backtop


Print 125 comment(s) - last by milli.. on May 13 at 7:56 AM

Steve Jobs has had enough of Adobe Flash and wants the world to move on and embrace HTML5

It's no secret that Steve Jobs is no fan of Adobe Flash -- Jobs basically kneecapped Flash development tools with iPhone OS 4.0. In addition, Jobs has long said that Flash on Mac computers is slow, buggy, and an incredible resource hog.

We all thought that the relationship between Apple and Adobe was beginning to thaw a bit when Apple announced that it would make hardware acceleration APIs available to developers like Adobe. That lead the way for yesterday's announcement of Flash Player 10.1 "Gala" for OS X which provides hardware acceleration of H.264 video content on Macs with NVIDIA GeForce 9400M, GeForce 320M, or GeForce GT 330M GPUs.

But that isn't quite the end of the story. In fact, Steve Jobs has even more to say about Adobe Flash in the form of an open letter entitled "Thoughts on Flash". Jobs' long-winded rant goes on about the fact that Adobe Flash is proprietary; HTML5 is a better, open solution; the fact that Flash is a security risk to Mac computers; and that Adobe Flash simply eats away battery life on notebook computers (among other things).

Here's a blurb on Adobe Flash being proprietary:

Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.

Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards.

And here's another section with regards to Adobe Flash and its interaction with touch-based devices:

Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary multi-touch interface doesn’t use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?

Jobs concludes, saying, "Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice… But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short."

"New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too)," Jobs adds. "Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind."

The fight between Adobe and Apple is definitely not over and we'll just have to sit back and wait to see what Adobe's response to Jobs will be.

For those that want to read the full letter, head on over to Apple's website.



Comments     Threshold


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

LOL JOBS!!!
By iFX on 4/29/2010 10:47:38 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc.


Pot meet kettle!!




RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By cochy on 4/29/2010 10:57:24 AM , Rating: 5
That's the biggest load of hypocrisy I think I've ever seen anywhere.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By The0ne on 4/29/2010 11:24:58 AM , Rating: 3
I couldn't agree more. I LMAO reading this article. Great stuff to recover from a long commute this morning :)


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Creig on 4/29/2010 11:49:50 AM , Rating: 6
Odd. If you substitute the word "Apple" for "Adobe" and "Mac" for "Flash", his rant makes even more sense:

"Apple’s Mac products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Apple, and Apple has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Apple’s Mac products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Apple and available only from Apple. By almost any definition, Mac is a closed system."


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By fsardis on 4/29/2010 12:24:44 PM , Rating: 5
Haha, I was thinking exactly the same thing as I was reading the letter. Best laughs I had in a very long time. Clearly, Apple lawyers and marketing dept should ban Steve from emailing or making any public statements anymore. The man has lost it.

The way, I see it, one of these days, Stevie is gonna have his ass handed to him. I would love to see Adobe pull all support for Macs and MS drop Office for Mac and Windows bootcamp compatibility. Apple will be dead in 3 years. Mix that with a nice Mac virus for the grand finale and that would make the most spectacular downfall for any company in world history. Now, if only Adobe would grow a pair of balls...


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By brshoemak on 4/29/2010 1:11:35 PM , Rating: 1
What do you have to do to get a 6? Someone from DailyTech has got to recognize this gem.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Jabroney701020 on 4/29/2010 1:49:38 PM , Rating: 1
C'MON, this is a +6 if anything ever is!


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By ronnaZ on 4/29/2010 1:58:52 PM , Rating: 1
Holy Smoke.. you totally nailed it dude!! +6


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Jucken on 4/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By rs1 on 4/29/2010 3:05:17 PM , Rating: 5
No, he really doesn't. Apart from repeating his flawed argument that HTML5 is a viable replacement for Flash (it isn't, HTML5 adds streaming multimedia support, which is only one particular use-case for flash), he makes a number of other fallacious arguments.

For instance, on the subject of open vs. closed standards, from the point of view of a developer, HTML5+Javascript is no more open than Flash is, because it's the browser that ends up interpreting the HTML markup and Javascript code. And the browser implementation itself is, for all practical purposes, closed to the web developer. Even worse is that since each browser has its own implementation of these "open" standards, the developer's code may look and perform differently in each one. So now he has to debug and test on multiple platforms, instead of just one. And if you're a developer, you'd really rather just have to worry about the one.

