The market is wy more than iPads.
There is a much bigger world outside of your myopic iPad universe.
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.
Flash Soon to Hit the iPad?
- Thread starter LouieSamman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The market is wy more than iPads.
There is a much bigger world outside of your myopic iPad universe.
No, obviousqly you dont.
You and people like you don't understand that there are people other than iPad users on the net.
Apple decided not to support Flash on their product for reasons that have been widely published. Other tablets made by other companies make tablets that do support Flash. The market has demonstrated that the non-Flash tablet is outselling all the Flash-enabled tablets by a large margin. There are two possible explanations for this. One is that people do consider Flash essential for their full experience of the web, but that they chose to buy a tablet for reasons other than surfing the web. The other is that web surfing is an important task that tablets are used for but that the customers do not find Flash to be an essential part of their full Internet experience. Everyone I have met who uses a tablet tells me they use it for surfing the web a lot, which suggests the first answer is unlikely to be true, which suggests to me that it is the second hypothesis that is true. This is backed up by my personal experience that the lack of Flash on the iPad does not particularly upset my web browsing.
Regardless of the reason for the relative sales figures of Flash and non-Flash tablets, the fact of the relative success of the iPad without Flash offers no particular reason to suppose that adding flash to iOS is something we are likely to witness any time soon.
Not exactly. Marketing 101 says that you must effectively differentiate your product form the competition. If you make a claim that Flash makes your product "special", but you fail to deliver on something far more fundamental like Apps, your marketing campaign actually detracts from your product. RIM managed to sink a bunch of bucks into buying ads (and paying $$$ to Queen) that did nothing to aid in the success of their product.
Actually, I was asking what the Adobe marketing phrase "full web experience" or "full internet experience" actually means. Adobe has managed to put the phrase "full web experience" on their website over 2400 times, so it's got to mean something, right? Interestingly, Adobe never offers a definition. You offered a definition:
Back to the current discussion:
I never argued that; I was noting the absurdity of your "viewing any site you want" definition above. I deconstructed your definition in this message. My point is that the phrase "full internet experience" or "full web experience" is essentially meaningless; it's just a codeword for "Flash".
Actually, installing the frequently-used code as an app is the creation of a work flow. Earlier in the discussion, you had noted the value in apps:
Now, you seem to have changed your tune. Could you please sort that out for us?
You don't need to have implemented an app with accessibility features to understand why they are needed. All you need to do is to see accessibility widgets in action before you understand their profound value. Accessibility APIs is part of what Jobs noted as the most important reason why Flash isn't allowed on their iOS devices in his 2010 Thoughts on Flash. I have emphasized the pertinent words from his memo:
Steve Jobs said:
Many people have read and commented on Jobs's memo, but few seem to remember what he cited as the most important reason for excluding Flash. You don't have to be a programmer to understand his point. Did you remember that Jobs called out that most important reason? The Adobe Flash lowest-common-denominator approach is a terrible thing for accessibility and a terrible thing for UI in general. It is a bankrupt approach.
darngooddesign said:
Oh, my. That is a distressing attitude. Any objective user would completely disagree: of course it's an argument against Flash! If Flash were an open standard and runtime versions were available from multiple vendors, would you pick the version that kept up with the UI or the one that operated in lowest-common-denominator mode?
Three years isn't long enough for you to be outraged that a UI feature hasn't been integrated into Flash. How long would it take you to be upset? Five years? Ten years? Twenty?
Since you haven't seemed to notice, I'll tell you something about scrolling and Flash: Flash has "worked" with two-fingered scrolling for at least six months, but there are two tremendous limitations:
1. The semantics for scrolling are different than the native Apple UI.
2. The Flash apps must be re-compiled and redeployed before two-fingered scrolling. If a developer hasn't bought the latest tools from Adobe or they are apathetic, their Flash apps will never get the enhanced feature.
In the past, users had to deal with two different kinds of two-fingered scrolling: Flash (broken) and non-Flash (working). Now they have to deal with three different kind of behaviors: non-Flash (working), neo-Flash (working, but in a different fashion), and old-Flash (totally broken). Of the Flash-sites, you never know which is which
One must ask: is this really an improvement?
My "twenty years" question above was rhetorical, but that absurd possibility is a reality. Twenty years from now, internet archaeologists will fire up ancient web browsers; they will find Flash code that *still* doesn't honor two-fingered scrolling.
Perhaps those archaeologists will see if they can locate those Flash developers and ask them why they never #$!! updated their code.
It most certainly is correct. Steve Jobs's memo spelled it out: the failure of Adobe's Flash to provide access to APIs was the most important issue why they kept Flash out of iOS.
