Just making sure. I know my questions sound rather pedestrian but civil discourse beats getting riled up over nothing.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
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
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're wrong.
Now that that's out of the way:
from what I've read about the ongoing HTML5 spec saga, Apple is not the only one who doesn't support OGG/Theora as the default audio codec. In fact, since MS announced that they will have HTML5 / H.264 support in IE9 the tide has turned pretty heavily in H.264's favor.
As far as the 2016 licensing thing goes, wasn't that just for HD content? I'm pretty sure it was.
To your last point: Developers being "free to choose" what codec they use in HTML5 is part of the reason there's no standard yet.
Wait, what exactly is he wrong about? What's hilarious is what I bolded above. Theora is for video LOL. Ogg is just a transport layer. Also, theora is quite good, I've used it in some game dev (BECAUSE it is royalty free and quite capable) and it produced some great results. Yeah, H.264 is obviously the leader right now, but that's because it's being pushed pretty hard by certain groups. It's going to suck when the royalty thing kicks in. Even if it IS only for HD, you don't think that HD will be far far more prevalent in 6 years? Think about where this stuff was in 2004.
What the hell is Apple's problem and why do they have such a vendetta against Adobe right now? I can absolutely guarantee you with a straight face that Mac computers would not be anywhere near the commercial success they are today if it were not for Adobe, who pledged their full support and stuck with Apple especially through the bad years and helped shape the Mac into the preferred creative platform for designers and content developers that it is now.
Apple still might make some cool stuff but I think they've lost their moral compass entirely.
Apple still might make some cool stuff but I think they've lost their moral compass entirely.
LOL. One of the first things I installed was anti virus software. The other option would be to delete Windows and install Linux instead. (Or even make it a Hackintosh, but I don't).
Yes, I have a GPS wristwatch that logs the track and heart rate when jogging or inline speed skating. The data can be transfered to a PC (in this case the Netbook) and the software shows the tracks on GoogleMaps and creates nice curves that show speed, heart rate, altitude. I don't think this will come to iPad.
Since I know several people who are also involved in software development it is sometimes very handy to have developer tools on a highly portable machine. Of course I would never use that for a real project, but it is enough to try some things out and share ideas.
I also have a USB stick that lets me watchand record DVB-T (digital terrestrial television). It works just fine on the netbook.
Sometimes I use skype for video chat (that iPad does not (yet?) have a camera.
The netbook also has built in 3G and can be used as a mobile wireless hotspot which is usefull in some situations (I don't know if Apple will allow this on the 3G ipad).
Of course you can use more than one device for differend things. I also have a 24'' iMac, I would not do HD video editing on the Netbook
Christian
Why would Adobe cut out ~50% of their revenue stream?
Because Adobe is slow moving and stupid. They can't see that Apple will take their product down and fight its use until they come up with a proper and more stable apple OS flash.
Adobe is not putting resources into mac software outside their creative suite. Flash will die unless the reinvest and take care of its problems.
Apple is obviously going to war over this issue.
Of all things mimicking the folder structure is the most trivial thing on earth. Putting the images is even necessary in order to work properly.
Nobody really knows how bloated the code really is that is generated, and bare in mind that all cross compilers are being banned not only the Adobe one.
Also nobody really knows if these compilers would be an issue with background apps, as they of course would need to be updated to produce valid and optimized code again.
T.
Most average users aren't that smart. They would click install or run without thinking too hard, and then blame Apple for their slow or broken device instead of themselves.
It's in all the psychology books.
Adobe is a different company than they used to be.
Apple is also, but Apple is cranking out lots of new cool stuff that I want to buy even given their mongo profit margins on it.
