Where's Apple's response to Adobe Flash announcement?

[electroshock]

Um, some of you guys, ever think that some of us might be just fine without Flash? I haven't needed it even once with my iPhone yet. So I don't really miss it. Desktop would be a different story, of course.

 

[-aggie-]

I was wondering what people would start complaining about, now that MMS is available on AT&T.

I think if we had everything....tethering, flash, two cameras, voip, background apps, you name it, they'd complain that we had too much.

 

[Knowlege Bomb]

I think the issue I see here is that it's something that's in demand now, even if it is on it's way out, and all smartphone manufacturers are including it on their devices. Except Apple.

It just seems silly that they are trying to play technology god again after their little charade with MMS. They said MMS was dead too and look where we are now.

it's pretty ****ing annoying that the most "advanced" phone in the world can't display most of the websites I visit properly.

These devs need to ****, grow up, and get flash on the iphone. I don't care
if Adobe or Apple are to blame--its not getting done and the one who gets screwed is the customer wanting to have access to his favorite sites while he's not at home. He gets charged on average $2000+ over the 2 year period he's required to keep the phone, as well. ********.

btw, anyone who says "go get another phone" is a tool. A coorporation's tool.
While these companies make billions providing us with inferior products, you choose to side with them and use their lame excuses for why they can't get a program like flash on a mobile device. You're unpaid shills.

I like this guy. He sounds like me.

 

[IronLogik]

I think the issue I see here is that it's something that's in demand now, even if it is on it's way out, and all smartphone manufacturers are including it on their devices. Except Apple.

It just seems silly that they are trying to play technology god again after their little charade with MMS. They said MMS was dead too and look where we are now.



I like this guy. He sounds like me.

Where did they ever say MMS was dead? They've said CDMA was a dying technology but I don't ever recall MMS being called dead.

 

[Knowlege Bomb]

Where did they ever say MMS was dead? They've said CDMA was a dying technology but I don't ever recall MMS being called dead.

Maybe Apple didn't say it. I guess I assumed that they had since that was the main argument around here for the past two years as to why the iPhone didn't have it to begin with.

 

[samcraig]

Hmm... looks like Flash is the new MMS!

 

[Knowlege Bomb]

Hmm... looks like Flash is the new MMS!

+2 since you just wrote the same thing in the other thread.

 

[IronLogik]

Maybe Apple didn't say it. I guess I assumed that they had since that was the main argument around here for the past two years as to why the iPhone didn't have it to begin with.

Eh. Everyone I talked to that was psyched about it rarely uses it anyway. I think the main reason they didn't put it in at first was hoping the drive towards Email on mobile devices would decrease demand for it. The quality is horrid, especially for videos. Just a guess but I think it was just for the simple fact there were bigger fish to fry.

I thought i'd use MMS more, but eh... in the end I sent a couple pictures and i continued on with my life. If I need to send a picture I use email because the quality is better, plus people can actually save them and store them on their computer with relative ease and in this day and age with huge monitors and large storage bigger pictures will clearly last longer. I hate looking at MMS quality pictures on my 23" Cinema display.

MMS has a nice quality of being able to quickly send a picture to someone but it is more novelty than anything else.

 

[samcraig]

+2 since you just wrote the same thing in the other thread.

it fit in both

just like the repetitive nature of all the MMS threads - now we will have the same with Flash threads.

It's always something LOL

 

[Knowlege Bomb]

Eh. Everyone I talked to that was psyched about it rarely uses it anyway. I think the main reason they didn't put it in at first was hoping the drive towards Email on mobile devices would decrease demand for it. The quality is horrid, especially for videos. Just a guess but I think it was just for the simple fact there were bigger fish to fry.

I thought i'd use MMS more, but eh... in the end I sent a couple pictures and i continued on with my life. If I need to send a picture I use email because the quality is better, plus people can actually save them and store them on their computer with relative ease and in this day and age with huge monitors and large storage bigger pictures will clearly last longer. I hate looking at MMS quality pictures on my 23" Cinema display.

MMS has a nice quality of being able to quickly send a picture to someone but it is more novelty than anything else.

Don't get me wrong. I agree with you 100%. I was never a strong supporter of MMS and I haven't used it a single time since it was implemented (my iPhone runs solely on wifi). But the situation was the same as this one. I believe it should be there because it can be found nearly everywhere else.

it fit in both

just like the repetitive nature of all the MMS threads - now we will have the same with Flash threads.

It's always something LOL

QFT.

 

[IronLogik]

Don't get me wrong. I agree with you 100%. I was never a strong supporter of MMS and I haven't used it a single time since it was implemented (my iPhone runs solely on wifi). But the situation was the same as this one. I believe it should be there because it can be found nearly everywhere else.



QFT.

I've always said people could disagree with me. i don't hold any 100% correct answers. I make some assumptions based around what I feel make sense. I try to do research before opening my mouth.

I think what Apple is doing here is exactly what we expect. They are reinventing the mobile computing platform. The same way they threw out the (hardware) keyboard, floppy drive (iMac), adopted USB and Firewire (iMac), included the Superdrive and all the other fun innovative things they've done, they are recreating the mobile experience.

What they probably feel at this point is that while a lot of phones have x and y feature, there's probably something that bothers people about those features. What can we do to improve that experience? In the end, Flash never made the cut. Probably due to a variety of factors.

I strongly encourage people to not say "well it's available on every other phone, why not the iPhone." But think why it isn't included on the iPhone? What makes the iPhone different from other phones? It does a lot of stuff well, it may not do all things better than other phones, but there's a reason for a lot of stuff they've chosen to put in, delay, or leave out.

First and foremost, iPhone OS has been an iterative design. Meaning they start with something and continually add features across releases. Each major release so far has added numerous big features. I think at this point though we never will see Flash. They can certainly prove me wrong. But I hope for everyone's sake it never gets included and as a result we get some amazing new technologies that are better for everyone. Even if it isn't available right now.

 

[jaw04005]

There’s actually not a lot of phones that support Flash. In fact, I can’t name one that supports anything other than Flash Lite. And Flash Lite is not going to let you view the Web sites you want.

Up until this week’s announcement, it hasn’t been a viable option (power management issues, battery life, requires specific chips for hardware decoding, etc) for most phone manufacturers. Not to mention stability (I suppose you don’t remember Apple mentioning at WWDC that the majority of Safari crashes are Flash related and that they would make the Flash plug-in in Safari its own process in Snow Leopard? The last thing they need is Safari mobile crashing more often than it already does with regular use (although it’s gotten much better since 1.x).

If you want Hulu or other Flash intensive Web sites on your iPhone, you should be pressuring those Web sites to make an iPhone app or code their sites for iPhone “Web app” compatibility.

With HTML 5, Flash will dead in a few years in favor of actual standard-based alternatives.

 

[nabechu]

My guess is that Apple is waiting on HTML 5 to get off the ground and include that in a future update instead of Flash.

 

[IronLogik]

My guess is that Apple is waiting on HTML 5 to get off the ground and include that in a future update instead of Flash.

Some of HTML 5 is actually supported in Safari 4 and Mobile Safari in iPhone OS 3.0.

http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/Google_Throws_Its_Weight_Behind_HTML_5

Google actually uses HTML 5 for GMail's website on the iPhone and Android. It won't take long for HTML 5 to get a lot of adoption. The benefits for developers is worth it.

 

[davyreins]

Well, I can definitely say I would prefer to see the webpage instead of that little blue box. Even if flash will be dead in a few years, that's a few years I could be seeing flash supported webpages instead of nothing.

 

[DeepIn2U]

I can name 3 that support it: Samsung Galaxy (Android), Nokia N900 coming soon (Maemo 5; Linux), and HTC Hero all built-in. as for Flash Lite 3.0/3.1 they CAN support sites using Flash 9: Nokia N85/86/95/97, E71/55/52/72/66/90 ... And I can load Motorola's old flash site just fine if not slow on the older WebKit 6.2 browser on my E71.

Abovee you'Ll find the question of Y Apple cannot implement flash lite on ther superior CPU and hardware video accelerated smartphone that has a webkit engine far more advanced and update more frequently than what the Symbian S60 devices currently use.

The excuses of HTML5 being better is great for the future but for current web "you can surf the REAL web on it and not that dorky mini web meant for regular phones or casual browsing on limited devices" - Steve Jobs

^ that is borderline false advertising if it cannot support a world wide used technology making it a standard.

How long should we wait for HTML 5 to be mainstream, or the option to use flash even if in the browser?? Is there a possible security hole thatcan be exploited in the browser being the real reason why Apple is avoiding implemting it??

There’s actually not a lot of phones that support Flash. In fact, I can’t name one that supports anything other than Flash Lite. And Flash Lite is not going to let you view the Web sites you want.

Up until this week’s announcement, it hasn’t been a viable option (power management issues, battery life, requires specific chips for hardware decoding, etc) for most phone manufacturers. Not to mention stability (I suppose you don’t remember Apple mentioning at WWDC that the majority of Safari crashes are Flash related and that they would make the Flash plug-in in Safari its own process in Snow Leopard? The last thing they need is Safari mobile crashing more often than it already does with regular use (although it’s gotten much better since 1.x).

If you want Hulu or other Flash intensive Web sites on your iPhone, you should be pressuring those Web sites to make an iPhone app or code their sites for iPhone “Web app” compatibility.

With HTML 5, Flash will dead in a few years in favor of actual standard-based alternatives.

 

[jaw04005]

I can name 3 that support it: Samsung Galaxy (Android), Nokia N900 coming soon (Maemo 5; Linux), and HTC Hero all built-in. as for Flash Lite 3.0/3.1 they CAN support sites using Flash 9: Nokia N85/86/95/97, E71/55/52/72/66/90 ... And I can load Motorola's old flash site just fine if not slow on the older WebKit 6.2 browser on my E71.

Here's a video of the HTC Hero running Flash for those that are interested. Doesn't seem very smooth to me.

http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pre...09AdobeandHTCBringFlashPlatformtoAndroid.html

The Galaxy is not yet available from U.S. carriers, and I couldn't find video footage of it running Flash. But you can get purchase it unlocked at Newegg for $599.

that is borderline false advertising if it cannot support a world wide used technology making it a standard.

Flash is widely used (mainly for advertising purposes). However, that doesn't make it a standard. ActiveX was all the rage in the mid-1990's, yet it has pretty much relegated itself to Microsoft's Web site.

Flash was innovative, but there are better alternatives now. Apple is looking for a long-term open solution (HTML5), not a short-term proprietary stop gap (Flash 10.1). There's absolutely no incentive for them to support Flash. Adobe has a stranglehold on the streaming video technology market. It's going to take a large player like Apple and a juggernaut like the iPhone to knock that back in favor of a better alternative.