Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone ad rapped as 'misleading'

alFR said:
Maybe you should read this and this. Hint: neither mentions Flash.
Click to expand...

Are you people nuts? Look above this post, at the ad paying for this space. IT'S IN FLASH! FLASH! FLASH!

And it's there, regardless of how you twist the facts to defend Apple.

Oh, and all those funny I Am A Mac ads on the Web, from Apple..., THEY ARE IN FLASH, TOO!:eek:
 
kdarling said:
For the same reason they hated 3G or GPS before the iPhone got it. Because it doesn't have it.

The moment Flash appears on the iPHone, I guarantee you that every Apple fanboy will be gushing over it, and comparing it to other phones without.
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if anyone here 'hates' Flash, they simply recognise it for what it is: a sometimes very useful non-standard technology available on the web.
 
You cannot argue with someone who is unwilling to accept the opinion of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) on internet standards and instead relies upon their own opinion as fact.

;)
 
gamac said:
I agree with you 100%. However the wiki Web Standards page does mention Flash...
Click to expand...

It's a fair cop. In my defence they don't say it's a standard. :)

macUser2007 said:
Are you people nuts? Look above this post, at the ad paying for this space. IT'S IN FLASH! FLASH! FLASH!
Click to expand...

It's still NOT! NOT! NOT! an officially APPROVED! APPROVED! APPROVED! internet or web STANDARD! STANDARD! STANDARD!, no matter how many banner ads use it or how many times you claim it is. :rolleyes:

macUser2007 said:
Oh, and all those funny I Am A Mac ads on the Web, from Apple..., THEY ARE IN FLASH, TOO!
Click to expand...

The ones on the Apple site are in Quicktime format.
 
Ubiquity does not mean it's an agreed-upon universal standard.

This isn't me defending Apple. I'd love for the iPhone to support Java and Flash and I'm bummed it doesn't. I'm just defending the meaning of the word "standard."
 
macUser2007 said:
Most people buy phones without thinking too much about them. In fact, most see a snazzy ad about a feature they'll probably rarely use (e.g. TV) and make a purchase decision based on that.

Oh, and BTW, if you are paying $2000 for an iPhone, I'd be happy to sell you one for $1900...:D
Click to expand...

I was referring to cost of the iPhone plus contract. That's why I used the word "commit". :D

Most people may buy phones without thinking much about them, but most people were not in the market for a 2G iPhone. I'd hope that smartphone buyers put a bit more thought into it than your average free phone with contract. I'm not sure what your point was.
 
Is anyone honestley surprised at this decision?

Apple's ads have almost always been borderline untruthful.

Anyone remember "Macs Don't Crash."???
 
alFR said:
The ones on the Apple site are in Quicktime format.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with you 100% about Flash not being a standard, QT isn't either, is it ;) Also, I seem to remember Apple put some videos on their own site in QuickTime format that the iPhone couldn't play. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot :D
 
Marky_Mark said:
In what way can flash be described as 'non-standard'? Flash is virtually ubiquitous across the web nowadays
Click to expand...

Non-standard in that it requires additional software beyond a standards-compliant web browser in order to be viewed. And you're right it is in very wide use, 99% of internet viewers have it. Should it become a standard? Absolutely not in my view: it can be universally read, but ultimately if you want to write it, you have to pay Adobe, which is unacceptable when you can currently write a damned good website without paying anyone for the privelege.
 
I think everyone's overlooked the one truly shocking revelation in this story...

Apple actually RESPONDED to something!

:eek:
 
Denarius said:
Non-standard in that it requires additional software beyond a standards-compliant web browser in order to be viewed. And you're right it is in very wide use, 99% of internet viewers have it. Should it become a standard? Absolutely not in my view: it can be universally read, but ultimately if you want to write it, you have to pay Adobe, which is unacceptable when you can currently write a damned good website without paying anyone for the privelege.
Click to expand...

You're quite right - I was thinking in the context of widespread use rather than adhering to an architectural minimum
 
well thats quite a thread i started!!!
watching the ad again its the old ad, the first gen ad is it not??
with the orginal music.
I seen an ad today on tv today with different music diffrent wording maybe they new it was coming?
 
lakaiordie said:
flash will suck down the battery life even more.
Click to expand...

More than what?

youTube?
Games?
Video?
3G Calls?
Turning the backlight on?

You know as well as I that the decrease in battery life by supporting flash would be negligible.
Why do the fanboys feel they have to blindly defend Apple's shortcomings. :rolleyes:
 
Denarius said:
...99% of internet viewers have it. Should it become a standard? Absolutely not in my view: it can be universally read, but ultimately if you want to write it, you have to pay Adobe, which is unacceptable when you can currently write a damned good website without paying anyone for the privelege.
Click to expand...

The web without Flash would be a pretty dreary place.

I am amazed you are not a DOS nerd, since you seem to discount precisely what makes Apple what it is: GREAT DESIGN.

No, you don't need Flash, you can have an all text-based web to get most of the core information across. You also don't need designer furniture, clothing, or cars. Heck, if it comes to "core," for procreation you don't need a good-looking mate either:D

It's a losing argument, just like "who needs 3G" was. Apple should just support Flash. Period.

BTW, most of us have to pay something for the tools we use to do our job.
 
Why all the flash hate around here? Granted, I'm a Windows XP user, but I've never had a problem with flash content be it in advertising or in website content.

It really sucks that the iPod touch/iPhone don't have flash at all. I was laying in bed this morning reading the release of the new Nikon D90 D-SLR and its new D-Movie mode. I pointed Safari on my iPod touch to the Nikon website to check out the features:

http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/d90/en/d-movie/

All I get are banners telling me to install Adobe flash. So I had to get up and resume my notebook from hibernate to view it the site. It's simple stuff like this that pisses me off.

So what's the problem here? Why the hatred? Is it because:

1) Is flash support on Mac computers spotty/crappy?
2) Do you just not like flash in general?
3) You just hate flash advertising?
4) Apple says flash is bad so flash is bad?

I don't I really don't see what the big deal is with flash. I've just grown accustomed to it over the years and just expect it as a common, requisite part of browsing on today's internet.

And nothing sucks worse than browsing to a webpage with my iPod touch with an embedded YouTube video only to have to be taken away from Safari to the built-in YouTube app. Then I have to go back to Safari only to find out that the YouTube app used up so much memory that my existing Safari webpage has to refresh again since it couldn't hold the page contents in memory.
 
you know that iphone doesn't show up gif animations? meanwhile plays music, video and videogames.

someday apple fanboys will rent hourly accesses to the web through the itunes store to achieve the hole web experience :apple:
 
Masquerade said:
you know that iphone doesn't show up gif animations? meanwhile plays music, video and videogames.

someday apple fanboys will rent hourly accesses to the web through the itunes store to achieve the hole web experience :apple:
Click to expand...

I don't know about you, but my iPod touch DOES play animated gif animation. It will play small animated gifs like animated emoticons or anything else that is relatively small in size.

It WON'T, however, play large animated gif files.
 
macUser2007 said:
Are you people nuts? Look above this post, at the ad paying for this space. IT'S IN FLASH! FLASH! FLASH!

And it's there, regardless of how you twist the facts to defend Apple.

Oh, and all those funny I Am A Mac ads on the Web, from Apple..., THEY ARE IN FLASH, TOO!:eek:
Click to expand...

No its not.

And this page works just fine on the iPhone, Ad included.
 
gamac said:
You cannot argue with someone who is unwilling to accept the opinion of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) on internet standards and instead relies upon their own opinion as fact.

;)
Click to expand...

Never try to argue with someone who quotes the W3C. The W3C is weirdly out of touch with reality.

But not nearly so out of touch as the ASA, who don't know what the word Internet means and think Java is an integral part of the Web.
 
Denarius said:
I'd be surprised if anyone here 'hates' Flash, they simply recognise it for what it is: a sometimes very useful non-standard technology available on the web.
Click to expand...

Why is it so surprising? Like I said in a previous post, Flash sites take long to load, are usually over-designed, and make it impossible to copy and paste the contents. I've been browsing World Wide Web since the early 90s. I honestly don't think Flash has made my browsing experience any easier. Tell me, what does Flash do that other, more traditional text and graphics formats do not do except for added cosmetic beauty?

Oh, BTW, I love CLI (command-line interface). I like Apple's graphical design principles, but my main desktop still runs Linux. :)

I am seriously hoping that Apple's lack of support for Flash will actually encourage Web admins to abandon Flash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back