Flash CS5 Will Export iPhone Apps

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Flash CS5 Will Export iPhone Apps

Posted by kdawson on Monday October 5, 2009 @09:04PM from the in-by-the-side-door dept.

HanClinto was among a number of readers to send word that Adobe has worked around the inability to run Flash on iPhones and iPod Touch devices. Adobe has been trying to work with Apple for more than a year to get its Flash Player software running on Apple's products, but has said it needs more cooperation from Apple to get it done. Now Adobe has come up with a work-around. At its Adobe Max developer conference in Los Angeles Monday, Adobe announced that the CS5 release of Flash Professional, due in beta later this year, will allow developers to write applications and compile the code to run on Apple devices. Getting these into the app store might be tricky, though.

154 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Some apps are already there... by chocobanana · 2009-10-05 21:13 · Score: 4, Informative

Look in http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashcs5/appsfor_iphone/ They already show apps accepted into the store that were made by devs with prerelease versions of Flash CS5... I think this is cool as it will enable people skilled in Flash to stick to their tool of choice. I would love to see a comparison between developing the iPhone SDK and Flash.
1. Re:Some apps are already there... by AwaxSlashdot · 2009-10-05 22:14 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I would love to see a comparison between developing the iPhone SDK and Flash.
  From Daring FireBall :
  
  From the FAQ:
  
  Can I run content created with Flash in the iPhone simulator on Mac? No. Flash content created for the iPhone will not run within the iPhone simulator on Mac.
  Thatâ(TM)s because the Simulator runs x86 binaries, but Adobeâ(TM)s compiler only produces ARM code.
  
  Can I use native iPhone OS Controls in my Flash based iPhone content? No.
  Not surprising. Iâ(TM)m guessing this will mostly be used to make games anyway.
  No debugging. No native controls.
  
  --
  Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
2. Re:Some apps are already there... by samkass · 2009-10-06 02:28 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  No native controls makes sense, but "no debugging" doesn't follow from the "can't run in the simulator" statement. With Apple's toolchain, you can still debug while the software is running on the actual device (not the simulator). It's possible that Adobe has done something similar with this. I don't know. It would be interesting to find out one way or the other.
  
  --
  E pluribus unum
3. Re:Some apps are already there... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 02:33 · Score: 0
  
  No debugging on the iPhone compiled code, but I am betting you can debug the Flash application itself, as "iPhone" should simply be a target, and not the only "compilation" mode available. After all, it still will write normal Flash applications.
4. Re:Some apps are already there... by s73v3r · 2009-10-06 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  Anyone who's developed for the iPhone, or any mobile device, for that matter, knows there's a world of difference between the "simulator" and the actual device. Not being able to do actual debugging on the device will make getting Flash-based apps to work that much harder.
5. Re:Some apps are already there... by StreetStealth · 2009-10-06 05:29 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  No debugging. No native controls.
  Less space than the SDK. Lame.
  
  --
  Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
6. Re:Some apps are already there... by edxwelch · 2009-10-06 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  I notice they all are rather simple games. It would be interesting to see how something more complicated performs, like tower defense - where you have hunderds of sprites on screen at the same time
Yet another language by BadAnalogyGuy · 2009-10-05 21:14 · Score: 1

Flash seems like it would need all sort of runtime support to do all the cool things that Flash is supposed to be able to do. If there is no runtime, and the language is just compiled down to native code, and it simply relies on existing iPhone libraries, then is Flash/ActionScript really all that useful and attractive as an implementation language?
This is where Android really shines. You can program in any language, as long as it's Java.
1. Re:Yet another language by BikeHelmet · 2009-10-05 21:27 · Score: 1
  
  This is where Android really shines. You can program in any language, as long as it's Java.
  Android has full C/C++ support, but then you're locked to whatever phone you made it for.
  Most devs would rather take a tiny hit in performance to not have to recompile constantly. If you go the C/C++ route, you have the chance that you'll miss out on an Android phone using a different SoC.
  With Java, you have languages like Ruby and Python too. ;)
2. Re:Yet another language by dFaust · 2009-10-05 21:30 · Score: 2
  
  then is Flash/ActionScript really all that useful and attractive as an implementation language?
  It's attractive to people that only know Flash/Actionscript and don't have the time/desire/skill to learn Objective-C.
  I fear just what kind of pre-existing crapware this will enable on the iPhone.
3. Re:Yet another language by tomtomtom777 · 2009-10-05 21:45 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Android has full C/C++ support
  They supply the standard C library, but they expose no other API whatsoever. In practice, this means you cannot do any input/output in C and it's use is limited to processor intensive logic.
4. Re:Yet another language by freeshoes · 2009-10-05 21:49 · Score: 1
  
  Ruby? Python? If I want the app to take the term of my natural life to load then I will use these, what we need is Haskell.
5. Re:Yet another language by naz404 · 2009-10-05 21:59 · Score: 1
  
  >I fear just what kind of pre-existing crapware this will enable on the iPhone.
  
  Addicting Flash games of course! :D
  
  I look forward to seeing some of the better Flash games ported to the iPhone.
  
  --
  http://www.object404.com
6. Re:Yet another language by BikeHelmet · 2009-10-05 22:17 · Score: 1
  
  http://developer.android.com/sdk/ndk/1.5_r1/index.html#overview
  My bad - you still need to tie apps in with the VM - you can just opt to code huge chunks in C/C++ if that's what floats your boat.
  You are correct.
7. Re:Yet another language by salarelv · 2009-10-05 22:31 · Score: 1
  
  Buy a Hero and You have Flash 9 support.
8. Re:Yet another language by Canazza · 2009-10-05 22:41 · Score: 1
  
  I work for a company that makes mainly Flash-based software. The thing about Flash is that with the same source code (totally unchanged between versions) we can output a web application and a stand-alone executable (for example, to go on a CD). Something which our clients love is the multi-format, multi medium nature of Flash. Yes, most of this can be done with Java, but not in the same amount of time and not with the same artist-integration Flash has.
  On the topic of iPhone integration, if Flash CS5 lets almost anyone make iPhone apps will this slow the approval of apps as every Tom Dick and Harry will be submitting their Newgrounds fodder? Not only this, but does this mean we can create and compile iPhone apps on the PC? As far as I'm aware it can only be done on Mac OSX with their Objective-C libs at the moment (one of the reasons we've not already started iPhone development is the lack of Macs in our office... or iPhones)
  
  --
  It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
9. Re:Yet another language by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-05 23:22 · Score: 0
  
  You can always use http://jaskell.codehaus.org/ or http://sourceforge.net/projects/jhaskell/
10. Re:Yet another language by gaspyy · 2009-10-05 23:31 · Score: 1
  
  Flash CS5 on both Mac and PC are supported. I am in the same position as you, especially since many people who play my chess game would love to see it on their iPhones.
  As for quality, only AS3 is supported. Most simple/crappy flash games are written in AS1/AS2 because of the easier learning curve, but really, considering apps like iFart on IAmRich, I doubt anyone will contend that the quality of the approved flash games could be too low.
11. Re:Yet another language by Canazza · 2009-10-05 23:54 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Thank god only AS3 is supported.
  Although, most of what our company outputs is AS2, mainly because our primary clients have paranoid and backwards IT techs who refuse to update their flash players, or low-budget IT Depts who are still using Pentium IIIs.
  Anything that'll give us some leverage to put AS3 into practice is well worth it
  "Sure, you can have it on the iPhone, but only if you update your flash player on your PCs"
  
  --
  It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for being subtle.
12. Re:Yet another language by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 00:00 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Right, because the programming language is synonymous with the quality of the program. "You wrote a program in a language I don't know or understand. It MUST be crap". It's like Fox News for technology here. Besides, you are worried about "crapware"? Yes, let's continue the trend of creating farting apps and bouncing boob games and hope that "crapware" doesn't come out. It's all quality now!
13. Re:Yet another language by AndrewNeo · 2009-10-06 01:41 · Score: 1
  
  if Flash CS5 lets almost anyone make iPhone apps will this slow the approval of apps as every Tom Dick and Harry will be submitting their Newgrounds fodder?
  You mean, slower than it already is, with everyone submitting their flashlight and other extra-generic apps?
14. Re:Yet another language by Hannes2000 · 2009-10-06 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  I fear just what kind of pre-existing crapware this will enable on the iPhone.
  none. this isn't a mobile safari flash plugin, it's just another way to compile your standard iPhone-App. Apple won't be accepting "pre-existing crapware" any more than they do already.
15. Re:Yet another language by Gilmoure · 2009-10-06 03:05 · Score: 1
  
  What's a Hero?
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
16. Re:Yet another language by salarelv · 2009-10-06 03:19 · Score: 1
  
  HTC Hero is a Android phone
17. Re:Yet another language by aztracker1 · 2009-10-06 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  That's absolutely funny, considering how many security flaws existed in earlier versions of flash, including the ability to access the filesystem via exploit.. oh well, tell them I hope they like being pwn'd for their ignorance on the issue.
  
  --
  Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Play nice! by sumthinboutjesus · 2009-10-05 21:15 · Score: 1, Offtopic

It is extremely frustrating to have a very capable mobile browser and not be able to watch online video content, such as Hulu, ESPN etc. Flash games would potentially be a side benefit of the technology, but I care less about games than I do viewing online video content. I really wish either the content providers would ditch Flash as their delivery method or Apple would get on board with Flash 10.1 so I don't have some web content effectively gimped. Either would be fine with me, although I imagine ditching Flash as the delivery method would be better as I don't particularly care for annoying Flash ads and Adobe's current Flash version for Mac doesn't lead me to believe their iPhone implementation would be stable or have smooth playback. I really do wonder how good Flash can be on all the other mobile platforms it is being ported to...
1. Re:Play nice! by dingen · 2009-10-05 22:03 · Score: 1
  
  You do realize the news that Flash CS5 will be able to export iPhone Apps has absolutely nothing to do with Safari Mobile supporting Flash or websites ditching Flash for something else to show their videos, right?
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
2. Re:Play nice! by sumthinboutjesus · 2009-10-05 22:14 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, I do know that, and I thought it was clear from my comment that I wanted either the option for Flash on the iPhone or for current online video providers to move away from Flash so I could use their content...neither of which is a solution with the current announcement of Flash 10.1. Effectively, that's the whole point of my comment: this announcement has nothing to do with my desire for Safari to either support Flash or for websites to ditch it, and that sucks.
3. Re:Play nice! by dingen · 2009-10-05 22:18 · Score: 1
  
  Effectively, that's the whole point of my comment: this announcement has nothing to do with my desire for Safari to either support Flash or for websites to ditch it, and that sucks.
  I'm glad we both agree your reply has nothing to do with this article.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
4. Re:Play nice! by freeshoes · 2009-10-05 22:20 · Score: 1
  
  Silverlight anyone..... thought not.
5. Re:Play nice! by sumthinboutjesus · 2009-10-05 23:08 · Score: 1
  
  Why don't you stop being a dick and RTFA, as in the article it clearly talks about how Flash Player is still not properly supported etc. My comment was clearly relevant to the article and the continuing issues surrounding Flash on the iPhone, and it's obvious you either didn't read the article (and just stuck with reading the summary as most do) or you have serious issues with reading comprehension and understanding critical commentary of the article's content.
6. Re:Play nice! by Bazar · 2009-10-05 23:10 · Score: 1
  
  Watching videos on your cellphone?
  We get charged by the kilobytes for online cellphone useage here in New Zealand, watching a 30 minutes youtube movie would probably cost at least 50USD
  If your annoyed that you can't download movies to your cellphone, i can't help but think your doing something wrong.
  Flash pages on the otherhand i can understand, especially since there are so many websites that don't function correctly without flash
  
  --
  To avoid criticism; Say nothing, Do nothing, Be nothing.
7. Re:Play nice! by sumthinboutjesus · 2009-10-05 23:23 · Score: 1
  
  Although I didn't explicitly state earlier, I'm actually using an iPod touch 3rd gen, which is essentially an iPhone without the cell radio. Therefore, all my data usage comes from WiFi. Hence, no worries about the outrageous data fees that cell companies charge; it would be hard to justify those prices given that 99% of the time I'm within range of WiFi. And yes, mobile Safari would be essentially a desktop browser (which would be very useful) if it could support a few critical plugins such as Flash that seem to be increasingly popular for viewing web content.
8. Re:Play nice! by Anonymusing · 2009-10-06 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  We get charged by the kilobytes for online cellphone useage here in New Zealand, watching a 30 minutes youtube movie would probably cost at least 50USD
  iPhone users in the U.S. are typically REQUIRED to pay for a $30/month unlimited data plan, on the assumption that you will either use a lot of data, or AT&T still wants to make a buck off you.
  
  --
  Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
9. Re:Play nice! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 09:26 · Score: 0
  
  Here in Canada, 30$ gets you 500MB. Like I want to burn all that bandwidth with fucking flash ads.
10. Re:Play nice! by mgcarley · 2009-10-06 22:06 · Score: 1
  
  All the more reason to do what I did and:
  1. Move away from New Zealand (instead try... Europe... Scandinavia. It's nice up there. Or France or Germany or Austria or... you get my drift.)
  2. Don't buy an iPhone.
  Look, I like Apple products as much as the next guy, but I can do way more with something like a Nokia E, N or XM series device than I can on an iPhone/iPod Touch.
  
  --
  Founder & COO, Hayai India (hayai.in) / USA (hayaibroadband.com) // t: @mgcarley
Why would this be tricky? by dFaust · 2009-10-05 21:22 · Score: 2, Interesting

There are already at least four apps on the store today that were built like this. This isn't Flash on the iPhone in any way - the apps are compiled into native iPhone applications. Does Apple have a rule somewhere that says all iPhone apps must be compiled with XCode?
1. Re:Why would this be tricky? by dingen · 2009-10-05 21:28 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  They do have a rule saying apps must be written using the iPhone SDK provided by Apple.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
2. Re:Why would this be tricky? by joh · 2009-10-05 21:57 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Yeah, but there's no rule that says that the code has to be hand-written. If it uses all the right APIs chances are that Apple will never even notice how the app was generated in the first place.
3. Re:Why would this be tricky? by biscuitlover · 2009-10-05 22:06 · Score: 1
  
  It's interesting if that is indeed the case, because there are a lot of apps out there that have been written using Unity3D...
4. Re:Why would this be tricky? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-05 22:42 · Score: 0
  
  It's interesting if that is indeed the case, because there are a lot of apps out there that have been written using Unity3D...
  ...ever looked at Unity's requirements for the iPhone edition?
  
  You must be an approved Apple Developer for the iPhone and install the iPhone SDK (requires Intel-based Mac running OSX 10.5.4 or later)
5. Re:Why would this be tricky? by gaspyy · 2009-10-05 23:24 · Score: 1
  
  The same note is present in Adobe's case - see here (scroll to bottom): "Delivery through the App Store requires participation in the iPhone Developer Program and approval of the application by Apple."
  It's worth noting that there are already a few apps made with Flash on Adobe store.
  Also not mentioned in the summary is that this is actually native code being generated:
  "We created a new compiler front end that allowed LLVM to understand ActionScript 3 and used its existing ARM back end to output native ARM assembly code. We call this Ahead of Time (AOT) compilationâ"in contrast to the way Adobe Flash Player and Adobe AIR function on the desktop using Just in Time (JIT) compilation. Since we are able to compile ActionScript to ARM ahead of time, the application gets all the performance benefits that the JIT would offer and the license compliance of not requiring a runtime in the final application."
6. Re:Why would this be tricky? by cerberusss · 2009-10-06 02:51 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Yeah, but there's no rule that says that the code has to be hand-written. If it uses all the right APIs chances are that Apple will never even notice how the app was generated in the first place.
  No, there is no specific rule, but there are a lot of complaints from developers using Phonegap. This framework allows HTML/JavaScript based development on iPhone, Android and BlackBerry. Apps developed using this framework have been rejected from the App Store in unusually high percentages.
  There are a lot of unwritten rules to the App Store as well. One of them is: don't use frameworks.
  
  --
  8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
7. Re:Why would this be tricky? by sootman · 2009-10-06 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  Do they? You've got to use iPhone APIs, but that's not the same thing as saying you've got to use Apple's SDK. We saw this also with last month's announcement of using .Net to build apps. As long as you wind up producing code that runs naively on the iPhone, I don't think it matters how you generate the code.
  
