Fallout From Apple's Exclusion of Flash-to-iPhone Export Continues

[timewasting]

Meh, They both stink.

Apple and Adobe both treat their developers like crap. I've done a fair amount of Flex and Objective-C and both are fine enough languages with their own warts. For any real developer, switching languages is fairly trivial. Us "old timers" of 35+ -- we've done any number of legacy languages (like PL1, fortran, COBOL, pascal, etc.), C/C++, probably dabbled in the MS world, Java clients and EE, all sorts of various web technologies, ad infinitum. It takes longer to read the developer agreement carefully than it does to learn objective C. The point of the whole matter isn't which language to sling code with.

The problem with this situation is that Apple overseers are capricious and exclusionary. Where's Opera? Google Voice? Rejecting a Picasa app for using the pinch and spread gestures to zoom? I can't even put my own code on my own phone without either jailbreaking or spending $100 per annum for a dev certificate!?! It's really no wonder why the dearth of open source development community for the iPhone OS in comparison to jakarta, spring, etc. for java or drupal, mediawiki, rails, etc. for other web stacks.

 

[Punchey]

I see a lot of very ill-informed posting going on here.

First, this is not about a "Flash player". This is about compiled apps, and it affects much more than just Adobe: Unity, MonoTouch, etc.

Second, the idea that the only "good way" to develop for iPhone OS is using Objective-C, C, and C++ through Xcode is baloney. It is a misconception that, for instance, code compiled with MonoTouch from C# to ARM bytecode is less secure or more error prone (the misguided Ferrari analogy here). The reality is it is MUCH easier to write buggy, crashy, memory-hogging code in non-managed languages like Obj-C, C, and C++, than with a managed code framework like C# in MonoTouch. Why? Because the managed framework is created by a dedicated team of people whose job it is to see that it handles things like memory management, exception handling, memory access, etc, in a graceful way automatically and vastly reduces these concerns for the individual end-developer. Non-managed code, on the other hand, requires that each individual developer (which come in much varying skill levels) keep track of every pointer, every reference, every array length, carefully make sure he doesn't overrun bounds, access invalid memory, free allocated memory, etc. It is very easy to run afoul if you aren't extremely careful.

Requiring that all apps be written the way Apple is now saying they are going to require actually greatly REDUCES the amount of quality apps that will appear in the App store, and REQUIRES developers to use tools that are much less reliable and more error-prone.

 

[Eidorian]

What's this?

Another hypocritical, yet typical, ad hominem derision toward Steve Jobs?

Please, please explain.

 

[richardtengcy]

Hey all,
I think people are not getting what this means. It is not about running Flash on the iPhone. Nebula, Baron, etc. are talking about a totally different issue. This is about using the Flash IDE to build native iPhone applications. Not Flash running in a browser. It's about mandating that you use certain development tools to create a product. Like, mandating that somebody use the Flash IDE to create .swfs or something. I can't deny that there may be some technical reason behind this that we don't know about, but with CS5 planned for a demo on Monday, it really is just pissing on Adobe. Rather than coordinating with them to help more people build applications, they are blindsiding them and deliberately derailing plans for their new CS5 suite. It really does suck.

I think it would be more sucks if Apple announces this AFTER the CS5 launch.

Perhaps someone would like to try using Adobe Flash CS5 to compile apps and then test them on Apple mobile devices to see how they fair when running such apps using Flash compiler compare to apps build using C, C++ from scratch.

 

[AidenShaw]

What's this?

Another hypocritical, yet typical, ad hominem derision toward Steve Jobs?

Were you not the one whining, recently, about jeers directed toward Steve Ballmer, as well as yourself?

Yet, here you are.

Clearly, you don't understand the meaning of ad hominem.

And, seriously, if Steve Jobs' emotions are a factor in what Apple does - the board should remove him. Look up "fiduciary responsibility" in a business school textbook.

There is nothing ad hominem in that statement. And there is nothing on topic in yet another ad hominem attack on me.

 

[MacPhilosopher]

What?

You say that but I have seen on these boards multiple graphic designers and some personal friends of mind who are in the art world have all stated they are thinking about leaving Apple and going over to windows due to the cost of the hardware to get what they need. They can get what they require from a PC for far less with out having to pay for all the extra crap they do not need.

Part for part Apple computers are competitively price problem is lets say you want something like an upgradable tower. You have to pay an arm and a leg to get than from Apple but for a PC you can get that for 1000 no problem instead on a Mac you have to buy $1000 of extra crap you do not need or want so it is a $1000 premium as far as they are concerned (using it as an example) They want a mid range tower.

I also have heard that if Adobe left apple and went PC only they would quickly follow suit since Photo shop is what the industry uses and the industry is not going to wait a year for something to replace the void.

