backtop

Print 165 comment(s) - last by weskurtz0081.. on Oct 11 at 12:03 AM

Blackberries, Palm Pres, Google Android phones, Symbian phones, and Windows Mobile phones will all be getting the latest version of Adobe's Flash Player. Apple's iPhone will not. Apple insists that Flash is an irrevelant technology and that its customers don't need it.  (Source: Rimarkable.com)
Steve Jobs still insists that Flash is irrelevant

Adobe Flash is one of the most widely used internet technologies for delivering rich graphical content.  Mobile phones' inability to display Flash animation have limited their ability to truly get the "full internet".  This problem has been common across the majority of smart phones from the iPhone to the RIM Blackberries, and across every carrier.

And now there is at last an incoming solution for most.  Adobe has officially unveiled Flash Player 10.1, a new edition of its software that will unify full Flash Player support across a variety of platforms, including smartphones, netbooks, PCs, and other devices.  Adobe is working closely with phone operating system makers to try to ensure no one is left out.

Betas will be rolled out for Google's Android OS and Symbian OS phones early next year.  Meanwhile, Adobe has announced a partnership with RIM to bring the technology to the Blackberry smart phones.  And a Windows Mobile, webOS (Palm Pre), and desktop developer beta of the Flash player will be rolled out before the year's end.

This means that by the middle of next year, just about everyone with a smartphone will have Flash and be exploring a richer internet.  Everyone, that is, except for those that own an iPhone.  Apple CEO Steve Jobs continues to insist that Flash is an irrelevant technology that Apple customers don't need and has refused to collaborate with Adobe.

Undeterred by the notable lack of support from this key player, Adobe is marching forward, with the rest of the industry firmly behind it.  The new Flash player will support GPU acceleration through a partnership with NVIDIA.  It will also offer browser-access to such features as multi-touch (which Apple claims to have patented in the smartphone mobile sphere), gestures, mobile input models, accelerometer and screen orientation, assuming that the phone has native hardware/software support for them.

David Wadhwani, general manager and vice president of the Platform Business Unit at Adobe describes, "With Flash Player moving to new mobile platforms, users will be able to experience virtually all Flash technology based Web content and applications wherever they are. We are excited about the broad collaboration of close to 50 industry leaders in the Open Screen Project and the ongoing collaboration with 19 out of the top 20 handset manufacturers worldwide. It will be great to see first devices ship with full Flash Player in the first half of next year."

The increasing population of Flash-ready phones will join the over 98 percent of desktop computers that support Flash.  Flash currently delivers 75 percent of the internet's videos and 70 percent of web games are written using Flash.  Adobe Flash 10, the latest desktop version of Flash, has achieved 93 percent adoption within 10 months, according to Adobe.

The mobile phone industries leaders are excited about the upcoming tech.  States Stephanie Ferguson, general manager, Product Management, Microsoft, "Adobe Flash technology provides a key experience on new Windows phones, enabling people to enjoy rich Flash based games, videos and other interactive Web content on the go. We look forward to bringing in the new capabilities of Adobe Flash Player 10.1 to the Windows phone browser when it becomes available."

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Self fulfilling
By nafhan on 10/5/2009 11:34:54 AM , Rating: 5
-Steve says Flash is an irrelevant technology
-iPhone users believe what Steve says
-Therefore, Flash is irrelevant tech to iPhone users




RE: Self fulfilling
By Motoman on 10/5/2009 12:01:32 PM , Rating: 4
Buy the device, you join the church. Word of jobs is that "Flash is irrelevant" - so you either believe it and stay in the church (remember to tithe!), or you realize that Apple is total BS through-and-through and find the nearest exit.


RE: Self fulfilling
By invidious on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 3:40:37 PM , Rating: 3
It really isn't. Only thing people ever say is good about the iPhone is it's App Store. And last I check that's not something the phone does itself. Multitouch is the next feature that comes up a lot, but since Apple owns the patents only Apple products will ever have multitouch. I don't think the feature is that useful anyway, but that's just my opinion.

Of course, you could actually think and use some logic...... or you could look like a tool by trying to show everyone how you can like what they like. You seem like a classic poser.


RE: Self fulfilling
By kmmatney on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Self fulfilling
By anotherdude on 10/5/2009 6:46:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As an iPhone user, I have yet to come across a site where I needed flash


What do you do about Hulu and Youtube and the other flash based video content on the web? Last I checked youtube had only a small amount of non-flash content. Has something changed?


RE: Self fulfilling
By michael2k on 10/5/2009 11:21:08 PM , Rating: 2
I thought all of YouTube was now H.264?


RE: Self fulfilling
By xRyanCat on 10/8/2009 10:29:16 PM , Rating: 2
Correct. The H.264 content is just delivered via Flash. Flash can decode H.264 natively, so it eliminates the need for the user to download any additional codecs.


RE: Self fulfilling
By PrinceGaz on 10/6/2009 12:12:25 PM , Rating: 2
As for YouTube, there's an app for that (installed as standard).


RE: Self fulfilling
By sebmel on 10/7/2009 10:21:14 AM , Rating: 2
With all this negative feeling towards the Apple iPhone it's GREAT that Windows Mobile 6.5 is out now offering an alternative.

And with such GOOD reviews too!

http://www.pcworld.com/article/173186/windows_mobi...

http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2009/10/06/windows-mob...

http://blogs.zdnet.com/cell-phones/?p=2213

http://gizmodo.com/5374876/windows-mobile-65-revie...


RE: Self fulfilling
By weskurtz0081 on 10/7/2009 10:44:21 AM , Rating: 2
You know, there are quite a few other options than just Windows Mobile and the iPhone. It's pretty clear though which camp you are pulling for. Going straight for Microsoft!

WebOS, Android, Blackberry OS...... just to name a few.


RE: Self fulfilling
By sebmel on 10/7/2009 10:49:58 AM , Rating: 2
"It's pretty clear though which camp you are pulling for. Going straight for Microsoft!"

Let me guess, you didn't read the reviews, did you...

lol


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/7/2009 2:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
LOL too :)))

your GOOD review links are AWESOME sebmel

[reading the last one now] ahahahaaa :)))


RE: Self fulfilling
By weskurtz0081 on 10/7/2009 2:22:01 PM , Rating: 2
Of course, the reviews are bad.

Obviously, you didn't quite understand my post.

This thread is talking about Flash, and support for it, or lack there of for Apple.

You brought Windows Mobile into it because obviously you are anti MS, or maybe Pro Mac.

My POINT was that there are many other options, and many of them are probably better OS's than the iPhone OS.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Zingam on 10/8/2009 2:50:10 PM , Rating: 1
...you forgot Shitnian OS by Nokia. Well it is wide spread in Europe at least.


RE: Self fulfilling
By TheMan876 on 10/5/2009 7:47:44 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
but since Apple owns the patents only Apple products will ever have multitouch.


Umm... this isn't true. Palm Pre has multitouch to name one.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 11:57:15 PM , Rating: 3
And I will laugh once Apple sues them. It might not be anytime in the foreseeable future, but with Apple holding the patent, they hold the cards.

But I was wrong about what I said so, my bad.


RE: Self fulfilling
By lightfoot on 10/6/2009 12:04:10 PM , Rating: 2
Apple will never sue anyone over the patent that they hold. The only thing that would accomplish is to have their patent invalidated and would bring more competitors to the market. The patent is far more powerful as a threat than it actually would be in court.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 2:00:41 PM , Rating: 2
Only one way to find out for sure though.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Hare on 10/7/2009 7:31:32 AM , Rating: 2
Do you honestly think that Apple is the only one with those patents? Palm and Nokia at least have patents going back more than 10 years...

Apple is suing companies if the logo resembles an Apple. I would sort of think that Apple would sue Palm if they thought that they could easily win the "multitouch war".


RE: Self fulfilling
By JoshuaBuss on 10/6/2009 9:00:21 AM , Rating: 2
almost all netbooks have multi-touch now.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 7:24:47 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't realize netbooks count as cell phones now.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 7:57:25 PM , Rating: 2
And you didn't realize those netbooks make you look stupid with your "Apple will sue you nasty multitouch device manufacturers!" mantra, did you? ;-)


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 8:03:43 PM , Rating: 2
Considering the patent is for cell phones, IIRC, no I really didn't look stupid. Just fools like you who wish, or more likely hope, that I'm wrong. With the way companies in this country work I'm sure Apple is just going to wait until they can get a good chuck of money out of everyone who uses multitouch on cell phones.


RE: Self fulfilling
By nikon133 on 10/5/2009 4:30:20 PM , Rating: 4
Completely agree.

While I dislike whole Apple philosophy, I gave a go to iPhone and liked it much; first smart phone I could completely find my way through without consulting user's manual.

Couldn't say the same for Nokia E63 and Blackberry Pearl, phones we were/are using for work.

It is a great phone, and could be close to perfect without Apple's paranoid control freak attitude.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Self fulfilling
By adiposity on 10/5/2009 5:38:59 PM , Rating: 2
WinMo devices (HTC) do not have tons of crap installed on them. Your argument does not apply to the mobile market.

-Dan


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/5/2009 5:59:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
HTC WinMo devices do not have tons of crap installed on them
Lack of control from MS caused WinMo devices to have this "choice" between crap default browser (IE) and some non-free but more decent alternatives instead of having a decent default one like Safari on iPhone. Same could be said about default UI and hardware config. All of that is a mess of a gazillions of options, making development and support of the platform pretty hard since it's so messy and non-uniform.

Users suffer and escape to iPhone in droves since most layman users like it uniform and easy (unlike techies which are but a few compared to mass of laymen), and these are areas where Apple has been traditionally a king.

Hence lack of control and uniformity leads to disaster from the usability perspective. Which is what we got with WinMo and other similar messy phones. No single uniform and clear vision - no success on the market, plain and simple.


RE: Self fulfilling
By NA1NSXR on 10/5/2009 6:00:30 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't even really apply to PC's either. The flipside to the freedom for system builders to load their machines up with garbage is the freedom to build your own machine or have it built by a trustworthy source to be leaner and meaner than any apple could be. Regulation never leads to a more efficient outcome. This is basic principle. It should be a last resort if the market naturally deems an ethically unacceptable outcome.

Most of the people I know using iphones are the students and the unemployed.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Self fulfilling
By weskurtz0081 on 10/6/2009 11:16:06 AM , Rating: 1
You think so huh?


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 3:29:46 PM , Rating: 2
You think not eh?


RE: Self fulfilling
By weskurtz0081 on 10/6/2009 4:35:56 PM , Rating: 2
Why don't you explain your position?

I do find a fault in his use of the word "never", but saying 1929 proved that high levels of regulation were needed would be incorrect. I would consider the regulation that Apple exhibits on Apple products to be VERY high.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 5:17:11 PM , Rating: 2
VERY high is in some other phones like cheapo SE ones that you get for free with a contract, where you can't do sh1t with 'em, not even internet. Apple at least allows to install stuff in there and surf the web etc and the rest are the limits imposed by AT&T, not Apple so you've missed.

As for 1929 - it was a telltale story about what the total lack of regulation could bring upon you all.


RE: Self fulfilling
By weskurtz0081 on 10/6/2009 5:30:31 PM , Rating: 2
You can't compare how much Apple locks down a phone that costs $400 to a phone you get for free. They aren't designed to be able to use the internet, that's why they are free. Come on, I know you aren't that stupid as to make that comparison. You know better than that.

And, no regulation is just as bad as over regulation.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 7:00:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can't compare how much Apple locks down a phone that costs $400 to a phone you get for free
You can't deny that Apple's phone can do WAAY more than a free one either. More freedom, more apps/functionality -> more ways to limit it for business needs. Is that news for you?
quote:
no regulation is just as bad as over regulation
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=16437 <- does not look like over regulation, now does it? ;-)


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 7:45:36 PM , Rating: 2
Ohhh noes, who'd have guess a $400 phone would beat one you get for free. Come on, if it didn't then that'd be just as sad.


RE: Self fulfilling
By weskurtz0081 on 10/7/2009 8:42:36 AM , Rating: 2
The capabilities of a $400 phone to that of a FREE phone is really a stupid argument, and I honestly can't believe you are trying to make it. It is irrelevant to our discussion.


RE: Self fulfilling
By themaster08 on 10/7/2009 6:32:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
VERY high is in some other phones like cheapo SE ones that you get for free with a contract, where you can't do sh1t with 'em, not even internet.

That's probably because the vast majority of Sony Ericsson phones are not smartphones. You might as well be comparing a Nokia 3310.

Heck, I'd barely consider the iPhone a smartphone, with it's inability to mutitask. One of the fundamental features of a smartphone.


RE: Self fulfilling
By eddieroolz on 10/5/2009 8:28:04 PM , Rating: 2
Hush, he's making his straw man, we must not interrupt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


RE: Self fulfilling
By kmmatney on 10/5/2009 6:20:19 PM , Rating: 1
Your experience mirrors most peoples - I think all the iPhone haters here have never owned one, and are just talking out of their ass. To the haters - its an awesome product - deal with it.


RE: Self fulfilling
By kmmatney on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 12:10:27 AM , Rating: 2
While your argument seems sound it has a major hole in it. Who would buy a product they believe is crap? I could only call you a sheeple if you did.


RE: Self fulfilling
By themaster08 on 10/7/2009 6:36:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Who would buy a product they believe is crap?

Only an idiot.

Oh, wait...

Pirks owns a Windows-based notebook....


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Self fulfilling
By Luticus on 10/6/2009 10:31:01 AM , Rating: 2
It's awfully easy to claim people haven't used the iPhone when its tied to a carrier no one likes!

Just because I don't own the iphone doesn't mean i haven't tested it or seen it demoed, I’m an IT Tech who's had to set a few of them up to connect to exchange.

While the iphone isn't complete garbage, the non-serviceable battery, fact that you can't install whatever you want... only what "mommy" (apple) says is ok, and the fact that there are other phones on the market just as good and in my opinion better.

I'm convinced that if God had a phone it would be the Samsung Omnia, while it does have some quirks and things I’d like to see different/better, it's on Verizon, and I feel it's much better than the iPhone ever was. Hopefully the Omnia II will be in the states soon.


RE: Self fulfilling
By SiliconAddict on 10/5/09, Rating: 0
RE: Self fulfilling
By sprockkets on 10/6/2009 12:33:39 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Buy the device, you join the church. Word of jobs is that "Flash is irrelevant" - so you either believe it and stay in the church (remember to tithe!), or you realize that Apple is total BS through-and-through and find the nearest exit.


