backtop

Internet Adobe Talks Flash 10.1, Apple, HTML5
Shane McGlaun (Blog) - February 4, 2010 10:48 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 54 comment(s) - last by thebrown13.. on Feb 7 at 8:48 AM
Adobe doesn't see HTML5 replacing Flash

Oneof the most commonly used content types on the internet is Flash. Flash allows for cross browser/platform compatibility on video and other forms of content like games. Flash isn’t without its issues though with many users complaining about some of its weaknesses and looking forward to an alternative.

Flash is often called a resource hog, especially when working with HD video. Mac users complain that Flash lacks proper support for OS X and some of the most popular Apple products like the iPhone, iPod touch, and the new iPad lack support for Flash.

Some are looking to HTML5 as the technology that will finally eliminate the need for Flash thanks to native video support in HTML5. YouTube, the largest video site on the Internet, already has an experimental HTML5 video player available for users.

The catch with HTML5 right now is that most browsers still don’t support it. Adobe, the company behind Flash, claims that it doesn't see HTML5 replacing Flash or vice versa. Adobe says that it supports HTML5 and its evolution and is looking forward to building Flash and other software around HTML5 as it evolves.

Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch wrote in a blog post, "Longer term, some point to HTML as eventually supplanting the need for Flash, particularly with the more recent developments coming in HTML with version 5."

Adobe reports that HTML5 has some serious issues that still need to be addressed, with the major issue being that a common format for HTML video implementations has not yet been agreed on. The next generation of Adobe Flash is nearing completion and the company reports that Flash 10.1 will be offered on all major smartphones, except one. That sole hold out continues to be Apple with its massively popular iPhone.

Lynch goes on to hint that if HTML5 could replace Flash, it might be a good thing for Adobe. He wrote, "If HTML could reliably do everything Flash does that would certainly save us a lot of effort, but that does not appear to be coming to pass."

Adobe has long maintained that it is ready to implement Flash on Apple products and is reiterating that it simply has not received the cooperation from Apple that it needs to bring Flash to devices like the iPhone. Lynch wrote, "We are ready to enable Flash in the browser on these [Apple] devices if and when Apple chooses to allow that for its users, but to date we have not had the required cooperation from Apple to make this happen."

After the launch of the iPad, Adobe's Adrian Ludwig was a bit more critical of Apple decision to not embrace Flash on its popular handheld products. It looks like Apple is continuing to impose restrictions on their devices that limit both content publishers and consumers. Unlike many other ebook readers using the ePub file format, consumers will not be able to access ePub content with Apple's DRM technology on devices made by other manufacturers,” Ludwig explained. “If I want to use the iPad to connect to Disney, Hulu, Miniclip, Farmville, ESPN, Kongregate, or JibJab -- not to mention the millions of other sites on the web -- I'll be out of luck.”

Today Flash is still wildly popular and is installed on over 98% of computers online. Adobe also reports that 85% of the top websites use Flash to deliver content including BBC, Hulu, and more.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 11:22:46 AM , Rating: 5
You had 15 years to work the bugs out of Flash, and still didn't manage to do it. You've also done nothing the last half-decade but sit on your laurels, failing utterly in the way of innovating to keep your dominant market position.

Time to move over now and let your faster, more agile competitors take your place. Capitalism and competition really are good things for the people...though its going to bite you hard this time around.




RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By imaheadcase on 2/4/10, Rating: -1
RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By cochy on 2/4/2010 11:33:32 AM , Rating: 2
Flash does way more than just play videos. It's a dynamic/interactive web content scripting language, with large support for graphics and video.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By Murloc on 2/4/2010 12:11:38 PM , Rating: 2
most important thing: games, newgrounds, farmville and that stuff.
Most ppl who would buy the ipad won't just because of farmville maybe :P


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By MScrip on 2/4/2010 1:47:55 PM , Rating: 2
Farmville... there's an app for that!

I think Apple would sell more iPads if there was a native iPad version built for the bigger screen.

Sadly...


