backtop


Print 55 comment(s) - last by Motoman.. on May 14 at 12:39 PM

Adobe still fighting to get Flash on iPhone

Ask a handful of iPhone users what they would most like to see happen for the handset, and many of them would say support for Flash. Adobe Flash support is famously missing in Apple devices, which has led to a lot of back and forth between Adobe, Apple, and Steve Jobs.

Adobe is still fighting Apple and Jobs to get Flash onto Apple devices and has resorted to using more open letters in an attempt to shame Apple into supporting Flash. One of the letters carried the headline We "Heart" Choice and outlines how the company believes that the internet should be open and developers should be allowed to develop with any platform they want. Adobe believes that an open internet is the only way forward, and many would agree. That is with the exception of Steve Jobs who calls Flash a proprietary system and sees HTML5 as an open source option. 

Adobe notes in a statement on its website:

We believe open markets that allow developers, publishers, and consumers to make their own choices about how they create, distribute, and access content are essential to progress. That's why we actively support technologies like HTML4, HTML5, CSS, and H.264, in addition to our own technologies.

Adobe also claims in its open letter that it is big on sharing the code behind many of its offerings and services. Adobe, Nokia, Palm, and other major companies banded together in late 2009 on the Open Screen project to urge an open internet that is accessible on all manner of devices in the same ways. Apple on the other hand is as closed to outside developers and innovation as Adobe is open to it.

Adobe founders Chuck Geschke and John Warnock published their own letter, specifically calling Apple out. The letter states, "We believe that Apple, by taking the opposite approach [to openness], has taken a step that could undermine this next chapter of the web — the chapter in which mobile devices outnumber computers, any individual can be a publisher, and content is accessed anywhere and at any time." The letter continues, " In the end, we believe the question is really this: Who controls the World Wide Web? And we believe the answer is: nobody — and everybody, but certainly not a single company."

Steve Jobs published an open letter in April 2010 where he came down against Flash in a big way and pushed the adoption of HTML5.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

let the battle continue
By omnicronx on 5/13/2010 11:39:32 AM , Rating: 5
Break out the popcorn and candy! This one is really heating up!

Nothing better than two corporate giants that thrive on closed platforms battling it out over who is the most 'open'.

Irony at its best ;)




RE: let the battle continue
By DarkElfa on 5/13/2010 12:41:33 PM , Rating: 5
Adobe ought to pull ALL of their products off of Apple devices and see how Apple fairs without stuff like Photoshop and the other Adobe products that helped to make Apple what it is. Its the art and professional design segments that kept Apple alive for so many years and Adobe was a major part of that. Apple is just proving that it has no idea what loyalty is in any capacity.


RE: let the battle continue
By icanhascpu on 5/13/10, Rating: 0
RE: let the battle continue
By Motoman on 5/13/2010 1:51:59 PM , Rating: 5
1. I think Adobe would be fine without the 4% of the market that runs on Macs. Apple, on the other hand, would be a bit screwed considering that the myth of Macs being better for photo work being totally abolished would really hose their effed-up little world.

2. I've never really gotten this. Sure, I've seen stuff about Adobe needing to fix something here or there, but I haven't honestly ever heard of anyone I know having any problem due to any Adobe bug. My instinct says this is Macolytes trying to divert attention away from the key issue, which is...

3. BS. There is one, and only one, reason why Apple doesn't want Flash on it's devices. It is 100% because you could make a Flash app that could replace what you buy from the App Store. For free. And then they wouldn't be able to continue sucking your wallet dry. Any other excuse is utter nonsense.


RE: let the battle continue
By reader1 on 5/13/10, Rating: 0
RE: let the battle continue
By Alexstarfire on 5/14/2010 8:42:37 AM , Rating: 3
Name one way they are superior and I'll let you win the argument.


RE: let the battle continue
By Motoman on 5/14/2010 12:39:01 PM , Rating: 2
They're superior because they allow his lord & master Steve Jobs to keep his cockenballs firmly shoved into his mouth. Which is exactly what reader1 lives for.


RE: let the battle continue
By Shadowself on 5/13/2010 5:51:43 PM , Rating: 2
1. While it is true that Apple's platforms are only about 4% of the worldwide sales, this is for ALL systems: personal, corporate, Point of Sales, Kiosks, etc., etc. Of Adobe's sales base the fraction that goes to Apple related products is, in the last report I read, over 20%. Adobe will not readily walk away from that.