Perhaps Apple could give them the proper APIs for hardware acceleration while they're at it instead of playing freaking games with everyone that WANTS to support OSX but never gets ANY support from Apple (e.g. Look at game developers and all the requests they made over the years to Apple and Apple just more or less IGNORED them since "Steve" doesn't have much of an interest in gaming (like that should have ANYTHING to do with it when it comes to a professional company). The worst part of it is the MULTITUDES of Apple "fans" (more like rabid illogical unthinking fanatics) are 100% for that decision because "Macs aren't for gaming" or "serious computer users don't game" or some other line of TOTAL *BS* to make excuses for why Apple cannot be bothered to act like a professional company when it comes to supporting developers instead of dictating TO them what they can and cannot do on their platform. Apple cannot even be bothered to keep Java and OpenGL to up-to-date most of the time, let alone help to make substantial improvements (Apple does the work on their own video drivers instead of supporting Nvidia and ATI to keep up-to-date high performance drivers because Stevie is afraid of letting anyone know too much about his top secret operating system. Perhaps that is why Mac video performance is almost always 20-40% SLOWER than the same hardware under Windows within a year of a chipset appearing on both platforms (and that in and of itself takes a miracle since Apple's GPU hardware is almost always 2-4 years behind an average Windows machine, usually because Stevie wants MOBILE chips in his "home" computers so he can keep the systems gaunt and thin like his own body instead of sleek and POWERFUL as they SHOULD be. Even the Mac Pro is usually WAY behind on GPU power despite normal expansion slots and then the hardware costs 50-100% more than the SAME hardware for the PC since Apple has to get their cut and write the drivers (again because OSX is so darn top secret).
Basically, I'm sick of FANATICS (as in unthinking illogical worshipers of Apple) painting this one-sided biased picture like Apple is the perfect company and everyone else are morons (especially when it comes to patent disputes, etc.; it's always ONE-SIDED despite the unreasonable GREED and profit margins of Apple that are night and day higher than everyone else in the industry and control freakish nature of Apple/Steve that seeks to demand unreasonable things from developers and do everything they can to AVOID competition instead of simply vying for the customer's support because they have the absolute BEST computers out there. That might be true if they'd keep up on video and offer a mid-range power machine instead of this mobile sub-$2000 crap and overpriced $3000+ Mac Pro stuff that has equivalent PC uses in 90% of the same areas in the $1200 range). I don't mind paying more for Apple brand, but not 250% more. It's absurd.
When I go to buy my next desktop there is NO WAY I'm buying a low-powered iMac and I'm not paying over $3000 to get the power of a $1200 PC when I can easily assemble my own and hack it to run OSX and have 90% of the power of the 4-CPU version of the Mac Pro (and more in some areas for almost 1/3 the price). And don't tell me I don't support Apple. I own 2 Apple TVs, 1 iPod Touch, a 1.5 year old MBP and one of their older PowerMacs souped up to be a power server for my whole house audio/video system, let alone various software packages. If Apple offers reasonable competition, I'd RATHER buy their hardware, but if they're going to continue to gouge and not offer the hardware I actually WANT to buy, I'll go elsewhere and hack if I have to (already skipped on the overpriced/underpowered iPad and got a nice Hackintosh Netbook that can do SO much more for nearly half the price and it couldn't hardly have been easier to install OSX on it either).
Apple needs to learn not all their users area total pansies when it comes to knowledge of hardware and price/performance. Apple has a nice GUI and thus far a lovely lack of viruses and spyware compared to Windows, but the OS is hardly perfect. I can just as many freeze/crashes on my MBP and PowerMac as I do my PC running the older XP Windows OS, if not more so and that's a shame considering the Macs are running a flavor of Unix and Windows has been a hodge-podge mess for years supporting so much old code, etc. that Apple can afford to abandon (try running software from 1999 on a Mac and then try the same on a Windows machine and see which one runs more of it).
Apple could have easily have garnered another 10% of the market by now (as in closer to 20%) if they would play more friendly and offer more competitive machines in the $1000-2000 range instead of laptops dressed up like monitors. They chose profit margins over market share, though and that might hurt them in the long run. It certainly hurts their reputation to have "Pro" machines that don't have "Pro" features like matte screens (glossy is AWFUL), expansion slots (an SD card reader doesn't cut it on the 15" MBP), etc. that they USED to have just 2 years ago. Catering to the masses is fine, but don't call something professional when it isn't and if you're going to cater to the masses then SUPPORT the masses by supporting things like gaming better (at least the current like of notebooks are a step up from the Intel GMA days....)
You're absolutely right. Sometimes, though, it's not really about winning anyone over. As you said yourself: they're not going to see your point of view anyway, so what's the point in trying to reason with them. Let's be honest; some of the postings here need and deserve to be ridiculed.
Ridicule can be - and often is - just as effective as reason.
Internaut
macrumors 65816
Hmmmm...... Regardless of Apple's motives, this will doubtless have the feint whiff of anti competitive to. Whatever, it will be interesting to watch this decided over in a court of law (which it inevitably will given Adobe's SEC filings).
I live in the US and the producer of a product has the right to set its value whether you like it or not. Just wouldn't want anyone telling me what I should charge for my products. This is why App Store rocks because the developer sets the price NOT Apple. Next, Apple doesn't hold a gun to your head and you do have a choice.
Agree. That is why I don't have a Mac and never have. If they had an affordable mid-tower, I would have bought one. But it is their choice to chose their market. I didn't get mad, I just built another PC.
But in the case here of demanding native application development. I am all for Apple on this one. Allowing things like a flash-to-iPhoneApp converter is only going drastically ramp up the influx of would be developers who know nothing about the platform outputting crap apps, that would overload the approval queue.
The courts do not care about Apple's actions over a private developer platform - they are not a monopoly and do not possess sufficient (read any) power over Adobe.
Adobe's SEC filings in fact mention that they are facing competition (competition that has little to do with their SDK). In short, there is no law that says that Apple has to support anybody or do business with anybody. As long as that is the case, the courts cannot do much.
Really. Apple or Adobe. One closed system for another. At least with Apple the have motivation to keep the end user happy since they deliver content. Adobe is the tool others use to deliver content and can always point the blame to the person who created the content. I am not saying Apple does not do that but we as the end user have greater recourse.
We can directly complain about the content to Apple but with Adobe do they care that people develop lousy flash code? Adobe as already made the sale to the developer..
We can directly complain about the content to Apple but with Adobe do they care that people develop lousy flash code? Adobe as already made the sale to the developer..
Do you work as a software developer? I want to know if I'm talking to a laymen or someone who understands the terminology used in this discussion.
Images are placed in a directory of an application bundle instead of being compiled into the top of the application so that when the application loads, it can load them as they are needed and unloaded them when not required. Games with large levels for example will load textures and objects on the fly if the level cannot be loaded into memory at once safely using a lazy loading mechanism without affecting gameplay with load screens or pauses. When you load all resources into the exe, the OS is forced to load the entire thing into memory at the beginning which means that it takes up a large chunk of ram. That ram chunk is a messy jumble of resources (pictures, sounds, text) as well as the program code and none of it is named in a friendly way because it is generated by Adobe's tool.
When you load gfx through the API, you are making specific calls which the OS is able to detect and you will use variable names for the resources which the OS is also able to detect them but when you use the Adobe tool, the OS cannot make heads or tails of it and there is no class hierarchy in that chunk so you could have a situation where you have two or more Adobe generated apps with the same set of resource names. How is the iPhone OS supposed to keep things straight if there is no structure in the app and there are name conflicts?
If the app was developed with the SDK, not only will Apple be able to monitor your API calls to help you with performance bottlenecks and detect race conditions and "code bloat" as you call it, but they will be able to find an entry point for suspending your app for the fast task switching.
Did any of this make any sense to you or am I arguing with a non-developer?
I started out learning assembler so I understand how exes are laid out. You really do want to avoid large exes with all of your resources inside because the OS will load all of it into ram when you run it. People who started out learning programming with Java or VB will have a hard time understanding a lot of this stuff. One of the exercises we had in college was to get our simple game of "Cokes" down to less than 4k through optimizing the assembly to make it as small as possible.
You mean unlike right now, where a ton of would-be developpers are grabbing Xcode templates, throwing in an image or two and submitting their crap apps, overloading the approval queue ? Language/environnement means nothing in the face of crap apps overloading the approval queue.
Flashlights, farts and 1000s of girls! already proved this, all written in highly efficient Objective-C (do I really need the /sarcasm tag here ?).
In fact, I'd much rather have the guys who write Flash games doing iPhone games (some Flash stuff is very well done and very complex. And it ran fine on P2-333 ages ago...) or even .NET developpers using Monotouch than have a bunch of no-nothing kids writing Objective-C for the first time with stick figures.
The fact is, middleware and RAD are very valid programming tools and they are used a lot in the industry because it is what helps save time on a project. Having to write a memory allocator for the 50th time just because it's "efficient" is just plain dumb. Write it once, include it everywhere. Code re-use is very important, as working out all the bugs in 50 implementation of the same algorithm makes for buggier apps.
And how do you know the flash packager doesn't make use of the bundle ressources to load images and sound rather than compiling them ? Extracting them from the .swf and putting them in the .ipa in a ressource folder is not exactly black magic...
"might hurt them in the long run."
It's already been "the long run." Apple's not hurt. In fact, they're selling Macs in record numbers. In a recession. Macs represent the cream of the computing crop, thanks to Apple focusing on what's most important: The User Experience. The $1000 entry fee is a natural barrier. But that's the Premium market being what it is. Meanwhile MS and the box-assemblers are busy selling junk to the low end of the market.
The days of the "desktop" are coming to a close, in any case. Retailers can barely sell them. Apple seems to know how to rethink them and make them move, however . . .
Those "laptops dressed up like monitors":
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ount_for_25_of_global_desktop_growth_in_2010/
http://www.cultofmac.com/apples-maligned-imac-responsible-for-record-mac-sales/27595
If you're going to troll, please don't post 998 words of it.
By the same token, MS is selling record numbers of Windows 7. Numbers that destroy anything Apple ever did with the OSX and the Mac. You know, in a recession. Just saying.
Yeah; they'll be pushing HTML6
(guess you're running out of juice after being smacked down multiple times. Pity, since you're kinda funny, in a John Hodgeman "I'm a PC" kind of way...)
Firstly.
I never claimed that Flash would or would not die out. Don't put phantom words into my post. Thanks.
Secondly. Who smacked who down? Muah? Because according to my post and retort history, you and your gang has yet to fault my original statement.
"Adobe changed the face of the Internet. Has Apple done this"?
No.
Exactly.
All this complaining about Apple's pricing is absurd. On several occasions I've had windows users say my computer is nice but Macs are too expensive. I tell them the extra cost is quality. They buy brand X anyway. Brand X breaks down and gives them numerous problems. Then they come around.
I'm not out there acting like an Apple cheerleader but when people ask me my preference I tell them Apple for quality.
And I know first hand several people who went with Dell specifically only to end up hating the company.
I'm not rabid about the choice of OS. People can use whatever they like. I use Windows too. But if I were to get non-apple computer, I wouldn't get one of these $499 laptops that is supposed to compete with a macbook and i certainly wouldn't ever get a Dell after what I have observed first hand with my friends over the years.
Hahaha! Less than 50 posts to go to hit 1000! Are we a bunch of opinionated bastards/ettes, or what?
Early congrats to all of us for informing, ranting, philosophizing, riling, boring, leading, following, sidetracking, preaching, blaspheming at each other.
Some of us have a very a deep, real world stake in this discussion, others, none at all. Maybe we should try and keep that in mind as we go forth.
I'm very interested in seeing how this (issue not thread) develops.
Off to work but I'll catch up when I get back.
Dave
Early congrats to all of us for informing, ranting, philosophizing, riling, boring, leading, following, sidetracking, preaching, blaspheming at each other.
Some of us have a very a deep, real world stake in this discussion, others, none at all. Maybe we should try and keep that in mind as we go forth.
I'm very interested in seeing how this (issue not thread) develops.
Off to work but I'll catch up when I get back.
Dave
Just saying what? That Microsoft continues to sell PCs to the low-end of the market? Bargain Bin Ballmer selling PCs loaded with Windows on the cheap. Every PC under the sun comes loaded with Windows. Shocking.
Microsoft licenses their OS universally. Apple does not.
I should hope they sold record numbers of Windows 7!!
It's hundreds of millions of PC users waiting for the Vista nightmare to be over. What did you expect? Poor sales of Windows 7?? What are the alternatives offered by MS? XP and Vista. One is an 8+ year old dog of an OS, the other is a massive flop. That's hundreds of millions of PC users dying for an upgrade after years of getting the shaft. And Apple's Premium end of the market has natural barriers to entry, starting with the $1000 minimum fee. Apple doesn't compete in the market segments occupied mostly by MS. Of course, Apple is now transitioning away from the traditional desktop computer + desktop OS paradigm.
PC users outnumber all others, and always have, whether MS released a good OS or a lousy one - PCs are cheap and now more disposable than ever (netbooks.) The bottom of the retail pyramid is always the widest. The biggest computer-using segment uses PCs. Now throw in an OS that fixes Vista and by sheer force of numbers alone (volume) you'll have a great quarter.
There's no miracle here. Just the massive number of PC users who suffered for years, now jumping at the chance to upgrade. It's nothing new, miraculous or groundbreaking.
It makes no difference whether it succeeds or fails. PC users, by virtue of the low cost of entry into the PC market alone, will always outnumber users of all other platforms. Windows will always sell well, in whatever form, because it can run on the cheapest hardware - and this is what you find the most of. But now, we're seeing highly concentrated sales of a particular version (good news) because everyone was waiting to upgrade and end the XP/Vista pain, which lasted far, far too long.