Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

From arstechnica:

"but with the draw of all those millions of iPhone (and now, iPad) customers, I fear that Apple's developers will, perhaps with some reluctance, just accept the restriction and do whatever Cupertino demands."

Hmmmmmm.

Sounds suspiciously similar to what I posted a few pages back:

"It's simple. Play by Apple's rules and have access to 85 million potential customers (and growing.) Don't and peddle your goods elsewhere.

What company on Earth can ignore a market that large? Your shareholders will roast you in the streets if you do."

Yay me!

Dave
 
-AG- said:
There is nothing in this little bitch fight that is going on, that says anywhere that you have to switch to windows.

If you use Adobe products like say Photoshop, There are a heap of other equally as good/capable products out there that work on mac still. and if they were to get more support (like what adobe gets now by default) then they would have the extra funds to further research and development. Examples being GIMP and Apeture3.

Your statement is like saying that Apple is going to drop MS Office so you had better swap to XP/Vista/7, all the while forgetting all about openoffice and iWork as other alternatives.

I just wish that people would actually take the time to see that there are alternative software applications out there that are cheaper (sometimes free) and are good enough to work in a business environment.
Click to expand...

If you think GIMP can replace Photoshop then your graphic needs are quite simple. Aperture is a photo managing app with basic editing functions; so it isn't really comparable to Photoshop and isn't even the same market space. Besides, until you can give me a Photoshop + Illustrator + After Effects integrated solution then your argument is a big fail.

What the **** would Apple have anything to do with MS Office; that is a Microsoft product. And who cares, just run it in Fusion or Parallels.

-mark
 
-AG- said:
If you use Adobe products like say Photoshop, There are a heap of other equally as good/capable products out there that work on mac still. and if they were to get more support (like what adobe gets now by default) then they would have the extra funds to further research and development. Examples being GIMP and Apeture3.
Click to expand...

There are good capable alternatives to Photoshop for those that only need a few features, but nothing remotely equal to what can be done with Adobe's product.

Even if an app like GIMP got the funding now, it's still YEARS off from being a serious contender. I know PS like the back of my hand and better than most of the other artists I've worked with over the past 15 years in my career. I've been using it since version 2 and professionally since version 3. I've had GIMP installed on my various comps over the years I know how to use it, but even if it were to catch up to PS, its arse-backward UI would always be a hinderance along with the fact that none of my other colleagues would bother adopting it.
 
Kwill said:
Wirelessly posted (iPhone : Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Is Jobs now replacing Balmer. For damage control, it's time for another open letter from Apple.
Click to expand...

I hate that power corrupts line.

As quoted from Trent Reznor from NIN.
Nine Inch Nails - Capital G
....
Don't try to tell me how some power can corrupt a person,
You haven't had enough to know what its like,
You're only angry cause you wish you were in my position,
Now nod your head because you know that I'm right..all right!
Click to expand...

I think that nails it (no pun intended)
 
NebulaClash said:
I'm sure Apple is just as prepared for this as they were with the switch to Intel. I'm sure they have a foundation product ready to replace Photoshop on the day that Adobe pulls something like this.
Click to expand...

I would be first in line to put down my money for this. Adobe is buggy and over priced. I have to use it in my business, but seriously after paying them over and over and then missing an upgrade for a couple of years they want me to pay from the start again??? A friend from Thailand provided me with a relief to the pocketbook drain...

Apple has never screwed in that way and I have been an Apple user for over thirty years. I am so glad they have pdf output support for all apps. If they got an Indesign/Photoshop equivalent going, no more needing the Thailand connection.

One can only take so much unfairness, I am a one person business, yet Adobe makes me pay equivalent to a huge business. Apple does not. Their pricing is always in budget. And always better performing (years ago I switched from Adobe Premiere to Final cut!!)

Adobe, as soon as Apple creates a DreamWeaver, Photoshop, Indesign type program I will kiss your a$$ goodbye!!!!!! (no iWeb is not a pro program, please try again and with normal web standards)
 
-AG- said:
There is nothing in this little bitch fight that is going on, that says anywhere that you have to switch to windows.