Funny, in other threads not related to Apple, most people say they hate Flash, hate Flash ads, hate how Flash runs their CPU up to 80% or more, hate how the same content in VLC runs at a normal 20% level, and hate how their netbooks can't even do full screen YouTube. We even have people on Anandtech articles wanting to do benchmarks on the Ion board just to see if it can actually play Flash full screen. Wait, if a 1.6ghz Atom on nVidia accelated hardware can't play full screen YouTube without dropping frames, you can't expect a phone with a pitiful ARM cpu to.

Your favorite console, the Wii, even after the update to the new Flash, can't even do the latest formats because Flash Light supports the older standards.

Dude, what's the point of Flash? All it does is encapsulate normal video so you can't easily steal it; that's it. It runs like crap on anything, even the upcoming Nokia N900 with the A8 Cortex CPU/OMAP3. OTOH, Apple custom engineered their stuff to play h.264 accelerated. Do you really think Adobe is going to hand optimize for the OMAP3, the CPU in the Google phones, the iphone, and all the old WinMob phones?

I guess for you it's rational to want Flash because you hate Apple supporting open, interoperable standards. Oh, wait, Mozilla and Google want HTML5 too. Even Microsoft joined the group too.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 2:06:10 PM , Rating: 2
I believe you'd be correct in saying that the Flash format is crap, but that's not exactly what we are talking about. The format might be crap and we want it changed, but until then we still want to be able to view the content. I haven't had trouble running full screen flash on the netbook I had. Can't say much about the Wii, but to be fair I wouldn't use it for the internet unless someone was using my computer and my laptop. A bit of a moot point for many people I'd say, but I can understand the frustration.

It's kind of like wanting the perfect car. Yea, you want a better car, but until the day that perfect one comes out you still need something to get to from A to B.


RE: Self fulfilling
By sprockkets on 10/6/2009 4:16:58 PM , Rating: 2
Well if you keep compromising then what happens is Flash will stay.

Put it this way: Apple sees how well Flash works on OSX, and I and other see how well it works on Linux. Adobe has been promising for years to optimize it for other platforms, but hasn't. Apple and others have much better things to do than wait for one company to optimize Flash content for phones when each can do better themselves.

Now try thinking about optimizing Flash for Linux on the Google phone, Linux on th Palm Pre, Linux on the N900, and OSX on the phone.

The netbook I was referring to was the Dell Mini 9. It plays fullscreen, but it starts to stutter.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 5:07:27 PM , Rating: 2
I fail to see how using Flash at this point is a compromise. Flash is already dominant and HTML 5 is being developed. I could understand it being a compromise if Flash was just coming out, but it's not, and it wasn't back when Flash debuted, IIRC. It's more of a compromise to not have Flash if the product can handle it, and I'm not saying it can ATM cause I'm just not sure.

Flash isn't going to be around any longer just because Flash is put on the iPhone. The iPhone doesn't run the world you know. There are probably billions of computers that can run flash while there are only, what, millions of iPhones I don't know the number but it's probably only about 2% of the amount of computers on the market, if that. Programming web sites for mobile devices, like cell phones, has always been a bit difficult because of the size and hardware specs. It's why many popular places have special web sites just for mobile users.


RE: Self fulfilling
By TechIsGr8 on 10/5/09, Rating: 0
RE: Self fulfilling
By Flunk on 10/5/2009 12:22:10 PM , Rating: 4
I believe that this has gone over your head.


RE: Self fulfilling
By JoshuaBuss on 10/5/2009 12:43:17 PM , Rating: 1
How can you want specific improvements if the company behind your beloved 'platform' is to blame for all the problems you're complaining about?

Maybe you don't actually love the platform, hm?


RE: Self fulfilling
By xti on 10/5/2009 12:43:47 PM , Rating: 2
i love the platform. i want flash.

broke your theory.


RE: Self fulfilling
By omnicronx on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Self fulfilling
By emarston on 10/5/2009 1:51:45 PM , Rating: 5
I'd have to disagree with your assertion having seen flash (albeit beta versions) on cell phones doing video collaboration. Those phones were previous year models as I saw this demo over a year ago. So with newer phones (like the Pre or new Blackberries) I can see this tech being very relevant today. Jobs statement had nothing to do with technology and everything to do with the bottom line.


RE: Self fulfilling
By omnicronx on 10/5/2009 3:16:18 PM , Rating: 2
You saw flashlite, not the same thing. As previously mentioned its just dubbed down flash 8, not compatible with most of the desktop versions features.

They are partnered with Nvidia on this one, and they have made it quite clear that GPU acceleration is the key. Well I'm sorry but no BB phone, no current WinMo phone has this kind of power, and even the Pre/iPhone sits right on the boarder.

I've seen the videos, they ran it on a yet to be released snapdragon for WinMo, looked great, but its using new Nvidia technology that no phone currently has. The Pre looked good for Flash desktop apps, terrible for browsing, which fits in quick nicely with what I've been saying. I would peg that on being beta, but then why does it look so good on a snapdragon which has a more powerful CPU and GPU?
I would like for it to be true, I'd love real flash on my phone, but I am not going to believe it until I see it.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/5/09, Rating: 0
RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 3:46:47 PM , Rating: 4
If you want the best battery life you might as well just get the cheapest phone you can and put a bigger battery on it. Every feature is going to require more juice, 3G, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, flash, games, camera, etc... How much would flash drain the battery? I couldn't say. If they had the option to turn flash off when you need longer battery life, just like they do for EVERY other feature, then I don't see the problem. There are many times when battery life isn't important, like if I have my charger with me, but that I would like to watch a video or such. To me this isn't a big deal since I don't even use the internet on my phone, but I can certainly see it being a very useful feature even if much of the time it's not going to be used. You obviously would want longer battery life on like a road trip or when flying after all.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/5/2009 3:55:24 PM , Rating: 1
What is better: to have an app written in Flash that sucks battery dry because it uses VM or have the same app as a ("native") ARM binary that doesn't suck battery dry because it doesn't use VM?


RE: Self fulfilling
By Helbore on 10/5/2009 4:18:25 PM , Rating: 2
Option 3 is better; where the end-user gets to choose themselves. If people find flash support more important than battery life, then who's to tell them they shouldn't think like this? Similarly, if you don't like your battery being drained by flash, don't use flash-based apps or visit websites with flash content. Simple.

Flash is part of the internet. Apple don't control the internet. Apple can't make the internet become flash-free, just because Heir Jobs says flash is not a relavent technology. Therefore, without flash support, the iPhone will be crippled as a complete web browsing device.

This reminds me of when Apple decided not to provide A2DP support on the iPhone because Jobs claimed it would not end up being the default standard for stereo-over-bluetooh (even though it already was, for all intents and purposes)Pretty sure Apple were forced to retract that one and put A2DP support into the iPhone because their customers were peeved.

Fair play to them for adding in a requested feature - but it just goes to show how the mighty Jobs often makes the wrong call in what is and isn't a "relavent technology."


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/5/2009 5:04:30 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
the end-user gets to choose themselves
Yeah, I saw how the user gets to choose antivirus themselves in Windows, instead of being provided by a decent default one (MSE). Sell your drap about "user choice" to someone else with less experience please.

Next big thing you gonna push is to sell cars with a choice of tires where the customer must choose a tire. "No default tires for you!"


