Adobe blasts uncooperative Apple

HTML 5 is flawed because of the codec situation. You either have the open source codec that would bring the net to a crawl because of the awful compression or H264 which is proprietry and costs companies millions to integrate into their browsers which would likely destroy Firefox. Until that is sorted, Flash wins and Apple removing the choice from customers is not open or fair. However that's the way Apple works and if you don't like it, you don't buy it. There are more open platforms for those people

By TimoGunt on 5 Feb 2010

Flash is necessary

Whether you think it's a flawed technology or not, Flash has got the net where it is today.

The internet simply wouldn' be the same without it. YouTube, Hulu, BBC iPlayer etc... and those are just the video sites.

Before Flash video came along, having video online was a nightmare with so many different formats and different programs to download and install just to play them.

This is why I laugh when Apple claim the iPad is going to be the best browsing experience. If it hasn't got Flash, it simply can't be.

Apple arrogance again. Or should that be Steve Jobs arrogance again?

By Grunthos on 5 Feb 2010

Games

could it be simply that if iphone / ipad owners could play flash games online they wouldn't be interested in paying for ported apple versions via appstore?

By thirdbrother3 on 5 Feb 2010

Unlike Flash, H.264 is not proprietary; it’s an open standard used by Apple, Google and Adobe. Nor does it necessarily cost “millions” — it’s licensed at no charge for non-commercial use on the web.

Flash-free versions of YouTube and iPlayer are both available on the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad as are many other sites that use Flash on the desktop, but other technologies on mobile devices.

It’s not just Apple that has eschewed Flash. Mozilla has turned off plugins in mobile Firefox for Nokie phones: “The Adobe Flash plugin used on many sites degraded the performance of the browser to the point where it didn’t meet our standards.” [http://www.macuser.co.uk/news/275524]

By SAughton on 5 Feb 2010

Sorry I shouldn't have said proprietary. However it is heavily patented. Google and Apple pay millions for the chance to have the decoder in their browser which Mozilla cannot afford to have.

It should be a matter of choice as to whether you want Flash on a device. However I've heard that Flash for Apple is appalling compared to the Windows versions.

By TimoGunt on 5 Feb 2010

Jobs needs another slapdown

Remember when Jobs last got sent out of the Apple boardroom simply because of his hubris? Genius comes at a price. I love Adobe and Apple. They are the nearest things that a corporation can be to parents and I don't like them fighting.
The SR71 blackbird and the Flash player (which only takes up 4.25MB and it does all that it does!!?) are IMHO two of the most amazing developments of the last 100 years. Be conciliatory over this one Steve.

By Alperian on 5 Feb 2010

Flash

With time it will be seen as having dwelt in a pan.

ClickToFlash
http://rentzsch.github.com/clicktoflash/

By Glovepuppet on 5 Feb 2010

Why doesn't apple give the chance?

Well I think that decision should be of users. I like to have the change to use flash in my iPhone. If it doesn't work well I could uninstall. But at the end it's my decision. Not apple decision.

By resuarez on 5 Feb 2010

Why doesn't apple give the chance?

Well I think that decision should be of users. I like to have the change to use flash in my iPhone. If it doesn't work well I could uninstall. But at the end it's my decision. Not apple decision.

By resuarez on 5 Feb 2010

But Adobe IS lazy..!

Lynch may have talked about "no buggy code" being shipped, but the comments underneath the piece you quote are also important:

"Lynch himself admits that 'given identical hardware, Flash Player on Windows has historically been faster than the Mac, and it is for the most part the same code running in Flash for each operating system.' You know what? That's exactly the problem right there. That's where the accusations of laziness are coming from. If Flash is optimized for Windows but doesn't run well on Unix-based platforms using the same hardware, it's Adobe's job to modify its code to improve performance. It's not Apple's job, it's not Linus Torvalds's job, it's Adobe's job. Even Microsoft knows better than to expect Office for Windows to run in Mac OS X with the same code; that's why Office for Mac exists."
(From TUAW)

By SwissMac on 5 Feb 2010

But, But...Adobe is Lazy @SwissMac

I had to use PS CS4 Extended to cut out some lemurs from the background today. Very labour intensive and just as difficult as with PS version 3. Not very good for an application that costs £976.42 standalone. There are 3rd party plugins that help with this. Wake up Adobe.

By Alperian on 5 Feb 2010

Apart from video, Flash is the work of the devil.
Flash-based adverts that take up 100% of CPU, indefinitely, forced me to use Adblock - a hassle for me, and counter-productive for website and advertiser.
Then you have sites that use it extensively, so are virtually unusable - not just 'designer' sites, even the lottery has something that uses 100%.
I read somewhere that Flash was the number one cause of Firefox crashes.
It needs constant updating to avoids security bugs.
Flash cookies.

Not much there to be proud of..... unless you are beelzebub.

By davidsoap on 6 Feb 2010