His "there's no mouse anymore" argument is also a bit odd, as a lot of HTML and Javascript event handling is built upon mouseover and mouseout events (among other things). So he's going to fault Flash websites for relying on an event that is also used just as frequently in HTML+Javascript websites? It sounds more like he's trying to come up with random excuses, to me. Surely it would not be so hard to make the iPhone/Ipad trigger mouseover/mouseout events when the user interacts with a control. In fact, I would be a little surprised if it doesn't do this already, given the number of non-Flash sites that rely on these very same events.

So all-in-all, his arguments are pretty much nonsense.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Aikouka on 4/29/2010 4:56:56 PM , Rating: 3
As per your point on JavaScript onMouseOver events:

Since JavaScript is interpretted browser-side, that means Apple is able to program Safari Mobile in a way that allows it to be more "touch friendly." If you go to a website with Safari Mobile, instead of performing the action when hovering over the specified object with your non-existent mouse, the browser will execute the action when you press on the object. To actually select the object (if it has an anchor object), you then press it again.

Now, Adobe could try and rework Flash for the iPhone specifically to be more user friendly, but I wonder what effect that would have on current Flash applications.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By jvillaro on 4/30/2010 12:07:44 AM , Rating: 1
Somebody please shut this guy up!
Jobs can't write a single line of code, so he just preaches bullsh!t


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 11:02:52 AM , Rating: 2
Hmm... apparently Steve didn't like just the tip. :/


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 11:44:49 AM , Rating: 3
Webkit
Flex
Blaze

Those three popped into my head. :)


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Phynaz on 4/29/2010 11:55:18 AM , Rating: 1
Except you would be wrong about Webkit.

Adobe does not appear on the contributors list because they haven't given anything back.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 12:02:00 PM , Rating: 2
Adobe Air isn't complete therefore they can't contribute when it isn't done.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Pirks on 4/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 11:51:56 AM , Rating: 5
as3corelib
BlazeDS
Cairngorm
CMap Resources
Durango
Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP)
Flash-Ajax Video Component
Flex SDK
flexlib
FlexPMD
FlexUnit
Generic Image Library
Mapping Resources for PDF
Open Source Media Framework
Adobe Media Gallery
Adobe Source Libraries
Tamarin
Text Layout Framework
Webkit

I count 19 open source from adobe...


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Krotchrot on 4/29/2010 1:15:35 PM , Rating: 3
Wow, he got quiet.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By retrospooty on 4/29/2010 5:14:25 PM , Rating: 2
ya, in a hurry LOL


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Pirks on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Alexstarfire on 4/29/2010 8:06:26 PM , Rating: 3
You pwned him in a completely unrelated topic. I have no idea what you were trying to do by posting that link, it's useless for this subject. In that link the OP was a moron. I see his line of thinking, but it's clearly flawed and some parts are probably just wrong, namely #4.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By retrospooty on 4/30/2010 8:24:59 AM , Rating: 2
Owned ? I think not, you are wrong on 4 of 4 counts there.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Alexstarfire on 4/30/2010 12:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
I think you have the incorrect definition of wrong. If by wrong you mean plausible, then yes, he's wrong. #4 could be wrong, but none of us know for sure. I doubt it runs standard software anyway. He's right about #1 since they do have the hardware and software for it. Is it used? IDK because I don't know every industry inside and out. #2 is blatantly right. To say otherwise is just ignorance. Just because most games are DirectX and not OpenGL doesn't make the computer itself incapable of such features. And #3.... how about you name some files that aren't compatible. .7z and it's variants I don't believe are Mac compatible, though I haven't checked in a good while. Likewise DMG isn't really used outside of Macs but I do believe you can deal with it on PCs. Ummmm, that's all I can really think of.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By retrospooty on 4/30/2010 1:05:05 PM , Rating: 3
You are responding in the wrong thread and missing the context. No-one said it wasn't capable of running any of the above. The context was that it runs "well" or not "well". Since you want to ring it here, I will paste some of it here.

1. Almost zero enterprise apps are written to run on Macs. - Doesnt work "well" on Mac
2. 3d games - the few that are written perform like crap compared to thier PC counterparts. - Doesnt work "well" on Mac
3. Not file compatible other than a few standard media items. - Doesnt work "well" on Mac
4. As far as Foxconn using PC's to build Mac's that is true too. What procurement software do you think they are using to manage the supply chain and order parts? Do you think its the corporate order procurement software written to run on a Mac? What about logistics and reverse logistics? the whole supply chain and just about every aspect of every contract manufacturing company from A to Z runs on a PC. Some use server based apps but are still being ran through a PC. - Doesnt work "well" on Mac


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 11:56:19 AM , Rating: 2
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/site/Home

Adobe contributes to a number of Open source projects..

