Steve Jobs posts his thoughts on Flash

[TheWart]

There's not cus cheaper ones can do more than one thing at a time so it's not comparable so there isn't any competition cus nobody in their right mind would gimp devices like Apple does.

lol

Ok dude, I think it is really pointless to try and reason with you on this issue. The tortuous 'logic' you employ is so ridiculous its irrefutable.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I think Steve Jobs can just say something a couple times, put a few hundred million dollars into advertising that says it over and over with nice white plastic around it, and shit will sell.

Who wants to buy a $2,000 motherboard? How about if it comes with a $50 LCD?

Here's the thing, did you notice the Courier and the Slate were killed today?

Corporations with virtually unlimited resources were unable to make something that could compete with the iPad with their current mindset and listening to the rants about how much the iPad was lacking.

Jobs had a singular vision and made something work and work fairly well, and likely ushered in a fundamental change in personal computing. Again.

But then again, I am constantly amazed at how people come with preconceived notions and stare at a little square of a painting and fail to see the whole picture.

Guess what's going to happen next? It'll take a concerted effort by nearly the entire industry to pull together likely 20 Android and or Chrome tablets from different manufacturers to dethrone the iPad in terms of numbers sold...

 

[zerocool84]

lol

Ok dude, I think it is really pointless to try and reason with you on this issue. The tortuous 'logic' you employ is so ridiculous its irrefutable.

I'm just using the same logic all you Apple guys use.

 

[TheWart]

I'm just using the same logic all you Apple guys use.

Well, I know I said I wasn't going to try and convince you, but I couldn't resist making one more comment.

First step you need to take in order to make a real argument is to stop lumping anyone who doesn't have a rabid hate of apple into "all you Apple guys."

Your surprisingly personal anger and frustration towards Apple - and the people who buy their products - clouds your ability to make rational judgments.

 

[TheStu]

I'm just using the same logic all you Apple guys use.

TheWart's argument was that since Apple obviously charges extra for the logo and the unicorn tears and the shiny plastic shell (which they are moving away from), then a competing tablet surely must cost less than $499. Only Apple could get away with charging that kind of money.

Your retort was nonsensical at best. Namely (if I understood correctly), that one cannot appropriately compare anything to the iPad, because Apple has artificially limited the iPad's abilities and anything that would ordinarily be compared to the iPad would not have the same limitations.

You are not entirely incorrect. However, I think that you are expecting more out of the iPad than what it is, and if the iPad is successful, then what I think you will see is a slew of Android (and now HP WebOS) devices that have roughly 10" screens, and smartphone guts. They will not be the Courier or the Slate, they will be iPad clones. Yes, running a different OS, but at the end of the day, that is probably what they will be aping.

And you and others are right. People will buy the iPad, with its limitations, over the competition simply because it has an Apple logo on it.

Is that fair? In a perfect world, no.
In the world we live in? Sure. A company has found a way to better market its device, the competition has to find a way to deal with that, or get out of the market.

Ask Creative, Sandisk and Archos how they are doing with their superior to the iPod MP3 players. Its ok, I'll wait.

I do not take delight in Apple 'winning' or Microsoft/Google/whatever 'losing'. I like good design, I like when that 'wins' and unfortunately for others, right now, most of the good design is coming from Apple.

 

[TheWart]

@TheStu

Well said - you hit the nail on the head and in a much more thought out manner than I had the patience to type up lol.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Cough...

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/28/ipad-android-iphone-numbers/

The iPad went on sale 25 days ago. It’s not yet on sale anywhere else in the world besides the U.S. The 3G version, which some are waiting for, still isn’t available. And yet, according to our logs, the iPad already accounts for more traffic to TechCrunch than Android does. I love the iPad, but even I was surprised when I saw this. The stats are for the last 30 days — and again, the iPad hasn’t even been out that entire time. Here’s a percentage breakdown of which OS visitors to TechCrunch have been using in the past 30 days:

1. Windows – 59.68%
2. Mac – 27.78%
3. iPhone – 5%
4. Linux – 3.72%
5. iPad – 1.18%
6. Android – 0.99%
7. iPod – 0.67%
8. (not set) – 0.54%
9. BlackBerry – 0.28%
10. SymbianOS – 0.07%

 

[JACKDRUID]

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

I'd say he's right on performance and battery life. Everything else is opinion.

he is stupidly wrong on EVERYTHING, he is got no point, he is dumb ars.

1. battery life is a non issue unless you plan to watch 10 hrs of flash video, which never happens and is unrealistic. flash DOES NOT DRAIN BATTERY unless it is in use.
2. wtFFFFuck is mouse over crap? ... no people DO NOT need to rewrite their apps. Adobe only has to make a patch on their plug in to fix it.
3. flash is slow, but it is what we have now. html5 isn't even finalized yet. before html5 become popular, WE NEED FLASH.
4. most phones don't have flash, so its OK iphone doesn't have it. HOWEVER, ipad is a NETBOOK REPLACEMENT!! all netbook support flash, ipad doesn't = fail.
5. steve is retarded. I don't give a crap about your open-source pants crap, your os isn't cross-platform thats ironic. Flash is open-platform, so people want it, developers like it, and there is no replacement yet (HTML5 is not FU*king finalized yet)!!

 

[pm]

Ok, Jackdruid, as moderator I formally request that you relax.

Steve Jobs is many things but he is most definitely not retarded.

You have a point with your post - which is why I came ever so close to labelling it trolling, but I stopped because you make some reasonable points... even if the method you chose to make them could have been worded better.

 

[zerocool84]

Well, I know I said I wasn't going to try and convince you, but I couldn't resist making one more comment.

First step you need to take in order to make a real argument is to stop lumping anyone who doesn't have a rabid hate of apple into "all you Apple guys."

Your surprisingly personal anger and frustration towards Apple - and the people who buy their products - clouds your ability to make rational judgments.

Anger??? You must be a sensitive guy if that's anger to you. You can say I have rabid hate that's fine but you clearly have rabid love for Apple.

Apple always gimps devices of basic features and releases and new version later that you have to pay for later. If you want multi-tasking you have to at least have 3GS which everyone knows is BS cus any phone has the power to multi-task. They gimped the iPad as they have always gimped all their devices. A device that people were touting as a notebook replacement. Can't print, can't multi-task, can't put any files on it whatsoever without syncing, can't watch presentations you made or movies you bought through itunes on a tv even after you buy a $30 add-on, zero mass storage support, and doesn't have access to tons of web content. I thought we were in the 21st century, not stuck in the 90's. Apple has always been a company that tells people what they can do to their device and what they can put on it. If you'd rather have flash over substance that's fine but I prefer to be able to do basic functions with the products I purchase. I don't care if it's WebOS, Android, or whoever makes the product but no other company gimps their products like Apple does, tells you what apps are appropriate for you to have access to, gives bs reasons why a certain software api can't be on their product, and charges much more for less.

 

[JACKDRUID]

Ok, Jackdruid, as moderator I formally request that you relax.

Steve Jobs is many things but he is most definitely not retarded.

You have a point with your post - which is why I came ever so close to labelling it trolling, but I stopped because you make some reasonable points... even if the method you chose to make them could have been worded better.

sorry about the rant previously.

i guess the pt i'm trying to make is...

its okay for iphone not to have flash (due to small screen etc) and not offer a complete browse experience.

however, ITS NOT OKAY FOR IPAD to not offer a complete browser experience...being a netbook replacement and all...

 

[Narmer]

Here's the thing, did you notice the Courier and the Slate were killed today?

Corporations with virtually unlimited resources were unable to make something that could compete with the iPad with their current mindset and listening to the rants about how much the iPad was lacking.

Jobs had a singular vision and made something work and work fairly well, and likely ushered in a fundamental change in personal computing. Again.

But then again, I am constantly amazed at how people come with preconceived notions and stare at a little square of a painting and fail to see the whole picture.

Guess what's going to happen next? It'll take a concerted effort by nearly the entire industry to pull together likely 20 Android and or Chrome tablets from different manufacturers to dethrone the iPad in terms of numbers sold...

