Steve Jobs' Wall Street Journal Visit Reportedly Included Arguments Against Flash

[jeznav]

About 135% peak on my 2.3 Ghz MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo in Firefox 3.6.
About 165% in Safari 4.04 same comp.

Even when I drag my window between the two screens I user here at home right now, it stays about the same CPU usage.

...

What the hell is wrong with your Mac? The CPU usage on my Mac is what I'd expect for animation running full frame using more advanced blending effects.

Perhaps I'm generating more pixels than what you have. My resolution is 1920x1200. Also there is no lag, or frame dropping. Its very smooth but it takes a lot of CPU.

EDIT: I guess, from what I remember in version 10 is that its multiprocessor ready. It tries to take advantage of all the cores to make it run smooth as possible. So utilizing greater than 100% CPU is a good thing? But bad for battery based mobile/portable devices.

 

[macUser2007]

Specifically why? His approach might be wrong (I'm not as successful as he is so I don't think I'm qualified to judge) but I believe his heart/intent of killing flash would to a huge service to the internet, and is in fact in the true spirit of the internet, open standards, and HTML as we know it.

He's not trying to kill flash for other uses which I've seen some previous posts about, just as an embedded thing spammed into html pages. Flash is disabled on my Mac; can't render it on my iPhone, and is even more busted on my PS3's web browser than on OSX.

Huge service to the internet?!!! Now I understand how Jonestown can be possible.

Jobs doesn't want Flash, because he wants to keep you from accessing outside entertainment content. He sees a huge potential in being the middleman between you and the media, be it movies, TV, games or apps.

Flash throws a wrench in his plan. As does Silverlight.

Have you asked yourself, why Silverlight is not on the iPad either? Does it crash Macs too? Or is it because you might stream from Netflix, instead of paying iTunes.

Great service to the internet, indeed. Oh, and I didn't know that the proprietary H.264 is in the "true spirit of the internet" either.

I can understand why Jobs does it, even if I hate it. But I never thought so many of my fellow Mac users are so damned naive, and uninformed.

 

[JackAxe]

Perhaps I'm generating more pixels than what you have. My resolution is 1920x1200. Also there is no lag, or frame dropping. Its very smooth but it takes a lot of CPU.

Nah, the difference is that I'm running Flash Player 10.1 beta 2. It does wonders on the Mac.

I'll test this again tomorrow on my HD 30".

 

[jeznav]

Nah, the difference is that I'm running Flash Player 10.1 beta 2. It does wonders on the Mac.

I'll test this again tomorrow on my HD 30".

I'm running beta 2 as well. So what do you think the cause is?

 

[khunsanook]

Flash is entrenched and definitely not going anywhere soon. Alternatives like HTML5 are many years from becoming mainstream.

I'm not really a fan of flash websites or development, but some days I really pull my hair out trying to fix browser specific problems on web projects. I don't blame many of my colleagues/friends for their love of Flash and its cross-platform, cross-browser uniformity.

Not that we didn't know it before, but Steve Jobs is waaaaay too full of himself. I'd hate to be the person writing his upcoming "authorized biography".

 

[teme]

I know a lot about what people look at and use on websites, and it is not the silly flash things web designers are so proud of...

I actually have data I use for my business, so I know what kind of components are most compelling, and get the most action.

None of them are flash.

Flash that you describe is something kids use because it is cool and fun. Not because it is practical or makes them money. It is not like all these websites that highly rely on flash are rolling in dough. Most of them are barely existing. Part of that is the over use of flash. Some of the absolute worst websites I have seen have been flash based. So many restaurant websites overuse flash that they are literally costing themselves money, by how poorly they present themselves online. It is a toybox, not a development tool. It could potentially be useful in moderation, but that era is long gone, and you have a whole generation of "web developers" who don't know how to do anything without flash. Which is silly, because flash is a single tool and not a very good one at that, at least not for what most web developers should be doing, and that is designing pages for the users and viewers and not to show off to their friends.

Speed of websites is a core component for a successful website and action and response. Google takes it into account when it ranks web pages for the search engines now. Flash is slow. There are so many valid reasons not to use flash, and get rid of the trickery and gimmicks. Focus on making your site user friendly, and professional, but most importantly usable and easy to find relative information. It doesn't have to look cool, it has to be easy to use and accomplish what the purpose of the website is.

If the only goal of the website is to look cool in the web developer's mind, then, and only then, should flash be a key component.

That's your opinion, but please don't tell me disrespectfully that I'm not professional if I use Flash. I rarely do anything with Flash unless my client asks for it. And usually they do ask for it. And they are not kids. And their target audience is not kids.

I understand the negative sides of making a website completely in Flash, and that's why I have never done that. But using Flash as a spice in normal standard HTML site is different case. If it's done well, it doesn't hurt Google search, usability or purpose of the website.

 

[Otaviano]

Huge service to the internet?!!! Now I understand how Jonestown can be possible.

Jobs doesn't want Flash, because he wants to keep you from accessing outside entertainment content. He sees a huge potential in being the middleman between you and the media, be it movies, TV, games or apps.

Flash throws a wrench in his plan. As does Silverlight.

Have you asked yourself, why Silverlight is not on the iPad either? Does it crash Macs too? Or is it because you might stream from Netflix, instead of paying iTunes.

Great service to the internet, indeed. Oh, and I didn't know that the proprietary H.264 is in the "true spirit of the internet" either.

I can understand why Jobs does it, even if I hate it. But I never thought so many of my fellow Mac users are so damned naive, and uninformed.

Why is Spotify in the App Store? You might pay 10 bucks a month to Spotify for unlimited streaming music, instead of buying songs from Apple.

 

[marksman]

That's your opinion, but please don't tell me disrespectfully that I'm not professional if I use Flash. I rarely do anything with Flash unless my client asks for it. And usually they do ask for it. And they are not kids. And their target audience is not kids.

I understand the negative sides of making a website completely in Flash, and that's why I have never done that. But using Flash as a spice in normal standard HTML site is different case. If it's done well, it doesn't hurt Google search, usability or purpose of the website.

Well you are doing your client a dis-service. Have you actually done any testing or research on how people use web pages, or what different elements actually attract people to do certain behaviors?

What kinds of goals do your clients give you for your web sites? To make them look cool?

Why is your client asking for you to do stuff with flash? Because they don't know any better is likely why. Seems like you should be the one who is educated and leading them into a better direction. Not to be rude, but I suggest you invest some real time in getting into the nitty gritty of website evaluation in terms of what actual gets people to act, and how minor little changes can change click through rates by 10%, 20%, 50%.

I am sure for you, you just want to make the client happy. If I were doing what you did, I would be more interested in making the client successful.

I have done entire website upgrades that I thought were awesome and when properly tested, scored like crap and had to be junked. For me the bottom line is results and depending on what your client is doing, they are various ways to measure it... but it all boils down to the same facts. I am talking about having a single non-critical element being broken causing 30% drop in click through rate. I am talking about adding a single extra link element to an image and having CTR go up by over 20%. These are the things that need to be the driving force to any website, not how much crap you can flash on the screen.

Like I said, it is a tool, but a seriously over-used tool, and one that should not be used on most websites. If you use it in some special cases, I see nothing wrong with that. If it is your default way to design a web page, I can see nothing but bad web pages coming from you. At least from how I rate web pages, and that is making money.

Do me a favor. Go look at Jack in the Box's website. Then come back here and tell me what is wrong with it. There is one very bad problem with that website (potentially more but one very significant one in terms of being useful.) They probably spent a good chunk of change on that site, yet it fails miserably for what it should be doing. So take a look and see if you can tell me what that is?

 

[angelneo]

Why is Spotify in the App Store? You might pay 10 bucks a month to Spotify for unlimited streaming music, instead of buying songs from Apple.

It's streaming music. Apple is already upfront about these things, if your apps emulate any of their core iphone functions, chances are they will never be approved.

I am very inclined to believe that Steve Jobs whined about all these due to the fact that Flash can disrupt the potential in iTunes App store. A passive income of 30% on all app revenues is no laughing matter

 

[teme]

Well you are doing your client a dis-service. Have you actually done any testing or research on how people use web pages, or what different elements actually attract people to do certain behaviors?

What kinds of goals do your clients give you for your web sites? To make them look cool?

Why is your client asking for you to do stuff with flash? Because they don't know any better is likely why. Seems like you should be the one who is educated and leading them into a better direction. Not to be rude, but I suggest you invest some real time in getting into the nitty gritty of website evaluation in terms of what actual gets people to act, and how minor little changes can change click through rates by 10%, 20%, 50%.

I am sure for you, you just want to make the client happy. If I were doing what you did, I would be more interested in making the client successful.

I have done entire website upgrades that I thought were awesome and when properly tested, scored like crap and had to be junked. For me the bottom line is results and depending on what your client is doing, they are various ways to measure it... but it all boils down to the same facts. I am talking about having a single non-critical element being broken causing 30% drop in click through rate. I am talking about adding a single extra link element to an image and having CTR go up by over 20%. These are the things that need to be the driving force to any website, not how much crap you can flash on the screen.

Like I said, it is a tool, but a seriously over-used tool, and one that should not be used on most websites. If you use it in some special cases, I see nothing wrong with that. If it is your default way to design a web page, I can see nothing but bad web pages coming from you. At least from how I rate web pages, and that is making money.

I told in my earlier post that I understand why a website shouldn't be made completely with Flash and that I have never done that, and you give me a example of why I shouldn't use Flash and that example is a website made completely with Flash. But I'm not going to continue this with you. You have your opinions, I have mine. You obviously are "P-R-O with facts and results and tests and all kinds of fancy stuff" while I'm just some amateur kid who doesn't know nothing.

 

[Otaviano]

It's streaming music. Apple is already upfront about these things, if your apps emulate any of their core iphone functions, chances are they will never be approved.

I am very inclined to believe that Steve Jobs whined about all these due to the fact that Flash can disrupt the potential in iTunes App store. A passive income of 30% on all app revenues is no laughing matter

It's a streaming music app, with offline status that competes directly with iTunes. You don't think all the people plonking down 10 bucks a month wouldn't throw some of that money at iTunes songs if it wasn't for Spotfiy?

If ever there was an example of Apple being scared of competitors cutting into their model it would have been Spotify. The fact that it's in the App Store and is in the App Store for free, meaning Apple get's no money, says to me that Apple is not too scared of competing with others.

The entire notion that Flash is being excluded because it's a competitor seems so ridiculous to me. Why can't someone code a video site with videos in h264 and undercut the App Store? You can do that today and it would work fine on every iPhone.

 

[angelneo]

It's a streaming music app, with offline status that competes directly with iTunes. You don't think all the people plonking down 10 bucks a month wouldn't throw some of that money at iTunes songs if it wasn't for Spotfiy?

If ever there was an example of Apple being scared of competitors cutting into their model it would have been Spotify. The fact that it's in the App Store and is in the App Store for free, meaning Apple get's no money, says to me that Apple is not too scared of competing with others.

The entire notion that Flash is being excluded because it's a competitor seems so ridiculous to me. Why can't someone code a video site with videos in h264 and undercut the App Store? You can do that today and it would work fine on every iPhone.

Here's some example for you
Opera
Google voice
and more

Steve Jobs is a businessman just like everyone else, the App store has a very huge potential, if I am in his shoe, I might have done the same thing.

 

[Nostromo]

That's your opinion, but please don't tell me disrespectfully that I'm not professional if I use Flash. I rarely do anything with Flash unless my client asks for it. And usually they do ask for it. And they are not kids. And their target audience is not kids.

I understand the negative sides of making a website completely in Flash, and that's why I have never done that. But using Flash as a spice in normal standard HTML site is different case. If it's done well, it doesn't hurt Google search, usability or purpose of the website.

You are wasting your time.

Some people are unable to respond to arguments.

Generally, I'd say Apple should leave the decision of using Flash to their customers. I don't like Apple's bullying people into certain technologies.

I agree with you that Flash has certain advantages. I personally use HTML, CSS, Javascript, but I respect Flash. There are great websites out there that use Flash.

HTML 5 (w3org puts its acceptance quite into the future) may be what we were waiting for, but it looks like we'll have to wait for it quite a bit longer.

The first books are announced at Amazon for this spring though.

 

[Otaviano]

Here's some example for you
Opera
Google voice
and more

Steve Jobs is a businessman just like everyone else, the App store has a very huge potential, if I am in his shoe, I might have done the same thing.

Nice of you to twist the topic, ignore what I said and reply with things that don't really apply to the argument. Kudos

 

[Otaviano]

HTML 5 (w3org puts its acceptance quite into the future) may be what we were waiting for, but it looks like we'll have to wait for it quite a bit longer.

The first books are announced at Amazon for this spring though.

Why wait there are already websites out there written in HTML5, like aneventapart.com

And what web programmer needs a book to start using HTML5? Anyone that's built websites should be able to code an HTML5 websites without many problems. It's not like it's an entirely new language, it's an upgrade on something web programmers have been using for ages.

 

[angelneo]

Nice of you to twist the topic, ignore what I said and reply with things that don't really apply to the argument. Kudos

I'm providing you more examples of competition to App store instead of just arguing about one specific app, which is relevant to why Flash will not be supported on iPhone/iPad which is the topic.

 

[Opiyum]

... the one thing Flash got right that will never go away with browsers is that it made your application look the same in every browser on every system and also now makes your desktop application look the same on every platform including mobile ...

I respectfully disagree with this statement.

Yes I agree about Flash, that's what I said previously, the only value Flash provides is that of an authoring tool. My contention is that it need not output to it's own data format to do what it does as an authoring tool. It bypasses what the internet is and what web browsers were designed to do, render web content. In the case of Flash, your browser is just a vector for Flash and isn't acting as a real cross platform device independent internet browser.

One note. I am a developer of web apps, OSX apps, and iPhone apps and have been creating full fledged large scale enterprise class web apps since 1995 on NeXT's, before Macromedia even released Flash. I saw Flash when it was introduced and have seen it progress (infect) web sites and occasionally actually used well also. That said...

Instead of creating a web app for your client that runs in a web browser they get a Flash application that runs in the Flash player in (a few) web browsers and on desktops as stand alone apps? So, IMO, it's just another implementation of Java, but not nearly as good at most things and better at some others. I can understand how and why you and your client are fooling yourselves into this understanding, not that I personally have a currently available solution, I don't... My point is, why SHOULD Flash be needed? Flash is an end run around html to avoid a bunch of technical difficulties with browser rendering implementations and continually evolving web standards.

For example I can use a text editor to write OS X apps, but I do not. Instead I use a development environment (aka Authoring Tool). It does a bunch of things for me that I would otherwise need to do manually, increasing my productivity.

I'm not talking about a dumb old school WYSIWYG html editor, but a real html authoring tool or development environment. It should take care of the cross browser stuff for you and generate code to the spec.

Let me sum up. We need a multi pronged approach. Web browsers need rendering tests akin to the javascript stuff out there to judge how compliant/complete they are (maybe they already exist, IDK), we need to author code to the html spec instead of a specific browser or browsers and the browsers need to be viewed as broken instead of the web sites that are written to spec but rendered incorrectly in a specific browser, and we need real development environments / authoring tools that generate smart and optimized html/javascript content to the html spec.

 

[Otaviano]

I'm providing you more examples of competition to App store instead of just arguing about one specific app, which is relevant to why Flash will not be supported on iPhone/iPad which is the topic.

First of all, the Opera browser was just demoed last week. So regardless of what that piece says I'm inclined to believe it's only been recently submitted to the App Store. The verdict is still out, but there are plenty of alternative browsers currently in the App Store & judging from how the Opera Mini browser is built it doesn't violate any of the SDK terms. So I believe it will be included.

Google Voice does not compete with any service Apple offers, it competes with a service the telecoms provide. It being blocked is clearly done by the telecoms in the same way they are blocking Skype over 3G.

None of the examples you listed are things that compete with services Apple sells. You don't pay to use Safari, if someone wants to use an alternative browser on the iPhone it doesn't affect Apple one bit. You can't compare those to Spotfiy having made it into the App Store, that is an example of a service that competes directly to one of Apple's big services. You can't compare stupid Opera Mini to that.

 

[JackAxe]

I'm running beta 2 as well. So what do you think the cause is?

That's odd. What happens if you switch your rez to 1680x1050?

That's the rez or my MBpro 17". It's only using a x1600 for the GPU.

That really shouldn't make much of a difference though, especially with your system having way more power at its disposal.

What about trying it out in FireFox? I'm using 3.6.

Here's a screen shot I took from my main screen. The animation jumped between 130% and 150% at this size.

 

[Compile 'em all]

Generally, I'd say Apple should leave the decision of using Flash to their customers..

You can't make a quality product if you leave decisions to customers.

 

[Opiyum]

The verdict is still out, but there are plenty of alternative browsers currently in the App Store & judging from how the Opera Mini browser is built it doesn't violate any of the SDK terms. So I believe it will be included.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but unless Apple changed the SDK again they do allow web browser apps, but only if they use WebKit for rendering/javascript/etc..

 

[angelneo]

First of all, the Opera browser was just demoed last week. So regardless of what that piece says I'm inclined to believe it's only been recently submitted to the App Store. The verdict is still out, but there are plenty of alternative browsers currently in the App Store & judging from how the Opera Mini browser is built it doesn't violate any of the SDK terms. So I believe it will be included.

Google Voice does not compete with any service Apple offers, it competes with a service the telecoms provide. It being blocked is clearly done by the telecoms in the same way they are blocking Skype over 3G.

None of the examples you listed are things that compete with services Apple sells. You don't pay to use Safari, if someone wants to use an alternative browser on the iPhone it doesn't affect Apple one bit. You can't compare those to Spotfiy having made it into the App Store, that is an example of a service that competes directly to one of Apple's big services. You can't compare stupid Opera Mini to that.

I think if we continue from here about specified apps, it will derail the current discussion about Flash in iPhone/iPad, so I am going to leave it as that.

Flash itself has communities/sites with a whole range of apps from games to useless crap. If Apple intends to put it on iPhone/iPad, developers could easily bypass the App Store especially if the player itself is an App on the phone. It might potentially break Apple control over the phone and provide a rev stream that bypass Apple.

The new Flash CS5 can create native iPhone app to be submitted to the app store, which I believe to be Apple's workaround.

 

[Otaviano]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but unless Apple changed the SDK again they do allow web browser apps, but only if they use WebKit for rendering/javascript/etc..

The Opera people got very clever and made a web browser where all the rendering is run on their own servers and it returns a completed product into the web browser. So they don't bring an alternate rendering engine onto the iPhone.

It's pretty fast:

http://www.opera.com/mini/demo/

 

[Otaviano]

Flash itself has communities/sites with a whole range of apps from games to useless crap. If Apple intends to put it on iPhone/iPad, developers could easily bypass the App Store especially if the player itself is an App on the phone. It might potentially break Apple control over the phone and provide a rev stream that bypass Apple.

Except there already are revenue streams that bypass Apple. Point in case SPOTIFY. What's Hulu, NBC, CBS, or anyone else from creating a website that you pay to access that plays videos in h264? Again bypassing Apple.

I'm just saying there are clear examples that show Apple is not too concerned about competition to their services.

I think Apple sees the chance to try and kill a product that they don't want to be forced to include in their operating system, and they are talking it. Try and imagine the amount of work it took write work around for Safari and Snow Leopard to support Flash which hasn't been re-written into 64-bit because they are forced to ship it with OS-X.

Apple is playing their cards to kill off this technology so they can keep their entire OS code to themselves. Kudos to them for doing it, it's the perfect device and time to try and do it.

If not having Flash ever becomes a real problem then it will be added.

 

[Ironduke]

Flash has to go, its just not acceptable for Battery powered mobile Products, it makes your CPU go like your playing the latest 3D kick ass Game, and what you get for that is just a little flash & maybe a crash.

wehay I rymed.

Getsome!