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By adntaylor on 2/4/2010 7:02:44 PM , Rating: 2
Well it wouldn't exactly be hard for them... there's an option in Flash to create a native iPhone OS app out of a Flash app which you can upload straight to the App Store and have it running on iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad.

If they think there's money in it, I'm sure they'll do it...


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 11:35:56 AM , Rating: 1
"Yah those bugs are really hurting them..lol"

It's why Youtube is working to abandon Flash entirely in favor of HTML5. It's the single largest source of customer complaints against Adobe...so yes, I'd say its hurt them.

" Nothing to innovate "

I was going to write a post tearing you apart for this little asinine gem, but I thought I should share the fun and not be greedy.

So...GO GET 'IM, BOYS!


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By bhieb on 2/4/2010 11:40:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's why Youtube is working to abandon Flash entirely in favor of HTML5. It's the single largest source of customer complaints against Adobe...so yes, I'd say its hurt them.


No $$$ is why Youtube wants to move to an open standard. I don't know what they pay, but I'm sure their licensing fees to Adobe are pretty high.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 12:16:14 PM , Rating: 2
IIRC, their licensing fees are for the Adobe tools that generate and serve up content...not for the content itself. That isn't going to change with HTML5 -- Youtube is still going to have to buy authoring tools (unless Google writes them all for them...which I suppose is a possibility).


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By Penti on 2/6/2010 9:12:13 AM , Rating: 2
They use On2 Tech tools i.e. the company that they has bidded on to buy.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By B3an on 2/4/2010 3:54:34 PM , Rating: 2
Hardly.

If so many people hate it, why do some many use it? Why do SO many sites use Flash including most of the biggest sites? Do you think they would be any where near as popular without Flash? Where would youtube or Hulu be now without it? using Quicktime?! Becuase we all know thats so great isn't it.

People like you have no technical understading of Flash. Out of all the web based technologies i've use as a site designer in 15 years, Flash has been the most fun and creative. You also dont have problems with things looking different in other browsers, as the browser does not render it, Flash Player does.

One of the thigns people like you complain about (going back to not understanding the techical side of things) is Flash performance.
Flash uses Vector based graphics, it can use bitmap but a lot is Vector, this has the advantage of no pixelation no matter how much you zoom in, or if the content is resized/scaled. Vector graphics have always been a performance hog in any form, Flash or any other software that uses it, theres nothing Adobe can do about this.

Another main reason people like you hate Flash is because of the many Flash based ads, this is not Flash's fault. Unless you can blame it for it's success, for being great to use for ads, as with many other things.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 4:18:11 PM , Rating: 1
"If so many people hate it, why do some many use it?"

Read my post again, and tell me where I said everyone hates it. At present, Flash is still the best tool for the job...but at present, "best" doesn't imply technical dominance as much as sheer market prevalence. Inertia. Flash is a de-facto standard. You use what you know your customers can consume...and they consume what you give them. But standards eventually die...if the standard bearer doesn't support them properly.

"People like you have no technical understading of Flash. Flash uses Vector-based graphics...."

I've been an Actionscript/Flex based programmer for over 5 years now. And I've done vector-based GIS graphics for 12 years. Want to try that one again?

I don't "hate" Flash. I'm sincerely annoyed with Adobe for not fixing the many prevalent bugs that exist in it. I'm disappointed they haven't done more to look to the future and expand Flash's capabilities.

"Another main reason people like you hate Flash is because of the many Flash based ads"

Funny how you keep putting words in my mouth that I never said. You really think that helps support your case?


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By TETRONG on 2/4/2010 4:19:27 PM , Rating: 1
"Vector graphics have always been a performance hog in any form, Flash or any other software that uses it, theres nothing Adobe can do about this".

Vector graphics are more economical than rasters. That's why the first video-game consoles used them. They consume less CPU resources not more. Flash runs poorly because it's engine is bloated.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 4:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
"Vector graphics are more economical than rasters. That's why the first video-game consoles used them. They consume less CPU resources not more"

Mmm, that's not quite correct. A simple vector image will consume less storage and require less rendering time than an equivalent bitmap representation. But a complex image will require more.

Bitmap load is based on resolution. Vector load is based on image complexity. You can't directly compare the two in all situations.

You're absolutely right that Flash is a resource hog though...even when displaying nothing but bitmap frames.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By kyleb2112 on 2/4/2010 10:25:44 PM , Rating: 2
Flash was designed by Macromedia in the days of dial up to save bandwidth, not cpu cycles. But the cpu usage problem lies as much with inexperienced flash developers who think vectors don't cost anything as it does with Adobe. Especially now with all the filters you can add on to of the vectors--just because you can doesn't mean you should.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By Reclaimer77 on 2/5/2010 10:41:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Flash runs poorly because it's engine is bloated.


What are you talking about ?

Flash runs "poorly" , especially on new HD content, because it doesn't use the GPU. It's 100% CPU rendered.

A new version of Flash is being worked on that will correct this.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By Lerianis on 2/5/2010 6:10:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hit the nail on the head with your statement...... flash is bloated and badly written from what I have seen... 10.1 is better but STILL isn't best, as they say.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By Penti on 2/6/2010 9:25:37 AM , Rating: 3
Actually you have other problems such as internationalization and performance issues. Don't merry the content creation tools with flash itself. You could use that to generate HTML/CSS/Javascript in most cases. The problem is really that they don't fix their video player function in flash. OS X and Linux gets left out in the cold. It's not because of vector graphics it's terrible it's because of it's pure software (in most cases) video decoder, YUV-RGB conversion and overlay/resizing. Most flash apps are worse then HTML/AJAX apps. That you can zoom is of no use when the controls are more limited rendering for example a PDF/News reader that's worse in flash then HTML/AJAX. You just need a good framework no matter what you do. You then program for the framework not the browsers itself. Vector graphics is no argument when any modern none IE browser has it and IE will too when they implement HTML5.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By atlmann10 on 2/5/2010 2:23:27 AM , Rating: 1
I agree HTML5 is leaps above flash, but does the same things as well. It also is way more efficient as well as natively cross path which is of course better.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By dgingeri on 2/4/2010 11:42:53 AM , Rating: 5
If you'd worked as a support tech, trying to fix problems with Adobe's installer after they took over Macromedia, you'd know about their problems.

Macromedia made Flash popular, and they did very well with it, but there were still some bugs. When Adobe took over Macromedia, they made some really, really stupid management decisions, such as using the Adobe installer. This caused massive problems back when Flash 9 came out.

Of course, they also reduced the people working on bug fixes and the amount of time those people could spend on those bug fixes. So, the bugs just kept coming. It took Microsoft to issue a fix to allow the Adobe installer to actually install Flash 9 on Windows XP, and had to reduce security to do it. (Adobe blamed MS time and again due to registry permissions, however other installers installed their addons in the same ways and to similar registry entries just fine with the normal default permissions.)

Adobe has done this with all their products. Notice that PDF has security issues, and Adobe has done nothing to fix them. They have an issue that is still going on where the Acrobat reader will sometimes get stuck, creating a continuous stream of 0k length temp files when trying to open a file. The solution is to end the task, clean out the temp folder of the 10-50 thousand temp files, then retry. That has been an issue since reader 3.0. (I've been at this support thing a very long time. 12 years and I still hate Quicktime and Acrobat Reader with a passion unlike any other.)

If the management were to actually see that fixing their bugs would improve their standing with their users, then they might do something, but they have a worse monopoly on certain things than Microsoft.

The SEC should never have approved the Macromedia takeover.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 11:45:57 AM , Rating: 1
"The SEC should never have approved the Macromedia takeover."

You were doing outstanding till you said this. The one sure way to ruin any company and its product line is to allow the government to make crucial decisions regarding its future.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By dgingeri on 2/4/2010 2:01:08 PM , Rating: 3
Macromedia, and their employees at the time, would be doing far better if the management had not been allowed to do such a stupid thing.

Also, this created more of an Adobe monopoly on many web development tools. Web developers everywhere would be doing far better working on Macromedia tools, with bug fixes and security updates, then they are today using Adobe tools, with Adobe being too lazy and stupid to fix their problems. So, the government's job, to stop a harmful monopoly from forming, was not done.

I'm mostly conservative, but on the point of harmful monopolies, I prefer the way the government is now. (I don't consider MS one of those, but I do consider Intel to be one.)


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 2:48:47 PM , Rating: 2
Its pretty silly to call Adobe a monopoly, much less a "harmful" one. Sure if you define their market narrow enough, they have a monopoly in theory. In theory, the Chinese restaurant around the corner from me has a global monopoly on their "moo goo gai pan, tex-mex style" house speciality.

In reality, Adobe is competing with any company that delivers content, and content delivery tools, not just on the web but elsewhere as well. If Adobe screws up too badly, their competitors will solve the problem for us...and far better than any brainless government oversight committee ever will.

"Macromedia, and their employees at the time, would be doing far better if the management had not been allowed to do such a stupid thing."

Maybe. So what? Governments don't exist to protect companies. They exist to protect the consumer. Would government control of the web-- and every company that builds software for us-- gives us all a better web experience? Are you serious?


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By croc on 2/4/2010 7:10:08 PM , Rating: 1
"Maybe. So what? Governments don't exist to protect companies. They exist to protect the consumer."

Did your brain lose a few cells there, or what???


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By tookablighty on 2/4/2010 8:54:00 PM , Rating: 2
Thats actually correct. The mantra in antitrust law is "protect the competition, not the competitors". The laws aren't mean to help corporations. Theyre just supposed to prevent the public from being taken advantage of.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By croc on 2/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By porkpie on 2/4/2010 11:37:35 PM , Rating: 2
"And where, recently, has this actually taken place? The Exxon-Mobil merger was good for the consumer?"

You seem to have slipped off the deep end here. What does this have to do with Macromedia, or even my original post? The OP seems to think antitrust laws exist to protect one company from another. They do not.

"In hindsight, was the AT&T break-up really good for the consumer?"

Lol, you complain because one company isn't broken up, then again because another company is? Make up your mind. I think you just want something to complain about.

In any case, you need to educate yourself if you consider "under-regulation" the root of the problem here. The banking industry is THE MOST HEAVILY REGULATED industry in the US. The software industry is one of the least regulated.

Now, which industry is doing great at the moment? Software. Which industry is doing horrible? Banks. Think that's a coincidence? Think again.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By dark matter on 2/4/2010 11:33:50 AM , Rating: 2
Nothing can ever be truly bug free.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By alyarb on 2/4/2010 11:49:48 AM , Rating: 1
performance and efficiency are abysmal. many CPUs that could otherwise play HD h.264 video smoothly will struggle if it is done within flash. It has no hope of running well on current generation mobile devices without compromising sacrificing the battery.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By omnicronx on 2/4/2010 12:46:03 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Time to move over now and let your faster, more agile competitors take your place.
This would be nice and dandy if there actually were any real competitors, HTML5 is not a competitor to flash as a whole, its a competitor to the video portion of flash, and considering the idiots behind the new standard can't even pick a video standard, I'm not even sure it will replace the video portion of flash either.

Flash works so well for video because the codec is left out of the users hands, you have the latest version of flash, you can play any flash video. Same can't be said about HTML and h264 etc.. When it comes down to it h264 isnt free, its going to be hard for open source browsers to agree on a codec that requires licensing. As such it is very unlikely they would package it with their browser. As it stands we could easily end up with the Apple/Google in the h264 camp, and Opera/Firefox in the Ogg Theora....

Have fun with that..


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By The0ne on 2/4/2010 12:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
While porkpie makes a good argument about the lack of support and improvements, I agree with you on the mess of HTML5. I'm not entirely sure it'll even take off this year to be honest. The confusion and most likely bickering will delay it or worse yet kill it off entirely.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By omnicronx on 2/4/2010 1:13:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
While porkpie makes a good argument about the lack of support and improvements
Without a doubt I also agree, I'm not trying to validate adobe's inefficiencies, I'm just pointing out that HTML5 is not a real flash replacement.
quote:
I'm not entirely sure it'll even take off this year to be honest. The confusion and most likely bickering will delay it or worse yet kill it off entirely.
Thats what I'm worried about, the bickering and arguing between the big players could result in HTML5 being fragmented. Its slowing down HTML5 deployment mainly because most are scared as a result of the current spec not being ratified. Perhaps companies like Google have the money to spend should the direction of HTML5 change, but many others will not take that kind of risk.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By thebrown13 on 2/7/2010 8:48:35 AM , Rating: 2
Silverlight is like Flash on steroids. It's also MUCH easier to develop for.


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By zero2dash on 2/4/2010 2:44:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You've also done nothing the last half-decade but sit on your laurels, failing utterly in the way of innovating to keep your dominant market position.


Making a blanket statement about a company with more products than a lame browser plugin like Flash is a really dumb thing to do.

Perhaps you haven't used Creative Suite in the last "half decade" I take it? Because they've put a lot of great things into Ps, Ai and Id, release after release, on a consistent basis (especially starting with CS2).

Rag on them for Flash all you want; I could care less. However leave their pro apps out of it. kthxbye


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By ScotterQX6700 on 2/5/2010 1:13:46 AM , Rating: 2
Regarding "You had 15 years to work out the bugs...":
From a software developer's perspective, my understanding of Flash's evolution (and most any development tool or OS) is like this: You take an island and populate it with certain plants, insects, and animals. After some trial and error, you attain a near perfect or even perfect ecological balance (no bugs). Then the people who rent the island out to vacationers decide this island really needs a family of panda bears. So you add the panda bears but that means you need to add a couple new species of fruit tree and the birds and insects to support them. And we must consider how those pandas are affecting the three species of fish and how those fish will be affecting one of the bird species. But we must keep in mind the relationship between those birds and two species of insects... I don't know if it is even *possible* to create something as multi-layered (hah a pun), complex, and flexible as Flash *without* bugs. Name an OS that does not have a single bug. Name any complex software that does not have a single bug. Anyone criticizing Flash for "having bugs" doesn't understand how software works. I may sound like a Flash or Macromedia or Adobe fanboy but actually I'm a programmer for a platform that is [somewhat] a competitor.

When you say "...done nothing the last half-decade but sit on your laurels..." I have a similar reaction. Did you work at Macromedia or Adobe and see them pulling each new version of Flash out of a magic hole instead of working their asses off to create new version after new version with new features each time, old bugs fixed, new ones introduced, and even at least one huge rewrite of the entire Flash Actionscripting language while still supporting older versions? Do you have any idea how herculean the effort must have been to do that?


RE: Goodbye Adobe...
By msomeoneelsez on 2/6/2010 3:43:43 AM , Rating: 2
Are you familiar with Test Driven Development and the Lean/Agile movement?

There is a lot of innovation happening within the software development community, and those disciplines mentioned above are doing an awful lot to reduce the number of bugs which occur. Of course it is near impossible to produce a complex and bugless program, but with cohesion, encapsulation, and the like, the extensibility of applications is truly amazing.

Of course, this movement is rather recent, which suggests that a newer company/standard will be much more likely to program using these disciplines than Adobe is.


Can someone help me understand what's going on?
By Roffles on 2/4/2010 3:37:22 PM , Rating: 2
Flash is a hot topic lately and there is just too much "I hate flash" for me to understand. The reason I don't understand is because flash runs without a hitch on my 3 year old computer (Win7 Ult. 64, Conroe E6600, nForce 650i chipset, 4GB PC2 6400, 7900GT). I really only use it intentionally for Hulu, Youtube and Yahoo Fantasy Stattracker...but it's everywhere none the less and it's never given me a problem using the Opera browser.

Linked is an interesting article stating that the reason flash performs so poorly on Mac is because Apple does not allow Adobe access to the necessary API's that would allow H.264 video decode.

http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flas...

quoting from the article:
Q. Why is hardware decoding of H.264 only supported on the Windows platform?

