Not simply for the sake of having one, no. But how do you determine if a counter-argument is worth having until you hear it?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Jobs Posts 'Thoughts on Flash' Open Letter
- Thread starter Lordillingworth
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not simply for the sake of having one, no. But how do you determine if a counter-argument is worth having until you hear it?
1/2 hour, really?
Platitude quoting haters are "gunna" hate this...
Apple is a business, duh.
It may or may not be business-driven. If it is that doesn't make Jobs an idiot, it makes him a businessman and a great showman, both of which we already knew.
Such lame excuses Jobs. Everyone knows you don't want Flash because it would kill your app store profits. Just man up and admit it. You'll be better for it.
It's sad that pro-flash/anti-Apple people require a letter from Jobs explaining these things when these self-proclaimed nerds should know all of this already.
Go Steve. It's funny how many people are blinded by their own bias - and I'm not talking about apple fan boys. I'm glad apple is taking the 'let's be open' to this topic. I love it when big companies let everybody else know what they're thinking. These answers are all pretty straightforward and would be hard to argue against - for the most part these are all based on science and facts (saying this of course will spur multiple comments below trying to rebuttle each argument, each of which will be extremely naive and weak).
Steve is not right...
The reason is that if the flash coding is wrong and slows down my machine, I (the user) should be one choosing what I want for my machine (iPad or iPhone), not Steve.
Imagine that Steve Jobs start blocking my adobe aplications in my mac pro, that is what he is doing with the iPhone and iPad.
The problem that all the blind falks here do not see is that THE IPHONE AND IPAD ARE MINE!!!! AND I AM SUPOSED TO DO WHAT EVER I WANT WITH IT!!!!.
There is wher adobe has a zilion% right. The ned consumer has the right to choose what he wants for the device he adquire.
The reason is that if the flash coding is wrong and slows down my machine, I (the user) should be one choosing what I want for my machine (iPad or iPhone), not Steve.
Imagine that Steve Jobs start blocking my adobe aplications in my mac pro, that is what he is doing with the iPhone and iPad.
The problem that all the blind falks here do not see is that THE IPHONE AND IPAD ARE MINE!!!! AND I AM SUPOSED TO DO WHAT EVER I WANT WITH IT!!!!.
There is wher adobe has a zilion% right. The ned consumer has the right to choose what he wants for the device he adquire.
Flash is Dead
Goodbye Flash lets watch their stock plummet. http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ADBE
Steve Jobs will finally remove flash from the mobile computing.
Goodbye Flash lets watch their stock plummet. http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ADBESteve Jobs will finally remove flash from the mobile computing.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I had such high hopes that this was going to conclude with Apple bending on this stance. Wouldn't it have been so nice- and customer-friendly- if something like the following had been the "one more thing" to this message:
Apple is a customer-centered company and we've heard the longings for many of our users to be able to access Flash content in spite of all of these points. So, today we are going to open the option for Adobe to offer a Flash Player for the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad. This will be a user-option so that those who don't want Flash for reasons cited won't risk rapid battery depletion, security & stability issues, etc. But those who do want access to Flash features will be able to access them as soon as Adobe delivers the Flash player tuned for these devices.
This would do 2 key things:
What is the customer-experience loss in allowing users to experience the "pain" of Flash if they so choose? Apple could even make the user option such that it provides an occasional warning message that summarizes the points in this letter, much like Safari has the warning message about security risk when a person visits certain websites.
Instead, Apple chooses to decide for its product buyers, rather than even extending the option. Even for the reasons shared in this letter, I'd rather decide to burn my own battery faster, etc myself. There are times when being able to access some specific Flash content is important, and there is not an HTML5 + H.264 + Javascript alternative available.
Apple is a customer-centered company and we've heard the longings for many of our users to be able to access Flash content in spite of all of these points. So, today we are going to open the option for Adobe to offer a Flash Player for the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad. This will be a user-option so that those who don't want Flash for reasons cited won't risk rapid battery depletion, security & stability issues, etc. But those who do want access to Flash features will be able to access them as soon as Adobe delivers the Flash player tuned for these devices.
