1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Apple explains why no Flash on iPhone

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 30 Apr 2010.

  1. Javerh

    Javerh Topiary Golem

    Joined:
    5 Sep 2006
    Posts:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    26
    Kinda reminds me how Apple doesn't want to pay for Nokia's patents. They'd prefer to use them for free.
     
  2. leveller

    leveller Yeti Sports 2 - 2011 Champion!

    Joined:
    1 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    24
  3. rickysio

    rickysio N900 | HJE900

    Joined:
    6 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    964
    Likes Received:
    5
    Well, apparently Nokia needs to advertise the hover mode in MicroB more, since it solves the issue. N900 IS Cheesecake! A winrar is Maemo/Nokia!

    Which is quite full of crap, since H.264 requires a YEARLY royalty fee of 5 MILLION. If they wanted open and accessible, they would have gone for the (free) Ogg Theora, but apparently they just want to prevent Mozilla from getting a slice of the pie. Either Apple and Microsoft pays the fee for Mozilla and other less rich companies, or they can just STFU.
     
  4. gavomatic57

    gavomatic57 Active Member

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    5,091
    Likes Received:
    10
  5. Kyser Soze

    Kyser Soze played by Kevin Spacey

    Joined:
    19 Feb 2010
    Posts:
    47
    Likes Received:
    1
    Apparently Gizmodo found the draft version of Steve Jobs' letter on the recovered iPhone4. Read only if terribly bored. Am drunk.


    Apple has a long relationship with Adobe (see Deliverance) In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested (sounds better than bought shares for profit) in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer (rip off bell labs and xerox) desktop publishing and there were many good times. (1982) Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience (Luke Skywalker), and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market (Darth Vader) with their Acrobat products. (Apple are not interested in corporate markets. We give away our machines for free.) Today the two companies still work together (but a bit less after this press release) to serve their joint creative customers (misguided punters) – Mac users buy around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that (massive crossover) there are few joint interests. (apart from making money)

    I (we) wanted to jot down (after considerable consultation with our lawyers) some of our (lawyer approved) thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers (disciples) and critics (everyone else) may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven (it is in fact charity driven) – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality (Narnia) it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. (and yet false) Let me explain.

    First, there’s “Open”. (or possibly The Word. Interpretations vary)

    Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. (unlike Apple products) They are only available from Adobe, (unlike Apple products) and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. (unlike you know who) While Adobe’s Flash products are widely (planet Earth) available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any (apart from some) definition, Flash is a closed system. (the mountain of freely available third party Flash content, Flash tools and Flash websites is irrelevant to this discussion)

    Apple has many proprietary products too. (sorry for apparently contradicting earlier 'in fact the opposite is true' statement.) Though the operating system for the iBreak, iTiny and iCan'tchangethe****ingbattery is proprietary (ie closed), we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. (If we owned the web this statement wouldn't be meaningless) Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance (most amusing), low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced (for 1995) graphics, typography (words), animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled (open and controlled? Linda, can you run this sentence past the Logic Department) by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.

    Apple even creates (adapts) open standards for the web. (in addition to the many non-web based standards outlined above) For example, Apple began with a small open source project (see 'KHTML', 'KDE' and 'bitter failure') and created (forked) WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the (slow, buggy, insecure and generally laughable) Safari web browser used in all our (shiny) products. WebKit has been widely adopted. (where widely <= 30 percent of the web browser market) Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (snigger) (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s (whoever they are) uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers. (and parted the seas)

    Second, there’s the “full web”.

    Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” (ie all of the things on the web) because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. (Adobe also employ lying shitbags) What they don’t say is that almost all (or some of) this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iStuff, iHope and iRun. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines (is fully supported?) in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps (possibly the best lager in the world) the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. (fact) Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. (youporn, redtube), iToss users aren’t missing much video. (apart from the stuff they're missing)

    Another Adobe claim (those corporate *******s!) is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. (we acknowledge our shitness) Fortunately, there are over 50,000 (unique, flawless) games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. (all the really professional stuff) There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPfreely, iCrash and iRedundant than for any other platform in the world. (we have never heard of the Amiga or the PC)

    Third, there’s reliability, security and performance. (we have also never heard of the 2009 pwn2own 5 second hack of Mac OS)

    Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. (although oddly not for PCs, despite its ubiquity. That is weird. If we could only pin down a difference between the two platforms) We have been working with (shouting at) Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security (yet further) of our iCame, iSaw and iMisquoted by adding Flash.

    In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. (proof) Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. (we have never missed a shipping date, apart from when we have) We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. (humour) Who knows how it will perform?

    Fourth, there’s battery life.

    To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. (fact) Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies. ( Flash can only play video, so this paragraph makes sense.)

    Although Flash has recently added support for H.264 (making above paragraph broadly redudant) the video on almost all Flash websites (not that they matter because there are hardly any of them - er. Linda, I've got a bit of a headache coming on. Please bring me my medication) currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software (our limitations are a virtue!). The difference is striking (shocking!): on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to (less than) 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than (up to) 5 hours before the battery is fully drained. (completely molested)

    When (if) websites re-encode (at no cost) their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome (explorer? what's that?) without any plugins whatsoever, and look great (the same) on iLick, iSuck and iSwallow.

    Fifth, there’s Touch.

    Flash was designed for PCs (evil!) using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. (come here Linda) For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary (evolutionary) multi-touch interface doesn’t use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. (hope somebody's buying this) Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. (fact) If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites,( for instance because they don't run on the iPad), why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?

    Even if iHuff, iPuff and iBlowyourhousedown ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most (some) Flash websites need (don't need) to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.

    Sixth, the most important reason.

    Besides the fact (fact!) that Flash is closed and proprietary (*****!), has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices (at all), there is an even more important reason (than profit) we do not allow Flash on iOld, iSlow and iFrequentlywetmyself. We have discussed (listed) the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.

    We know from painful (unprofitable) experience that letting a third party layer of software (Cocoa, Objective-C, Xcode, iTunes) come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps (Objective-C, iTunes, OS-X) and hinders the enhancement and progress (market share) of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools (instead of coding in pure machine code), they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. (Or we choose to) We cannot be at the (terrified) mercy of a (vicious) third party (apart from standards committees and Intel) deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.

    This becomes even worse (and horrific) if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. (we think that's what the cross and platform bits refer to) Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot (and will not!) accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms. (This is not the end. This is not even the beginning of the end. We will fight them on the beaches!)

    Flash is a cross platform development tool. (see evil things, above) It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iShake, iRattle and iCantthinkofanymore apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. (what *******s!) And Adobe has been painfully (for us) slow to adopt (all the hundreds of) enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been **** for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X. (for any given creative definitions of the word major and fully)

    Our motivation (profit) is simple - we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, awe-inspiring, fabulous, powerful, fun and useful applications. We want to walk together into the sunny uplands and we want the world to sing in perfect harmony. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience, if we let them onto the app store, and (closeted, myopic and broadly insane mac) users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform. (fact)

    Conclusions. (In summation. To rigorously and objectively draw together.)

    Flash was created during the PC era (now long gone) – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs.(profit) But the mobile era (sunny uplands) is about low power devices, touch interfaces, smudgy fingerprints and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short. As we have conclusively proved.

    The avalanche (a destructive rockslide that wipes out everything in its path) of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. Apart from Flash sites. Or sites containing Flash. And the 200,000 (flawless) apps on Apple’s (open and uncensored) App Store proves (Q.E.D.) that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.

    New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.

    Steve Jobs,

    The Tiny Mansion,
    Messiah Avenue,
    Jesus Wept,
    The Bahamas,
    April 2010.
     
    willowthewhite likes this.
  6. wyx087

    wyx087 Homeworld 3 is happening!!

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    10,926
    Likes Received:
    306
    that Atom is what making netbook usable.

    Flash are not needed at all. i browse all websites with flashblocker, and apart from youtube being whitelisted, never had any problem with other websites. if there's a website that insists using flash as their menu, i tend to simply not visit them due to their stupidity in deciding to use Flash.
     
  7. tron

    tron New Member

    Joined:
    12 May 2009
    Posts:
    253
    Likes Received:
    11
    I agree that website designers need to get with the times and design sites that are touch-screen-device friendly.

    I use a multi-touch capacitive touch screen Windows mobile phone which does support flash. Some of the flash content on certain websites can seem 'broken' and do not function correctly due to the phone's lack of an old-school mouse pointer.

    However, what I generally don't like about Apple's products and policies are their own 'locked down', 'closed' and 'proprietary' software environments that restrict me from having the freedom to visit a website that may contain 'broken' FLASH elements so I can at least get an idea of what's supposed to be displayed.
     
  8. thehippoz

    thehippoz New Member

    Joined:
    19 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    5,780
    Likes Received:
    174
    I can agree with jobs on his thinking.. flash will always have a place in a lot of web designers hearts though.. it's like all adobe products, those guys are freaking aliens.. they make products where if you want to stretch your imagination you can.. really no limits

    the problem with being so open is a bad flash programmer can display the same thing a good one can- but it eats up resources :eek:
     
  9. Woodspoon

    Woodspoon New Member

    Joined:
    10 May 2008
    Posts:
    502
    Likes Received:
    1
    Sometime in the future, hopefully not too far off, all this, "you can use this but you cant use that, we say what you can and cant do with the thing that you paid for, because we know so much more than you" thing is going to turn round and bite Apple in the ass very hard indeed.
    And I will laugh
    Loudly.
     
  10. leveller

    leveller Yeti Sports 2 - 2011 Champion!

    Joined:
    1 Dec 2009
    Posts:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    24
    Surely all you guys should be pro-HTML5? Instead of pro-Adobe-monopoly.
     
  11. hexx

    hexx New Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    flash sucks
     
  12. eddtox

    eddtox Homo Interneticus

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,296
    Likes Received:
    15
    Flash sucks. Apple sucks. Yet you can't get away from either of them atm.

    openftw
     
  13. hexx

    hexx New Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    flash is ok on win platform, on mac it's real pain - click2flash :)
     
  14. HourBeforeDawn

    HourBeforeDawn a.k.a KazeModz

    Joined:
    26 Oct 2006
    Posts:
    2,637
    Likes Received:
    6
    It would mean that Apple would have to pay Adobe to use Flash, and well Apple is all about screwing people over and forcing them to use their proprietary stuff and have no personal freedoms, so of course they wouldnt Support Flash.
     
  15. VipersGratitude

    VipersGratitude Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 Mar 2008
    Posts:
    3,275
    Likes Received:
    640
    This isn't about browsers; This is about keeping the App Store proprietary. (You can write a flash app for free on any platform using the open source flex framework, but to write an iWhatever app you have to first buy a Mac)

    I wonder if there'll still be Flash vs HTML5 arguments in 2 years time, when HTML5 gets to its first candidate reccomendation, or 2022 when it reaches the final release :/
     
  16. thehippoz

    thehippoz New Member

    Joined:
    19 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    5,780
    Likes Received:
    174
    yeah I don't see why he can't allow flash apps on apple products really.. he just wants full control over what you see.. I mean youtube plays on phones just fine.. but lets say a user goes to a site with a badly written swf and it bogs down the phone

    his audience (apple buyers) aren't the smartest bunch.. they'll take that the phone is weak.. so I can see his reasoning- he's trying to make his hardware look better than it is- but it works for them.. people buy it
     
  17. hexx

    hexx New Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    sorry but you're wrong, completely wrong. there's no flash only on multitouch devices from apple. youtube has written app for iphone, one of the first and is part of the package. youtube if you know has html5 player if you opt for it instead of flash player - quality of videos is much better.

    your opinion about apple buyers is immature and probably corresponds your age :) after 15 years of ****ing around with windows i installed at first mac os x86 version on my quad desktop and after few months of use i jumped on apple products.

    if you want a computer for daily use and not a tamagochi than apple is way to go. your comments are shortsighted and obviously you haven't got any clue about flash adobe and adobe's products on mac platform.

    They just released CS5 which finally now is 64-bit and is written in Cocoa framework - after 10 years of existence of mac os x - adobe was last third party developer who was using old framework.

    when apple had difficult times in late 90s adobe switched focus on windows platform and every single CSA suite until now for mac was inferior to win versions.

    if you think that apple buyers aren't smart enough how would you explain their growing customer base? I can see it at my work where during last 5 years nr of apple computers tripled and it's almost 30:70 split.

    if you need to work apple computers are the only way not stupid win boxes which always need maintenance every now and then. I haven't restarted my macbook pro in for other reason than update since october when i bought it.

    experience yourself then comment. i've been working with computers since early 90s, which is almost 20 years now and i guess i know what i'm talking about.
     
  18. Constructacon

    Constructacon Constructing since 1978

    Joined:
    12 Oct 2004
    Posts:
    2,651
    Likes Received:
    97
    It's called marketing. Everywhere you look Apple is telling us (in 50 foot high glowing letters) that we should be buying their products. If you look at any movie/tv show lately you'll see that Apple has paid for a(t least one) product placement (with very prominent logos) there on the desk. In fact I can't remember the last time I saw a PC in a movie. People are dumb (I try not to be, but occasionally succumb myself) and buy what we are told to buy.
     
  19. Sloth

    Sloth #yolo #swag

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    5,634
    Likes Received:
    208
    I'm sorry in advance if English isn't your primary language, but my brain hurts after reading that.

    thehippoz has a valid point. Supporting standards shouldn't be entirely about what's outdated, what's profitable, or what the future trends are. Many users want to at least have access to Flash content, even if it's not fully functional or drains their battery life. If people didn't want Flash there would be no issue in the first place. Are the consumer's desires not considered at all? Has the mobile trend reached such a level that what the consumer wants is irrelevant and products are designed around what manufacturers say they want? That also applies to the issues browsers are facing. Do consumers want HTML5 over Ogg Theora? Not particularly, but you can bet MS and Apple will say they do. But that's another story.

    I will say, though, that saying Apple buyers specifically aren't the brightest isn't entirely true. Most buyers, especially in the rapidly growing mobile market, aren't too savvy. Show someone a poorly writtten page on their Droid and they'll complain that it's the phone's fault just the same as if it was an iPhone.

    Oh, and to 'feed the flames': Your work may be 30:70, but the 360,000+ computers where I work are 100% PC.
     
  20. wyx087

    wyx087 Homeworld 3 is happening!!

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    10,926
    Likes Received:
    306
    hexx is a true apple fanboy, written in codes us mortals don't quite understand.

    the only reason i can explain their growing market base was because of the bad publicity on Vista. there is also the fact that proprietary software for their handheld devices are inferior on Windows machines. there's also marketing and product placement, as Constructacon said.


    FYI, my Windows desktop hasn't restarted "in for other reason than update" and installing latest hardware since 2007 when i first got it. also my desktop is acting as a server for my housemates to access TV series with zero problem.

    i have experienced Apple products. their OS is just a prettier version of FreeBSD (since Windows machines at my uni are always being used); their hardware is well made, but low-end (think crappy graphics cards and lack of sound card/SSD's in Mac Pros); their phones are badly made (i own one, home button only registers half the time) and finally their music device require proprietary software.


    i do agree with Apple on Flash though. it ought to go, and i personally won't miss it a single bit. Javascript and plain text is all i need (and youtube in HTML5)
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page