No. Did you find the "Thoughts on Flash" memo and read it? Did you not the magic phrase the most important reason in the memo?
Yes. I explained what I thought of that memo. If you need to reread, please do. I'm not retyping it here.
We are talking about Flash. SJ spelled out exactly why he chose to have iOS devices be Flash-free in his 2010 "Thoughts on Flash" memo. You can tell which was the most important reason, because SJ labeled it as the most important reason.
Have you read the memo?
See above.
Attempting to label iOS a port of Mac OS X is rather naive. iOS was a branch of the OS; there are all sorts of features spanning from the user interface to app firewalling which are only starting to appear in Mac OS X -- five years later. Major APIs in Mac OS X are still not available on iOS.
So wait... now that it suits you, you'll go against what Apple has said/done? They are very obviously trying to make iOS a one-size-fits-all. Thus the Mac App store.
Claiming that Apple "killed Flash" in iOS is also rather naive. Any Flash App can be packaged for iOS using Adobe's packaging tools and sold (or freely distributed) in the iOS App Store.
Yes it can be. I never said it couldn't. I said that making your customers do your work because you think you're so much better than the rest of the world was a poor way to do business. And false advertising saying you can deliver the whole internet if you have to have sites repackage their content.
You missed my point entirely. My point: your claim that "every major website I've seen has some Flash on it" is complete nonsense.
Weather.gov. CNN. YouTube. Google sites. Weather Underground. I could keep going, but I won't.
Hmmm. I just searched for
"weather.gov" iphone
and found weather.gov site
http://radar.weather.gov/Conus/index_lite.php . Did you try that on your iPhone? Did you ever bother looking for Flash-free westher.gov apps?
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here, and I mean that with the utmost respect.
This URL you gave me is a static image. Static images do not require Flash. Try getting a loop, or a local loop of the radar. It's all Flash, and the CONUS loop is actually Java I believe. Either way, it can't be done. Now, looping that small image you provided in the link does work - and is my usual workaround. But as a meteorologist, it doesn't work for me. I should be able to get to the full internet, as Apple states, and that means that my phone shouldn't have to be JB and myWi put on it just so I can access the NWS.
Have you tried m.cnn.com? That is the version of the CNN website that is Flash-free.
I have. Call me crazy, but I like the internet to be fluid across all devices. One version, one experience, all devices. It's the fact that it COULD be that way save for Apple's stranglehold on their devices. That's all I'm saying. It's a major flaw. Did it stop me from getting an iPhone? No.
No. My point is that your claim "every major website I've seen has some sort of Flash in it" is nonsense. There are Flash-free ways to access CNN and FB. One general rule of thumb you may not know: try to access the m.xxxxxx.com version of websites to get Flash-free access.
Again, different strokes for different folks. Which is my point. Just because something works for you, doesn't mean it works for someone else. I like the full internet. I like to be able to find something on my phone and go to my computer to look it up when I get home. If you can deal with it, then good for you. It doesn't mean I have to settle for it.
And I haven't seen flash-free games for FB. I'm sure the bigger ones are there, but not most of them. Same with the videos. It took forever for FB to get posted videos to show. I shouldn't have to settle with a device I pay $200 for and advertises the full internet. Same for the $500 non-cellular low-end model of the iPad.
Demographics is destiny, and the sad truth (glad truth?) is that a growing percentage of devices will never ever have native Flash support in the browser. Adobe has officially abandoned Flash development for new mobile platforms. Smart companies have either completely removed Flash from their websites or are in the process of doing it.
Agreed. Flash was piss-poor at best. I was never defending it's performance. I hate Flash. What I hate more is not being able to view a site because they don't have the cashflow to redo all their content. It's a valid concern.
I don't find it surprising some are still complaining that Apple's mobile devices are Flash-free. What I do find noteworthy is how few people are complaining these days. The truth is that Flash was a dying technology anyhow; it would have been totally gone in 10-15 years. Through its decision to go Flash free on its new OS, Apple just accelerated the process.
No one complains anymore because it's been in their phones for 5 generations now. But again, just because it's a fact of life doesn't make it good. But I know before buying an Apple mobile device it doesn't have Flash. It doesn't mean I like it.
If there are compelling apps developed on a Flash platform, then developers can satiate that demand by distributing their apps through the varios App Stores. If their apps are sufficiently compelling, they can even make money on them! As a practical matter, I believe that native apps will dominate on all of the App Stores (but I'd be happy to be proven wrong). It's noteworthy: even though Adobe trumpets their packager software as a means to rapidly develop and deploy software for a variety of mobile platforms, they chose to create platform-specific native apps for their new image-processing apps. Adobe talks the talk, but they don't walk the walk. Adobe isn't putting its own money behind Flash for mobile.
Yes. So now they have to invest resources and money into rewriting their apps, and then get approval from Apple which can be arbitrary, and then to make money, Apple gets a cut. It's very obvious the removal of Flash was purely for Apple's gain. They make money on the backend by being able to charge a cut for apps, then make money on the frontend by being able to state massive battery gains.
Are you sure? You haven't said a single thing here which indicates that you've read the memo. Earlier in this your reply, you were ignorant of what Jobs noted as the most important reason for iOS to be Flash-free.
See above.
Not shouting. Just don't like italics for clear writing. I was emphasizing.
I think jailbreaking was inevitable. Hackers will attempt to JB every single mobile OS. I also think it's a good thing: it keeps Apple in check. At the same time, I doubt that naive users realize the risks they add by JBing their devices.
Risks? There are few risks with JB a device purely to remove the limits on Apple's ecosystem. This is another lie perpetuated by Apple to reduce the loss of income from apps that don't pass their standards, whatever those may be.
Now, if you're unlocking and messing with basebands and the like, then yes, you're taking some risk.
Are you implying that the vast majority of iOS users that JB their product do so to get Flash? Do you have any numbers at all to back up that claim?
Absolutely not. That was what you inferred for some reason. I stated that the stranglehold on the device was why jailbreak started.
Ultimately, the marketplace decides what is viable and what is not. At this point, Adobe has clearly communicated that Flash is not viable on mobile devices.
That really is tired rhetoric in the US. The marketplace does nothing to decide. It's all contrived. Look at Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint. All give you cell service. All overcharge. Some give you unlimited, but at such slow speeds it doesn't compete with the others. Just because you have a choice in companies doesn't mean they are competing for the best service.
Nobody is forcing you to use Flash-free mobile devices. If Flash is essential for your mobile experience, then get something that has Flash. But please realize: if the lack of Flash were a show-stopper for the marketplace, then neither Apple nor its mobile products would be the runaway hits in the marketplace.
I never said that I was being forced. I never said I needed for my experience. I merely am trying to point out that just because Apple says so, and your experience says so, doesn't make it so.
Nope. Normal people don't care any more. Almost everyone has stopped complaining that the iPhone/iPad are Flash-free. On the MR forums, you are one of the very few left who continues to complain.
And why is that? Because it is now a known they won't come with Flash. It would be ludicrous of me to go out, buy a new iPad, and say I cannot believe that it came without Flash, unless I was either under a rock or stuck on an island.
Rather, my argument these days is that I cannot believe they made that decision, that people buy into the PR that Apple spews, and that people who love Apple so much can so visciously attack anyone who dares speak against an Apple decision.
Apple does not provide the full internet on their mobile devices. They limit users to what Apple thinks they should do. If you can understand that, and realize that's a limitation of the device, then you are informed. Being informed about something is different than the people on these forums that just state it's a non-issue and that it doesn't matter.
It DOES matter. It just might not matter as much to you as it does to someone else.
It's this whole thinking outside of your box and not thinking that you are the center of the universe thing. If someone has a gripe about something, it's probably legitimate depending on how they shed light on it. Just because it doesn't affect you doesn't mean it doesn't affect them.
If you think you have a grip, then show us the data: what numbers do you have that the general population actually cares that Mobile devices are Flash-free?
And I don't have those numbers. But conversely, I could ask you to give me the same numbers, and I suppose on that point we'd both have to shut up, huh?
Please do. Please present your facts that accessibility is not important.
First, I never said it wasn't important. I said it wasn't the basis for removing Flash. Please stop intertwining my arguments to fit yours.
No. But websites that fail fail to accomodate the quarter-billion+ iOS devices do so at their own peril. Demographics is destiny, and the future is Flash-free. Apple gets it. Adobe gets it. You don't get it.
And I'd argue that you're making Apple feel more important than it is. At some point, websites are designed for the computer PC. Not for the iPhone. That's another part of Apple I can't stand; the part that says "we're better than you so do as we say".
No devices -- including the iPhone -- is perfect. Everything is a tradeoff. If you don't like the tradeoffs of the iPhone, then don't use it. Find some device that has a set of tradeoffs that you approve of. But implying that large numbers of people are unhappy about the tradeoffs of the iPhone is rather silly -- especially since you've provided no numbers to back up that claim.
And this is all I've been trying to say. There are tradeoffs for everything. It's whether or not the tradeoff is acceptable to the person using it. And I never implied anything. You simply inferred it. I never said "large numbers" were unhappy. But again, I ask you to tell me the numbers of people happy without Flash. What I suspect we'd find is exactly my situation - people are unhappy about Flash not being on the device, but for all the other connectivity it does provide, people will overlook it and begrudgingly accept the device.
I'm happy with my iPhone. I'm not happy with no Flash. Doesn't mean I didn't get one. Nose. Face. Spite. I can still be unhappy with it not having Flash, and can still chide Apple for making that decision in the interests of PR, marketing, and funding their own ecosystem. But hey, that's what corporations do. They make money, everything else be damned. It's a pretty ruthless way of doing business, but that's society today.
If you don't like a "walled garden" approach for your mobile devices, don't use the iPhone. Find a more promiscuous device to use as a telephone and your mobile browser. Or JB your iPhone. But, don't complain if your phone starts catching diseases.
Just because I don't like something doesn't mean I can't use it. I don't like the walled garden approach. I think it is a great reason to be hit by antitrust suits, and I think it stifles innovation, creation, and the ability for the users to use their brain. Why do so when Apple tells you how to think?
What fact will I not admit to?
[/QUOTE]
Well, you actually did admit to it above when you said that Apple devices aren't perfect, so my statement here is now moot.
