iPad Promotional Video and Images Show Properly-Displayed Flash Content

[194567]

Ah... a light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[rjtyork]

If it has Flash I WON'T get one.

Stick it to them Apple. Stick to your guns and try to initiate an industry movement against the use of Flash.

I hate Flash, too. Along with anything else that has the Adobe name on it. Sure, photoshop is great, and that's what Adobe should stick to. Let everything else die cause HTML5 is the future.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Eh... with HTML 5 coming and H.264 video, there won't be much point to Flash in the future. So I'm okay if they keep it standards based.

Funny thing about new technology, it all depends on the market to adopt it. If the market is stubborn and sticks with flash then it remains the "D factor." Until then HTML5 and H.264 will be playing the wait and see game.

 

[ugp]

Here's my perspective (not that anyone asked)...and it's probably already been stated since the thread is so long, and I haven't read all the posts.

I am a retired business owner. For years I designed my company website. I was a programmer before owning my own company, so it wouldn't have been a problem for me to use Javascript, Java applets, Flash, etc.

Flash is cool. Lots and lots of websites use Flash. I understand this - we all know this. However, I also know that there is a large percentage of the population that doesn't use or like Flash, for many reasons. Many have computers that aren't powerful enough to display Flash content very well. Many still have slow Internet connections and don't want to download huge Flash content just to browse a website. Many don't want the ads. Many use computers with operating systems that don't have very well optimized plugins for displaying Flash content.

As a business owner I decided NOT to use Flash when designing my website because there would always be a large percentage of potential clients that I could not reach if I used Flash. My website could have been cooler. It could have taken less time to design. However, I decided to design the website so that I could reach nearly everyone.

So, when I browse to a website that only supports Flash, I wonder if the developer of the website and owner of the company realize how shortsighted they are being. Millions and millions of people simply cannot see their website, no matter how cool or awesome it looks.

If Apple decides not to support Flash on the iPad, I support and appreciate their decision. I believe they are trying to make a global statement. I bet that the iPhone and the iPad will be a catalyst and convince many people to modify their websites to work without requiring Flash. I bet it already has.

So, I believe that the argument shouldn't be to convince Apple to implement Flash on the iPod and iPad. It really should be to convince people to stop using Flash.

Just my $0.02.

I 100% agree with you. A lot of major sites I notice that do use a all Flash site give you an option for a HTML version as well. With the iPhone selling is such high numbers and I am sure the iPad as well more and more sites will make optimized versions for all browsing experiences.

 

[Peace]

When Apple announced they were transitioning to the Intel platform I got the Developer Transition Kit. A Powermac tower with an Intel CPU inside. I'm absolutely positive Adobe Labs did too.

Adobe has had access to Apple API's for a long,long time. This is one reason PDF is default in Apple products. Adobe helped create the PDF standard.

Since then Apple has come out with several iterations of the Intel platform in a Mac. Adobe has had almost 6 years to transition their Mac OS programs to the Intel platform for the Mac.

What have we seen since then ?

Bloated software from Adobe. Including their "Creative Suite's". And it will continue as long as Adobe sees Flash as not just a way to view video but also as a way to generate money.

People that say Apple is doing this because they want to make more money are truly mis-informed. It is Adobe that is causing this stuff to happen because they generate a LOT of money from Flash. Apple doesn't make more money by endorsing HTML 5. It is now a standard according to the standards committees. Flash is NOT.

I believe Adobe needs to get up to date with their Flash if THEY wish to be standards compliant.

See :

http://www.w3.org/

 

[Povilas]

Apple is doing us a favor killing Flash. Google (youtube) and Vimeo has already html5 versions. Flash video is going to die quite soon.

Animation in websites; html5, CSS3 and javascript (jQuery) can make awesome animations keeping cpu cool. It's not more difficult than Adobe Flash, it's simply a different language.

What about Silverlight? What IF everyone starts installing that crap too?

Instead of complaining to Apple, complain to Adobe WHY flash is such a crap software? Adobe is becoming more and more crap. That company only include features making the app more bloated but never optimize it. Now if you plan to install ONE application, you have to include a bunch of other apps too.

+1.

