It might not be that easy, they are dealing with regulators not the court and if they claim that the batter life is the justification then regulators might ask them to prove that 1/ Flash is such a drain on the battery, 2/ Apple made every effort to support Adobe in order to insure a good experience on iDevices, 3/ that the claim still holds true today. And there is also the leverage FTC and EU has in term of public image, a formal full blown investigation could hurt the stock and would not be good at all for Apple.
Apple doesn't have to prove anything. And they certainly don't have to make "every effort to support Adobe." Where do you come up with this crap?
If I was anti Apple I would not work on a MacBook and carry an iPhone, even though I feel betrayed and will switch to Android as soon as a reliable alternative shows up (I want a solid phone, not a piece of plastic). The MacBook Air is underpowered, it's very small and we wonder where the power comes from or where the battery is, I did not make that up, I thought it was common knowledge, did I miss something?
A blog called "Applesucks" would be evidence to the contrary.
If I am right it did hurt the sell, or I am wrong and it did not, you have to pick one =;o) I think it is all depending on what else is on the shelve. I do not believe most of Apple's consumers to be fans or even loving Apple more than the product and I do not believe the masses will pull with the increasingly obvious abuse from Apple. The company has the right to do it but I believe it would be not reasonable to say Flash did not play any role in Android's success.
iPhone sales have only been limited by production to date.
That alone is enough for me to endorse Flash because I remember spending sometime up to 50% of my time dealing with cross browser and cross platform issues, I save my clients 100% of that overhead with Flash since I actually never even test my application on other browsers or OS until the end because I know the chances of discrepancy is close to 0. That alone means saving 25% to 50% of the total development budget.
That's good for developers and their clients. Which is why you support it. Cross platform development is not usually in the best interest of consumers though.
Finally some sense. There is no doubt that whoever does not like Flash ads will hate HTML5 ads, there is no doubt that when HTML5 will be pushed to the limit it will be as much of a resource drain as non optimized Flash was (I have actually seen 10.2 outperform HTML5 in many use cases involving video, 3D, complex rendering, frame-rate etc).
Sure, but we will have more control over HTML5 content because it is an open standard and will have multiple implementations to choose from.
Well it only went up 0.7% between 2009 and 2010, I would not really call that "going up" when Android shown 888% increase in 2010 from the year before, way more spectacular that any iPhone performance to date. I know, it is unfair because Apple only 1 device blablabla but the bottom line is you do not know more than I do how many customers Apple lost to Android over the Flash issue. All I know is that a lot of people are not happy about it and the fact they pull with it does not mean everyone does.
So, you went from 0.4% to 0.7% pulled out of nowhere. The real number is 89%. Stop repeating made up crap.
No it does not, Apple could have lost 10% market share over Flash their numbers will still look exactly as it does now: 0.7% market share increase between 2009 and 2010. Now, let's see how the iPhone 5 does and how good Apple is doing compared to last year... we will know in a matter of months.
More made up numbers. Apple sells every iPhone they produce. They have not lost any sales to Flash.
Where do you get that from? Where exactly do you see Flash installations on phone sold prior to its release?
Anyone that upgrades to Froyo and installs Flash? Adobe's actual release said 20 million shipped or upgraded. Not just shipped.
http://eon.businesswire.com/news/eon/20110213005219/en
50% based on what number?
Current growth rates of the smartphone market (302 million smartphones in 2010 with 75% growth from 2009.) I was actually being generous. 200 million is well below 50% in 2012.
W3C standards or outdated before to even see the light, I wish you good luck keeping up with Flash by sticking to W3C, their bureaucracy has been the worst enemy of the evolution of the web since day 1 and it is being carried on with HTML5 now.
In your opinion. Believe it or not, the type of content available through Flash isn't really that important to my life. I'm not waiting on pins and needles for a transition of the content to HTML5.
It is not because they can that they may, consumers do not give a damn about copyrights, they will decide based on what it delivers and what it does not deliver. Only Apple is pushing that kind of crap and I doubt they are not losing share over it but we can keep going for days.
What in the world are you talking about? Are you proposing that we ignore copyright?
I never heard of a platform refraining me from installing a software that we know works on that platform. Give me examples of a company deciding out of the blue that they will refrain, not just remove from factory default, but refrain a competitive technology to be installed?
You misquoted me. Again. I said that. Not
dccorona.
Just because you haven't heard of something doesn't make it illegal. But there are tons of platforms that choose what content they want to provide. My cable company chooses what channels to carry. WalMart chooses what products to carry. Microsoft chooses which file formats Office will support.
That is not true, most of the money with digital entertainment is monetized though Flash today with crumbles left to Microsoft Silverlight.
Source?
I am talking about market share and in points, in both cases Apple gained a fraction of a percent market share between:
2.1% market share in 2009, 2.9% in 2010 for all mobile devices.
14.4% market share in 2009, 15.7% in 2010 for smart phones.
No, you weren't. You are lying. Bald faced and obvious attempt to cover your mistake.
1) None of the numbers you listed here support 0.4% (or 0.7%) growth in Apple's market share.
2) You said "Apple increased sales by 0.4% between 2009 and 2010, compared to Android's 888% surge." Not share. Sales.
3) It would be a mathematical impossibility for Android to increase their market share by 888%.
What you are actually referring to with Android 888% increase was probably 2009 sales vs 2010 sales. The comparable number for Apple, as I pointed out, was 89%.
I do not care much about how many units Apple sale or how much many they make, all I worry about is whether or not they have enough market share to manipulate competition. It was the case, it is no more so now it is really about the choice, that choice you denied the user the right to have on his iPhone or iPad. Now, let's see how long Apple is going to keep it up. I think they will break open on the iPad but that's just me.
They don't have enough market share to manipulate competition. We've established that over and over. You just pull it out whenever you want to insinuate that they are doing something illegal by not including Flash Player.
Without upgrade or new contract it is not unusual at all to end up with a $1000 bill once you get the accessories and MobileMe and the extra care and the case and you know, all the stuff. If you end up paying only $200 or $300 does not mean the true value is $1000 because if it was not $1000 then maybe it would be free, like most phones are and like most smart phones will become within the next 2 years.
What bullcrap is this? If someone asked me how much my phone costs, I surely wouldn't include optional accessories and services and the extended warranty. You exaggerated for no other reason than to make your point. Admit it and move on.
