NPR and Wall Street Journal Preparing to Launch iPad-Optimized Sites

[MacRumors]

MediaMemo reports that National Public Radio and The Wall Street Journal are preparing to roll out iPad-optimized versions of their websites as the device launches in the U.S. on April 3rd. Similar to sites formatted specifically for the iPhone or other mobile devices, users visiting the publications' sites using an iPad will be automatically redirected to the iPad-optimized version.

While the iPhone and other mobile devices with small screens relative to traditional computers can benefit from streamlined and reformatted versions of many sites' content, Apple intends for the iPad's larger display to be used for a much richer browsing experience. The iPad's lack of support for Adobe's Flash technology, however, means that many sites will not display as they would on a traditional computer supporting Flash. Consequently, publications such as NPR and The Wall Street Journal have turned to Flash-free versions of their sites to varying degrees.

So if all goes as planned, iPad users who want to listen to NPR programming will have a couple choices next month. They can:

- Download a free iPad-optimized version of the broadcaster's popular (two million downloads) iPhone app. Or
- Use the iPad's browser to visit NPR.org, which will detect that it's being viewed with Apple's device and serve up a custom-built site. This means no trace of Adobe's (ADBE) Flash, which is used to power graphics and media on the site.

I've heard about a handful of other big publishers who are altering some but not all of their Web sites to create iPad-optimized versions.

That's what The Wall Street Journal - like this Web site, the Journal is owned by News Corp. (NWS) - is doing, for instance: Visitors to the newspaper's front page will see an iPad-specific, Flash-free page. But those who click deeper into the site will eventually find pages that haven't been converted.

According to Kinsey Wilson, NPR's head of digital media, the publication recently rebuilt its entire site to separate content from design, allowing it to easily tweak the visual presentation for certain platforms. Another aspect in NPR's favor is its limited advertising, reducing the hurdles imposed by the need to work with that Flash-dependent industry.

So while developing Flash-free versions of websites may be reasonable for certain publications with the structure and resources to accomplish the feat, it is by no means an easy solution for the many sites out there currently relying on Flash to display their standard Web content. During a visit to New York City to promote the iPad to publishers, Apple CEO Steve Jobs reportedly argued against the need for Flash, pushing publications toward adoption of other technologies such as H.264 video and JavaScript that are more iPad-friendly.

Article Link: NPR and Wall Street Journal Preparing to Launch iPad-Optimized Sites

 

[satcomer]

As a Mac user I am starting to hate the iPad. Before you discard me just think the last time you have seen updates on Mac book Pros & Mac Pros. It seems the iPad is delaying the updates to these two Macs.

 

[GeekLawyer]

More good news for our Apple-supplied mobile future.

Can't wait for 4/3!

 

[jo0]

love NPR! can't wait to see it on the apple tablet device

 

[spazzcat]

As a Mac user I am starting to hate the iPad. Before you discard me just think the last time you have seen updates on Mac book Pros & Mac Pros. It seems the iPad is delaying the updates to these two Macs.

Completely different groups work on these projects. They are not tied in anyway at Apple.

 

[addicted44]

As a Mac user I am starting to hate the iPad. Before you discard me just think the last time you have seen updates on Mac book Pros & Mac Pros. It seems the iPad is delaying the updates to these two Macs.

Didn't we just have a new OS released? One with probably the greatest overhaul in Mac OS X since 10.0.

Hardware will come soon. The problem is probably either the Nvidia/Intel battles, or Intel's inability to deliver the latest chips in great quantities immediately.

 

[kwikdeth]

so, how can i make my mac direct itself to the ipad-optimized sites?
I know it might look weird on a desktop browser, but I'd like to keep my browsing as flash-free as possible.

 

[karmachrome]

Completely different groups work on these projects. They are not tied in anyway at Apple.

Except by marketing.

$$$ talks.

 

[satcomer]

I just know if I have to pay for a site or a site's App than it BETTER NOT have any adds in it!

 

[justinfreid]

Spoof the User Agent

so, how can i make my mac direct itself to the ipad-optimized sites?
I know it might look weird on a desktop browser, but I'd like to keep my browsing as flash-free as possible.

Many browsers let you spoof the "User Agent" they supply: http://j.mp/bTToqG

 

[a.gomez]

exactly what will go on, they not going to change their main site (just like Disney wont) for the ipad (or the iphone, droid, pre) just make a water down version for it... No reason to dump a site that works on 96% of the worlds computer if you register good number of eyes on it every month.

 

[pubwvj]

Oookay. So I, and many web designers from the 1990's, are at the head of this pack! I optimized my page designs to work with 1024x768 screens with NO Flash.

I don't like Flash. It's a resource hog and is usually used for glitz or flickery ads, neither of which I like seeing.

I like smaller web pages because they don't take over my whole computer screen.

This 'redesign' is a good thing. Retro-time! Back to the good designs.

 

[Darkroom]

i'm not sure what this story is suppose to represent. iPhone specific sites without Flash are numerous and have been around for a long time. is this story suppose to imply that Adobe should suddenly prepare for the great wrath of iPad? please. the advancements of ActionScript 3.0 and Flash Player 10.1 are far more interesting than a larger iPod touch.

 

[FSMBP]

This is good news.

I'm not a fan of the trend that when I want to visit a site on an iPhone - that I have to download an App to get a 'full experience'. I hope other sites will optimize their sites or just start using HTML5.

 

[Xtremehkr]

NPR and the New York Times yes, those services are worth paying for or making a donation to. The WSJ, not so much. The WSJ is moving closer to being the NYPost.

I'd much rather think of the iPad as a NewsPad, or a MediaTab. Anything but the iPad.

 

[DominikHoffmann]

Need to rename site to ipadrumors.com!

What about those of us who aren't salivating over an iPad? It's a nice device alright, but a MACrumors site should have some news about, for example, the next MacBook Pro updates every so often.

I think it's time to rename this site "iPadRumors."

Dominik

 

[Garion]

Interesting news in deed. The Flash proponents told us that big media would never abandon Flash on their websites and make Flash-free versions for the iPhone/iPod Touch and iPad. But isn't that exactly what we're seeing here?

When a media giant like News Corp start prepping their content for troublefree playback sans Flash I bet it won't be long before other major media organisations follow suit. The future is beginning to look interesting, friends.

 

[cvaldes]

i'm not sure what this story is suppose to represent. iPhone specific sites without Flash are numerous and have been around for a long time. is this story suppose to imply that Adobe should suddenly prepare for the great wrath of iPad? please. the advancements of ActionScript 3.0 and Flash Player 10.1 are far more interesting than a larger iPod touch.

Based on the recent history of mobile device growth and the lack of Flash support on many/most of these devices, Flash is getting left behind.

The biggest potential for Internet growth over the next 5-10 years isn't on the desktop. The next generation Internet war will be fought on the mobile battlefield. The role of Flash in this marketplace is nearly zero.

It's not just Apple either. For example, the Mozilla Foundation yanked Flash support right before they MR'ed Firefox Mobile for Maemo devices. This is not Steve Jobs' personal vendetta against Adobe.

 

[diabolic]

Interesting news in deed. The Flash proponents told us that big media would never abandon Flash on their websites and make Flash-free versions for the iPhone/iPod Touch and iPad. But isn't that exactly what we're seeing here?

Yes. I think it will be a trend as more sites follow suit. Within the next couple of months they know close to half a million new iPads will be browsing the web. They don't want to leave out those people.

I don't believe the idea that iPad users that can't see a site that uses Flash will be upset and return the iPad. More likely is the idea that they will just go to another web site for their content.

 

[spazzcat]

Except by marketing.

$$$ talks.

Which means it would be in Apple's best interest to have both products talked about as much as possible. When the systems team is ready to release an update there will be an update.

 

[gwangung]

Based on the recent history of mobile device growth and the lack of Flash support on many/most of these devices, Flash is getting left behind.

The biggest potential for Internet growth over the next 5-10 years isn't on the desktop. The next generation Internet war will be fought on the mobile battlefield. The role of Flash in this marketplace is nearly zero.

It's not just Apple either. For example, the Mozilla Foundation yanked Flash support right before they MR'ed Firefox Mobile for Maemo devices. This is not Steve Jobs' personal vendetta against Adobe.

Think this is reasonable. A power hungry app is fine for desktops and some laptops. But for mobile devices, it REALLY isn't a good thing.

 

[mabaker]

I think the spite from other mac users is all apparent in this thread just cuzz Apple didn’t update their favorite toys to these heat-factories containing the new i7 CPU!

I’m fairly excited about the iPad, it’s a new day in Apple’s history and we all have seen it coming - they ARE shifting to the mobile computing, as much as I and the other fellows forumers here hate it.

One has to look at the bright side, though - Apple now is more potent than it ever was and is making history even with such an feature-underpowered device like the ipad.

 

[Scottsdale]

So while developing Flash-free versions of websites may be reasonable for certain publications with the structure and resources to accomplish the feat, it is by no means an easy solution for the many sites out there currently relying on Flash to display their standard Web content. During a visit to New York City to promote the iPad to publishers, Apple CEO Steve Jobs reportedly argued against the need for Flash, pushing publications toward adoption of other technologies such as H.264 video and JavaScript that are more iPad-friendly.

This has been my point all along. So many entrepreneur and small business websites were created using Flash for even simple navigation for "pretty" results which require Flash for navigation. If Flash was just about animated simple graphics and navigational links designed to make sites look better, Apple would have been on board with Adobe a long time ago.

Since Flash also means free video content that competes with Apple's iTunes store, and Free Web Apps that compete with Apple's App Store, Flash is a threat to Apple's business model. Therefore, Jobs blames it on crap software, but the results show that html5 and h.264 offer almost zero benefit over Flash when Adobe has access to APIs to make Flash great, as on Windows.

It's easy for a few publishing companies to change their content, but the web is full of sites comprised of Flash that will not be viewable or "surfable" by the iPad for many years. I believe Apple gets away without Flash on the iPhone because it's a phone. I don't think people will be happy when they realize their $500 to $830 iPad will not even surf the web, as the iPad is being sold as a web device first and foremost. I suspect a lot of problems when people realize that these other sites have no plans to add non-Flash based sites. In addition, all of these iPad buyers will have to BUY every bit of content that they could get for free via ad-based sites like hulu.com.

I don't believe Apple is going to get away with just saying html5 and h.264 is the answer, when it's multiple years off from providing widescale usage and integration into the web. Flash is an "accepted" standard now whether Apple likes it or not. A year ago, 98% of all web connected devices could run Flash, and I consider that a "standard."

 

[Small White Car]

What about those of us who aren't salivating over an iPad? It's a nice device alright, but a MACrumors site should have some news about, for example, the next MacBook Pro updates every so often.

I think it's time to rename this site "iPadRumors."

Dominik

There were no Macbook Pro updates today.

There you go. Does that make you happy? Here's another one.

That rumor about new Mac Pros is still the same rumor.

 

[Darkroom]

Based on the recent history of mobile device growth and the lack of Flash support on many/most of these devices, Flash is getting left behind.

The biggest potential for Internet growth over the next 5-10 years isn't on the desktop. The next generation Internet war will be fought on the mobile battlefield. The role of Flash in this marketplace is nearly zero.

It's not just Apple either. For example, the Mozilla Foundation yanked Flash support right before they MR'ed Firefox Mobile for Maemo devices. This is not Steve Jobs' personal vendetta against Adobe.

RIM devices, Android OS devices, the HP-Slate, even Windows Phone 7 Series who will push their own Silverlight technology supports Flash. i didn't know about Firefox Mobile for Maemo devices. if you have more examples i'm all ears.