Slashdot Mirror
A Peace Plan To End the Flash-On-iPhone Fight
GMGruman writes "As the pro- and anti-Flash camps have hardened their positions, the editors at InfoWorld have come up with a four-point peace plan that would allow Flash on the iPhone while addressing Apple's very real concerns over performance, stability, and security. Readers can vote and comment on the peace plan, which InfoWorld hopes will result in serious talks between Apple and Adobe."
I doubt it does much good. Apple has taken it stance, and they have a very clear reason to do so: Apple is building a replacement for Flash.
Throw away all that hypocrisy where Steve Jobs said H.264 is "open, free and non-proprietary", and their "humble" goal to open up the internet (while their devices are closed as hell), and welcome to the masterplan. It's not about open standards or supporting HTML5 (and funnily closed H.264), it's because Apple wants to compete with Adobe. Talk about backstabbing, at least I knew Mac's because artists always used a Mac with earlier Photoshops.
Obviously you can only develop software for this Flash-lookalike using Macs and if you want to develop for iPhone or iPad you are required to buy a pricy developers license. So much for hobbyist creating interesting programs and fun games? It makes perfect sense now why Apple doesn't want to allow even cross-compiled apps.
Get ready for Apple fanbois coming in and commenting on this on why it's "innovative" and why suddenly "Apple shouldn't support HTML5".
You could outline that plan in the summary. How many people here will RTFA?
Help & Preferences --> Classic Index --> Sections --> Apple (x)
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
It's about Profit going down the drain if Flash apps make it to the iPhone!
Ban both of them?
(Apple fans will mod me troll - but fortunately, there are no Flash fans!)
Here I was thinking they were talking about the lack of a camera flash on the iPhone... I guess Adobe Flash is important too. Whatever makes you happy!
Where's the option for "I support Apple not because I agree with their acceptance policies but because I honestly don't want Adobe's crapware anywhere near my phone!"
After all, unlike my desktop where I can easily -remove- Flash or block it with browser plugins, if Flash is on my phone then they better make sure I can remove it!
It's /anything/ on iPhone. Someday, there will be another widely used application that people want on an iPhone, that Apple won't approve. This won't be resolved until Apple pulls their collective heads out of their arses and gets rid of the insane requirement that they approve all applications on these platforms.
For me, this application would be Ogg Vorbis and Theora support, hence I won't be buying an iPhone or iPad any time soon.
-- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
The Apple/Adobe fight is about money and control. Apple wants to wall people into their garden and Flash is an impedance to that. Apples banking on their customer loyalty (accept that owning an iPhone/iPad == no Flash) and that HTML5 will replace Flash for video.
If this was only about technological/security hurdles it'd be done and done already. Apple and Adobe have the resources to get this working in short order. The issue is money. No amount of standards and compatibility will get past that.
...or does InfoWorld now employ an entire department to astroturf here?
The decision is Apple's and Apple's alone. Apple has all the cards and has no need to cut any deals. InfoWorld's suggestions fail to take that into account.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
it's complete bollocks.
Steve HATES Adobe.
You're more likely to get Steve Jobs to prove at the next Apple Keynote that he really can shit rainbows. "One more thing....."
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
It's all about not allowing unapproved apps to play on the iProduct. Everything else is mostly an excuse to hide the blatant fact. If it was truly about stability and performance, then iTunes among others wouldn't suck so bad.
Apple wants total control over the tools used to create applications on their devices. They can't do that with Adobe Flash. Peace is not possible.
Having flash in the locked down iPhone/iPad environment would be akin to having a dynamic programming environment on the iPhone/iPad. It would open up so many vectors for screwing with the security on the devices. I imagine it would be a great vector for hacks as well, especially given how homogenous the iPhone/iPad environment is.
Why make them "at peace". This competition has been driving standards forward like nothing else has. The byproduct has been great for all, and I'm not interested in seeing this end.
1) Forget about it, it's their device and they'll do what they want with it, no matter if you like it or not.
2) Learn another language. WTH is wrong with developers these days? It's not that hard to learn another language! Makes me ponder if most the flash developers are actually programmers or just script kiddies.
3) Web authors: start using HTML5 video standards and quit the stupid flash video player already!!!
Finally: I actually hopes flash dies, I hate the tech on my browsers and hate feeling forced to install it on every computer I have. Flash should die and Adobe should turn all their Flash authoring tools into HTML5 authoring tools instead. Heck, that would get them into the iphone too!!!
Actually it's not a bad idea, but not as a "plug-in". The iPhone OS should simply load the .swf, analyze if it references an MPEG-4/H.264 file, and access that video file directly (i.e. replace the Flash video player with its built-in player on the fly).
Anyone know if it's easy to parse a Flash Video Player file to check for an external video file reference?
That way, they at least force people to switch to H.264/AAC if they haven't done so already.
Really.
If they want to control what users do in their walled garden, let them.
Flash sucks... hell acrobat reader sucks too.
I don't care for either Apple or Adobe personally.
But neither should control what I have on my phone.
Why would they want flash, it is horrible. Just try to get an hp driver onto a server through RDP. Their webpage is so flash heavy that it is almost impossible to get past the first page. Any flash on RDP is horrible even static images saved as flash. Makes my job a nightmare as I work using RDP all day supporting servers. Give me something that works instead of bandaiding a horrible product into 80% effectiveness.
What I don't get is why Microsoft doesn't disallow to run windows on a mac (inside vmware or otherwise natively).
I mean, a big argument in favor of buying a mac is that it can always run windows anyway. That argument
would then disappear. Less people would be inclined to buy apple, and as a nice side-benefit, Jobs would get to
swallow some of his own tricks.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
Point #2: "Put the core Flash technologies into the standards bodies." Um, you mean like HTML5 video, SVG, WebGL, and JavaScript? Sure, these combined aren't quite yet a replacement for Flash, but I have faith that the competition between Microsoft, Mozilla, Apple, Google, and Opera will eventually produce superior implementations. Making Flash an "open" standard would just entrench Adobe's product further in the market and not lead to innovation.
This has to be more than just allowing flash movies to play. Adobe would have to allow people to write applications that supports all that is flash. This would clearly get rid of the major worry about Flash, that it is controlled by a single firm that could wipe our it's competitors simply by no longer supporting Flash on their products. Of couse, as Adobe is finding out, it works both ways. Apple is doing it's best to destroy Flash by not supporting it on the mobile products.
Why will Adobe not allow flash players? Well, because then we might get functionality that would be a detriment to major players like google. Users might have in browser control of browser cookies. Users might get the control the do with images, like automatically blocking any flash object below a certain size. Or, heaven forbid, user might get an off switch.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
The author misses the real point here: vendor lock-in... Why would people even bother to buy an iPhone if any of the Google offerings allow them the same apps? If there's a really hot app that can only be had on the iPhone, then people will buy iPhones... Plain and simple.
A black hole is where God divided by 0
How do so many people seem to miss the rather glaring issue that Apple has no desire to be a slave to a third party development tool. They've stated as much and it is a very real and serious concern. They offer features to their customers but, if a third party provides developer tools (such as Adobe with Flash) and that third party decides to take their time offering support for those new features or to outright not offer it at all then those features do not make it to the customer. That is a serious concern. In an environment where manufacturers need to provide every advantage possible to stand out from the other offerings on the market, Apple would be hamstringing themselves if they allowed Adobe, rather than themselves, to dictate what features do and do not make it to their customers. Anyone who thinks, even for a second, that this is a trivial part of the equation is not thinking clearly about things.
I'm surprised that InfoWorld completely overlooked this very real and very significant concern. Ah, who'm I kidding?... I'm not surprised at all... sigh...
...people could stop whining every damned day about it and vote with their wallets.
There is no mobile Flash ready for the market. So for now, this is a fight over nothing. At the current rate, by the time Adobe actually delivers something usable for consumers (how long has it been delayed now?), it will be irrelevant.
"performance, stability, and security" is a factor no matter what. You can't be against Flash for those reasons but be supportive of HTML5. HTML5 has the very same "performance, stability, and security" issues as flash. HTML5 can kill a battery, kill stability and is only as secure as the person who is using it. (IE, easily socially engineered to be stupid in most cases)
How about Apple just make their own implementation of flash? I mean flash is a public and published standard and anyone are allowed to create an implementation.
So if Apple don't like the current Adobe implementation(And I can understand that) they can just make their own.
Apple's new terms forbid applications written in any language that is not called C, C++ or Objective-C. For example, I work on the Free Pascal Compiler and added iPhone support a couple of years ago (it compiles straight to ARM assembler, no intermediate code or frameworks are involved). Most people that use it write their GUI in Objective-C and reuse Delphi or other existing Pascal code for their backend, just like other people would reuse C or C++ code.
But simply because FPC stands for Free Pascal Compiler rather than for Fast Progressive C, this way of working is no longer allowed. That just does not make any sense to me. Why on earth would the name of the programming language matter in any way? I could understand it if they would limit you to using their tool chain (although I'd still disagree with it), but limiting to a particular set of programming languages?
The fact that I can't even discuss this on the iPhone developer forums without first signing the new developer agreement (and thereby make it illegal for me to continue working on that project) only adds insult to the injury.
Donate free food here
However it's the "Hipster Douchebag" that influences something like 30% of those 97% because those 30% ask the 3% for advice on all things tech. So it's a leading edge bit. Yes, current market share is around 3% for iPhones, but what will that be in the next five years? Let the wave catch up to the leading edge, and you might be surprised.
However, since you're trolling, I'm going to stop feeding the troll ... now.
yeah well, you can fuck right off with this - apple have made their bed and they're starting to realize that they made a big mistake. GOOD!!!!!!!
I hate apple and the pathetic scum who follow them - let them rot in their walled garden.
why do apple guys need the internet - you've got itunes and the appstore?
Apple's phone market-share has dropped down to 21 percent. Android is all the way up to 28 percent. While RIM has 36 percent.
If you are going to troll, you had better have a fucking clue what you are talking about. Save yourself in the future from making yourself look like such a complete idiot like you just did.
Infoworld story doesn't load on my iPhone. Guess it's a flash site. Classic.
-- http://www.criticalassets.com
It claims to support SWF1 and a lot of SWF2. Right now I believe we're on SWF9, so there's a long way to go, but it does show that the approach works.
I'm sure I heard recently that someone had implemented a flash player in Javascript / HTML5.
If that's for real (and I confess I never tried it out), then why can't iPhones/iPads use that? If nothing else, it would be a good stop-gap solution.
I'm sure it would be dog slow, but it may be good enough for some users/uses at least.
1. Apple allows Flash on the iPhone / iPad, with one caveat - there's a huge fucking OFF switch in the settings. When this is turned off, no Flash code can execute.
2. If Adobe doesn't like that, too God damn bad. Get screwed with your pants on.
This way, the *user* gets to decide if Flash has all the problems that Apple claims it does, and if those problems aren't outweiged by the added functionality. If the problems are that bad, then very few people will use it, and Adobe looks like the goat for churning out terrible inefficient crapware.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Here's another idea:
1) some bunch of technically skilled people with a lot of spare time put together a proposal for a linux based tablet system
2) those people ask for funding (for example on http://www.kickstarter.com/
3) slashdot crowd starts donating money
4) people start developing the device
5) profit!
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
The more they waste time, the better it'll be for the german Neofonie to negotiate most european publishers for hts rival Wetab tablet machine.
Which may not be so bad ( Linux based, yes sir).
http://wetab.mobi/en
http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/26/neofonies-wepad-tablet-shown-to-german-journalists-seems-legit/2#comments
http://eu.techcrunch.com/2010/03/29/europes-biggest-publisher-embraces-the-wepad/
Herve S.
