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

[ranReloaded]

No. I don't think Apple or anyone else should be forced to "include" flash or even implement it. If Adobe wants to support Flash on some platform they have to implement it themself and if there are technical limitations its Adobes problem to work around them.

But Adobe has made flash work on the iPhone it ist just prohibited by Apple. So the reasons are not technical.

Yes, a "proof of concept"; In real world speak, and in its current form, they call that "Mickey Mouse". Because...

Yes, maybe it uses resources and drains the battery but any other graphical intense App (games etc) does the same.

...but a graphical intense app delivers intense graphics in exchange. You are asking for approval of an app at the "fart app" level of complexity to consume the same amount of resources.

Btw: You can download a browser for the Wii that is based on Opera and yes, it does support flash.
The browser for the DS does not, but I think given the specs of the device it is really not possible (it won't play HTML5 video either).

Christian

Just as I expected. Thank you.

 

[barberio]

Here's a quick summary...

How much do groups lose out on Apple's decision to exclude bytecompiled-resource apps, such as Flash, from the iTunes App Store...

* General Users
Not a bit, they still get apps. Possibly beneficial, as apps they get remain close to usability and technical recommendations.
* Corporate Users
Not a bit, they can use corporate provisioning if they have to use a bytecompiled cross-platform app. (Most of which are Java not Flash incidentally)
* Enthusiast Users
Not a bit, they have tactic allowance to jail-brake their hardware should they wish to. Only the itunes store is affected, you can still run any app you want on a jail-broken phone.
* Native app developers.
Not a bit, they still get to develop native apps. They even benefit from less competition from 'cookie cutter apps'.
* Companies that provided Rapid Development tools.
A bit. They need to ensure that the product is a user editable xcode project, or other allowed source. This means RAD tools that were library collections and 'enviroment editors' are not affected. But ones that allowed scripted cookie cutter code outputted into a binary blob are now excluded.
* Flash/All-In-One-Rapid-Development/Lego-and-playdough developers.
Sucks to be you.
* Adobe.
Flash is dying. Make a HTML5 IDE.

 

[christian_k]

Your rant just seems to ignore a few facts:

2. While Apple has no equivalent of Photoshop today, do you really believe that they couldn't create one? First, most of the functions are already in Core APIs and would require just a front end. Or, Apple could buy Pixelmator or another program and build on that. Or Apple could simply put a couple of programmers to work on improving GIMP.

Apple cannot use GIMP as the base for a commercial product. Since GIMP is under the GPL any product based on it would have to be under the GPL, too. So "take something that is for free, improve it a bit and sell it for $1000" will not work in this case.

But personally I really would like to see this happen. Imagine the Mac platform lost one of its major Apps. Would Apple try their best to replace it? Or have they lost their interest in the Mac as a serious and general purpose coputing platform already and see their future in iGadgets only?

Christian

 

[MH01]

Are you sure you work for the BBC, or perhaps did you mean to say BBC Worldwide?

Anyhow... No, those macs are not going to magically all be dumped and replaced with PCs if Abode announce they are abandoning OS X development. That's because the computers are all assets, as is the *existing software on them*. Your management would have to be insane to get rid of them all because there won't be any new versions of the Flash IDE. They'll just keep the current version running.

And by the time they think about getting a new IDE, guess what... HTML 5 will have a full support ecosystem pushed and backed by Apple, Google, Microsoft and... everyone else but Adobe.

*No Company* likes being beholden to another, which is why HTML5 is taking off so quickly, because no one wants to be forced to keep on relying on Abode to keep Flash relevant and functional on their platforms.

And I bet you that your 'Flash works, why move' argument is going to get you a hard stare at a meeting asking why you see zero revenue from the iPad. I doubt you'd be as mocking and sarcastic in your reply to your boss about it then you have been here.

For the sake of your continued employability, I suggest getting a head start on learning HTML5 tech.

Thats correct, BBC worldwide. Though i doubt many know the difference.

Actually our policy is to run software that is supported (as do all large scale organisations), when your a very large scale organisation you do not run the risk of running unsupported software, heads roll when something goes wrong. Frankly we would be saving a fortune in support fees that we pay for the macs, the PCs are much cheaper, so management would not be upset. The point is, in the short term the macs would hang around, once the support went and it came to a refresh, we would replace them, its daft to buy new hardware to run unsupported software.

Umm we currently make money from Ipad, look at the BBC app on it, and check out the sponsor, ORACLE, geez learn about ads mate, u think that they are only in flash..... and guess what we also make revenue from iphone... its page impressions, on a browser, not a device. Noone ever ever is going to ask you in a meeting how much revenue you made from a particular device.

 

[ranReloaded]

If Adobe pulled products from the Apple platform, big deal. They'd continue using their *current* versions they are using and someone else would come in and fill the void.

Heck, they could even realize the fact that you don't really need to upgrade to the latest version of CS to do your job, 99.9% percent of the time! (and the majority will settle for even less) They're always charging more and more for little silly details, like "Preview Path Offset"(Illustrator). And don't give that "Content Aware Fill" crap. That's the photographer's job to start with.

There is not going to be this big migration to a sub-standard platform. Adobe isn't the only reason they are on Apple, and wouldn't be the big catalyst for everyone to jump ship into the shark infested waters of Microsoft.

I don't know you guys, but I's rather stick to CS3 for 5 more years than switching to windows. XP is the last one I used thoroughly; Did they finally get png support? transparency? Decent fonts? Native pdf-like GDI? Or is it still designed to run Office?

 

[Piggie]

I seem to ask the same question when Flash haters come along and never get a clear answer.

I don't care about Flash, yeah, replace video clips / embedded video's on web pages with something else. That's fine.

But, what alternatives are there fof the other two main uses of Flash I see?

1: Vector Animation creations. (computer cartoons if you like to call them that)

2: Online games.

If Apple can supply answers to both these other things Flash can do then yeah great.

 

[redtaildd]

Adobe deserves it

Over the years Adobe has, in most of their applications, worked to remove features from Mac versions only to make that same feature available online for a price. The features remain in the Windows versions. That looks to me a bit like making a choice to support one platform over the other. Now they piss and moan when the shoe is on the other foot. This isn't dignified but... Pththththththth.
I decided a long time back that I would not buy anything from Adobe where a similar product was available from anyone else even if the similar product was more expensive. This after purchasing an expensive upgrade only to find that one of my favorite features was now pay per view.
-Rob

 

[barberio]

Actually our policy is to run software that is supported (as do all large scale organisations), when your a very large scale organisation you do not run the risk of running unsupported software, heads roll when something goes wrong. Frankly we would be saving a fortune in support fees that we pay for the macs, the PCs are much cheaper, so management would not be upset. The point is, in the short term the macs would hang around, once the support went and it came to a refresh, we would replace them, its daft to buy new hardware to run unsupported software.

As I said, by the time that refresh comes around, HTML5 will be an established technology, and flash will be on it's way out. And Apple will certainly have replaced Adobe's software with something to fit the niches.

Umm we currently make money from Ipad, look at the BBC app on it, and check out the sponsor, ORACLE, geez learn about ads mate, u think that they are only in flash..... and guess what we also make revenue from iphone... its page impressions, on a browser, not a device. Noone ever ever is going to ask you in a meeting how much revenue you made from a particular device.

Did you even watch the iPhone OS 4 preview at all? Understand the implications of iAd?

And you realise that when they ask what revenue the iPad app makes, it's kind of asking what revenue you're making off the iPad?

 

[MH01]

Your rant just seems to ignore a few facts:

1. Apple accounts for 50% of Adobe revenue. Adobe software is only on 10% of Apple computers (and some of that is easily replaced - I use Photoshop Elements, but Pixelmator would do the job just as well). Adobe would be bankrupt in under a year if they stopped selling Mac software.

2. While Apple has no equivalent of Photoshop today, do you really believe that they couldn't create one? First, most of the functions are already in Core APIs and would require just a front end. Or, Apple could buy Pixelmator or another program and build on that. Or Apple could simply put a couple of programmers to work on improving GIMP. I know quite a few professional photographers who absolutely refuse to use Windows. If Apple were to come up with a comparable solution, many of them would stay with Macs. In fact, given how badly Adobe has done in the past 5 years on Mac software, one could argue that ANYONE with a willingness to switch to Windows should already have done so.

3. HTML 5 is not just 'a dream' as you put it. Did you see the Toy Story iAd demo? HTML 5 will do just about everything that Flash does. I've been asking all week for examples of things that Flash can do that html 5 can't do - and no one has provided any examples.

4. Your statement that 'flash works' is absolute proof that you don't know what you're talking about. Aside from its demand for 120% CPU time on a dual core system for a simple popup menu, there is NO Flash at all in the mobile space today. None. It just doesn't exist (OK, there's a beta and Adobe promises that it will be out REAL SOON NOW). So your statement that Flash works is just plain wrong. It doesn't even exist on mobile devices (not just iphone, but ANY mobile devices).

Your rant has almost no bearing on reality.

1. Its a hypotherical situation if Adobe left, geez, pointing out what apple users would loose.

2. I doubt it, how long did it take to get copy and paste into the iphone and multitasking? And your talking up a replacement to PS???

3. Well, as you surf the web Today, HTML5 is still a dream in regards to taking over flash. Newsflash, toystory 3 demo on iphone 4.0, good example o how its dominating the current world...

4. Reality check, flash is making a huge amount of money for alot of companies right now on the web, ad revenue is huge, ask google. Just because safari suffers under flash does not mean most of the users on the net do not get a normal experience. Using your arguement, MP3s should be replaced cause the new mac pros could not play them in itunes without almost killing the CPU.

 

[oncdoc]

Apple cannot use GIMP as the base for a commercial product. Since GIMP is under the GPL any product based on it would have to be under the GPL, too. So "take something that is for free, improve it a bit and sell it for $1000" will not work in this case.
...
Christian

GPL does not prohibit anyone from improving/changing GPL software and then selling it. However, if software under GPL is modified and distributed publicly, then the modified source code should be released under GPL. FAQ

One can argue if the above model is commercially viable, but I think it would definitely help apple sell more computers.

 

[christian_k]

Yes, a "proof of concept"; In real world speak, and in its current form, they call that "Mickey Mouse". Because...
[/qupte]

Since Adobe is a company that has a reputation to loose, I don't think they would release it unless it is really "ready for production".

(... No flash in Nintendo DS because of low specs...)
Just as I expected. Thank you.

The DS has 4 MB of RAM and a 66 MHz ARM CPU. (You find this easily on the Net, I don't have to disclose anything that is under NDA).

The iPad has a 1000 MHz CPU (15 times more!) and 256 MB of memory (64 times more!) and a much larger screen.

You really cannot compare the two devices.

I think the iPad would be a better platform for Flash than the Wii (729 MHz PowerPC, 88 MB RAM, only TV SD resolutions) is, just compare specs and esp. screen resolution. But the Wii does support Flash while it is prohibited on the ipad...
This is a stategic decission, not a technical one.

Christian

 

[ranReloaded]

Apple cannot use GIMP as the base for a commercial product. Since GIMP is under the GPL any product based on it would have to be under the GPL, too. So "take something that is for free, improve it a bit and sell it for $1000" will not work in this case.

Besides that, let's be honest: If you have used Photoshop for more than 5 seconds, GIMP sucks bad. The closest thing it has to Photoshop is the lazy port: far from being Cocoa (or even Carbon), it's an X11 Application with lots of fake Windows/Linux like windows inside an OSX window canvas each, with windows-like menu bars on the windows, etc. You have to click each tool pane once to activate it (focus the window) and once more to slect the tool, the same for the canvas. Even if it were not GPL, starting from scratch is a better option.

But personally I really would like to see this happen. Imagine the Mac platform lost one of its major Apps. Would Apple try their best to replace it? Or have they lost their interest in the Mac as a serious and general purpose coputing platform already and see their future in iGadgets only?

Christian

Even though quite limited yet, I think Pixelmator is a better candidate for an Apple acquisition. Heck, they should buy it/improve it even if Adobe doesn't drop support for the Mac. Like having Aperture despite Lightroom, or FCP despite Premiere.

They will need to improve it a lot **AND** not sell it for $1000 (much less)

 

[macjiro]

I love Adobe and Apple tools. I'm just an end-user. I think its just a safe-bet to conclude that if you want to invest in CS5 and other future apps, that you put it on a PC. I think i will also go with PC for 3D as well. And just run the rest of my multi-media apps on Macs. You need both comps. For a small operation i think this is not a prob. If you are a bigger outfit, then its more of a pain. I just don't trust that either company is going to really 'help' each other and 'hold hands'. Running CS5 on a Mac will probably not be as smooth as on a PC. They require certain graphic processors to run PPro to run native video h264. Its in areas like these where i think the Mac users will have issues like those trying to run flash with Mac. I don't believe the everything-in one comp is going to work completely smooth. There's too much competition and bashing.

 

[MH01]

As I said, by the time that refresh comes around, HTML5 will be an established technology, and flash will be on it's way out. And Apple will certainly have replaced Adobe's software with something to fit the niches.



Did you even watch the iPhone OS 4 preview at all? Understand the implications of iAd?

And you realise that when they ask what revenue the iPad app makes, it's kind of asking what revenue you're making off the iPad?

If we choose to develop apps, yeah big implications (we have very few). Though given we run websites, iAds means very little.

 

[Bulbuls]

It's simple

Apple doesn't own HTML5.
Adobe owns Flash.

 

[ranReloaded]

I seem to ask the same question when Flash haters come along and never get a clear answer.

I don't care about Flash, yeah, replace video clips / embedded video's on web pages with something else. That's fine.

But, what alternatives are there fof the other two main uses of Flash I see?

1: Vector Animation creations. (computer cartoons if you like to call them that)

2: Online games.

If Apple can supply answers to both these other things Flash can do then yeah great.

I'm not saying it's ready for "production" (it will never be if everyone sticks to the comfortable Flash), but there is something called SVG. Then you have Javascript. The Javascript interpreters have been getting really faster these two years. Ask Google Chrome or webkit.

And it's not Apple alone. There is something called W3C.

 

[MyBrainIsSpeakn]

Apple doesn't own HTML5.
Adobe owns Flash.

Speak to them.

Apple doesn't own HTML5.
Adobe owns Flash.

Say it again, please...

Apple doesn't own HTML5.
Adobe owns Flash.

Flash will die once websites stop using it. Remember VHS?



Apple is such an egotistical, tyrannical, monopolistic brainwashing, selfish, stubborn company... its getting ridiculous. And this is coming from a Apple fan, just not a brainwashed Apple religious stan.


Apple is becoming quite the devil, and Google is the messiah ready to lay the mofocin smack down.

 

[Pared]

I think the iPad would be a better platform for Flash than the Wii (729 MHz PowerPC, 88 MB RAM, only TV SD resolutions) is, just compare specs and esp. screen resolution. But the Wii does support Flash while it is prohibited on the ipad...
This is a stategic decission, not a technical one.

Christian

The Wii doesn't have to worry about battery life.

You try running flash on the Wii or PS3. It's abysmal.

No one is saying the iPad can't do flash. The problem is, it's so resource intensive there are no real benefits to allowing it "just because."

 

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

You're actually going to bet against Apple?

I usually don't reply to bots but if you insist then be it...


1. Both Apple and Adobe are bunch of corporate arseholes who care about their shareholders and profit much more than about us - the users...

2. Both Apple and Adobe are ripping of people in such way that it borders with daylight robbery and legal crime. Apple, by selling outdated and mostly crap hardware that is made in China at ULTRA premium price and Adobe by charging MEGA bucks for minor updates to their software.

3. Both Apple and Adobe are bunch of "lazy" noobs who take ages to fix, patch and update their products.

4. Both Apple and Adobe are here for the money and money alone and both are ready to cut as many "throats" to meet their financial targets.

5. On positive note, both Apple and Adobe did and are still doing some great stuff...


Now, I don't care about the box, logo or particular brand - I care about my work and general computing experience!

At the moment - the best OS out there, at least in my opinion, is OS X - hence I am Mac user. Saying all that - I would drop it tomorrow if something better appears on the market since I can't give a crap about SJ and his spunky Apple...

Same goes to Flash and / or any Adobe product - I am using some Adobe products since they do the job perfectly for me... As soon as something better appears I will drop them instantly and go for it - be that Photoshop, Flash, Lightroom or InDesign replacement...

However, I do not believe in "murder" or "dictatorship" - I believe in freedom and "natural death"...

Problem with Apple recently is that they are actively promoting "murder" in very "dictatorship" like way - something I really really don't like... In fact, HATE! And anyone who is behaving in such way will sooner or later get seriously screwed - so yes, to answer your question, as long as they practice such attitudes - I am betting against Apple and am positive they will loose - sooner or later...

 

[GoodWatch]

Whenever
- my windows boxes with firefox and chrome crash it's because of FLASH
-my Ubuntu Boxes with firefox crash or get unstable it's because of FLASH
- my safari in mac os craches and th fan starts to speed up it's because of FLASH

Thanks Apple for going against this crappy piece of plugin....
Push html5 and javascript!

Whenever
- I miss my train, it's because of FLASH
- I don't win the lottery, it's because of FLASH
- The movie I'm watching is cr@p, it's because of FLASH

 

[barberio]

But, what alternatives are there fof the other two main uses of Flash I see?

1: Vector Animation creations. (computer cartoons if you like to call them that)

2: Online games.

If Apple can supply answers to both these other things Flash can do then yeah great.

Perfectly possible to do games in HTML5, proof of concept - http://ptdef.com/

 

[Poll Smoker]

2) Adobe abandons Apple, within two years Adobe would be absolutely buried. Look at what the Pixelmator team has done. And that's only a few guys working on a budget. Imagine Apple throwing money and developers at it.[/B]

Apple can't even keep its own "Pro" software up date, and all of a sudden they're going to pull a worthy CS competitor out of its ass?

It's no longer just a "creative tool." It's a lifestyle choice.

Computers are only a "lifestyle choice" for people who don't have a real life. Such as yourself, you pathetic Jobs knob-gobbler.

 

[WilliamLondon]

+1. Trying to get an objective opinion out of LTD is like pulling teeth from a honey badger. He has quite literally turned himself into a willing religious zealot for a company.

-1

This kind of comment is childish, schoolyard s**t. You're acting like 2 little girls who think they're more popular than everyone else on the playground, pointing with derision at another child and saying to each other, "can you believe the shoes she's wearing? We're so much better than her" while ensuring a you speak in a volume loud enough so she can hear you belittle her.

It was childish and mean then, it hasn't changed now.

(BTW, LTD, I'm not saying you're a little girl)

 

[andyone]

Flash sucks, but Apple banning any other developer tools/programming languages than their own is a dick move. I really hope Android gets more market share and developer support, and forces Apple to give up their ridiculous control-freak stance.

 

[LagunaSol]

It almost seems like you'll post any old silliness, just to get your sig up on as many pages as possible. Is that what's going on?

Astroturfing is a volume business.