If you use Adobe products like say Photoshop, There are a heap of other equally as good/capable products out there that work on mac still. and if they were to get more support (like what adobe gets now by default) then they would have the extra funds to further research and development. Examples being GIMP and Apeture3.

Your statement is like saying that Apple is going to drop MS Office so you had better swap to XP/Vista/7, all the while forgetting all about openoffice and iWork as other alternatives.

I just wish that people would actually take the time to see that there are alternative software applications out there that are cheaper (sometimes free) and are good enough to work in a business environment.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with Ommo as a Graphic Designer the bad relationship between Apple and Adobe is very worrying.

Apple have seemed to have forgotten the Pro market which has supported Apple since its birth. If for example the Adobe CS software was only available to Windows user I could see the whole Design and Media industry moving over to Windows. Programs like Aperture are not practical replacements for programmes like Photoshop.
 
Flash exists for graphic/web designers to make media. Sure, it evolved to move into casual games for the web, but until recently it's been a very second-rate language.

Then there's the fact that Adobe don't treat real programmers with any respect - they don't have an IDE of their own (flex builder is a complete money-grab using the free work of other people) that any serious programmer would use and their whole structure is still aimed around the data rather than the code.

The only reason someone would write an app in Flash is because they can't grok C. It's not as if Objective-C hasn't been around very long.

Add to that the fact that Adobe are trying to pretend to be the 'good' side here... Tell me, why is my photoshop install limited by activations ? Why is it limited to a single platform and I have to pay again if I need to switch between OSX/Windows ?

I won't even go near the quality control of Flash on the Mac. Or the security implications of Flash cookies (that you have to visit an Adobe web page to control :rolleyes:).

Whilst you can argue the merits of 'freedom' or 'control' as long as you like, between the two companies, Apple tends to favour the user and the developer very well - the software tools they provide are excellent and great value and easy to use, generally innovating to make life easier for the user.

Adobe, on the other hand, are so stuck in their ways, often making interfaces more confusing (elements ?), charging old-fashioned high prices for limited license software, and generally doing their best to screw the customer - the only reason they want Flash everywhere is so they can sell more proprietary creation tools at a much higher entry-point than any other language.

Sure - photoshop has some cool features, though many of the tasks people really need it for can be achieved in other software and the majority of things that can't be done are likely because of patents. But that's it.

Adobe - go moan to your designer crowd and get them riled up. Go for it. You know what ? Programmers - those people who write systems and user apps and all the other things that already existed 'before the web' probably don't care... because we don't need flash. Flash is being kicked out by other better, more open technologies and your day is up. You had many years to produce a decent IDE to encourage Flash as a development language, and you didn't bother.

Apple aren't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but they're nowhere near as useless as Adobe.

</rant>
 
Eric2 said:
I have to agree with Ommo as a Graphic Designer the bad relationship between Apple and Adobe is very worrying.

Apple have seemed to have forgotten the Pro market which has supported Apple since its birth. If for example the Adobe CS software was only available to Windows user I could see the whole Design and Media industry moving over to Windows. Programs like Aperture are not practical replacements for programmes like Photoshop.
Click to expand...

I totally agree that Aperture is the wrong apps to compare with Photoshop. Aperture was develop in order to compete against Adobe Lightroom in fact.

The closest alternative other than Gimp would be Pixelmator (http://www.pixelmator.com/). Not only its a lot cheaper than CS4 Photoshop, it also does what i required for image editing.
 
For all those here in a state of brain fade throwing about that Adobe will stop developing for the Mac and Apple has a secret photoshop replacement ready to roll out please! This is as far as we know about flash, and we all know the reasons why Apple is taking this stance.

To think that Adobe would cut it's nose off to spite it's face is silly and this whinging is pretty pathetic and school yard stuff!
 
gigi1701 said:
I would be first in line to put down my money for this. Adobe is buggy and over priced. I have to use it in my business, but seriously after paying them over and over and then missing an upgrade for a couple of years they want me to pay from the start again??? A friend from Thailand provided me with a relief to the pocketbook drain...

