What makes you think Microsoft will be able to get Silverlight on the iPhone if Adobe is unsuccessful? I would think Adobe has a better chance than Microsoft in that regard.
ethan
· 1 year ago
What! man I just got an iPhone and was hoping for a flash update soon.
I'm all for SVG but at least make flash sorta work in the meantime.
swbuehler
· 1 year ago
Flash on the mobile platform in general, not the least of which is that it's processor-intensive. Jobs doesn't believe that the iPhone's processor can handle the full version of Flash (which is what he wants) and he doesn't like the limitations of Flash Lite.
This is definitely politically motivated. Flash is nearly ubiquitous at this point so getting in on an iPhone should park-walk stuff. Jobs is angling for another play, I'm sure.
Aaron
· 1 year ago
Very odd. I don't understand Apple's stance on this, other than they see Flash as an open-door to applications they won't get to "approve" or that can be installed outside of iTunes. Steve needs to make sure he doesn't get on a power trip over the iPhone. He talks on and on about Apple being a company that's about giving its customers freedom to make choices but it seems at every turn they keep adding more and more restrictions on the users who have made them successful. Apple needs to decide who they are when it comes to user freedom. I thought they used to be very free, but lately, ehhh... not looking good long-term.
Peter: Microsoft doesn't need to get Silverlight on the iPhone. It just needs to be on every other platform. It just needs to demonstrate that it can do everything Adobe can do but better.
Adobe was pinning its hopes on Apple because they know there's probably little chance that Steve Jobs would let Silverlight onto the iPhone too.
Al Degutis
· 1 year ago
It'll be interesting to see what tomorrow's iPhone Roadmap event showcases.
Scoble,
Does the Nokia N95 do Flash?
Doug R
· 1 year ago
This blows in so many ways...
Robert 'Groby' Blum
· 1 year ago
Well, there's the small point that pretty much *any* version of Flash I've ever seen is buggy as heck. Flash content out of the ordinary YouTube video has probably a 1 in 4 chance of crashing whatever browser you're using - so I can understand Apple's reluctance to put that on the iPhone.
However, I think it's ultimately about sandboxing developers - so I'm really not sure how that could be considered an opening for Microsoft. What - you think Apple ditches Flash to port Silverlight to the iPhone? I think not ;)
And the SDK is probably not going to allow browser plugins. If it does, this is all moot anyway - both MS and Adobe can create their own versions, and it would be a very unwise move by Apple to cert only one of them.
phej
· 1 year ago
I don't know what Steve is thinking but this is a major blow. What's the point of having 'the internet on your phone' if you can't use of the most powerful applications?
Is this something that the community can add or is it totally dead now?
Robert Scoble
· 1 year ago
Yes, the N95 does Flash and it does Java too.
So, the N95 can run things like Kyte.tv and Qik.com, which let you do video from your mobile phone.
Luke Gedeon
· 1 year ago
Jobs and Gates have been getting along quite well lately. My guess is that Steve will go with Silverlight for iPhone soon.
FreeMobileGames
· 1 year ago
No more jokes, I'm waiting for iPhone SDK it is the main question...
Mike Gowen
· 1 year ago
While this certainly is bad news I have a certain amount of trust in SJ that he has another card up his sleeve. However, for the life of me I can't figure out what it would be. Sure, he's made mistakes, but I think I'll let this one play out a bit more before I pass any judgement.
Levi Figueira
· 1 year ago
Flash *is* heavyweight! I'm currently working on a G4 867Mhz Dual with 1GB RAM and I cannot open any webpage with Flash without getting CPU usage to 90-100%!
The problem is that a lot of websites use flash these days! As a web designer I flee from Flash at all cost on the grounds of usability and user experience, but I reckon the usefulness of Flash in some applications!
With that in mind, I think that audio/video should focus more on Quicktime formats as they're already the future (H.264 is supported and is the best format around for HQ video), Apple should develop better integration from Safari on the iPhone with the QT player (not browsing other tabs while I'm streaming a MP3?) and developers should start thinking of ways to provide non-flash users with alternatives to get to the content which shouldn't be hard as some videos already use H.264/etc.. but just rely on Flash for the frontend/UI! Changing that shouldn't be that complicated..
On Silverlight... Too early to tell! Seems promising but it's kind of heavyweight too (I'll keep my final opinion until I see what Nokia does with it...).
Phil S.
· 1 year ago
Cant you see the connection? no flash means no games that are not bought. no flash means no videos that are not through the you tube app. =more $$$ for apple! does not bother me though. when I get the phone/touch, I will be satisfied with what it does, or else I would not have bought it in the first place!
Walter Wimberly
· 1 year ago
I don't think that Apple is really stabbing Adobe in the back with this, but it is making a poor business decision. The fact that the iPhone doesn't support Flash is one thing holding me back. I bought my last phone without checking that, and it's a mistake I don't intend to repeat.
Apple stabbing Adobe in the back is where Apple has created products that directly compete with Adobes audio/video tools, especially since Adobe for the longest time was a huge supporter of Apple development. I thought they were going to do something similar here when I read the article title.
Steve, Come on.. just support it.. we want it.. Be an enabler/orchestrator not a dictator. The market is too fragmented as it is. We need handsets that just support!!
Jake McKee
· 1 year ago
Have you actually USED Flash on the Mac? It's a slow, crash-prone dog.
In Firefox, if I have more than a couple of tabs open that have any level of Flash content on the pages, I'm destined for a browser crash every couple hours.
I was recently having consistent, reliable crashes when using a video camera through the Flash-based player in Utterz (totally Flash, not Utterz, I recreated the exact error in other "grab your video cam with Flash" apps). So I started digging.
Turns out that there's a great deal of discussion about the Mac Flash player, with many people suggesting a downgrade to the older version. (Didn't solve my problem, unfortunately)
If the Flash player on full sized Macs is a resource hog, prone to crashes, why would I possibly want it on a mini-sized Mac (the iPhone)?
Honestly, I'm bummed at Apple's decision, but not because I think they made the wrong one. Hopefully this will get Adobe into gear and actually make a robust Mac version of the Flash player...
TonyB
· 1 year ago
Well, in the past, Adobe has treated Apple as the red-headed stepchild. They take their sweet time upgrading their applications for Mac.
Doc Searls
· 1 year ago
Flash is closed. Silverlight too, though perhaps more friendly to Apple's purposes.
Yeah, I know all kinds of stuff is available only on the Flash (and soon, Silverlight) closed "platforms" (or whatever you'd call those), but the winds in the long term blow in the open direction. Apple should adopt and support as much open stuff as they can. So should everybody. Even if they hedge their bets with the closed crap in the meantime.
bluebeard2
· 1 year ago
Apple are creating a barrier to protect their high-value glossy image.
They've survived and prospered because they are seen to be exclusive and different in some way shape or form in the market. Why change the habit of a life-time now just to make people happy? I'm sure they'll come up with their own 'exclusive to Apple ONLY' version of flash...
ceejayoz
· 1 year ago
"Flash isn’t that heavyweight..."
Apparently you've never used the Mac version, particularly on something like a Mac mini. I've no doubt it'd be slow as a stone statue of a dog on the iPhone.
Debbie
· 1 year ago
I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here. Flash allows people to runs applications that aren't installed on a device. Jobs wants to maintain control over applications that run on the device and have them distributed through iTunes so he can monetize them. For example, being able to play a free flash game on a website reduces the demand for games that might be sold on iTunes. Bad for business.
scoobie doobie
· 1 year ago
Make no mistake, Apple's lack of verbal support for Flash Lite on the iPhone is a bombshell, but a totally predictable one. It really speaks to a larger question about the evolution of our industry. What role does the RIA serve in a world migrating to mobile devices?
It seems that two domains are emerging. One is the RIA created in Flex/agLight/Java and rendered in a desktop browser. RIA's seek to replace the bulky traditional desktop apps and provide numerous advantages in universality and deployment. The other is a highly fragmented mobile market, with competing APIs in .NET CF, iPhone SDK, Android, Symbian, Brew etc.
I have to say from a developer/CEO's POV, it's somewhat daunting to think of porting a single app across all the different rich mobile platforms available. Furthermore, these mobile platforms are becoming just as sophisticated as desktop apps, with mutimedia, animations and responsive UI controls, and require a similar investment in resources. The only thing in common is that they tend to leverage the same XML based web services such as gMaps and RSS for their content.