"Adobe is active in Open Source projects. The following are a number of our contributions and commitments to open source.

as3corelib
BlazeDS
Cairngorm
CMap Resources
Durango
Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP)
Flash-Ajax Video Component
Flex SDK
flexlib
FlexPMD
FlexUnit
Generic Image Library
Mapping Resources for PDF
Open Source Media Framework
Adobe Media Gallery
Adobe Source Libraries
Tamarin
Text Layout Framework
Webkit"

Yay for Google..


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 12:03:32 PM , Rating: 5
You don't understand how open source works, clearly.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 1:02:41 PM , Rating: 5
How about YOU read the details, Adobe is the main contributor to the majority of those projects. You can't just pick out one to validate your point..

Pirks asked for 3 projects and I answered, I'm not going to post a 5 page response detailing every project.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 11:51:52 AM , Rating: 4
Are you that dense? The Apple platform itself is 100% proprietary, the fact that they have endorsed some open source projects does not change this..

Furthermore Webkit is a forked project, they had to keep it free.. And OpenCL is not theirs either.. endorsing a few open source technologies does not changed the fact they have a closed platform. And lets not get started about darwin, that ship has long sailed, aside from the hackintosh community, what value does it have exactly?

When it comes down to it, the morons behind HTML5 can't agree on the spec, especially the video portion. No standard video codec = major failure. How on earth Jobs even thinks it can replace Flash until this happens is beyond me..


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 12:00:50 PM , Rating: 2
FYI I am a fan of HTML5, but they really need to decide on a video codec before they can go further. And while h264 is definitely the better codec, its not free and thats a big problem.

So you say Apple endorses open source projects yet it is pushing a codec that goes against that statement. Any browser implementing HTML5 with h264 support must pay licensing fees. This would all be screw over true open source browsers like Opera and Firefox.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 12:17:51 PM , Rating: 1
x264


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By adiposity on 4/29/2010 12:23:30 PM , Rating: 3
no


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 2:00:23 PM , Rating: 4
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 12:34:11 PM , Rating: 2
ogg vorbis.. The other codec being pushed by Opera and Firefox..(browsers not pushed by a corp entity whose business model can't support a paid codec) Obviously you have not been following the story


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Flunk on 4/29/2010 1:05:10 PM , Rating: 3
Ogg Theora, Vorbis is an audio codec.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 1:11:54 PM , Rating: 2
Yep, my mistake..


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By ats on 4/29/2010 1:21:44 PM , Rating: 2
And no one actually knows if its encumbered or not since no one has cared about it till now. If it came into widespread use, expect the patents to start coming out of the woodwork. In addition, its a substandard codec that doesn't have the features needed to compete with H.264 in quality/bandwidth.



RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 2:15:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And no one actually knows if its encumbered or not since no one has cared about it till now. If it came into widespread use, expect the patents to start coming out of the woodwork.
You are making out as though its a massive unknown, its most likely unencumbered as claimed by Xiph.org Foundation (who released it under a public BSD license).

Furthermore if you realize how patent law works, you can't just sit on a patent without actively trying to defend it. Ogg Theora is used by a lot of people, and considering its been available for years, that idle time has likely passed even if someone does have patents that cover the technology.

i.e nobody has been actively asking for licensing fees or settlements. The case on the subject would be thrown out pretty quickly.
quote:
In addition, its a substandard codec that doesn't have the features needed to compete with H.264 in quality/bandwidth.
A substandard codec? Have you ever done the comparison? Especially at lower bitrates (which it will be for the foreseeable future) the average person is not going to be able to tell the difference. Furthermore think about how much better h264 has got in the last few years, Ogg coudl greatly improve if the same weight was thrown behind it..

I also might add that these licensing fees also apply to content providers... How will the little guys compete? H264 as a standard is not a good thing in the long run, its going to cause fragmentation among browsers and will all around benefit the big players. (whether it be browser makers or content providers)


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By ats on 4/29/2010 5:26:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are making out as though its a massive unknown, its most likely unencumbered as claimed by Xiph.org Foundation (who released it under a public BSD license).


It IS a massive unknown. VC-1 was believed to be unencumbered as well. Not so much.

And actually, unlike copyrights, you CAN sit on a patent. It happens ALL THE TIME. And Ogg Theora is used by basically no one. Hell, more people probably still use Indeo than Theora.