For a number of reasons, I'm running Red Hat Enterprise 4 on my desktop. Yes, it's not Windows or Mac, so that makes me an outlier. On the other hand, Adobe advertises that Flash is available for "Linux". If I want Flash, I have to dump RHEL 4 and load RHEL 5. One of the reasons I use the Enterprise editions is to *not* have to update my primary system every six months or so -- indeed, I'm waiting for RHEL 6 before I go through the process.
And I do have a RHEL 5 system I use on occasion...and Flash will mysteriously die on that platform. The failure occurs most often when there are many Flash objects in a Web window. Everything just goes blank, and my CPU loading shoots to the moon. That includes ads.
RHEL 4? The lack of flash prevents all sorts of problems. Not to mention being free of obnoxious ads when browsing the World Wide Web.
Before InfoWorld's truce proposal can be seriously considered, I think Adobe has to clean house first. When Flash runs well where it says it runs, then they have a better position in the peace talks.
People really don't understand what this is about.
Sure the crashing is an issue and flash does suck and sure the gesture support thing is a bit of a problem.
But this isn't really about flash. Apple wants applications to be developed for the iPhone, not for the lowest common denominator. If flash (or any technology) is available on all phones then everyone and their brother will release apps using that technology and the phone becomes a commodity. New applications don't use the cool new hardware feature that Apple put in because flash doesn't support it yet (and may never or at least not until its on every phone). Suddenly there is no way to differentiate your product.
Sure, right now you can write an app for the iPhone and port it to Android but you end up with, optimally, 2 applications that are both optimized for their particular application. When you have something in the middle you don't get that. Java was like this for the longest time. Apps were optimized for windows and sucked on the Mac. Its possible to make a good java based UI app on more than one platform but its difficult and developers are lazy.
This is why apple doesn't want flash on the iPhone or even apps that are compiled from flash. The fact that Adobe is likely to make these things worse by not fully supporting the iPhone or by not keeping up with new features makes it worse.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
I've programmed in a lot of languages. I just learned Flash a few weeks ago because I needed to port an iPhone game to Flash. From a developer's perspective, programming in Flash is like programming with half a language that only has half a run-time library. That wouldn't be so bad if it was fun to program in like some of the more modern scripting languages, but it's not.
Regarding performance, I found that the only way to make Flash code perform well is to write spaghetti code. I had a collision detection routine running really slowly, and when I hacked together a profiler for it (which is not easy because the language has no high-precision timers), I discovered that the function call overhead in Flash is obscenely high. I had to get rid of all getter methods (i.e. make all my read-only member variables public), replace convenience functions like Math.abs() and Math.max() with if-then-else statements, and take my hit test function and copy+paste its contents everywhere I wanted to call it. (I didn't see any macro or inline features, and as much as I hate to copy+paste, the hit really was that bad.)
IMO, if Adobe can't fix the language, they should put a bullet in it. If they won't do either (and they've had years), then I have no problem with other companies attempting to put a bullet in it.
Google and Mozilla have been working with Adobe on a new plugin API to put Flash in a sandbox. The plugin API also auto-updates to the latest version of Flash at all times, to make sure people aren't running around with old versions that have known exploits.
Apple's hardware is getting faster with newer iterations. Assuming Adobe was willing to meet in the middle and work on performance and stability, I don't think this is an overtly complex issue.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
I own a iphone and have absolutely no need for flash in any form on my device. Flash would add nothing of value to the platform. I already have nearly a unlimited quantity of applications and games on it what value would it add?
Got Code?
I think I read somewhere about h.264 hardware decoder chips for mobile devices being readily available. I guess a flash video plug in wouldn't support those. So it'd kill batteries.
Which codec should we use for HTML5 video? The one that doesn't work in Opera/Firefox or the one that doesn't work in Safari/(future)IE9?
Also, give me Farmville, badgersbadgersbadgers and Chatroulette in HTML and I'll buy what you say. But since you can't, I feel compelled to say you are wrong.
inb4: I don't want simple games!
I don't have autism!
Why would you talk to strangers?
Why bother? 80% of flash is simply video, and the iPhone supports sites like YouTube already without supporting Flash. The 20% that's simple animation can be done just as easily in HTML5/CSS3.
I keep missing what great Flash applications people need ported to their iPhones.
Steve is known to hold a grudge a really, really long time based on reports from those around him, and I think he has had Adobe in his sights for a while. Now that he finally has a weapon, the popularity of the iPhone OS, he is going to take every opportunity to wield it against Adobe.
It wasn't too long ago that Adobe used to love the Mac platform, they would release most of their tools on the mac either at the same time as the windows release or often before it. However, a couple of years back things started to change and the Mac platform was no longer Adobe's buddy. They released a 64 bit version of CS 4 for windows, but the mac version was 32 bit only(though largely thats because of a dick move on Apple's part, scrapping 64 bit Carbon GUIs right before Leopard was due to be released). After Apple released Aperture Adobe came out with Lightroom which only furthered Steve's ire.
Steve can come up with a billion supposedly technical reasons why they shouldn't use Flash on the iPhone, but it really all boils down to the fact that Steve hates Adobe and is trying to get back at them in any way he can.
Monstar L
Compatibility and open standards are not the real issue here; the real issue is who will own the lucrative ebook market.
There are two competing standards for eBooks -- one owned by Adobe and the other while not owned by Apple it is at least in a version that is the more fully developed. While Steve may not feel the need to own the eBook standard, he sure as hell doesn't want Adobe to own it, either. Flash is but collateral damage in this war. The next killer app - which Steve desperately needs to justify sales of iPads, which aren't burning the barn like the iPhone did - will be digitized books.
Dude, get over yourself. No one is -impressed- with your little tirade other than a handful of other idiots just like yourself.
Do you clowns not realize what a joke you've become to the rest of the 99 percent of the computing world?
In one thread, I have this going on:
while (Flash.Sucks)
{
Developer.Bitch();
Developer.Moan();
Developer.Complain();
}
While in another thread, I have:
while (Apple.IsBastards)
{
Developer.Bitch();
Developer.Moan();
Developer.Complain();
}
These threads are deadlocked in a race condition, and meanwhile, most Users have absolutely no idea what's going on. Surprisingly few of them even seem to care.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Flash is a god-awful piece of software, but the issue for many people is that it's the cheapest option to do cross-platform, dynamic applications. While the iPhone is a nice piece of kit, it doesn't have the levels of market penetration that makes it worthwhile developing your application twice, so developers are left with the choice to either drop iPhone OS support (which they'd rather not do because it's a nice marketing coup at the moment) or spending an extra amount developing an iPhone specific version of your app which probably won't give you the same ROI (of course, the other option is to use something like HTML5, but then you're screwed if you want to also offer your app on older desktop browsers which tend to have a much higher market penetration). Now, having said that, I too hope Flash dies sooner rather than later - but experience tells me this is unlikely to happen (since I'm stuck supporting IE6 on 50% of my projects, I don't see HTML5 saving the day in the near future).
4) Salesmen: really stop selling flash. Be a sport, and sell something more modern.
Flash is usually there because of the salesmen, not because of the web authors.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
3) Web authors: start using HTML5 video standards and quit the stupid flash video player already!!!
You need to pay more attention, there is not standard video codec for the tags. As far as AJAX + SVG thats doable.
All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
1. Create a Flash video player plug-in
Irrelevant. Within a year 90%+ of online videos will have a HTML5 alternative. Other services that currently use Flash for video will have apps in the App Store as well.
2. Put the core Flash technologies into the standards bodies
I thought the Flash format was open, hence Gnash, etc. Standardise it, fine. It still won't change anything about Apple's stance.
3. Create an iPhone-certified SWF exporter for Creative Suite
Basically you're asking for a new Cocoa Touch component - a "Flash Canvas" but with native code instead of ActionScript. I'm sure that the existing (but now disallowed) Flash->iPhone OS App compiler did this. I don't think Apple will care to implement that in any form though, they want to push their OS, not a cross-platform subset of functionality. They already have a HTML5 Canvas which can be controlled via Javascript. http://www.canvasdemos.com/ has some examples.
4. Explore a Flash app certification process
If the app is worthwhile, it will get ported to Apple's platform anyway. Apple would rather the apps all shared the same UI conventions and used the same underlying UI kit.
In my opinion Adobe should put their effort into leveraging their creative suite tools to generate HTML5 apps, via HTML5 Canvas, Video and so on. If they don't, Apple surely will eventually have such offerings!
You're more likely to get Steve Jobs to prove at the next Apple Keynote that he really can shit rainbows.
he doesnt need to prove it. havent you seen the rainbows showing up everywhere? yeah, that's steve.
I'm an Arch Linux user, and besides high CPU usage, I don't have any real problems with Flash. No browser crashing, stability problems, etc. On the other hand, I would still prefer to use HTML5 for streaming video, for ideological and other reasons (multiple videos open, or running CPU-intensive applications as well as Flash video tend to really bog things down.)
Yet Another Tech Blog
(but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
2)
First, Flash is not just "another language". It's a completely different platform, with different concepts and APIs.
Second, it's not about being "difficult" to learn it. It's about being able to develop a single cross-platform application. By taking care of the device-specific quirks and APIs, Flash provides developers a common ground.
The alternative is doing a Objective-C port for the iPhone/iPad and a Java port for Android.
Dilbert RSS feed
The article above says you can vote. I can't find the voting link anywhere in the article.
Armaments, 2-9-21 And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, 'O Lord, bless this Thy hand grenade' N
LOL, what a moron. What a retarded attempt at saving face.
You made a fool out of yourself dipshit. You're only making yourself look more butt hurt loser.
It's a CPU hog. I despise Flash (and I'm not an Apple fanboi even!)
...somebody get Mitchell over here. He can shuttle back and forth between the two camps if he's not too busy
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
Albert Einstein
Nice article.
A waste of time, ones, and zeros.
Neither Adobe nor Apple have any reason to compromise unless and until the Feds get involved and force the issue in which case the solution will be worse than the disease.
Let them both eat cake.
(Disclaimer: I love the closed environment of the iPhone and iPad. It keeps some of the junk out of my way.)
Take Evernote. I use it on both Android (Moto Droid) and my iPod Touch. Because there's less buttons and the native autocorrect of the iPod, I find it easier to use on that, but the Droid app has more features and control (allow network access) that "fits" that platform better.
I'm sorry, developers *can* make apps that take advantage of each platform they're on, they just choose not to for expediency. Flash is a lowest common denominator - and it's a bad one at that.
Get a life dipshit.
Flash provides developers a common ground.
Yup. Abysmal performance and instability on every platform. It's uniform across the board.
It get's worse with every release as well.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The faulty assumption such a "peace plan" is that the "technical reasons" Apple states are the real reasons. The real reason Apple doesn't want Flash is because there are tons of excellent cross-platform games written in Flash that would kill both their lock-in and their cottage industry of iPhone games, many of which are just imitations of games already available in Flash.
Apple feels strong right now, and they want to leverage that strength as much as they can to kill competition and tie developers to their idiosyncratic platform.
'Every six months'? RHEL 5 is three years old. It (and it's derivatives like CetOS 5) has reached the point where we can't even compile our latest code on it without replacing every library we use on the system. And you're running the version before that. Are you really surprised that Adobe isn't supporting your platform?
Meanwhile the x86_64 Flash plugin for Mozilla works pretty good on my (old) Fedora Core 10 workstation. I think Linux is the only platform you can even get a native 64bit binary of Flash for. So yeah, I think Adobe's Flash support on Linux isn't half bad.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
If there were Flash on Android systems, there'd be a lot more free games and the Android phones would be MUCH more popular. Adobe should have committed substantial resources to facilitating Flash on Android systems.