I thought the iPad was competing against netbooks? If that's the case then Apple is late to the game and people will choose the cheaper product over the singular product.

 

[dwell]

1. battery life is a non issue unless you plan to watch 10 hrs of flash video, which never happens and is unrealistic. flash DOES NOT DRAIN BATTERY unless it is in use.

Flash: It doesn't suck if you don't use it.

 

[dguy6789]

I wonder, if iPhone was getting Flash exclusively and Android was not getting it, would Apple fans still be like "man Flash sucks, I wish we didn't have it just like Android".

 

[dwell]

I wonder, if iPhone was getting Flash exclusively and Android was not getting it, would Apple fans still be like "man Flash sucks, I wish we didn't have it just like Android".

It's really no different than the Android cultists proclaiming Flash as a major advantage over Apple. Truth be told, most of them will probably never use it. Flash is more of a political tool than a useful technology.

 

[dguy6789]

I'm pretty sure most of them who say they want it have given examples of what they will use it for(videos, games, onion radio). The fact is, Flash is something that is widely used all over the Internet and having it as an option can in no way be a bad thing. Nobody is forcing anyone to use it.

That said, I don't like Flash itself(and a lot of Adobe stuff) for a couple reasons, but Flash is a necessary evil because of how widespread it is.

 

[ViRGE]

I wonder, if iPhone was getting Flash exclusively and Android was not getting it, would Apple fans still be like "man Flash sucks, I wish we didn't have it just like Android".

As a long-time Apple user, such a day would be horrifying for me.

I've put up with Flash through all of its incarnations on the Mac. I've put up with the crashing, the lousy performance, the crashing, the bugs, the crashing... well you get the idea. Adobe has not shown themselves to be capable of writing a proper Flash runtime for an Apple OS (or really, any non-Windows OS) thus far. So the mere concept of having to put up with Flash on my iPhone scares the heck out of me. As it stands I consider not having Flash on the iPhone to be a feature because it means I don't have to put up with any Flash on websites.

With that said I can't deny Adobe has done some cool things with Flash. They more or less delivered streaming video singlehandedly where everyone else (QuickTime, RealPlayer, etc) failed in some manner. They made H.264+AAC the de-facto codec for Internet video. But the truth is that you don't need Flash for that. H.264+AAC can be played completely separate from Flash - when people say they want Flash they don't mean they want Flash the bloated vector graphics and ActionScript runtime, they mean they want the ability to play H.264+AAC. You can do this today without Flash, largely through HTML5's video specification.

Either way, I don't miss Flash on the iPhone, and I don't believe I ever will.

 

[JJChicken]

Well, in other words, when it supports his point, open source is good, when it doesn't, it's irrelevant.

This, I can't believe how many idiots here sipping the apple-flavoured kool aid.

 

[Wonderful Pork]

This, I can't believe how many idiots here sipping the apple-flavoured kool aid.

He did not say open SOURCE, he said open STANDARD. Like Webkit, which nearly all platforms are using to create browsers. The source of each browser isn't necessarily open, but the WebKit part is.

Adobe controls any and all features of Flash and can guide it in any direction they want.

When Apple does this (no flash allowed) its the worst thing in the world ever! if Adobe does it (<some feature not added to Flash>) it completely irrelevant. Holy double standard Batman!

His point about Adobe potentially holding back features was spot on. For example, say Apple implements a Holographic Projector in Iphone HD (way over the top example) and releases an API for it. Adobe may choose not to incorporate it in their Flash APIs until much much later, so none of the cross compiled Flash programs could take advantage. Apple doesn't want this, therefore Flash isn't available.

EDIT:

If Adobe has shown Flash would run on iPhone OS with any type of stability this would be a huge point in their favor. I'm surprised 1 flash engineer hasn't hacked at it in their spare time, just as a proof-of-concept. It would be like loading a brand new OS on production systems with no testing. Yea, lets just go ahead and do that. Nothing bad has ever happened.

 

[dwell]

well you get the idea. Adobe has not shown themselves to be capable of writing a proper Flash runtime for an Apple OS (or really, any non-Windows OS) thus far.

That brings up a point I never realized. Flash on Linux makes Flash on OS X look godly in terms of performance. Adobe can go on all day about how Flash on the Mac is slow because Apple shut them out of the "sekret APIs", but here we have Linux, an entirely open operating system, and Flash performance is absolutely abysmal. If I write a Flash game that renders 30 frames per second on Windows, it will do ~20 on OS X and, seriously single-digits under Linux.

With Android being Linux based I don't see how this fares for Flash under Android. Maybe they can hardware accelerate video playback, but everything else should have the same dogshit performance we see under Linux, on a low-power device to boot.

 

[JACKDRUID]

That brings up a point I never realized. Flash on Linux makes Flash on OS X look godly in terms of performance. Adobe can go on all day about how Flash on the Mac is slow because Apple shut them out of the "sekret APIs", but here we have Linux, an entirely open operating system, and Flash performance is absolutely abysmal. If I write a Flash game that renders 30 frames per second on Windows, it will do ~20 on OS X and, seriously single-digits under Linux.

With Android being Linux based I don't see how this fares for Flash under Android. Maybe they can hardware accelerate video playback, but everything else should have the same dogshit performance we see under Linux, on a low-power device to boot.

single digit performance is okay for flash picture viewer etc, and its 1000x better than a "blank space" iphone/ipad is current rendering.

I can't praise enough how nice ipad looked, that I almost bought one except it ran out of stock. I'm okay with it not have a camera, not able to print, not able to use usb , no user replace battery etc... however, a complete web experience is a must... i need to be able to use it to surf web, check web email etc without worrying that some sites may not be able to be rendered, some contents may not be seen, etc. it was replacing my netbook however i end up getting a netbook tablet because of the flash. happy with it, runs flash, allows usb, camera, has a real keyboard etc, and cost about the same.

 

[dwell]

single digit performance is okay for flash picture viewer etc, and its 1000x better than a "blank space" iphone/ipad is current rendering.

I can't praise enough how nice ipad looked, that I almost bought one except it ran out of stock. I'm okay with it not have a camera, not able to print, not able to use usb , no user replace battery etc... however, a complete web experience is a must... i need to be able to use it to surf web, check web email etc without worrying that some sites may not be able to be rendered, some contents may not be seen, etc. it was replacing my netbook however i end up getting a netbook tablet because of the flash. happy with it, runs flash, allows usb, camera, has a real keyboard etc, and cost about the same.

JACKDRUID

Don't buy an iPad then. Not that big of a deal.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

 

[JACKDRUID]

JACKDRUID

Don't buy an iPad then. Not that big of a deal.

Steve

Sent from my iPhone

dont worry, i'm not.

its TRULY A SHAME, that apple would disable flash and intentionally make ipad not able to offer full web surf experience... because ipad hardware is SO PERFECT for browsing due its speed, size, weight, and design.

 

[WelshBloke]

That brings up a point I never realized. Flash on Linux makes Flash on OS X look godly in terms of performance. Adobe can go on all day about how Flash on the Mac is slow because Apple shut them out of the "sekret APIs", but here we have Linux, an entirely open operating system, and Flash performance is absolutely abysmal. If I write a Flash game that renders 30 frames per second on Windows, it will do ~20 on OS X and, seriously single-digits under Linux.

With Android being Linux based I don't see how this fares for Flash under Android. Maybe they can hardware accelerate video playback, but everything else should have the same dogshit performance we see under Linux, on a low-power device to boot.

Why is this? Is OS X intrinsicly inferior to Windows OS wrt flash?

 

[dwell]

Why is this? Is OS X intrinsicly inferior to Windows OS wrt flash?

I had an Adobe engineer explain it to me. I won't try to repeat because I will get something wrong. It has to do with have Flash handles screen invalidation frame to frame on Windows vs OS X. Windows is able to invalidate small regions that only need to be redrawn where OS X requires a full redraw every frame. I don't know how accurate that is.