Posted on 04/29/2010 10:07:50 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
* Adobe shares fall 2 percent, Apple up 2.4 pct
SAN FRANCISCO, April 29 (Reuters) - Apple Inc (AAPL.O) Chief Executive Steve Jobs on Thursday called Adobe Systems (ADBE.O) Flash multimedia software a "closed system" that is ill-suited for the company's suite of mobile devices, escalating the war of words between the two companies.
Jobs said Flash's system is closed because it is a proprietary system from Adobe, which controls everything from its features to its pricing. Ironically, perhaps, similar charges have been lobbed at Apple's products and services, such as iTunes.
In a long, detailed letter posted on Apple's website, Jobs cited a number of problems with Flash, which is used to run video on many Internet sites but which is not compatible with Apple's iPhone and iPad."
"Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven - they say we want to protect our App Store - but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Wonder if Microsoft is listening?
Apple's Jobs: Adobe Flash Is Closed, Unstable, Antiquated
*****************************EXCERPT*********************************
Steve Jobs on Thursday fired back at Adobe, denying that Apple eschewed Flash on the iPad to protect its App Store, and instead accusing Adobe of living in the past and not innovating to keep up with the mobile Web.
"Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues," Jobs wrote in a note posted to the Apple Web site.
Apple's recently released iPad tablet does not support Adobe's Flash technology, meaning that Flash-based videos (like those on Hulu.com) accessed in the iPad's Web browser will not play. Companies like YouTube and Netflix have gotten around this issue by developing apps that play on the iPad, prompting Adobe to accuse Apple of ignoring Flash so it could make a few extra dollars via App Store purchases.
Jobs denied this, and said that "iPhone, iPod, and iPad users aren't missing much video" because online video is "also available in a more modern format, H. 264," which works on Apple products.
Jobs highlighted six specific reasons Apple takes issue with Adobe Flash.
Apple invented the concept of closed systems. They are the king of proprietary hardware and software.
Pot calls kettle black!
Once they release the new OS for iPhone, the only thing that I will not like about my iPhone is that it can’t view Flash. It’s frustrating to go to Flash driven websites and see that little 3d blue block!
Excerpt from Jobs' statement:
Sixth, the most important reason.Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
Gee, Steve, don't you think that should be the free choice of developers to use or not to use Flash to create apps? Let the market decide if the apps suck or not?
My thoughts exactly!
Is this really about the iPhone and iPad alone? I thought Flash did not work in Safari on any platform - and I wrong?
this is a tough call because I don’t like either one’s closed system. (and I really LOATH those flash and flash type websites)
Yeah that is a huge problem with UNIX, how closed it is.
That’s why it works better.
I’ll give him the unstable and antiquated, but Jobs complaining about somebody having a closed system is serious hypocrisy.
Yep. Take a look in the mirror, Steve-o. Blatant hypocracy.
Closed system?
Pot, meet Kettle. Kettle, this is Pot.
Sure NOW wit OSX Apple has an open OS. Pre-OSX they didn’t have open anything. And of course by picking and choosing which apps are available they’re keeping the iGadgets pretty closed too.
LOL
Pot, meet the Kettle....
And that is exactly what Apple is doing. Want Flash? No problem, there are a plethora of computer vendors who will sell you a Flash-enabled system. No one puts a gun to your head and forces you to buy an Apple machine. People buy them because they are beautiful, polished works of art. There are cheaper alternatives that do similar things ... isn't that the way the market is supposed to work?
But we are talking about current products, Flash is out now. OS X is out now, OS 9 isn’t.
The funny thing about the phones is that Microsoft is going to a similar model, only one way to get apps minimum hardware requirements for the phones. It might be that this is the most effective model for phones. Android certainly seems to be running into problems with widely varied hardware and 4 versions of the OS in the wild currently all with different capabilities.
Silly question.
Today, your iPhone will give you have numberous hours of useable battery life, because the video is rendered in an ASIC.
Who are you going to blame for an iPhone with a 2 hr battery life when FLASH demands that the video be decoded in software? Are you going to rail against Adobe, who created Flash ... or are you going to say the iPhone is a peice of crap because the battery doens't last more than an hour or two?
Who says it has to be limited to current products. Apple was a seriously closed shop during Jobs’ first reign there. And even if we stick to current products the iGadgets, which he’s keeping Flash off of, are all quite closed. It’s pretty funny the guy that used to run the most closed shop out there keeping Flash off their current devices (more closing) because it’s closed. Had he just stuck to the fact that it’s a piece of crap I’d be with him 100%, but complaining it’s closed is silly, at least coming from him.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
You are wrong. Flash is supported by Safari on the desktop. Like Safari on the iPhone, Safari Desktop also supports H.264 or the (open) standard that Apple is pushing for video content on the Internet.
Good article thanks for the link.
Good grief!
When I read that diatribe, I seriously heard Obama voice narrating it!