Now, do you have any factual basis for your "That's incorrect" claim?
Adobe's failure to provide prompt access to enhanced APIs like scrolling and accessibility APIs is the most important reason why Apple excluded Flash from their iOS devices. Indirectly -- and especially because of the runaway success of the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch -- Apple's actions has accelerated the extinction of Flash from all webpages.
Do you have any factual basis for your "That's incorrect" claim?
BTW: the purpose of the "Edit" button is to make small changes in a message. If you publicly post a 3-line message, adding 50 lines to that message is an abuse of the editing capability of the forum. Please don't do that again. Thanks.
Last edited:
Incorrect.
1. It would be wrong had I done it after you responded to my post...I did not.
2. Adding a second post with the additional content is considered double-posting, which is in violation of forum rules. Its #9 under "Minor Problems". A moderator previously asked me not to do it again so I didn't. Are you a moderator?
3. Please stop worrying about how I edit posts; see #2. Thanks.
That is why i didn't address the rest of your post and I'll leave you with that. Feel free to keep beating your drum.
As this website notes, iPhone sales have been increasing at a stellar pace since its introduction. Starting back in Q2 of 2008 to the present, the year-to-year quarterly increases in sales have been:
243% 801% 184% 197% 534% 5% 90% 124% 74% 92% 88% 126% 150%
It is difficult to find many products anywhere that have performed better than that over the past 3 years.
@henchman, how good would the numbers have to be before you would agree that the marketplace has decided?
Claiming that Apple disregarded the community of Flash developers would have been accurate.
His priority has been on the user experience and not on these third-party developers.
Adobe has a long history of disregarding all users everywhere. Their products have been CPU hogs and security sieves. Most importantly (as Steve Jobs noted in his "Thoughts on Flash" memo), Adobe has chosen a "lowest common denominator" approach and has chronically been late to the game to connect to API innovations on the particular platforms.
Adobe Flash has completely let down the communities that need accessibility widgets. If someone has a right to be outraged in this debate, it is that community and Adobe is the perpetrator.
If you have any anger, you should direct it at Adobe for being so unresponsive to the end-user. They had a chance for Flash to be an integral part of the web, and they blew it.
You should also start to direct your anger to sites that have failed to drop their Flash code. Adobe has provided HTML5 solutions for several months; sites should either be planning or should have already deployed a universal solution.
If that were the case, then all efficiency problems on the Mac would have already been addressed. That is not the case: a single badly-performing Flash app can cut battery life in half on the Mac. Read the description of the FlashFrozen app for the Mac:
While most knowledgable Mac users already have Flash muzzled with click-to-flash plugins, an errant click could leave a Flash app running.
Is this still a problem? You betcha. This paid app is currently in the top 20 of all apps in the Mac App store.
Then you should have an answer to the most important reason that Steve Jobs cited for Apple's keeping Flash off of iOS devices: Adobe's "lowest common denominator" approach to user interface, accessibility, and other APIs.
It's hardly a personal issue. Flash is a train wreck for anyone who needs accessibility widgets to use computers.
You've got it backwards. Adobe's philosophy with Flash has never been about the needs of the end user. Adobe has had a "lowest common denominator" approach in adopting enhancements to the UI. Their adaptation for two-fingered scrolling works poorly, was late to the game, and only works if the Flash developers rebuild and re-deploy their apps. In other words, many existing Flash sites will NEVER work correctly with computers using modern trackpad devices.
Inexperienced users are confused why their input and control devices do not work as specified on some websites. They have no idea why some keyboard shortcuts fail based on where their cursor is located in the browser window. Experienced users are just supremely annoyed by the Flash user experience and do their best to avoid its use.
Flash has been a train wreck for individuals that need to use the accessibility widgets. Adobe has never provided the hooks for Flash apps to seamlessly access those widgets; those users are "shut out" from Flash apps.
With iOS, Apple decide that enough was enough. They would not shackle any of their users with the nonsense that Flash imposes on accessing their computers and accessing the internet. Apple banned Flash from the iOS world: the iPhone, iPad, and iPod Touch.
Not exactly. By 2007, Apple had decided that enough was enough; they categorically excluded Flash from the iOS platform.
Many of us are quite grateful they've done this; the people who need accessibility aids are especially grateful. Not only are iOS devices free of the clutter of Flash, but the entire Internet is slowly getting purged of this "lowest common denominator" approach to computing. The post-PC era has begun, and Flash wasn't invited to the party.
@henchman: your "absolutely zero excuse" claim just don't hold water. There are plenty of good reasons why Flash is a terrible choice for the end user. They have been pointed out by several posters here. You have failed to address those reasons.
Last edited:
I'll assume you never read this article about the fable that HTML5 is more efficient.
http://m.readwriteweb.com/archives/does_html5_really_beat_flash_surprising_results_of_new_tests.php
http://m.readwriteweb.com/archives/does_html5_really_beat_flash_surprising_results_of_new_tests.php
Who are you talking to? What message are you responding to?
@henchman, the Flash CPU issue I was noting in this message was about runaway CPU usage and the value of the Mac App Store program FlashFrozen. Based on that paid program's 4.5 star rating and sales in the top 20 of all apps in the MAS, do you agree that there is indeed a problem with leaking CPU resources with Flash programs on current Mac computers?
That article you noted came out about a month before the iPad debuted. The most amusing quote from the article:
Seventeen months later, those questioning people have their answer: the iPad is a runaway success, and the lack of Flash has had no impact on that success. On the other hand, the slate devices with Flash are all struggling. Best Buy is giving away the Galaxy Tab 10.1 with a TV purchase. RIM's playbook sales have been quite disappointing. And HP is going to cease manufacturing its Flash tablets -- and probably all PC's altogether.
Is Flash a make-or-break feature for new tablet devices? All of the Flash-based tablet devices do seem broken!
Should we assume that you have never read Steve Jobs's memo and that you failed to note the most important reason Jobs noted why Flash was excluded from iOS devices? Do you understand that Flash is a train wreck for people who need accessibility features? Do you understand the problem with the "lowest common denominator" approach of Adobe Flash and why that is a problem for both Apple and Apple's customers? Do you understand why these issues are even more important on touch-based post-PC computers?
Let's start with a discussion the most important reason that Apple decided to keep Flash off of iOS devices. Can you do that?
You missed the art where flash is not efficient because apple refuses to give access to gpu acceleration.
The number one reason Jobs left it off is sour grapes, disguised under the mantel of inefficiency, which HE created.
Everything else is just hot air.
Heres a brand new site, see if yo can build your own car there.
http://www.fiatusa.com/en
----------
Typical response.
Just like when the first ipad came out and it didn't have a camera, and that decision was defended by all the apple lovers.
Then one was added, and suddenly it was such a great thing.
Just like IDE drives were considered crap, until apple started using them.
And intel processors were incredily inferior until apple started usng them.
Yadda, yadda, yadda, and the list goes on. yawn.
The number one reason Jobs left it off is sour grapes, disguised under the mantel of inefficiency, which HE created.
Everything else is just hot air.
Heres a brand new site, see if yo can build your own car there.
http://www.fiatusa.com/en
----------
Is this really being discussed?
Yes, we know everyone wants flash which is why he iPad isn't selling and apple are now holding firesales
End of the day, if you want flash then go buy a HP touchpad
Typical response.
Just like when the first ipad came out and it didn't have a camera, and that decision was defended by all the apple lovers.
Then one was added, and suddenly it was such a great thing.
Just like IDE drives were considered crap, until apple started using them.
And intel processors were incredily inferior until apple started usng them.
Yadda, yadda, yadda, and the list goes on. yawn.
Incorrect. Jobs made it easy: he spelled out his reasons, and he even spelled out which was the most important to Apple. Many of the Flash enthusiasts talk about that memo, but few seem to have actually read it.
Are you interested in a rational discussion of the failure of Flash?
Were you talking about the Fiat USA iPad app on that page? Is that a Flash app cross-compiled for the iPad, or is it a native iOS app?
Really?
Did Jobs spell out that the reason Flash was inefficient in Safari and iOS devices it was because he would not give flash access to hardware acceleration?
And. Did you trybthe App? because no, you can not design your own Fiat in it.
The Flash debate has had a lot of time to develop. But allow me to try and return to the basics of the debate.
To my understanding, most users do not take issue with Apple's belief that Flash is not the future of Web content. They argue that in spite of this, Apple should still allow Flash because Flash is still used now. Essentially, users should be given an option to turn Flash on/off. What I fail to understand is how that is any different from supporting Flash outright.
Look at this from Apple's point of view. Apple believes that Flash is a dying technology. From Apple's point of view, supporting Flash is like giving a dying man a glass of water. Apple must have known that there would be a transition period based on how deeply Flash was ingrained in the Web. From their point of view, supporting Flash will only make the transition away from Flash harder than it already will be. Let me give a similar anecdote. I had to improve my mental math in order to do well on the GMAT since calculators were not allowed. I was very accustomed to just pulling out my calculator to do computations. To improve my mental math, I put my calculator well out of reach so I would not be tempted to pick it up. Keeping that crutch within reach would have made it that much harder to improve my mental math.