2. Flash has been buggy since day one. Anyone who has spent a lot of time dealing with it (especially from the developer side) has had experience with this. It is not really anectodal evidence anymore and has not been since before Adobe bought Flash (well, really bought that developer). Adobe has done nothing to make Flash more stable or more secure. Many would argue that Adobe has taken a step backward in these aspects and pushed "featureitis".

3. While your reason is a valid one -- and certainly one of the reasons why Apple does not want Flash on their mobile platforms -- it is most definitely not anywhere near 100% of the reason. Besides the stickiest issue is over writing apps in a translated version of Adobe's software. These would be apps that Apple would sell through the app store and skim 30% off the top. Why wouldn't Apple want that 30%?

Additionally, modern web standards can do virtually everything that you can do with Flash. When web sites start supporting advanced features of modern open standards won't that hurt Apple's app store just as much as your assumption Flash would? If the only reason for not supporting Flash is that it would radically hurt Apple's app store then, why isn't Apple forbidding development that allows access to these open web standards too?


RE: let the battle continue
By B3an on 5/14/2010 4:24:22 AM , Rating: 3
2. Flash has been buggy since day one. Anyone who has spent a lot of time dealing with it (especially from the developer side) has had experience with this. It is not really anectodal evidence anymore and has not been since before Adobe bought Flash (well, really bought that developer). Adobe has done nothing to make Flash more stable or more secure. Many would argue that Adobe has taken a step backward in these aspects and pushed "featureitis".

Speaking as a web/flash dev i'm telling you this is BS. This BS is spread about far too often by people who have no clue about these things...
Each year Flash gets new features - unlike HTML which is every few years at best. This is one of the main reasons why Adobe do not want to open up Flash as features will be implemented a lot slower as with open standards.
If anything, Flash has got more features added since Adobe bought Macromedia and the dev software is way less buggy, the tools have greatly improved too, it also integrates really well with other Adobe software.
For web users Flash Player 10 and now 10.1 add lots of things (GPU acceleration being one of the more popular).

If i was to list all the new features Flash has got in the last 2 - 3 years i would be here all day (it even got a completely new and more powerful coding language), i urge anyone to look this stuff up on Adobe's site.
Flash evolves faster than HTML does, yet you get people that say "Flash is old tech, it needs to die" so by that logic, HTML is absolutely ancient and should have died years ago.
As for Flash being stable... how many times have most people on here had Flash crash in comparison to the browser itself? for instance, on all my computers, Firefox or IE have crashed WAY more than Flash has crashed the browser.

Additionally, modern web standards can do virtually everything that you can do with Flash. When web sites start supporting advanced features of modern open standards won't that hurt Apple's app store just as much as your assumption Flash would? If the only reason for not supporting Flash is that it would radically hurt Apple's app store then, why isn't Apple forbidding development that allows access to these open web standards too?

Wrong again, modern open web standards cannot do many things that Flash can. I often have to use Flash as HTML5 and whatever else simply cannot do what my clients sometime need.
Or if they can do it, it's often vastly more complex and time consuming as i have to use many different coding languages (HTML + JAVA + CSS + PHP) to get the same thing done, but i'm not finished there! then i have to check it in each browser as they still render things differently, and each browser often still needs specific code to get certain things working or looking the same.

Now when it comes to animations and games in particular (which Apples app store has a lot of) Flash is often by far the best option for a dev - it's tools and ease of use for this stuff are unrivalled.
Theres also the fact that you cannot make games with HTML, as it's a simple mark-up spec, so the only other decent alternative is JAVA... now whens the last time you see a JAVA game? Flash games must out number JAVA games by about 100/1.
Before someone embarrasses themself and links me to that HTML5 Quake 2 demo - it's not exactly HTML5, you cant write a game engine in HTML, you cant do AI with HTML, you cant calculate 3D with HTML. HTML is only used for simple things like the <audio> tags.

The average net user dont seem understand Flash at all. It's an application platform, it can make full blown apps, sofware, games, 3D engines and anything else you can imagine. THIS is why Apple do not allow it as 99% of the apps in there store can be made with Flash, but not with HTML and other open web standards. Another advantage to Flash is that it can all be packaged into one file (SWF or AIR).