You pay 500+ dollars for a tablet, only to be TOLD that a simple plug-in, that happens to power the vast majority of the internet, is banned from your use because the CEO doesn’t like it?
iNanny State
Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there are few joint interests.
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, there’s “Open”.
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. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.
Second, there’s the “full web”.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video.
Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.
Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?
Fourth, there’s battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
Fifth, there’s Touch.
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?
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.
Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.
Conclusions.
Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.
Steve Jobs
April, 2010
Because the current reality is Apple is making a huge move toward openness. How long do you hold something against someone especially after they have made moves to change?
There are technical reasons to control the iPhone ecosystem. As has been said on this thread, a poorly written program won’t be blamed for a short battery life, Apple will be.
Is there an app for that?
Steve Jobs has a lot of gall to complain about proprietary systems! Apple is the KING of proprietary. Nearly everything "Apple" is exclusive and proprietary!
Apple = PROPRIETARY!
But that really isn’t the current reality. The iGadgets are almost as closed as Macs were from day 1 to OSX. I’m not holding it against Jobs, I’m pointing out the silliness of the king of closed systems complaining about somebody else having a closed system.
I don’t have a problem with with the iGadgets being controlled. I just find it incredibly funny and hypocritical for a guy to be closing off his system to an app and using as the list of reasons the fact that the app is a closed system. It’s right up there with the TV weenies complaining about the new AZ law making it a crime to be an illegal alien. “You can’t play on my closed system because your stuff is closed” is just plain funny.
I think he states his case very well...
Perhaps the "nattering nabobs of negativity" will finally "get a clue" ... LOL ...
Thoughts on Flash
Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there are few joint interests.
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, there’s “Open”.
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. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.
Second, there’s the “full web”.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video.
Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.
Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?
Fourth, there’s battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
Fifth, there’s Touch.
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?
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.
Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.
Conclusions.
Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.
Steve Jobs
April, 2010
Ooops... didn’t see you posted it here already... sorry ... :-)
I disagree. It's just one more annoying ad I don't have to wait to have load up.
I didn’t say their current systems are closed, I said they developed and used that strategy for years and now they want to slam Flash and call it a closed technology rather than adapt to a widely used app and no, not utilizing Flash does not make it better.
They also spread Apple and Apple software far and wide during the early 80s by giving it away to schools but then a couple of years ago tried to have MS prosecuted for doing the same thing.
They behave like the democrats they are; do as I dictate, but do not do the things that made me successful.
Railing on ‘proprietary systems’. That is a good one.
Pot Meet Kettle, kettle meet pot.
Apple invented the concept of closed systems. They are the king of proprietary hardware and software.
A quote for you... since you didn't read what Jobs said ... LOL ...
First, there’s “Open”.
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. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.
You can read his full statement in Post #36 ... :-)
Seems you didn't. That diatribe lists many good reasons for not supporting Flash.
Since you didn't, I'll summarize: Flash is too buggy, demands too much power, and is incompatible with the user interface (no "mouse-over" with a touchscreen; no multi-touch for a mouse-focused app); these lead to a "it crashes! the battery lasts for 2 hours instead of 11! my favorite Flash apps are unusable!" cry which will be blamed on Apple and drive away users.
The iPad is a new paradigm, incompatible with the old (the height of which is Flash).
I love the iTouch itself. Web browsing, texting and talking all take place on my cell phone. The iTouch is reserved for entertainment to fill those long boring waits we all must endure from day to day.
Instead of watching a flash video as it streams, I have to download, convert and upload. It sort of defeats the purpose. Too much planning and work for a gadget which I thought would make life a bit easier. As for battery life...that's why God made adapters.
I love the iTouch itself. Web browsing, texting and talking all take place on my cell phone. The iTouch is reserved for entertainment to fill those long boring waits we all must endure from day to day.
Instead of watching a flash video as it streams, I have to download, convert and upload. It sort of defeats the purpose. Too much planning and work for a gadget which I thought would make life a bit easier. As for battery life...that's why God made adapters.
I read it. And that first part is a fat pile of hypocrisy. notice how carefully he ignores over a decade of Macs being closed and all the iGadgets being closed. Again it’s the “you can’t put your stuff on my closed system because it’s closed”, that is pretty much the definition of hypocrisy.
Everything past that I agree with. Flash is a POS. But by leading with the complaints about it being closed he invalidated his argument and made himself look like an idiot.
Sorry about all of my double posts. Don’t know what the issue is. I only hit enter once, I promise!
Sorry about all of my double posts. Don’t know what the issue is. I only hit enter once, I promise!
hiccups ... :-)
Well, I didn't say that, but I certainly agree with it, so let's move on. Given the the vaunted 'superiority' of Jobs's brainchildren, how did the market respond over the years? Which platform has the widest array of applications and other software - stiil, today? And who outsold whom? And continues to do so? Which architecture domintes the business world? Check, please.
It opens a gateway for MS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.