Fight Flash Here!

[scottjl]

oh you're so right, apple codes crap and sells junk and they are going to go under. any day now.

[Fat Abe]

Originally Posted by scottjl

oh you're so right, apple codes crap and sells junk and they are going to go under. any day now.

Quite right. Apple codes in its own universe. By making his own rules, Stevie boy is able to embellish all that comes out of the house of Apple. But consider this analogy. Car Maker X builds a beautiful, dream sports car. But it can only be driven on perfectly flat roads on sunny days. But the world is filled with bumpy roads and rain, snow and ice. The blind mice at Apple can't deal with this. The world does not conform to their vision. Tsk, tsk.

We can squabble all we want on this board. But Jobs attacks on Adobe are completely unprofessional, and to put it mildly, childish. Read this article from Business Week:

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...429_384492.htm

Jobs' letter harms the reputation of Flash, said Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer for Landor Associates, a branding and design firm. "There's unquestionably damage to the brand—whether it's permanent damage is the question," he says. "This letter is now seen by untold millions around the world, who've been told—chapter and verse—what's superior about the technology that goes into Apple's products."

Flash is installed on about 98% of PCs connected to the Internet, according to Adobe. Flash also runs on more than 800 million mobile phones, manufactured by 19 of the top 20 handset makers—all except Apple.

[Trubu]

Originally Posted by Fat Abe

We can squabble all we want on this board. But Jobs attacks on Adobe are completely unprofessional, and to put it mildly, childish.

I think Jobs was considerably more circumspect in his remarks than that Adobe Evangelist who wigged out in a blog post a couple of weeks ago.

Gotta admit I'm getting tired of these pissy little slap fights between tech companies, though. And then there's poor Microsoft, standing off to the side, ignored by everyone. I wonder if they ever pine for the days when they were the Evil Empire Du Jour?

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by Fat Abe

...

We can squabble all we want on this board. But Jobs attacks on Adobe are completely unprofessional, and to put it mildly, childish. Read this article from Business Week:

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...429_384492.htm

Jobs' letter harms the reputation of Flash, said Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer for Landor Associates, a branding and design firm. "There's unquestionably damage to the brand—whether it's permanent damage is the question," he says. "This letter is now seen by untold millions around the world, who've been told—chapter and verse—what's superior about the technology that goes into Apple's products."

Flash is installed on about 98% of PCs connected to the Internet, according to Adobe. Flash also runs on more than 800 million mobile phones, manufactured by 19 of the top 20 handset makers—all except Apple.

Moreover, there is NOTHING which can replace Flash today. Nothing.

I am not speaking about video. That can probably be replaced over a couple of years, albeit at considerable cost. It will be done at some point, anyway, and Adobe itself is adopting replacements.

But without Flash, we'll end up with every site looking like Amazon or Google. Which is fine for THAT kind of site, but not for other kinds.

HTML5 is far from capable of replicating everything Flash can currently do, and certainly not at reasonable cost. Anyone who tells you otherwise, has no clue what they are talking about.

And you are right. What SJ did with this letter is pursue his own agenda (chiefly in hiding from the technologically dimmer the real reason why Flash (and Java, even though SJ conveniently forgets to mention it), are banned from the iPad).

But the manner that he employed certainly crossed a line in business civility.

I do believe Google will pull the rug out from under Steve, though, over the next few years. We'll just have to wait and see.

[scottjl]

[scottjl]

Another nail in Flash's coffin..

[jibril]

I hope Apple helps rid the entire net of the flash abomination.

[rock]

Originally Posted by scottjl

Another nail in Flash's coffin..

Were you not the one yesterday who said you do not go by blogs?

Flash has no nails in their coffin, it is nieve to even think that.

Again HTML5 is not even close to being full fledge. Only some parts are being used now.

And please tell me, how that blog is anywhere close a nail in Flash's coffin?

Do you associate Flash with just videos? If so then you really do not understand much about flash.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

By supporting flash, there cutting out sales of some apps with people who just opt for the free web version.

This is not one of the reasons -- though I admit it's much "juicy-er". You can write apps in HTML5 and bypass the app store -- as Google did with Google voice. Apple wouldn't let the app in the store -- Google rewrote it as a web app.

There are also all manner of free apps in the app store. If Apple was so interested in getting money for every flash game, why would they allow free apps in the App Store?

I believe out of the 6 points that Jobs wrote -- the main one was the desire to keep cross platform apps off the iPhone. He wants developers to develop FOR the iPhone/iPad -- he's not interested in being a 'me to' platform running the same apps everyone else does.

Lee

[scottjl]

Originally Posted by rock

Were you not the one yesterday who said you do not go by blogs?

Hmm.. A blog from the General Manager who "is responsible for the design, development, and release of Internet Explorer." The most popular web-browser in use today?

Yeah. I kinda think that gives him some credibility.

Flash has no nails in their coffin, it is nieve to even think that.

Again HTML5 is not even close to being full fledge. Only some parts are being used now.

And please tell me, how that blog is anywhere close a nail in Flash's coffin?

Do you associate Flash with just videos? If so then you really do not understand much about flash.

rock, you're not even worth responding to any longer.. you're in IT but can't even get get a MacBook on your network..? Welcome to my ignore list..

[rock]

Originally Posted by scottjl

Hmm.. A blog from the General Manager who "is responsible for the design, development, and release of Internet Explorer." The most popular web-browser in use today?

Yeah. I kinda think that gives him some credibility.



rock, you're not even worth responding to any longer.. you're in IT but can't even get get a MacBook on your network..? Welcome to my ignore list..

Because you can't find a good comeback this time? Good Job. You don't know how our network works so how can you even Judge? Seeing I don't work in that department, it isn't my job to do it. You again fail because you can't come up with a good response, so again you resort to personal attacks.

[scottjl]

Some ex-Adobe engineers weight in on the whole Flash on iPhone matter.

A "Hello World." application, written in Adobe's toolchain, would result in an 8meg app for the iPhone. The same application using Apple's toolchain is "no longer than a few KB." Ouch. But then again that's what cross-compiling does to your apps.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by leebase

This is not one of the reasons -- though I admit it's much "juicy-er". You can write apps in HTML5 and bypass the app store -- as Google did with Google voice. Apple wouldn't let the app in the store -- Google rewrote it as a web app.

There are also all manner of free apps in the app store. If Apple was so interested in getting money for every flash game, why would they allow free apps in the App Store?

I believe out of the 6 points that Jobs wrote ...

Lee

LOL. Seriously?!!

Web apps?! If people didn't complain so loudly about web apps on the iPhone, we would never have gotten the SDK.

Free apps?! Most free apps are there either to push other services, or to push the paid version. Most are there to monetize, and Apple gets almost a third of every dollar spent.

JS sees the App Store as a billion dollar market - that's why we will not get Flash. That's why we will not get Java applets, either.

Then, there is the movie/tv thing, that JS couldn't pull off this time, but hopes to in the future. Big money there, too. Flash throws a wrench in that one too.

Let's not forget iAd. Apple is shopping it around at a huge premium. SJ is talking about an ad every 3 minutes - pushed based on your tracked use of the iPhone. Flash would bypass this, too (as may Java).

So, if you really believe the stuff in the letter, I have a bridge for sale.

BTW, the timing of the letter is perfect, to try to steal the thunder from Google's big event on the 20th of May, when Android 2.2, meshed with Flash 10.1 is being unveiled.

Flash is the biggest selling point of Android over the iPhone OS, so SJ is making a preemptive strike.

Of course, most of us can see through it, but evidently some cannot.

[scottjl]

Some people wear aluminum foil hats too.. Doesn't make their point any more valid than anyone else's.

Maybe Adobe should just produce their own Flash based phone and be done with it. Hmm..

[tomsem]

Originally Posted by scottjl

Some ex-Adobe engineers weight in on the whole Flash on iPhone matter.

A "Hello World." application, written in Adobe's toolchain, would result in an 8meg app for the iPhone. The same application using Apple's toolchain is "no longer than a few KB." Ouch. But then again that's what cross-compiling does to your apps.

This is what the article you've referenced actually says, the numbers are a bit different, but still informative:

"A simple “Hello World” app created in Flash and compiled to work on the iPhone is substantially larger in file size, and it would take up 3.6 MB when it should be no larger than 400K when made with Xcode, according to James Eberhardt, a mobile developer who has tested iPhone Packager."

So, 3.2 Mb overhead in file size for an app that does nothing. That says nothing about file size overhead for a real app, or runtime memory requirements or performance, which are arguably more critical and which the article leaves very much in question - but I'm not convinced that additional file size in and of itself is evidence that this approach is a dead end.

It's rare when a multi-platform toolset can outperform a native platform toolset (assuming best practices), nobody expects that it will. The question has always been (for Flash, Java, whatever) whether the performance tradeoffs are offset by the obvious, if sometimes elusive, benefits of 'write once, run many'.

It's all moot in this case since Apple has banned all such approaches, which is their right, and while it may not be to everyone's liking, they may well be making the best call for the success of their business (I'd like to see a credible argument that it is a bad business decision, if anyone has or knows of one). It remains to be seen.