This would do 2 key things:
- It would end the "we decide for you" stance of Apple, by letting their customers decide if they want to use Flash or not (the way- IMO- it should have been all along), and
- It puts all the pressure on Adobe to deliver an optimized Flash player for the premier mobile platform that doesn't seem to burn batteries too quickly, that doesn't result in security breaches, that doesn't crash Safari "4 times a day", and so on.
What is the customer-experience loss in allowing users to experience the "pain" of Flash if they so choose? Apple could even make the user option such that it provides an occasional warning message that summarizes the points in this letter, much like Safari has the warning message about security risk when a person visits certain websites.
Instead, Apple chooses to decide for its product buyers, rather than even extending the option. Even for the reasons shared in this letter, I'd rather decide to burn my own battery faster, etc myself. There are times when being able to access some specific Flash content is important, and there is not an HTML5 + H.264 + Javascript alternative available.
i much prefer Engadget's summary/rebuttal.
apple fighting for open standards is like child molesters going to church every sunday.
oh yeah, and the Flex SDK is open source.
apple fighting for open standards is like child molesters going to church every sunday.
oh yeah, and the Flex SDK is open source.
Steve is just trying to push Adobe to take Flash and innovate it further, because honestly... it's been piece of s* for too long, on Windows AND Mac!
It's time to step up Adobe!
It's time to step up Adobe!
I will start by saying I love HTML5. But it will never kill flash. Not until they get their s**t together and until this"web standard" become an actual standard and you don't have to keep redesigning and making changes with every browser and browser updates. HTML is markup language that relies on css and java. And that's it.
Haha come on man, "an idiot" is the last thing he is, he is a super intelligent man. He is either very uninformed about Flash (not the case) or he knows whatever he says will be followed by thousands of people without questioning it.
Putting flash out of their device makes them millions of dollars with their appstore. Of course it's all business driven. But that's his job, to make Apple money, and he is very good at it.
The key here is what Steve said was most important, Adobe wants it to be a cross-platform development tool and this would hinder developers since they would be at the mercy of a third-party's advancements.
I would say consumers have the right to accept what any vendor offers in relation to a product. If you don't like it, then don't buy it.
It wouldn't work out like that. There would be alot of customers who would blame apple for problems with flash if the implemented it like that. Applecare would be flooded with support calls due to battery life issues.
So why would apple do something to ruin the experience for the majority of their customers by apeasing the want's of a few?
Notice how Steve glossed over the fact that H264 is not an open? "Open standard" vs "industry standard".
An "industry standard" in control of patent holder MPEG LA (of which Apple is a member), who will start charging content providers in 2016. And when they charge content providers, they will charge us.
Thanks, Steve!
I know Flash has to go bye-bye sometime, but do you really have to charge us a toll as we drive along your highway to the future?
Reality distortion field at full effect... My thoughts on HTML5; there are no solid pro tools for highly interactive content creation. No tools = no go. Create professional quality tools Stevo and then you can tell its the way to go. If not then please stop talking nonsense.
It's actually royalty free at least until 2016. And there's no guarantee that using Ogg will prevent you from being sued on patents.
It's all filler except for this:
That's really the only part that matters.
The iPhone is under Apple's control and Apple's goal is to make the iPhone better than other smart-phones. Letting Flash in would put the iPhone under Adobe's control and Adobe's goal is to make all smart-phones the same. That's what's good for Adobe.
It would be insane for Apple to hand over control to a company with such radically different goals.
You can certainly argue about everything else in the letter (both pro or con) but none of it really matters like this one point does.
Steve Jobs said:
That's really the only part that matters.
The iPhone is under Apple's control and Apple's goal is to make the iPhone better than other smart-phones. Letting Flash in would put the iPhone under Adobe's control and Adobe's goal is to make all smart-phones the same. That's what's good for Adobe.
It would be insane for Apple to hand over control to a company with such radically different goals.
You can certainly argue about everything else in the letter (both pro or con) but none of it really matters like this one point does.