  --
  Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
8. Re:Why would this be tricky? by firewood · 2009-10-06 05:17 · Score: 1
  
  Apple's XCode iPhone SDK tool chain supports development and building apps using ARM (armv6 armv7) assembly language, as well as Objective C, C, and even Javascript wrapped up in a local web viewer. Developers occasionally use just a tiny bit of ARM assembly for DSP or vectorized floating point stuff, but there's nothing to prevent 99.9% of an apps source from being compiled from ARM assembly language. So this Flash authoring tool is likely an intermediate assembly language source code generator, with just a bit of Objective C glue to connect to the UI, all compiled into an app using XCode on a Mac.
9. Re:Why would this be tricky? by dingen · 2009-10-06 09:26 · Score: 1
  
  So you're saying Flash CS5 for Windows will not be able to create iPhone apps? I doubt that.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
10. Re:Why would this be tricky? by firewood · 2009-10-06 18:30 · Score: 1
  
  So you're saying Flash CS5 for Windows will not be able to create iPhone apps? I doubt that.
  Yes. The required libraries and code signing tools are very likely not licensed for redistribution by Adobe. Good luck creating an app without any libraries, and installing on a non-jailbroken device or submitting an unsigned app to the App store.
11. Re:Why would this be tricky? by dingen · 2009-10-07 03:04 · Score: 1
  
  Not according to Adobe, quoting:
  
  "What operating systems are supported for authoring iPhone content using Flash?"
  iPhone application development will be supported on operating systems supported by Adobe Flash Professional CS5. This includes both Mac and Windows based operating systems.
  Also note this Tweet from Ryan Stewert, saying:
  
  "One of the biggest things about the Flash/iPhone news is that you no longer need a Mac to build iPhone apps."
  So yeah, unless Apple does something radical, Flash CS5 will be able to export to iPhone from Windows.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
12. Re:Why would this be tricky? by firewood · 2009-10-07 06:15 · Score: 1
  
  So yeah, unless Apple does something radical, Flash CS5 will be able to export to iPhone from Windows.
  Apple's already done that. It's their iTunes DRM.
  Their iPhone libraries also have a license restriction, try reading it.
13. Re:Why would this be tricky? by dingen · 2009-10-07 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  You're suggesting Adobe can't read or understand the iPhone license restrictions and will release Flash (one of their major applications) with a key feature that breaks Apple's rules?
  Yeah, right.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
14. Re:Why would this be tricky? by firewood · 2009-10-07 19:57 · Score: 1
  
  It looks someone didn't read the SDK license when they first started talking about porting Flash early last year. Since then they have which is probably why they created this new tool.
  The way not to break the rules is to finish building the translated lash the iPhone app on a Mac using Apple's SDK.
  No other way that I know of.
15. Re:Why would this be tricky? by dingen · 2009-10-07 20:13 · Score: 1
  
  Well Adobe found a way, that's for sure, because they're saying on their official site right now that you'll be able to build iPhone apps using Windows.
  I don't think Adobe would say this without the legal department knowing, so they either did something clever or they're lying. I don't find the second option to be very credible.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
16. Re:Why would this be tricky? by firewood · 2009-10-08 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  Where does it say that whatever it builds on Windows will be directly installable on an iPhone or submittable to the App store without also requiring a Mac somewhere for "post-processing"?
Ok. by mcgritch · 2009-10-05 21:23 · Score: 1

But when are they going to announce support for Authorware?
Hard vs. easy by JonTurner · 2009-10-05 21:37 · Score: 1, Insightful

>>Getting these into the app store might be tricky, though.
But getting this into the courts will be a snap.
Certain recent high-profile apps store refusals (most notably, google voice) have drawn FCC attention. Apple cannot keep a walled garden forever.
1. Re:Hard vs. easy by BasilBrush · 2009-10-05 22:43 · Score: 2
  
  Whilst they are not a monopoly supplier of mobile phones they can do what they like.
2. Re:Hard vs. easy by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-05 23:17 · Score: 0
  
  No, they can't.
3. Re:Hard vs. easy by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 00:36 · Score: 0
  
  As pointed out by a previous poster, there are already apps using this on the store http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashcs5/appsfor_iphone/
Monotouch by AwaxSlashdot · 2009-10-05 22:18 · Score: 3, Informative

http://monotouch.net/
Compile C# code written against .Net libs and get it running on the iPhone. Monotouch provides a C# to ARM compiler and the ARM implementation of the .Net libs you might need.

--
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
1. Re:Monotouch by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 03:50 · Score: 0
  
  Thank you for posting this link. I saw the story a few weeks ago (whenever that was), but ignored it because of the $1000 price tag that it mentioned.
  Without a goal of enterprise sales, $300 is much more reasonable, albeit still expensive. It would require 572 sales of $1 apps (pre government tax, post Apple tax [30%]) to repay. Still, I think getting out of XCode will be a boon for a lot of people's productivity.
  XCode has nothing on Visual Studio, Eclipse or NetBeans.
Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Viol8 · 2009-10-05 22:28 · Score: 1

Serious question - I have no idea what their beef is. Is it yet more paranoid control of the apps , even apps running in a VM , that can run on their system or is some sort of security issue , or is it just sour grapes?
1. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dingen · 2009-10-05 22:39 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The main reason Apple and Adobe fight over Flash is because Adobe doesn't want to do a complete rewrite of Flash for the iPhone and instead just wants to modify its Mac-version to run in Safari Mobile.
  Apple however isn't content with this, because it's their opinion that Flash for Mac/iPhone takes up too much resources, which will harm the "browsing experience" and drain the battery.
  Basically, Apple demands something better than Adobe is willing to develop.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
2. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by tpgp · 2009-10-05 23:05 · Score: 1
  
  Basically, Apple demands something better than Adobe is willing to develop.
  Do you have a non-speculative source for this?
  
  --
  My pics.
3. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by BasilBrush · 2009-10-05 23:06 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Paranoia is an irrational fear.
  Apple strongly controlling apps is a business decision.
  There's a difference.
  It's one of many business decisions that makes up the iPhone ecosystem. Something which has been phenomenally successful. Consumers like the end result, and vote with their dollars.
  Whilst Apple employees do make mistakes with edge cases of their rules, the rules themselves are not irrational. And Flash isn't an edge case.
4. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dhovis · 2009-10-05 23:21 · Score: 1
  
  Basically, Apple demands something better than Adobe is willing to develop.
  Do you have a non-speculative source for this?
  Have you ever used Flash on the Mac?
  
  --
  --
  The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
5. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by anti-pop-frustration · 2009-10-05 23:32 · Score: 1
  
  Apple however isn't content with this, because it's their opinion that Flash for Mac/iPhone takes up too much resources, which will harm the "browsing experience" and drain the battery.
  True. Flash on mobile browsers might be too much (hardware wise) for the current generation of smartphones. But we're getting there fast.
  
  Also, a proper flash plug-in would mean arbitrary code (which in Apple speak is code word for communism), and we can't have that sort of thing, no sir. Users must be protected from it at all cost.
  
  Apple: Making trusted computing cool since 2008.
6. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by elvum · 2009-10-05 23:46 · Score: 1
  
  It seems to work fine for me.
7. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-05 23:47 · Score: 0
  
  That's not an argument. Flash is too ineficient, bloated and plain sucks in any platform.
8. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dingen · 2009-10-05 23:49 · Score: 1
  
  Then you haven't looked at your CPU usage while running Flash on a Mac.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
9. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by FlyingBishop · 2009-10-05 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  In all fairness, he probably has a fast enough CPU that it isn't an issue.
10. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 00:01 · Score: 0
  
  Politics. Flash would allow to write applications that are not screened by Apple, same reason for Java. Imagine the possibility, someone could
11. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dingen · 2009-10-06 00:10 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, but the iPhone hasn't.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
12. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dingen · 2009-10-06 00:11 · Score: 1
  
  Until that is fixed, Steve Jobs doesn't want it on his precious platform.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
13. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dingen · 2009-10-06 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  Not really though, because even if a JVM or Flash Player existed on the iPhone, you wouldn't be able to install stuff on the iPhone without getting it from the App Store.
  The only way you could provide applications would be throug the web, but web apps are currently also not being screened by Apple.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
14. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dhovis · 2009-10-06 00:53 · Score: 1
  
  That's not an argument. Flash is too ineficient, bloated and plain sucks in any platform.
  The Windows version of Flash craps out unicorns compared to the Mac version.
  
  --
  --
  The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
15. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by cppmonkey · 2009-10-06 00:58 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Just because Flash is single threaded and thus can only choke one core of a dual core machine at a time doesn't mean it can't bring a 2.8 Ghz machine to it's knees. Just try watching one hulu movie in Safari in one window and load some particularly crappy flash game in firefox. Your machine is now unusable. Adobe treats mac users as second class citizens thus treating many of their power users like dirt. If you think like Steve Jobs, this is an insult to Apple since they went and did want industry members like Adobe have long demanded of them and built a better OS than Windows (much better) and built really solid hardware, the iPod Touch/iPhone anyways, and then been plagued with monopolists like Adobe/Microsoft shutting them out. If history is a lesson, (think iWork) Apple will soon deliver a native version of Inkscape and dump resources into Pixelmator, and start bundling them with Final Cut studio and new iMacs (well a trial version in Pixelmator's case). Apple somewhat reasonably demands more, Adobe and Microsoft refuse to/can't deliver so Apple just raises the bar... this is capitalism at its best; even if the Google Voice fiasco is capitalism at its worst.
16. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by moogied · 2009-10-06 01:55 · Score: 1
  
  This is true with windows too? Flash is a bloated pile of shit program. Is this really shocking? Wake up and smell the piss poor programming along with god awful management decisions. (Rewrite? Screw that! Lets tack more shit on!)
  
  --
  So basically, -1 troll/offtopic is really slashdots way of saying "I hate that you thought of something before me."
17. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by FlyingBishop · 2009-10-06 03:01 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Yes, I know. Until just last week I ran Ubuntu on a 2.8ghz machine, and believe me, I know how painful it is to hear your CPU fan spin up to max as you're watching a TV show that if you had pirated would take almost no system resources to run.
18. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 03:03 · Score: 0
  
  I can't speak for the first half ("Apple demands...") of that statement, but I think anyone that uses Adobe Acrobat or Flash can reasonably agree that Adobe is unable to develop a clean, memory efficient, and fast application.
19. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by tlhIngan · 2009-10-06 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  True. Flash on mobile browsers might be too much (hardware wise) for the current generation of smartphones. But we're getting there fast.
  Actually, if you want to try surfing the flash based web, you really should try turning off adblock and noscript. If one flash ad doesn't bring your phone to its knees, a few of them will.
  I've tried flash on mobile devices. It's horrible. You're surfing around, and all of a sudden, your device hangs as it loads and runs some flash app. Worse yet, it won't budge since the flash plugins are taking 100% of your multi-core multi-GHz ARM processors. Now say you want to look up some data off the web on your phone, and boom, the page you want to access has a flash ad and now you can't scroll, exit, or do anything because the CPU is bogged down processing flash more than handling the UI or other issue.
  (BTW, this was on multiple devices that support it - a Nokia N810, Archos 605). You won't notice on a number of pages because the flash ads don't hog the CPU, but then you'll hit one that does. Not fun at all. Oh yeah, while your device is "hung" trying to update the latest punch-the-monkey, it's CPUs have ramped up to max speed, and your battery life will be depleting before your eyes - you can see the gauge go down. (ARMs are power efficient, yes, but you're still talking a wide range of power consumption - from multiple watts with everything full on, to fractions of a milliwatt when in powersaving mode).
  And since most flash is done to watch video these days, it's probably better to have it shell out and run a video player than try to run an emulated codec - my Archos could play all sorts of Flash video (that's why it supported it) pretty flawlessly, but the Nokia dropped frames on practically every YouTube.
20. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by newcastlejon · 2009-10-06 04:01 · Score: 1
  
  I always assumed it was down to the vast number of free flash games on the web.
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
21. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Skuld-Chan · 2009-10-06 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  More importantly its a platform to run ad-hoc applications on top of (like Java or Commodore 64) and Apple doesn't want their customers having freedom of choice to run applications on their phones.
22. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 04:47 · Score: 0
  
  Balogne...
  Adobe has been more than willing to do so. The real issue is one of control. Apple also does not allow for any other runtimes but their own. (This is why the Commodore 64 emulator was pulled.)
23. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by firewood · 2009-10-06 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  Probably at least 3 issues:
  Apple doesn't want any other company in charge of the API for distributing apps on the iPhone. Open web standards that they can influence are OK. But they don't want to give yet another potentially competing company an opportunity to "extend and embrace".
  Apple doesn't want any other company responsible for the security of a language interpreter or publicly exposed library. They want to be able or fix (or not fix) security problems on their own schedule.
  Current Flash implementations have terrible performance (s*cks actually) for a given battery life.
24. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 07:10 · Score: 0
  
  http://www.tuaw.com/2008/03/05/steve-jobs-dismisses-flash-for-iphone/
  http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/03/05/steve_jobs_pans_flash_on_the_iphone.html
  http://gizmodo.com/364173/steve-jobs-craps-on-adobe-mobile-flash-does-not-bode-well-for-iphone-support
25. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by elrous0 · 2009-10-06 07:38 · Score: 1
  
  No, Apple just doesn't want people getting free flash apps on the internet when they could be paying Apple money for apps with the same functionality in the app store. It's not a technical matter, but rather a financial one, that keeps flash off the iPhone.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
26. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 07:50 · Score: 0
  
  The main reason Apple and Adobe fight over Flash is because Adobe doesn't want to do a complete rewrite of Flash for the iPhone and instead just wants to modify its Mac-version to run in Safari Mobile.
  Apple however isn't content with this, because it's their opinion that Flash for Mac/iPhone takes up too much resources, which will harm the "browsing experience" and drain the battery.
  Basically, Apple demands something better than Adobe is willing to develop.
  And how do you know that? What are you sources? Your mom?
27. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 08:29 · Score: 0
  
  I've got an 8 core mac that turns into a space heater just from flash based ads on popular websites in firefox. 10.6 multithreads non-threaded apps and will distribute across multiple processors even if you're not maxing out 100% of a CPU, resulting in a lot of heat and fan usage.
  Couple that with firefox memory leaks, and I have to wonder how much these two programs are costing me in electricity a month.
28. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by dingen · 2009-10-06 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  There are *a lot* of free apps in the App Store right now. Apples makes absolutely nothing on these, but accept them anyway.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
29. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Beau6183 · 2009-10-06 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  Adobe has worked with 50+ mobile device vendors (Open Screen Project) to improve Flash performance, power management and compatibility on mobile devices in yet-to-be-released Flash 10.1. At the MAX 2009 keynote yesterday, and they demoed Flash 10.1 (full flash, not flash lite) on several mobile devices, including the Pre. Adobe wants as much coverage as it possibly can with Flash, but Apple enjoys it's strong hold over it's App store and the sole publishing technology. Given Apple's lack of interest in allowing device interoperability with iTunes (Palm's Pre, for example), I'd be more inclined to think that it's Apple that is not willing to work with Adobe.
30. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by ya+really · 2009-10-06 14:35 · Score: 1
  
  Then you haven't looked at your CPU usage while running Flash on a Mac.
  
  I can say the same about flash running on a windows pc as well. YouTube can peg an entire core on a 4 core cpu. In general, flash is pretty bloated and a resource hog, it'll be nice when html5 is fully out and supported along with 3d acceleration in the web browser. Flash being pushed aside for open standards seems like nothing but a win overall.
31. Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-07 01:11 · Score: 0
  
  We're there *this year* - that was the other news from MAX - every smart phone O/S (Maemo, Symbian, Crackberry, MS etc) are getting a proper in-browser player (not lite).
Clarification by orta · 2009-10-05 22:46 · Score: 3, Informative

Before a million 'oh noes runtime' posts. It doesn't use the flash runtime, it uses Apple's LLVM to convert the usual AS3 JIT runtime to being a compiled app. This is why it won't have any problems with the app store. The OP is wrong, and it's documented. As proved by the fact they have apps on the store. I just hope this gets Open Sourced so that we don't have to use the Flash IDE to do it.

--
my band is more brutal techno punk than yours
1. Re:Clarification by cerberusss · 2009-10-06 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  There are a lot of Phonegap-based apps in the App Store, too. But there have been a lot of rejections as well. Apple doesn't like you using third-party frameworks. This will be no exception -- a couple of apps in the App Store is not evidence that it's OK to use 3rd-party frameworks.
  
  --
  8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
Same as Mono? by WarwickRyan · 2009-10-05 23:13 · Score: 1

So they've written a static compiler, just like mono did?
ahref=http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/01/open-source-mono-framework-brings-c-to-iphone-and-wii.arsrel=url2html-27181http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/01/open-source-mono-framework-brings-c-to-iphone-and-wii.ars />
1. Re:Same as Mono? by AndrewNeo · 2009-10-06 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, that's exactly what they did. Another commenter posted from another source that they modified LLVM to understand Actionscript and output AOT-compiled ARM code.
Do you still have to... by Assmasher · 2009-10-05 23:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

...sign that horrid SDK license?
Do you still have to buy a hideously overpriced Apple machine to use as a dev box?
Flash (REAL, unchained and fettered, Flash) and Java do not exist on the iPhone for one simple reason: GREED.
If a complete Flash Player and Java are on the iPhone, everyone can develop for the iPhone without an SDK, everyone can publish/sell applications without the crApp Store.
I have no problem with a company making money off its products, but the lengths to which Apple disciples will go to justify the hideousness of its corporate behavior is only matched by their ability to ignore Apple's ridiculous prices.

--
Loading...
1. Re:Do you still have to... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 00:07 · Score: 0
  
  yeah anony cause I don't need the flame...
  
  This sentiment is really getting old. Don't like the hardware prices, don't buy. Recently I purchased a Macbook Pro for me, Gateway uber machine for my wife, and a Toshiba mid-line machine for my daughter. Know what...the Mac was worth what I paid.
  
  Having worked on Microsoft stuff, I'm wondering why I have to buy a hideously expensive OS, Visual Studio, and maybe a couple of Win mobile phones (you know, to test all the form factors and processors). My iPhone programming experience is an order of magnitude better than my WinCE and Win Mobile development experience. Compare the real price to get in the door and I think the Apple story is much better.
  
  Also, I'd expected to hate learning Objective-C (am a Java guy) but wasn't so bad. Had to remember how to release memory :)
2. Re:Do you still have to... by dingen · 2009-10-06 00:17 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  If a complete Flash Player and Java are on the iPhone, everyone can develop for the iPhone without an SDK, everyone can publish/sell applications without the crApp Store.
  Your argument makes no sense at all. First of all, there are already lots of ways to build iPhone apps without using a Mac, like Unity 3D or MonoTouch. So you don't need a Mac, even without a JVM or Flash player.
  Secondly, you wouldn't be able to publish and sell apps if a JVM or Flash Player would exist on an iPhone, because without jailbreaking the device, the only way to install apps remains through the App Store. Supporting Java or Flash has nothing to do with the way apps are distributed.
  Rant all you want, but at least make sense while doing so.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
3. Re:Do you still have to... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 00:40 · Score: 0
  
  Your argument makes no sense at all. First of all, there are already lots of ways to build iPhone apps without using a Mac, like Unity 3D or MonoTouch. So you don't need a Mac, even without a JVM or Flash player.
  Do you even know what you are talking about? MonoTouch lets your write in .NET languages, but still requires a Mac.Unity 3D is a gaming platform, I'm sure everyone wants to just write games....
  So refute rants all you want, but at least make sense while doing so.
4. Re:Do you still have to... by gaspyy · 2009-10-06 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  Secondly, you wouldn't be able to publish and sell apps if a JVM or Flash Player would exist on an iPhone, because without jailbreaking the device, the only way to install apps remains through the App Store
  Why? Maybe I want to sell through Apple's App store but also through my site directly and avoid their fees.
  Whether or not I use the SDK is kinda irrelevant as long I pay to join the developer program and get an iPhone to test (the simulator is not enough for serious testing, especially for the actual user experience, sensors, etc).
5. Re:Do you still have to... by dingen · 2009-10-06 00:44 · Score: 1
  
  Why? Maybe I want to sell through Apple's App store but also through my site directly and avoid their fees.
  You can't install apps from a website on an iPhone.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
6. Re:Do you still have to... by rxmd · 2009-10-06 00:59 · Score: 4, Informative
  Your argument makes no sense at all. First of all, there are already lots of ways to build iPhone apps without using a Mac, like Unity 3D or MonoTouch. So you don't need a Mac, even without a JVM or Flash player.
  Regarding Unity3D, see the Unity for iPhone Requirements page:
  In order to license and use Unity iPhone Publishing, developers must meet the following requirements:
  
  You must own Unity 2.x (Indie or Pro)
  
  You must be an approved Apple Developer for the iPhone and install the iPhone SDK (requires Intel-based Mac running OSX 10.5.4 or later)
  
  And regarding MonoTouch, see the MonoTouch FAQ:
  What is MonoTouch?
  MonoTouch is a software development kit for Mac OS X that lets you use .NET programming languages to create native applications for Apple iPhone and Apple iPod Touch devices. [...]
  Do I need a Mac to use MonoTouch?
  MonoTouch requires a Mac and Apple's iPhone SDK to test on the emulator and deploy on the device.
  So no, those aren't ways to build OS X apps without a Mac. For someone who asks his parent poster to rant all he wants, but at least to make sense while doing so, you might check your facts a little better.
  --
  As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
7. Re:Do you still have to... by AndrewNeo · 2009-10-06 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  Unless your phone is jailbroken, but that's not the route Adobe is going for, here, obviously.
8. Re:Do you still have to... by mdwh2 · 2009-10-06 01:49 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Having worked on Microsoft stuff, I'm wondering why I have to buy a hideously expensive OS, Visual Studio
  Nice try, but Visual Studio is available for free (see the Express editions). Plus you don't need to use those, there are other compilers/IDEs available. And you can run on hardware from any manufacturer. And you don't need permission from MS to release your application on their platform.
  But apart from all of that, yes, I'm afraid you do need to pay for Windows.
  Don't like the hardware prices, don't buy.
  Sure, we don't. But all the while there are daily Iphone stories (two today, in fact), it's fair game for people to comment on them. If people don't know about these issues, how will they know not to buy?
  My iPhone programming experience is an order of magnitude better than my WinCE and Win Mobile development experience.
  Order of magnitude, eh? How do you quantify "experience"?
  Compare the real price to get in the door and I think the Apple story is much better.
  What's the "real" price, and how does it differ to price?
9. Re:Do you still have to... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 02:05 · Score: 0
  
  Flash (REAL, unchained and fettered, Flash) and Java do not exist on the iPhone for one simple reason: GREED.
  What an idiot.
  How can you discount the very real performance problems of Flash on platorms other than Windows. You can't even run Flash on a Mac without the processor pegging to 100% and the fans coming on. That's not true of other video codecs on the same platform.
  What a hideous post.
10. Re:Do you still have to... by Snocone · 2009-10-06 02:09 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Flash (REAL, unchained and fettered, Flash) and Java do not exist on the iPhone for one simple reason: GREED.
  If a complete Flash Player and Java are on the iPhone, everyone can develop for the iPhone without an SDK, everyone can publish/sell applications without the crApp Store.
  Unfortunately, we can demonstrate your thesis incorrect by example.
  People are indeed developing for the iPhone without an SDK and publishing/selling applications without the crApp Store right now, using HTML5. I reviewed an example here, ponying up the big $4.95 over the web to do the complete non-crApp Store buying experience, and was quite impressed indeed with how native it appeared.
  As a matter of fact, apparently you're a bit young to remember this, my son, but for the first year after the iPhone was released there was no SDK and developers were told that writing HTML apps, as the above cited people are making a business out of now, would be the only way to develop for the iPhone. And although the release of the SDK rather overpowered it, last year a whole metric fluffton of various hooks and APIs were added specifically to make HTML apps like the above examples more powerful, more native looking, and all around better. ... so, looks like your reasoning doesn't hold up. Apple not only approves but is actively promoting the development of non-SDK native-appearing HTML5 apps. Yet, somehow, Flash and Java remain off the phone. Now why, oh why, could that be? Begins with an "S" and ends with a "k", that would be my guess!
11. Re:Do you still have to... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 02:39 · Score: 0
  
  Interesting article, but that intro where you just dismissed cydia offhand took a bit away from it. It would have been one thing if you had numbers, but you essentially just said "It's like this because it's the conclusion I want as the intro to a review". I mean 100% of the people I know with iphones have it jailbroken. They all also have paid for apps from the normal app store.
12. Re:Do you still have to... by Snocone · 2009-10-06 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  that intro where you just dismissed cydia offhand took a bit away from it. It would have been one thing if you had numbers,
  If you'd like numbers, check out the weekly Admob reports for instance. They will show that less than 8% of user sessions are on jailbroken phones.
  I consider that quite sufficient reason to dismiss Cydia offhand. Now, if you have a counterexample -- just one! -- of a publisher that has actually made significant money from a Cydia offering, then I will rethink my offhand dismissal.
13. Re:Do you still have to... by Assmasher · 2009-10-06 23:44 · Score: 1
  
  "Don't like the hardware prices, don't buy"? Really? How the heck am I supposed to develop an iPhone app without using the Apple SDK on an Apple machine? I guess I should hack the SDK if I "Don't like the hardware prices" - LOL.
  Microsoft? Who cares about Microsoft? (Ignoring that you can get versions of Visual Studio for free and the hardware to run it would save me tons of money compared to buying anything remotely similar at Apple)
  I write applications for Android, my IDE - free, my SDK runs on a multitude of platforms, my language - Java, my experience - enjoyable.
  "maybe a couple of Win mobile phones" - I guess you don't test your iPhone apps on more than one iPhone then, neh?
  Typical Apple disciple, turn this into a Microsoft comparison when that has nothing to do with it.
  
  --
  Loading...
14. Re:Do you still have to... by Assmasher · 2009-10-07 23:49 · Score: 1
  
  Do you have any idea what you're talking about?
  
  --
  Loading...
15. Re:Do you still have to... by Assmasher · 2009-10-07 23:56 · Score: 1
  
  You're seriously confused. The reason a full flash implementation does not exist on the iPhone is precisely because you wouldn't have to use the app store to use flash applications, *they don't have to be installed locally*. You do not have to store a flash application on your local filesystem. You can write quite complex and useful applications as flash (and applets if you enjoy a bit o' UI pain) where absolutely nothing is stored on the local filesystem. Settings, data, history, all easily stored on the server. Our company actually serves a full on application in this fashion to some of its clients.
  Oh, by the way, the two methods you proposed for building iPhone apps without needing a Mac explicitly state that you need both a Mac AND the iPhone SDK.
  I'm still waiting for you to make sense.
  
  --
  Loading...
16. Re:Do you still have to... by Assmasher · 2009-10-08 00:16 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, you haven't demonstrated anything except for a tendency to wax prosaic as if you were some great learned cove condescending to educate the poor unfortunates, such as myself. :)
  "People are indeed developing for the iPhone without an SDK and publishing/selling applications without the crApp Store right now, using HTML5" - Wow, you are proposing that application development in HTML is an acceptable alternative to application development in Java or Flash?
  Apparently you're a bit old to recall this, my dear old man, but people have been building HTML applications for years and the results are terrible in comparison to what you can do in Flash or Java. This isn't to diminish those HTML developers because they've chose HTML due to platform/availability/market constraints (which is exactly why you've got an HTML example application for the iPhone.)
  I guess, by this logic, Slashdot has published an iPhone application because you can see this website on your iPhone and (probably) put in comments. ;)
  As for my "theory" not "holding up" - I guess SUN and Adobe have been repeatedly rebuffed by Apple for the sake of the iPhone users, eh? LOL. Somehow a crippled version of flash is acceptable on the iPhone, but not full Flash - Oh, ye Gods and little boarlets, thanks be to Apple for saving our poor iPhone users from the terrible damage that regular flash would have done. LOL.
  
  --
  Loading...
17. Re:Do you still have to... by Snocone · 2009-10-08 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  Apparently you're a bit old to recall this, my dear old man, but people have been building HTML applications for years and the results are terrible in comparison to what you can do in Flash or Java.
  And apparently, my dear young pup, you're not aware that HTML5 brings new capabilities, especially on the iPhone. To quote myself:
  "Our new MindBeam 'application' has animation, device rotation detection, native alerts, and so forth ... seriously, it's more polished and functional than a lot of native apps we've seen. There's nothing that we see that jars the illusion."
  With hardware graphics acceleration, the canvas tag for arbitrary drawing, full SQLite-backed local data access, and all the native device capabilities exposed ... no, as a matter of fact, iPhone HTML5 apps are definitively superior to anything you can achieve in Flash or Java on any other platform. And as I've done some non-trivial Flash programming in my time -- for example, the interactive video player you can check out at videoclix.tv -- I state that with a good deal more experience than I suspect you bring to our discussion.
  Or perhaps you have a more complicated Flash project than my videoclix.tv interactive video player that you can make a good argument could not be done better in HTML5 than the way it's done for legacy platforms in Flash? If so, well, I'll start taking you seriously then. But I don't see that happening.
  As for my "theory" not "holding up" - I guess SUN and Adobe have been repeatedly rebuffed by Apple for the sake of the iPhone users, eh?
  Your theory was that it was all about requiring application sales through the App Store, was it not? The existence of Hottrix selling HTML5 apps, the efforts Apple has put forth to allow HTML apps to appear as native, and the fact that for the year before the SDK came out Apple told developers that HTML was the only way to write applications; all of those show your theory as laughable.
  That Apple chooses to not let the inferior legacy technologies of Flash or Java drag down the iPhone user experience, well good for them! Has nothing to do with the observable fact that your theory is bunk.
18. Re:Do you still have to... by Assmasher · 2009-10-08 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  LOL - I'm quite aware of HTML5. The only positives, for application writing, that HTML5 has over Flash (I'm not a flash fan myself but it has its uses) is that you can use structured storage (Flash has unstructured/hackish storage.) All of the other 'pluses' you're referring to with HTML5 existed in Flash/Java ages ago.
  Your statement that "iPhone HTML5 apps are definitively superior to anything you can achieve in Flash or Java on any other platform" is patently ridiculous. Of course, given that you are obviously technology biased in this case ("Our new MindBeam 'application'") I'll forgive you for that; however, I'll also happily point out that you don't have sockets, or video, you don't have nearly the animation capabilities of flash, you don't have performance of flash or java (even in chrome, where I have personally written a very simple software 3D renderer), you have enormously larger testing footprints (HTML5 is implemented quite differently in browsers even on the same operating system.) I could go on, but why?
  Don't think I am disparaging HTML5, I think it's awesome, if something of a bastardization of the purpose of HTML (something you can accuse flash of being as well - a bastardization of the original purpose of flash), but claiming that it's better for writing applications in than Java or Flash? It might be time to put you in a home ;).
  "Your theory was that it was all about requiring application sales through the App Store, was it not" It was mostly based on that premise; however, you forget that Apple chooses what aspects of HTML 5 to implement or not implement, including avoiding support for Ogg/Theora, avoiding the other HTML5 features found in Safari on Mac OSX but NOT on the iPhone; ergo, Apple will not be supporting web sockets in HTML5 on the iPhone until they are forced to via the threat of lawsuit or investigation as just one example.
  "That Apple chooses to not let the inferior legacy technologies of Flash or Java drag down the iPhone user experience" - That's a particularly silly statement considering that flash was ok'd by Apple just recently, as long as they crippled it. LOL.
  I'm sure you're very happy that Flash and Java are not allowed to run on the iPhone, because you'd face more competition. Oops, sorry, didn't mean to 'out' you.
  
  --
  Loading...
19. Re:Do you still have to... by Snocone · 2009-10-08 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  Your statement that "iPhone HTML5 apps are definitively superior to anything you can achieve in Flash or Java on any other platform" is patently ridiculous
  I dropped a word there, I meant to say "browser platform". With that correction, I stand by the statement. Since your list of "don't haves" applied to WebKit on the iPhone is, in order, wrong, embarrassingly wrong, wrong as far as I can tell (but please, give me an example of Flash animation that can't be done better in hardware accelerated CSS3 and I'll grant you that trivial point), very wrong, and stupid. So please, go on, because you've provided nothing correct yet.
  I'm sure you're very happy that Flash and Java are not allowed to run on the iPhone, because you'd face more competition. Oops, sorry, didn't mean to 'out' you.
  Actually no, none of the above are any serious competition for native code. But Objective-C won't be portable to any other platform any time soon; and through WebKit browsers, HTML5 will be. Sooner your decrepit old technologies get consigned to the obsolescence they deserve, the better.
20. Re:Do you still have to... by Assmasher · 2009-10-08 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  "give me an example of Flash animation that can't be done better in hardware accelerated CSS3" - Um... Weren't you talking about HTML 5? Or have you turned this into "any supported browser technology" means that browser apps are better than Java or Flash for applications? LOL. How many browser even support CSS3? How long has it been out? Anyhow, if you want an example of Flash animations that can't be better done in hardware accelerated CSS3 (you do realize that flash is hardware accelerated both at the composition layer and on several platforms at the GPU level, right?) which browser would you like me to pick apart? ALL of them are missing large portions of SVG support (just as an example.)
  Objective-C being portable? Good God, why would anyone want that? Webkit browers making HTML5 portable? Well, let's just hope the absolute impossible happens and there's one base browser renderer out there future, eh? LOL. Browser fragmentation is getting worse, and a plugin (sadly) is actually a better solution to combatting such fragmentation.
  "Sooner your decrepit old technologies" - Wow. First, they're not mine - I'm a software engineer and architect, they're just tools in a toolbox, whatever best fits the problems now and in the future. Second, how is Flash, Java, or anything "not HTML5" decrepit?
  People like yourself always overlook two of the most important things in software engineering (probably because you're a programmer and not a software engineer) - the tools available and the talent pool. You think developers should be completely satisfied with Apple and the App store because if you don't like their incredibly restrictive policies, you can use what you consider to be a vastly superior technology - HTML5 (and CSS3 though you kind of lump them together.) Who cares if each browser implements canvas differently, supports video differently, supports AND renders SVG differently. That's not important. Who cares if there are exponentially more Java and Flash developers out there, much more mature and stable tools and IDEs, debugging procedures, testing suites, et cetera. That doesn't matter, because you're cool like that.
  
  --
  Loading...
Palm Pre by markdavis · 2009-10-05 23:27 · Score: 1

Palm seems to have no problem with it. The Palm Pre is going to be the first phone to support Flash:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpI6gA9cuME
http://www.precentral.net/adobe-flash-player-101-demod-pre
1. Re:Palm Pre by Spliffster · 2009-10-05 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  Palm seems to have no problem with it. The Palm Pre is going to be the first phone to support Flash:
  
  The way you write this, it sounds like something positive.
  
  Seriously, I don't like the stronghold of Apple over the iPhone platform but if this prevents the poor iPhone users to ever have to witness the Flash "Experience", I think this is a good thing.
  
  Oh, an if you want video, there is a video player on the iPhone which can display streaming video. Flash is the worst option for watching video so just offer a Video stream on your site instead of a fucking flash applet, dammit!
  
  -S
2. Re:Palm Pre by __aapspi39 · 2009-10-06 00:09 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  your having problems with logic here but its quite simple, let me help you a bit.
  for most people flash is a very good thing, for idiot zealots like you it isn't. flash continues to spread and grow in power.
  the increasingly shrill voices of those like you
  if you're stupid enough to buy a phone that drops 1/5 of all calls in nyc then they deserve what they get - a walled garden that nobody with half a brain would want to be in.
  you just wait for html 5 with svg wundershow extensions /sarcasm.
3. Re:Palm Pre by icebraining · 2009-10-06 01:10 · Score: 1
  
  "for most people flash is a very good thing"
  No, for most people flash is the "least bad"* of the available solutions, but it doesn't mean it's good. Many people have problems due to lack of proper hardware acceleration and multi-platform support (as we can see in this very case).
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
4. Re:Palm Pre by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 01:16 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Interesting...I must have gotten my Nokia E71 from the future...
  It has been out for over a year with flash support, and it is not the first phone to have it...
5. Re:Palm Pre by AndrewNeo · 2009-10-06 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  So does that make all Windows Mobile phones somehow the second phone to support Flash, or.. what?
6. Re:Palm Pre by mdwh2 · 2009-10-06 01:53 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I love how things not being supported is twisted to be a good thing - we've seen it before: 3G, MMS, video, copy/paste. That last one in particular, it's amazing the lengths people went to to justify how the UI was improved by not being able to do something as simple as copy/paste, by talking about "new paradigms" (but not ever explaining what those were).
  The joke is that when the Iphone finally does add those new features, suddenly the argument that it was better off without them vanishes, and the news is accompanied with much hype and fanfare, as if it was the first phone to ever have such a feature.
  I wish I thought of these tactics 10-15 years ago for the Amiga, when development for it was disappearing after Commodore's demise. "Why yes, it doesn't matter that AmigaOS doesn't have Java, in fact, that's a reason why it's better than Windows, because Java is horrible!"
7. Re:Palm Pre by __aapspi39 · 2009-10-06 01:53 · Score: 1
  
  it is arguable that the whole point of flash is its ubiquity and the ease with which it can be installed. compare/contrast with java fx and silverlight, which are both a lot more troublesome than flash in both respects.
  hardware acceleration is great, (who would argue against it), but if it compromises these aspects of the flash plugin then that might be seen as a bad move.
  with flash 10, pixel bender can be used to offload a certain amount of work to a gpu but its not ideal. something that adobe are working on no doubt.
8. Re:Palm Pre by mdwh2 · 2009-10-06 01:55 · Score: 1
  
  Well this is Appledot, we can't expect stories about phones from the major companies in the industry like Nokia.
  But yes - if not having Flash is a good thing (as some here claim), why isn't there a story for the Motorola V980 not supporting Flash? And if it is a good thing, why aren't there stories for all the phones that do?
9. Re:Palm Pre by BasilBrush · 2009-10-06 02:05 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  it's amazing the lengths people went to to justify how the UI was improved by not being able to do something as simple as copy/paste, by talking about "new paradigms"
  It would be amazing if it was true. But it's not.
  What people did say was that all the various suggestions that people here and on blogs were making for how to do the UI were shit. And that Apple would probably do cut'n'paste in a future version when they came up with a good UI for it. Which is exactly what happened.
10. Re:Palm Pre by csboyer · 2009-10-06 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  S60 has had flash support for a while now......though the palm will be one of the first phones to support flash 10.1. S60 support will follow a month or so later.
11. Re:Palm Pre by Spliffster · 2009-10-06 06:36 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  your having problems with logic here but its quite simple, let me help you a bit.
  for most people flash is a very good thing, for idiot zealots like you it isn't. flash continues to spread and grow in power.
  the increasingly shrill voices of those like you
  if you're stupid enough to buy a phone that drops 1/5 of all calls in nyc then they deserve what they get - a walled garden that nobody with half a brain would want to be in.
  you just wait for html 5 with svg wundershow extensions /sarcasm.
  Well I byte, young man.
  Embedded devices have not the same resources available as desktop PCs have. CPU intensive tasks are often offloaded from the CPU to specialized hardware. Video and Audio en-/decoding is a good example for that.
  Running a video player as separate application (which is by no means efficent) in another application just isn't going to help the cause (especially, if the same software performs already pretty bad on Desktop hardware).
  NAtive video players can take advantage of the environment by default (be it hardware acceleration or desktop integration).
  Apple might have an agenda, but if not I see plenty of technical reasons to rather not have flash on the iPhone (doesn't flash videos use h.264 for encoding which is certainly already supoorted on all apple platforms?).
  I am still trying to figure out where my logic is flawed, you might be able to help me politely?
  -S
12. Re:Palm Pre by markdavis · 2009-10-06 09:31 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  >The way you write this, it sounds like something positive.
  Well, it is both positive and negative. Personally, I *hate* what Flash does to web browsing, most of the time. It consumes tons of RAM, makes loading pages slow, eats bandwidth, eats CPU, lowers security, damages compatibility, restricts screen sizes, and most of all- makes animation while I am trying to READ.
  And on a phone, it will drain the battery like no tomorrow.
  But if they have the ability to turn it on/off or limit/control it's use, that will be the best of both worlds.
  >Oh, an if you want video, there is a video player on the iPhone
  Well, WebOS/Pre, Android, etc, they all have that- Youtube player, video player, stream player. This is about Flash 10.1 on a phone web browser.
It's pretty obvious if you were a Mac user by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-05 23:33 · Score: 0

Flash sucks a whole lot on OS X.
Apple's not going to let Adobe develop on the iPhone until Flash doesn't suck on OS X.
I'm on powerbook g4 1.67 GHz and playing hulu videos pegs 100% of CPU. It still stutters quiet a bit. I don't think iPhone Flash will be much better.
1. Re:It's pretty obvious if you were a Mac user by __aapspi39 · 2009-10-05 23:56 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  oh come on - everything sucks on osx. its like wading through a highly-viscous saccharin gloop.
Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-05 23:48 · Score: 0

as flash goes from strength to strength it seems that the haters are getting more and more absurd in their hopes and dreams.
i know lots of open source advocates who have embraced flex, which is quite open and incredible powerful. they're doing fine.
if i were to sink to your level and use the same faux glee that you try to put across in your post then i would say that people like you are welcome to sideline yourselves; more work for the likes of me.
to be perfectly honest, i suspect that a large proportion of you haters are too thick or too old to get their head around the tools for flash. technology has never kind to those that fail to adapt.
anyhow, good luck with your applets and your html 5 dude!
Adobe, don't you know Apple? by Ilgaz · 2009-10-06 01:15 · Score: 2, Interesting

Number 1 rule to make sure something ships on Apple iPhone platform or even OS X is: Keep your mouth shut up about it. Especially if you do "workaround" kind of stuff. Look what they did to Google, Sun (ZFS).
This announcement will not serve anything rather than thousands of trolls and fanboys not knowing a single thing about "Flash lite" kind of things working perfectly on Symbian/Win MO talk how bad Flash is and how it will eat their battery.
They didn't understand the basic but secret reason about why a multimedia/app platform like Flash wasn't shipped with iPhone at first place. We, users have very good guesses.
If I sound paranoid, I ask you what happened to ZFS after Sun CEO blogged about it before SJobs was able to announce it with his genius PR. There are no traces of ZFS on Snow Leopard nor its server. It is amazing that $1 shareware app authors knows how to deal with Apple but multi billion Adobe which somehow owes its existence to Apple does such lame PR announcements.
Have fun with your "export to iPhone" menu option next year. Something tells me something will go wrong with the cunning plan.
1. Re:Adobe, don't you know Apple? by Phroggy · 2009-10-06 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  Number 1 rule to make sure something ships on Apple iPhone platform or even OS X is: Keep your mouth shut up about it. Especially if you do "workaround" kind of stuff.
  Kinda hard to sell a product that you can't tell anybody about, isn't it?
  
  --
  $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
  $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
2. Re:Adobe, don't you know Apple? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 09:57 · Score: 0
  
  Your timeline on ZFS is wrong. In 2007, the Sun CEO said 10.5 Leopard was going ZFS and it didn't. There was some read-only support though.
  If what you said about "SJobs" was FACT, Apple never would've announced ZFS support for *Snow* Leopard Server two years later but it did and it was on their site for months before being removed and not appearing in the final release. You conveniently ignore two little things that make ZFS a *risk* not worth jumping into for Apple: patent questions over ZFS & the Oracle purchase of Sun.
Apple Wants Control Of Its Apps by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 01:19 · Score: 0

They want total control over what does run, and what doesn't run on their iPhone. Their rejection of Flash points toward that fact. Why? Because many of the apps, including ones with pr0n and other Apple no-no's could easily be written in Flash and run through the browser, thus rendering Apple's draconian control useless...
I'd prefer it if Flash went away entirely by crunchly · 2009-10-06 01:33 · Score: 1

Aside from the occasional clever game, I could certainly do without Flash in general, let alone on the iPhone. And even if Flash were available, I suspect that most Flash apps would have to be rewritten to work well on the size screen and the touch interface of the iPhone. If you are going to write an app for a specific platform then, use the appropriate tools for the job. Certainly, Apple tries its best to keep all aspects of its machines under its own control, but anything to reduce the annoyance of Flash is a good thing IMO.
Great. NOW you tell me. by tenzig_112 · 2009-10-06 01:54 · Score: 1

After spending a month diving into the iPhone SDK and re-learning C NOW you tell me that I can make iPhone apps with Flash?
Will iPhone apps built in Flash still feature Flash's terrible bitmap scaling and rotation? Will it still allow for sloppy (and dangerous) typing and memory operations? Probably not, I suppose. Still, I can't see myself developing in Flash (or .net for that matter) just because it's more familiar. Tools for jobs. If I want to make a game for the web, I'll use Flash. If I want to make an iPhone app, I'll use X-Code thanks very much.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong WRONG! by sootman · 2009-10-06 02:14 · Score: 5, Informative

HanClinto was among a number of readers to send word that Adobe has worked around the inability to run Flash on iPhones and iPod Touch devices. Adobe has been trying to work with Apple for more than a year to get its Flash Player software running on Apple's products, but has said it needs more cooperation from Apple to get it done. Now Adobe has come up with a work-around.
This does NOT let Flash content, as we know it, run on iPhone! For once in your miserable lives, editors, (and maybe submitters, too), READ THE DAMN ARTICLE! Last line of the first paragraph, IN BOLD: These aren't Flash SWF files, they're native iPhone apps.

Getting these into the app store might be tricky, though.
And I HATE this whiny editorializing BULLSHIT! Again from TFA, THIRD FUCKING PARAGRAPH, first sentence: As of today, participants in the Adobe pre-release program have submitted 8 applications and all of them have been accepted into the App Store.

Slashdot eds, this is the worst submission I've seen in a while. kdawson, do you know how to read, or click on a link?

For anyone who actually cares to know details, there's more info here.

--
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
1. Re:Wrong wrong wrong wrong WRONG! by elrous0 · 2009-10-06 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  I always thought that "kdawson" was just an Alan Smithee type pseudonym that /. editors put on stories they were particularly ashamed of.
  
  --
  SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 02:36 · Score: 0

I always saw the lack of Flash as a bonus. When it went beyond animation and turned menu's into Menutisements that take 30 seconds before you can even click on a link, I lost all interest in Flash and what it can do for me, other than to annoy.
Re:Awesome! by Me!+Me!+42 · 2009-10-06 02:57 · Score: 1

Too true, GradiusCVK!
(even if somewhat overly "skilled" in sarcasm.)
Mod him up.

--
-- My apologies if the above facts contain any opinions, or vice versa! --
Not seeing the wood for the trees. by awjr · 2009-10-06 03:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

Adobe have basically announced a way to compile Flash to native iPhone apps. This should mean that all their future product releases that author Flash should hopefully have similar functionality. (I'm being selfish and thinking Flex here.)
The next logical step is for Adobe to allow you to deploy natively to other Phone OS. So as a Flex(read Flash, well AS3 ) developer I should be able to write an application, and then deploy to Air, browser, iPhone, Android, Symbian and Windows Mobile. Do you realise the impact on development time? Bug fixing each target environment suddenly becomes a non-issue. Time to market is massively shortened. This is huge.
I don't know if Adobe realise the potential for this. I know they were trying to get around Apple's intransigence, but I think they may have something exceptionally useful here.
1. Re:Not seeing the wood for the trees. by PCM2 · 2009-10-06 08:18 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Yes, they completely see the potential... insofar as Adobe would love to see entire phones running with Flash as the front-end, and have demoed such devices (from Asia) already. Adobe wants to rule the smartphone market just like everybody else. The question is whether Adobe really has more clout than everybody else.
  
  --
  Breakfast served all day!
2. Re:Not seeing the wood for the trees. by multimed · 2009-10-07 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  I remember seeing Flash on a smart phone/Palm device like...I just realized no shit it was 10 years ago at a Macromedia User Conference. Either the company doesn't really want it as bad as you're suggesting or they just aren't capable of getting it done. Maybe the problems are technical - maybe they lack the business acumen, I don't know. Personally, as a general rule, I think Adobe seems to love cool new stuff, but generally has poor follow-through & implementation.
  
  --
  Vote Quimby.
Haxe by BungaDunga · 2009-10-06 03:49 · Score: 1

can do this too. Haxe is a pretty neat language, it can compile to swf, Windows exe and iPhone. Plus you can run the compiled iphone apps in the simulator. Haxe is also significantly better than Actionscript 3.0 even if you just use it to write for the flash player- it can access the fast memory functions you can get with Android, and supports inline functions.
More importantly... by Anonymous Coward · 2009-10-06 06:48 · Score: 0

Does this mean I will be given a legitimate way to made iPhone apps on a windows platform and be able to submit to the app store?
Re:Awesome! by GradiusCVK · 2009-10-06 08:55 · Score: 1

Haha, thanks but ultimately it's futile - too many fanbois around here.
Amazing by chmxjc · 2009-10-06 09:00 · Score: 1

Now people will have access to all those useful and well thought flash apps out there.
Re:Yaaay. by DECS · 2009-10-06 14:40 · Score: 1

No worries, this is not about putting any sort of Flash-anything on the iPhone.
It's only about using the next Flash developer tool release to convert Flash apps into iPhone apps. They're using LLVM to compile ActionScript (Adobe's proprietary version of JavaScript) into ARM code, resulting in a standard iPhone app. There's no Flash runtime involved (nor could there be). So there's no problem with shoveling this into the App Store, apart from meeting basic quality requirements.
So this will turn shitty Flash game-lets into shitty iPhone apps. Not really news, apart from the fact that Adobe is scrambling to line up every phone vendor but can't get its Flash runtime on the phone that's soaking up half of the world's mobile Internet traffic.
HTML5 assault on Adobe Flash heats up with ClickToFlash