 

[Adam Lect]

You just joined today, yet already sent two people off this site? BAD APPLE!

I've been following macrumors for 5 years. I just got around to creating a profile. I prefer "go away" to ****.

 

[Formul]

Adobe

Of course Adobe is doing everything in their power to push flash on the iPhone platform. You know how much are the tools for making HTML5 site with ajax and all the other bells and whistles? 0 USD. Flash Professional alone is 699 USD. Its all about money. Web standards are free, proprietary standards are not, if there is a major platform, that doesn't support flash, that can and will make more developers use the open standards ... finally.

Im on the Apples side on that, they can help to force the flash from the mainstream sites.

 

[Enuratique]

That makes no sense—you’re taking Apple’s often-repeated reputation for greed (vs. Microsoft and Adobe?) and working backwards to make the facts fit. But Apple delivers tons of free video via YouTube, and other video sources do so via their own free apps. Apple serves up TONS of free games, and pays the server costs while getting none of the ad revenue! So Apple loses money when you play a free iPhone game vs. playing a free Flash game.

You're right, for Apple it's not about saving us from buggy, slow, battery-burning Flash to "save the Internet." It's about:

a) Making the user experience better to boost hardware sales. (For all the clamor in tech forums, the absence of Flash doesn't actually ruin Apple's sales. Not like crashes, slowdowns and dead batteries would.)

b) Keeping the OS under Apple's control so that Apple can fix problems, add features, and even innovate at the deepest hidden levels, without needing Adobe's cooperation and being dependent on Adobe's quality control. (Read up on the problem of Flash still being 32-bit while Apple was trying to move OS X to 64-bit. It matters.) You could say "make Flash optional then" but if tons of Web sites install it anyway, that solves nothing. It's still part if the system, and when Flash fails or runs slowly (seriously--spend time with it on other mobile platforms or OS X) most people won't say "Flash sucks," they'll say "my iPad sucks."

c) Many/most Flash games, menus, and even video players would not even WORK on a touch device. They are coded to use button down/up events and rollovers--like video controls that pop up when you mouse over--that simply have no equivalent in touch. (Imagine what happens when you click a video—it pauses. Versus when you mouse over it without clicking: controls appear. Versus when you right-click—you get a menu with security settings. How does touch distinguish those three? It doesn’t without the Flash content being completely re-done for multitouch—in which case, just re-do it with HTML 5 or as a native app.) Plus Flash games apps often expect a single-pixel mouse arrow, not a finger touch, so the while UI, when it does work, would feel imprecise and frustrating. Is every Flash site going to reprogram everything to no longer use mouse-over functions and small button areas? No.

Better (for Apple) to forget those few who NEED Flash (or think they do) and let them buy something else--like a MacBook.

Yes, both a) and b) come down to money. They're still good reasons, though, so I don't expect them to change. These iPad videos are just careless mock-ups, and an embarrassment for Apple.

I’ll change my mind when Flash becomes efficient and stable, and every major Flash site re-writes all their Flash for multi-touch instead of mouse-over. It won’t happen.

People who think they need Flash on the iPad would HATE it if they actually got what they’re asking for and tried to use it.

+100000000.... Well said!

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

Ah... a light at the end of the tunnel.

Actually I do not see what the big fuss is on behalf. Just include Flash as an option to be turned on/off and warn the user that it will drain battery life. Similar to push and WiFi. Why limit the web experience, this is a contradiction to the claim that it is the way the web should be experienced.

 

[Rocketman]

The stated reason for Flash not being supported on iPhone and iPad is "performance issues". I get the impression Flash elements hog CPU time.

I saw a recent MacBookPro15 grind to a crawl running a Facebook Zunga game that has perhaps 20-30 avatars and another 30 or so object elements that had some form of occasional motion to them. I imagine that would slog even an iPad.

Apple (Steve) has said on numerous occasions they are working with Adobe on lower resource variants of Flash. I suspect that is a misdirection from the reality that Apple is hoping to get Adobe to change Flash itself to some HTML5 compatible variant and deploy it widely as a version upgrade. I have no first hand information to support it, but I can assure you of one thing, Flash as it is currently implemented needs notebook class processor speed or better to function well.

Flash is no longer supported at all by Adobe on OS 10.3.9 and earlier. No Facebook games for you. BTW, that's a feature, not a bug.

Rocketman

 

[alent1234]

That makes no sense—you’re taking Apple’s often-repeated reputation for greed (vs. Microsoft and Adobe?) and working backwards to make the facts fit. But Apple delivers tons of free video via YouTube, and other video sources do so via their own free apps. Apple serves up TONS of free games, and pays the server costs while getting none of the ad revenue! So Apple loses money when you play a free iPhone game vs. playing a free Flash game.

You're right, for Apple it's not about saving us from buggy, slow, battery-burning Flash to "save the Internet." It's about:

a) Making the user experience better to boost hardware sales. (For all the clamor in tech forums, the absence of Flash doesn't actually ruin Apple's sales. Not like crashes, slowdowns and dead batteries would.)

b) Keeping the OS under Apple's control so that Apple can fix problems, add features, and even innovate at the deepest hidden levels, without needing Adobe's cooperation and being dependent on Adobe's quality control. (Read up on the problem of Flash still being 32-bit while Apple was trying to move OS X to 64-bit. It matters.) You could say "make Flash optional then" but if tons of Web sites install it anyway, that solves nothing. It's still part if the system, and when Flash fails or runs slowly (seriously--spend time with it on other mobile platforms or OS X) most people won't say "Flash sucks," they'll say "my iPad sucks."

c) Many/most Flash games, menus, and even video players would not even WORK on a touch device. They are coded to use button down/up events and rollovers--like video controls that pop up when you mouse over--that simply have no equivalent in touch. (Imagine what happens when you click a video—it pauses. Versus when you mouse over it without clicking: controls appear. Versus when you right-click—you get a menu with security settings. How does touch distinguish those three? It doesn’t without the Flash content being completely re-done for multitouch—in which case, just re-do it with HTML 5 or as a native app.) Plus Flash games apps often expect a single-pixel mouse arrow, not a finger touch, so the while UI, when it does work, would feel imprecise and frustrating. Is every Flash site going to reprogram everything to no longer use mouse-over functions and small button areas? No.

Better (for Apple) to forget those few who NEED Flash (or think they do) and let them buy something else--like a MacBook.

Yes, both a) and b) come down to money. They're still good reasons, though, so I don't expect them to change. These iPad videos are just careless mock-ups, and an embarrassment for Apple.

I’ll change my mind when Flash becomes efficient and stable, and every major Flash site re-writes all their Flash for multi-touch instead of mouse-over. It won’t happen.

People who think they need Flash on the iPad would HATE it if they actually got what they’re asking for and tried to use it.

the reasons you stated are exactly why Microsoft missed out on the mobile revolution. Bill Gates was adamant about a consistent user experience and so CE/Pocket PC were too bloated for mobile devices even though they got very good reviews and my wife and I loved our PocketPC devices back in the day.

Now Apple is doing the same thing by trying to tie you in to iTunes and lockout free content like watching Caprica for free from the website a day after it airs. instead Apple wants you to buy it from iTunes. Strange from a company that supposedly only makes money from the hardware and iTunes is supposed to be a break even business to add value to the hardware

i was visiting the inlaws a few weeks ago and needed some cartoons. i was ready to buy a few on iTunes then decided to go to the websites and my son was able to watch Dora, Oso and others streamed via flash for free.

tens of millions of people play zynga games and you need flash for those. the iphone versions are crap. as soon as i told my wife the iPad won't play farmville, she lost interest.

HP Slate is looking like a much better alternative. iPad you still need a PC. Slate looks like you don't need one and i can probably run my wife's iphone off it. Steve Jobs seems to be back to his old games of creating a closed ecosystem where he controls everything. didn't work in the 1980's and it probably won't work in this decade.

 

[steve-p]

I bet that the iPhone and the iPad will be a catalyst and convince many people to modify their websites to work without requiring Flash. I bet it already has.

I'm sure they must be crapping themselves over the 0.64% of web traffic that the iPhone accounts for - good job there's still the other 99.36% to focus on

 

[Peace]

the reasons you stated are exactly why Microsoft missed out on the mobile revolution. Bill Gates was adamant about a consistent user experience and so CE/Pocket PC were too bloated for mobile devices even though they got very good reviews and my wife and I loved our PocketPC devices back in the day.

Now Apple is doing the same thing by trying to tie you in to iTunes and lockout free content like watching Caprica for free from the website a day after it airs. instead Apple wants you to buy it from iTunes.

i was visiting the inlaws a few weeks ago and needed some cartoons. i was ready to buy a few on iTunes then decided to go to the websites and my son was able to watch Dora, Oso and others streamed via flash for free.

tens of millions of people play zynga games and you need flash for those. the iphone versions are crap. as soon as i told my wife the iPad won't play farmville, she lost interest.

HP Slate is looking like a much better alternative. iPad you still need a PC. Slate looks like you don't need one and i can probably run my wife's iphone off it. Steve Jobs seems to be back to his old games of creating a closed ecosystem where he controls everything. didn't work in the 1980's and it probably won't work in this decade.

When you watched those cartoons "for free" you were actually viewing commercials and advertising. Which cost YOU money whether you realize it or not.

 

[alent1234]

The stated reason for Flash not being supported on iPhone and iPad is "performance issues". I get the impression Flash elements hog CPU time.

I saw a recent MacBookPro15 grind to a crawl running a Facebook Zunga game that has perhaps 20-30 avatars and another 30 or so object elements that had some form of occasional motion to them. I imagine that would slog even an iPad.

Apple (Steve) has said on numerous occasions they are working with Adobe on lower resource variants of Flash. I suspect that is a misdirection from the reality that Apple is hoping to get Adobe to change Flash itself to some HTML5 compatible variant and deploy it widely as a version upgrade. I have no first hand information to support it, but I can assure you of one thing, Flash as it is currently implemented needs notebook class processor speed or better to function well.

Flash is no longer supported at all by Adobe on OS 10.3.9 and earlier. No Facebook games for you. BTW, that's a feature, not a bug.

Rocketman

Adobe is going to have an ARM version of flash for Android, WebOS and other devices in a few months. same deal as in the 1980's, being open will win over closed ecosystems

 

[ugp]

It seems this is always going to be a constant endless debate. No one is ever going to win it.

 

[rjohnstone]

Dude http://visuallightbox.com/ It's a FREE WIZARD THAT GENERATES AJAX GALLERIES! No programming experience necessary... Although, if you can learn ActionScript and Flash, then you can certainly follow along with the MYRIAD jQuery plugins that do photogalleries.

Visualligthbox is cool looking, but offers no content security.
I can still lift the content from an AJAX gallery in a heartbeat.
Pro photographers want their content protected from theft.
Flash is the perfect solution for this.
Short of screen scraping, you are not going to be getting the source images from a Flash based gallery.

 

[Stella]

Thank you so much Macrumors for bringing AAPL down by another $4/share today on your phony story.

LOL. Its a rumour site, nothing more.

 

[alent1234]

When you watched those cartoons "for free" you were actually viewing commercials and advertising. Which cost YOU money whether you realize it or not.

i honestly don't remember or care since everything i buy has a marketing cost built in. main thing is my son was able to watch Dora, Oso and Little Einsteins without me spending money to buy the episodes.

although iTunes has much better prices for this stuff than buying a DVD and i'll probably buy some later. but for TV, i just want to watch it on my computer sometimes without paying $1.99 to iTunes. i can do that with a Flash enabled device

my 2 year old loves my iphone and i have 30 apps just for him. he knows how to open them, close them and switch between his apps. he even knows which ones are his when they end up on the wrong page sometimes. and he tries using a regular computer with his finger like the iphone. iPad would have been perfect for him. but the lack of flash kills it since he can't go to Playhouse Disney, Nick Jr and other websites to view the content

he'll probably like the HP Slate if I buy it since he will be able to do whatever he wants on it without crazy restrictions

 

[lucasgladding]

@ lucasgladding

Adobe have gone on record countless times, saying that they cannot improved Flash performance on the Mac without Apple's help - help which Apple have refused to give. The massive performance increase in the last version of Flash Player for Windows was a result of Adobe and Microsoft working together. Apple refused.

I'm talking about the Mac, not the iPhone. Other developers have made things much more advanced (*cough* Luxology *cough*) than Flash and I doubt they had much hand-holding from Apple. I don't see what magical recipe Adobe thinks that Apple has if they honestly believe that they need the help.

Besides, IIRC, one of the big things Apple mentioned when the first version of Safari arrived was how well it performed with Flash content, so they know that Flash performance is an issue and have acknowledged such in the past. They ship Flash with the operating system, so one would expect they would like performance to be top-notch. It's just my opinion, but I call BS on Adobe on this one.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

In other words, Flash is a proprietary, cludgy solution for a problem that's being resolved by HTML5.

As much as you hate Flash ads, are you ready to fight with HTML5 animated ads? The problem in this case isn't Flash. It's advertising. That isn't going away.

The animation capabilities of HTML5 are an order of magnitude behind those of flash. Also, if you want dynamic, database driven apps in a browser, there are a thousand different ways to do it. And they each have different problems in different browsers and different OS's.

At least in Flash, everything looks the same between platforms and browsers.

Is there a such thing as well-built, nicely-interfaced Flash apps out there? They're usually clunky, SLOW, unstable gimmicks, rather than actual useful apps. Google doesn't even use Flash for their suite of web apps.

More than a few of the hit games on the App Store were made with the beta of Flash CS5, and published to iPhone OS. You've probably used it and didn't even know it. Really, that's how it should be.

Flash is just like the rest of the web. Most of it is useless crap. Don't pretend that HTML5 will get rid of poorly designed/programmed web pages or animated ads. HTML5 will just mean it's harder to block them.

Apple is only concerned with pushing Flash out the door as a technology faster than it would be naturally, so that we can all move on to HTML5 a little sooner. And I'm more than happy to see it happen.

I won't argue that it isn't happening, but just that HTML5 can't do all the things flash can. It will be a step backwards in some ways.

 

[Jayomat]

When they first announced the device that was exactly what I was thinking. And then I pondered how my wife and I would use the device in our house if we were given one. It was at that point that I realized how useless a device like this is to share. It doesn't support multiple user profiles so you're stuck with the primary user's calendar and email accounts. If my wife wanted access to her stuff as well, I'd have to set it up to do all of those accounts simultaneously and then you'd constantly be switching back and forth between outgoing email account preferences, signatures, etc. They didn't design a device like this to be shared.

you can set up different signatures for different accounts, just like you can 'almost' set up anything for each specific account. it's just one 'click' to determine which account you be used to send a mail.. that won't be a problem. you can have different calendars displayed. just unselect those which don't matter to you and your good. other than that, where's the problem with sharing?

 

[125037]

Given that Steve seemed to make a point of showing the absence of Flash during the keynote, I don't think anyone can really say Apple are trying to hide anything here...

I think he purposely shows the lack of flash. It's a way of not having to say "and unfortunately - it doesnt support flash" type thing.

 

[reactions]

Eh... with HTML 5 coming and H.264 video, there won't be much point to Flash in the future. So I'm okay if they keep it standards based.

Lol spoken like a true fanboy

forget about hulu , full web experience, etc

so I'd love to hear ur response

U want to just wait years for this? That would make u happy?

U hAve a mind and a voice - don't be a follower - don't be another lemming

 

[fishmd]

Thank you so much Macrumors for bringing AAPL down by another $4/share today on your phony story. You are being credited today (not by me) for this achievement. Why does it even matter if the iPad supports Flash. Obviously, with HTML5, Flash is going to disappear at some point because most programmers prefer to write in the standards-based code. So, in the pursuit of sensationalism, you may have just delivered a significant blow to people holding AAPL. The financial analysts, who know very little about the technology, are reading your site and making their decision to sell or to buy based on the information you are posting here. Please be responsible when posting stories like these that have no informational value but bring up all the FUD about Apple and that cost us, the shareholders, thousands of dollars.

On the other hand, thank YOU MacRumors for bringing down the price so that those of us who are looking to invest in Apple can do so.