1st question (biggest question) - is flash dead -> no. First flash dominates the net multimedia sector. It runs well on windows p.c. which are the majority of computers (the last time i used a windows p.c. was a year ago so i can not comment on how it runs now on p.c. however i suspect nothing has changed). You can also run it on mac. I do not have that many problems with flash since i unselect allow plugins thus giving me control of when I would like plugins loaded by selected the option again. Some websites that I visit do require flash. Also, looking outside the bubble the net is starting to be surfed by phones more & more. Adobe is set to release flash on several smart phones this year wino, google, palm pre, nokia to name a few. HTML 5 is not a reality and with the economy the way it is now, I do not suspect that HTML 5 will take for at least another 2 years. So we are going to have to figure something out. Also with slates/tablets coming up. Apple will be the only one not supporting flash. The google slates (many types), joojoo, & win 7 slates (many types) will support flash. So, instead of alienating the adobe company there will have to be a resolution. I suspect the issue is more a bottom line issue (money for apple basically the same reason there is not BD on mac). Granted no flash will not be ipads only thing that it lacks but it is 1 more thing.
He never said Flash is DEAD, he said it’s dying. And it is—Flash enabled viewers are going down year-over-year at surprisingly high rates. Much like the push to make sites standards compliant as Firefox gained marketshare, this will be the same. Web developers can no longer rely on all users having Flash, and those sites that don’t work on Flash-lacking platforms will be a turn-off for users. Users don’t care about Flash in and of itself, or in keeping web development simple for developers—they care about their sites working.
Or, think of it like this: USB was a dead-in-the-water standard in 1998, hardly deployed anywhere. Then Apple used it as the only accepted external devices interface for the one of the most popular individual personal computer models ever the next year... and it exploded. Now it’s everywhere.
Adobe bought Flash because it was everywhere. It was everywhere because it was the first thing to fill in the “rich media” gap in web standards. Much like RealPlayer, it has nowhere to go but down now that more flexible standards are on the way. As HTML5 video, CSS transforms and animation and 3D in the browser mature, there will be less and less need for Flash. And as the number of non-Flash-enabled clients continue to rise, the demand for developers to use these technologies will increase.
I think Adobe made a foolish purchase.
2nd question google - google is not microsoft. Google will take over the smartphone market and the tablet market. Google gives you several options while apple gives you one option. Google is more open vs closed apple. They are not like microsoft since they also give people the option to buy the google branded phone. Once they hit the slate/tablet market it will take off. 3 qi screen option, multiple different size screens, full internet support including flash, camera, multiple service carrier option, etc. In the end people do like innovation but they also love several options. I will probably buy the low end pad but i will probably sell it once the google tablet (notion ink) comes out with their tablet with a 3 qi screen (aka dual screen with e-ink & regular color). Silly to think that anyone could actually say that reading backlit screen for a long period of time is acceptable or healthy for your eyes. I will probably even use the 3 qi screen to surf the net so that I can give my eyes some rest.
Most people seem to do it for ages these days and be fine with it. As long as you’re not reading a bright screen in the dark, it’s really not awful.
As for Google eventually “taking over,” that remains to be seen. I am extremely skeptical that “open” appeals to anyone who isn’t a tech-head. I actually
agree with Fraser Speirs' take that “open” is the biggest PROBLEM with computing right now for the vast majority of “non-techies.” Again, not to say that there will never be a space for more traditional platforms, but... people don’t care about the idea of “open.” They care about whether something does what they want. If the iPhone/iPad does what they want, and you tell them wild-eyed that it’s not “open,” they’ll look at you like you’re crazy... because you are.
3rd BD - no brainer. BD is king and sale numbers confirm it. Once again alienation from apple. Who would like to pay for the bd. version and the downloaded itunes version???? Get real bd. is here to stay. Games are made in BD and BD rules the movie market. So put bd. on the macs so that we can watch movies when we travel. There are no bd. portables yet so putting bd. in a mac as an option is a great idea. If you do not want bd. fine do not but it but give me the option to purchase it. What is up with mac not giving people an option. I feel stuck use either 1. great os mac os X but you have very little to no options or 2. use win 7 aka an ok os but have several option from software to hardware?
Alienation does not work. It did not work for Bush and it surely will not work for apple. Apple put intel in their computers to attract more p.c. customers so I know apple can give the people an option so that it can attract more customers.
Apple put Intel chips in their computers because PPC was a dead-end with lax chipmakers and Intel had a better roadmap.
I agree BD will come eventually, but I don’t think there’s nearly as much demand out there as you imply for BD in portable computers. As for games, there are no shipping games for personal computers that are on Blu-ray discs simply because the market penetration of BD-ROM drives is so low, just like the lag time with DVD and computer games in the late 90s/early 00s. The only platform with BD games is the PS3 because it’s the only platform where BD is guaranteed.
Implying that “no Blu-ray yet” on OS X == “no options” is exaggerating the case. Highly.