I hope this long post has got through to some people, because most of the bad things said about Flash is down to most people not having a clue about it.


RE: let the battle continue
By sebmel on 5/13/2010 2:03:05 PM , Rating: 1
I think there's a more important reason:

Imagine if Adobe decided to favour a particular company by refining the porting to one platform a little better than to another. It's perfectly possible... actually it's what they appear to be doing with Photoshop... ever since it was ported to Mac OS X and onto the same hardware as the PC version, the Mac version slowed down considerably.

What if Adobe supported all the features in some platforms but not others?

Imagine the power over the smartphone market.

Would you invest billions in the highly competitive hardware/software market like smartphones and then hand control of the performance of your product to another company?

Other phone manufacturers are keeping quiet but I'm sure none of them want to see Adobe develop that power over them. They would all have knifed Flash. Apple just got there first.


RE: let the battle continue
By Alexstarfire on 5/14/2010 8:48:31 AM , Rating: 2
So some phones supporting full fledged flash while others don't is a better option? Logic, your post makes none.


RE: let the battle continue
By akugami on 5/13/2010 8:05:03 PM , Rating: 2
http://tinyurl.com/y4dpx39

http://tinyurl.com/y8q67jk

Well...Adobe has long screwed Apple in the form of less than stellar support. Even when Apple asked them way back in the day. This is Stevie J's way of giving Adobe the finger for services not rendered.

Adobe doesn't want to lose the money from selling to Apple users, who make up way more than 4% as Motoman suggested. Apple may have 4% (or whatever single digit) overall market share in the personal computer space but they have a pretty decent share of certain markets like photo editing.

Flash was once useful for streaming video and the like and it is still useful for web based games but for general web site design it is an annoyance. It is buggy. It is slow. It is processor intensive to integrate into a web site just to have some pretty flashy thingy on the screen. Said pretty flashy thingy is usually so annoying I want to stab my eyes out. I really hate web sites that require Flash because 99.99% of the time the web site doesn't even need Flash to be effective.


RE: let the battle continue
By icanhascpu on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
RE: let the battle continue
By sebmel on 5/13/2010 1:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely! It's just a shame that Daily Tech writers so rarely represent what's going on accurately.

Consider this from the article:
"Apple on the other hand is as closed to outside developers and innovation as Adobe is open to it."

It is opinion, written as fact, and actually explains nothing. You wouldn't imagine from that statement that Apple's developer programs are cheap, offer subsidised hardware purchases and many developer tools are free.

Those struggling to understand what is going on here may find it helpful to consider the process of updating software for a new OS update:

Developers writing using Apple's developer tools:
Download the new OS
Download the new developer tools
Rewrite and recompile app
Submit to the Apple iApps store

Developers that have written using Adobe Flash tools:
Wait for Adobe to write a new version of it's tools supporting the latest iPhone OS
Buy the new version of Flash
Download the new OS
Rewrite and recompile app
Submit to the Apple iApps store

Now consider that:
Apple makes a big deal out of updates in technology to it's OS... like it did when it brought out Mac OSX... releasing that with fanfare telling all how great the new user experience is.
Adobe then announces: Don't update yet or you'll break your flash apps... like they did regarding Photoshop on Mac when OS X came out.

And now the customer waits... Apple dependent for good customer experience on another company!

So how long did Mac users wait for a native OS X version of Photoshop? I seem to recall it was about 5 years from the time Apple gave Adobe notice and tools to start porting to the new Intel platform... the same processors the Windows version used.

Imagine Apple writing some new feature into the OS that other platforms don't share. What happens to that means of competing with other smart phones? Do developers decide not to use it because they write using Flash tools and Adobe doesn't support it yet... or do they decide not to fork their app code because other platforms couldn't use the feature?

To this date, a decade on, the Mac version is not running as efficiently as the Windows version (previously the Mac version was faster than the Windows one... tools pallets that took a minute to open in Windows opened instantly on the Mac).

Apple have learned their lesson well from Adobe. They aren't going to leave the performance of, and customer satisfaction with, a flagship product in Adobe's hands.

Adobe is being disingenuous in saying that Apple is stifling competition. Of course there is competition, and more than ever. Apple is saying to the public... you have a choice: iPhone OS with native apps and HTML5: or Android, Symbian, RIM & Palm which will offer you a choice of Flash apps and native ones.

Apple happens to think that a phone on which all apps run natively, and not behind a layer of Flash, will be faster, have better battery life and have more immediate updates that aren't dependent on a third party's whim.

Especially considering that the third party in question is a company which, when Apple was reported to be failing 13 years ago spoke and acted, foolishly, as though life would be easier for it if it just wrote one version of its software for an enormous monopolist's platform, Windows, in a world WITHOUT competition, and gave every impression of trying to help Apple into an early grave by abandoning lagging with updates for the Mac platform, openly making announcements putting down the platform, and grudgingly taking ages over Mac OS X versions when Apple refused to die.

We, the public, get to do out research and make our choice... it's not simply an app choice... it's a platform choice... and now it's several with a flash abstraction layer and one without.

Finally... read AnandTech's review of the new HTC Incredible... look at the performance of the relatively old iPhones vs the newer Nexus and Incredible, which have much better hardware. That the iPhone is beating newer hardware a lot of the time demonstrates what Apple is saying about the need for native, efficient software. The iPhone 4 is due out soon... the iPad in that review has the same processor... it's way faster than the offerings from Google and HTC. Clearly Apple's determination to offer performance that customers will be impressed with is paying off.

But as I said... you have a choice. It just would be nice if sites like Daily Tech would inform you better: If you choose a phone with Flash... just remember that your App updates are dependent on Adobe's plans... not your hardware manufacturer.


RE: let the battle continue
By Krioni on 5/13/2010 1:56:50 PM , Rating: 2
I don't want to get into a lengthy debate with anyone here because I'm not terribly concerned over the iphone flash debate. Personally, I would like for the iphone to support flash... but it's not a deal breaker.

You said "just remember that your App updates are dependent on Adobe's plans... not your hardware manufacturer."

That's not entirely true. I agree that there is a dependency on the underlying technology (flash in this case). But in reality most updates to applications have to do with the feature set, performance, bug fixes, etc. of that particular application, not the underlying technology.


RE: let the battle continue
By sebmel on 5/13/10, Rating: 0
RE: let the battle continue
By Targon on 5/13/2010 5:27:14 PM , Rating: 2
Your argument is a bit misguided here, mostly because Flash is not a core technology in the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad. Apps written for a given device, or ported to the device SHOULD be faster than the same app written in Flash, but since Flash is an added layer, all Apple has to do is make a clear statement that Flash applications may see degraded performance compared to native versions of the same app. There is no need for Apple to ban Flash since Flash is not needed for anything that is provided by Apple.

It would be like Microsoft banning OpenGL on Windows desktop operating systems, it just wouldn't make sense. On the other hand, Microsoft can easily disown any comments about Windows being a poor choice for OpenGL since they don't get involved in OpenGL, and leave it for hardware manufacturers to decide what they want to support when it comes to APIs.

I am sure that some of the updates to the OS on the iPhone have broken some applications along the way, and you don't hear people crying about it, so why should Apple care about Flash as long as they are not expected to support it?


RE: let the battle continue
By rcc on 5/13/2010 5:40:05 PM , Rating: 3
likely because if Apple updates the OS, and flash is lagging, the customer that just updated to phoneOSxx.3 isn't going to say "gee flash hasn't updated yet", they are going to say, "gee, Apple phoneOSxx.3 really sux."

You do need to be careful about what's happening inside a device that has your name on it.


RE: let the battle continue
By magneticfield on 5/14/2010 4:26:21 AM , Rating: 1
True, I wouldn't want to wait for such a lazy company to bring updates.

I'm already sick&tired of waiting for their final release of flash player for 64bit linux.


Apple is rotton to the core
By p05esto on 5/13/2010 1:47:26 PM , Rating: 2
Apple needs a serious takedown, they are too big for their own good. When they go against the one company that helped keep them in business and supported their platform through the dark years that spells disaster. Adobe needs to unleash kick-ass and pull their support from the Mac (Photoshop, Acrobat, etc). Watch the Mac fall into non-existance within one year. It's already irrelevant at 10% marketshare, lol.




RE: Apple is rotton to the core
By akugami on 5/13/2010 8:10:25 PM , Rating: 2
I do agree that Apple's decisions lately are getting on the really annoying side but at least I can see valid reasons for why Apple is not supporting Flash.

Read my previous post in this thread and follow the two links I provided to see how well Adobe supported Apple during Apple's lean years.

If you want Cliff Notes, Adobe essentially gave Apple the finger. Apple had more than a foot in the grave and clawed its way back out. Apple is now giving Adobe the finger.

I'm not saying Apple is 100% in the right. It certainly is snubbing Adobe to be vindictive. But at least in all honesty, Adobe had this coming to them. Adobe assumed Apple was dead and allocated less resources to Apple development. Apple is giving back ten-fold what it received from Adobe. And Adobe still makes a lot of money from Apple users who buy Photoshop and other apps. Adobe will talk a lot of trash but that's all it can do right now.


This seems desperate
By Tony Swash on 5/13/2010 12:34:28 PM , Rating: 1
This seems a desperate move from Adobe. They realise that their internet deoptimizer and content creation tax collection system known as 'Flash' may be going the same way the 3 inch floppy went. Its all a bit rich considering that Adobe have so far failed to release a full version of Flash that runs on any phone.

If Adobe was confident that end user were going to be demanding Flash on their phones (when it is released) then they would just sit back and watch the consumers make their choices and watch Apple's sales decline. It looks as if Adobe think that that might not happen.

Meanwhile I am sure Steve Jobs is hoping very much that all the iPhone competitors do put flash on their phones, especially when you get farcical episodes like this:

http://jeffcroft.com/blog/2010/may/08/android-flas...




RE: This seems desperate
By sebmel on 5/13/2010 2:46:08 PM , Rating: 1
Well put, Tony.

If you take a look at AnandTech's HTC Incredible smart phone you see, again, that the effect is the previous generation of iPhone becomes competitive with the latest hardware.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3710/the-htc-droid-i...

Apple, on releasing the iPhone 4 will be thanking Adobe Flash on it's competitors for making the iPhone look blisteringly fast. We know how fast thanks to AnandTech putting the iPad in that review... they share the same CPU.


Here is a novel idea.....
By Tony Swash on 5/14/2010 7:31:24 AM , Rating: 1
Here is a novel idea. If, as Adobe claims, Apple's statement that Flash on the iPhone will be an unstable resource hog is false then all Adobe has to do is demo a stable version of Flash running well on an iPhone and not acting as a power drain.

Apple allows any developer to install developer versions of apps on iPhones in order to test them so Adobe is free to do this. But they don't - why?

Such a demo would carry a lot more weight than any open letter does but Adobe can't demo flash running well on the iPhone anymore than it can demo flash running well on an any phone.




Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By reader1 on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By mcnabney on 5/13/2010 9:37:01 AM , Rating: 3
Apple's App Store = Closed (and closely policed)

Once again Reader1 FAILS at reading the article.


RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By reader1 on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
By themaster08 on 5/13/2010 11:26:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Adobe doesn't want people creating apps instead of Flash sites, but that is what's happening.

You can easily create a Flash app that serves the same purpose. Flash extends further than just sites, and from my experience, those apps can be of high quality. It can be used to create individual applications for a specific device. Apple doesn't want developers creating Flash apps for the iPhone because it severely dents their App Store business plan. That is the threat Flash has on the App Store. Why can't you Apple zealots realise this? NATIVE FLASH APPS CAN BE MADE! FLASH DOES NOT REQUIRE THE USE OF A WEBSITE!

quote:
Instead of an Iron Man 6 site, you'll get an Iron Man 6 app. This is what terrifies Adobe.

I'm sure it would be of no threat to Adobe if those apps were Flash based, which is more than likely due to cross platforming, rather than instead having to create multiple native apps.


By CU on 5/13/2010 11:49:39 AM , Rating: 1
So as a developer I have to write an Iron Man 6 app for every device. I don't think so. This should terrify everyone with a brain. Web sites either flash or html, or whatever comes next and is free to install on anything will be the future not apps for ever known device.


RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By msheredy on 5/13/10, Rating: 0
By Alexstarfire on 5/14/2010 8:54:52 AM , Rating: 2
There was nothing in his post that suggested Apple's App store wasn't doing well.


By themaster08 on 5/13/2010 9:40:37 AM , Rating: 1
Wrong on so many levels.

quote:
Apple's App Store is the first true competitor and threat to the Web.

No. HTML5 is the first true competitor to Flash, which Apple is fully backing and wants Flash to be taken over with.

Flash is a hindrence to the App Store's business model, due to it's ability to make most of the paid-for apps available, obsolete.

quote:
Apple made a critical mistake by supporting the Web on their mobile devices.

Apple, as closed as they are, support a fully open source web. The web is here to stay, and HTML5 (which is even backed by Apple as I've mentioned) is a prime example of the continuing growth of the web.

As soon as you get your head around that, and stop dreaming of that closed platform world you desire, the sooner you will stop posting absurdities like this.


RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By probedb on 5/13/2010 9:55:19 AM , Rating: 1
How is Apple's app store a threat to the Web? It's an app store for Apple's iPhone etc and has nothing to do with the web, other than the fact you purchase stuff over the net.


RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By smackababy on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
By Alexstarfire on 5/14/2010 8:56:20 AM , Rating: 1
Cause some people don't like to waste money?


RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By reader1 on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By hexxthalion on 5/13/2010 11:21:07 AM , Rating: 2
maan you need medical attention. apps and web sites are two completely different products. if you can't distinguish between these two you need to seek some help.


RE: Open platforms are invariably monopolized.
By reader1 on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
By hexxthalion on 5/13/2010 11:49:19 AM , Rating: 2
yes it is, you should check it ;)


By CU on 5/13/2010 12:20:39 PM , Rating: 1
If the iPhone didn't have a web browser it would be the laughing stock of the smart phones.

If you can only handle one method of distributing data then apps need to go not the web. What advantages do apps have over the web? The disadvantages are: only good for one device, inherits restrictions from the device ie. screen size, user input methods, etc., and restrictions on content by device makers.


By cfaalm on 5/13/2010 4:40:16 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Apple made a critical mistake by supporting the Web on their mobile devices. They should have released them without a Web browser, like the Xbox 360. They wouldn't be dealing with this nonsense now if they had.


Seriously? What good is a mobile device like an iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch these days without web access. You should have stayed with your Sony Walkman.


How many times?
By Ristogod on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
RE: How many times?
By The Raven on 5/13/2010 10:14:04 AM , Rating: 1
Although I agree these stories are repetative. Shane is announcing the new facts in the story. The fact is that Adobe wrote some letters and the Adobe/Apple feud is something that may have a big effect in the tech field.

Personally I didn't read the 'whole' thing but rather glazed over it for the news. But anyway, I hear you, but what can you do?


RE: How many times?
By Snow01 on 5/13/2010 6:08:51 PM , Rating: 1
By gralex on 5/13/2010 12:13:58 PM , Rating: 2
I sense a disturbance in the Force...

Not your usual self today:(


please no flash on iphone
By hexxthalion on 5/13/10, Rating: -1
RE: please no flash on iphone
By daveinternets on 5/13/2010 10:47:34 AM , Rating: 1
Not a day goes by where I can't get the full experience of a web site on my iPhone because of the lack of Flash support.

I am counting down the days to when I can switch back to Verizon and get a real phone.


RE: please no flash on iphone
By hexxthalion on 5/13/2010 11:17:51 AM , Rating: 2
poor boy :) what is that site you can view on your iPhone? i guess it isn't something with content for reading otherwise developer's choice to use flash instead of html is simply overkill


RE: please no flash on iphone
By Shadowself on 5/13/2010 11:36:04 AM , Rating: 1
Shockingly, there are many, many people around the places where I work who have iPhones. When I've asked them about why they picked them and what they wish were on them that is not there, not a single person has ever said, "I wish it supported Flash." Not a single one out of conversations with several dozen individuals.

Based on my experience, I find it impossible to believe that if you, "Ask a handful of iPhone users what they would most like to see happen for the handset, and many of them would say support for Flash."


RE: please no flash on iphone
By AssBall on 5/13/2010 12:08:41 PM , Rating: 2
My biggest problem with the iPhone is not that it doesn't support Flash.

It's that it doesn't support Porn apps. :(


RE: please no flash on iphone
By CU on 5/13/2010 12:26:23 PM , Rating: 2
LOL


RE: please no flash on iphone
By chagrinnin on 5/13/2010 12:33:30 PM , Rating: 2
"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs


RE: please no flash on iphone
By Anoxanmore on 5/13/2010 1:23:25 PM , Rating: 2
Posh, Safari is the greatest porn app created ever.


"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki