Adobe to sue Apple over flash...

[rudeguy]

http://www.itworld.com/legal/104320/adobe-vs-apple-going-get-uglier?source=smlynch


this could get ugly

 

[Pliablemoose]

lol, unless there's a contract, good luck

 

[Ancalagon44]

Misleading thread title. They havent announced anything, its just speculation. Wake me when Adobe actually sues them.

 

[rudeguy]

So, unless things change drastically between Apple and Adobe in the next few weeks, from what I'm hearing you can expect to see Adobe taking Apple to court over the issue. It's not going to be pretty.

Next couple weeks doesn't sound too far off.

 

[Narmer]

These two used to be so close. Adobe was what kept Apple relevant in those dark days. I wonder if Adobe will start delaying their professional software for Macs.

 

[Deeko]

I don't understand under what grounds they'd be sueing? Unless they had prior agreement with Apple, which seems unlikely.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Adobe seems to be run by fools

 

[TheWart]

lol, unless there's a contract, good luck

Yea, seriously. On what other grounds would they even have a case? Monopoly? I really am having a hard time picturing the DOJ backing that, especially given Apple's healthy - but not dominant - share of the smartphone space and tiny share of the PC market.

I guess it could be bluster by Adobe to try and get concessions, but I can't imagine Apple's lawyers falling for that.

 

[tatteredpotato]

Yea, seriously. On what other grounds would they even have a case? Monopoly? I really am having a hard time picturing the DOJ backing that, especially given Apple's healthy - but not dominant - share of the smartphone space and tiny share of the PC market.

I guess it could be bluster by Adobe to try and get concessions, but I can't imagine Apple's lawyers falling for that.

I don't Adobe has a case (IANAL), but I can see why they are upset; Apple has been unwilling to incorporate their product into the iPod and iPhone, which is totally within Apple's rights (a little controlling, but whatever). So Adobe accepts this fate and sinks development time and money into creating an application that will compile down to iPhone code, Apple goes and blocks those apps from the App Store.

Perhaps not illegal, but it's the reason I refuse to buy an iPhone and Android will be my next platform of choice.

 

[EightySix Four]

I don't Adobe has a case (IANAL), but I can see why they are upset; Apple has been unwilling to incorporate their product into the iPod and iPhone, which is totally within Apple's rights (a little controlling, but whatever). So Adobe accepts this fate and sinks development time and money into creating an application that will compile down to iPhone code, Apple goes and blocks those apps from the App Store.

Perhaps not illegal, but it's the reason I refuse to buy an iPhone and Android will be my next platform of choice.

Adobe writes shit Mac software for a decade (flash for OS X is a joke and chokes even high end machines) -> Apple finally has a new platform which they have control over -> Adobe wants a piece of the action -> Apple blocks them at every turn.

Sounds like pay back is a bitch... While it's definitely not "right," there is nothing Adobe can really do about it IMO. I wonder if Adobe has some patents they may go after Apple with or something because otherwise a lawsuit seems pointless.

 

[MJinZ]

These two used to be so close. Adobe was what kept Apple relevant in those dark days. I wonder if Adobe will start delaying their professional software for Macs.

Adobe should just stop all Apple development of Photoshop, Lightroom etc and see how Apple likes it.

 

[Bateluer]

So, with Apple already burning cash in frivolous lawsuits with Nokia and HTC, and possibly Google and Adobe soon, when are their shareholders going to step in?

 

[QueBert]

Adobe writes shit Mac software for a decade (flash for OS X is a joke and chokes even high end machines) -> Apple finally has a new platform which they have control over -> Adobe wants a piece of the action -> Apple blocks them at every turn.

Sounds like pay back is a bitch... While it's definitely not "right," there is nothing Adobe can really do about it IMO. I wonder if Adobe has some patents they may go after Apple with or something because otherwise a lawsuit seems pointless.

I'm personally glad Apple's doing this, I saw a demo from Adobe of a flash game that was cross compiled running on an iPhone 3GS, it looked unplayable, couldn't have been getting any more than 10fps, if that. Wasn't a particularly involved looking game either. I suspect Adobe has optimized the CS5 cross code thing since then, but I still don't see it performing well at all. On my Hackintosh I cannot watch Youtube videos in 720p, they move at about 7FPS. On my Windows 7 (same machine) I can watch 1080p on Youtube without a hitch. It's NOT Apples fault Flash runs like shit on OSX, if Apple allowed CS5 apps in the app store, they would almost all run like snail shit, I guarantee it. People are going to be shocked when Flash comes to other smart phones and find out their $500 S.P. chokes on Farmville. Flash is not in any way shape or form ready for the mobile market. Kudos to Apple for not giving in to Adobe.

Adobe should just stop all Apple development of Photoshop, Lightroom etc and see how Apple likes it.

That would end up hurting Adobe more than Apple, Aperture is already better than Lightroom by a good margin, FCP is way better than Premiere, DVD Studio is better than Encore. And they have Motion, which while not super can be a decent replacement for After Effects. If Adobe left all Apple would have do to is come up with a Photoshop like program and they would be fine.

 

[996GT2]

Adobe should just stop all Apple development of Photoshop, Lightroom etc and see how Apple likes it.

That would probably hurt Adobe just as much as Apple since a considerable number of photographers, graphic designers, etc use Adobe products on Macs and not PCs. Stop developing PS, LR, etc, and all those customers won't be paying Adobe to upgrade to the newest versions.

 

[EightySix Four]

So, with Apple already burning cash in frivolous lawsuits with Nokia and HTC, and possibly Google and Adobe soon, when are their shareholders going to step in?

Considering the stock is at a high right now, never.

 

[TheWart]

Adobe should just stop all Apple development of Photoshop, Lightroom etc and see how Apple likes it.

Then Apple could just use its $45 billion in cash to buy adobe with plenty to spare, lol.

So, with Apple already burning cash in frivolous lawsuits with Nokia and HTC, and possibly Google and Adobe soon, when are their shareholders going to step in?

As ridiculous as the patent system is, companies have to aggressively defend what they think is theirs...otherwise they won't have any future claim to damages. Besides, their lawyer fees are a drop in the bucket compared to what will probably be $11-12 billion in revs for this quarter alone.

 

[theeedude]

Not sure if an Adobe lawsuit is going to go anywhere, but simply having a claim that Apple is engaging in anti-competitive behavior on the table could attract attention of regulators from EU and FTC who could then pick up the ball and start their own investigations.

 

[tatteredpotato]

I'm personally glad Apple's doing this, I saw a demo from Adobe of a flash game that was cross compiled running on an iPhone 3GS, it looked unplayable...

I guess it all comes down to how you look at the problem. The way I see it, flash provides a means to provide rich internet applications across platforms. Since it provides a common framework across platforms, it is much easier for publishers to develop for as wide of an audience as possible.

One argument is that these applications might not provide the best experience for consumers, but that's none of the business of Apple. I bet you I could write an incredibly shitty application in Objective C and get Apple to approve it. What difference does it make what language it's written in.

What you have here, is a power play on Apples part. With the iPad it's obvious Apple desires to be the source for as much digitial content as possible. Look at the markets they have their hands in: music, video, tv, books, newspapers, magazines, etc. Apple doesn't want content providers to rely on someone else's tech to provide these services... they want it to come from them via their marketplaces.

The way I see it, with HTML5 on the rise, Flash and Silverlight are already dying, and Apple knows it. Apple just wants to benefit as much from it as possible, consumer be damned.

 

[TheWart]

What you have here, is a power play on Apples part. With the iPad it's obvious Apple desires to be the source for as much digitial content as possible. Look at the markets they have their hands in: music, video, tv, books, newspapers, magazines, etc. Apple doesn't want content providers to rely on someone else's tech to provide these services... they want it to come from them via their marketplaces.

The way I see it, with HTML5 on the rise, Flash and Silverlight are already dying, and Apple knows it. Apple just wants to benefit as much from it as possible, consumer be damned.

Umm, except that have no problem with ABC or Youtube or others providing video, Amazon providing books, and magazines offering their own apps....how much does Apple make off of these? Try zero....or even negative (since they provide the itunes backend and all these apps are free).

This flash issue is a combination of legitimate gripes against a platform that you even admit is on the way out, along with a perhaps less noble personal vendetta that Jobs apparently has with Adobe....not some master plan to control all content on the web.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Im an Apple stockholder, and I don't see a damn thing that Adobe can do except maybe do what its supposed to so and write some tight code.

There is no contract, there is no case. Its Apples game and they sent Adobe along their merry way...

As far as claiming anti competitive BS, all Apple needs to do is point at Android based phones which will take the largest market share in the very near future, Adobe can code all the shit it wants for Android.

 

[pm]

So the lawsuit isn't about Flash, guys. It's about Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone compiler - which is a tool which basically lets you take a Flash application and create an iPhone app using it with a minimal amount of work. Apple recently updated their SDK specifically to disallow use of this compiler for iPhone apps.

An article about the OP's blog link:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...will_sue_apple_over_cs4_iphone_app_tools.html

And more specifically - but without the lawsuit threat:
"Apple Gives Adobe The Finger With Its New iPhone SDK Agreement"
http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/08/adobe-flash-apple-sdk/

The legal question isn't whether Apple shouldn't allow Flash on their iPhones, but whether developers can violate the Terms of Service agreement for being by merely using a rival's compiler.

 

[Pliablemoose]

So the lawsuit isn't about Flash. It's about Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone compiler - which is a tool which basically lets you take a Flash application and create an iPhone app using it with a minimal amount of work. Apple recently updated their SDK specifically to disallow use of this compiler for iPhone apps.

An article about the OP's blog link:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...will_sue_apple_over_cs4_iphone_app_tools.html

And more specifically - but without the lawsuit threat:
"Apple Gives Adobe The Finger With Its New iPhone SDK Agreement"
http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/08/adobe-flash-apple-sdk/

This all happened before

Apple ran into similar problems back in the early 90s, when all the application developers that had started their businesses on the Macintosh began seeking lowest common denominator ways to sell their apps to both Mac users and Windows PC users. This resulted in developers largely ignoring all the new features Apple developed for the Mac OS, including QuickDraw GX and PowerTalk.

Rather than developing apps for the Mac, developers such as Microsoft and Adobe began creating their own internal platforms that then tacked a Mac-native front end onto their new general purpose code. The result was that Apple suddenly became powerless to push its third party Mac developers to support the platform's unique features, resulting in increasingly less differentiation between the Mac and Windows PCs.

Ten years later, Apple similarly had a difficult time trying to convince its third party developers to natively support its new Mac OS X operating system. Adobe refused to bring many of its Mac apps to the new Carbon environment Apple created expressly to facilitate easy porting to Mac OS X; among the list of apps that never made the transition were FrameMaker and Premiere. Adobe didn't even bring Photoshop to Mac OS X as a native app until 2005.

Similarly, while Adobe joined Apple on stage in announcing the migration of the Mac to Intel in 2005, Adobe didn't release a Universal Binary version of its core apps until early 2007. The company never updated its existing Creative Suite 2 apps, nor the Studio 8 suite it had acquired from Macromedia.

In the future, Apple doesn't want to be forced to wait a few years for Adobe to get up to speed on its development plans. For the iPhone OS, Apple has established a rapid development cycle that demands that its app developers stay current with the latest firmware. They can't do that if they're tied to a third party development platform like Flash Professional, which is likely to lag Apple's own Xcode tools by months or even a year or more.

That being the case, it's hard to fathom how Adobe could invent a legal claim to force Apple to do anything to support its efforts to produce iPhone apps using alternative development tools.

Apple's chief executive Steve Jobs reportedly explained the situation to a user by writing, "we've been there before, and intermediate layers between the platform and the developer ultimately produces sub-standard apps and hinders the progress of the platform."

Thats the issue right there, Apple is already getting crap about dumping the 1st gen & second gen iPhones because the hardware isnt capable of taking on the new OS and still performing worth a damn.

By allowing some apps that don't play well with the impending hardware & software Apple must implement to remain competitive, it would further fragment the platform, and that's already happening because the sector is evolving so quickly.

I hardly think the courts will side with Adobe if they choose to attempt a lawsuit.

Its a stupid game and Adobe needs to take its marbles and go home. As I said, the Android marketplace is perfect for them, let them be Google's problem when they deploy an update to Android and a crap load of ported apps don't work for consumers

 

[TheWart]

So the lawsuit isn't about Flash, guys. It's about Adobe's Flash-to-iPhone compiler - which is a tool which basically lets you take a Flash application and create an iPhone app using it with a minimal amount of work. Apple recently updated their SDK specifically to disallow use of this compiler for iPhone apps.

An article about the OP's blog link:
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...will_sue_apple_over_cs4_iphone_app_tools.html

And more specifically - but without the lawsuit threat:
"Apple Gives Adobe The Finger With Its New iPhone SDK Agreement"
http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/08/adobe-flash-apple-sdk/

The legal question isn't whether Apple shouldn't allow Flash on their iPhones, but whether developers can violate the Terms of Service agreement for being by merely using a rival's compiler.

Understood, but how can one sue over onerous demands of an SDK? Couldn't Apple declare that you must code with one hand while standing on your head? I mean it is not as if you have to code for their iProducts...

 

[pm]

Its a stupid game and Adobe needs to take its marbles and go home. As I said, the Android marketplace is perfect for them, let them be Google's problem when they deploy an update to Android and a crap load of ported apps don't work for consumers

I don't know that I agree. To me it's a bit like saying "it's a violation of the terms of service of our SDK to do any iPhone development on a Windows machine. you must use MacOS". except that they have at least some explanation for why they don't want to allow 3rd party development platforms.

It seems to me that it's not Apple's problem but the developers if the apps don't work. Apple doesn't handle support for bad apps - the developers do. And the rating system on iTunes for apps is brutal even for perfect apps. Apps that crash a lot are penalized almost more than they should. To me if a developer chooses to use a 3rd party development platform, or Xtools, or even if they want to hand-code the entire app in machine code by hand... that's their choice. They take the risk of coding up a flaky app - Apple's job as an OS vendor is to make sure that flaky apps don't take down the entire OS. I don't see how Apple can call it a violation of the terms of service regardless of the risk.

What if Microsoft changed the terms of service for their Windows SDK to only allow Microsoft compilers to be valid?

 

[theeedude]

Exactly how would Apple know if an app was compiled from Flash or from Objective C if the code is in native iPhone code? Is the next SDK going to require that developers allow Apple to do code reviews?