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 12:19:01 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, did you just compare flash to an anti-virus program and a cell phone to Windows? I'm sorry, but for the longest time Mac OS had no anti-virus/anti-spyware programs to start with despite there being spyware, trojans, and other malware for the Mac OS. No, I'm not going to get into the fact that they aren't widespread, but that really isn't the point you or I am trying to make, now is it?

Of course your analogy is wrong to since Windows does come with a default anti-virus program, even if it's not that great. Same can be said of tires. The best will almost never come standard.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 3:13:33 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Windows does come with a default anti-virus program
LOL :)))))


RE: Self fulfilling
By ExarKun333 on 10/6/2009 9:31:01 AM , Rating: 2
Thats because the government says MS can't include this in their OS (I know this is off-topic).

I own an iPhone, and the lack of Flash is rediculous. For you to say that not having this feature IS A FEATURE, you are a fool. Apple can release the iPhone with Flash disabled, and 95% of the population would never even know to activate it, but those who do care, would.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 2:16:09 PM , Rating: 2
What? I never said not having flash was a feature. In fact in just about every post I keep saying how it should be on there and up to the user if he/she wants to watch flash content over having a longer battery life.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 5:15:33 PM , Rating: 2
I can understand the push to make Adobe optimize their product, but all Apple does is make choices for it's end users. There is absolutely no reason why the consumers can't have the choice between using Flash and not using Flash other than Jobs says so. That is the whole point everyone here keeps trying to make. Unfortunately your whole argument is that Flash is crap, which no one seems to be denying btw, and hence forth shouldn't be offered on any device ever. Would be great if we could just magically switch to something else like HTML 5, but that's just not the way things work.

And if the iPhone is supposed to be your idea of perfection..... then you can keep it. I think it's garbage and always has been. That's my opinion and it's not going to change unless Job's pulls his head out of his ass. I see no reason why Flash can't be offered on the iPhone, even if you say no one wants it, since it'll likely be offered for free anyway, and Job's/Apple can't pressure Adobe into making it's code more optimized. I seriously doubt Adobe is going to care much that the iPhone users won't be able to use Flash after all. Not like they profit from it.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 7:08:59 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
all Apple does is make choices for it's end users
Yeah, that's called "service" and is usually paid for ;-)
quote:
hence forth shouldn't be offered on any device ever
That's your words, not mine. I never said piece of excreta called Flash should not be included on ANY phone ever. Nothing like that. I only said that Flash excreta should not be included on iPhone because iPhone is not about watching ads while the battery runs dry quick. iPhone has rather the opposite priorities, hence Jobs's position is logical. I'd do the same if I were him AND if I were arranging priorities the way he does.

I have nothing against runnig Flash on some Nokia or what not. Flash definitely has its place on these techie-friendly phones for people like you, who want every feature possible on any device they own.

iPhone is just not for you guys. Or maybe not yet, who knows.
quote:
the iPhone is supposed to be your idea of perfection
Nooooo, VERY far from it. Can't play Crysis. Screw THAT! :)))


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 7:58:56 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure what I'd do without you on these forums stirring up conflict just for the hell of it. Your ability to take words out of context is astounding.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Helbore on 10/6/2009 4:11:43 PM , Rating: 2
And that, my little friend, is called a Strawman argument. No relation to what I said at all. Invent a different position and attack that instead - because you clearly have no worthwhile argument against what I said (and how could any rational consumer ever have a legitimate argument about being provided with wider personal choice?)

Your "tyres" example is a perfect example of this Strawman. I hardly suggested that Apple drop their App Store in favour of Flash. I suggested it was better for the user to have the option of both. Just like how you buy your car with the manufacturer's standard tyres fitted - but they haven't superglued them to the wheels and you can happily switch them to anything you like if you so wish.

Where on Earth does that ridiculous "No default tires for you!" statement even come from? It bares no relavence to what I said! Hence, strawman.

BTW, I'm sure you are fully aware of the antitrust reasons as to why Microsoft cannot supply MSE bundled with Windows. Or do you seriously think companies like Symantec and McAfee wouldn't instantly would not kick up a legal stink about monopolistic behavour if Microsoft tried this - no matter how much I might agree that it would be god for the end-user.

Talk about jumping off the handle and spouting anger-driven "how dare you disagree with post post!" nonsense. But then you are the Apple fanboy, who claims not to be an Apple fanboy that I've seen posting on Apple-related threads before, aren't you?


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 5:46:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
how could any rational consumer ever have a legitimate argument about being provided with wider personal choice?
Yeah, how could anyone protest against 1,000,000 of various models of a light bulb in a store. 100 models is clearly not enough, eh? ;)
quote:
how much I might agree that it would be good for the end-user
So now you agree that depriving user of a so called antivirus "choice" is a good thing. That's a start. Flash is the next step, but you won't make it, alas.

Maybe you will understand some day that for most users the technology doesn't matter as much as the final result.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 8:07:18 PM , Rating: 2
What final result? That you can't play a good amount of the videos on the net? have fun with that one. And yet again your analogy is wrong. The models of lightbulbs would be equivalent to different apps that provide the same function. It'd be more appropriate if the store didn't offer lightbulbs, but that's not the same thing either as you didn't pay to get into the store.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 9:46:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
you can't play a good amount of the videos on the net?
Who cares when you have Youtube working fine on iPhone?


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 10:17:35 PM , Rating: 2
Cause perhaps YouTube isn't the whole internet.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 11:10:31 PM , Rating: 2
youtube == your "good amount of the videos on the net"

see why you fail now?


RE: Self fulfilling
By Alexstarfire on 10/7/2009 12:05:08 AM , Rating: 2
When youtube doesn't account for even half of the videos on the internet..... I believe you fail.


RE: Self fulfilling
By themaster08 on 10/7/2009 7:02:03 AM , Rating: 2
Couldn't you come up with anything better than light bulbs?

Sure, let's all use the same phones, and whilst we're at it let's all wear the same clothes, have the same job, eat the same food, have the same hobbies. Live the same lives.

Oh what a glorious world that would be.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/7/2009 2:19:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
what a glorious world that would be
When everyone uses Windows? No freakin' way! We need alternatives, but just a couple of them, not a gazillion.


RE: Self fulfilling
By themaster08 on 10/7/2009 5:56:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
We need alternatives, but just a couple of them, not a gazillion.

In some cases yes, but in others we need more than just a few.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Helbore on 10/7/2009 2:02:20 PM , Rating: 2
Oh just go away and learn what a Strawman argument is. Then come back and post again once you know what not to do. Its tiring to read such poorly thought-out analogies.

BTW, suggesting that it would be a good idea to bundle a free antivirus product with Windows IS NOT restricting user choice. You'd still be free to remove it and put something else on. I just think it would be a good idea for Windows to not come "out-of-the-box" with no AV protection.

But I'm guessing you already knew that's what I meant.


RE: Self fulfilling
By eddieroolz on 10/5/2009 8:30:33 PM , Rating: 2
Some of the iPhone 3GS already run out of batery in less than a day without 3G or WiFi anyway.


RE: Self fulfilling
By omnicronx on 10/5/2009 4:23:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yep seems I'm right, GPU acceleration only for Tegra/Snapdragon right now. As such I don't see how they are going to get decent performance on pretty much any phone aside from perhaps the iPhone3GS (which as we know isnt getting it) and the Pre (only because they use the ARM cortex)with the pure software rendering. Certainly wipes all BB/WinMo phones off the list..


RE: Self fulfilling
By AnnihilatorX on 10/6/2009 3:58:16 AM , Rating: 2
I hate how every CEO in this world make aristocratic and face-saving statements. Stop telling customers what isn't what they want. Apologise if you don't have a certain function and say we will consider implementing it.


RE: Self fulfilling
By stussmachine on 10/6/2009 6:45:39 PM , Rating: 2
There is actually a technical reason for Flash being on its way out. You are a member of a church as well, its just the anti-apple church. Objectivity is lost whether it is from your side or theirs.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/10/06/html...

Adobe will fight this all of the way and I am sure if it were Apple doing it you would be one of the first ones to whine about it.


RE: Self fulfilling
By Pirks on 10/6/2009 8:24:39 PM , Rating: 2
Good to see Apple and others pushing Adobe's stinky excreta AKA Flash out of the system. Good job, Jobs *thumbs up*

Thanks for a cool link, stussmachine. Very interesting read.

P.S. exactly what Tony Swash noted here earlier. Bye bye Adobe POS, welcome HTML5 ;-)


It's all about the money
By ubcz on 10/5/2009 11:21:36 AM , Rating: 5
For example, imagine being able to watch The Office on Hulu for free versus paying $2.99 per episode on iTunes?




RE: It's all about the money
By Titanius on 10/5/2009 11:28:49 AM , Rating: 5
I think you hit the nail on the head with that one.


RE: It's all about the money
By scrapsma54 on 10/5/2009 12:13:27 PM , Rating: 5
I know he hit it on the head.
Too bad for those of you who are now officially locked in to iphone.


RE: It's all about the money
By scrapsma54 on 10/5/2009 4:15:25 PM , Rating: 3
Well, apple is repeating itself from back in the day when it made the computer, the problem about it was it wasn't personal.

Which is what is making this device run amok like it is going out of style. Sure iPhone will be held in merit to being the first multi-touch device, but it wont be the first computer with an IBM chip or any such novelties.

The hate toward such a device is strong due to the fact that other phones are adapting to what this device is and quickly out pacing its various features. In fact many other devices out there do many of the same things the iphone does with little to do with money or what the developer even intends, this is what makes the iPhone a fading product and not a progressive technology.


RE: It's all about the money
By aharris on 10/5/2009 4:17:58 PM , Rating: 2
Cydia to the rescue.

There'll be a flash-enabled browser available to those of us not "locked" into our iphones.


RE: It's all about the money
By 67STANG on 10/5/2009 4:51:43 PM , Rating: 2
But have you ever wondered how you can watch YouTube on it? Last I checked YouTube videos played in Flash. Is the iPhone OS simply parsing the data and playing it in a QuickTime applet?


RE: It's all about the money
By sprockkets on 10/6/2009 12:17:21 AM , Rating: 2
One has commercials, one doesn't.

One can be played on a desktop or some devices, the other can be played on any ipod video device, and you have the right to sync it to an unlimited amount of devices.

Btw, it's $2.99 an episode. You can buy more than a show for a lower cost.

FYI, youtube is h.264. They converted most of their stuff years ago. It just goes to show you that Flash is nothing more than a crappy wrapper for video, which causes issues for everyone.


RE: It's all about the money
By MozeeToby on 10/5/2009 1:06:35 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think Hulu by itself is the problem, since all that Apple has to do is remind the content owners that they are missing out on revenue and let them pressure Hulu to disable it for the iPhone. That is almost exactly what happened with Hulu support on the PS3, it worked well for months and then was suddenly dropped on Hulu's side of things.


RE: It's all about the money
By dragonbif on 10/5/2009 2:08:31 PM , Rating: 2
Hulu pays the owners for the content that is watched by way of their ads and other revenue. The cost for watching a 40min episode is less then $1. (It also depends on who owns what and when it came out for the cost) Some do not like having their content played on some devices such as the PS3 that has Blue on it (or so they say becuase some computers have blueray). Anyway it is about the money and Apple would like to make a replacment for flash.


RE: It's all about the money
By SavagePotato on 10/5/2009 2:20:52 PM , Rating: 2
Sort of like when you try to play youtube music videos on the ipod or iphone and they come up with the message saying this video cannot be played, I guess?


RE: It's all about the money
By dubldwn on 10/5/2009 2:35:35 PM , Rating: 2
I know it's not the same thing, but a hulu app would be a nice fix. Where's that at?


RE: It's all about the money
By foolsgambit11 on 10/5/2009 2:45:27 PM , Rating: 2
Right. And what about all the games that Apple sells through the App Store right now? They could all be superseded by online Flash games. Another hit in revenue.


Well..
By damianrobertjones on 10/5/2009 11:15:06 AM , Rating: 2
If apple states it's not important, then it's not. Like copy+paste, MMS, forward etc. Nice.

Can't they just give people what they want even if they don't know themselves?




RE: Well..
By psychobriggsy on 10/5/2009 12:42:56 PM , Rating: 1
Hmm, but the iPhone supports all of those.

Sure, they took time to get added, but all that means is that they were less important than other features. Like telephony, web browsing, email, etc.

As for Flash, flash can go burn to death as far as I am concerned. Too many over-animated or video flash ads, some of which try to jump all over the content you are reading. All the iPhone web browser needs is a Flash interrogator to detect FLV content to play via the standard video playback mechanism (although many sites will simply use the HTML5 video tag eventually when they detect an iPhone).


RE: Well..
By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 4:00:46 PM , Rating: 2
Yet if anyone other than Apple made the iPhone it never would have gotten past the 1st gen. The 1st gen iPhone is truly a piece of garbage and I can't believe anyone even purchased it. It's missing features that phones 3-4 years older, or even longer, than it had, at the time it came out.


RE: Well..
By Pirks on 10/5/2009 6:11:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's missing features that phones 3-4 years older, or even longer, than it had
Features are not everything, you should have known this by now. If features WERE everything, then iPod with its lack of features (like radio, etc) would lose the battle. Since it didn't - you must be wrong, right? :o)


RE: Well..
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 12:30:50 AM , Rating: 2
I'm honestly not sure what to say to something as idiotic as that. If features don't matter then what does? Not saying it's all important, but when you're missing out on basic features that most people use all the time.... then what is the advantage of the phone.

Of course, when the iPod came out it actually did have some features that other players didn't have, like storage capacity. Though I would agree that the iPod isn't what it used to be.


RE: Well..
By Pirks on 10/8/2009 4:23:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
when you're missing out on basic features that most people use all the time
If you seriously believe most people use MMS and cut'n'paste all the time on their phones you gotta run and see the doctor ASAP!


RE: Well..
By kmmatney on 10/5/2009 6:54:00 PM , Rating: 1
The first gen phone changed everything - a completely new interface that was easy to use and blew everything away that came before it. Features don't matter if they are a pain to use. The first gen had multi-touch and a good web browser - something that other phones lacked (and still lack). The Phone network was too slow to fully utilize the web browser all the time, but it always had wifi.


RE: Well..
By Pirks on 10/5/2009 7:59:59 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Features don't matter if they are a pain to use.
This is the phrase that Alexstarfire and all the other Apple bashers should learn by heart and repeat every time they see another bait Mick post on DT. Should decrease amount of mindless Apple bashing here quite a bit.


RE: Well..
By eddieroolz on 10/5/2009 8:42:16 PM , Rating: 2
Although you have a point about user experience being important, the population elsewhere outside of the US don't necessarily share the same sentiment.

Users in Japan crave the technical advancements made with each new generation of their phones. Some of them surpass the resolution of a modern netbook - notably the Sharp 931SH.

Most notably though, in Europe where the first gen iPhone was also released, it barely sold mainly because of the lack of 3G and the rich content 3G can offer. That lack of technology was the key factor in the iPhone 1G's demise in Europe.


RE: Well..
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 12:52:03 AM , Rating: 2
What features do you find a pain in the ass to use? MMS, radio, copy/paste, stereo bluetooth, 3G capabilities, and a laundry list of other common features on phones (except for perhaps radio at the time) shouldn't be hard to use for anyone unless you are physically handicapped (though I don't see how the iPhone would help in that case). I could probably give you web-browsing, though with Flash still unsupported on most devices it's not only the iPhone that I find lacking in that department. Multi-touch? Seriously? Other than the "wow" factor I don't see any reason to have it. Hell, most people I know who have an iPhone don't even use that "feature". But that's your preference obviously. Same goes with the interface. I have certainly come across many phones that have crappy interfaces, but not all of them. Certainly none of the phones I have purchased. Granted I look at all phones, not just the, mostly, crappy ones the wireless companies feel like subsidizing.


RE: Well..
By themaster08 on 10/7/2009 7:13:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Features don't matter if they are a pain to use

Sure, because copy and paste is an absolute nightmare to work with.

Seriously, what an asinine statement.


RE: Well..
By Helbore on 10/7/2009 2:19:05 PM , Rating: 2
That realy depends on how you look at it.

The iPhone innovated with its interface for sure and it did provide a much better web browser than the competition. However, beyond that, the first gen iPhone was a joke. What was the point of a good web browser with no 3G support? Oh, you could use it on wifi, but it kinda defeats the whole point of web on a mobile.

Don't forget that the original iPhone also had no App Store - making it a total joke compared to the smartphone competition. It had no A2DP support, either (which is pathetic for a device billed as a phone/PMP combo) It lacked stupid details like copy/paste, which as so flipping simple that there really is no excuse for it to have taken three generations to implement. Same goes for MMS and tethering support.

The iPhone was a success and was lapped up because it was pretty and Apple are the masters of marketing. Don't get me wrong, Apple really changed the landscape with the way they did the interface and I'm glad they did - its invigorated the market tremendously. But don't make excuses for their poor feature support. Apple missed the boat on several areas of the iPhone and it wasn't down to them "cutting out fiddly features." They made mistakes and have been forced to correct themselves in later revisions (which, to their credit, they have been doing - albeit still a little too slowly to be allowed totally off the hook).

It amazes me how far people seem willing to go to defend Apple when they make mistakes. I've recently become an avid Android fan (thanks to my HTC Hero), but I'm not letting them off the hook for blatently forgetting to put bluetooth file transfer capabilities in the software. They cocked it on that one, just like Apple have done by missing so many basic features out of the iPhone.

I just don't get why Apple customers have to twist every which way to avoid admitting it. Do you have to sign an anti-defamation agreement with Apple when you buy their products or something?


RE: Well..
By Pirks on 10/8/2009 4:52:50 PM , Rating: 2
First iteration products are quite often crappy, be it iPhone 1.0 or Vista, same story. Companies need to sell product NOW even if it's not quite polished, it's just business as usual. Yeah, Apple has better marketing and more fanatical followers, but at the core they are pretty mush the same as MS, at least business-wise (same crappy 1.0 products for both)


Alternative?
By MrX8503 on 10/5/2009 11:16:23 AM , Rating: 5
"Apple insists that Flash is an irrevelant technology and that its customers don't need it."

If its irrelevant, what other alternative is there? Maybe Apple doesn't like it when other companies have a monopoly.




RE: Alternative?
By themaster08 on 10/5/2009 12:25:27 PM , Rating: 5
It's irrelevant to Steve Jobs' bank account. That's all it boils down to.

If flash was enabled on the iPhone, a vast majority of paid Apps would become redundant. The App store would be as crappy as everyone elses.


RE: Alternative?
By Mitch101 on 10/5/2009 1:00:43 PM , Rating: 5
I think someone forgot to tell Steve Jobs hes going to live and stop his bucket list of attacking other companies.

Apple Attacked Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Palm, and now Adobe.

Maybe its time Adobe to stopped making Dreamweaver and Photoshop for Apple PC's and see how Steve gets by without.


RE: Alternative?
By Conner on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Alternative?
By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 3:51:50 PM , Rating: 3
You must be naive if you think adoption of HTML 5 is going to happen even remotely fast. You're talking about millions of sites, though I will say probably only a fraction of that if you only consider flash based sites that would finally function on HTML5, that would need to be pretty much completely rewritten. That's simply not going to happen overnight just so mobile internet users can have the site work properly. They've obviously been getting by just fine without having that support.


RE: Alternative?
By ExarKun333 on 10/6/2009 9:34:15 AM , Rating: 2
LOL, that would be awesome. You go to Google.com on a mac and the site says, "I am sorry, you have a Mac and are not able to view this page. Please see Steve Jobs about this issue because he a douche..."

:P


RE: Alternative?
By KWRussell on 10/5/09, Rating: 0
RE: Alternative?
By Pirks on 10/5/2009 3:35:13 PM , Rating: 2
So is Mick an Apple shill or is he an Apple hating crony? Cast your vote people, let's decide on that once and for all.


RE: Alternative?
By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 3:53:24 PM , Rating: 2
He's both. Depends on which one gives him more views at the time of the article.


I'd like to see how it performs on a handset...
By tayb on 10/5/2009 11:49:45 AM , Rating: 2
Flash is intensive and most mobile phones aren't exactly bustling with speed. It takes plenty of time to load graphic intensive websites on 3G networks as it is I am not sure I even want to know the wait times for flash intensive websites and flash-based advertising.




By JoshuaBuss on 10/5/2009 12:44:30 PM , Rating: 2
That's funny, it works fine on my 'slow' nokia.


By omnicronx on 10/5/2009 1:31:06 PM , Rating: 2
You have basic flashlite3 support, not the same thing.. its a stripped down version of Flash 8, lacks interactivity and is pretty much useless for anything but low bitrate flash video.


By Marlonsm on 10/5/2009 2:09:19 PM , Rating: 2
At least it works...


By omnicronx on 10/5/2009 2:24:28 PM , Rating: 2
..some of the time.. Usually not worth the time and effort.
Right now for video standalone players are a much better solution. They look better, and perform better.

Flash does not 'Just Work' on any device, Nokia included.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to have real working flash on my phone, but its just not feasible right now with acceptable performance. Believe me, I have it on my WinMo phone right now, not flashlite but real flash. It does not make my web experience any better, much worse actually as now adds and flash content that was previously not there has to load.


By JoshuaBuss on 10/5/2009 6:24:57 PM , Rating: 2
maybe we have different expectations. i just want flash support so I can view websites that require it.. i don't really care about video.


I can't wait to get rid of my iphone
By tdawg on 10/5/2009 1:13:01 PM , Rating: 2
I am looking forward to the day I can unload this device on ebay and get a real smartphone, one that's open and provides more capabilities. Once the new year rolls around, I'll be breaking this contract and either going with something else on AT&T, or jumping ship if they continue to offer sub-par alternatives, compared with the myriad of android and winmo (not to mention webOS) smartphones available thru other providers. This will be my last apple product for the foreseeable future.




RE: I can't wait to get rid of my iphone
By Marlonsm on 10/5/2009 2:05:37 PM , Rating: 2
Too bad most consumers aren't like you, most of them will just assume that it's normal and keep buying things from Apple...


RE: I can't wait to get rid of my iphone
By cabjf on 10/5/2009 2:43:16 PM , Rating: 2
Those poor, gullible consumers purchasing products they like. If only they knew...

Or maybe they do know it isn't normal to have a system like Apple has set up with the iPhone and that is why they chose it in the first place. Putting up with Apple's management of the platform apparently isn't as bad as people here think it is considering the continued success of the iPhone.


By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 3:57:39 PM , Rating: 2
If only success meant having a good product. Usually it's marketing that determines how successful something is. This can be said about many products other than what Apple makes and even applies to TV shows and movies. Probably applies to a lot more if I really took the time to look into it.


And all this proves is that..
By Misty Dingos on 10/5/2009 11:12:30 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Apple CEO Steve Jobs continues to insist that Flash is an irrelevant technology that Apple customers don't need and has refused to collaborate with Adobe.


All this proves that Two Liver Jobs is an idot. It is incredibly annoying that my iPhone doesn't support Flash.

Hey Two Liver pay attention here! The iPhone is great and would be better with Flash.




RE: And all this proves is that..
By omnicronx on 10/5/2009 1:24:38 PM , Rating: 1
Lets make this clear, support from Jobs or not, full fledged flash is never coming to any of the current gen iPhones, nor is it comming to any other phone currently on the market.

Phones right now just are not powerful enough, Its just not possible! Sure you can watch flash video, but thats irrelevant for most users as you can still download the video and play it most of the time. I have limited flash support right now on my phone (real flash, not flashlite), and any webpage that even has limited flash slows to a crawl and can take forever to load. I would not even dare load a flash based page. I personally turn it off, as it slows down browsing so much its just not worth it.


By farcryAK on 10/5/2009 1:24:41 PM , Rating: 2
Can they take Steve Jobs to court?Customers have rights.




By Maxima2k2se on 10/5/2009 3:44:24 PM , Rating: 3
Like the right to NOT BUY the iphone?


bla bla bla
By p05esto on 10/5/2009 2:17:50 PM , Rating: 2
Apple products are overpriced, overhyped crap. Only lemmings and followers buy that crap. There are better products for better prices in every category.




RE: bla bla bla
By tjr508 on 10/5/2009 4:39:01 PM , Rating: 2
Really?

I would think that the data usage among iPhone users alone (something like 4-8x other smart phones)shows that it is a great platform that people actually use.

I've had a Windows Mobile phone and while it was 'capable' of doing everything that my iPhone does, I rarely bothered to use it. The iPhone interface is so smooth that I rarely even open my laptop anymore except for in-depth business correspondence. Even with business, if it is just a simple reply, it is followed by "Sent from my iPhone."

Than there is banking, stock trading, weather, maps, GPS, and many more tasks that are simply more accessible on the phone than they are even on PCs.


RE: bla bla bla
By kmmatney on 10/5/2009 6:41:31 PM , Rating: 1
yep - it's really a decent netbook replacement. With the "document to go" app, you can even edit and read word and Excel documents (glad they finally added the ability to edit Excel). I hardly ever break out my laptop anymore when I'm stuck at an airport. I even use the phone to do work while I'm at home, with my computer a few feet away. Some of the apps are just easier toi use on the phone, than using my real computer.


Can't believe the whining
By Dug on 10/9/2009 4:34:58 PM , Rating: 2
OMG! iPhone can't do flash, biggest piece of crap evar!. I would never get a phone without flash, its the only thing important!! Cause I have to watch those crappy flash ads pop up all the time. Give me the choice now or die Apple! I don't care about the other 100 things you did right on the phone, you suck!
I don't have any other devices to view flash with! I can't believe anyone has survived this long without flash on their phones. Can't you see how important it is!! OMG!, OMG!, OMG! Arghhhhh!




RE: Can't believe the whining
By weskurtz0081 on 10/11/2009 12:03:52 AM , Rating: 2
I think you miss the point that all other smart phones are going to have it, and that Flash is pretty much a standard.

Not to mention, Flash is MUCH more versatile than just ads.


Steve Jobs still insists that Flash is irrelevant
By Phynaz on 10/5/2009 12:41:43 PM , Rating: 1
Can you provide a link to this statement please?




By fourzeronine on 10/8/2009 7:34:27 PM , Rating: 2
ok not a couple months, almost a month, i do remember reading it in the past. this isn't the article i read but its another that was posted. apparently adobe's flash lab twittered about it at some point. this article does also mention AS3 and I am so happy!!! also happy that its coming so soon! :D

i'll be checking my creative suite updater often. :P


In other news...
By Marlonsm on 10/5/2009 1:30:09 PM , Rating: 2
Apple announces new iPhone OS upgrade.
New features include the revolutionary iFlash app, that allows you to see videos inside the web browser.

They are just waiting for they idea of videos inside the web browser to be patented before they release it.




Battery Life?
By ultimatebob on 10/5/2009 2:08:09 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know about you, but the battery life on my iPhone 3G already sucks. I can only imagine how quickly a full screen Flash video would drain it... but I'll bet that the phone would go from fully charged to dead within an hour if you were watching Hulu on it.

Fix the battery life on these phones first... THEN we can worry about this.




Flash irrelevant?
By smegz on 10/5/2009 2:30:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Steve Jobs still insists that Flash is irrelevant


I think this shows that it may be Steve that is irrelevant. The Apple messiah has waffled several times already on his proclamations of all things Apple. I feel it is time, for a new messiah to lead the faithful to paradise. That's right; Stephen Colbert IS that messiah (or is it Walt Mossberg?) :P

Honestly Steve, pull your head out of your ass and wake up. Silverlight is irrelevant. HTML 5 video embedding is irrelevant (for now.) Flash is not. Please don't advertise that I get a complete web experience on the iPhone when I have no ability to use Flash. The iPhone actually does have the internet lite (no taste, less filling.)




Bash what deserves bashing
By Shadowself on 10/5/2009 3:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
Clearly Jason does not care about reality when it comes to Apple bashing. As I've said here before, Apple needs to be bashed and bashed often, but we should stick to the facts and not outright falsehoods.

quote:
Apple CEO Steve Jobs continues to insist that Flash is an irrelevant technology that Apple customers don't need and has refused to collaborate with Adobe.


Both Apple and Adobe have repeatedly stated over the last two years that the two companies are working together to bring Flash to the iPhone. Apple does not like the generic implementation and thinks it's a resource hog. Adobe claims to have been tweaking it to get it acceptable to Apple. Nowhere has either side claimed the other is refusing to work on bringing Flash to the iPhone.

quote:
It will also offer browser-access to such features as multi-touch (which Apple claims to have patented in the smartphone mobile sphere), gestures, mobile input models, accelerometer and screen orientation, assuming that the phone has native hardware/software support for them.


Apple does not claim to have patented multi-touch for the smart phone market. The USPTO claims it. The USPTO has issued a patent to Apple for this. Note that even though the patent has been issued Apple has not sued or even threatened to sue anyone over this patent.