The fundamental Theora codecs are effectively as good as they are going to get without a new standard. And yes, I've seen the quality comparisons and Theora does a horrible job, esp with non postage stamp content which is where the market is heading. A large part of the reason why 264 has improved is because more and more of its feature set has been used as well as learning how to use its feature set. And for as "great" as 264 has gotten, the best codec available is the opensource x264 so Theora has no argument.

H264, is THE standard. Fantasies of theora are just that, fantasies.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By milli on 5/13/2010 7:56:21 AM , Rating: 1
As soon as Google makes VP8 open-source, all other codecs will be obsolete.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By NAVAIR on 4/29/2010 10:12:07 PM , Rating: 2
Darwin is OSX. Think about OSX as a Linux box with GUI, instead of using Gnome or KDE; it use's the propriety Apple GUI. Darwin is nothing more than UNIX, most of it with underlying roots of Free BSD and on other UNIX system that does not come to head. OSX is POSIX compliant and has a full BASH command line. You Apple hatters out there will praise linux, the true geek OS although if you can use Linux in the command line; you can use OSX to. OSX is nothing more that a consumer UNIX/Linux box with professional consumer applications written for it. The OSX is rock stable, just like a good Linux install. OSX use's about 450MB of RAM on a 4GB box. How much does the VISTA for WIN7 box use? How often to you have to reboot the windows box to recover performance lose's from WIN32 memory leaks? You can praise WIN64 all you want; how much software is available in WIN64 runtimes? And how long has Microsoft been trying to get WIN64 established? Since WINXP Pro 64 bit edition... OSX & Windows are decent OS's. Windows does not have any open source guts although the root cuts of OSX is Free BSD= open source, rebranded as Darwin from Apple.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By NAVAIR on 4/29/2010 10:19:13 PM , Rating: 2
I should have previewed my post, lots of stupid spelling errors, oops. Hope you guys can make sense of what are was trying to convey. I do not post much although I have been reading this site since it was a side bar from ANANDTECH and I have been reading Anand Lal Shimpi since he was a high school kid reviewing the K6+; I hated Tomshardware when he changed his format when Anand moved onto the scene.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Alexstarfire on 4/29/2010 11:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
To answer your questions about Windows... I don't know how much Vista uses since I don't have Vista installed. I imagine it'd be similar to Win7 usage which uses a fair amount of RAM. The point is to use the RAM to pre-load applications hence the RAM usage. Less RAM installed, less usage. Also, it frees up RAM when needed.

About rebooting for RAM.... ummm, I don't even remember the last time I had to do that. Like Windows 98 I think.

It doesn't matter if the base roots of OSX are open-source, OSX itself is not.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Phynaz on 4/30/2010 10:09:40 AM , Rating: 2
Learn to read.

OSX is as open as Linux.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Ambictus on 4/29/2010 1:46:54 PM , Rating: 1
Read up on WebKit... NDAs, lack of documentation... Certainly a good way to be open source. They are open source but they do what they can to make life difficult.


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By Zavaros on 4/29/2010 1:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
Well is does seem very wrong by Steve to be saying that kind of nonsense. Nevertheless I must say i've had various web browsers crash due to flash. Never had any troubles with html5 sites though. And why should apple use open source?
All i know is that i don't know ANYBODY that has paid for a pc program for the last 10 years( other than windows).
While everybody I know who has a mac bought all their programs.
I really just think that most people are a bit too used to downloading all their music,movies and programs from the net and so they expect everything for free.
A lot of people want flash on the iphone so they can just download for free whatever they want. Here's an idea why not work for free too. When your boss hands you your paycheck just say "no i work for free boss"


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 1:18:59 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
A lot of people want flash on the iphone so they can just download for free whatever they want.
Exactly, and this is exactly why you can't trust Jobs. He's right about flash, but its foolish to think hes doing this for the sake of consumers.. Hes pushing is own agenda plain and simple, flash on iPhone means less apps being purchased, which means less income and less developer support for his platform.

I also fear that if he continues to push h264 for HTML5, that browsers like Firefox and Opera will go the way of the dodo. Google and Apple have the money to pay for the codec support, Firefox and Opera most likely don't.. Wouldn't that be a great world, MS,Google and Apple being the only choice for browsers =P.. Yep that will definitely benefit the consumer in the long run..


RE: LOL JOBS!!!
By eddieroolz on 4/29/2010 5:51:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc.


I find this extremely ironic coming from a company synonymous with everything proprietary.


“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls














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