Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple teams up with Adobe for iPhone Flash
- Thread starter dmb8021
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Isn't the built-in video decoder exposed to use by any html5 compliant webpage?
So the problem isn't needing flash as flash is just being used as content control. You could change to use not just Flash but another front end as well or drop the content control altogether. Much like YouTube has already done.
I don't understand these posts.Am I missing something?
I can view Flash on my Mac without any hitch and always have. I have a G4 PowerBook.
Really? Every system i've ever used has been hogged by flash. I'm using Macbook C2D 2.16ghz with 4GB ram.. really should run flash perfectly. You only have to look at the difference of flash on Windows next to Mac.. On windows it's fast and efficient and has been since Flash v5.
Can't believe you haven't noticed - it drives me mad when there's a single banner on a website and suddenly the system goes into overdrive.
I have a MacBookPro 17". It replaced my G5 2.5 when it died. I also have a working G4 DP 1.25, a Quad Core PC and an Athlon MP 2800. I had a Barton XP3200 and two TI Power Books 1Ghz, which all died the other years. Where I'm going with this, is that I've used Flash on a wide spectrum of configurations. I've been developing in Flash since version 2 and for the most part people like you always exaggerate. You only cite the worst case examples, which I can understand, since the good examples are generally transparent to most users.
It's just like when my friend fed me a whole line of BS that since Yahoo started using Flash, it now took his MacBookPro some exaggerated time of like 30 seconds to launch their start page, so he had to disable it. I filmed my G4 DP on my phone launching Yahoo in about a second. Needless to say, I proved he was full of it and had to ask him if there was something wrong with his system.
Like any popular format, there's going to be bad with the good, but from someone that has real experience working with it, not just a consumer spreading hate, Flash is an excellent tool when used properly, which as noted, most don't notice it when it's done right.
Ugh.
Flash on the iPhone? Ugh. Flash is used by many animated ads. It is EXTREMELY annoying. I hope Apple allows for Flash to be turned off. Ideally I would like Apple to buy PithHelmet, hire its programmer and integrate it into Safari so we can control junk, ads, etc. I have not upgraded to the latest Safari since it won't work with PithHelmet.
Flash on the iPhone? Ugh. Flash is used by many animated ads. It is EXTREMELY annoying. I hope Apple allows for Flash to be turned off. Ideally I would like Apple to buy PithHelmet, hire its programmer and integrate it into Safari so we can control junk, ads, etc. I have not upgraded to the latest Safari since it won't work with PithHelmet.
Flash meh well if we have to!
I cant say that i really want flash but without it you dont get the full web so to me its a necessary evil.
But that aside it does sound a little like when the app store first came out and Adobe said 'yeah were going to have flash on the iPhone within a couple of weeks' and look where that got em, i'll believe it when i see it!
I cant say that i really want flash but without it you dont get the full web so to me its a necessary evil.
But that aside it does sound a little like when the app store first came out and Adobe said 'yeah were going to have flash on the iPhone within a couple of weeks' and look where that got em, i'll believe it when i see it!
I don't understand these posts.
I can view Flash on my Mac without any hitch and always have. I have a G4 PowerBook.
Whatever you're missing I am too. I only have 1Gb RAM in my Macbook and I haven't been driven crazy by flash on OSX. And that's including using a flash application on Facebook. I wouldn't even have noticed any Windows difference if it wasn't pointed out so often here.
So I'm very much hoping this rumor is true. Maybe I'll finally be able to watch icenetwork.com vids on my iPhone.
For those who don't want it I'm sure there'd be a way to disable so I don't understand all the naysayers. It's not fair to begrudge others a wanted feature (and I'd say the same for MMS - I don't need it myself but hope it comes for those who use it).Because you don't pay for it. You pay the BBC to rent it on your behalf from the people who create it. You want the BBC to buy it instead, then buying costs more than renting and your licence fee will be £800.
Apart from a couple of one off experiments, no, they don't. They simply don't.
Phazer
It's too bad so many people can't distinguish between a bad technology, and a good technology used badly.
Flash is a good technology (YouTube, Pandora, sites that allow you to visually customize a product, like BMW, Nike, etc.) but has often been implemented badly (by dweebs doing splashpages that add nothing to a website's content).
Don't throw the Flashbaby out with the bathwater.
Flash is a good technology (YouTube, Pandora, sites that allow you to visually customize a product, like BMW, Nike, etc.) but has often been implemented badly (by dweebs doing splashpages that add nothing to a website's content).
Don't throw the Flashbaby out with the bathwater.
Strictly as a practical matter, how much of this supposed "good technology" do suppose the average user will encounter, say, as a ratio against the splashmenupage garbage we see non-stop on the web today? 1:100000?
Also, the YouTube example is a bit specious, because they are the prime example of the "Flash that didn't need to be Flash", that was actually de-Flashed and restandardized.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, now that Apple is allowing customized WebKit-based iPhone browsers, the guys who create one with the same functionality as FF3 w/ Flashblock and Adblock Plus + Element Hiding Helper will make a mint.
Is there a good implementation of flash that isnt so CPU taxing?
If not, i vote bad technology.
I'm not really looking forward to flash. It's not high on my iphone wish list but as long as Apple has an on/off switch for it, then there's no problem.
Better still a lot of the content on iVeiw is podcasted within 24 hours of first boardcast. So fire up iTunes and have the content come to you.
It would still be network-taxing, even if the CPU isn't strained.
+1. Flash is for adware. I'm so happy that I can turn it off. Only rarely do I turn it on.
For everyone experiencing problems with flash: use firefox!
Incorrect. As many posters have pointed out, the same problem occurs on FireFox. It's not a problem with FireFox/Safari/Opera. It's a problem with Adobe being a bunch of lamers.
This statement is in general to all of the fundamentalist Flash haters that only come out of the woodworks when they see Flash in a the subject, and especially if that subject also contains iPhone.
Right now you people have a "CHOICE." How hard is that to understand? You can turn Flash off. Why? Because it's a plug-in. Browsers like FireFox support options like FlashBLocker, which has the ability to target specific Flash objects and ignore any content from that URL.
Now that's not good enough, because some of you are so extreme in your views and blinded by hate to the point of being shortsighted, that you would rather Flash begone and would like to replace it with a non-plug-in like HTML 5, something that won't be easily disabled. Imagine a future where some annoying banner is making your fans kick-in, because as we all know, noise at any level is inexcusable. What will you do then, it's not a plug-in... Whatever replaces Flash when and if it happens, will be just as bloated in the wrong hands.
And for you HTML 5 supporters which view it as a good Flash replacement, you're being naive, it's no more of a Flash alternative than it is a Java alternative. Just as SVG + JS + CSS + HTML are no where remotely as capable of accomplishing what can be done in Flash.. But having said that, a good Flash site relies on all of those standards -- Minus SVG of course, but it can display that content in the plug-in. If you want to approach the level of Flash and in some areas surpass it, you have to use Java, which has its own quirks to deal with.
Flash is a good tech when "not" in the hands of a tweener or an inexperience designer. The worst offenders are always the larger overpriced agencies. Good Flash work is transparent, it doesn't make your fan rev up unnecessarily and it loads just as fast as standard HTML and for some content it can display them as fast as your CPU can render it. There's a good reason why Flash was originally adopted and why it has become a standard for banners. It can do more with less k and minimal CPU in the hands of a "good" developers and it's still the best cross-platform/browser option available.
I guess turning off Flash would be too easy and it would kill the fun of spouting hate in these forums...
Right now you people have a "CHOICE." How hard is that to understand? You can turn Flash off. Why? Because it's a plug-in. Browsers like FireFox support options like FlashBLocker, which has the ability to target specific Flash objects and ignore any content from that URL.
Now that's not good enough, because some of you are so extreme in your views and blinded by hate to the point of being shortsighted, that you would rather Flash begone and would like to replace it with a non-plug-in like HTML 5, something that won't be easily disabled. Imagine a future where some annoying banner is making your fans kick-in, because as we all know, noise at any level is inexcusable. What will you do then, it's not a plug-in... Whatever replaces Flash when and if it happens, will be just as bloated in the wrong hands.
And for you HTML 5 supporters which view it as a good Flash replacement, you're being naive, it's no more of a Flash alternative than it is a Java alternative. Just as SVG + JS + CSS + HTML are no where remotely as capable of accomplishing what can be done in Flash.. But having said that, a good Flash site relies on all of those standards -- Minus SVG of course, but it can display that content in the plug-in. If you want to approach the level of Flash and in some areas surpass it, you have to use Java, which has its own quirks to deal with.
Flash is a good tech when "not" in the hands of a tweener or an inexperience designer. The worst offenders are always the larger overpriced agencies. Good Flash work is transparent, it doesn't make your fan rev up unnecessarily and it loads just as fast as standard HTML and for some content it can display them as fast as your CPU can render it. There's a good reason why Flash was originally adopted and why it has become a standard for banners. It can do more with less k and minimal CPU in the hands of a "good" developers and it's still the best cross-platform/browser option available.
I guess turning off Flash would be too easy and it would kill the fun of spouting hate in these forums...
Loading ...
Loading ...
Loading ...
Oh boy! Flash! Because Safari doesn't crash enough and they're aren't enough adverts while websurfing. At least everyone will finally be able to go to their favorite porn sites and watch the videos now though! All in the palm of one hand, so your other one is free.
Let's see the Pre do that.
Loading ...
Loading ...
Oh boy! Flash! Because Safari doesn't crash enough and they're aren't enough adverts while websurfing. At least everyone will finally be able to go to their favorite porn sites and watch the videos now though! All in the palm of one hand, so your other one is free.
Let's see the Pre do that.
Have you ever tried actually building something with Flash? It's a royal PITA. Up until AJAX started to eat Adobe/Macromedia's lunch, ActionScript was downright atrocious. It still sucks, but at least they're making a conscious effort to improve it.
Flash is a proprietary technology. There is exactly one fully-functional implementation of it. That implementation sucks on every single platform that's not Windows NT/x86 (where it just sucks less). The first-part implementation is known for being unstable and resource hungry. The content that requires the plugin is nearly invisible to search engines, and is completely inaccessible to disabled users. To top it all off, Flash offers absolutely nothing that modern browsers can't deliver via HTML/CSS/JS. This means that in exchange for using a proprietary, buggy, resource hungry, inaccessible plugin you get to do.... absolutely nothing that you couldn't do with standard, open technologies. Awesome.
That certainly sounds like a bad technology to me. Yes, there was a time when Flash enabled you to do stuff you couldn't otherwise do. Circa 1998 I actually was pleased with Macromedia: their plugin let me do all sorts of stuff that I couldn't do through HTML and Javascript. But times have changed. We have CSS 2, we have AJAX, we have good PNG support in all major browsers, and MPEG-4/H.264 support is widespread -- we have all the things that we previously lacked that made Flash a necessity. There simply isn't a compelling reason to use Flash anymore. Compared to the open, standards-oriented way of doing things, Flash really *is* a "bad technology."