Apple has never screwed in that way and I have been an Apple user for over thirty years. I am so glad they have pdf output support for all apps. If they got an Indesign/Photoshop equivalent going, no more needing the Thailand connection.

One can only take so much unfairness, I am a one person business, yet Adobe makes me pay equivalent to a huge business. Apple does not. Their pricing is always in budget. And always better performing (years ago I switched from Adobe Premiere to Final cut!!)

Adobe, as soon as Apple creates a DreamWeaver, Photoshop, Indesign type program I will kiss your a$$ goodbye!!!!!! (no iWeb is not a pro program, please try again and with normal web standards)
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more - Photoshop is tremendously bloated, buggy, and poorly laid-out.

I dropped Premier as soon as FCP was released, and was blown away by the levels of refinement - greatly looking forward to Cocoa FCS.

Adobe's pricing scheme is sadly steep enough to make pros want to reach out and 'torrent.'

I prefer Pixelmator to Photoshop for light editing - the slick and responsive interfaces of Pixelmator, and Logic Pro, to some extent, seem to foreshadow enhanced UI features of future releases of Cocoa Pro Apps.

Looking forward to an Apple Creative Suite, one day. :)
 
*LTD* said:
It's a strategic partnership, not an example of fair play and not hurting each other's feelings. You can be sure that they have a competitor that they paint as a common enemy.

And by the way, backing the winning horse each time makes you right. Try it sometime.
Click to expand...

I don't know the effect of long term kool-aid abuse - maybe its a loss in short term memory, or the need to re phrase other peoples arguments in order to shoot them down.

Reminder:
baryon said:
Companies should work together and not hate each other.
Click to expand...

You responded with...

*LTD* said:
You're kidding, right?

If you'll ever apply as a CEO anywhere, make a mental note NOT to say that. Or anything remotely related to that.
Click to expand...

"Companies should work together" Fair comment. Strategic alliances are part of that, despite you claiming its not.
"And not hate each other" Fair comment. Hate is an emotional response - business needs to be about what in the interest of a company in order to maintain its competitive advantage. Interesting to note there's no mention about doing it to avoid "hurting feelings" as you later claim.

As a business owner myself I'd suggest it would be fine to say that - or something like it in an interview.

And by the way - adding a trite and meaningless comment to the end of a message makes the poster look like an ass. Try not doing it sometime.
 
I keep seeing desktop and laptops being pulled into these discussions but they are only the "friendly fire" victims. The collateral damage.

This fight is 100% about the mobile market. This is Apple's "damn the torpedos" charge to change the very nature of computer devices at the dawn of the 21st century.

THIS is why the I's (pod, phone and pad) are REVOLUTIONARY.

Dave
 
Well I will say this, I don't really care about the upset feelings of some of the Adobe evangelists or programers. The developers using Flash may be getting upset but really need to deal with the programers working on Flash at Adobe. I use Apple computers and Windows computers every day, in all cases I am disappointed with the level of the Flash software. It is a shame as many of the other Adobe products are really good. However I don't want Flash on my iPhone based on this performance and the amount of times it crashes my browsers. The day I can use Flash on my Macbook and not have it turn into a mobile toaster or sound like a vacuum cleaner as the processor maxes out completely then I will be happy it will not kill the processor and battery in my iPhone. I have had to move to html5 in Youtube to avoid all this pain in the backside. All it would take is for the programmers to fix Flash on the desktop platforms properly and then maybe Apple would reconsider allowing it onto the iPhone.
 
"This is a frightening move that has no rational defense other than wanting tyrannical control over developers"

I think it's a bit hypocritical of Adobe to make such accusations when they appear to have a similar business model.

I'm pretty sure it was adobe who bought my favourite web design package "golive" many years back, only to discontinue it, in order to force feed us web designers the then inferior "dreamweaver".

thats what I would call knocking out the competition in order to obtain tyrannical control.
 
DMann said:
I couldn't agree more - Photoshop is tremendously bloated, buggy, and poorly laid-out.

I dropped Premier as soon as FCP was released, and was blown away by the levels of refinement - greatly looking forward to Cocoa FCS.

