apple offered them 40% more on their current share price.

Adobe's suite has become bloated and stuck in a rut for years.

Which would you rather own Apple stock which has been going through the roof with dominate products in the US consumer markets ready to eventually explode into China and India, or Adobe stock which has been relegated to virtual obscurity?

 

[LagunaSol]

Apple wasn't pushing it for open standards, they were pushing it to help establish their exclusive ad network that will do all the things people hate about Flash ads.

Apple is obviously not doing this for the good of humankind, but the bottom line is they are doing it. The days of the proprietary Flash Web must come to an end, and Apple can do a lot to speed up the process of full HTML5 acceptance by not opening the door to Flash on their mobile platform.

And yet the ragers still rage.

It's hilarious/pathetic to note that the same people bitching about intrusive Flash ads now get their very own Apple made equivalent through iAd delivered to their hand held devices- that they can't turn off! Oops!

I'm certainly not happy about the prospects of this. To the Android gloaters, however - how many days until you start seeing Google do this more prominently on your own devices? Do you really think Google is giving you Android for free because they love you? They are an advertising company - they are simply luring you in with freebies to pitch you with ads (after mining your search habits), and you don't even recognize it. That too is hilarious/pathetic.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Ever consider going to the anti-Google discussions and complaining about all of Google's ads ?

Oh, don't get me started on google! Trying hard not to be evil, and failing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7yfV6RzE30

(stick around for the end for a nice joke to soften the blow of how creepy google is)

Flash & Java will never be allowed on Apple mobile devices... iAd is the reason.

With the potential for 1 billion highly-effective, targeted hits per day to qualified buyers, Apple has a lot of ad leverage.

As a user and a stockholder I support the decision.

As a stockholder, you have good reason to be happy! As a user? Not so much.

 

[petsounds]

And what application do these people use to write that SWF with ?

There's lots of alternative SWF creation tools. Many Eclipse-based tools, FlashDevelop (completely open-source), FDT, IntelliJ Idea, TextMate, etc. No one to my knowledge has really replicated the timeline animation aspect, probably because that's a lot harder to do than write a code editor. But it certainly could be done.

 

[nostaws]

Adobe needs Apple a lot more than Apple needs Adobe.

Not

 

[firewood]

They may be "looking into it" but I'm not seeing much ambiguity here. You basically can't use a 3rd party library or virtual machine which uses Apple's libraries; you have to develop programs with Obj-C/C/C++ directly with Apple's libraries. The only thing I can see is that if the 3rd party tool auto-generates Objective C, then it was not "originally" written in Obj-C. It may be difficult for Apple to actually detect that that's what's happening since you'll then compile it with gcc or llvm anyway.

Depends on the quality of the code generation. Objective C started out as a macro translator of SmallTalk-like syntax into straight C plus a very small runtime. ( Seems to have worked out fairly well.

The Adobe and Unity tools produce a huge amount of added runtime support, even for really simple ("hello world") apps. They also partition the resulting code into huge chunks that perhaps might not have as good cache locality as typical human written C and Objective C.

imho

 

[Mac_Freak]

No Problem. Apple buys Adobe. Apple kills flash. Apple re-writes the entire flagship line making it mac only software.

one of the world's best creative package will run only on future macs and ipads.

So, your suggestion to Apple is to buy Adobe for couple billion dollars. Throw in the trash what ever they have bought from Adobe and start from scratch.

I hope nobody is seriously taking your business advices.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Apple is obviously not doing this for the good of humankind, but the bottom line is they are doing it. The days of the proprietary Flash Web must come to an end, and Apple can do a lot to speed up the process of full HTML5 acceptance by not opening the door to Flash on their mobile platform.

And yet the ragers still rage.

Well, that's what us ragers do! We RAGE! I think what makes the "ragers rage" is things like this:

The type of ads you're going to see will be different as well. Ideally, according to Jobs, they'll hit the intersection of emotion and interactivity. In practical terms, that means interactive and video content ads are going to be served up without your leaving the app.

What that means is that we're going to start seeing a lot more ads inside of apps. Since the average person spends 30 minutes inside apps per day, Jobs figures, one ad every three minutes would lead to 1 billion ad impressions per day over Apple's 100 million devices.

In the thread about iAd, users on this forum were excited, saying Apple is trying to change crappy advertising to make it emotional, interactive, and fun! Nah, nothing so noble. We'll have Evony ads on there day 1.

I'm certainly not happy about the prospects of this. To the Android gloaters, however - how many days until you start seeing Google do this more prominently on your own devices? Do you really think Google is giving you Android for free because they love you? They are an advertising company - they are simply luring you in with freebies to pitch you with ads (after mining your search habits), and you don't even recognize it. That too is hilarious/pathetic.

Man, what happened to all of these cool upstart companies? When did they go from being the Rebellion to being the Empire?

 

[BaldiMac]

Apple wasn't pushing it for open standards, they were pushing it to help establish their exclusive ad network

Apps are not required to use iAd. If they chose to use an ad, they can obtain the ad from anyone.

that will do all the things people hate about Flash ads.

Did you see the demo? It was just a static banner ad unless you tap it.

It's hilarious/pathetic to note that the same people bitching about intrusive Flash ads now get their very own Apple made equivalent through iAd delivered to their hand held devices- that they can't turn off! Oops!

How is it in any way worse than the current situation with ads in apps?

 

[ddrueckhammer]

I'm certainly not happy about the prospects of this. To the Android gloaters, however - how many days until you start seeing Google do this more prominently on your own devices? Do you really think Google is giving you Android for free because they love you? They are an advertising company - they are simply luring you in with freebies to pitch you with ads (after mining your search habits), and you don't even recognize it. That too is hilarious/pathetic.

There are already Ads on free Apps on the iPhone. iAds just makes a more streamlined way for developers to put their ads in. Of course the price is 40%. but has Apple said you can only use iAds to serve your ads now?

Besides making both Apple and developers of apps more money from Ad supported apps, iAds is obviously designed to keep flash out of Ad content on the iPhone. I really don't see how iAds makes the ad supported app situation any worse than it currently is.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Ads encroach on the home screen or even the desktop with Android in the future though.

 

[Peace]

I'm curious about who is going to code these iAds.

The developer ? An in-house team at Apple ? Outside ad agencies ?

 

[Thex1138]

There's quasi-wise things:

Not putting in a camera in the iPod Touch so it doesn't cannibalize iPhone sales.

Then there's just the idiotic things:

No FM tuner, seriously, Steve?

How long did it take copy-and-paste? How long will it take to get a flash for the iPhone camera?

Apple befuddles me and amuses me at times w/ their decisions. Heck, you're only NOW getting a unified inbox. When the iPhone and iPod will get OLED screens like the Zune HD (yes, Zune sux), I don't know. Like I said... bizarre decisions.

The bottom line is pretty simple...
All other vendors are copying the Apple hand set form factor..
They are all copying the OS style, design and implementation...
All are copying the Apps implementation
and now all are copying the tablet hardware and software implementation.

Apple numbers are going up whilst other vendors such as vendors like Nokia and HTC are churning out multiple hand set models implementing multiple OS's and Android variations in hopes of capturing a slice of the growth market that Apple has created, even during a global decline in tech sales, Apple is on a growth path...

So by that alone, trolling will not in any way will not help or alleviate your beleaguered ideological brevity...
Android hand sets for geeks, PC's are for the churn... Apple does what they want.

This is a Mac forum, so ranting is an obvious choice for your web-hero prattling on and on... good luck with your mask and cape brother...


Posted using; XP-HP Box, Chrome Browser....