Suppose Flash had allowed Flash from the beginning in the form of the on/off option that a lot of people are craving. Why would content providers have any reason to take a look at another format? Content providers could care less if their content is a battery hog. They care about getting views, as they should. They would have no incentive whatsoever to consider HTML5. What little progress that has been made so far on HTML5 would not have been accomplished if Apple had allowed Flash from the beginning. Also, whether Flash were on always or if users had the option to turn it on/off wouldn't have made any difference in that regard. Content providers would still have no reason to explore other formats for their content.
Stop making this out to be a pride issue. It's a business decision, plain and simple. Apple did not coerce anyone into anything, nor did they lie about their stance. It's up to consumers to do their due diligence on products they spend money on. The content providers made a business decision to rework their content in HTML5 in order to avoid losing the viewership of iOS users. In their mind, the benefits of gaining access to the iOS user base outweigh the costs of reworking things in HTML5. It's nothing more than a business decision.
To my understanding, most users do not take issue with Apple's belief that Flash is not the future of Web content. They argue that in spite of this, Apple should still allow Flash because Flash is still used now. Essentially, users should be given an option to turn Flash on/off. What I fail to understand is how that is any different from supporting Flash outright.
Look at this from Apple's point of view. Apple believes that Flash is a dying technology. From Apple's point of view, supporting Flash is like giving a dying man a glass of water. Apple must have known that there would be a transition period based on how deeply Flash was ingrained in the Web. From their point of view, supporting Flash will only make the transition away from Flash harder than it already will be. Let me give a similar anecdote. I had to improve my mental math in order to do well on the GMAT since calculators were not allowed. I was very accustomed to just pulling out my calculator to do computations. To improve my mental math, I put my calculator well out of reach so I would not be tempted to pick it up. Keeping that crutch within reach would have made it that much harder to improve my mental math.
Suppose Flash had allowed Flash from the beginning in the form of the on/off option that a lot of people are craving. Why would content providers have any reason to take a look at another format? Content providers could care less if their content is a battery hog. They care about getting views, as they should. They would have no incentive whatsoever to consider HTML5. What little progress that has been made so far on HTML5 would not have been accomplished if Apple had allowed Flash from the beginning. Also, whether Flash were on always or if users had the option to turn it on/off wouldn't have made any difference in that regard. Content providers would still have no reason to explore other formats for their content.
Stop making this out to be a pride issue. It's a business decision, plain and simple. Apple did not coerce anyone into anything, nor did they lie about their stance. It's up to consumers to do their due diligence on products they spend money on. The content providers made a business decision to rework their content in HTML5 in order to avoid losing the viewership of iOS users. In their mind, the benefits of gaining access to the iOS user base outweigh the costs of reworking things in HTML5. It's nothing more than a business decision.
Really. Please go read the memo.
With all due respect, your questions are starting to sound like trolling. If you want to know what Jobs said, go read the memo. Then you won't have to wonder, right?
I didn't say that Flash is dead; I said that Flash has failed.
Millions of laptop and desktop uses have either de-installed Flash or never installed it in the first place. Tens of millions of laptop and desktop users -- like you -- have installed Click to Flash plugins. They have muzzled Flash and only run the Flash apps that you want; they will never see Flash-based advertising. And a quarter of a billion iOS devices will never ever run Flash in the browser.
Flash has failed to be an ubiquitous viewer of content on the web. Adobe had a chance to do that, and they blew it. Even Adobe realizes that Flash will never fill that role; they have been actively encouraging developers to generate HTML5 instead:
Adobe's Jack Nack said:
Flash will never be universal; Adobe itself notes that it doesn't make sense to deploy both Flash and HTML for websites. There's a unique opportunity now for Flash developers to work with those websites to get them modernized. @stoked: we're in the window between Flash's failure and its disappearance from the internet. Flash will never completely disappear; there will still be some curiosity websites serving up Flash code 20 years from now. It's my bet that two-fingered scrolling will still fail on those Flash apps.
There are two opportunities for Flash developers. One is to take exemplary Flash apps and cross-compile them for the iOS App Store. The second is to contact website owners that are hosting legacy Flash code and work with them to have their websites serve up HTML5.
I don't have an iPad, so I didn't trybthe App. I don't understand your point in asking about that website in this discussion.
I own an iPad and think his points are defensible and warrant a response. Just pretend I wrote what he did and respond to them, then.