Really? Designers, art directors, video editors, etc prefer Apple because of its dependability in both the short and long term. Only a fool is willing to save $500 today for hardware and an OS that will crash regularly, make them susceptible to every worm and virus in the IT world only to have to replace their hardware in half the time as that of the Apple gear. The argument for saving money by going windows has been over for years. You are going to buy a very expensive software suite just to put it on a cheap b-grade component windows PC? Really, take it from someone that works as a designer and editor, Apple gear saves you money and heartache. Do you know why Apple gear is so dependable? Control of hardware and software development. Now, I hope everyone out there that believes windows PC's are the best deal keeps on buying them. Along with Apple's firm control of their OS, it is low market share that keeps the viruses in the windows world and out of mine.

 

[Bytor65]

I see a lot of very ill-informed posting going on here.

Yes and you are contributing to it.

Requiring that all apps be written the way Apple is now saying they are going to require actually greatly REDUCES the amount of quality apps that will appear in the App store, and REQUIRES developers to use tools that are much less reliable and more error-prone.

No it requires developers than know what they are doing. I have spent my entire career developing Assembler/C/C++ applications. Memory management is only a challenge to amateurs.

When you give proper languages to competent developers, they write faster, tighter code.

On a resource constrained platform like a smart phone, using a manage language and run time environment compared to native, is like Java vs C++ on an 80486 running win 95.

You are just throwing away performance and memory when you don't have any to spare.

 

[theelysium]

Why would they post their apps to the iPhone App Store.... there's 185,000 apps, most of which are pure garbage.

Once the handheld market plays out completely, Apple will have its 10% market share like usual.







Meanwhile..... the touchpad on my MBP has s**t out on me. Awesome.

When the market pans out Apple will for once be dominate. How could you not see that? That's the reason why the have the power to force Adobe Flash out of the mobile market. Peace out Adobe I'm tire of the taxed cpu, the browser crashes and the lag when I switch to HD or full screen. I wanted a code that freaking works!

Your track pad would be in working order if you didn't pound on it like a child. Call Apple Care and get it fixed.

 

[DMann]

Clearly, you don't understand the meaning of ad hominem.

And, seriously, if Steve Jobs' emotions are a factor in what Apple does - the board should remove him. Look up "fiduciary responsibility" in a business school textbook.

There is nothing ad hominem in that statement. And there is nothing on topic in yet another ad hominem attack on me.

Ad hominem - translated from Latin to English - "against the man" or "against the person."

"Turtlenecked overlord?"

This seems both derogatory and disrespectful.

It is your recursive use of the term, ad hominem, I am mocking here.

Furthermore, deriding Steve Jobs as a "turtlenecked overlord" is hardly 'in-line' with the topic.

 

[Nostromo]

The solution is easy. Adobe should just not release Photoshop CS5 for MAC. I will be (as many, many designers and photographers) on a PC faster than Steve Job iScrewedup! And MAC will be history in the design/photography industry. Apple may dress up their decision with many cheap excuses, but Apple is been just plain jerks. Screw brand loyalty. They either give us what we want and need or Apple can jump in a lake.

Apple is already neglecting the professional users for the gadget lovers and mass consumers.

You can stop by this thread to check it out: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/855974/

And, as you rightfully said, brand loyalty is pointless.

Apple shows time and again it's just another corporation. And, like any other corporation, it exists to make money. Everything else is just make-up and washes off quite easily.

 

[theelysium]

I agree with you!

Yes and you are contributing to it.



No it requires developers than know what they are doing. I have spent my entire career developing Assembler/C/C++ applications. Memory management is only a challenge to amateurs.

When you give proper languages to competent developers, they write faster, tighter code.

On a resource constrained platform like a smart phone, using a manage language and run time environment compared to native, is like Java vs C++ on an 80486 running win 95.

You are just throwing away performance and memory when you don't have any to spare.

I am currently starting out in my first programing class. I am starting at the basics of Pseudocode and flow charts. Some of us in class have talked about where we are going as far as code is concerned once we pass the first class. Out of a class of 40 I'm the only one that said I was going to C++ and objective-C. Most of the others are going to focus on HTML, Java and Flash.

The reason why most people said they didn't want to go to any version of C is, because it's too hard. Which I think is a good thing. Keep the ones out of the code that won't ever be able to figure it out and the ones who are smart will be the ones coding in C and the ones that will make the money!

If my class is an example of the way the deves are splitting on code then I have way less competition sticking with Apple and their way of coding. I also have a way better chance at making a lot of money on the iPhone!

So by all means please stop coding for Apple and give the reset of us the green light to make more green!

 

[John.B]

This whole prohibition could be nothing more than a huge case of FUD. Where does it actually say you can't use a complier etc. What I saw was that apps must be 100% in native code, not something else such as Flash with a translator. Nothing about how you get to that point.

and hell if this Adobe thing is actually produces the appropriate code and doesn't say "made by Adobe blah blah" how would Apple know.

You don't think Apple engineers can decompile an iPhone .ipsw file to find the Adobe runtimes or libraries?

 

[H. Flower]

My inner Apple Fanboy and Flash/Adobe Fanboy are going mental over this.

Mine too.

But at the end of the day, I need Adobe more than I need Apple.

 

[AidenShaw]

Ad hominem - translated from Latin to English - "against the man" or "against the person."

...and you prove that you don't know the meaning of the phrase.

See http://www.tfd.com/?osearch&word=ad+hominem

 

[justinfreid]

He's right, and if you don't at a gut-level understand why, I can understand his hesitance to enter into a multi-page remedial embedded systems development course. What he said is like someone saying "it's perfectly reasonable for a daycare to require a contact phone number for the parents." If you honestly don't know why, maybe it's just not the right conversation for you to be in.

I'm right, and if you don't at a gut-level understand why, maybe this is a conversation you shouldn't be in...
Does that sound like the beginning to a fruitful discussion as I wanted? Maybe a rambling remedial something or other would be better.
Defining the iPhone as an embedded system is exactly the problem I have to begin with. Maybe for a lot of users a truly embedded system would be best, and I don't begrudge anyone that, but people defending Apple's draconian step to now limit cross-compiling worries me especially with only nebulous claims about speed and stability to back them up. I regularly use apps developed with tools outside the SDK and that call APIs Apple would never let a third party developer have access to and, and in fact, my ability to do so is one of the reasons I stick with iPhone hardware. Where is your counter evidence (feel free to make it anecdotal as well) that my use of Cydia et al has caused a secret disruption of the sacred embedded system temple that is the iPhone? I'm sure I'll pay later for my heresy...
You just accept on face that the iPhone OS is such that the benefit of not running cross-compiled apps is greater than allowing people who are already fluent in Flash or other methods to get their apps on the App Store? Why should the App Store be the ONLY acceptable method for installing software?

Was it fair for Apple to prevent third party developers like Google from using APIs that were merely undocumented (as was the case with Google Mobile and its use of the sonar sensor)? Or to prevent the use of the "unpinch" API by third parties even while it's plainly in use on the iPad photo app? Even if these did seriously upend the embedded system, can't those who want to "live on the edge" with their hardware be allowed to make their own choice in the matter?
Next you can explain how cross-compiling hinders the end user, especially with plenty of cross-compiled apps already successfully being used, then you can defend Apple's decision to prevent pornography in the app store, etc. What I'm getting at is this seems like the beginning of a slippery slope, one that the company which once heralded thinking different should be worried about being on.

Look, the tenor of your response almost caused me not to respond at all, so I'll end my post here.

 

[firewood]

Adobe swears up and down that they produce valid objective-c: no runtime interpreter, no virtual machine. If so then I don't think they have a problem.

Merely valid Objective C is not the problem. Everybody is barking up the wrong tree. (It's probably just a graduate homework assignment to turn LLVM output into bad Obj C source code.)

It's the API translation issue (megabytes of it).

A standard Cocoa Touch button in Objective C: 1 line of code to create it, 1 line of code to place it in a view (or both in a xib), 1 line of code to start responding to a user's tap. 3 API calls.

Does the CS5 tool do this? Could the CS5 tool do this? No and No. The Cocoa Touch button doesn't look and act *exactly* like a flash API button (or else it wouldn't be cross-platform portable). So there's library code to build it, code to draw it, code to convert touches into mouse events (because that's what flash buttons handle), code to redraw the button when hit, redraw when under flash pop-ups, and etc.

Instead of 3 lines of Obj C, the tool calls 100's, maybe 1000's of lines of flash library code and wierd API calls only distantly related to the UIButton. Plus the button now looks (maybe even smells) funny to an iPhone user.

Apple wants to optimize Obj C button handling (save power or sprinkle fairy-dust between taps or some such)? Easy, they find my 3 lines of API calls and handler. Apple wants to optimize button handling inside the flash cruft: Good luck even finding this "button" code without an FBI search warrant. User's battery dies and she blames Apple.

That's the real reason why Apple is kicking out Adobe's CS5 tool.

ihmo.

 

[DMann]

...and you prove that you don't know the meaning of the phrase.

FYI, the literal translation also happens to be correct.

Let's go with - appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason:

"Tutlenecked overlord."

It's applies to you, either way.

 

[Punchey]

Yes and you are contributing to it.



No it requires developers than know what they are doing. I have spent my entire career developing Assembler/C/C++ applications. Memory management is only a challenge to amateurs.

When you give proper languages to competent developers, they write faster, tighter code.

On a resource constrained platform like a smart phone, using a manage language and run time environment compared to native, is like Java vs C++ on an 80486 running win 95.

You are just throwing away performance and memory when you don't have any to spare.

You're missing the point entirely. The point isn't that Apple is filtering out all but the skilled developers here (which they aren't). The point is that developers of ALL skill levels will continue to develop for the platform, and shoehorning them all into using tools that make it much easier to write unstable code is not going to result in only apps getting through that have a great user experience. They are ensuring that the less skilled developers are going to be churning out apps with more bugs than they would otherwise have.

As someone who's been writing C/C++ code for 16+ years, I would also disagree that only amateurs encounter memory management issues. Are you seriously telling me that no experienced developer ever has a pointer go astray, etc? Seriously? Get real.

 

[skyehill]

Apple being a bunch of morons. How surprising. Not.

 

[theelysium]

Rock ON!

Merely valid Objective C is not the problem. Everybody is barking up the wrong tree. (It's probably just a graduate homework assignment to turn LLVM output into bad Obj C source code.)

It's the API translation issue (megabytes of it).

A standard Cocoa Touch button in Objective C: 1 line of code to create it, 1 line of code to place it in a view (or both in a xib), 1 line of code to start responding to a user's tap.

Does the CS5 tool do this? Could the CS5 tool do this? No and No. The Cocoa Touch button doesn't look and act *exactly* like a flash API button (or else it wouldn't be cross-platform portable). So there's library code to build it, code to draw it, code to convert touches into mouse events (because that's what flash buttons handle), code to redraw the button when hit, redraw when under flash pop-ups, and etc.

Instead of 3 lines of Obj C, the tool calls 100's, maybe 1000's of lines of library code and wierd API calls only distantly related to the UIButton. Plus the button now looks (maybe even smells) funny to an iPhone user.

Apple wants to optimize Obj C button handling (save power or sprinkle fairy-dust between taps or some such), easy, the find my 3 lines of API calls and handler. Apple wants to optimize button handling inside the flash cruft: Good luck even finding this "button" code without an FBI search warrant. User's battery dies and she blames Apple.

That's the real reason why Apple is kicking out Adobe's CS5 tool.

ihmo.

It's folks like you who make sense and know what your talking about! This has less to do with Apple's relationship with Adobe and more with perfecting code and user experience on the best mobile device in the world.

It's just an unfortunate coincidence that the new rule effects Adobe CS5.

Think about how little news this would be if Adobe was as lazy with the creating this converting app as they are with fixing their flash code?

Thats right it wouldn't be news at all and that's what proves this is just a coincidence.

 

[lilo777]

Umm wait a minute. I just checked the release docs for Unity 3D, another middleware program for the iphone. The following is one of their main features.



I don't think that UNITY 3d is going to get bit by this license change because they actually use objective-c. (EDIT: They are already on record saying the license change won't effect them.)

At first I was pissed because I thought apple was digging on Adobe for no reason but....

Adobe swears up and down that they produce valid objective-c: no runtime interpreter, no virtual machine. If so then I don't think they have a problem. Unless they are ********ting and actually have an Objective-C virtual machine that runs their flash code......

In which case Apple has a reason to be pissed and adobe has reason to be scared.

Both Unity and Adobe produce a code that can be compiled for iPhone (Objective-C, C, C++ who cares). Yet the original source code in both cases is not one of those languages hence, according to this agreement, they will be banned.

 

[PowerGamerX]

Doesn't bother me one bit. In fact, it wouldn't bother me if Flash disappeared from all Apple products as long as they included a quicktime based youtube like the iPhone has for their full computer lineup.

 

[lilo777]

It's folks like you who make sense and know what your talking about! This has less to do with Apple's relationship with Adobe and more with perfecting code and user experience on the best mobile device in the world.

It's just an unfortunate coincidence that the new rule effects Adobe CS5.

Think about how little news this would be if Adobe was as lazy with the creating this converting app as they are with fixing their flash code?

Thats right it wouldn't be news at all and that's what proves this is just a coincidence.

If it's all about user experience, they should have defined the experience and not how the application is developed.Believe me, I can write an application in Objective-C that will be uglier, slower and worse in any other respect than anything developed with Adobe's language. But this will be OK by Apple, right?

 

[paepcke]

Your proprietary platform is not as cool as my proprietary platform!

100% Ack!

I think this remark told the whole story! No more other comments needed! Its all about money. No more. No less.

If Apple would be able to control the Flash market they would not care about the arguments they are using now to hurt Flash and you all Apple fellows would defend flash as cool and you would point HTML5 out as useless. It´s that simple. And sad. Dont be a tool. I don't like flash. I don't like Apple DRM.

 

[jameskatt]

To Adobe

To Adobe:

Go screw yourself.

Go screw yourself.

Go screw yourself.

Your platform leader is such an ass.

People like you make Apple's decision all the more correct.

Go Apple!