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.
iPad Promotional Video and Images Show Properly-Displayed Flash Content
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HTML is hardly static, either. We've already had HTML1, 2, 3 & 4 before we got to 5, y'know...
I assume to answer an obvious question without formally addressing it.
Either that or someone got reamed after the presentation.
Well, if you wan't a lousy user experience that's you choice, but I for one hope (and believe) they won't support Flash, not in it's present form.
Look just what Mozilla team did for Maemo:
The Adobe Flash plugin used on many sites degraded the performance of the browser to the point where it didnt meet our standards.
Surely that means on a article that suggests that they are you should mark that as positive.
By your argument apple could come across this story see that people are marking it negatively, then decide that people don't want flash.
I don't think that would happen, but still your logic doesn't make sense.
To show that "it shows the whole internet". Didn't he say something like that when showing off the iphone?
Everyone should go read this article Gruber wrote on daringfireball. I think this is what it boils down to:
"The simplest argument in favor of Flash support on the iPhone (and The Tablet, and everywhere) is that Flash is, by dint of its popularity and ubiquity, part of the web. But the best argument against Flash support is that it is harmful to the web as a whole to have something as important as video be in the hands of a single company, and the only way that’s going to change is if an open alternative becomes a compelling target for web publishers.
It’s a chicken-and-egg problem. Publishers use Flash for web video because Flash is installed on such a high percentage of clients; clients support Flash because so many publishers use Flash for web video. Apple, with the iPhone, is solving the chicken and egg problem. For the first time ever, there is a large and growing audience of demographically desirable users who don’t have Flash installed. If you want to show video to iPhone users, you need to use H.264.
Apple isn’t trying to replace Flash with its own proprietary thing. They’re replacing it with H.264 and HTML5. This is good for everyone but Adobe.
And yes, I know Flash does much more than just play video. But that’s the main thing everyone is talking about when they talk about Flash not working on the iPhone — video. And when you talk about other uses for Flash, you’re talking about serving as a software runtime, and whether you like it or not, Apple has a clearly stated opposition to third-party software runtimes for iPhone OS, and that policy seems to be working out pretty well for them."
"The simplest argument in favor of Flash support on the iPhone (and The Tablet, and everywhere) is that Flash is, by dint of its popularity and ubiquity, part of the web. But the best argument against Flash support is that it is harmful to the web as a whole to have something as important as video be in the hands of a single company, and the only way that’s going to change is if an open alternative becomes a compelling target for web publishers.
It’s a chicken-and-egg problem. Publishers use Flash for web video because Flash is installed on such a high percentage of clients; clients support Flash because so many publishers use Flash for web video. Apple, with the iPhone, is solving the chicken and egg problem. For the first time ever, there is a large and growing audience of demographically desirable users who don’t have Flash installed. If you want to show video to iPhone users, you need to use H.264.
Apple isn’t trying to replace Flash with its own proprietary thing. They’re replacing it with H.264 and HTML5. This is good for everyone but Adobe.
And yes, I know Flash does much more than just play video. But that’s the main thing everyone is talking about when they talk about Flash not working on the iPhone — video. And when you talk about other uses for Flash, you’re talking about serving as a software runtime, and whether you like it or not, Apple has a clearly stated opposition to third-party software runtimes for iPhone OS, and that policy seems to be working out pretty well for them."
Yes, but Flash progresses at a faster rate than HTML. So, the Flash of next year will have capabilities that HTML 5 does not. We are back to square 1.
How long between HTML 4 and 5? Years and years.... HTML cannot keep up with Flash to be a total replacement.
I wonder if it does have flash (or a flash converter??) that decided not to work at that moment.
Probably because almost any website you go to has some sort of Flash content. I dont know how they can say its the best way to experience the web when you cant see everything.
The only reason why Apple doesn't allow Flash on their mobile devices is because the content will rival their own offerings. Apple won't get their 30% cut for games built with Flash, and Apple will lose iTunes movie store customers when allowing sites such as Hulu. In other words, pure greed. At the expense of the customer.
As for HTML5: Forget it. That will take years. Firefox and Google are using different codec implementations (try watching YouTube html5 content on Firefox... You can't!). HTML5 won't support DRM, which means services like Hulu and Netflix can't and won't use it, unless the mighty movie industry gives in.
As for HTML5: Forget it. That will take years. Firefox and Google are using different codec implementations (try watching YouTube html5 content on Firefox... You can't!). HTML5 won't support DRM, which means services like Hulu and Netflix can't and won't use it, unless the mighty movie industry gives in.
Honestly...
I don't want to be rude or anything but arguing about web STANDARD is frekn stupid!!!
And why are you asking me such a questions!?!?
Ok - I am in art, design and photographic business and well over 80% of my contacts (as in artists, designers, photographers etc...) HAVE FLASH BASED SITES!!!
Is this hard to understand!?!?!
Meaning, using this awesome tool made for best browsing experience ever - I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO MY JOB which is keeping an eye on all those guys and their latest work...
I personally don't give a damn about video or Hulu!
I want to be able to browse the net using web STANDARDS!
Apple can simply make Flash OPTIONAL just like it is on any other platform...