Maybe there's still time . . .. We'll see if functional Flash shows up in June.
You snooze, you lose.
Web content > proprietary non-Apple software component > Apple device
Apple does not want to let a single third party control Apple's ability to access web content, and thus perhaps dictate terms for access to that content. To access Flash content currently requires a proprietary software component from Adobe, giving Adobe substantial power to dictate terms for accessing this content. Even if Flash were made an open standard, it would require substantial resources and time for Apple to create its own Flash renderer. Why not simply put that effort into HTML5 rendering and authoring tools? Apple is gambling that the iphone and ipad currently give it the leverage to move the web ecosystem away from proprietary Flash and towards HTML5, a standard over which it and other parties have some control.
Adobe could produce a fantastically efficient, bug-free Flash plugin that exposed all the nifty features of the latest iphone OS and Apple still wouldn't want to use it.
Take a look at many of the iPhone/iPad and Android apps. Do you notice something? Take a look at Hopstop, Facebook, Twitter, FlightAware, Weather Channel. Now, do you see something?
A good percentage of the iPhone/Android apps are customized interfaces for webapps. That's right. Instead of downloading and installing these apps, the user could simply go to the webpage and do the same thing.
Even more strange is that many of these apps are paid apps. That is, the user is buying an app when they could do the same thing for free by merely visiting the webpage? Why are users doing that?
We could snarkily claim that these users are stupid (They're not using Linux after all!) Or, we could say that maybe there is something about native apps that users prefer and are even willing to pay a few dollars for in order to enjoy the privilege of using a natively written app.
That is why Flash is dead. Adobe is trying to push the AIR platform as a write once/execute anywhere platform. Adobe wants to push Flash as a "Universal" web platform for creating rich webapps. But, the users aren't going to buy that. It's not an HTML5 vs Flash debate because users don't want to use HTML5 either. They want the apps they download to work as effortlessly as the mobile device they're using.
If you're a Flash developer, it's about time to learn to program in the native apps found on these various platforms. Heck, learn them all! I believe that Android is Java based (I haven't programmed on it yet) and the iPhone uses Objective C which is not too difficult a language to pick up. Plus, both platforms have extensive SDK that help with things like GUI, buttons, scrolling, etc.
Because the truth is that no one wants to use a Flash app on any platform.
Too bad for iPose users that their little toy is not a computer.
My Android based phone is definitely a computer.
No wonder Android phones have been beating iPhone sales all year.
http://jeffcroft.com/blog/2010/may/08/android-flash-demo-flashcamp-seattle/
I don't know a lot about flash, so here's my question:
If flash is proprietary, then how can someone easily write a program that reads and plays it (other than Adobe)?
Um, there's a lot of video sites beyond youtube that are mostly flash-contained videos. In fact, the streaming sites like Ustream, that seem right up the mobile market's alley, are flash. And it's not "the iPhone supports youtube," it's "Youtube supports the iphone." You've got it backwards.
Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
Ustream supports the iPhone.
http://www.ustream.tv/mobile
1) Except if they are found to be violating antitrust laws.
2)A lot of people that develop flash "apps" are not programmers.
3)What HTML5 video standards? Which ones do all the major browsers support?
I don't disagree that flash CAN be an annoyance (it can also be a convenience), but what Apple is doing is ridiculous. I can understand them blocking the flash player itself from their devices. But blocking any applications developed in flash and compiled to run natively in their OS? That's just off the charts of ridiculousness.
Apple has every right to guard their monopoly, as does Adobe. I just hope that Adobe announces very soon that they're going to stop developing Creative Suite for Macs, and watch the Windows-only CS6 force Mac users into buying PCs. Then Apple will either have to develop their own version of CS, or go to Microsoft to buy their creative apps. That will indeed signal the end times.
- Jack
Learn another language. WTH is wrong with developers these days? It's not that hard to learn another language!
Sure, lets go back to the early 1980s where every computer had a different incompatible version of BASIC and development costs were multiplied by the number of different platforms.
You're preaching to the convert, I rarely use Flash at all. Just saying it's not simply for lazyness over learning a new language, it's to make cross-platform apps.
In Windows/Linux/MacOSX there are plenty of alternatives for producing cross-platform stuff. It's not true for iPhone/Android.
Dilbert RSS feed
A simpler solution:
Open source the flash player and let Apple contribute to it, forking it if necessary. I doubt they would devote much resources to it for the iphone version, but they might throw some resources at it for the desktop version. That's the version that causes pain for most Apple users, btw. This strategy may have worked a few months back. But frankly, the ship has sailed Adobe, and you're not on it. Apple has already moved on, and they have seen significant movement by content providers already, so you have no leverage. I suggest begging.
Or, second solution:
Adobe should make their tools output to HTML5. It's not as hard as you think and they would become the dominant html5 tool vendor overnight. They could lock that market up. Problem fucking solved. How hard was that?
Third solution (in concert with #2): Work with apple.
Apple is putting a heavy push behind iAds. iAds are all HTML5 and javascript. If Adobe came out with great tools for producing HTML5 content, specifically mobile ads, they could rake in the dough. Just like the Apple iStore launched 10000 dev startups, iAds is going to create a whole bunch of new companies that specialize in making html5 based iAd content. Adobe should be marketing to them. They are likely already using some of the Adobe toolset already, so now sell them on a new dreamweaver plugin, or flash export specifically for iAds call it 'Adobe AdBuilder' or whatever.
Stop picking fights with a company 10 times their size, in other words, and try to share their heat .
there, problem solved.
In regards to #3. HTML5 does not specify a video standard: http://www.zdnet.com/news/html-5-drops-open-source-video-codec/318208
If you are truly into open source you want to use Theora, but support there is not full, so maybe you have to work with h.264, which has a myriad of licensing issues, I fail to see how this is truly superior to the issues faced with Flash currently. It to me feels like an "out of the pot and into the fire" scenario. Both have their pitfalls and neither are clearly better solutions until we get the HTML5 issue more clearly resolved.