Adobe's pricing scheme is sadly steep enough to make pros want to reach out and 'torrent.'

I prefer Pixelmator to Photoshop for light editing - the slick and responsive interfaces of Pixelmator, and Logic Pro, to some extent, seem to foreshadow enhanced UI features of future releases of Cocoa Pro Apps.

Looking forward to an Apple Creative Suite, one day. :)
Click to expand...


Couldn't disagree more - Apple has never made a program as powerful as Photoshop, Illustrator or After Effects. Yeah, Premier has sucked but it is quickly catching up and may surpass FC on Monday.

Want to talk about "lazy" - FCS STILL isn't cocoa 64 and there's no good reason why it shouldn't be by now. And let's not even start comparing Motion to After Effects ;)
 
- for Apple

Apple has become Microsoft.

(He also said the Apple does post comments, and ... it seems that this thread has some).
 
what's with all the hysteria?

people need to relax and breath a bit... there appears to be genuine reasons for Apples decision here, this will only effect a small part of one Adobe application, it's not like Flash has been running on any Apple portable device anyway. This is a perfect opportunity for Adobe to actually bring something worthwhile to the table, and they are in a perfect position to do this.
 
The users are the losers

I'm getting very fed up of this Apple/Adobe spat. While they are busy throwing childish insults at each other it's the users that are the losers. As a graphic designer, I'm obliged to use Adobe's industry-standard Creative Suite on Apple's industry-standard hardware. And until this spat is resolved it is people like me that are suffering the consequences: incompatibilities, clumsy workarounds, lack of real support and absolutely no sign of any resolution to the increasing amount of problems.

Both of these companies need a good slap and time on the naughty seat to think about how this childish behaviour is affecting their customers before those customers lose patience and give them both a good bottom line kicking.
 
CBGEEK626 said:
From arstechnica:

"but with the draw of all those millions of iPhone (and now, iPad) customers, I fear that Apple's developers will, perhaps with some reluctance, just accept the restriction and do whatever Cupertino demands."

Hmmmmmm.

Sounds suspiciously similar to what I posted a few pages back:

"It's simple. Play by Apple's rules and have access to 85 million potential customers (and growing.) Don't and peddle your goods elsewhere.

What company on Earth can ignore a market that large? Your shareholders will roast you in the streets if you do."

Yay me!

Dave
Click to expand...

This is a very very dangerous precedent, and it should not be allowed to happen. However, Apple seem to be tightening their stranglehold on the app store market, and people are foolishly going along with it. What next from Apple, you can only develop for the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad if you don't develop for any other platform? I feel like we're teetering on the edge of dangerous, monopolistic and anti-competitive practices.
 
Uh... dunno if anyone has said this yet, but:

This has nothing to do with stopping users from creating Flash-based native content. All it means is that Adobe has to make sure everything they let their users deploy is compiled the right way. The only way to ensure that is if it BECOMES C/C++/Obj-C at some point in the development process before it is compiled. It is absurd that Adobe would think code generated any other way would even be plausible.

Why? Several reasons:
1. If it's not compiled to Apple's standards, then it means if Apple releases an OS update all Flash-based apps may suddenly crash. Nobody will blame the Flash developers, they will blame their "stupid iPhones".
2. If there is no layer that can be examined in Xcode, then it means Apple is forced to purchase Adobe's proprietary product in order to review submitted apps.

I suspect the reason for Apple using the words "written in" rather than "compiled from" stem from the fact that auto-generated code is downright impossible to read sometimes.

Frankly, Apple allowing this would be absurd.
 
reden said:
Apple obviously developed the iPhone OS, and they are entitled to do whatever the f. they want with it.
Click to expand...

really? i remember when ms was forced to open up windows to other webbrowsers and everybody here was dancing happily. i am not sure but i thought ms develped windows and were entiteled to include whatever browser the f. they wanted.

i liked apple cause they were different back then. apple was about innovation. now apple is turning more and more into a greedy evil company like ms was once, just trying to secure what they did so far by any cost.

it seems to me that apple hired the whole ms lawyers and advisors department.

apple was convincing people back then. now it's forcing people. thats sad. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back