End of the story - talking about such ridiculous things any further is below anyones level really.
Rapid development is not necessarily a good thing. If you don't keep a proper handle on what you're doing, you end up with systems that are slow and bloated.
A bit like Flash, really.
Flash support, yeah, but what is it?
I use a MacBook Pro, and carry an iphone. But for the life of me, in it's current form, I can't see what the iPad is for. The flash support is just part of it.
What is it? An oversized music player? An oversized datebook? A $500 electronic picture frame/photo album? An oversized 'portable' email device?
My iPhone does all that exceptionally well, it has a phone, and fits in my pocket. Why would I want to carry something that large around that duplicates the same functionality? In it's current form, I can see no other function or feature besides e-books, possibly used in Academia, that would justify people bothering to carry it around vs. an iPhone. This thing is basically a Kindle on steroids...
If they're going against netbooks, then it also has to do what the netbooks do, only better.
1) Despite the more powerful processor, the OS still does not allow application multi-tasking, so you can't bounce back and forth between mail and excel, or word. Highly annoying on iPhone, but a killer on a 'netbook replacement'
2) The iPhone OS hides the file storage structure, so saving files (like word documents) will be strange and probably messy.
3) Forcing the use of an onscreen keyboard, which reduces screen realestate and is unstable with the rounded back of the iPad, will be goofy and unproductive.
4) No camera, This would have been the ideal video conferencing platform to finally achieve the George Jetson kind of communication. Nope. Heck the iPhone 3Gs has a 3mp camera, are you telling me they couldn't fit one in the iPad?
5) No Adobe Flash. Come on, it can't be that hard. Did anyone notice the audience laughter during the presentation, when Jobs brought up a website with a giant hole in it, from the lack of flash support? They cut away quickly, but it was still there.
What I think they didn't realize was, that to expand an iPod Touch to replace a netbook, some changes had to be made beyond the size of the screen and removing important key hardware features on a successful product.
I use a MacBook Pro, and carry an iphone. But for the life of me, in it's current form, I can't see what the iPad is for. The flash support is just part of it.
What is it? An oversized music player? An oversized datebook? A $500 electronic picture frame/photo album? An oversized 'portable' email device?
My iPhone does all that exceptionally well, it has a phone, and fits in my pocket. Why would I want to carry something that large around that duplicates the same functionality? In it's current form, I can see no other function or feature besides e-books, possibly used in Academia, that would justify people bothering to carry it around vs. an iPhone. This thing is basically a Kindle on steroids...
If they're going against netbooks, then it also has to do what the netbooks do, only better.
1) Despite the more powerful processor, the OS still does not allow application multi-tasking, so you can't bounce back and forth between mail and excel, or word. Highly annoying on iPhone, but a killer on a 'netbook replacement'
2) The iPhone OS hides the file storage structure, so saving files (like word documents) will be strange and probably messy.
3) Forcing the use of an onscreen keyboard, which reduces screen realestate and is unstable with the rounded back of the iPad, will be goofy and unproductive.
4) No camera, This would have been the ideal video conferencing platform to finally achieve the George Jetson kind of communication. Nope. Heck the iPhone 3Gs has a 3mp camera, are you telling me they couldn't fit one in the iPad?
5) No Adobe Flash. Come on, it can't be that hard. Did anyone notice the audience laughter during the presentation, when Jobs brought up a website with a giant hole in it, from the lack of flash support? They cut away quickly, but it was still there.
What I think they didn't realize was, that to expand an iPod Touch to replace a netbook, some changes had to be made beyond the size of the screen and removing important key hardware features on a successful product.
Personally, I think it's simple.... Apple said they want this to be the "ultimate internet device"... if that is the case, Flash will have to be supported. Without it, there are too many restrictions.
I would think on the iPhone memory and processor power may steer them away from supporting Flash on the iPhone... but seems as though the iPad has plenty of power to make it go. I think it will be supported.
My 2 cents.
I would think on the iPhone memory and processor power may steer them away from supporting Flash on the iPhone... but seems as though the iPad has plenty of power to make it go. I think it will be supported.
My 2 cents.
Correct, after 10.x releases it is actually worse than it has ever been in terms of both security vulnerabilities and performance.
Downloading TV Shows is not stealing. All my movies I rip from my own DVD collection or I make a rip from NetFlix. The majority of my movies are on Blu-Ray which almost all movies anymore come with a digital copy.
If I can I watch my TV Show when it airs on TV. If not I will grab it from EZTV and watch it then.
bad, but think of other adds
Ok, this looks bad considering the fact that apple has always been very responsible about showing the actual UI in their advertising. But, this is relatively minor considering other advertisements for phones that show the user enjoying crystal clear full screen video and other features that are clearly overlaid in post -- i.e. every single commercial during a football game that isn't for a truck or car insurance.
Ok, this looks bad considering the fact that apple has always been very responsible about showing the actual UI in their advertising. But, this is relatively minor considering other advertisements for phones that show the user enjoying crystal clear full screen video and other features that are clearly overlaid in post -- i.e. every single commercial during a football game that isn't for a truck or car insurance.
