Hey Apple...Adobe has learned its lesson! We want Flash

[Havas]

Very well put, and you know what else is funny?

Most of the people here are not programmers or have too little experience, did you guys know that we can now write Apps in ActionScript and compile them for Web, Android (With just a new skin), Desktop and because of the force of change in Apples T&C IPhone very shortly?

And do know you what the funniest thing is? Many of you will never know you are using an application built in Flash.

Personally as a business man if I'm going to build something, I'd much rather target IPhone + Android + RIM + Web without writing each one separately because my clients just can not afford that and the reach is way higher than just Apple, The mobile industry is way larger when combined than just Apple, and the majority are on board with Adobe.

Any way you look at it, HTML is not an OO language it's not as power full and it's not secure when it comes to Video etc and doesn't even have half the features and will not do for a very very long time indeed.

Flash is here to stay, either help make it better by submitting bugs you find, or loose out. Steve Jobs is not my Boss, he does not pay my salary nor that of my clients and yes they have a right to access his user base as well as every other platform and only a selfish bastard would say otherwise.

Funny thing is, I think Steve's plan sort of backfired. See the kind of attention Flash is getting now that Apple said no? Apple says no, and everybody else says yes! More devices than ever are now running Flash and boasting it as a major feature. It would have never gotten this much attention had Apple just put it in from the beginning, and it probably would have gotten boring eventually. But now that a major contributer to the mobile OS space has said no, it pretty much guarantees that all of the competitors are going to try to one-up this major contributer. End result is faster and more widespread Flash adoption everywhere and a push on Adobe to make it better for mobile devices to prove Apple wrong. Seems they're doing a good job now because Flash is on literally every Android phone nowadays.

Also, Flash running badly on OSX isn't Adobe's fault. Flash runs well on Windows because Microsoft helped Adobe. Flash runs well on Ubuntu because Ubuntu devs and the community helped Adobe. Flash runs well on OpenSUSE because the devs and the community helped Adobe. Flash runs well on Google Android devices because Google helped Adobe and the fans welcomed it with open arms.

Flash runs badly on OSX because Apple decided to be childish and, instead of help Adobe, just decided that they were better off without supporting a major web standard. Their loss. But it's particularly annoying when blind fanboys (which make up a good portion of these forums) say BS about Adobe and how much Flash sucks when it's Apple's fault and when Flash runs excellently for 94% of the market and growing.

 

[daneoni]

It's not like Apple are the only one deciding whats best for users. Didn't Google say they're stripping H.264 support from their products.

 

[VulchR]

 

[Cod3rror]

It's not like Apple are the only one deciding whats best for users. Didn't Google say they're stripping H.264 support from their products.

And that was absolutely stupid and will ensure flash lifes for a long time.

 

[Havas]

Thats fine seeing as Flash supports those formats I think it's a move against Apple lol.

It's not like Apple are the only one deciding whats best for users. Didn't Google say they're stripping H.264 support from their products.

 

[flexengineer]

It's not like Apple are the only one deciding whats best for users. Didn't Google say they're stripping H.264 support from their products.

Thats fine seeing as Flash supports those formats I think it's a move against Apple lol.

You think? LOL It is indeed, as much as Apple's ban of Flash was a move against Adobe. Apple started that war, won the first battle, now it is time for a showdown! What goes around comes around... That will give Steve Jobs a reason to think really hard next time before to open his big mouth and end up making an adversary more powerful than it has ever been, nothing can stop Adobe now. It also sends a clear message to all professionals: watch out before to drop Flash because you WILL get caught in the browsers and standards war!

And that was absolutely stupid and will ensure flash lifes for a long time.

And what is the problem with that? Flash has been around for a long time and will be around for a long time, thinking Jobs could kill Flash with his tongue was delusional. Did people really believe Adobe will just stay still and wait?

Most of the people here are not programmers or have too little experience, did you guys know that we can now write Apps in ActionScript and compile them for Web, Android (With just a new skin), Desktop and because of the force of change in Apples T&C IPhone very shortly?

And do know you what the funniest thing is? Many of you will never know you are using an application built in Flash.

Personally as a business man if I'm going to build something, I'd much rather target IPhone + Android + RIM + Web without writing each one separately because my clients just can not afford that and the reach is way higher than just Apple, The mobile industry is way larger when combined than just Apple, and the majority are on board with Adobe.

Any way you look at it, HTML is not an OO language it's not as power full and it's not secure when it comes to Video etc and doesn't even have half the features and will not do for a very very long time indeed.

Flash is here to stay, either help make it better by submitting bugs you find, or loose out. Steve Jobs is not my Boss, he does not pay my salary nor that of my clients and yes they have a right to access his user base as well as every other platform and only a selfish bastard would say otherwise.

You got that right, there is only one problem: it is not possible to convert Flash applications that make use of video, instant messaging, VOIP etc... But Apple will break open eventually, just a question of time before Apple's consumers turn back against the company and demand Flash once they see it work everywhere else and figure out what really happened. I can hear it from here "what the hell? why do you get that on your Android and I do not on my iPhone? I thought I had the best device!!!? And Steve said Flash does not work! Put me Apple on the phone!".

The fact that Apple modified its TOS just when Adobe released that tool was a clear sign of Apple's bad faith and a proof that the war goes beyond Flash on iDevices, because the only reason we can now convert Flash application into iOS native apps is the fact that the European Commission constrained Apple to reverse the change of TOS, leaving Apple the choice between complying or becoming the subject of a full blown official anti-trust investigation and we know with Microsoft what the EU is capable of!!

As I always said, will laugh hard who will laugh last.

 

[w00t951]

If Apple found a way to make it not suck, I would be fine. I would just want a sort of "ClickToFlash" thing that would disable Flash (not even have Flash running in the background or memory) until I tap on it to view whatever Flash content I want see.

 

[flexengineer]

If Apple found a way to make it not suck, I would be fine. I would just want a sort of "ClickToFlash" thing that would disable Flash (not even have Flash running in the background or memory) until I tap on it to view whatever Flash content I want see.

That would be perfectly acceptable. Microsoft tried that when the war on Flash was about Silverlight, they changed something in the Active X or something (can't recall, did not last) and you had to click on a Flash app before it actually starts. A week later Adobe released another way to embed Flash that bypassed that.

It's a perputal war, Flash is too good and too widely spread so there is always someone who want to control a piece of its market.

Apple has the capability to reinforce a "ClickToFlash" and once again that would be acceptable.

Making that blue box clickable would be nice.

That would giving a choice.

 

[daneoni]

You think? LOL It is indeed, as much as Apple's ban of Flash was a move against Adobe. Apple started that war, won the first battle, now it is time for a showdown! What goes around comes around... That will give Steve Jobs a reason to think really hard next time before to open his big mouth and end up making an adversary more powerful than it has ever been, nothing can stop Adobe now. It also sends a clear message to all professionals: watch out before to drop Flash because you WILL get caught in the browsers and standards war!

As I always said, will laugh hard who will laugh last.

Call me naive but i sincerely doubt Apple/Microsoft are shaken by Google's announcement nor will it change Apple's tune. The majority support of H.264 can't be overlooked and by most accounts it is a better codec. It is Android and Chrome users that will suffer in the end...at least in the short term. The major sticky factor (leverage) will be Youtube.

Google thinks doing this will force people to jump on WebM but to me it's just giving Adobe who have a proprietary product more power and thus negating all the 'it's not open' argument. If the argument is openness why not drop Flash too or they gonna argue 'choice'? if so why not allow for the 'choice' of H.264?

Anyhoo, it'll be interesting to see how it pans out.

 

[roadbloc]

This thread's still going?

 

[Moyank24]

This thread's still going?

I wonder if Steve has really learned his lesson and will allow Flash on the Verizon iPhones?



/Thread

 

[w00t951]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

iOS devices really do need to be able to access Flash. And it's not just for porn, as The Apologists seem to think. I'm in the process of buying a car right now. All automobile manufacturer websites use flash. So, I can't look for a new car while on my iPhone. Second, many hotels use a flash-based reservation system. There's another I can't do on my iPhone abd SkyFire doesn't fix any of these problems. Sure, perhaps some videos are being ported over to HTML5, but that is just a fraction of Flash content on the web.

Because 50%+ is definitely a "fraction."

 

[mtnDewFTW]

Flash doesn't look good/run smoothly on mobile devices, unless the developer recodes it for that mobile phone, in which case they might as well use something that works better like HTML5 and crashes less times.

 

[flexengineer]

I wonder if Steve has really learned his lesson and will allow Flash on the Verizon iPhones?



/Thread

Call me naive but i sincerely doubt Apple/Microsoft are shaken by Google's announcement nor will it change Apple's tune.

No, Microsoft just accuses Google to "abandon English" and Apple does not say anything, no more than they say anything about why they changed their TOS back in favor of Adobe, or why they ended up approving Google Voice after bouncing it for a year, or why they truly decided to ban Flash.

H.264 is a better codec.

What are your sources?

Flash doesn't look good/run smoothly on mobile devices, unless the developer recodes it for that mobile phone, in which case they might as well use something that works better like HTML5 and crashes less times.

Optimization will take place and every Flash developer wants to get his/her app to work properly so if they have to not "recode" as you said but optimize as it is the case, then they will do it and if they don't people will not use their websites while we need repetitive users to make money on the web.

We have a legacy of a decade of creative content and we intend to carry on mobiles. Yes Adobe was behind on mobile probably too comfortable with their penetration on computers but then shown all efforts to catch up and now it's showdown.

What are your sources to say that when used for the same purpose HTML5 will not consume as much resources if not more as optimized Flash?

 

[daneoni]

What are your sources?

Apart from its wide adoption despite having to pay royalties...expert opinion/analysis.

...VP8, as a spec, should be a bit better than H.264 Baseline Profile and VC-1. It’s not even close to competitive with H.264 Main or High Profile. If Google is willing to revise the spec, this can probably be improved.

VP8, as an encoder, is somewhere between Xvid and Microsoft’s VC-1 in terms of visual quality. This can definitely be improved a lot.

VP8, as a decoder, decodes even slower than ffmpeg’s H.264. This probably can’t be improved that much; VP8 as a whole is similar in complexity to H.264

...VP8 is not ready for prime-time; the spec is a pile of copy-pasted C code and the encoder’s interface is lacking in features and buggy. They aren’t even ready to finalize the bitstream format, let alone switch the world over to VP8.

With the lack of a real spec, the VP8 software basically is the spec–and with the spec being “final”, any bugs are now set in stone. Such bugs have already been found and Google has rejected fixes.

Overall, I expect VP8 to be surely better than MPEG-4 ASP (Xvid/DivX) and WMV9/VC-1. It will likely be nearly as good as Mainconcept’s H.264 encoder (one of the best non-x264 encoders), but assuming they still believe that blurring out the entire image is a good idea, probably still significantly inferior to x264.

That and the comments/reactions from the tech community in general when WebM was first announced by Google which was; In it's current state: inferior to H.264.

 

[flexengineer]

Apart from its wide adoption despite having to pay royalties...expert opinion/analysis.
That and the comments/reactions from the tech community in general when WebM was first announced by Google which was; In it's current state: inferior to H.264.

You are definitely making a point here. Do you also believe WebM can't get to at least equal performance and quality as H.264? Because again, it is free and open.

 

[daneoni]

You are definitely making a point here. Do you also believe WebM can't get to at least equal performance and quality as H.264? Because again, it is free and open.

Well...we'll see.

 

[flexengineer]

Well...we'll see.

You got my attention for sure. I will try to do some encoding with both and get a touch feeling of what it looks like. What really matters is the visual rendering in term of quality, the size of the compressed file and the speed at which it can be encoded, right?

 

[daneoni]

I'm no expert in codec technology so i can't really say. Those things you've mentioned are important but i doubt that would be all there is to it.

 

[JAT]

I am not alienating anyone, it is the anti-flash fanatics who are alienating everyone else! Have you read that thread? You noticed not everyone agrees, right?

I hope for your sake that you don't make the decisions in your business. Because you obviously don't have a clue about it. Stick to writing code.

 

[BaldiMac]

You are definitely making a point here. Do you also believe WebM can't get to at least equal performance and quality as H.264? Because again, it is free and open.

WebM is a final, published spec, so it can't improve in quality. The performance of the encoders and decoders can improve. The real key will be how widespread hardware support for encoding and decoding WebM will be.

 

[scottnj1966]

I want flash enable for one reason only. So I can visit every website if need be. I want so frustrated when I come across a website that needs flash just to navigate to the rest of the site.

 

[Zac7]

Hell no I don't. Flash crashes in every OS I use that it supports and in every browser. Keep that off my phone.

Flash is seriously garabage. I have had it on my droid for sometime and its almost useless. The browser forcecloses all the time. I could live without it too.

 

[Kblakeshot]

How is this even an agrument? Seriously??

See all sites > Not able to see all sites.

Period

 

[flexengineer]

Flash is seriously garabage. I have had it on my droid for sometime and its almost useless. The browser forcecloses all the time. I could live without it too.

Then why you don't just turn it off? You should be able to turn it off like any feature in Chrome. Now, why should you dictate what all others should experience?

I want flash enable for one reason only. So I can visit every website if need be. I want so frustrated when I come across a website that needs flash just to navigate to the rest of the site.

If Apple was acting in good faith its customer would get a Flash Player disabled by default with an on and off switch but the company decided to start a war instead. Now, what you are describing is an improper use of Flash. Flash should be used when nothing else can be used. If you want some visual experiences even in application structures then it has to be Flash. If it can be HTML5 it should be so, but sometime maintaining functionality across browsers is a real challenge so Flash is used instead for its consistency, it just works everywhere and does so the same. As HTML5 solves some of those issues we should not need Flash for menus any longer. Flash is an incredible technology that is powerful and always ahead, because it is very powerful it might be a problem in the wrong hands. Once again a switch would work.

WebM is a final, published spec, so it can't improve in quality. The performance of the encoders and decoders can improve. The real key will be how widespread hardware support for encoding and decoding WebM will be.

I have always seen On2 highly, I worked with their formats since VP2 which made Quicktime a success for web video until they licensed VP6 to Adobe making Flash the de-facto format for web video. Their compression algorythms are some serious pieces of work. I did not work with VP8 yet, actually I did not work on significant encoding work since VP6 introduction a few years back but On2 tend to be the best at it. Now Google owns them and gives away VP8 as WebM. I personally would like to give a chance to Google, it's a cleaner open proposition.

I hope for your sake that you don't make the decisions in your business. Because you obviously don't have a clue about it. Stick to writing code.

My business bares my name and my clients include companies such as Walt Disney, Adobe, VMware. You are going to have to find something else to attack me than the quality of my work. Let me know if there is any fact you would like to discuss.