Why is Apple not listed on the announcement from Adobe if they are indeed working together? For this one you CAN (and SHOULD) bash Apple. Apple is ridiculously tight lipped about what it is doing before any formal announcement by Apple. Adobe easily might have gone to Apple and asked them if they can be part of the announcement. Apple's reply almost assuredly was, "Not only no, but HELL NO!"

In Apple's mind (and probably no one else's) they'd like to be the first one to announce a shipping product. Too bad they almost assuredly won't be. I expect them to be an also ran with regard to Flash for years to come -- and they may be one of the last platforms to get it.




I look forward to...
By gstrickler on 10/5/2009 5:54:21 PM , Rating: 2
.. the day when all computers and smart phones are Flash free. Until Adobe demonstrates a single version of Flash that isn't a terrible waste of CPU, RAM, and bandwidth, I will avoid Flash as much as possible. Of course, it's not just Flash, it's all Adobe software that is bloated, slow, and insecure, so I'm not going to hold my breath waiting, I'll just continue to use Flash blocking software until that time.

My apologies to the sites that depend upon advertising for their revenue, but if you have Flash ads on your site, I won't be seeing them, and definitely won't be clicking them, which means you'll make no revenue from me unless you have non-Flash ads also.




The reason
By NullSubroutine on 10/5/2009 9:13:36 PM , Rating: 2
The reason "flash is irrelevant" is because if the iPhone is running flash it is going to require it to do more work and drain the already short battery life.




90% of Flash are Ads
By jeromekwok on 10/5/2009 9:54:12 PM , Rating: 2
Come on. More than 90% of flash today are annoying ad banners. I have adblock and Flashblock addons with my Firefox, and I cannot live with Flash all over my favorite websites.

Fancy menu can be done with simple Javascript. Flash FLV has never been a good video compression.

Flash is not consumer wants. It is what marketing people want you to have.

If iPhone has got Flash, in sake of battery life and performance, I would leave it off most of the time. When you let Flash sucks up the bandwidth, don't complain AT&T for slow download speed.




To me, it's pretty obvious why...
By CZroe on 10/6/2009 9:32:30 AM , Rating: 2
It's pretty obvious why Apple doesn't want Flash on their phone. Think about it: Most anything available on the App Store that doesn't use a phone-specific feature (GPS, 3D acceleration, etc) can easily be created as a Flash app that can work with the competition's phones too and side-step any control they have as to what apps users are allowed to run on their phones.

Adobe could even market that point:
"Can't get App Store approval? Next time, make a Flash app instead to reach the same customers and more with the ability to run on every other Flash-capable smartphone!"

For those who hadn't yet clashed with Apple:
"Effortly expand your potential customer base beyond a single platform with true 'write once' programming!"

Apple would not be pleased.




Flash on iPhone
By JoeHobot on 10/6/2009 10:10:26 AM , Rating: 2
Dude flash is coming to iPhone what'cha talking about http://www.mwd.com/2009/10/adobe-flash-on-iphone-a...




Us poor iPhone users
By dtm4trix on 10/6/2009 3:47:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple CEO Steve Jobs continues to insist that Flash is an irrelevant technology that Apple customers don't need


I think Steve Jobs is irrelevant when it comes to Apple. I have an iPhone and I can tell you I wish the damm thing supported Flash. Cheap bastid prolly doesnt want to fork over the licensing fees. So us iPhone users have to have a deminished experience. What an A$$.




iPhone is the best, I thought?
By Yawgm0th on 10/6/2009 4:14:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Let's face it -- the iPhone is the best smartphone in the industry.

Jason Mick
September 22nd, 2009
http://www.dailytech.com/Finally+a+Get+a+Mac+Comme...




AS3?
By fourzeronine on 10/8/2009 1:51:59 PM , Rating: 2
This is honestly pretty old news, there have been articles for a month or 2 talking about this (id find the articles but I have to start work in 10 mins).

I was hoping there would be mention of Action Script 3 support for mobiles? I assume this will be the case (I HOPE). AS3 for mobiles would help with performance and battery life significantly.




Farewell Flash
By Tony Swash on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Farewell Flash
By Einy0 on 10/5/2009 12:46:38 PM , Rating: 2
HTML5 is around the corner. It could be a year or more before we see it used. It could be years before the full HTML5 spec is final. Flash is here and now and bravo for bringing it to smart phones. I hate the fact that flash is owned and not an open standard but it works and is available. Then think about how many games, etc use flash. Then consider it will take a long time before they are converted over to HTML5, if at all.


RE: Farewell Flash
By Conner on 10/5/2009 1:35:25 PM , Rating: 2
Did you not read the article. Flash for the phones isn't gonna be even out till half way through next year and who knows how well it will work. HTML5 is being deployed now, with Chrome Firefox and Safari. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML_5
As for games on a cellphone screen! Most require you to have a 1024x640 screen. Good luck.


RE: Farewell Flash
By dark matter on 10/5/2009 3:11:10 PM , Rating: 2
With regards to the games and flash, are games writers fixed to making games in that resolution? No. So how do you figure luck comes into it?


RE: Farewell Flash
By 3minence on 10/5/2009 1:46:20 PM , Rating: 2
Steve Jobs has said, and I paraphrase here, that he doesn't go where the market is, is goes to where the market will be. He may be right, Flash may be a dead end, to be replaced by HTML5 or something else. However, as of right now, flash is anything but dead. It is alive and even dominates. So if I buy a smartphone today, I want it to run everything today. By the time flash really is dead and whatever else is supreme, its probably time for a new phone anyway.


Idk
By Drag0nFire on 10/5/09, Rating: -1
RE: Idk
By DarkElfa on 10/5/2009 1:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
No, Mr Thickety Thickhead from Thicksville Thicksylvania, to watch any kind of flash video or use flash based games and the like.


RE: Idk
By mydogfarted on 10/5/2009 3:27:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
No, Mr Thickety Thickhead from Thicksville Thicksylvania, to watch any kind of flash video or use flash based games and the like.

ZOMG!!!111oneoneone Name calling on the intertubez makes me kewl!
*headdesk*

Each Flash upgrade is getting worse and worse IMHO. I've had more crashes with the most recent update of Flash on both my PC and Mac than I care to think about.

If anyone here is to blame, it is Adobe. They take the M$ approach to software: put out an unstable piece of software, over price it, tell everyone why they have to have it, and then patch it when everyone complains.


RE: Idk
By Alexstarfire on 10/5/2009 4:04:55 PM , Rating: 2
Free = overpriced now? What the hell is priced properly then? I sure would like to get paid for using their products.


RE: Idk
By mydogfarted on 10/5/2009 4:35:01 PM , Rating: 1
Free? Maybe their player/reader are, but their software is ridiculously expensive:
(full version pricing)
Acrobat : $299
Creative Suite: Starting at $999
Photoshop CS4: $699
Flash Professional: $699
Illustrator: $599


RE: Idk
By Alexstarfire on 10/6/2009 12:58:46 AM , Rating: 2
The same can be said of most business products. And btw, I've made several flash apps without the use of any of those programs.

Regardless, I was talking about from the consumer perspective. It costs me nothing to watch flash content on my computer, and by that I mean for the software to play it, and that is what is going to matter to people. I could not talk about the quality of their professional software but as I said before, most professional products aren't cheap.


"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki