Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Isn't this really about flexing new muscle from market share? Isn't this really Apple saying "Ok guys, we had to sweat to make sure we had compatible software for a couple years there, but now we're big enough to put it back on you?"

Apple is also putting the responsibility of selling the products back on the manufacturer - that is, Oracle and Adobe are going to need to demonstrate the value and ease of using their products without support in the form of pre-installation.

Or am I missing something?
That's a very insightful post. More so with Java then for Adobe. Apple got tied up in the Java game because Sun wouldn't adequately support OS X on PPC themselves. Apples current Java implementation is a significantly modified port of Oracles code, but Flash is just a redistribution of Adobes binary.
 
Well, I did say in my post that its no big deal.

Its just the attitude - "if I don't need it then neither does any one else".

The attitude from apple is 'we are not willing to shoulder the support burden of adobes ****** track record in regards to security'. Which IMHO is a very sensible attitude, why should they shoulder that burden when adobe is better suited to deliver flash upgrades in a timely manner.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)

archurban said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)



You don't even know what you are talking about. If you don't buy apple because you don't want to have to install flash yourself what os do you run? Windows requires you to do it yourself, same with Linux so I'm not sure what you are complaining about.

Are you too arrogant to actually read the article or did you just assume based on the title that apple completely blocked flash? Because that is not true at all, in fact all they've done is quit bundling it with the os, just like ms does.

Also if you hate apple so much why are you even on these boards? Just to troll?

These threads just prove people on the Internet don't know how to read. NOWHERE does it say apple blocked flash but somehow everyone has to get their panties in a bunch over it. Maybe MR and engadget should give up posting these retarded misleading article titles so these stupid fanboy arguments can end. When will people understand that if you dontvlike the way a company does something you have other options. If you want flash on your mobile, you have other options. Nobody forces you to buy apple so give it up.

it's obvious you are the same Apple fanboy who just think if someone has different opinion is not acceptable, huh? again, don't judge me. you don't know me. I have macs, have used them for 15 years. I know very well about mac, apple. requirement? I don't think you don't know what you talking as well. I don't need to tell you the whole miserable apple hisotry in the past. now, they became arrogant because fortunately market share in US has grown over 20%. then they decided to change situation? it's only in US. Apple was nothing back until 2000. windows is still dominated for world market. don't tell me what to do. it's not even 5% share for world market (mac business). they maybe change US. but can't change the world. there are more reasons why. but I don't have time to explain now. just google it. by the way, don't pretend that you know or better than anyone here. worthless.

I'm worthless? Your argument completely changed. I never said anything about Mac market share. You said in your original post that you don't buy macs because they restricted you by not including flash. Then you go on to say you do buy macs. Sounds like you are a victim of your own hypocrisy.

Since you claim not to buy macs because they restrict you from flash because it no longer comes pre installed, which os you use. Windows does NOT come with flash pre installed either so your argument is obviously flawed. I'm not sure where your logic comes from but if you don't buy macs and don't like them why come to a Mac forum? If windows is your preferred os there are plenty of places for you to "hang out" online with others who also have the same interests in Microsoft as opposed to apple. You come here to flame and have a useless argument. Get a life.
 
More than just flash -- look at 3.3.1 on the new Mac Store App requirements
I'm not sure I get your point. Mac App Store apps are clearly meant to self contained. Apple has no interest in maintaining a web of application dependencies. Since Apple is depreciating Java, the app will break if Java is removed. AFAIK you could include the Java JRE with your App, or distribute your app yourself outside of the Mac App Store.
 
I can see the logic in this because all Apple have been doing is taking a flash binary from Adobe and pre-installing it. As others have said, this leads to problems when vulnerabilities are discovered in Flash after it's been incorporated into the OS image (Apple then have to include fixes in their core updates)

Windows 7 doesn't ship with Flash, possibly for the same reason

However, if you want to indulge in conspiracy theories, you'll notice that the Mac App Store will only accept submissions for apps that work with a default installation of OS X (i.e. anything that uses a 3rd party framework isn't allowed). By unbundling Flash, they immediately ban any flash based apps from the Mac App Store
That may sound like a good thing to most people, but what about Growl? Lots and lots of apps use Growl and it is a superb notification system, but it's a 3rd party framework and by those rules, apps that use Growl won't be allowed in the App Store...
 
glad I got your attention

I'm glad my post about my students needing Java-equipped computers got some responses.

Earlier I posted a simple question, asking whether PC's typically come with Java installed at the factory, and nobody answered. As a Mac user I've not kept up with this but somehow I had the impression that most PC's now do ship with Java. But err404 now says that 90% of Windows machines don't ship with Java. Ok, news to me, although I'd love to see some documentation of that.

In another response, 0815 seems to have gotten the impression that I'm teaching programming. Not true--at least, not in the course I'm referring to. I teach in the physics department of a public 4-year commuter school. The course that concerns me is introductory astronomy, which is taken by students with a very wide range of computer skills (and a very wide range of internet connection speeds). Many of our students use machines in the campus computer labs, but many others depend on home computers because their work and family schedules don't allow them to spend much time on campus. Of these, most are fully capable of installing something like Java. But a few aren't. My goal, in any case, is for them to spend more time studying astronomy and less time installing software.
 
good move

Why pre-install stuff when you can so easily download and install over the web and get the latest and greatest.
 
As an educator I depend on my students having Java installed on their personal computers. For much of what I do, there is no feasible alternative to Java. So my preference would be for all computer manufacturers to ship machines with Java installed. Otherwise it's an additional step for my students--a step that some of them will be unable or unwilling to take (sad to say).

Can i ask what you are teaching them using java, because if it is programming and they are unable to install java themselves then you have a big problem.
 
You mean Flash on a Mac sucks, it works just fine on my Windows machine.

My friend creates a lot of web sites and I do not intend to stop using Flash anytime soon. HTML 5 is still in its infancy and will take years to come anywhere close to the Flash content that's out there today.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)

wordoflife said:
I'm not really into this idea, but I guess its not hard for people to download it. The thing is, it won't be "Works out of the box" anymore.

Although you could previously say "it worked out of the box" apple was shippingboutdated versions of flash with their computers and unless the user upgraded they would be vulnerable to security flaws in flash. Apple updated flash on their schedule before as opposed to when adobe released updates.

Now it can be said to work better out of the box because you are not open to those vulnerabilities out of the box and when you download flash you will receive the latest up to date version where as before many people were probably leaving the installed (read old) version of flash and therefore potentially compromising their systems.
 
Flash Player for OS X is total crap, anyways. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. (Granted, I'm biased, as my mac is PowerPC, which is especially awful for Flash).
 
I can see the logic in this because all Apple have been doing is taking a flash binary from Adobe and pre-installing it. As others have said, this leads to problems when vulnerabilities are discovered in Flash after it's been incorporated into the OS image (Apple then have to include fixes in their core updates)

Windows 7 doesn't ship with Flash, possibly for the same reason

However, if you want to indulge in conspiracy theories, you'll notice that the Mac App Store will only accept submissions for apps that work with a default installation of OS X (i.e. anything that uses a 3rd party framework isn't allowed). By unbundling Flash, they immediately ban any flash based apps from the Mac App Store
That may sound like a good thing to most people, but what about Growl? Lots and lots of apps use Growl and it is a superb notification system, but it's a 3rd party framework and by those rules, apps that use Growl won't be allowed in the App Store...
[CAPS]Sparkle is dead[/CAPS]
 
I'm glad my post about my students needing Java-equipped computers got some responses.

Earlier I posted a simple question, asking whether PC's typically come with Java installed at the factory, and nobody answered. As a Mac user I've not kept up with this but somehow I had the impression that most PC's now do ship with Java. But err404 now says that 90% of Windows machines don't ship with Java. Ok, news to me, although I'd love to see some documentation of that.

In another response, 0815 seems to have gotten the impression that I'm teaching programming. Not true--at least, not in the course I'm referring to. I teach in the physics department of a public 4-year commuter school. The course that concerns me is introductory astronomy, which is taken by students with a very wide range of computer skills (and a very wide range of internet connection speeds). Many of our students use machines in the campus computer labs, but many others depend on home computers because their work and family schedules don't allow them to spend much time on campus. Of these, most are fully capable of installing something like Java. But a few aren't. My goal, in any case, is for them to spend more time studying astronomy and less time installing software.

Fair enough, but honestly, installing software, especially java, has never been rocketscience and it's a one time deal. I can't but help think that you are making a mountain out of a molehill.
 
I don't see anything there about the chances of my Windows machine already having Java installed at the factory.

A fresh install of Windows will not have Java. Many vendors of Windows machines will go ahead and put Sun/Oracle Java (and other stuff like Flash, crapware, etc...) on the machines before sending them out though.

And really, if you're running Windows the first thing you should do upon receiving the machine is wipe it and install clean. Vendors have made this harder by not including a Windows disc and instead including some recovery CD, which is crap IMHO.
 
I don't see anything there about the chances of my Windows machine already having Java installed at the factory.

If it's a windows machine, just assume that Java is not installed by default.

BTW - By 90% I was referring to total windows market share, not the subset of windows machines w/o Java. Sorry for the confusion.
 
Fair enough, but honestly, installing software, especially java, has never been rocketscience and it's a one time deal. I can't but help think that you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

A molehill for you or me; a mountain for the poor student who's in a hurry to finish his homework and has a slow connection and can't wait for a 50MB download (or whatever the latest version is). This already happens, of course, to some students who have Windows computers. If it's really true that most Windows computers don't come with Java from the factory, that's actually good news to me because it means that the majority of my students are already installing Java themselves, or are using machines on which someone else has already installed it. Then we could expect the same to be true of Macs when Apple stops installing Java on them. Still, I worry about all the things that could go wrong...
 
And really, if you're running Windows the first thing you should do upon receiving the machine is wipe it and install clean. Vendors have made this harder by not including a Windows disc and instead including some recovery CD, which is crap IMHO.

But I'm not really running Windows. I'm trying to anticipate all the different environments under which my students will be trying to run my Java applets. No way am I going to order them all to wipe and install clean.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.