Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Because Flash on a PHONE is really necessary. :rolleyes:

Actually, I have Flash almost always disabled on my Mac as well.
 
Nice, but I haven't missed flash. Have migrated my use (on all systems since I have Click 4 Flash) to sites that use little or no flash.

People do tend to adjust their activities to fit certain limits. Battery life, wireless range, 3G speeds, device capabilities, storage size and so forth.

Ughhhh, could care less about flash video. That's all everyone talks about when discussing flash. I need flash to browse websites that use flash as part of the page content and can't otherwise be viewed. That's where Apple has dropped the ball.

Exactly. I used to avoid Flash based sites, until I got Flash on Android. Now I have no problem using sites such as restaurant pages with Flash menus, native Flickr slideshows and some movie upload sites. It's quite empowering, having the real internet just an optional click away.
 
Not that I ever cared about lame Disney online games.. but guess what - Disney has an iPad-optimized website made of HTML5 and Java. Just tried couple of Disney free games, like Disney Match 3 and Pirates of the Carribean - they look to be Java-based and play fine on standard iPad Safari browser.

Pixar TS3 website seems to work just fine also - videos are available in H.264, and are playable on built-in Quicktime player on Ipad.

If these 2 are your best examples - you just proved that Flash is truly irrelevant.

You seem to miss my point: these are examples of the regular, rich media sites of the two largest companies where Steve "Flash Sucks" Jobs is the largest shareholder. The fact that you personally don't care about Disney or Pixar is irrelevant to the argument.

It is also irrelevant that you can access the mobile versions of the sites. Mobile versions are stripped down and do not offer the richness of experience of the full sites. Kind of like being back in 1999.... ;) The vast majority of users would prefer to see the real site, than the mobile version.

Plus, with the rapid adoption of Android, mobile versions of sites will become less needed: if by the end of 2011 the vast majority of mobile users are able to view the full versions of sites on their Flash-enabled Android phones and tablets, there will be less pressure to expend resources on mobile versions of sites.

In reality, there is very little wrong with Flash. All graphic-intensive operations place demands on hardware and battery life. Steve Jobs banned Flash mainly because it interferes with his business model, which includes an ecosystem designed to generate revenue for Apple at EVERY point of user contact, including ads. The iPhone 3Gs hardware was also unlikely to perform well enough with Flash 10.1.

Nobody is arguing that video is not moving fast to the new codecs (H.264 and now WebM). But Flash is used for a lot more than video. HTML5 is a great advancement, but most knowledgeable and sane observes know that it cannot fully replace Flash, but it will coexist with it, for ultimately a better web.

I am certain that Jobs is not stupid, and Flash will appear on iOS at some point. I am just afraid it will be a day late and a pound short.

Anyway, if you really don't want to see iOS being irrelevant to the WWW, then you should welcome companies like SkyFire, which can at least mitigate some of the advantages of the Android juggernaut.
 
Stupidity by Apple man if they approve this app.
As Apple claimed that Flash video would kill the battery, don't they think that first converting Flash to HTML 5 and then playing it is going to kill the battery more?

The conversion happens remotely. E.g. a bunch of CPU fans are spinning in some server hosting facility where I can't hear them.

From thence the conversion is sent to my device in HTML5, where there is a h.26x hardware decoder that runs a lot cooler than the CPU for decoding video. Kills the battery, yes, but a lot more slowly.

Very clever.
 
Adobe's not gonna skirt the App store perimeters that easily, expect this to be taken down any day now.

Great job actually reading the article. First, it's not going to be in the App Store until Thursday (today is Tuesday), and second, Apple has approved the App.
 
Anyone who used skyfire on droid knows its worth. 3 bucks is NOTHING compared to how awesome it is.

It will replace my safari.

It actually does not replace Safari. Flash content will identified by an icon. If you select it, you are then ported to Skyfire for playing the Flash content. No games (which require interactivity not possible on a touch device and Hulu has blocked Skyfire so as not to conflict with their pay service for iPhones.
 
I may as well pipe in on the Flash issue. I agree that the Web would be much better off without Flash. Flash is a source for trojans and viruses. Flash is a CPU hog. Flash ads are extremely annoying. Flash may not have been originally meant for video (as someone stated - and something I don't personally believe), but it is used for video to an extremely large degree. It's also used for site navigation and many other web based functions. Flash exists in an overwhelming number of websites. Should the developers upgrade their sites? Yes. But it does cost to re-design a website and businesses are reluctant to pay for re-designing for such a small (but growing) market. It's been easier to simply design a watered down site designed specifically for iPhones, iPods and iPads.

My biggest gripe with Steve Jobs is his statements, beginning with the original iPhone, iPad and continuing to this day, that the iOS devices surf the "real" internet. Without the ability to display Flash content, it is not the "real" internet. Jobs' statements regarding iOS Safari are simply not true and are misleading. It is a Flash crippled device and will not show all the content available on the internet.

With my iPhone and iPad, I will also say that I have not missed Flash content. I see no real personal need for the Skyfire app. For me, the iPhone is not a "waste my time surfing the Internet" device. I use Safari on my iPhone frequently. One example comes to mind when shopping at Best Buy, I wanted to do some price comparison. The iPhone's no-Flash actually prevented me from viewing a couple of sites for comparison. No real big deal and 90% of the time, I don't have a need for Flash viewing. The iPad is a little different. I would use the iPad for the "time wasting Internet surfing" - if it would enable me to view all Internet content. But it won't. At least I still have my MacBook Pro.

All-in-all, I think that Steve Jobs has done and will do the Internet a great service by working towards the elimination of Flash. But who knows how long it's going to be before HTML5 will completely overtake Flash, if ever. Until then, Skyfire appears to be a decent stop-gap measure for those people who really have a need or desire for Flash.
 
Skyfire has been around for a while and worked pretty well on Windows Mobile phones. I'm pretty psyched for this...I can finally watch hockey games without having to be home to do it. :)
 
FYI, HTML5 has a similar "feature" to allow the equivalent of persistent local storage, it'll likely be used the same way as LSOs have been.

I'd certainly like the ability to have this configurable on a whitelist-only basis, where it was turned off by default.

Hopefully, web browsers will be able to control the use of persistent local storage in HTML5, and that will let us avoid the nonsense of having to go to Adobe's nearly hidden web page to control Flash's use of LSO's. Any way you cut it, the only true reason why many sites on the web are attached to Flash is the circumvention of privacy settings in web browsers. Adobe is complicit in this in that they make managing Flash LSO's inconvenient. :mad::mad::mad:

In any case, does anybody have any information as to whether the new app works with Flash 'cookies'?
 
Not sure I quite agree - the content is there. If certain companies decide not to support that then they can't help that. Its still a VERY small %age of all users that are limited.

HTML5 etc was not around when the current design of site was implemented. It may change in time but can't expect them to revamp it for a small minority
I'm not sure how small that "minority" is these days.

And, yes, it's up to the content provider to meet their customers (or, in this case, taxpayers) needs.

From what I see around the Intarwebz, that "revamp" seems to have been pretty simple for some pretty un-tech-savvy content providers. OTOH, this *is* the BBC we're talking about. :p
 
Without the ability to display Flash content, it is not the "real" internet. Jobs' statements regarding iOS Safari are simply not true and are misleading. It is a Flash crippled device and will not show all the content available on the internet.

flash = plugin
flash != html spec

...flash is not native to the web, its a 3rd-party plugin, no different than a RealMedia plugin, or a Silverlight plugin. do you bemoan not being able to view silverlight on your phone? why not? because its not the web. its a third-party component. one that you dont care about, like so many others.

you caring about flash doesnt somehow make it part of HTML. even if youd like it to be.
 
This is quite a hilarious, if not sad thread to follow. It starts out as new software which will allow flash content to be viewed on our beloved ipads and iphones, and that should be a good thing *if* you feel you need it and are willing to pay the 2.99.

But the funny and sad at the same time part is all the anti-flash arguing. I really honestly don't get why a bunch of supposed adults find so much satisfaction in telling others why flash is not needed on the ipad/iphone. I mean if you don't want flash then is there any reason to even comment in this thread? Seriously. For me personally flash is very important to my ipad use. The vast majority of the medical research sites I go to have flash videos only, but even besides the professional need even just my recreational browsing is dominated by flash. The vast majority of gadget blogs for example usually have several articles with flash video each and every day. Just regular news sites have tons of flash videos. Even Macrumors itself usually has an article or 3 on their front page with flash video, and the majority of the Mac/Apple blogs I've visited also have plenty of Flash. Hell the other day I wanted to watch The Daily Show from Comedy Central and guess what, yep Flash. I am simply describing MY own personal flash difficulties and what I encounter as a consumer of Apple's devices, and am not advocating for or against flash.

Every day I seriously consider switching over to Android. The whole myth of Flash not running well is just that a myth, at least in my user experience. I have a Samsung captivate which runs of Froyo 2.2 and I must say the Flash experience is quite awesome on it, I don't see any more difficulty or issues than say just using my ipad/iphone in general, what I wouldn't give just to simply have that experience on my Apple devices. The problem is I really love my ipad, I just absolutely love everything about it, the battery life, the UI, the programs, the overall hardware, etc etc., and I really don't want to switch from it to another device. Something like this skyfire browser is a godsend to someone like me. If it's not for you, then just move along. Flash is an important part of the web and no matter how a single company rails against it, the fact that the other mobile and browser companies are all embracing it should tell us that it will be here for a long time, but then again none of us (no matter how much some of us think they do) have a crystal ball to peer into the future.

/soapbox
 
But the funny and sad at the same time part is all the anti-flash arguing. I really honestly don't get why a bunch of supposed adults find so much satisfaction in telling others why flash is not needed on the ipad/iphone.
Your mistake, sir, is in assuming that all the responders are adults. Usually most are at this time of year, but we seem to have more than the usual non-adults around. You can spot them instantly because of their inabilty to see both sides of a coin, or to think of anyone's needs other than their own.

(long list of sites that use Flash snipped)
I agree, there are lots of useful places with Flash. Sometimes we take them for granted. The first two site links we sent to my mother's new iPad were for a private family Flickr slideshow, and a private family video upload site. Neither worked on iOS because they used Flash and the sender didn't realize it. Very disappointing for her.

The whole myth of Flash not running well [on Android] is just that a myth, at least in my user experience.
Same for me on an Incredible. Flash works just fine, or at least as well as can be expected on a mobile device if on a page with heavy calculations.

I've tried the same kinds of pages using HTML5, and they're just as fast/slow, and have the same "mouse" problems (plus), so it's not a Flash vs HTML5 resource problem. It's now more of a political debate than technical.

Btw, I think Jobs is clever. Adobe was already porting Flash to ARM cpus with the help of ARM cpu makers. It was going to turn out well in any case. But by doing his typical handwaving and misdirection ahead of time, Jobs' followers will believe that he somehow caused this to happen. Amazing.
 
Isn't that statement justnfull of irony, when the iPhone was the FIRST time the full web experience ever fit in someones pocket. iPhone was the thing that started full web browsing for mobile
No, that was the Opera browser. Opera had been doing full web browsers for several years when the iPhone arrived.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.