Competition for the developer will continue fragmenting the markplace even as the trend is toward standards and interop. I just don't ever see a clear winner emerging, so the only choice for any ISV is to target all 'views' and keep the 'logic' tier as decoupled and universal as possible.
foobar
· 1 year ago
I said this a long time ago. Apple had a job opening on their website for developers to build their own brand of silverlight/flash. That's why.
Gerald
· 1 year ago
HTML5 will do almost everything Flash can do, and what it can't h.264 covers.
Apple is breaking away from proprietary codecs and file formats, but sticking to proprietary hardware and software to do it!
Java, Flash, Silverlight, and (sadly) AppleScript are history. HTML5 is the future.
Adam
· 1 year ago
meh... another reason I don't like the iPhone.
Dude
· 1 year ago
Stabbing in the back? No. That would be Adobe dragging their feet and being brought kicking and screaming to OS X. All the while kissing Microsoft's backside with Windows only features. Now who's the big threat to Adobe.... yep none other then Microsoft, you reap what you sow.
Apple should teach Adobe a quick lesson by buying them outright.
Chris
· 1 year ago
This is such a non-issue. What task are you barred from by the lack of Flash? Scoble's assessment that Flash isn't that heavyweight seems uninformed. It's not heavyweight on a desktop OS with appropriate horsepower, but the iPhone isn't a comparable platform. Why would you burden the user experience with Flash? Seems like there'd be a very low return for what would have to be a pretty steep investment for both Apple and Adobe.
dssstrkl
· 1 year ago
How exactly is that Apple stabbing Adobe in the back? They never said that the iPhone would support Flash, only that they were looking into it. Apple is looking to keep the iPhone safe by having it rely on Apple technologies and open standards. Flash is neither. If it is political, its a result of Adobe treating Apple (and NeXT) like second-class citizens. Everyone knows that OSX is PDF-based, right? Its an Adobe technology, but its also a royalty-free open standard that Adobe's trying to get ISO certified. That's a long way from PostScript, which when NeXTStep was using it, NeXT engineers had to go to Adobe for access to APIs with pen and paper, no computers or networked devices. Have your tried to use Acrobat on the Mac? Its terrible. Adobe refuses to use Applescript, or even acknowledge that it exists. Apple has zero love for Adobe and with good reason.
Robert Scoble
· 1 year ago
Chris: it might be uninformed, but from what I've seen it wouldn't be impossible to get Flash working well on an iPhone. Yeah, some engineering would need to have been done. Maybe even some pretty significant engineering. How significant? Obviously enough to give Steve Jobs pause.
There's tons of tasks that are only available through Flash. Games and videos are the two major ones.
It'll be interesting to see what Apple proposes developers do. Steve Jobs would LOVE to get games onto the iPhone -- that's a huge revenue potential.
the kid
· 1 year ago
"...it certainly does cripple their chances against Microsoft’s Silverlight."
Does it? What's a couple million iPhones in the broader scheme of things? Future devices from all manufacturers will have faster processors, more memory and fuller operating systems, allowing both Flash and Silverlight to run comfortably.
Tom
· 1 year ago
I think there were multiple reasons for this move most of which have been discussed above (applications, performance, etc…). But I’m surprised by the reason that’s being left out and which is Quicktime.
To put video on the iPhone you need to use Quicktime. That forces web developers to use Quicktime if they want a chance with all those iPhone users (soon to be 10 million of anaylsis is to be believed). So if you’re a web developer you’re looking at two facts:
1. You have to support Quicktime for the iPhone 2. Every PC and/or Mac user has both Flash and Quicktime at this point
Given those two facts wouldn’t it make sense to drop your Flash video in favor of Quicktime?
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think you’ll see developers leaving Flash based video right away but the idea is there. Jobs has created a situation where Quicktime is bootstrapped to the iPhone’s success. The more iPhones that are sold, the more compelling Quicktime looks and the more ground Flash loses.
There’s a lot of advantage in controlling the de factor video standard on the web and I doubt that’s something that’s escaped Steve Jobs.
Jake McKee
· 1 year ago
Robert, I'll point this out, as others have, again: It wouldn't be "impossible" to make a stable DESKTOP version of the Flash player either, but Adobe is choosing not to do that. What makes you think that if they're not committed to a decent Mac desktop player they'd be committed to a decent iPhone player?
Bob
· 1 year ago
Do a little research guys. The primary reason for no flash on the iPhone is a reason that makes a great deal of sense IF YOU DO THE FRIGGIN RESEARCH. Please read this article and then comment:
Who needs the iPhone, Adobe certainly does not,. Jobs has obviously gone nuts in the past siz months with the ridiculous Air. Adobe is not pinning its hopes on mobile devices by any means. Mobile is still years a couple of years away from being a real contender. Flash is unstopable and will eventually become a W3C standard. Silverlight is generating hype at the moment but we have no idea how it will run on a mobile device. They cant push Silverlight or they risque more antithrust cases. Microsoft is spread too thin.
DJ Sipe
· 1 year ago
Owning an iPhone myself, I'm getting a little sickened by what I'm hearing about the direction Apple is taking the iPhone in. I'll reserve judgment until the road map is released, but closed systems don't breed innovation or happy customers.
Gerald
· 1 year ago
@44 Tom,
You are mostly correct, except it isn't Quicktime they're pushing, it's h.264. Quicktime isn't a codec, it's a container. The Quicktime Player plays any codec that's plugged into it. ( see: http://perian.org )
Quicktime is Apples' solution for playing h.264 files, but it's not a requirement.
By forcing developers to support an open standard rather than a closed one, everybody wins. (Except Adobe and Microsoft)
neverness
· 1 year ago
This just settles it, why would I invest a lot of money in a "phone" which only hinders me in putting stuff on it. A phone without J2ME and/or flash/silverlight is to be honest of no interest anymore.
We might try to fool ourselves that it looks pretty, shiny etc. etc. but what can I do with it.
Robert, you've got two phones, the N95 (which has flashlite, J2ME, video capabilities) and the iPhone, which of these helps you to get people to your site etc. etc. and provides real value. Which of these lets you just install stuff and invites you to tinker with it?
And apart from that, the iPhone is currently only available in some countries, reception in Europe has been luke warm. The iPhone is just as Windows Mobile nothing more than a niche product which has gathered the faithful, but nothing more than that.....
scotts13
· 1 year ago
I see a lot of people expecting Flash because A. They want it and B. There are some useful things they can do with it. I hear nothing (from Apple) about WHY it's not being supported. I rather suspect it would be offered if it was a good idea. Having supported Macs in a networked, secure environment for years, I can tell you that Flash is a constant headache. It's buggy as hell, and doesn't play by the rules with ANYTHING. I can't count the hours I've spent adjusting permissions, pushing out config files, and generally trying to reverse engineer this stupid animation player so it would work.
Apple clearly wants the iPhone to be a reasonably secure platform; in my estimation, any version of Flash installed would either require constant tweaking or would seriously compromise that.
Sean Carruthers
· 1 year ago
Yeah - another bit of confirmation here that Flash on the Mac is not as lightweight as it could be: leave any website open with embedded Flash in it, and sometimes the processor utilization spikes to 90-100 percent until you close it. Doesn't matter whether it's YouTube or a site with Flash running the site's menu system...it can be a huge resource hog. If it brings a Macbook to its knees, how's that going to run cleanly on an iPhone?
Tom
· 1 year ago
@Bob - The fact that you think that article is "research" is just kind of sad. That article is essentially Applle PR.
The fact that the article takes pages to even get to Flash lite should prove just how Apple biased it is.
When it does get to its point the article basically says "Apple won't support Flash Lite because its got Cocoa which is better anyway"
That's like Microsoft saying it isn't going to support Javascript because Silverlight is better anyway. Its stupid, APIs aren't exclusive and the only people who would accept an argument otherwise is the Mac faithful.
Robert Scoble
· 1 year ago
I carry both a Nokia N95 (several of them, in fact) and an iPhone. I use the iPhone to make and receive calls, look at my voice mail, and for things like stocks, maps, and using the Web browser.
The Nokia? For creating videos and for GPS, since those are two things the iPhone doesn't do.
Mark Scrimshire
· 1 year ago
I think this could actually be about QuickTime and the movie industry. Steve doesn't want to handover more power and influence to Adobe.
@Gerald - I thought Apple video (like the trailers on their web site) specifically played in Quicktime only. I could be wrong here but I remember being told by someone that RealPlayer couldn't play those videos even though it supports H.264. Something about the .mov container
(I just did a quick Google search and couldn't find
Could be wrong though so a big grain of salt there...
metroxing
· 1 year ago
Abobe started this fight they couldn't win years ago by annoying Apple first and then later annoying Microsoft. Adobe's not so smart in picking a fight with Apple AND Microsoft.
So, until Steve Jobs resigns from Apple - no flash ...
Thanks for the links to the webcast, Robert. I am viewing the 750K stream, which is pretty sweet, and I daresay I have a better view for free than if I was sitting in at the Venetian in row 892.
It is also a reasonable time of day on the East Coast :-)
Nice headline BTW. ;-) The more prosaic truth is that Flash is a pig, and the iPhone doesn't have enough horsepower to run it, but it's hard to get a snappy headline out of that. The truth also places the blame at the feet of both Adobe and Apple....
Long-Time Flash Developer
· 1 year ago
Have done extensive Flash gui programming since about 2000. Macromedia and Adobe really need to make a decision about Flash. It is still very unproductive and a programming environment. That has not changed much since 2000. Actionscript has gotten a few needed features, but still lacks many. IDE is buggy -- we refuse to use the current version. They have done a great job with video -- think that has been the big new feature set for each Flash release for quite some time. But quite honestly, the runtime is cumbersome, the programmer productivity is just not there. Maybe Adobe should split the development team into one focused on gui/programming, and one on video. The runtime needs significant architectural rework. Likely Silverlight is going to be much better re: runtime architectures. Silverlight Expression Builder has some really good features for programming a gui that Flash sorely needs. But, you have to commit to C# and IronPython. Jobs is 100% right. Flash is a memory and processing intensive beast. Adobe has done little or nothing to address that -- seemingly to increase the bloat. If only Silverlight supported more opensource like CPython as well as IronPython. Oh well.
Don MacAskill
· 1 year ago
Hey Robert,
The iPhone already supports Canvas, the HTML5 spec to do vector graphics.
I'm certainly not claiming it's a replacement for Flash (it's not), but I'm not sure why they'd be working on SVG really hard if they already support Canvas. It's a standard, I think Firefox and Opera support, it, etc etc.
Kontra
· 1 year ago
I explained why WebKit is Apple's answer to Flash, Silverlight and JavaFX here:
Let's not jump the gun, here. I think there is a logical reason, and I do not think it is to spite them, and I doubt that they will instead port Siliverlight instead. And why would Adobe "retaliate" by not releasing Photoshop or Illustrator for Mac? Those are probably it's two biggest products. How is Apple obligated to support Flash for the iPhone or else Adobe retaliates? I luv ya, but you need to calm down or admit to blowing this up just for page views.
mikecane
· 1 year ago
>>>The inside story has yet to be told on this one.
You used to work for MS. After MS dropped WMV support for the Mac, did you expect APPLE to write its own WMV player?
It's the same thing here.
And Adobe has a solid history of this too: the PalmOS PDF Viewer disaster, no Flash for PalmOS. *Sony* had to create a Flash player for CLIEs because Adobe wouldn't.
Once the "iSDK" is released, Adobe will have no excuse.
Sandmax
· 1 year ago
Robert, how about if we had an N95-class or WinMo phone with an Iphone-like touch screen interface and carrier supported visual voicemail? Its only a matter of time before iPhone competitors get technological parity in features and we see that happening.
The next gen Iphone will eventually have video and GPS (perhaps an add on). These will be in "Just one more thing like announcements" and we will all go "OOOh!" And then Jobs will say we heard your feedback, you wanted Flash so here it is.. Flash.. for the Iphone, new improved and better than ever. I guess the video part will come with some neat easy to use video blogging service with .mac The only thing preventing Apple from adding flash support is a lack of competition, not a lack of demand. And yes Apple and carriers will lose revenue on "Games" and "Content" they may want to sell.
Robert said "I carry both a Nokia N95 (several of them, in fact) and an iPhone. I use the iPhone to make and receive calls, look at my voice mail, and for things like stocks, maps, and using the Web browser.
The Nokia? For creating videos and for GPS, since those are two things the iPhone doesn’t do."
They're pushing Silverlight hard as an ad platform as well... more later.
will
· 1 year ago
Robert,
All of the developers I talk to say it's a platform battle - Quicktime being Apple's contender. Flash or Silverlight would allow Adobe or Microsoft to wedge into the iPhone platform outside of Steve's tightly-controlled environment. We'll find out when the SDK is released soon how Steve plans to compete with these technologies.
The example I've always heard was YouTube - i.e.: YouTube good; Flash bad - What to do? Convince Google to create an iPhone-only YouTube by converting all of YouTube's content over to H.264 mp4.
It's strictly platform this time. This is where Jobs lost control 30 years ago, and I think he doesn't want to repeat the same grave mistake. Godspeed, Steve.
Randy
· 1 year ago
Geez Robert, did you even read the article you referenced? It didn't say Apple would not support Adobe Flash at all. It merely stated that the current Flash Player was not suitable for the iPhone and I would have to agree. The existing player is overly processor intensive and meant more for a laptop as Jobs indicates. If Adobe would get their act together and make a better mobile version of their Flash Player, then I would not have a doubt Apple would adopt it.
Next time, please read things a little closer before crying wolf!
saran
· 1 year ago
Processor speed defines PC world, Network bandwidth defines web world.
Battery life defines mobile world. hence platform (flash/silver) doesn’t matter. We need innovation in battery life. Tech people love rich services (video) in mobile devices, but not so many end users. "Phone means talk"
Videos in iPhone = Vista in PC.
Mark
· 1 year ago
Robert:
Please explain this.
When I hit play on a video on kyte.tv, Safari goes from 2% CPU usage to over 60% CPU usage. This is on a dual-core Xeon!
When I play a video on qik.com, Safari goes to 24% CPU usage.
How in the hell is the processor on the iPhone supposed to provide any sort of comparable performance?
If people want their videos to show up on the iPhone, _upload_ _to_ _Youtube_.
Tom
· 1 year ago
For the last few commenters, there are plenty of cell. phones that run Flash Lite just fine with processors slower than the iPhone.
Anonymous
· 1 year ago
Adobe has been in bed with M$ for years getting bribes to screw flash development for linux, so fuck them!
will
· 1 year ago
Tom,
Exactly. That's how all the fancy WM6 interfaces work. I don't know why everyone thinks a mobile phone chip can't run flash. It clearly can, and does. Flash's omission has much more to do with the future plans of Microsoft, Apple, and Adobe's mobile (and desktop) application platforms.
A new turf war in the mobile space is obvious and imminent. Google's made their strategy clear. Apple hasn't (is that a big surprise to anyone?).
Rick
· 1 year ago
Lets face it, Adobe have been screwing over Apple for a long time now, clearly putting more effort into developing their core products for Windows. Adobes refusal to release an Intel version when Apple made the difficult switch from PowerPC to Intel was a big "FU, we don't need you anymore" to Apple.
Adobe's arrogance means they are now fighting on four fronts: against Microsoft, Apple, against the proponents of a web based on open standards (hello Google), and against the upcoming competition of web-based alternatives for their desktop apps. Oh, and the Linux/open source community isn't to happy about their attitude either.
Adobe is going down. It's just a matter of time.
Derek
· 1 year ago
This is the first of many big wins for MSFT now that Stephen Elop is in place. I think he will use what he knows about Adobe/Macromedia against them very effectively. He is a very shrewd operator.
Synthmeister
· 1 year ago
You're forgetting several key points: 1. Apple helped Adobe rise from obscurity, not the other way around, when Apple used PS in it's first LaserPrinters. 2. As others have said, Adobe has plenty of history screwing Apple, starting with Premiere and continuing with their foot-dragging conversions of Photoshop and with one of their main execs recommending PCs over Mac a few years ago. 3. Flash is by no means a standard on mobile computing, so why should Apple help it become one? 4. Do you really think Apple has sold even one less iPhone because it's lack of Flash support?
Damien
· 1 year ago
Robert
I love the access you get to people. And it is enjoyable to play 'strategy consultant' over a beer.
However, "stab in the back" is awfully strong and not very well backed up. There is a detailed history between the two to appreciate, and even the relatively little I know of it suggests that "stab in the back" isn't a realistic representation of the situation. These companies make commercial decisions and these is another of those.
Your son would be much more impressed with your knowledge about matters Apple if you supplemented your reading with RoughlyDrafted - which has written content that is, overall, very compelling. And highly educational.
And daring fireball is good too.
Both have addressed the Flash on iPhone issue. Far better than you. If you're going to comment so strongly, do some research and provide some links to external commenters with developed opinions. We read them as well as you.
Your main value is access, shown over an accessible medium, meaning I can watch and appreciate in Australia things that used not be possible. Thanks for contributing these things.
I've been using an iPhone in Australia for months now, and I cannot say that the absence of Flash has bothered for me for a minute. Personally, I don't even like waiting for Flash over a fast land connection to a Mac Pro.
Finally, it seems Steve has outlined what would be required to operate Flash on the iPhone. The missing product. A 'maybe' to Flash on the iPhone.
Why not go and speak to Adobe about why they won't make an intermediate program that your users suggest would be necessary since no Dual Core Desktop / Flash Lite would work?
I guess the commercial return wouldn't be in Adobe's interest.
So, again, tell me in more detail about the stabbing in the back. How, why, etc. in a way that would stand up to scrutiny by RoughlyDrafted.
Again, thanks for playing your role in bringing access of the tech world to monitors all over the world.
Paul Brian
· 1 year ago
Can't help but think Apple are shooting themselves in the foot here.
kramer
· 1 year ago
once again viewership is low and robert and the gang at fastcompany are getting nervous.
time to take a topic from techmeme and craft a really flamboyant headline.
apple is always good for comments. "stab in the back" should provoke the fan boys.
presto, more downloads!
JS
· 1 year ago
Flash lite? Why does the iPhone need flash? Silverlight will die a slow painful death. No tools to develop with on the Mac. Why would Apple use Silverlight so it can take the same abuse from MS that it has taken over the years with Office? Why would Apple give MS any kind of leverage into this part of their business knowing how MS uses this leverage to control others fortunes? Anyone that thinks that is going to happen has their head up their arse & has no sense of the history between these two companies. Hey Robert, Apple was also a large part why Adobe succeeded & still does. MS, of course had absolutely no part in making desktop publishing happen. You're statements are just ignorant.
Fernando
· 1 year ago
Why is this focused only alleged politice between Adobe and Apple? Why is the the technical feasibility of adding Flash support *NOT* a viable arguement here? Additionally, what mobile platform currently supports Flash *WELL*? (Keywords being supports Flash well.)
Christopher Coulter
· 1 year ago
Stabs in back? Gotta love bloggers, drama-queening and conspiracy theorizing everything they understand not.
Flash regular is too heavy, and Flash Lite lacks the full 'Zen of Apple' feel, says Jobs -- nothing more or less complicated than that.
PS - FastCompany.TV? That maybe I could look forward to, but this is just Scoble Show minus the trainwreck of Podtech. Ouch. Dud. Should have hit ground running with a fuller slate of programming, something that would actually appeal to the Inc. and Fast Company readers, as I can't imagine the tech slash celebrity romps (and eternally endless Talking Heads and Photo Walks) will hold broad appeal beyond the usual cult. Would be interesting, if instead of going off Scoble Show willy-nilly, it would actually follow the editorial ballgame, i.e. a company walk-thru or extended interview, based on something featured in the current issue. Marry the content, instead of just another ScoblewhateverIbumpintoChannel9Podtech copycat.
Robert Scoble
· 1 year ago
Christopher: we have a whole hour with John Kao, who taught business for 14 years. If that's not good enough for Fast Company's readers, I don't know what is. It's pretty obvious you haven't even watched the videos.
hanford
· 1 year ago
"Flash isn’t that heavyweight"?
Are you nuts Robert? Look at the javascript specs that iPhone does ... it's 10,000 times slower than your average PC. Flash does just about everything with the CPU. I've noticed that when I play flash video on my old laptop the cpu fan kicks in.
Seriously, the iPhone isn't powerful enough to run Flash, just like we'd never expect it to play Quake.
Dude, the iPhone chokes on Google Reader. Flash rendering that isn't shitty?
nowai.
Maybe iPhone rev 2 when they can shove more RAM and a faster and more energy efficient processor in there.
Christopher Coulter
· 1 year ago
a whole hour with John Kao
Actually I have watched some, mostly of him trying to sell his book and outlook, it's not really an interview, it's an informerical. File him under 'endless talking head', not a techie, so I guess you get brownie points for that. And I was thinking in terms of overall strategy and editorial content marriages.
Mister Snitch!
· 1 year ago
Before you write an inflammatory headline like "Apple stabs Adobe in the back" and then admit that you DON'T really know the issues ("I can't believe" is not the same as being able to say "here's why that's not accurate"), why not... GET the facts?
Until this moment I honestly had much more respect for your opinion on anything tech. From here on, anything I see on your site has to be open to question.
Robert Majhen
· 1 year ago
ok ... since we are in Flash since 1999 I may not be objective, but ... few facts:
1. There is a flash player for windows mobile that runs inside IE ... it works great since we developed applications and tested them
2. Flash Lite isnt going to be standard for applications but flash player inside browser will
3. Opera will release their Opera Mobile 9.5 with Flash Lite 3 integrated into browser very soon
4. Dont forget independent browser manufacturer .. try Skyfire ... once iSDK is out they will most likely create version for iPhone too that supports flash player
5. Peak of mobile gaming market is few years away from now .. try to imagine how will handhelds look like 2011. .... can you imagine not running Flash?
My 2 cents on topic :)
drunken_economist
· 1 year ago
What a wag. Scobbie, you conveniently ignore-
1/ While your butt end of the world are flash fanbois, the rest of us are installing Flashblock. I *love* that movie, it shows content uncluttered by the [blink] tag of this generation, Fuh-lash.
2/ Apple is not going to allow Adobe to hold what is it? 2.5 mil handsets hostage to Adobe's timeline to update their cruddy Flashplayer plugin. Why subject handset ENDusers to what Desktop Mac users gnash their teeth over??
3/ There's an SDK. Adobe can line up like every other vendor and port Fuh-lash Light like everyone else.
4/ Oh, and here's an important one: the US telco infrastructure. Lessee how all that 'Rich Content' you keep getting wet over runs. On the mis-named 'Edge' network.
Basically, Stevo is killing a number of birds with one stone. Apple doesn't get the bone, neither does Microsoft, and users [of the burdened Edge system] all win. Win-Win-Win. Except for Adobe and Fuh-lash fanbois.
drunken_economist
· 1 year ago
Sorry. I meant ADOBE also doesn't get the bone. My bad. Some more thoughts:
5/ Why do you think Apple has been working with Youtube / Google ? To get out of that little *.flv wrapper. It really doesn't matter that Adobe added h.264 support, that's like a *burp* at the dinner table. If Adobe wants on the iPhone, they are going to have to make their own Flash browser, or perhaps they'll partner with a sympathetic browser vendor and you'll see a signed application.
But Flash as a plugin in MobileSafari? [duly note the name]. Don't. Make. Me. Laugh.
TranceMist
· 1 year ago
I think the technical challenges could be overcome.
However, I agree that the reason is strategy. (Flash would be a back door to the iPhone)
While there's a lot of flash-based content you may want to enjoy, in the end Flash is a kludegy platform that should be minimized and depricated.
Having competition from Silverlight and whatever Apple decides to put on the iPhone will be a very good thing, in the end. Despite your short-term pain.
John B
· 1 year ago
Presumably, Adobe could, as Sun is promising to do with Java, deliver a version of Flash for the iPhone themselves. Consider how long it took for them to port their apps to 1. OSX and 2. OSX on Intel, Apple probably isn't about to make promises about delivering Flash on iPhone in any timeframe.
Also, all the current apps, IIRC, are developed by Apple, meaning Adobe would have to share source code with Apple, which is also probably not all that likely. Considering Sun's promise to bring Java to iPhone, those who really want Flash (*cough* animated banner ads *cough*) on the iPhone should start pestering Adobe. :-)
RogerV
· 1 year ago
I've never seen a more patently ridiculous blog from a sold-called hotshot blogger.
Just as Sun announced they'll be porting Java JME to the iPhone SDK, Adobe will be able to do their own port of the Flash Player to iPhone. Sun examined the iPhone SDK and found it entirely adequate to proceed to take matters into their own hands to get Java on iPhone. (We all know how Steve has infamously panned Java for the iPhone.)
Let's face it, Steve Jobs says a lot of crap for marketing reasons that serve his own personal vision of Apple supremacy. Adobe's Flash/Flex/AIR and Sun's Java crimp his style in that regard.
Yet at the same time, Apple had to bow to the reality that the iPhone will succeed in the long term by cultivating a 3rd party market for software - hence the iPhone SDK. So the genie is out of the bag.
Scoble, when it comes to trying to project a reality distortion field in this matter of Silverlight vs. Flex, dude you come off as completely pathetic - and ridiculous.
Silverlight 1.0 player has 1.5 million downloads a day. Silverlight 2.0 is still mere betaware even after MIX. (All those downloads are still just 1.0 media players so there's still no seeding of the consumer market with a Silverlight that is capable of competing against Flash Player 9, which supports Flex 2 and Flex 3.
In the developed countries, the Flash Player 9 penetration of Internet users is already above 90%. Now think of that as one ponders this figure:
Despite how already saturated the Internet audience is with a Flash Player 9 capable of running Flex 2 and 3 RIA web apps, Adobe still sees 12 million new downloads (vs. the 1.5 million sited for Silverlight above).
Flex RIA is so far ahead of Microsoft's great hope Silverlight 2.0, one has to wonder why Microsoft should even bother. Where things stand today, Adobe technologically is a full two generations ahead of Silverlight. In end-user adoption, there's not even a comparison to be made as there is no consumer adoption to talk about for a Silverlight where it could be considered to compete against Adobe's Flex and AIR.
Microsoft lands one somewhat significant deal (NBC sports) while everybody else of note goes with Flash and Flex. The Salesforce.com CEO is pretty typical of the corporate stance on the matter right now - Salesforce.com is only concentrating on Flash/Flex/AIR, they'll not be bothering to mess with Silverlight at all. The only folks that pay any attention to Silverlight are those that are rigidly .NET in their development stack. Those that care about succeeding in the marketplace with a superior technology are sticking with Flash/Flex/AIR. And Flex will work just fine with a .NET tool stack too so there's no reason those folks should consider themselves captive to Microsoft Silverlight.
It's fine to champion a company one favours, but jeeze, spouting nothing but empty bravado comes off merely as pathetic.
Robert Majhen
· 1 year ago
To Some Geek ... why are you trying to leave impression how big geek you really are ... the nick ... then this deprecated language . Are these information you are providing here based on your research and experience? Well ... mine are.
drunken_economist
· 1 year ago
@R Majhen:
Nope, I'm just pissed at all you fanbois who are trying to cram Director crapola down our throats.
I'm don't much like the Silverlight fanbois either.. they are beyond pathetic.
As to my 'research' and 'experience' open your damn eyes.
* Mobile phones still have POSTAGE STAMP displays. Even the iPhone / Touch displays are ONLY 320x480. Steve was RIGHT to cordon off Youtube to its own app, and restrict _Mobile_Safari from downloading or plugins. For the iPhone it's all about what powers the RIM set too: Textual and static graphic content.
If you want to develop 'games' or 'farting frog interactivity' then use the SDK. Steve is after the Enterprise customers who favor _reliability_ over _flying baloney_.
* Flash is used 80% of the time or more in 'look at me!' crap like banners and ads; that slow down and crash browsers. Jobs was WISE to keep that crap off his iPhones. Joe Cartoon nonwithstanding.
Again, Flash is [blink] or animated gif. If you wanna look all cheap and porno, then by all means bandy about that acronym RIA or 'embedded content' some more. Meanwhile Scooby Dooby can't [embed] in Wordpress because the WP folks consider it a security risk. Which. it. is.
* Content that you want to pipe thru Flash / Flex / Air doesn't have to be piped at all. There are REAL robust solutions like Java apps and uh, HTML/CSS for that. Unless you're pitching Fuh-lash as a type of DRM so that users can't copy and paste text. In which case you're in the DRM bid-ness. Which is in decline.
* Do you LIVE in the USA? Where DSL is around 1.5M/sec and Cingular [stink-u-lar] runs Edge instead of 3G? Your 'RIA' stuff will fall flat. And does.
* Anyway, we're headed into a recession. MS and Adobe are shifting MOST if not all their Dev to India, meaning your 'authoring tools' and 'dev environments' will be buggier than shit. I kinda feel sorry for you propeller heads stuck in visual basic, Lingo, Action script.
As to my language, Scooby Dooby's blog was such patent BS, I just couldn't resist on loading up on some good rotgut and then typing it like it is. Cheers!
RogerV
· 1 year ago
"Flash is used 80% of the time or more in ‘look at me!’ crap like banners and ads; that slow down and crash browsers. Jobs was WISE to keep that crap off his iPhones. Joe Cartoon nonwithstanding."
People keep trying to demean Adobe's RIA technology by referencing the years of multi-media marketing annoyances built on Flash. However, since August 2006 release of Flex 2 beta (followed by Jan 2007 release of production Flex 2), it has been all about RIA - which is based on the Flex technology enhancement of the Flash player.
This is what enterprise IT is now busily retooling its business applications around - which is now Flex 3 and AIR.
Flex/AIR is now being used to retool what once was being built using such things as Java Swing, .NET Winform (in my company we've abandoned .NET for Flex-based GUIs), and even in some cases Java applets.
However, because Flex is a web RIA solution that runs perfectly (and consistently well) in all browsers of note, it is also a great RIA solution for retooling the consumer Internet user experience. Flash player is the most defacto programming standard that exist on the Internet (as HTML/DOM/Javascript are not very consistent and hence not much of a standard actually exist in that realm). That's a very happy story as the Flash player is so pervasively seeded due to sites like YouTube.com. None-the-less, Flex was first devised and aimed at enterprise software development. It's rather cool, though, how the old programming paradigm of Flash meshes so well and rather seamlessly with the new Flex programming model. That makes for some very nice UI capability.
RogerV
· 1 year ago
"Do you LIVE in the USA? Where DSL is around 1.5M/sec and Cingular [stink-u-lar] runs Edge instead of 3G? Your ‘RIA’ stuff will fall flat. And does."
Actually the RIA style of web app does much better in this scenario as it's not constantly pulling newly generated web page UI from the server. It just makes SOA services calls to the server - or even better does BlazeDS messaging (server-side push of events), which use less bandwidth.
The nice thing about RIA web app approach of Adobe Flex is it puts MVC back down completely on the client-side. It was a brain dead approach in splitting MVC across network tiers that all the server-side web frameworks have done all these years. It is web 1.0 apps that suck in particular when bandwidth is mediocre. Our customers love our Flex apps as they're so much more robust than old web 1.0 web apps due to this very issue.
Nikos
· 1 year ago
Guys the huge Thing would be MICR OSOFT SILVERLIGHT & ADOBE FLASH SUPPORT iphone. Sounds good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
david
· 1 year ago
Hi, im a iPhone official programmer (!?) and expert in flash and flex technologies for big brands and companies. (yah, my apps doesn't explode, u know).
All you guys talking about is really nonsense and funny :)
How can Jobs "FORBIDDEN" to put flash on their phones???
Apple is not the people who will program a flash player. Who did thought that??? Apple will not code a single line of an Adobe program. IS LOGIC!
Of course Jobs has been asked thousands of times about flash player on iPhone, but, he has nothing to be with Adobe company, more than negotiating to put it BY DEFAULT on their phones.
I would better listen what did Adobe say in respect. The last news i had was that Adobe was very happy about the appearing of the iPhone SDK, because that way they would have a flash player for the iPhone in a short time.
So believe me, sure iPhone will have a flash player soon. Adobe will program it, no doubt, Apple would not code that. And it will appear soon. no idea if it will be a Lite version of flash, but there will be a version, 100% sure.
And about iPhone power...whatever u program to a mobile device will have it's limitations. Even nokia or wmobile phones. People think that a mobile with windowsmobile inside actually runs windows vista?? i'm amazed about the opinion of people. Of course, silverlight for a mobile wont be same as silverlight for a desktop. Neither any other app.
And about that, could add that iPhone is quite powerfull, and runs an OS that is more near to a desktop system (in kernel, resources admin, etc) than any other mobiles.
So guys, i think u won't see a website with animation on a mobile soon. But im sure we will see flash apps on the iPhone soon, since the only thing Adobe needs to make it, is the SDK, and they already have the SDK, and might have many programmers doing it.
All Comments
I'm all for SVG but at least make flash sorta work in the meantime.
See this article.
* http://daringfireball.net/2008/02/flash_iphone_...
Adobe was pinning its hopes on Apple because they know there's probably little chance that Steve Jobs would let Silverlight onto the iPhone too.
Scoble,
Does the Nokia N95 do Flash?
However, I think it's ultimately about sandboxing developers - so I'm really not sure how that could be considered an opening for Microsoft. What - you think Apple ditches Flash to port Silverlight to the iPhone? I think not ;)
And the SDK is probably not going to allow browser plugins. If it does, this is all moot anyway - both MS and Adobe can create their own versions, and it would be a very unwise move by Apple to cert only one of them.
Is this something that the community can add or is it totally dead now?
So, the N95 can run things like Kyte.tv and Qik.com, which let you do video from your mobile phone.
I'm currently working on a G4 867Mhz Dual with 1GB RAM and I cannot open any webpage with Flash without getting CPU usage to 90-100%!
The problem is that a lot of websites use flash these days! As a web designer I flee from Flash at all cost on the grounds of usability and user experience, but I reckon the usefulness of Flash in some applications!
With that in mind, I think that audio/video should focus more on Quicktime formats as they're already the future (H.264 is supported and is the best format around for HQ video), Apple should develop better integration from Safari on the iPhone with the QT player (not browsing other tabs while I'm streaming a MP3?) and developers should start thinking of ways to provide non-flash users with alternatives to get to the content which shouldn't be hard as some videos already use H.264/etc.. but just rely on Flash for the frontend/UI! Changing that shouldn't be that complicated..
On Silverlight... Too early to tell! Seems promising but it's kind of heavyweight too (I'll keep my final opinion until I see what Nokia does with it...).
Apple stabbing Adobe in the back is where Apple has created products that directly compete with Adobes audio/video tools, especially since Adobe for the longest time was a huge supporter of Apple development. I thought they were going to do something similar here when I read the article title.
Be an enabler/orchestrator not a dictator. The market is too fragmented as it is. We need handsets that just support!!
In Firefox, if I have more than a couple of tabs open that have any level of Flash content on the pages, I'm destined for a browser crash every couple hours.
I was recently having consistent, reliable crashes when using a video camera through the Flash-based player in Utterz (totally Flash, not Utterz, I recreated the exact error in other "grab your video cam with Flash" apps). So I started digging.
Turns out that there's a great deal of discussion about the Mac Flash player, with many people suggesting a downgrade to the older version. (Didn't solve my problem, unfortunately)
If the Flash player on full sized Macs is a resource hog, prone to crashes, why would I possibly want it on a mini-sized Mac (the iPhone)?
Honestly, I'm bummed at Apple's decision, but not because I think they made the wrong one. Hopefully this will get Adobe into gear and actually make a robust Mac version of the Flash player...
Yeah, I know all kinds of stuff is available only on the Flash (and soon, Silverlight) closed "platforms" (or whatever you'd call those), but the winds in the long term blow in the open direction. Apple should adopt and support as much open stuff as they can. So should everybody. Even if they hedge their bets with the closed crap in the meantime.
They've survived and prospered because they are seen to be exclusive and different in some way shape or form in the market. Why change the habit of a life-time now just to make people happy? I'm sure they'll come up with their own 'exclusive to Apple ONLY' version of flash...
Apparently you've never used the Mac version, particularly on something like a Mac mini. I've no doubt it'd be slow as a stone statue of a dog on the iPhone.
It seems that two domains are emerging. One is the RIA created in Flex/agLight/Java and rendered in a desktop browser. RIA's seek to replace the bulky traditional desktop apps and provide numerous advantages in universality and deployment. The other is a highly fragmented mobile market, with competing APIs in .NET CF, iPhone SDK, Android, Symbian, Brew etc.
I have to say from a developer/CEO's POV, it's somewhat daunting to think of porting a single app across all the different rich mobile platforms available. Furthermore, these mobile platforms are becoming just as sophisticated as desktop apps, with mutimedia, animations and responsive UI controls, and require a similar investment in resources. The only thing in common is that they tend to leverage the same XML based web services such as gMaps and RSS for their content.
Competition for the developer will continue fragmenting the markplace even as the trend is toward standards and interop. I just don't ever see a clear winner emerging, so the only choice for any ISV is to target all 'views' and keep the 'logic' tier as decoupled and universal as possible.
That's why.
Apple is breaking away from proprietary codecs and file formats, but sticking to proprietary hardware and software to do it!
Java, Flash, Silverlight, and (sadly) AppleScript are history. HTML5 is the future.
Apple should teach Adobe a quick lesson by buying them outright.
Everyone knows that OSX is PDF-based, right? Its an Adobe technology, but its also a royalty-free open standard that Adobe's trying to get ISO certified. That's a long way from PostScript, which when NeXTStep was using it, NeXT engineers had to go to Adobe for access to APIs with pen and paper, no computers or networked devices.
Have your tried to use Acrobat on the Mac? Its terrible. Adobe refuses to use Applescript, or even acknowledge that it exists. Apple has zero love for Adobe and with good reason.
There's tons of tasks that are only available through Flash. Games and videos are the two major ones.
It'll be interesting to see what Apple proposes developers do. Steve Jobs would LOVE to get games onto the iPhone -- that's a huge revenue potential.
Does it? What's a couple million iPhones in the broader scheme of things? Future devices from all manufacturers will have faster processors, more memory and fuller operating systems, allowing both Flash and Silverlight to run comfortably.
To put video on the iPhone you need to use Quicktime. That forces web developers to use Quicktime if they want a chance with all those iPhone users (soon to be 10 million of anaylsis is to be believed). So if you’re a web developer you’re looking at two facts:
1. You have to support Quicktime for the iPhone
2. Every PC and/or Mac user has both Flash and Quicktime at this point
Given those two facts wouldn’t it make sense to drop your Flash video in favor of Quicktime?
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think you’ll see developers leaving Flash based video right away but the idea is there. Jobs has created a situation where Quicktime is bootstrapped to the iPhone’s success. The more iPhones that are sold, the more compelling Quicktime looks and the more ground Flash loses.
There’s a lot of advantage in controlling the de factor video standard on the web and I doubt that’s something that’s escaped Steve Jobs.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/03/05/s...
You are mostly correct, except it isn't Quicktime they're pushing, it's h.264. Quicktime isn't a codec, it's a container. The Quicktime Player plays any codec that's plugged into it. ( see: http://perian.org )
Quicktime is Apples' solution for playing h.264 files, but it's not a requirement.
By forcing developers to support an open standard rather than a closed one, everybody wins. (Except Adobe and Microsoft)
We might try to fool ourselves that it looks pretty, shiny etc. etc. but what can I do with it.
Robert, you've got two phones, the N95 (which has flashlite, J2ME, video capabilities) and the iPhone, which of these helps you to get people to your site etc. etc. and provides real value. Which of these lets you just install stuff and invites you to tinker with it?
And apart from that, the iPhone is currently only available in some countries, reception in Europe has been luke warm. The iPhone is just as Windows Mobile nothing more than a niche product which has gathered the faithful, but nothing more than that.....
Apple clearly wants the iPhone to be a reasonably secure platform; in my estimation, any version of Flash installed would either require constant tweaking or would seriously compromise that.
The fact that the article takes pages to even get to Flash lite should prove just how Apple biased it is.
When it does get to its point the article basically says "Apple won't support Flash Lite because its got Cocoa which is better anyway"
That's like Microsoft saying it isn't going to support Javascript because Silverlight is better anyway. Its stupid, APIs aren't exclusive and the only people who would accept an argument otherwise is the Mac faithful.
The Nokia? For creating videos and for GPS, since those are two things the iPhone doesn't do.
http://ekive.blogspot.com/2008/03/no-flash-on-i...
(I just did a quick Google search and couldn't find
Could be wrong though so a big grain of salt there...
So, until Steve Jobs resigns from Apple - no flash ...
http://2aday.wordpress.com/2007/07/09/iphone-fl...
It is also a reasonable time of day on the East Coast :-)
Nice headline BTW. ;-) The more prosaic truth is that Flash is a pig, and the iPhone doesn't have enough horsepower to run it, but it's hard to get a snappy headline out of that. The truth also places the blame at the feet of both Adobe and Apple....
The iPhone already supports Canvas, the HTML5 spec to do vector graphics.
I'm certainly not claiming it's a replacement for Flash (it's not), but I'm not sure why they'd be working on SVG really hard if they already support Canvas. It's a standard, I think Firefox and Opera support, it, etc etc.
Runtime wars (1): Does Apple have an answer to Flash, Silverlight and JavaFX?
http://counternotions.com/2007/11/15/runtime-wars/
Runtime wars (2): Apple’s answer to Flash, Silverlight and JavaFX
http://counternotions.com/2007/11/15/apple-runt...
You used to work for MS. After MS dropped WMV support for the Mac, did you expect APPLE to write its own WMV player?
It's the same thing here.
And Adobe has a solid history of this too: the PalmOS PDF Viewer disaster, no Flash for PalmOS. *Sony* had to create a Flash player for CLIEs because Adobe wouldn't.
http://mikecane2008.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/ad...
Once the "iSDK" is released, Adobe will have no excuse.
The next gen Iphone will eventually have video and GPS (perhaps an add on). These will be in "Just one more thing like announcements" and we will all go "OOOh!" And then Jobs will say we heard your feedback, you wanted Flash so here it is.. Flash.. for the Iphone, new improved and better than ever. I guess the video part will come with some neat easy to use video blogging service with .mac
The only thing preventing Apple from adding flash support is a lack of competition, not a lack of demand. And yes Apple and carriers will lose revenue on "Games" and "Content" they may want to sell.
Robert said
"I carry both a Nokia N95 (several of them, in fact) and an iPhone. I use the iPhone to make and receive calls, look at my voice mail, and for things like stocks, maps, and using the Web browser.
The Nokia? For creating videos and for GPS, since those are two things the iPhone doesn’t do."
http://weblogs.asp.net/Jeff/
They're pushing Silverlight hard as an ad platform as well... more later.
All of the developers I talk to say it's a platform battle - Quicktime being Apple's contender. Flash or Silverlight would allow Adobe or Microsoft to wedge into the iPhone platform outside of Steve's tightly-controlled environment. We'll find out when the SDK is released soon how Steve plans to compete with these technologies.
The example I've always heard was YouTube - i.e.: YouTube good; Flash bad - What to do? Convince Google to create an iPhone-only YouTube by converting all of YouTube's content over to H.264 mp4.
It's strictly platform this time. This is where Jobs lost control 30 years ago, and I think he doesn't want to repeat the same grave mistake. Godspeed, Steve.
Next time, please read things a little closer before crying wolf!
Battery life defines mobile world. hence platform (flash/silver) doesn’t matter. We need innovation in battery life. Tech people love rich services (video) in mobile devices, but not so many end users. "Phone means talk"
Videos in iPhone = Vista in PC.
Please explain this.
When I hit play on a video on kyte.tv, Safari goes from 2% CPU usage to over 60% CPU usage. This is on a dual-core Xeon!
When I play a video on qik.com, Safari goes to 24% CPU usage.
How in the hell is the processor on the iPhone supposed to provide any sort of comparable performance?
If people want their videos to show up on the iPhone, _upload_ _to_ _Youtube_.
Exactly. That's how all the fancy WM6 interfaces work. I don't know why everyone thinks a mobile phone chip can't run flash. It clearly can, and does. Flash's omission has much more to do with the future plans of Microsoft, Apple, and Adobe's mobile (and desktop) application platforms.
A new turf war in the mobile space is obvious and imminent. Google's made their strategy clear. Apple hasn't (is that a big surprise to anyone?).
Adobe's arrogance means they are now fighting on four fronts: against Microsoft, Apple, against the proponents of a web based on open standards (hello Google), and against the upcoming competition of web-based alternatives for their desktop apps. Oh, and the Linux/open source community isn't to happy about their attitude either.
Adobe is going down. It's just a matter of time.
1. Apple helped Adobe rise from obscurity, not the other way around, when Apple used PS in it's first LaserPrinters.
2. As others have said, Adobe has plenty of history screwing Apple, starting with Premiere and continuing with their foot-dragging conversions of Photoshop and with one of their main execs recommending PCs over Mac a few years ago.
3. Flash is by no means a standard on mobile computing, so why should Apple help it become one?
4. Do you really think Apple has sold even one less iPhone because it's lack of Flash support?
I love the access you get to people. And it is enjoyable to play 'strategy consultant' over a beer.
However, "stab in the back" is awfully strong and not very well backed up. There is a detailed history between the two to appreciate, and even the relatively little I know of it suggests that "stab in the back" isn't a realistic representation of the situation. These companies make commercial decisions and these is another of those.
Your son would be much more impressed with your knowledge about matters Apple if you supplemented your reading with RoughlyDrafted - which has written content that is, overall, very compelling. And highly educational.
And daring fireball is good too.
Both have addressed the Flash on iPhone issue. Far better than you. If you're going to comment so strongly, do some research and provide some links to external commenters with developed opinions. We read them as well as you.
Your main value is access, shown over an accessible medium, meaning I can watch and appreciate in Australia things that used not be possible. Thanks for contributing these things.
I've been using an iPhone in Australia for months now, and I cannot say that the absence of Flash has bothered for me for a minute. Personally, I don't even like waiting for Flash over a fast land connection to a Mac Pro.
Finally, it seems Steve has outlined what would be required to operate Flash on the iPhone. The missing product. A 'maybe' to Flash on the iPhone.
Why not go and speak to Adobe about why they won't make an intermediate program that your users suggest would be necessary since no Dual Core Desktop / Flash Lite would work?
I guess the commercial return wouldn't be in Adobe's interest.
So, again, tell me in more detail about the stabbing in the back. How, why, etc. in a way that would stand up to scrutiny by RoughlyDrafted.
Again, thanks for playing your role in bringing access of the tech world to monitors all over the world.
time to take a topic from techmeme and craft a really flamboyant headline.
apple is always good for comments. "stab in the back" should provoke the fan boys.
presto, more downloads!
Flash regular is too heavy, and Flash Lite lacks the full 'Zen of Apple' feel, says Jobs -- nothing more or less complicated than that.
PS - FastCompany.TV? That maybe I could look forward to, but this is just Scoble Show minus the trainwreck of Podtech. Ouch. Dud. Should have hit ground running with a fuller slate of programming, something that would actually appeal to the Inc. and Fast Company readers, as I can't imagine the tech slash celebrity romps (and eternally endless Talking Heads and Photo Walks) will hold broad appeal beyond the usual cult. Would be interesting, if instead of going off Scoble Show willy-nilly, it would actually follow the editorial ballgame, i.e. a company walk-thru or extended interview, based on something featured in the current issue. Marry the content, instead of just another ScoblewhateverIbumpintoChannel9Podtech copycat.
Are you nuts Robert? Look at the javascript specs that iPhone does ... it's 10,000 times slower than your average PC. Flash does just about everything with the CPU. I've noticed that when I play flash video on my old laptop the cpu fan kicks in.
Seriously, the iPhone isn't powerful enough to run Flash, just like we'd never expect it to play Quake.
<abbr title="Professional top blogs report"> a more pro top blogs daily report </abbr> . Now I've just posted <abbr title="Professional top blogs report"> the newest report </abbr> , see and reply me some comments. Thanks.
nowai.
Maybe iPhone rev 2 when they can shove more RAM and a faster and more energy efficient processor in there.
Actually I have watched some, mostly of him trying to sell his book and outlook, it's not really an interview, it's an informerical. File him under 'endless talking head', not a techie, so I guess you get brownie points for that. And I was thinking in terms of overall strategy and editorial content marriages.
I.e.: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/03/05/s...
Until this moment I honestly had much more respect for your opinion on anything tech. From here on, anything I see on your site has to be open to question.
1. There is a flash player for windows mobile that runs inside IE ... it works great since we developed applications and tested them
2. Flash Lite isnt going to be standard for applications but flash player inside browser will
3. Opera will release their Opera Mobile 9.5 with Flash Lite 3 integrated into browser very soon
4. Dont forget independent browser manufacturer .. try Skyfire ... once iSDK is out they will most likely create version for iPhone too that supports flash player
5. Peak of mobile gaming market is few years away from now .. try to imagine how will handhelds look like 2011. .... can you imagine not running Flash?
My 2 cents on topic :)
1/ While your butt end of the world are flash fanbois, the rest of us are installing Flashblock. I *love* that movie, it shows content uncluttered by the [blink] tag of this generation, Fuh-lash.
2/ Apple is not going to allow Adobe to hold what is it? 2.5 mil handsets hostage to Adobe's timeline to update their cruddy Flashplayer plugin. Why subject handset ENDusers to what Desktop Mac users gnash their teeth over??
3/ There's an SDK. Adobe can line up like every other vendor and port Fuh-lash Light like everyone else.
4/ Oh, and here's an important one: the US telco infrastructure. Lessee how all that 'Rich Content' you keep getting wet over runs. On the mis-named 'Edge' network.
Basically, Stevo is killing a number of birds with one stone. Apple doesn't get the bone, neither does Microsoft, and users [of the burdened Edge system] all win. Win-Win-Win. Except for Adobe and Fuh-lash fanbois.
5/ Why do you think Apple has been working with Youtube / Google ? To get out of that little *.flv wrapper. It really doesn't matter that Adobe added h.264 support, that's like a *burp* at the dinner table. If Adobe wants on the iPhone, they are going to have to make their own Flash browser, or perhaps they'll partner with a sympathetic browser vendor and you'll see a signed application.
But Flash as a plugin in MobileSafari? [duly note the name]. Don't. Make. Me. Laugh.
However, I agree that the reason is strategy.
(Flash would be a back door to the iPhone)
While there's a lot of flash-based content you may want to enjoy, in the end Flash is a kludegy platform that should be minimized and depricated.
Having competition from Silverlight and whatever Apple decides to put on the iPhone will be a very good thing, in the end. Despite your short-term pain.
Also, all the current apps, IIRC, are developed by Apple, meaning Adobe would have to share source code with Apple, which is also probably not all that likely. Considering Sun's promise to bring Java to iPhone, those who really want Flash (*cough* animated banner ads *cough*) on the iPhone should start pestering Adobe. :-)
Just as Sun announced they'll be porting Java JME to the iPhone SDK, Adobe will be able to do their own port of the Flash Player to iPhone. Sun examined the iPhone SDK and found it entirely adequate to proceed to take matters into their own hands to get Java on iPhone. (We all know how Steve has infamously panned Java for the iPhone.)
Let's face it, Steve Jobs says a lot of crap for marketing reasons that serve his own personal vision of Apple supremacy. Adobe's Flash/Flex/AIR and Sun's Java crimp his style in that regard.
Yet at the same time, Apple had to bow to the reality that the iPhone will succeed in the long term by cultivating a 3rd party market for software - hence the iPhone SDK. So the genie is out of the bag.
Scoble, when it comes to trying to project a reality distortion field in this matter of Silverlight vs. Flex, dude you come off as completely pathetic - and ridiculous.
Silverlight 1.0 player has 1.5 million downloads a day. Silverlight 2.0 is still mere betaware even after MIX. (All those downloads are still just 1.0 media players so there's still no seeding of the consumer market with a Silverlight that is capable of competing against Flash Player 9, which supports Flex 2 and Flex 3.
In the developed countries, the Flash Player 9 penetration of Internet users is already above 90%. Now think of that as one ponders this figure:
Despite how already saturated the Internet audience is with a Flash Player 9 capable of running Flex 2 and 3 RIA web apps, Adobe still sees 12 million new downloads (vs. the 1.5 million sited for Silverlight above).
Flex RIA is so far ahead of Microsoft's great hope Silverlight 2.0, one has to wonder why Microsoft should even bother. Where things stand today, Adobe technologically is a full two generations ahead of Silverlight. In end-user adoption, there's not even a comparison to be made as there is no consumer adoption to talk about for a Silverlight where it could be considered to compete against Adobe's Flex and AIR.
Microsoft lands one somewhat significant deal (NBC sports) while everybody else of note goes with Flash and Flex. The Salesforce.com CEO is pretty typical of the corporate stance on the matter right now - Salesforce.com is only concentrating on Flash/Flex/AIR, they'll not be bothering to mess with Silverlight at all. The only folks that pay any attention to Silverlight are those that are rigidly .NET in their development stack. Those that care about succeeding in the marketplace with a superior technology are sticking with Flash/Flex/AIR. And Flex will work just fine with a .NET tool stack too so there's no reason those folks should consider themselves captive to Microsoft Silverlight.
It's fine to champion a company one favours, but jeeze, spouting nothing but empty bravado comes off merely as pathetic.
Nope, I'm just pissed at all you fanbois who are trying to cram Director crapola down our throats.
I'm don't much like the Silverlight fanbois either.. they are beyond pathetic.
As to my 'research' and 'experience' open your damn eyes.
* Mobile phones still have POSTAGE STAMP displays. Even the iPhone / Touch displays are ONLY 320x480. Steve was RIGHT to cordon off Youtube to its own app, and restrict _Mobile_Safari from downloading or plugins. For the iPhone it's all about what powers the RIM set too: Textual and static graphic content.
If you want to develop 'games' or 'farting frog interactivity' then use the SDK. Steve is after the Enterprise customers who favor _reliability_ over _flying baloney_.
* Flash is used 80% of the time or more in 'look at me!' crap like banners and ads; that slow down and crash browsers. Jobs was WISE to keep that crap off his iPhones. Joe Cartoon nonwithstanding.
Again, Flash is [blink] or animated gif. If you wanna look all cheap and porno, then by all means bandy about that acronym RIA or 'embedded content' some more. Meanwhile Scooby Dooby can't [embed] in Wordpress because the WP folks consider it a security risk. Which. it. is.
* Content that you want to pipe thru Flash / Flex / Air doesn't have to be piped at all. There are REAL robust solutions like Java apps and uh, HTML/CSS for that. Unless you're pitching Fuh-lash as a type of DRM so that users can't copy and paste text. In which case you're in the DRM bid-ness. Which is in decline.
* Do you LIVE in the USA? Where DSL is around 1.5M/sec and Cingular [stink-u-lar] runs Edge instead of 3G? Your 'RIA' stuff will fall flat. And does.
* Anyway, we're headed into a recession. MS and Adobe are shifting MOST if not all their Dev to India, meaning your 'authoring tools' and 'dev environments' will be buggier than shit. I kinda feel sorry for you propeller heads stuck in visual basic, Lingo, Action script.
As to my language, Scooby Dooby's blog was such patent BS, I just couldn't resist on loading up on some good rotgut and then typing it like it is. Cheers!
People keep trying to demean Adobe's RIA technology by referencing the years of multi-media marketing annoyances built on Flash. However, since August 2006 release of Flex 2 beta (followed by Jan 2007 release of production Flex 2), it has been all about RIA - which is based on the Flex technology enhancement of the Flash player.
This is what enterprise IT is now busily retooling its business applications around - which is now Flex 3 and AIR.
Flex/AIR is now being used to retool what once was being built using such things as Java Swing, .NET Winform (in my company we've abandoned .NET for Flex-based GUIs), and even in some cases Java applets.
However, because Flex is a web RIA solution that runs perfectly (and consistently well) in all browsers of note, it is also a great RIA solution for retooling the consumer Internet user experience. Flash player is the most defacto programming standard that exist on the Internet (as HTML/DOM/Javascript are not very consistent and hence not much of a standard actually exist in that realm). That's a very happy story as the Flash player is so pervasively seeded due to sites like YouTube.com. None-the-less, Flex was first devised and aimed at enterprise software development. It's rather cool, though, how the old programming paradigm of Flash meshes so well and rather seamlessly with the new Flex programming model. That makes for some very nice UI capability.
Actually the RIA style of web app does much better in this scenario as it's not constantly pulling newly generated web page UI from the server. It just makes SOA services calls to the server - or even better does BlazeDS messaging (server-side push of events), which use less bandwidth.
The nice thing about RIA web app approach of Adobe Flex is it puts MVC back down completely on the client-side. It was a brain dead approach in splitting MVC across network tiers that all the server-side web frameworks have done all these years. It is web 1.0 apps that suck in particular when bandwidth is mediocre. Our customers love our Flex apps as they're so much more robust than old web 1.0 web apps due to this very issue.
OSOFT SILVERLIGHT & ADOBE FLASH SUPPORT iphone.
Sounds good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All you guys talking about is really nonsense and funny :)
How can Jobs "FORBIDDEN" to put flash on their phones???
Apple is not the people who will program a flash player. Who did thought that??? Apple will not code a single line of an Adobe program. IS LOGIC!
Of course Jobs has been asked thousands of times about flash player on iPhone, but, he has nothing to be with Adobe company, more than negotiating to put it BY DEFAULT on their phones.
I would better listen what did Adobe say in respect.
The last news i had was that Adobe was very happy about the appearing of the iPhone SDK, because that way they would have a flash player for the iPhone in a short time.
So believe me, sure iPhone will have a flash player soon. Adobe will program it, no doubt, Apple would not code that. And it will appear soon.
no idea if it will be a Lite version of flash, but there will be a version, 100% sure.
And about iPhone power...whatever u program to a mobile device will have it's limitations. Even nokia or wmobile phones. People think that a mobile with windowsmobile inside actually runs windows vista?? i'm amazed about the opinion of people.
Of course, silverlight for a mobile wont be same as silverlight for a desktop. Neither any other app.
And about that, could add that iPhone is quite powerfull, and runs an OS that is more near to a desktop system (in kernel, resources admin, etc) than any other mobiles.
So guys, i think u won't see a website with animation on a mobile soon. But im sure we will see flash apps on the iPhone soon, since the only thing Adobe needs to make it, is the SDK, and they already have the SDK, and might have many programmers doing it.