I really don't understand why people want to settle things between Adobe and Apple. Honestly, I'm loving it.
The more Steve Jobs complains about Flash, the more focused in building a decent runtime for Flash Adobe will be (current Flash on Linux is a resource hog and OS X is not that far away either); The more Jobs says H264 is for "open web", the more people will scream about it being a patent encumbered protocol.
You just don't have the right. Whether or not there is a protectionistic objective here, there is no right to use a competitor's proprietary software, and Apple made a lot of good reasons to NOT have Flash on their mobile platforms. Just because Flash is so successful, it's non-standard and broken. If Apple wants to risk the loss of sales that could come from not supporting something that is so successful, then that is their decision, and this is Apple we are talking about. Let's not act all surprised when they decide to not jump on a bandwagon just because it's popular.
Apple has a long history of not playing well with others. They also have a long history of having the best technology money can buy. It has always been a choice between the two, and quite frankly, if you don't want to buy a Mac, they don't really care; they're too cool to care. They know they are the shit, and will continue strutting their stuff.
Apple is basically saying that if you want to programme for our hip, sleek, and oh-so-well integrated platform, you have to programme in languages that are time-tested, stable, and lack the massive overhead you get from so many "programming" languages these days, (in quotes because most "programming" languages these days are interpreted). Basically, they are telling you to act like programmers, rather then script kiddies, so stop getting all upity about it.
Non-interpreted languages are a lot more powerful and use a lot less resources. The cost is that you have to do the hard work yourself.
When will people realize that this isn't a war on Adobe, but on one particular technology that Adobe offers (Flash)? As a web developer and an iPhone developer who happily uses OS X, I find Adobe's products are regularly used parts of my daily workflow. I keep XCode up to date and I also pay licenses to keep CS up to date. Flash is not a requirement for a web site, but it can be a wonderful tool for fulfilling some client requirements and making a site look great. It is important to be able to degrade to a suitable alternative when a user doesn't have flash installed or enabled and such practices will leave a site looking great whether viewed on an iDevice or a desktop machine. Proper degradation should even be in place if you're doing DHTML. Aside from Flash, Adobe has many great products that are not threatened by Apple's position on Flash, among them Photoshop, Acrobat, Illustrator, and Dreamweaver. Additionally, Bridge is a useful way to keep track of media assets if you care to use it. I think Adobe will do just fine whether or not the Flash Player is universally available.
If the mountain will not come to Mahomet, Mahomet must go to the mountain. Adobe should release an iphone to flash plugin.
Which codec should we use for HTML5 video? The one that doesn't work in Opera/Firefox or the one that doesn't work in Safari/(future)IE9?
I'm not in charge of standards, there is a group doing it though. Whatever ends up being used the most will be adopted by the others. It's the way it's always been.
Also, give me Farmville, badgersbadgersbadgers and Chatroulette in HTML and I'll buy what you say. But since you can't, I feel compelled to say you are wrong.
Will Quake 2 running in HTML5 do?
http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/01/google-html5-quake/
How much more do we have to read about all of these know-nothing douchebags who do nothing but talk crap about Flash on the IPhone, IPad, or otherwise?
No one really gives a crap about how you all feel about Flash, The market is demanding Flash applications on the IPhone and IPad.
Now go back to your jobs at Best Buy or Starbucks. The rest of us are tired of you.
However it's the "Hipster Douchebag" that influences something like 30% of those 97% because those 30% ask the 3% for advice on all things tech. So it's a leading edge bit. Yes, current market share is around 3% for iPhones, but what will that be in the next five years? Let the wave catch up to the leading edge, and you might be surprised.
However, since you're trolling, I'm going to stop feeding the troll ... now.
If people are ignoring 97% of the computing world to listen to the advice of the 3% "hipster douchebags," then they're stupid enough to deserve all of the scorn and contempt the rest of us pour on them and more. Apple's i* crap isn't "leading edge" in any technological way. It's the bleeding edge of Marketing and convincing customers that eating shit for the sake of Apple's profits makes them "cool", but the tech is generally over-priced, underpowered, underperforming, and under-featured.
There's only one real way to get Flash on the iPhone. Put Flash on other platforms such as Android. Make it good enough that it becomes a selling point for those platforms. When Apple's sales start hurting because of it's lack of Flash on the iPhone, the iPhone will get Flash.
But then, why all the crying for Flash and none for Java? Flash is just one thing that is hit by a larger policy. Even the new license hit several companies that were making developer tools specifically for the iPhone while iPhone compatability is all just a minor subsection of Flash. (Although it could have made it big because then people like me who have just Flash knowledge could then make apps for the iPhone.) There's much more being affected here than just Flash, but Flash gets all the headline titles. Java seems more important. Most of the enterprise web apps I'm familiar with are in Java and if it ran on the iPhone or iPad, that would open up many opportunities in enterprise as people could include those in their off site workflows for business. Still, I guess videos and games trumps enterprise apps for most people.
A far better solution is to not treat the end users or developers like children and allow the platform to develop and grow organically.
Let the end users decide if Flash is going to be on the phone, or anything else for that matter.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Flash is a god-awful piece of software, but the issue for many people is that it's the cheapest option to do cross-platform, dynamic applications. While the iPhone is a nice piece of kit, it doesn't have the levels of market penetration that makes it worthwhile developing your application twice, so developers are left with the choice to either drop iPhone OS support (which they'd rather not do because it's a nice marketing coup at the moment) or spending an extra amount developing an iPhone specific version of your app which probably won't give you the same ROI (of course, the other option is to use something like HTML5, but then you're screwed if you want to also offer your app on older desktop browsers which tend to have a much higher market penetration). Now, having said that, I too hope Flash dies sooner rather than later - but experience tells me this is unlikely to happen (since I'm stuck supporting IE6 on 50% of my projects, I don't see HTML5 saving the day in the near future).
Your application can be developed 100% in C++ for the iPhone. You only need Objective C if you going to be using the interface (ie: games don't need it) and then you can still just do the hooks in Objective C and the rest in C++
OpenGL also is available in most platforms. Heck, make a game with OpenGL and C++ at it's core, and you will be able to take it quickly to MacOS, Windows, Linux and potentially even the Nintendo Wii (if they had something like Apple's open policy that many say is closed.) Can't talk for the Android, last time I gazed at it it said you needed to program in Java with their SDK, there may be other options though.
How is letting the OS/browser play the H.264 file directly any more wrong then having a Flash plug-in player play the H.264 file? It still all happens on your computer and doesn't change the CODEC used by the video.
Flash provides developers a common ground.
Yup. Abysmal performance and instability on every platform. It's uniform across the board.
It get's worse with every release as well.
True that! Plus, games and anything you would likely use flash for can be developed in OpenGl + C++, other than a bit of testing for platform quirks, thats rather cross platform AND ends up being faster than a 1 legged turtle!
1) Except if they are found to be violating antitrust laws.
For Apple to be found violating antitrust laws, Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft all would have to get probed for doing worse in their video game consoles.
I'll happily accept the annoyance and pain that will be perpetual Flash dependency if the government forces console makers to open up their machines too, though.
What the console makers do is different from what Apple is doing: AFAIK none of the console makers mandate what language you have to write your apps with. Whether it's worse or not depends on perspective.
can i get a caddy with that CD-ROM?
this whole debate is hilarious.
you bought those apple device now live with its quirks damnit.
Learn another language. WTH is wrong with developers these days? It's not that hard to learn another language! Makes me ponder if most the flash developers are actually programmers or just script kiddies.
It's not hard to learn another language, but there are plenty out there that are much, much better than the horrendous hybrid of extremely low-level and extremely high-level that is Objective-C. Regardless of Flash, I'd much prefer, say, OCaml to that abomination - but that's blocked by the license, too.
Of course it is ultimately about profits as far as Apple is concerned. Apple is, after all, a business, with primary responsibility to its shareholders.
But what is it that makes this a profitable move for Apple? If there were really a strong public demand for Flash on portable devices, Apple would be busy trying to help Adobe put Flash on Apple products, also in the interests of Profit.
The reason that Apple can get away with it is that large numbers of users are themselves pretty fed up with Flash--it crashes or hangs up their browsers, and it is responsible for irritating ads that animate without being asked to, or worse, "escape" from their sidebars to get in the way of content. For every user who loves Flash games, there are several more who find a Flashless web to be a pretty nice place.
This is the problem that Adobe needs to solve if they want Flash to survive.
have you seen the hoops you need to jump though before you get 'quake running in html5?'
care to provide a link so i can get see that running in my browser of choice?
no, i didn't think so.
nice try dude, but if you talk shit around here then you might get called out, especially if you don't know what you're talking about.
be careful, you can end up looking like a prick.
1. Apple are idiots, jailbreak to get this amazing feature.
2. Too late, they did that already (mostly)
3. Too late, they did that already (mostly)
4. Apple are idiots, get a n900 to get this amazing feature.
Looks like Adobe is mostly there and Apple are idiots. Who knew!
The war is over.
It's Apple's box.
Steve has decided.
Now the only "fight" is whether or not whiny app makers and web designers want to shut themselves out of what is likely to be a very large part of their market.
That is all.
Ya gotta love the summarizers that - believing we are unable to either read or think for ourselves - attempt to simplify the problem for us dullards:
"It's all about money..."
"It's all about control..."
"It's all about Apple being vindictive..."
"It's all about Adobe wanting to sell Flash..."
Actually, it's all about a bunch of slashdotters wasting time arguing about stuff they have absolutely no control over.
Me? I'm laughing my ass off. Apple has been the marginal market has-been for years, getting bashed for being overpriced with a has-been OS. The MS and Linux fan-boys that wrote Apple off the business marketplace are *shocked* and *appalled* by Apple's success in the consumer arena, dismayed that their favorite player is unable to keep up. Now that Apple is starting to squeeze a few nads, everyone and his brother is up in arms about it being somehow unfair. Apple has always been about a quality user experience and now that this - combined with great design - appears to be an enormous draw to the average consumer, the MS and Linux folks are dumbfounded! Why can't buyers see the advantage in open source? Why won't they select my virus-magnet OS of choice? Please can we go back to 1999? Waaaaaaa!
Welcome to the reality distortion field.
What the console makers do is different from what Apple is doing: AFAIK none of the console makers mandate what language you have to write your apps with. Whether it's worse or not depends on perspective.
They do, and you must use their SDK and nothing else. The iPhone is not too different from consoles, it just does not require you to be a large corporation to be able to publish software for them. You still have to be a registered apple developer just as you have to be a registered Nintendo/Sony/MS developer to develop to those systems and as I just noted, to use their SDK and your software to be reviewed and approved for publishing.
People question Apple's motives and point out that the Adobe/Apple scrap is all about money and control. Of course it is, but why should we care? Apple may have the wrong reasons for supporting HTML5 but isn't it more important that they are doing the right thing (supporting an open standard) even if it is for the wrong reasons? Moreover, why should we want a peace agreement that will 'save' flash? If flash is not saved, that would leave an opening for open standards to fill the gap that would quickly be filled. Adobe would survive and prosper without flash as the are a very large company with a lot of other businesses. They would likely become one of the biggest supporters of technologies using open standards that would replace flash functionality. So, really, why do we want to save flash?
Interesting. I thought you could use other tools to write games for consoles. I swear I've at least heard of "middleware" tools for consoles.
What? You can't watch YouTube on your iPhone? We're not unreasonable. Here's the video version
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I think a better story here would be in two parts: the first about how it is that the editors of InfoWorld have inserted themselves into a situation that they don't have any part in. Did Apple or Adobe (or both) ask them to mediate? No. It's just a me-too technology rag trying to create a story that they can fit between the advertisements. The second part: Who thought this was news for nerds / stuff that matters?
Flash doesn't work well on the platforms Adobe does have access to like Android:
http://jeffcroft.com/blog/2010/may/08/android-flash-demo-flashcamp-seattle/
In the comments an Adobe employee notes that Adobe is essentially proving Steve Jobs point for him. Maybe Adobe should worry about getting Flash working well on Android before having aspirations for any other platform.
Stop making apps for Apple. How many apple machine will get dumped if you can only get illustrator/photoshop/creative suite for Windows.
Lets See how quickly apple will give in...
Remember Netscape vs IE. Many of Microsofts fans said the same thing, this competition will help the web.
Nearly 15 years and we still haven't undone the damage that little "advancement" cost us. We've barely been able to contain it (Damn it IE 6, why wont you die). Apple is trying to do the same thing, take control of the HTML5 standard so Apple can decide what is and isn't permitted and push proprietary codecs. At least all MS wanted was money, not my obedience.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
The key events of this month pretty well define the future for how the iPhone will unfold.
True to form, Apple will not blindly chase market share with the iPhone, and instead will target the upper end of the market. In order to do this, they don't need a bunch of second-rate Flash applications. In fact, these low-quality applications would tarnish the value of the iPhone brand. What Apple does need is high-quality applications, for instance that can compete with Google's turn-by-turn navigator. Those type of applications aren't ever going to be built on Mobile Flash.
Tactically, it isn't in Apple's interest to let Android catch up in the numeric number of applications offered. Might as well hold on to a numerical lead in the number of applications as long as you can.
Even though we know virtual machines on handheld devices have historically resulted in pretty crummy applications (witness J2ME), we now have one counter-example, namely the Dalvik VM. Imagine, horror-of-horrors, if Dalvik were ported to the iPhone. Now instead of worrying about a third-party development environment, Apple would have the much larger worry of a the competitor's development environment. Better for them to quash all such attempts right now.
Even though Neil McAllister is a pretty bright guy, his peace offering doesn't do anything to reconcile the fundamentally different business goals that are shaping Apple and Adobe.
You mean like gnash? Clearly it's not quite as simple as that, because gnash's primary function appears to be to crash, taking the browser with it...
-- Andrew
When I read the title, I thought this would be about keeping the camera flash on the iPhone! That would have been more interesting...
Thread 1:
while ([flashLanguage sucks]) {
[developer bitch];
[developer moan];
[developer complain];
}
Thread 2:
while ([apple areBastards]) {
[developer bitch];
[developer moan];
[developer complain];
}
I think the discussion on this is missing an important point.
The iPhone is after all just a phone. Flash or not it won't make a lot of difference.
The iPad is an internet viewer, that's its main task. This is where the lack of Flash support is going to sux and sux hard. An internet viewer without Flash support is worthless. Only an Apple junky would buy such a device. Why would anyone in their right mind want an internet device that didn't fully support the technologies of the internet? It dooms the device to the left field of uselessness.
Because Adobe would sue them for violating their TOS because surely someone at Apple has purchased any CS product.
Take a look at the Gnash FAQ if you do not understand the legal dance they are performing. It would certainly not work for Apple.
Flash is always the thing that kills my browser for no other reason then a crappy flash banner. - Flash can just go and die for all I care.
How can people have a crusade for a technology that is so damn young. What did you do before flash, was your life empty and unfullfilled?
- To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion -
the real problem here is that steve jobs & apple co want to a) control the app market for their devices which earns them a lot of revenue b) force developers to write applications that are more challenging to port to other platforms so this peace plan doesn't really address the key issues. if iPhone is so 'sandboxed' and 'secure' Flash security running in a sandbox shouldn't be a major concern. As for performance - only one app is running at time, so should be able to figure out how to manage the performance for that. the argument about being a proprietry web technology is a bit of a laugh, that's what apple iPhone applications are. the key difference for apple is most flash apps/games are free (apple does not get revenue) apple apps money goes to apple.
Why? RealMedia^WQuickTime^WFlash is obsoleted by new technology. In this specific interation, it's QuickTime^WFlash^WHTML 5.
"The security, stability, resource, and UI issues Jobs cites in his opposition to Flash simply don't exist for Flash video."
I don't know about security, but the stability and resource issues simply do exist for flash video. UI is arguable (i.e. not-identical)
Like anyone can even know that
No they would not. They have changed their TOS to allow 3 party player implementations.
The debate is pointless, in that Flash itself is dead, and HTML5 (and the upcoming HTML6) are where the industry is already going.
Wasting precious time debating it, or having a peace plan, is like France building a Maginot Line.
It won't work, and Flash will be crushed as the industry continues to move forward to an HTML5 future.
At best, it will only give lazy programmers a false sense of hope, as their industry, like Betamax or Palm or any of the other fallen-by-the-wayside prior technologies, dies off.
Embrace the future. Surrender now, Dorothy!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
It should be quite easy to fart rainbows if the positions of the light source, observer and Steve's sphincter are in proper alignment. Have a bag of burritos handy in case there is a need for re-takes. This could be modeled with any reasonable ray-tracing program or the like. I want to see the first free iDevice app with this graphic. To be fair, an Adobe representative should be present to indicate the relative position of the observer. YouTube will gladly convert the display format to Flash for the X.264 impaired.
Which codec should we use for HTML5 video? The one that doesn't work in Opera/Firefox or the one that doesn't work in Safari/(future)IE9?
Which one would be the one that doesn't work in Safari? Cause Theora works on my Safari.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
FTA:
But the Sorenson Spark codec is equivalent to the requirements for the H.264 codec used in HTML5 and on the iPhone, so it should be allowed.
No, no it's not. H.264 is hardware accelerated on the iPhone.