A. In Flash Player 10.1, H.264 hardware acceleration is not supported under Linux and Mac OS. Linux currently lacks a developed standard API that supports H.264 hardware video decoding, and Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs. We will continue to evaluate when to support this feature on Mac and Linux platforms in future releases.
/End Quote.

Now if this statement is true, that means Apple is at fault for Flash's poor performance on the Mac OS. I hope this doesn't come as a surprise to anyone in Macland. I mean, we are talking about a closed operating system developed by a company with its own special interests.

I have also read elsewhere throughout the web where some flash programmers say to others, "the language of flash is perfectly fine and you will find that the only thing buggy about flash is your inability to code it".

I don't know if any of this is true or not or if this just adds to the pile. All I really know if flash runs fine on my computer for what I need it for and I have learned how to block any flash advertising that gets in my face.




By bug77 on 2/4/2010 4:30:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Linux currently lacks a developed standard API that supports H.264 hardware video decoding, and Mac OS X does not expose access to the required APIs.


Did it occur to you that since every single media player (open source included) is able to play H.264 video on both Linux and Windows, the above may be plain BS?

That's why everybody hates Flash. Because instead of making it universally available, Adobe keeps serving those lines instead.


By StinkyWhizzleTeeth on 2/5/2010 12:30:50 AM , Rating: 2
I have an almost six year old computer working with 1080p Flash, thanks to GPU hardware acceleration. :-)

Not to change the topic, but I do like to put out there that Linux does have a developed standard API for hardware acceleration. It's called VDPAU. It is used by many Linux software video players.


By theslug on 2/5/2010 3:08:34 PM , Rating: 2
I would be interested to know if screen tearing is still an issue or not using flash in Windows 7.


By Penti on 2/6/2010 9:57:44 AM , Rating: 2
"We're too lazy to demand required functions to work as we wishes as we did for Windows, embedded linuxes such as Android, webOS and for other mobile OS's such as Symbian, Blackberry, in the nVidia and ATi drivers for Linux and OS X."

Would be a good paraphrase of the situation. They are simply not communicating.

Yes even nVidia can release beta / experimental drivers for OS X on it's own. Which would be a good way to develop flash player there, but Adobe must be on the band wagon. It's not a god damn closed platform. You could even supply a custom kernel if you want as it's open source.


RE: Can someone help me understand what's going on?
By Penti on 2/6/2010 10:05:41 AM , Rating: 2
Besides that your just wrong. In general. Your wrong about your own computer.

Your 7900GT is not support by the beta Adobe Flash Player 10.1 (b2) player. There's no hardware acceleration for video decoding. But it does well any way. It's because you have a fast overclocked processor, remember most computers are laptops! On OS X even a 8 core Mac Pro has trouble with the same software decoding of videos that your computer has to do. IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with quicktime APIs or video acceleration. It is not as I said Apples fault. It's all Adobes.


RE: Can someone help me understand what's going on?
By Penti on 2/6/2010 10:12:07 AM , Rating: 2
Correction -- It is not as I said not Apples fault. It's all Adobes.

Of course.


By Penti on 2/6/2010 10:14:26 AM , Rating: 2
Ah forget it I just made it worse.

It is not Apples fault as I said (above). It's all Adobes. Would be more accurate :)


Greed
By forevershanec on 2/4/2010 11:29:04 AM , Rating: 5
Adobe and Apple are thorns in both my sides.

Flash HD and Quicktime HD with smooth playback, now there's a concept. These two companies need "A good kick in the teeth!"

And Im just not talking HD playback, talking as a whole company....




RE: Greed
By adiposity on 2/4/2010 2:32:31 PM , Rating: 2
Amen. If there's something that's worse than having to use Flash for video, it's having to use Quicktime. Now that's a terrible plugin.

Actually, I don't mind using flash for youtube, I just hate it when it is used to embed ads. Somehow those ads just kill my CPU (of course I use adblock now).

-Dan


By zero2dash on 2/4/2010 2:58:28 PM , Rating: 2
I find this whole thing funny. Never too proud to toot their own horn, Apple decides to bite the hand that feeds them (Adobe) despite Adobe being the largest software company that has kept them afloat for so long.

I wonder if their tune would be different had Aldus (and eventually Adobe) went Windows only all those years ago? I know some film workers have migrated from Premiere Pro to FCP, but I don't think there will ever be a mass exodus dropping CS Design Premium in favor of...iWork. <=D

Please though, Apple. As a "geeky nerdy old PC user with a constantly crashing OS", I'll be happy to grab the popcorn and watch this one from the sidelines. After all, you don't NEED Adobe anymore, do you?




By smackababy on 2/4/2010 4:47:57 PM , Rating: 2
Haven't you ever talked to a Mac user? Their Mac came with all kinds of professional grade creativity programs.


By Penti on 2/6/2010 1:06:55 PM , Rating: 2
He must be smoking crack.

Consumer level. iWork, iPhoto, iMovie, Garageband.

Prosumer/Professional level. Aperture, FC Express/Studio. There's Logic Express, Logic Studio etc, from none Apple companies such as compositing and visual effects packages for video from none Adobe firms examples such as Nuke, then there's Avid software and more. For painting there's also Corel Painter.

And in regards to software such as inCopy and inDesign there's QuarkXPress and QuarkCopyDesk for the Mac still as an alternative. There's other solutions for technical publishing still, not just Lyx/LaTeX, but also Syntext Serna. There's plenty of scientific apps such as Mathematica, MATLAB, Maple and so on.

Corporate level, streaming of Windows MS Office to OS X desktops. Streaming of other Windows only apps (Office for Mac are less compatible with MS Office then Go-oo or Novel OpenOffice).

Aperture if fully comparable with Adobe's Lightroom.

Photographers seldom need Photoshop or like it for that matter.

They are not fully dependent on Adobe but who would care if they where? Many of their apps where dependent on old world Mac OS when they where first created. Adobe CS suit in not the only thing that users use on Macs any way. Mac OS, Irix and Unix made Adobe a success and enabled those softwares to be developed and later ported to Windows.


By riottime on 2/4/2010 12:08:10 PM , Rating: 4
oh, well. one more plus for html5. :)




Adobe vs consumers
By ralniv on 2/4/2010 12:18:49 PM , Rating: 2
Thank goodness for Firefox plug-ins like Flashblock. Some advertisers have leveraged Flash is very annoying ways and I like being able to squelch them. I don't fully blame Adobe for this, but nonetheless I'm happier in a world without Flash. Until Adobe implements some user controls (vs. letting content providers push stuff down our throats) I say "screw you".




By crystal clear on 2/4/2010 7:51:15 PM , Rating: 2
Expect some severe Flash bashing at-

Black Hat DC 2010
Hyatt Regency Crystal City • Feb 2 - 3

Neat, New, and Ridiculous Flash Hacks

Flash is scary stuff. It's installed on just about everybody's web browser, used everywhere, and has a poor security track record. Even within the web application security community, its quirks are poorly understood. Known and intentional behavior can have serious consequences which merit exploration.

This talk is a discussion of new flash-based attacks, repurposing of old attacks, and demonstrations of working (and sometimes ridiculously complex) attacks on Gmail, Twitter, and other major websites

http://www.blackhat.com/html/bh-dc-10/bh-dc-10-bri...

Flash will fade away to make place for HTML.




Waiting for the fireworks.
By Roffles on 2/4/2010 10:18:37 PM , Rating: 2
All this noise has got my attention. Flash will be on our WinMo and Android phones VERY soon. How's it doing on Maemo so far? Are there any complaints?

I'm anxiously waiting for the mobile flash advertising to cross the line. Then everyone's gonna' pay good money to buy a flash blocker from the app store. It's capitalism at it's finest...forcing us to spend money in a roundabout and ill conceived way. Just you watch.




Adobe and Apple kaputt (German)
By wwwcd on 2/5/2010 3:52:13 AM , Rating: 2
Enough with the misery those from Apple and Adobe! Take a simple tablet with Linux OS and you're light years ahead!




"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




16 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki