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

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..

By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
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.

By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
By Anoxanmore on 4/29/2010 12:17:51 PM , Rating: 1

By adiposity on 4/29/2010 12:23:30 PM , Rating: 3

By Phynaz on 4/29/10, Rating: -1
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.

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

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

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

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.

By omnicronx on 4/29/2010 2:15:26 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.
You are making out as though its a massive unknown, its most likely unencumbered as claimed by 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.
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)

By ats on 4/29/2010 5:26:17 PM , Rating: 2
You are making out as though its a massive unknown, its most likely unencumbered as claimed by 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

OSX is as open as Linux.

"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki