Steve Jobs continues to criticize Flash

When the Apple iPad was unveiled last month one of the main criticisms of the device was its lack of support for Adobe's Flash player, an interactive component used on many major websites to provide everything from video content to games. Since then, Steve Jobs has attended a series of private meetings with newspaper journalists and editors to give them a better idea of how their content will be utilised by the iPad, and seemingly to persuade them to abandon Flash on their websites.

At these "behind closed doors" events, Jobs reiterated comments made at a company meeting shortly after the original announcement where he explained his reasoning behind the decision to exclude Flash from the iPad; as well as its continued absence on iPhones and the iPod Touch, despite large demand for it. Jobs believes that Flash is too buggy on the Mac platform and thinks that new features in HTML5 will eventually replace the need for it, and reportedly went as far as to call Adobe "lazy".

The main newspapers that Jobs visited - the Wall Street Journal and New York Times - heavily use Flash on their websites to provide video and graphics. These two sites are interested to hear why Apple thinks that it is unneeded and will not appear when users visit their website on the iPad.

According to Valleywag, Jobs continued his negativity towards Flash, calling it a "CPU hog," a source of "security holes" and "old technology" - comparing it with other older technologies that Apple has apparently encouraged people to ditch, such as floppy drives, FireWire 400 (ironically Apple's creation in the first place), and CDs (because of the iTunes Store).

At the Wall Street Journal, Jobs is reported to have said that the iPad's battery life would degrade from 10 hours to about 1.5 hours if it used Flash, blaming having to spend extra CPU cycles decoding it. However, you may wonder how they can know this unless they have performed tests of Flash on the device, and as Valleywag point out it "sounds like an unfair comparison; the iPad would unlikely achieve its advertised 10 hours of maximum battery life while continuously playing video of any sort, iPad optimized or not."

Jobs even went as far as suggesting that the newspapers could abandon Flash, and that it would be a "trivial" move to create video in the H.264 codec instead. The Valleywag post gives some good arguments against such a move and why it makes no sense at all, including the cost of licensing the codec and the time and staff that would be needed to complete the so-called "trivial" move to a website without Flash.

Apple's apparent grudge against Adobe was obviously made quite clear, and shortly after the meetings the Wall Street Journal's Holman Jenkins wrote an editorial which compared Apple to Microsoft. In the piece Jenkins wrote that Apple is in danger of becoming preoccupied with "zero-sum maneuvering versus hated rivals" and that the decision to not allow Flash on the iPad was a prime example of this.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft demonstrates stunning new Bing Maps features

Next Story

FBI will investigate school who used laptop webcams to spy on students

155 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I doubt this has anything to do with getting flash to work properly on the devices as I bet Adobe would be more than willing to make a version that worked well on Apple devices. I think the real issue is that making flash available on the Ipod family would do heavy damage to the App Store. Why buy apps when there will be tons of people making them for free on flash. Apple will no longer have control over the content of applications, their family friendly image might be tarnished. This is typical control tactics of Apple.

"However, you may wonder how they can know this unless they have performed tests of Flash on the device"

They obviously know - there has to be some unmentioned reasons as to why they chose not to include the support. Or it could be that the battery life sucks when its included...

FWIW, personally I'd have to lean towards Jobs on this one, since his points, extreme or not, are at least based on fact -- the Valleywag opinions not so much.

The Valleywag post is misleading if not out & out wrong, especially re: video... 1st off, Flash video is encoded, often using basically the same tech as H264. Software used for encoding either is available free &/or as pay-ware, with Flash video encoding pay-ware usually being higher priced, plus it's not included like H264 in many pro or consumer video apps. Encoding video to Flash takes longer than H264 [with Flash being owned by Adobe, you can't just choose the fastest &/or highest quality encoding apps]. Nor is H264 the only video alternative... Long story short, **when it comes to the video end of things**, costs are higher using Flash, quality is lower, hassles increase, video prep times increase.

OK, so that's the "backend" -- what about the video consumer?... the Flash video format is simply the envelope video's delivered in -- no more, no less. Most often Flash separately, also provides the player. The 1st part of that, the *Envelope* is irrelevant -- the last half, the Flash *Player* makes all the difference. If your hardware can Play the video, it can Play the video -- the envelope's just the envelope. If the video's huge, or uses a more complex method of encoding [H264, AVC], it takes more processing & processing power to decode/play. Since the video player is in software, that's an entirely different matter. Software developed in, written for Flash is less efficient than the full-fledged coding languages otherwise used creating programs like the F/Fox browser I'm using to view this page. Common & popular Flash/Shockwave-based games [RealArcade, Big Fish Games etc] normally run the CPU full tilt [regardless how fast or powerful that CPU is], so playing a Tetris clone is much more demanding of resources, takes much more electrical power, than vastly more complicated games [WOW etc] that don't have anything to do with Flash/Shockwave.

If the only concern was efficiency, Flash/Shockwave in it's present form & common use wouldn't even exist -- ironic since originally the reason behind their development was to enable vector graphics animation, requiring less modem bandwidth than raster-based animations [animated GIFs for instance]. From a purely tech standpoint, it shouldn't be used in most cases where it's used today. It makes no more sense than firing up, driving an 18 wheeler 1/2 a mile down the street just to buy a Coke. Jobs can make grand statements that Flash should be abandoned -- I can't & won't because that would likely cause many working in &/or with Flash today to sign up for unemployment. For a corp.it'd be a hassle to have parts of your site re-written, but if done as part of normally scheduled updates, not a big deal [but neither would be sending a Flash designer to unemployment].

Still... I can't help but wonder how much electricity would be saved, & what sort of impact that would have on the environment if Flash/Shockwave stopped working tomorrow?... if you consider only a portion of those would have been playing videos, millions of PC/laptop CPUs going from full throttle down to 5 or 10%.

Of course none of that has anything to do with the corp vs. corp bickering both Adobe & Apple would draw folks into. Adobe bought Macromedia & got Flash/Shockwave in the bargain, & the more cash they make for the less work, the higher their profits. Apple benefits the better their products work, would like to get max dollars for less work, & wouldn't mind at all if their Quicktime video franchise [remember that?] started once again paying more of the bills. When it comes to Flash, Jobs has the edge basing his arguments on facts, but Adobe, relying on more personal sorts of attacks may still win out -- after all, facts or the absence thereof have never put a damper on the tabloids sold at supermarket checkouts.

mikiem said,
FWIW, personally I'd have to lean towards Jobs on this one, since his points, extreme or not, are at least based on fact -- the Valleywag opinions not so much.

The Valleywag post is misleading if not out & out wrong, especially re: video... 1st off, Flash video is encoded, often using basically the same tech as H264. Software used for encoding either is available free &/or as pay-ware, with Flash video encoding pay-ware usually being higher priced, plus it's not included like H264 in many pro or consumer video apps. Encoding video to Flash takes longer than H264 [with Flash being owned by Adobe, you can't just choose the fastest &/or highest quality encoding apps]. Nor is H264 the only video alternative... Long story short, **when it comes to the video end of things**, costs are higher using Flash, quality is lower, hassles increase, video prep times increase.

OK, so that's the "backend" -- what about the video consumer?... the Flash video format is simply the envelope video's delivered in -- no more, no less. Most often Flash separately, also provides the player. The 1st part of that, the *Envelope* is irrelevant -- the last half, the Flash *Player* makes all the difference. If your hardware can Play the video, it can Play the video -- the envelope's just the envelope. If the video's huge, or uses a more complex method of encoding [H264, AVC], it takes more processing & processing power to decode/play. Since the video player is in software, that's an entirely different matter. Software developed in, written for Flash is less efficient than the full-fledged coding languages otherwise used creating programs like the F/Fox browser I'm using to view this page. Common & popular Flash/Shockwave-based games [RealArcade, Big Fish Games etc] normally run the CPU full tilt [regardless how fast or powerful that CPU is], so playing a Tetris clone is much more demanding of resources, takes much more electrical power, than vastly more complicated games [WOW etc] that don't have anything to do with Flash/Shockwave.

If the only concern was efficiency, Flash/Shockwave in it's present form & common use wouldn't even exist -- ironic since originally the reason behind their development was to enable vector graphics animation, requiring less modem bandwidth than raster-based animations [animated GIFs for instance]. From a purely tech standpoint, it shouldn't be used in most cases where it's used today. It makes no more sense than firing up, driving an 18 wheeler 1/2 a mile down the street just to buy a Coke. Jobs can make grand statements that Flash should be abandoned -- I can't & won't because that would likely cause many working in &/or with Flash today to sign up for unemployment. For a corp.it'd be a hassle to have parts of your site re-written, but if done as part of normally scheduled updates, not a big deal [but neither would be sending a Flash designer to unemployment].

Still... I can't help but wonder how much electricity would be saved, & what sort of impact that would have on the environment if Flash/Shockwave stopped working tomorrow?... if you consider only a portion of those would have been playing videos, millions of PC/laptop CPUs going from full throttle down to 5 or 10%.

Of course none of that has anything to do with the corp vs. corp bickering both Adobe & Apple would draw folks into. Adobe bought Macromedia & got Flash/Shockwave in the bargain, & the more cash they make for the less work, the higher their profits. Apple benefits the better their products work, would like to get max dollars for less work, & wouldn't mind at all if their Quicktime video franchise [remember that?] started once again paying more of the bills. When it comes to Flash, Jobs has the edge basing his arguments on facts, but Adobe, relying on more personal sorts of attacks may still win out -- after all, facts or the absence thereof have never put a damper on the tabloids sold at supermarket checkouts.


I don't know where to start. But, I will tell you this, we certainly can save enormous amount of electricity and time if we all stop playing games, watching hulu and netflix. We can save a lot of trees if we all stop reading books. And, we can all save enormous amount of money, if we stop buying Apple branded products, won't we?

While the software, Dreamweaver, Flash, Photoshop run best on Macs, their output is geared more towards PC. Adobe recognizes that most professional designers use Macs while the average target audience are on PC.

SputnikGamer said,
While the software, Dreamweaver, Flash, Photoshop run best on Macs....

Actually no... Adobe support on Macs, like many other major brands, has really been declining over the years. Many like Sony seem to rely on Mac users running their Windows versions in bootcamp.

mikiem said,

Actually no... Adobe support on Macs, like many other major brands, has really been declining over the years. Many like Sony seem to rely on Mac users running their Windows versions in bootcamp.

Actually yes, my pc has twice the processing power and twice the ram and my mac still runs adobe development tools better than my pc. At the same time my pc runs the outcomes of those tools much better.

SputnikGamer said,

Actually yes, my pc has twice the processing power and twice the ram and my mac still runs adobe development tools better than my pc. At the same time my pc runs the outcomes of those tools much better.

There is something seriously wrong with your PC. With CS4, my PCs beat any other macs that I have.

zagor said,

There is something seriously wrong with your PC. With CS4, my PCs beat any other macs that I have.

There is nothing wrong with my PC. It's the operating system that has the issue. Do I really need to point out that most graphic designers, web designers(not developers), and most people who work with video on a professional level use Mac's, not PC's for that. They all do it out of ignorance clearly. It's been a long proven fact that Mac's render graphics, video, and sound much better and efficiently than a PC. Development tools run better on the Macs of these major software companies because that's the niche market the developing tools are made for. The outputs are designed by the people using the tools to work better on PC's because most consumers use PC's.

Don't take this as a flame but use some common sense here. This is old news and there is no reason I should even have to state it.

Doesn't Apple own (or possess) a significant portion of Adobe? And Isn't Adobe Products geared towards MAC's OS as opposed to the "porting" necessary to use Adobe Software on DOS based OS's (Windows, DOS, OS Warp]? If Apple wants the iPad, iPhone and iTouch to be continuously relevant, one would think that Apple would create to underlying OS to function within the prevailing environment as is the case with other internet devices. And being that Flash is not going to be replaced by Slverlight or HTML5's video and audio tag's really soon, again, one would think that Apple would design an OS for it's media devices that would allow it's users to have full access to the web.

Eddie Cannon said,
Doesn't Apple own (or possess) a significant portion of Adobe? And Isn't Adobe Products geared towards MAC's OS as opposed to the "porting" necessary to use Adobe Software on DOS based OS's (Windows, DOS, OS Warp]? If Apple wants the iPad, iPhone and iTouch to be continuously relevant, one would think that Apple would create to underlying OS to function within the prevailing environment as is the case with other internet devices. And being that Flash is not going to be replaced by Slverlight or HTML5's video and audio tag's really soon, again, one would think that Apple would design an OS for it's media devices that would allow it's users to have full access to the web.

Please, for the love of God - shut up.

Windows is not based on DOS - so please, re-write what you wrote and thing long and hard about it before posting it.

rawr_boy81 said,

Please, for the love of God - shut up.

Windows is not based on DOS - so please, re-write what you wrote and thing long and hard about it before posting it.

OOPS! Not DOS Based. The underlying issue is that the products were designed for a OS not necessarily a UNIX Robbed based application. Hence the issues faced by numerous Microsoft Software users. And, "God" has nothing to do with the quote and makes it clear why animosity amongst programmers and end user increases as it appears "rawr_boy81" has an edge or issue with certain topics. Unfortunately, not every individual is an Einstien in programming, nor operating systems. So, forgiveness is in order and Apple must re-think it's future as the mobile current devices they offer will experience uselessness in the coming years.

Wonder if he can explain why not even safari on ipod touch can't even play videos with html5 test from youtube in the browser...

well i think Flash is a CPU hog. only reason people use it is because they are pretty much FORCED to use it because of stuff like YouTube etc.

they need to come up with a decent alternative that's CPU friendly and with all the stuff we have nowadays it's a wonder this aint happened.

ThaCrip said,
well i think Flash is a CPU hog. only reason people use it is because they are pretty much FORCED to use it because of stuff like YouTube etc.

they need to come up with a decent alternative that's CPU friendly and with all the stuff we have nowadays it's a wonder this aint happened.


yes, like we are all forced to use something called Computer and WEB! It seems there is no end to ridiculous arguments anytime soon.

Edited by zagor, Feb 21 2010, 12:53am :

ThaCrip said,
well i think Flash is a CPU hog. only reason people use it is because they are pretty much FORCED to use it because of stuff like YouTube etc.

they need to come up with a decent alternative that's CPU friendly and with all the stuff we have nowadays it's a wonder this aint happened.

For me the only reason why I have it installed is for YouTube. If YouTube suddenly moved to Silverlight or HTML5, I would remove Flash immediately since I see no reason reason to have it installed.

ThaCrip said,
well i think Flash is a CPU hog. only reason people use it is because they are pretty much FORCED to use it because of stuff like YouTube etc.

they need to come up with a decent alternative that's CPU friendly and with all the stuff we have nowadays it's a wonder this aint happened.

There *ARE* alternatives. Flash/shockwave is easier in many cases to put on a site or page, loads of folks experienced at it, & most people have the plugin necessary to view it. Macromedia [orig. Flash inventors/owners] built up Flash acceptance over years & years before there was Flash video or Flash-based sites, so there was that huge user base to build on. Few major sites want to take a chance on losing part of their audience by moving away from Flash now. even if it makes technical sense.

if it is not blu-ray then it is flash.

Not counting :interchangeable battery, usb ports, fw400, hdmi, sd slot (or any removable battery) and such.

Lately, Apple has been flooded with pity excuses.

Magallanes said,
if it is not blu-ray then it is flash.

Not counting :interchangeable battery, usb ports, fw400, hdmi, sd slot (or any removable battery) and such.

Lately, Apple has been flooded with pity excuses.

It's business as usual. Can't load the first gen with full features or there will be nothing to go for for second gen and third gen. Sell the first gen with no features for alot and later with more features for less. Keeps the money flowing. It would be like a game such as WoW or Aoin coming out with all the content available at once. A few weeks later people would be done and quit the game. Do it in increments and money will keep flowing. Good business model. Consumers may complain but they still pay. Their money speaks more than their whining.

SputnikGamer said,

It's business as usual. Can't load the first gen with full features or there will be nothing to go for for second gen and third gen. Sell the first gen with no features for alot and later with more features for less. Keeps the money flowing. It would be like a game such as WoW or Aoin coming out with all the content available at once. A few weeks later people would be done and quit the game. Do it in increments and money will keep flowing. Good business model. Consumers may complain but they still pay. Their money speaks more than their whining.

I agree 100% with you but i disagree with the people (customers) that now declare that Flash is useless when it is not. At least i want to have option to use flash or to disable it).

Magallanes said,

I agree 100% with you but i disagree with the people (customers) that now declare that Flash is useless when it is not. At least i want to have option to use flash or to disable it).

Of course it's not useless yet but that's not really the point. Apple is attempting to render it useless.

Magallanes said,
if it is not blu-ray then it is flash...

I'm no Apple fan -- have never owned anything with their logo -- but from a tech standpoint both stink, & I've seen little disagreement on that among techs.

That's NOT to say Apple should/shouldn't support either, or anything for that matter, but that's a debate that's decided at the cash register as Apple either sells product or it doesn't. Rest assured that if Apple saw an overall profit there [BD, Flash] support would follow.

The Apple dictatorship is the reason I sold my iPhone a long time ago. If I want to run flash and cut my battery life by three quarters that should be my prerogative. My Nokia 5800 has significantly better battery life than my iPhone used to and I can watch youtube on that using flash lite..

Apple could quite easily put flash on the app store with a disclaimer; "WARNING! Flash will significantly reduce your phone's battery life and web browser performance."

Or if it included it in the phone itself, it could be turned off by default with the disclaimer popping up whenever it's enabled in the options dialog.

SOME idiots will still blame Apple for the loss in battery life, but idiots need to learn, not be shielded.

This is probably why they're refusing to add multitasking too, because people will run 20+ apps in the background then complain that their battery is dying too quickly, but is that really a reason to hold back useful features? I don't think so.

Hardcore Til I Die said,
The Apple dictatorship is the reason I sold my iPhone a long time ago. If I want to run flash and cut my battery life by three quarters that should be my prerogative. My Nokia 5800 has significantly better battery life than my iPhone used to and I can watch youtube on that using flash lite..

Apple could quite easily put flash on the app store with a disclaimer; "WARNING! Flash will significantly reduce your phone's battery life and web browser performance."

Or if it included it in the phone itself, it could be turned off by default with the disclaimer popping up whenever it's enabled in the options dialog.

SOME idiots will still blame Apple for the loss in battery life, but idiots need to learn, not be shielded.

This is probably why they're refusing to add multitasking too, because people will run 20+ apps in the background then complain that their battery is dying too quickly, but is that really a reason to hold back useful features? I don't think so.

Will you replace Apple's dictatorship with Microsoft's dictatorship for the WP7 (No changing of UI by manufactures, dictating use of hardware, no external applications.....)

ilev said,

Will you replace Apple's dictatorship with Microsoft's dictatorship for the WP7 (No changing of UI by manufactures, dictating use of hardware, no external applications.....)

No.. I'm getting the HTC Desire with Android, which is (almost) completely open.

Even though it has about 5 times (or more) less apps than the store at the moment, at least you can run whatever you want.

ilev said,

Will you replace Apple's dictatorship with Microsoft's dictatorship for the WP7 (No changing of UI by manufactures, dictating use of hardware, no external applications.....)

unlike your dear friend greedy apple, ms is not blocking other companies or flash

The biggest problem is that Apple shouldn't have the final say in what I installed on the device I paid for.
Don't care what platform you prefer, you should have complete control over it - such as installing applications of your choice, setting passwords, powering it on/off at your whilm and the device conforming with industry standards.

I hate this totalitarian dictatorship Apple keep bringing to the world of technology. iPhone, iTunes/iPod, AppStore etc.

I'm up for end-user accessiblility, but the ultimate decision for code to execute on a device is the device owner. Don't see any reason why the AppStore couldn't just have a warning when you download flash player saying it has known stability and performance issues - IF Apple can actually prove it.

The developer creates, the user decides if they want to install it. Adding a middle layer of censorship doesn't help anyone other than Apple hiding the flaws of their own platform by "protecting" users from accessing content that can't be played such as interpreted code.

My hatred for Apple grows ever stronger...

Why ?

Do you have a choice what is installed on you TV ? Game Console ? PSP ? ... No. Just because it's theoretically possible for you to install anything on it doesn't mean it was made for that.. Apple just did the smart thing and kept the hardware/OS familliar to make it easy to program for.

stevehoot said,
The biggest problem is that Apple shouldn't have the final say in what I installed on the device I paid for...

The consumer should always have choice, & when it comes to Apple you do... either buy/use their products or not. What they will or will not do is hardly a secret.

Steve Jobs is a very talented person and has a great vision, but is difficult to work with and he's difficult working with others. I'm afraid he will end up being outed from Apple again if he resumes the close mindedness nonsense he engaged in 20 years ago. Comparing Apple with Microsoft in this article is unfair because as much as some people hate Microsoft: 1) they have never attacked viciously a competitor with advertising, 2) They have collaborated many times with competitors (for instance, MS invested 150 million dollars in non-voting Apple stock to help the company, they are pushing and working with Adobe to bring flash to their mobile devices, even tough MS has its own product, Silverlight, which is much better and powerful). 3) MS has satisfied the ridiculous demands of the european market, which asked to remove windows media player and give a browser ballot for users to chose their browser. No other company has been forced to advertize products from others in their platform, OSX comes with Safari and itunes, Android with Chrome, etc. that's the way it is and people can then download whatever other browser they want. And most of this MS bashing has been fired up by Apple's Mac vs PC misleading ads.

steve jobs is a tool. he keeps this up and apple will fail. there is nothing wrong with flash. i love how the fanboys always try to defend his actions when you know he's dead wrong.

i will laugh when adobe focuses it's other development efforts on pc instead of mac. Imagine mac with an inferior photoshop version, that would mean the end of apple.

Now we have to change the whole Farking internet just to support the Ipad pffft.

Very cool product, but yet again Apple limit their users.

gtxvortex said,
Now we have to change the whole Farking internet just to support the Ipad pffft.

Very cool product, but yet again Apple limit their users.

limits? how about totally cripples their products. i cannot believe how many still support apple and their mindset. i just saw a used macbook pro on craigslist selling for $1400. these people are out of their minds. ill take a pc any day of the week.

Yikes... This is beginning to make Jobs look a bit immature... It's a fine line I guess (Though I never thought it to be one) between promoting the dropping of a technology and a childish spat... Who knew?

S Jobs will say and do whatever is best for himself. Always keep that in mind. When he says "Flash sucks", the question you should ask yourself is what does he have to gain by that statement? Is he trying to strong-arm Adobe? Is he pimping the App Store? Is he distracting customers from the obvious inferiority of the iPhone's lack of Flash support? If he were serious about giving customers a good experience, he would get the Apple workers to add Flash support. Why not, then? One reason could be that he (Jobs) loses control if the iPhone runs Flash. God forbid if Jobs loses the dictatorial control over Apple products that he's so accustomed to.

Hey Steve, you know, core i7 mobile processors are the future. But your bloody lazy company have yet to update its macbook pro line! Stop bitching about other companies and stop telling us what the future should look like..Go and catch the future in your own company!

zagor said,
Hey Steve, you know, core i7 mobile processors are the future. But your bloody lazy company have yet to update its macbook pro line! Stop bitching about other companies and stop telling us what the future should look like..Go and catch the future in your own company!

Totally agree. Just check right now. A Dell Studio XPS 16 with i7 quad core 1.6GHz/2.8Ghz turbo mode, with 4gig ram and 500G HD, ATI Radeon HD 1Gig and great design including backlight keyboard sells for $1,199. The most powerful 15 inch Macbook Pro you can buy today has the old Core 2 Duo and NVIDIA Geforce 512 meg, no removable battery, no HDMI port, less USB ports, no 8-in-1 media card reader, no e-SATA port, and Apple fanboys will pay $2,299 for it, more than a thousand dollars more for older hardware and less features!

Charles Keledjian said,

Totally agree. Just check right now. A Dell Studio XPS 16 with i7 quad core 1.6GHz/2.8Ghz turbo mode, with 4gig ram and 500G HD, ATI Radeon HD 1Gig and great design including backlight keyboard sells for $1,199. The most powerful 15 inch Macbook Pro you can buy today has the old Core 2 Duo and NVIDIA Geforce 512 meg, no removable battery, no HDMI port, less USB ports, no 8-in-1 media card reader, no e-SATA port, and Apple fanboys will pay $2,299 for it, more than a thousand dollars more for older hardware and less features!

I second that; but even on the low end laptops; Core 2 is so yesterday, why are MacBooks still using them? why haven't they moved to i3 or i5 yet? if they keep going at this rate Windows 7 laptops are looking more tempting each day with the quick refreshes of lines up available when compared to the glacial pace of change in the Mac world.

@ SputnikGamer stfu most people want flash now and when something is ready to replace it in terms of how many websites have made the change we will THEN make the switch. Apple needs to pay for flash and have a long time hatred for adobe plain and simpleJobs is a tool and I wish you macboys would stop supporting utter crap just to be cool overpriced and not as good as the competition. Flame away Ive read enough and agree with the majority of the posts. Oh by the way my kids own 2 ipod touches I got off craigslist for under a hundred bucks jailbroken and Apple wont get a cent from me. I also agree they must have tested flash with their product if they know how bad their battery will do

Jughead said,
@ SputnikGamer stfu most people want flash now and when something is ready to replace it in terms of how many websites have made the change we will THEN make the switch. Apple needs to pay for flash and have a long time hatred for adobe plain and simpleJobs is a tool and I wish you macboys would stop supporting utter crap just to be cool overpriced and not as good as the competition. Flame away Ive read enough and agree with the majority of the posts. Oh by the way my kids own 2 ipod touches I got off craigslist for under a hundred bucks jailbroken and Apple wont get a cent from me. I also agree they must have tested flash with their product if they know how bad their battery will do

You should probably be slightly informed before posting on these forums. A replacement for the UI features and ad's on websites does exist and is widely used. Its called JQuery(which by the way works on every mobile device (Ipod/Pad/Touch/Andriod/WM7). If you seriously think that opening up Flash on a device that brings in tons of revenue from selling controlled apps is a smart business move on Apples part, you are officially retarded.

I'd never buy Apple product because of their tactis. They tell me how to use the product and no way around. I absolutely dislike their proprietary connectors for iPhone / iPod / iPad and them forcing users to use crappy iTunes (no file names, no way to sort files without iTunes interface).

I hope history repeats itself and Apple will remember what happened to them in 90s with their proprietary hardware and similar tactics.

I think it should be up to the user to decide what applications they choose to use on the iPhone and iPad and not Apple or Steve Jobs. If someone wants to use Flash on their device, then it's up to them.

This is exactly why I dumped my iPhone. I used to love apple, but their not listening to users and suggesting that content providers change delivery formats is ridiculous. Android ftw.

JSYOUNG571 said,
AND THAT IS WHY THE IPAD HAS WHAT???..........MADE SLOW SALES....

Are you from the future? The iPad isn't even on the market, yet.

xiphi said,

Are you from the future? The iPad isn't even on the market, yet.

Its not on the market and making sales. Doesn't that technically mean its doing good then? LAWL

I have to agree with him for once. I despise Flash. It's buggy, CPU-hungry, and for the most part unnecessary. HTML was created to allow you to lay out content like a newspaper already, and now the NYT is using Adobe Air for their digital reader. No thianks.

Darrian said,
He can criticize Flash all he wants. It won't change the fact that Apple is lazy.
How so ? Apple doesn't need to write the code to make flash work, Adobe already did infact.

Adobe just needs to prove they can do it in a way that's secure and not a memory/cpu/battery pig.. and they can't, so Adobe screams and Jobs tells them to screw themselves.

Im already bored of this argument his ipad is hardly new technology and if he wants to keep bashing at flash being pants he's is barking up the wrong tree. HTML 5 is a few yrs away yet and until its industry standard, flash is one of the best and only technologies that actually is used by each and everyone of us whether it be pc flameboys or mac flameboys.
My personal viewpoint on this is he has to blame someone for the bad general reception of the ipad and he has decided to vent his spleen at adobe.
Just look at the neowin poll of people who are going to be buying an ipad and it does look good.

Will you be purchasing the iPad in March?
Definitely - 3.4%
Maybe - 6.9%
No - 88.3%

I'm tired of hearing what the Apple dictator has to say. Can we please get stories up about a person that is not a ****ing moron that I hate and wish had bled out and died on the table?

I could not think of a less violent way of saying that.

AltecXP said,
I'm tired of hearing what the Apple dictator has to say. Can we please get stories up about a person that is not a ****ing moron that I hate and wish had bled out and died on the table?

I could not think of a less violent way of saying that.

Then why do you keep reading ? Seriously, this culture that you need someone to babysit you so you never see anything you don't like is just Sad.

See something about Apple/Jobs, just Don't click and read more.. it's simple, 90% of the people on the net can already do it.

While I agree that flash can be a pain sometimes, it is still widely used. If Jobs wants to switch people away from Flash this isn't the way to go. My laptop from 5 years ago barley runs most flash applications since they run the CPU all the way up, Pandora for one does this

gamestargrinder said,
While I agree that flash can be a pain sometimes, it is still widely used. If Jobs wants to switch people away from Flash this isn't the way to go. My laptop from 5 years ago barley runs most flash applications since they run the CPU all the way up, Pandora for one does this

so you're comparing Macs the iPhone and the iPad to a cheap 5yo computer?

Interesting analogy

z0phi3l said,

so you're comparing Macs the iPhone and the iPad to a cheap 5yo computer?

Interesting analogy


while that does seem bad, even our new mac pros at school can get sluggish with flash. ive never had a situation where flash didn't used a lot of resources.

gamestargrinder said,

while that does seem bad, even our new mac pros at school can get sluggish with flash. ive never had a situation where flash didn't used a lot of resources.

ditch the mac and switch to a PC. Enjoy hulu, netflix and gazillion of other sites without much of a worry on how much resources it will use. I can open two 1080p movies streamed in flash on my humble 1.86 GHz tablet. Computer is only a tool to access other mediums, web, documents, data...if it can not perform these functions, change it for something better.

Edited by zagor, Feb 19 2010, 10:53pm :

ipad will be apple's epic fail with no camera no flash no usb and ridiculously high price .. mark my word

Bero said,
ipad will be apple's epic fail with no camera no flash no usb and ridiculously high price .. mark my word
Didn't everyone say the same thing about the iPhone? Oh noes, no keyboard! It's going to fail!

hotdog963al said,
Didn't everyone say the same thing about the iPhone? Oh noes, no keyboard! It's going to fail!

Actually the iPhone was very well received, since it was a massive leap forward in the smart phone market (outside of Japan at least). The iPad wants to be a computer, but its locked down like an appliance, and won't sell well. Don't get me wrong, it will sell, but it will sell at the same rate as something like the MacBook Air, which sells to the customers that want it, but most everyone else will go for the alternative (in the case of the iPad, netbooks and Tablets with USB ports).

hotdog963al said,
Didn't everyone say the same thing about the iPhone? Oh noes, no keyboard! It's going to fail!
And iMac, iPod, MiniMac, Macbook Air..

They just fail all over the place, no wonder the company is almost bankrupt.. o_0

hotdog963al said,
Didn't everyone say the same thing about the iPhone? Oh noes, no keyboard! It's going to fail!

that was not the same case with iPhone and u know it .. iPhone was a revolution in multitouch and software with its iconic design and its consistency. I loved it from the first moment i saw it even it was 2G back then
but the iPad is not even close to iPhone in case of providing something rly awesome .. imo i find it's lacking of key features and relatively high price is a break down deal for me

Ruddy hate flash based websites they hamper accessibility especially when some insist in ones encoded entirely out of the stuff. Deffnetly agree with Mr Jobs wanting it to become a relic.

Are you guys kidding me? With flash on my macbook pro, my CPU is always running 20% or 30%. Even that stupid banner ad on most sites will cause my CPU to skyrocket. Now that I've installed ClicktoFlash, my CPU has stayed at 1-2% all the time. My battery life has skyrocketed instead.

Now when I use Firefox and Chrome, and wonder why my computer is getting so hot / battery is getting so bad, I realize why. So I've stopped using them completely. ClicktoFlash really saved the day, by removing flash. Of course, I still watch youtube / etc but there isn't a constant 20% drain on my CPU now whenever I visit a site with ads (like this one actually, I got adblock + clicktoflash, great I don't have any problems now)

wankey said,
Are you guys kidding me? With flash on my macbook pro, my CPU is always running 20% or 30%. Even that stupid banner ad on most sites will cause my CPU to skyrocket. Now that I've installed ClicktoFlash, my CPU has stayed at 1-2% all the time. My battery life has skyrocketed instead.

Now when I use Firefox and Chrome, and wonder why my computer is getting so hot / battery is getting so bad, I realize why. So I've stopped using them completely. ClicktoFlash really saved the day, by removing flash. Of course, I still watch youtube / etc but there isn't a constant 20% drain on my CPU now whenever I visit a site with ads (like this one actually, I got adblock + clicktoflash, great I don't have any problems now)

The sad thing for me, heavy flash banner ad's dont even use up much of my CPU time on a windows system... Adobe needs to optimize their code on OSX

neufuse said,

The sad thing for me, heavy flash banner ad's dont even use up much of my CPU time on a windows system... Adobe needs to optimize their code on OSX

The trick with Flash is two parts: 1) The Windows code is better than the OS X code 2) Flash even on Windows is still a CPU hog on many CPU configurations.

Since they added in threading in 9.0 of Flash, many dual core and especially HT enabled processors take a beating because of the poor threading code. Take an old P4 with HT or an Atom with HT and Flash makes the system run hard and hot. Sure these are older/slower processors, but Flash will also do this on a i5, i7 that has HT enabled, and these are not old or slow processors.

Flash is just bad code, and so saying that it runs better on Windows is liike saying that dog po*p tastes better on crackers than bread.

neufuse said,

The sad thing for me, heavy flash banner ad's dont even use up much of my CPU time on a windows system... Adobe needs to optimize their code on OSX

Unfortunately Apple provides the technology and Adobe refuses to use it; Adobe whine about 'not having direct access to hardware' and yet they could easily utilise OpenCL which would allow the OS to decide whether it is best to decode using CPU or GPU depending on the underlying hardware. The issue isn't even that; if many other video players can provide smooth playback without hogging up the CPU the obviously Adobe have lousy programmers.

As much as I think that people should at least be given the chance to use flash, flash still sucks and I hope HTML5 makes it obsolete

Julius Caro said,
As much as I think that people should at least be given the chance to use flash, flash still sucks and I hope HTML5 makes it obsolete

Final spec for html5 is planned for 2022. Happy waiting.

k7of9 said,

Final spec for html5 is planned for 2022. Happy waiting.

Huh? So are you saying we need to have the standard finished as for how the page header tags should work before we can take advantage of the canvas, video, and audio advantages?

Are you not even aware that many browsers already do HTML 5 video streaming etc?

Edited by Northgrove, Feb 19 2010, 9:25pm :

Northgrove said,
Huh? So are you saying we need to have the standard finished as for how the page header tags should work before we can take advantage of the canvas, video, and audio advantages?

Are you not even aware that many browsers already do HTML 5 video streaming etc?

Not to mention HTML5 Support slated for IE9..

k7of9 said,

Final spec for html5 is planned for 2022. Happy waiting.

Final Spec? Doesn't that mean that HTML5 will be the most up to date version until that date when a new one starts being made? Computer languages are not like OS or games or any software. You don't wait until the final version of a web based language is out or you will always be behind.

k7of9 said,
Final spec for html5 is planned for 2022. Happy waiting.

Parts of HTML5 are already standardised; everything isn't standardised all at once, they are standardised piece by piece and then at the end the whole thing is standardised - so it is possible to do a gradual role out of features over time so that when HTML5 is standardised all the browsers are 90% of the way there.

Why doesn't Apple make an alternative to Flash if they dont like how it is? Microsoft already did with silverlight... dont dish it out if you can't show something better...

neufuse said,
Why doesn't Apple make an alternative to Flash if they dont like how it is? Microsoft already did with silverlight... dont dish it out if you can't show something better...

They are pushing towards HTML5 being used for video and possibly the canvas tag for games and whatnot. Flash isn't really a very good technology for anything but games and very animation dependent websites (even though in most cases you could do those with modern JavaScript libraries easier).

In normal use, Flash video is pretty much the only thing that makes my Macbook Pro's fans really ramp up. HTML5 video on the other hand keeps them at a quieter level.

LaXu said,

They are pushing towards HTML5 being used for video and possibly the canvas tag for games and whatnot. Flash isn't really a very good technology for anything but games and very animation dependent websites (even though in most cases you could do those with modern JavaScript libraries easier).

In normal use, Flash video is pretty much the only thing that makes my Macbook Pro's fans really ramp up. HTML5 video on the other hand keeps them at a quieter level.

The rub though, HTML5 can't fill the functional gap of Flash. Silverlight can. The more likely outcome will be Silverlight support on the iPhone/Touch/Pad platform. Silverlight is not a CPU hog and Silverlight is secure, due to its managed and dual sandbox design. (no known exploits to date)

neufuse said,
Why doesn't Apple make an alternative to Flash if they dont like how it is? Microsoft already did with silverlight... dont dish it out if you can't show something better...

WebKit already does HTML 5 Canvas + Video, as well as CSS transitions and inline SVG support. What's still missing? The point is to move into standards territory, and out of this Flash/Silverlight rubbish. The next version of Safari will no doubt carry over these advances. Firefox is also tagging along on this path, and so is Chrome (given it does WebKit too of course).

Edited by Northgrove, Feb 19 2010, 9:48pm :

Northgrove said,

WebKit already does HTML 5 Canvas + Video, as well as CSS transitions and inline SVG support. What's still missing?

A good SDK/Toolkit to make making web animations and interactivity as easy as drag and drop and doable in a rather fast time-frame?

em_te said,

A good SDK/Toolkit to make making web animations and interactivity as easy as drag and drop and doable in a rather fast time-frame?

JQuery does that to an extent.

neufuse said,
Why doesn't Apple make an alternative to Flash if they dont like how it is? Microsoft already did with silverlight... dont dish it out if you can't show something better...

Apple wants people to buy from the app store. With Flash on the device, people wouldn't need to buy games/apps from the app store anymore.

hagjohn said,

Apple wants people to buy from the app store. With Flash on the device, people wouldn't need to buy games/apps from the app store anymore.

So... how many Flash games do you pay for? I'm guessing ZERO. So are the free games on the app store a threat as well?

thenetavenger said,

The rub though, HTML5 can't fill the functional gap of Flash. Silverlight can. The more likely outcome will be Silverlight support on the iPhone/Touch/Pad platform. Silverlight is not a CPU hog and Silverlight is secure, due to its managed and dual sandbox design. (no known exploits to date)

Hence the reason I've said in the past (and now) that Apple should go to Microsoft, ask for Silverlight to be on iPhone and iPad exclusively (no Flash in otherwords or Flash pre-installed on any Macs) in return for Silverlight development tools to be created for the Mac. If we do have to have a Flash like technology, would sooner it be Silverlight given how reliable, stable and efficient it is on the Mac when compared to Flash.

KeR said,
What ever it takes to kill Flash I am all for it, there is nothing good to come out of it.
I'm with you man. I've made things in Flash for the last 5 years. And I couldn't be happier to see it go. Its a buggy pos. I'd rather use HTML5 over it any day. The only benefit to making things is Flash is you don't have to worry about Internet Explorer displaying the website all ****ed up. But thats another story...

Xero said,
I'm with you man. I've made things in Flash for the last 5 years. And I couldn't be happier to see it go. Its a buggy pos. I'd rather use HTML5 over it any day. The only benefit to making things is Flash is you don't have to worry about Internet Explorer displaying the website all ****ed up. But thats another story...

People shouldn't be making "websites in Flash" anyway, thats not what its there for, and its an accessibility nightmare. Flash there to provide rich content, and I think its sad that Apple are preventing users the opportunity to see the full web. They should at least be providing an option, not forbidding it altogether.

Majesticmerc said,

People shouldn't be making "websites in Flash" anyway, thats not what its there for, and its an accessibility nightmare. Flash there to provide rich content, and I think its sad that Apple are preventing users the opportunity to see the full web. They should at least be providing an option, not forbidding it altogether.


You can make some really amazing things without flash that have the same 'rich, alive' feel. Just not as easy.

Xero said,

You can make some really amazing things without flash that have the same 'rich, alive' feel. Just not as easy.

Or what the website creator could do is focus on delivering content rather than hopeing that the 'wizz bang' effects will some how distract the attention of the reader that the website owner is full of sh*t.

1.5hrs my arse. Can't wait for adobe to set him straight with the actual number of hours.

Also most flash things are banner ads, menu's and games. Flash isn't always 1080p videos so flash wouldn't reduce the battery life that much.

torrentthief said,
1.5hrs my arse. Can't wait for adobe to set him straight with the actual number of hours.

How would they? Adobe won't care about developing Flash for the iPad.

torrentthief said,
Also most flash things are banner ads, menu's and games. Flash isn't always 1080p videos so flash wouldn't reduce the battery life that much.

True, but even the ads and menus destroy performance nonetheless (games are kind of a different category because it's purely for fun, but very few games would translate to a mouse-less experience). Destroying performance is akin to destroying battery life. Even within Chrome and Firefox on Windows, this page drags thanks to Flash, which is also taking up more memory than all of my open tabs (Neowin on different pages, 3 times, Slashdot, and Gmail) and it's constantly stealing the CPU more than my Neowin tab even though I can't even see the Flash ad. The only good thing that I can say about it is that at least it's not growing in memory to move those stupid clouds behind the BlackBerry, in the ad.

I can't wait to see Flash ads die. When Hulu finally goes to HTML 5, or even to Silverlight, then I will happily uninstall Flash and watch my computer thank me with extra battery life. Try browser in Firefox with FlashBlock. It's a lot uglier (because it leaves a big empty, clickable block), but it's so much faster.

torrentthief said,
1.5hrs my arse.

I agree the H.264 decoder build into flash is much more effiecient and has more features than the decoder built into Apple products like Quicktime.
I am sure flash will perform more better for video decoding than the decoder built into iP(a/o)ds.

pickypg said,

True, but even the ads and menus destroy performance nonetheless (games are kind of a different category because it's purely for fun, but very few games would translate to a mouse-less experience). Destroying performance is akin to destroying battery life. Even within Chrome and Firefox on Windows, this page drags thanks to Flash, which is also taking up more memory than all of my open tabs (Neowin on different pages, 3 times, Slashdot, and Gmail) and it's constantly stealing the CPU more than my Neowin tab even though I can't even see the Flash ad. The only good thing that I can say about it is that at least it's not growing in memory to move those stupid clouds behind the BlackBerry, in the ad.

Wow dude, you must seriously have a **** computer or have an extremely outdated version of Flash. Flash doesn't bother me at all, I barely even notice it running. As for CPU usage on Neowin, I've got round 5 Neowin as well as other tabs such as my bank account open and my CPU is running at 1% + I'm using a Pentium D. Firefox is only using round 120mb of ram, no biggie. On my WinMo phone, flash runs with no problem when browsing the interweb.

torrentthief said,
1.5hrs my arse. Can't wait for adobe to set him straight with the actual number of hours.

Also most flash things are banner ads, menu's and games. Flash isn't always 1080p videos so flash wouldn't reduce the battery life that much.

Run Flash apps on a MacOS Laptop.. you'll soon see just how bad Adobe's flash player is on the MacOS Platform..

Adobe wants it on the iPhone/Pad, they best start with the top and make it useful on MacOS.. Cause as long as it's **** there, why would Apple want it on their products ? Not like it's required ( or am I mistaken, and no one is buying iPhones o_0 )

Ryoken said,
Run Flash apps on a MacOS Laptop.. you'll soon see just how bad Adobe's flash player is on the MacOS Platform..

Adobe wants it on the iPhone/Pad, they best start with the top and make it useful on MacOS.. Cause as long as it's **** there, why would Apple want it on their products ? Not like it's required ( or am I mistaken, and no one is buying iPhones o_0 )

Who says it's Adobe that wants to get Flash on the iPhone/iPad? I wouldn't want to fix things for Apple on any of their platforms with them talking so much **** and attacking them all the time. I'd rather take support away and pull any licenses they have to run Flash on their platforms. That's just me though. It might or might not hurt them if they were to do that though.

dogmai said,

Who says it's Adobe that wants to get Flash on the iPhone/iPad? I wouldn't want to fix things for Apple on any of their platforms with them talking so much **** and attacking them all the time. I'd rather take support away and pull any licenses they have to run Flash on their platforms. That's just me though. It might or might not hurt them if they were to do that though.

Adobe themselves have said they want to get it on the iPad/iPhone but have said that they can't because of Apple's policies. How about reading some news on the internet before jumping onto neowin making claims you can't back up.

Billa said,

Moving from flash to HTML5 isn't going to take a day, have fun there.

No one said it would? If Adobe wants to push flash into the archives and move on to HTML5 then not letting Flash on its devices, which are used by how many people, is a good way to push that agenda. You can complain all you want but in a few years people's complaint about Flash not working on their device will be as valid as us complaining that their Wii can't play their super Nintendo games. Everything that Flash can do can be done with HTML5. Software developers will use the new systems to create the same content. They won't do that until there is a reason to. Apple is just giving them that reason. When your (insert mobile device of choice) has fully capable content running faster than it does not because Flash is no longer in the picture, you'll be thanking Apple for being pricks now.

SputnikGamer said,

No one said it would? If Adobe wants to push flash into the archives and move on to HTML5 then not letting Flash on its devices, which are used by how many people, is a good way to push that agenda. You can complain all you want but in a few years people's complaint about Flash not working on their device will be as valid as us complaining that their Wii can't play their super Nintendo games. Everything that Flash can do can be done with HTML5. Software developers will use the new systems to create the same content. They won't do that until there is a reason to. Apple is just giving them that reason. When your (insert mobile device of choice) has fully capable content running faster than it does not because Flash is no longer in the picture, you'll be thanking Apple for being pricks now.


You might think Apple is doing it because they're doing the "right thing" for all of us but nobody seems to think that Jobs is avoiding flash for the obvious reason of protecting his app store? That's my bet. It's financial motivation - the second oldest form of motivation known to man. We all know what the first is.

Tim Dawg said,

You might think Apple is doing it because they're doing the "right thing" for all of us but nobody seems to think that Jobs is avoiding flash for the obvious reason of protecting his app store? That's my bet. It's financial motivation - the second oldest form of motivation known to man. We all know what the first is.

No one doubts his motivations. Point is that it will take the industry in the right direction. Someone is going to profit regardless.

SputnikGamer said,
No one said it would? If Adobe wants to push flash into the archives and move on to HTML5 then not letting Flash on its devices, which are used by how many people, is a good way to push that agenda. You can complain all you want but in a few years people's complaint about Flash not working on their device will be as valid as us complaining that their Wii can't play their super Nintendo games. Everything that Flash can do can be done with HTML5. Software developers will use the new systems to create the same content. They won't do that until there is a reason to. Apple is just giving them that reason. When your (insert mobile device of choice) has fully capable content running faster than it does not because Flash is no longer in the picture, you'll be thanking Apple for being pricks now.

WARNING: WALL OF TEXT

That's all well and good, however at the end of the day, rich content is easier to create and much more efficient with Flash than JavaScript and HTML. WebGL might change the game, but its implementation is far from ready, and only available in the Firefox and WebKit nightly builds. Internet Explorer support is years off for WebGL, and even SVG, which will reduce penetration to near zero on all major sites until they catch up (again).

What Adobe needs to do really is ditch the bloat that is starting to consume Flash. Things like Microphone/Webcam capabilities could be removed and 99% of users would remain unaffected. Strip all the useless content out of it, and it would be much less CPU intensive, yet continue to provide users with rich content that HTML/JS is capable of, but not competent at.

What HTML5 and CSS3 will do reduce is the "hacks" that web developers are required to use to bring the user the best experience on their website. Things like using flash to embed fonts are replaced by the CSS3 fonts module, and Flash video/audio players can be all but replaced by the HTML5 video and audio tags.

Then again, HTML5 video is going to be a total disaster. h.264 is going to be the preferred codec, but the world's second most popular browser (Firefox) won't be able to play it by default since it can't cater to the licensing requirements.

The real reason Apple don't support Flash is because, like Tim Dawg said, Flash is a threat to the app store. Developers could avoid paying for Mac hardware, a development suite, and a licence to distribute on the app store by simply creating a flash applet, and Apple could lose megabucks, so there is no way in hell that they're going to start letting things like Flash be useable on their devices while it undermines their entire software business model.

Contrary to how the above might sound, I despise Flash, and can't wait for the day that flash in most of its forms disappears for good. There are certain things that flash will be good at forever, but most of the web could be replaced with HTML5, WebGL, SVG, CSS and JavaScript. However the fact that HTML5 and CSS3 STILL aren't approved as recommendations means that the IE team aren't going to implement it yet, and as a result, Flash is going to be appropriate for a long time yet.

I believe that Apple will have little impact on where Flash goes. Microsoft tried to influence the web with "their standards" at the start of the decade, and the internet population simply turned around and said "NO!", and they'll do the same here for the most part. Flash is still useful, and I think that Apple are hurting their consumers by not allowing it. Even if their intentions were good (and lets not fool ourselves here, they're intentions aren't good at all), they're too far ahead of the game to be forcibly removing flash from the web (it will go away, but not yet), and to be honest, they're not a big enough player in the game to be making these kinds of decisions anyway. Microsoft learned their place eventually and now they (for the most part) play nice, and I think this is a lesson that Apple will learn in time too.

Edited by Majesticmerc, Feb 20 2010, 2:04am :

Majesticmerc said,

That's all well and good, however at the end of the day, rich content is easier to create and much more efficient with Flash than JavaScript and HTML.

JQuery already does everything Flash can do as far as ads and ui features go. Even works on an IPhone. You can't blame Apple for making a profit as far as controlling the store goes though. The system they have now has been stable and working for years. Apples overall market share with various products continues to rise. As far as business goes, they are doing well for themselves considering they are going against companies that make a habit out of having a monopoly (google/microsoft)

SputnikGamer said,

No one said it would? If Adobe wants to push flash into the archives and move on to HTML5 then not letting Flash on its devices, which are used by how many people, is a good way to push that agenda. You can complain all you want but in a few years people's complaint about Flash not working on their device will be as valid as us complaining that their Wii can't play their super Nintendo games. Everything that Flash can do can be done with HTML5. Software developers will use the new systems to create the same content. They won't do that until there is a reason to. Apple is just giving them that reason. When your (insert mobile device of choice) has fully capable content running faster than it does not because Flash is no longer in the picture, you'll be thanking Apple for being pricks now.

+1
I am watching all youtube videos in HTML5 using Chrome. There is no need to convert anything as the browser does the conversion on-the-fly.

ilev said,

+1
I am watching all youtube videos in HTML5 using Chrome. There is no need to convert anything as the browser does the conversion on-the-fly.


you wont be getting protected content with HTML5. And, that is the reason why you won't be able to watch legally any tv show with html5 for a long time.

Cocoliso said,
Flash sucks period.

As a flash devloper myself, i can say flash does suck..a bit, but is also pretty amazing. And i have yet to see a good enough evidence that HTML5 is fully up for the task (yet!), and to be honest by the time it is, and is mainstream enough for all browsers to support it (IE wtf!) iPad would had expired its shelf life, and replaced by something.

Thou in hindsight, i am kind of glad that Apple is making a noise, and that HTML is pushing up standards, Adobe does need a kick up the ass when it comes to flash, they have led the market so long, and have got lazy. They need to pick up their game, and improve, it is a hog, and does have security issue (thou they have improved on that a lot).

To conclude, i dont care that iPad doesnt have flash, infact im happy. Might force ppl to stop filling Apple's pockets, and it rasies awareness to Flash, and infact other portable devices :)

SputnikGamer said,

JQuery already does everything Flash can do as far as ads and ui features go. Even works on an IPhone. You can't blame Apple for making a profit as far as controlling the store goes though. The system they have now has been stable and working for years. Apples overall market share with various products continues to rise. As far as business goes, they are doing well for themselves considering they are going against companies that make a habit out of having a monopoly (google/microsoft)

No disagreement there! JQuery, ExtJS, and the like all do a lot of UI stuff that was previously the territory of Flash, but then it could be argued that user interfaces shouldn't have been done in Flash in the first place. Where JS struggles against Flash is with things like complex graphics, games, and things that require intensive processing, things that JavaScript just doesn't have the efficiency to do.

Tim Dawg said,

You might think Apple is doing it because they're doing the "right thing" for all of us but nobody seems to think that Jobs is avoiding flash for the obvious reason of protecting his app store? That's my bet. It's financial motivation - the second oldest form of motivation known to man. We all know what the first is.

I quite frankly couldn't give a crap what his motivations are - as long as the desired out come is the same; HTML5 + Javascripts + h264 then bring on the fight.

If Apple were really serious about this, they would buy out Adobe with the cash they have and create a tool that transforms flash projects into HTML5 + Javascript with a single button; that alone would speed up the transition and Adobe would provide a nice revenue stream when it comes to providing money from middleware.

Majesticmerc said,
WARNING: WALL OF TEXT
That's all well and good, however at the end of the day, rich content is easier to create and much more efficient with Flash than JavaScript and HTML. ...

FWIW, lots of current, Flash-enabled design is still bad design IMHO. In many cases it's not how to mimic current design in Flash using something else, but should the current design be used at all? Pages using Flash, CSS, JavaScript etc always started out with what features were available, & things grew from there, not always in positive directions. Far as the mess that's video goes, there are all sorts of alternatives, little reason for F/Fox not to support VLC for example as a plug-in the way it does Flash Player today.

Billa said,
Gotta love the thing about everyone moving to H.264.

... and now please tell us in which type of container you're going to put your h264 elementary stream for web streaming?!? I guess that is still using some kind of flash player like JW player for example hey!
Or are you still using the moronic Apple .mov container? I hope not, cause THAT would be stupid indeed.

djesteban said,

... and now please tell us in which type of container you're going to put your h264 elementary stream for web streaming?!? I guess that is still using some kind of flash player like JW player for example hey!
Or are you still using the moronic Apple .mov container? I hope not, cause THAT would be stupid indeed.
I know this is unlikely to happen as some other containers have been designed with streaming in mind, but you can stream video in matroska containers. Move to .mkv/.mka already, world! That would make me so happy.

mov and mp4 are the same formats.
mpeg-4 part 14 (i.e. mp4) allows for streaming with an additional track. No need to even recode the video file for streaming.

djesteban said,

... and now please tell us in which type of container you're going to put your h264 elementary stream for web streaming?!? I guess that is still using some kind of flash player like JW player for example hey!
Or are you still using the moronic Apple .mov container? I hope not, cause THAT would be stupid indeed.

Why? what is wrong with Apple's *mov container? considering that m4v is the default format for outputting videos on Quicktime when compressing, I wouldn't be surprised if in the future m4v and mp4 simply become the status quo.