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.
WIRED to still use Adobe's Flash
- Thread starter LadyHoneyBabe
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Articles stating that company A intends to do such-and-such are much less credible without a link to an official statement. Since your htlounge.net link has no such thing, I'll hold judgment until it's backed up with evidence.
How dare they defy the wishes of Apple and loyal iPad owners. May they be struck by a thousand flying iPads in Hell.
There's nothing wrong with the article. They state that the reader application WILL play by Apple's rules. The magazine file that Wired will create will be made with Flash and exported to some format which the reader can then open.
No agreements are being violated here.
No agreements are being violated here.
Yes, and that video shows that it's powered by Adobe. There's even an Adobe rep in the video explaining it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwFbwHaP5tE
2 months isn't that old in terms of software development. It shows what they were working on and what they planned to work on over the past couple months, which is an Adobe based app. And the article in the first post is from April 24th. In any case, I doubt Wired is going to be too happy about scrapping all the work they've put into this Adobe powered app.
After watching those videos. With the right look and multitouch a pc tablet would be just as sick with the right flash apps.
What do you mean by "still trying"? What if they just have not heard of iPad or don't care? Apple is STILL a very small player when it comes to Internet.
It's really simple - most people use Windows-based computers for browsing the Internet (by a long shot).
Is that your supposition or do you have empirical evidence backing this statement up?
What's there to back up? It's a well known fact that Macs comprise about 4% of personal computers worldwide. Then there are smart phones. Once again, very few people (worldwide and even in US) can afford data plans so it's not really a big factor.
Yet according to Apple there are 85 million iPhones/iPod Touches to go along with an estimated 30 million Mac users. That's not an insignificant number.
Even Wired said their stats show the newly announced iPad accounts for 26% of their traffic and it hasn't been out a month.
I gotta really wonder how long Flash is going to be able to survive in light of continued advancement of HTML5, CSS, Javascript and other technologies. Surely it'll survive but I think it's importance may greatly be diminished.
Actually that is 26% of mobile traffic. I dont think the ipad fits in the mobile category, but that is just me.
And that is only 115 million total Apple products accounting for only 5.9% of worldwide usage. So yeah I think Windows is the dominate internet experience. And actually it's only the Apple i devices that can't run flash so that is an even smaller piece of the pie.
That piece of the pie gets larger every day. More and more sites are making sure they are compatible with the Apple mobile devices. I've been making it a point to fire off an email asking about iPad compatibility when I run into a problem with a site.
Wired specifically used the iPad as their target device when they unveiled their digital version preview. I look forward to reading it on mine.
That article says that mobile devices only account for up to 3.5% of Wired's overall web traffic.
It also says that while the iPad accounted for 26% of the mobile traffic their site saw in April, there was a significant decline in iPhone / iPod touch traffic at the same time.... seemingly indicating that the iPad traffic wasn't from new users, but from people who have traditionally used the iPhone to surf Wired's website. It also says the overall proportion of mobile users has remained more or less level for the month in question.
In other words, the iPad makes up 26% of about 3.5% of the overall traffic Wired's website saw in April, and it also resulted in a decline in iPhone traffic at the same time.
I'm not saying I wouldn't like to see Wired support the iPhone OS completely, but this article is hardly indicative of a huge spike coming from the iPad at this point.
The digital edition of Wired magazine really has little to do with mobile traffic or marketshare. It's not about laptops or netbooks or mobile phones. It's 100% about tablets and a new way to present magazine content. If they can't release on the iPad it's a huge problem for them.
By the time they release a digital edition, there will be more than a million iPads being used, perhaps signifcantly more, depending on the worldwide release schedule.
As a publisher, who would you target first, the million plus iPad owners or the 100 JooJoo owners and insignificant numbers of other tablet owners out there currently? Other tablets will be coming eventually, and who knows how competitive they'll be sales-wise, but in the near term, it's really the iPad or nothing for this new hope in magazine formats.
I predict they'll find a way to release on the iPad.
By the time they release a digital edition, there will be more than a million iPads being used, perhaps signifcantly more, depending on the worldwide release schedule.
As a publisher, who would you target first, the million plus iPad owners or the 100 JooJoo owners and insignificant numbers of other tablet owners out there currently? Other tablets will be coming eventually, and who knows how competitive they'll be sales-wise, but in the near term, it's really the iPad or nothing for this new hope in magazine formats.
I predict they'll find a way to release on the iPad.