Funny — I'd been classifying no Flash is a "feature"...
Re:CmdrTaco drags big brass ones along the ground
on
iPad Review
·
· Score: 1
Let's identify success metrics on this: tell me what specific performance points you'd be examining, as well as the threshold they would have to exceed in order that you'd be satisfied iPad is not a "mistake" of a product. Is it sales volume? Is it sales in the first year? Is it a percentage comparison against another tablet device that preceded it in the market, or against netbook sales, or...?
If you propose some sane evaluation points, I'm kinda ready to make some loot off you, sir, if you're the gambling type;-)
I been saying this throughout the thread, so pardon my (re)redundancy, but I really think Adobe's wisest move at this juncture would be to create authoring tools as great as the Flash authoring environment and Flex IDE for HTML5 (SVG + Canvas, etc) production.
And hey - remember <blink> and ridiculously large paychecks?- good times...;-)
No mental gymnastics here: just happy to have a likely "win" for HTML5 and web standards in general. If Adobe were smart, they'd stop divert money from Flash, and focus on building out great Flash-like authoring tools that put out HTML5 content.
They're (finally) meant to be working on this... except I don't see it as a useful technology any more, now that Canvas and the rest are available. My take is that if Adobe were smart, they'd spend their resources on creating a Flash-like authoring environment for producing HTML5 content.
I'm a web professional of 13 years experience... and it's my professional opinion that websites ought to be built with open standards and web technologies;)
On the UX tip, it's certainly possible to design and implement Flash content that doesn't rely on hover states, but the story's main point is that a great number of existing websites would have to be rewritten to do so... the thing is, while you're rewriting, you may as well just go standards.
I presently work at a major media company in NYC that has websites that use plenty of Flash (including a number of children's sites that are WAY flash heavy); my team produces both HTML and Flash-based sites. And, being that I'd get paid either way (forgive me for raising that point, but it does seem like your viewpoint is likely to suffer from no small amount bias, since your livelihood is presently tied to Flash development), I'd still always recommend going HTML.
That said, Flash does offer a great "fallback" solution for rendering SVG, Canvas content, and audio / video media in browsers that don't yet support HTML 5:)
Who ever said there needs to be just one reason? Your proposed reason is an excellent one (from the business perspective), no doubt, but banning Flash is just a Great Idea for a metric ton of reasons;)
Or, just adopt progressive enhancement as a implementational methodology:) websites can certainly leverage hover state interactions to provide "additional awesome," but should be fully accessible in cases where hover is not possible... including, say, the Lynx browser or audio interfaces for the hearing-impaired.
He's talking about existing sites. Sure, one could rewrite existing sites so that there is no reliance on hovers, but at that point you really ought to be considering web standards.
There are plenty of reasons to keep Flash of those devices, but let's keep those aside for the moment; this particular point is simply more of a wake-up call to those who are lamenting its absence.
You're also talking to a fella that has Flashblock installed on all his browsers:)
But back to the particular point made in this post: ask yourself honestly... would the average consumer be more annoyed that Flash doesn't show up on the page at all, or that it does but that you can't interact with the bloody thing?
I dunno how much web work you've done, but I've been a (backend) web developer for thirteen years (yikes!) and this would be a huge issue for the majority of sites that I've worked on over those years.
And, frankly, if people have to reword their sites if they're interested in engaging the iP* audience, I'm beyond pleased that there's a whole swathe of folks that would be coerced into developing against open web standards, coz let's face it: unless you're a nerd like many of us on slashdot, you don't give a rat's ass about these concerns unless there's implications for your bottom line.
This finally provides a pragmatic reason for business owners and content publishers to get on the open standards bandwagon.
Well that's the fabulous part, isn't it? The individual ingredients are all out there... I mean, who can't get water, corn syrup, and the rest that's in coke? Moving away from crap like Coke and McDonald's, even the most exquisite pasta dishes start with eggs, flour, semolina, and a pinch of salt.
And that's UNIX's slot in the picture — the perfect base upon which to build towards excellence.
I would remind you that hardware is Apple's product; the software is just the "secret sauce" that pulls it all together.
McDonald's doesn't share what's in the Big Mac's sauce, Coca Cola doesn't share the recipe for Coke.
Besides, you can install Linux or Windows on your machine, if you so desire. I just don't think it's very fair to cry "foul" that they're not just giving away their secret sauce ('cause that worked so well for Sun...)
Aw, come on mr. coward – are you attempting to comparing sales volume of Mac-only era iPods against that of dual-platform iPods?
If you were to take the sales figures from this era as a percentage of the modern-day, you'd get a fraction so close to zero that statisticians relish describing as a "rounding error".
Your point attempts to account for historical knowledge, but dismisses pragmatic rationality.
Re:It's worked pretty well for the rest of us
on
Psystar Crushed In Court
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Even assuming I agreed with you regarding whether or not Apple gave licensing a "real" chance (which I haven't yet decided, but leaning towards not), I don't see any compelling reason for them to roll the dice (again) on such an experiment, considering both their present commercial performance AND reported customer satisfaction.
But, for the sake of entertaining a thought: what specific choices on Apple's part regarding the handling of licensing Mac OS would have constituted giving it a "real" chance?
If they can get the information from other places, why are you concerned if they come to class or not? As long as they are learning, your job is done.
Fair enough question to ponder, right there... though I do understand the importance behind effectively encouraging students to actually show up in class -- education is a collaborative process and student interaction can enrich the course material with additional (and often unanticipated) depth.
My solution is take attendence and make it relevant towards the student's grade. No need for extra barcodes and silly processes. I went to art school, and if I missed more than three classes, I failed. Yes, failed. That was that.
Slashdot Mirror
Errr... from what I see here, it's not Mr. Jobs that seems to have to worry.
Hint: see Wovel's suggestion.
Yea — I'm using a full-sized bluetooth keyboard on my iPad ... I just love it.
The funny thing is: I would never trade it in for a netbook.
Sounds like we both win.
Funny — I'd been classifying no Flash is a "feature" ...
Let's identify success metrics on this: tell me what specific performance points you'd be examining, as well as the threshold they would have to exceed in order that you'd be satisfied iPad is not a "mistake" of a product. Is it sales volume? Is it sales in the first year? Is it a percentage comparison against another tablet device that preceded it in the market, or against netbook sales, or...?
If you propose some sane evaluation points, I'm kinda ready to make some loot off you, sir, if you're the gambling type ;-)
I been saying this throughout the thread, so pardon my (re)redundancy, but I really think Adobe's wisest move at this juncture would be to create authoring tools as great as the Flash authoring environment and Flex IDE for HTML5 (SVG + Canvas, etc) production.
And hey - remember <blink> and ridiculously large paychecks?- good times... ;-)
No mental gymnastics here: just happy to have a likely "win" for HTML5 and web standards in general. If Adobe were smart, they'd stop divert money from Flash, and focus on building out great Flash-like authoring tools that put out HTML5 content.
Or appreciates standards, amigo. Relax.
They're (finally) meant to be working on this... except I don't see it as a useful technology any more, now that Canvas and the rest are available. My take is that if Adobe were smart, they'd spend their resources on creating a Flash-like authoring environment for producing HTML5 content.
How exactly is this a misstep? Are we talking from a market success perspective, or from a Flash developers' perspective?
I'm a web professional of 13 years experience... and it's my professional opinion that websites ought to be built with open standards and web technologies ;)
On the UX tip, it's certainly possible to design and implement Flash content that doesn't rely on hover states, but the story's main point is that a great number of existing websites would have to be rewritten to do so... the thing is, while you're rewriting, you may as well just go standards.
I presently work at a major media company in NYC that has websites that use plenty of Flash (including a number of children's sites that are WAY flash heavy); my team produces both HTML and Flash-based sites. And, being that I'd get paid either way (forgive me for raising that point, but it does seem like your viewpoint is likely to suffer from no small amount bias, since your livelihood is presently tied to Flash development), I'd still always recommend going HTML.
That said, Flash does offer a great "fallback" solution for rendering SVG, Canvas content, and audio / video media in browsers that don't yet support HTML 5 :)
Doesn't mean that this particular point is without (strong) merit, amigo.
Who ever said there needs to be just one reason? Your proposed reason is an excellent one (from the business perspective), no doubt, but banning Flash is just a Great Idea for a metric ton of reasons ;)
Or, just adopt progressive enhancement as a implementational methodology :) websites can certainly leverage hover state interactions to provide "additional awesome," but should be fully accessible in cases where hover is not possible... including, say, the Lynx browser or audio interfaces for the hearing-impaired.
You may have already seen the comment I'm about to link to, but just in case not, here's the main point: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1558048&cid=31219426
He's talking about existing sites. Sure, one could rewrite existing sites so that there is no reliance on hovers, but at that point you really ought to be considering web standards.
There are plenty of reasons to keep Flash of those devices, but let's keep those aside for the moment; this particular point is simply more of a wake-up call to those who are lamenting its absence.
You're also talking to a fella that has Flashblock installed on all his browsers :)
But back to the particular point made in this post: ask yourself honestly... would the average consumer be more annoyed that Flash doesn't show up on the page at all, or that it does but that you can't interact with the bloody thing?
I dunno how much web work you've done, but I've been a (backend) web developer for thirteen years (yikes!) and this would be a huge issue for the majority of sites that I've worked on over those years.
And, frankly, if people have to reword their sites if they're interested in engaging the iP* audience, I'm beyond pleased that there's a whole swathe of folks that would be coerced into developing against open web standards, coz let's face it: unless you're a nerd like many of us on slashdot, you don't give a rat's ass about these concerns unless there's implications for your bottom line.
This finally provides a pragmatic reason for business owners and content publishers to get on the open standards bandwagon.
Well that's the fabulous part, isn't it? The individual ingredients are all out there... I mean, who can't get water, corn syrup, and the rest that's in coke? Moving away from crap like Coke and McDonald's, even the most exquisite pasta dishes start with eggs, flour, semolina, and a pinch of salt.
And that's UNIX's slot in the picture — the perfect base upon which to build towards excellence.
I would remind you that hardware is Apple's product; the software is just the "secret sauce" that pulls it all together.
McDonald's doesn't share what's in the Big Mac's sauce, Coca Cola doesn't share the recipe for Coke.
Besides, you can install Linux or Windows on your machine, if you so desire. I just don't think it's very fair to cry "foul" that they're not just giving away their secret sauce ('cause that worked so well for Sun...)
Aw, come on mr. coward – are you attempting to comparing sales volume of Mac-only era iPods against that of dual-platform iPods?
If you were to take the sales figures from this era as a percentage of the modern-day, you'd get a fraction so close to zero that statisticians relish describing as a "rounding error".
Your point attempts to account for historical knowledge, but dismisses pragmatic rationality.
Even assuming I agreed with you regarding whether or not Apple gave licensing a "real" chance (which I haven't yet decided, but leaning towards not), I don't see any compelling reason for them to roll the dice (again) on such an experiment, considering both their present commercial performance AND reported customer satisfaction.
But, for the sake of entertaining a thought: what specific choices on Apple's part regarding the handling of licensing Mac OS would have constituted giving it a "real" chance?
The claim that OS X is "absolutely irrelevant to any reasonable person" [emphasis mine] isn't a terribly reasonable statement.
Yes. And they have -- Beta 3. Where's the update on that, ed team?
OK, well I can beat that: I'm getting an "unknown error" of type (-50) after I accept the EULA... and iTunes 6 is completely gone, obviously.
Top that!! ;-)
(At least Songbird still works... sigh.
Hello little troll... what are you doing so very far from your cave?
Fair enough question to ponder, right there... though I do understand the importance behind effectively encouraging students to actually show up in class -- education is a collaborative process and student interaction can enrich the course material with additional (and often unanticipated) depth.
My solution is take attendence and make it relevant towards the student's grade. No need for extra barcodes and silly processes. I went to art school, and if I missed more than three classes, I failed. Yes, failed. That was that.