Windows Phone 7 to get Flash "within months" of release

According to a blog post made by Tim Anderson at ITWriting.com, it seems that Adobe will be releasing both Flash and AIR for the Windows Phone 7 platform. After chatting with people at the Adobe partner conference in Amsterdam, Tim has learned some interesting tidbits of information regarding the future of these Adobe offerings.

AIR for Android is ready to roll, for PalmOS it's, apparently, very close to complete, BlackBerry is coming along nicely, and Windows Phone 7 ain't too far off. According to Michael Chaize, who is a Flash Platform evangelist in Paris, Flash and AIR will make their way to the Windows Phone 7 platform "within months" of Microsoft's new baby hitting the streets. This is the first time any release timetable has been specified.

Although no further information was revealed, this news is something for Windows Phone users to be excited about. With Microsoft joining the ranks of those who support Flash on mobile, Apple is now looking more and more like a lone wolf in their battle for mobile dictatorship. Before getting too excited, it should be mentioned that "within months" can mean so many different things. As users, we could possibly see Flash on Windows Phone 7 by the end of the year, though it seems unlikely. The first half of 2011 seems like a pretty reasonable assumption.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Dell is setting aside $100 million for anti-trust settlement

Next Story

YouTube adds cloud-based video editor

37 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Months? They will already have lost a lot of points if they wait even more lol
HTML5 is growing and growing...Flash isn't yet ready to die, but it'll remain an app for impossible-to-do-in-HTML5 animations only. Not for video players and ads and those little placeholders on the front webpages anymore.

PsykX said,
Months? They will already have lost a lot of points if they wait even more lol
HTML5 is growing and growing...Flash isn't yet ready to die, but it'll remain an app for impossible-to-do-in-HTML5 animations only. Not for video players and ads and those little placeholders on the front webpages anymore.

O? So they've made HTML5 video DRM-capable now? Last I heard, for any website dishing up video content they want copy-protected, HTML5 won't be an option.

Or do you think HTML5 will be the first step to never having copy-protected content ever again, the RIAA and MPAA will disband, and we'll all hold hands in a circle and sing songs about sharing and freedom?

Sorry. They want to live?? They should get their act together. Release Beta Flash for Windows Phone 7 now. Release after Windows Phone 7 on sale is too late. Everyone will be happy with silverlight.

Hate to agree with Steve Jobs but Adobe Flash is dying. Not from itself but from the people who make it.

So will Windows Phone 7, Android, WebOS, and BB support other browser plugins or just Flash? Can I make a browser plugin and will all those phones support it for me? I'm in the camp that says if Adobe wants Flash to be standard then maybe they should release it for standardization so others can implement Flash directly in their web browsers like they are currently trying to implement HTML5.

Shadrack said,
So will Windows Phone 7, Android, WebOS, and BB support other browser plugins or just Flash? Can I make a browser plugin and will all those phones support it for me? I'm in the camp that says if Adobe wants Flash to be standard then maybe they should release it for standardization so others can implement Flash directly in their web browsers like they are currently trying to implement HTML5.

Silverlight will most likely come for WP7, and I believe MS is working with Nokia to bring Silverlight to Symbian

Within months of release. they said that about 64 bit flash support back in the days of vista, many years later and still nothing.

Why I like companies like Adobe, MS, and Android. These companies support the old with the new and gives users more functionality and usability. HTML5 is still in the beginning phase and not even 100% completed yet. To drop support for something that hasnt been fully proven or completed is stupid...IMO

I guess MS is trying to pull some iPhone users away from the dark side by adding support for stuff that Apple won't... wait a minute... Microsoft is the good guy... no that can't be right... (head explodes)

Conjor said,
I guess MS is trying to pull some iPhone users away from the dark side by adding support for stuff that Apple won't... wait a minute... Microsoft is the good guy... no that can't be right... (head explodes)

Microsoft seems fairer in pricing. To be totally honest in my opinion I prefer MS to Apple.

Conjor said,
I guess MS is trying to pull some iPhone users away from the dark side by adding support for stuff that Apple won't... wait a minute... Microsoft is the good guy... no that can't be right... (head explodes)

why not? What's so bad with ms, they aren't really the big bad evil corporation the apple fanboys want you to think they are latly it do look like apple is though

Leonick said,

why not? What's so bad with ms, they aren't really the big bad evil corporation the apple fanboys want you to think they are latly it do look like apple is though

They are not big and evil...they are big, inefficient, and known for subpar product.

MarenLBC said,

They are not big and evil...they are big, inefficient, and known for subpar product.

My iPhone 3GS could be described as subpar.

Conjor said,
I guess MS is trying to pull some iPhone users away from the dark side by adding support for stuff that Apple won't... wait a minute... Microsoft is the good guy... no that can't be right... (head explodes)

MS used to be the bad guy...and I never really liked them back in the day. Looks like Apple will be the odd man out when it comes to flash because hey, they know whats best for everyone.

MarenLBC said,

They are not big and evil...they are big, inefficient, and known for subpar product.

windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows 7, Windows Vista (even though people hated it for no reason), MS Office (name me a better office suite), visual studio (name me a better IDE), xbox 360 (after RRODs were "sorted"), Media center, microsoft's hardware division (keyboards and mice), etc

Yup totally subpar. As for being inefficient, where? In most of their products, MS seems to be doing things faster or at the same speed as other companies in the same field. Yes they have made some major mistakes in the past, but which company hasn't? And their research division is arguably one of the best in the world, yes not everything they do makes it into a release product but a good amount does.

crazyfish said,
$299.00 for a 32 GB iPhone 4, the phone with the highest pixels per inch ever, is outside your price range?

For the size of the screen, the increase of resolution will be barely noticeable to the human eye, if it even can notice it.

MarenLBC said,

They are not big and evil...they are big, inefficient, and known for subpar product.

Wow, its good to know that most of the world uses subpar products from MS.

Seriously dude, dont talk about things you know nothing about.

/- Razorfold said,
windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows 7, Windows Vista (even though people hated it for no reason), MS Office (name me a better office suite), visual studio (name me a better IDE), xbox 360 (after RRODs were "sorted"), Media center, microsoft's hardware division (keyboards and mice), etc

Yup totally subpar. As for being inefficient, where? In most of their products, MS seems to be doing things faster or at the same speed as other companies in the same field. Yes they have made some major mistakes in the past, but which company hasn't? And their research division is arguably one of the best in the world, yes not everything they do makes it into a release product but a good amount does.

Half agree... while the products you mention were fairly stable, user experience is really what makes or a breaks a product from a consumers eyes... people didn't hate Vista "for no reason", they hated it because it was a pain in the ass and constantly bothersome to the average user, with less than desirable backwards compatibility.

Office is a slow, clunky beast (particularly 2007), but from a feature-set standpoint it can't be beat... I think that it's so popular more because it's been the norm for so long, not because it really made any huge strides forward from over the past decade or so (97, XP, 2010 were the good releases... 2000, 2003, and 2007 were riddled with issues)

I would also agree that MS is fairly inefficient from a management & development perspective, but most huge corporations are (I'm looking at you, Intel... dropping your webcam division right when it was starting to take off was a horrible idea). Frankly, when you've got billions of dollars per year to spend, you spend it, even if half of it is wasted.

vaximily said,

Half agree... while the products you mention were fairly stable, user experience is really what makes or a breaks a product from a consumers eyes... people didn't hate Vista "for no reason", they hated it because it was a pain in the ass and constantly bothersome to the average user, with less than desirable backwards compatibility.

And a lot of that was down to simple drivers and the whole intel gpu fiasco. There were other problems but those were soon fixed with updates, and finally by sp1.

Office is a slow, clunky beast (particularly 2007), but from a feature-set standpoint it can't be beat... I think that it's so popular more because it's been the norm for so long, not because it really made any huge strides forward from over the past decade or so (97, XP, 2010 were the good releases... 2000, 2003, and 2007 were riddled with issues)

I would say 2007 was one of the best releases of Office. 2010 is very good and certainly a refinement, but it doesn't really have anything that would make you want to upgrade. Though I assume this can be said about previous Office releases. I do disagree with you saying that 2007 was slower than 2010, because for me its the complete opposite. But yes hardware will play a role in this so.

I would also agree that MS is fairly inefficient from a management & development perspective, but most huge corporations are (I'm looking at you, Intel... dropping your webcam division right when it was starting to take off was a horrible idea). Frankly, when you've got billions of dollars per year to spend, you spend it, even if half of it is wasted.

The problem comes down to shareholders. Shareholders demand more profits, less spending. So just because a company makes billions doesn't always mean it can simply just throw cash at whatever they please without consequences. But for the most part MS has been able to keep up with trends and shift their company's resources behind them. They aren't a trend setting company like Apple however, even though they do come up with innovative products well before other companies do.

shakey said,

For the size of the screen, the increase of resolution will be barely noticeable to the human eye, if it even can notice it.

Is that with your eyes open or closed? I'm pretty sure everyone* will be able to "notice" the difference between 163 PPI and 326 PPI some 12-18" from ones face. It's likely to be significantly more noticeable than the difference between 720p and 1080p on a 50" screen at 10'. Yet everyone* will scoff at a 720p HDTV as crap when talking specs.

Microsoft's problem is that they have a lot of really great products that no one ever seems to remember. I also think that there are some ****-poor OEMs selling crap hardware with Windows on it. You have average joe uneducated consumer buy something because they think they are getting the best deal, see Windows and Microsoft all over the box and on the screen, have problems and blame Windows and Microsoft. Same with some Windows Mobile phone OEMs (although IMHO, the current version of WinMo leave a LOT to be desired).

Office 2007 is crap, but I like 2003 and am warming up to 2010. 2000 was decent. Microsoft just has a fragmented brand name problem that follows them around. You love them for some things and hate them for other things. Certainly the two RRoD I have gotten from XBox 360 has left a bad taste in my mouth. But I absolutely loved my 80GB 2nd gen Zune when I was using it. Microsoft isolates its brand names (Office, Windows, Zune, XBox) because they don't want the failure in one category bleeding over to the other category. But that also works against them when it comes to the success of one product of a particular Microsoft brand.

crazyfish said,
$299.00 for a 32 GB iPhone 4, the phone with the highest pixels per inch ever, is outside your price range?

There has been a ton of articles how there are already phones with higher resolutions than the Iphone 4 and how Steve Job's Comments were borderline false advertising

I've had problems with full screen HTML5 stuff, so I am still okay using Flash. Or we could use Silverlight. YouTube HTML5 just doesn't work quite right for me so I welcome WP7 and Flash!

This is the problem with the "HTML 5 is the only way forward" Flash works, almost everything has it, and it delivers a suite of design tools that allow anyone to make a fluid and moving interface.

Is it overused? sure.

Is it a battery hog? Currently, but Adobe seems genuine in it's attempts recently to fix that... even it it took competition and pressure to do so.

Should the fundamental extendability of the web that has existed from it's modern foundation be thrown away because theoretically you could write every app in a less-easy, more "broken" (anyone that says Javascript isn't inherently broken... on a syntax level is lying.) way that will sometime in the possible future be viewable in probably the same way on all the browsers...unless you count the various browser based prefixes and specialized code... if you can make the animations look good after hours of hard-editing numbers while you wait for SOMEONE, ANYONE to produce a good animation studio.... God no.

Allow PLUGIN support, and GET THE HELL OUT OF MY WAY platforms.

Your problem is you believe Adobe will fix it. It's be years with nothing to show, even their recent attempts butcher the performance of pages with Flash on them. It's one thing to want Flash, but in its current state it would **** off more people than it would please. Given the years of flaws found in their Creative Suite I have no faith Adobe can fix problems without creating new ones. They should have never bought Macromedia.

Xero said,
Your problem is you believe Adobe will fix it. It's be years with nothing to show, even their recent attempts butcher the performance of pages with Flash on them. It's one thing to want Flash, but in its current state it would **** off more people than it would please. Given the years of flaws found in their Creative Suite I have no faith Adobe can fix problems without creating new ones. They should have never bought Macromedia.

Time will tell if they fix it or not. It was never a real issue on PCs...infact, I NEVER had an issue with flash on PCs. Always worked great for me. Now that smart phones are becoming more and more popular, making Flash work better is a priority. If Adobe doesnt fix it, then its their own damn fault and people will be quick to move away from that platform.

techbeck said,

Time will tell if they fix it or not. It was never a real issue on PCs...infact, I NEVER had an issue with flash on PCs. Always worked great for me. Now that smart phones are becoming more and more popular, making Flash work better is a priority. If Adobe doesnt fix it, then its their own damn fault and people will be quick to move away from that platform.

Adobe has been saying that they can get flash working just fine on a phone since the original iPhone launched, 3 years ago! I don't think they're actually shipping the full version of flash on any shipping phones yet are they? It's been "just another few months now" for years.

People have been bashing Apple for locking out flash for years now, but until recently flash wasn't even available for Android and only now as a beta product. Apple has said that they would reconsider if Adobe could show them a smartphone implementation of flash that worked well.

Stetson said,

Adobe has been saying that they can get flash working just fine on a phone since the original iPhone launched, 3 years ago! I don't think they're actually shipping the full version of flash on any shipping phones yet are they? It's been "just another few months now" for years.

People have been bashing Apple for locking out flash for years now, but until recently flash wasn't even available for Android and only now as a beta product. Apple has said that they would reconsider if Adobe could show them a smartphone implementation of flash that worked well.

know what motivates companies? boatloads of cash. Your argument is that Apple dosnt allow Adobe into the boatload of cash because...adobe didn't enter markets that...don't have money in them. Face it, Flash on Macs sucks because there's no money in putting more then functional time into it. There's no money in the linux port either. There IS money in a iPhone version... but there wasn't any indication until recently there was much money in a android version (that, and Andriod is a bitch to develop for.)

Play FlashCompact apps on windows mobile 5 and realize that the basic fundamentals that surpass JS/CSS/HTML5 feature set are still accessible in a phone from the late 90s then continue to defend Apple's narrow minded view that a possible future vision they have for the internet should allow them to CLOSE the internet down from third party development.

AgentGray said,
There IS money in a iPhone version... but there wasn't any indication until recently there was much money in a android version (that, and Andriod is a bitch to develop for.)

Droid is so much nicer then iPhone to program for tbh, have you seen the mess that is ObjC which is the iPhone platform?

^ If Adobe wants on the iPhone then they should treat the mac as an equal to the pc. Shunning their mac platform isn't going to encourage them to allow it on their mobile platform. Especially since its based off the mac. If they can't get it good on a desktop, I seriously doubt they can on the iPhone.

ZeroHour said,

Droid is so much nicer then iPhone to program for tbh, have you seen the mess that is ObjC which is the iPhone platform?

Depends, object-c is a small hurtle if you're coding in native C, but the cocoa collection is intuitive, while andriod's a bit more muddled and maze-like to find what you need. experience in both has lead me to prefer writing straight-c on the iphone then anything on android.

then again, my opinion only, and even that I haven't written anything substantial on either

AgentGray said,

Depends, object-c is a small hurtle if you're coding in native C, but the cocoa collection is intuitive, while andriod's a bit more muddled and maze-like to find what you need. experience in both has lead me to prefer writing straight-c on the iphone then anything on android.

then again, my opinion only, and even that I haven't written anything substantial on either

My experience has been quite the opposite. I found the android JAVA based SDK to be quite intuitive. The iPhone SDK was nice, but I felt as if many of the basic UI elements were only half implemented, leaving me to code a great deal more. While I enjoy having more control over objects, time is money in my business.