Apple is a b*tch (discussion HTML and FLASH)
So we have herd all across numerous blogs, and from steve jobs that flash is "on its way out" and now its all about HTML5. this is not a war between the two or a flamer thread but a discussion of opinions from he web design community.
Do you think in your own words and experiences that Flash is Dying? HTML 5 is living?
IMO, Flash is far more alive with Air, Flex and Well Flash 10.1 Apple is idiot and retarded for not allowing it on their iphone/pad.
HTML5 is not even validating and thus not considered semantic, for gods sakes W3C validator throws errors on the doc type of html.
so what do you think of HTML, Flash and the recent fight over one being on the Iphone and safari supporting HTML5 and CSS3 even when both are too new to use.
their not even semantic yet, and yet dreamweaver has implemented the new "languages"
And discuss
Do you think in your own words and experiences that Flash is Dying? HTML 5 is living?
IMO, Flash is far more alive with Air, Flex and Well Flash 10.1 Apple is idiot and retarded for not allowing it on their iphone/pad.
HTML5 is not even validating and thus not considered semantic, for gods sakes W3C validator throws errors on the doc type of html.
so what do you think of HTML, Flash and the recent fight over one being on the Iphone and safari supporting HTML5 and CSS3 even when both are too new to use.
their not even semantic yet, and yet dreamweaver has implemented the new "languages"
And discuss
Comments135
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Flash is horrible on mobile devices. Battery issues and CPU hogging is a no-no on the iDevices. It doesn't even work for touch-screens, it's for a mouse cursor. There are so many reasons that Flash is just not meant for a touch device.
Flash is also horrible in Mac OS X. Steve likes it when things work, and if that means rushing out better applications then go Steve go.
Flash is also horrible in Mac OS X. Steve likes it when things work, and if that means rushing out better applications then go Steve go.
I doubt Jobs reasoning is based upon technology of platform at all. He seems more concerned with controlling the IPad/IPhone as a locked down application platform. The rest of his reasoning is highly suspect, at best.
Flash does not work for touch devices.
Flash is optimized for a mouse cursor, not a fingertip. Flash usually relies on hover effects, you can't do that with a fingertip (as far as I know).
Sometimes Flash uses keyboard commands, which unless you're using a keyboard with the iDevice, it won't work.
Besides, it's Steve's product, he can lock it down as much as he wants, yet he has absolutely no control in what you buy.
Flash is optimized for a mouse cursor, not a fingertip. Flash usually relies on hover effects, you can't do that with a fingertip (as far as I know).
Sometimes Flash uses keyboard commands, which unless you're using a keyboard with the iDevice, it won't work.
Besides, it's Steve's product, he can lock it down as much as he wants, yet he has absolutely no control in what you buy.
Flash does not work for touch devices.
Flash is optimized for a mouse cursor, not a fingertip. Flash usually relies on hover effects, you can't do that with a fingertip (as far as I know).
Right, but that is not the reason for denial claimed by Jobs. Jobs claims are vested in stability and speed, which don't hold water in actual tests.
Besides, it's Steve's product, he can lock it down as much as he wants, yet he has absolutely no control in what you buy.
It is exactly because of such silliness that so many people will never buy any product from Apple.
Flash is optimized for a mouse cursor, not a fingertip. Flash usually relies on hover effects, you can't do that with a fingertip (as far as I know).
Right, but that is not the reason for denial claimed by Jobs. Jobs claims are vested in stability and speed, which don't hold water in actual tests.
Besides, it's Steve's product, he can lock it down as much as he wants, yet he has absolutely no control in what you buy.
It is exactly because of such silliness that so many people will never buy any product from Apple.
However, millions of people buy Apple's shit. If some malcontent does not want what Apple offers, they don't have to change the mind of the minority, when they have the majority's approval. Personally, I like Apple, I do think the iPhone is a tad locked down, but Jobs can do whatever the fuck he wants, an if that's what he wants, more power to him.
That would be fine, however, people are confusing what Jobs says to be practices that should be necessary parts of the HTML5 openness. That is also find if IPhone is the only consumer of HTML5, which it is not, and therefore it is actually not fine. Until Apple is ready to drastically open the IPhone platform they need to stay the hell away from standards. If they wish to stay so incredibly locked down then they should advocate proprietary solutions for their proprietary closed platform where nobody outside that closed platform is harmed by their purely self-serving motivations.
How can it hurt anybody for them to abide by standards? You're talking out of your ass. Like I stated before, this hints that they may be moving toward more open standards, they don't have to overhaul everything immediately. Quite frankly, this may be their litmus test to see if it will work out.
View all replies
Flash is sorta horrible, period.
It works fairly well on OS X.
It works fairly well on OS X.
It works ok in OS X, it's just much better in Windows.
He keeps talking about denial of Flash in favor of HTML5 because it is an open standard. How does locking down a platform so heavily exemplify the openness that Jobs keeps mention?
Open standards mean he doesn't have to pay to use it in his locked-down systems.
So, if all it takes is free then you would consider a patented technology to be open if its licensing makes it free to use?
You can have free open-source and free closed-source technology, can't you?
View all replies
Point take.
"Open" in the sense that Jobs s using it is the use of open standards. Flash is proprietary, to that end, not open. Jobs wants to use HTML5 over Flash. While, yes, the iPhone has one hell of a chastity belt on it, it's there for a reason. Perhaps this is the beginning of a new chapter in Apple history, this may be the first step to them becoming a much more open standards based company. You can't just say "YO DAWG WE'RE GONNA BE OPEN RIGHT NOW", it's a gradual process, you start small and go forward with it.
"Open" in the sense that Jobs s using it is the use of open standards. Flash is proprietary, to that end, not open. Jobs wants to use HTML5 over Flash. While, yes, the iPhone has one hell of a chastity belt on it, it's there for a reason. Perhaps this is the beginning of a new chapter in Apple history, this may be the first step to them becoming a much more open standards based company. You can't just say "YO DAWG WE'RE GONNA BE OPEN RIGHT NOW", it's a gradual process, you start small and go forward with it.
"Open" in the sense that Jobs s using it is the use of open standards. Flash is proprietary, to that end, not open.
Adobe has open sourced the Flash platform. Anybody can write their own Flash player right now using the open API that Adobe has published and therefore play and develop Flash media not use Adobe products. How is that not open? How is that some how less open than the IPhone platform?
While, yes, the iPhone has one hell of a chastity belt on it, it's there for a reason.
To force people to use the app store instead of allowing people to use free open source software like any other platform.
Perhaps this is the beginning of a new chapter in Apple history, this may be the first step to them becoming a much more open standards based company.
They don't get to have their cake and eat it too. They either wish to participate in the openness, which clearly they are not, or they wish to hang it around people's neck like a noose. I thinking this talk of openness is entirely a fabrication to keep the app store locked down tight only. If Jobs could control, regulate, and limit things like Flash on his platform he would be all over it instead of HTML5, and that is entirely contradictory to openness.
You can't just say "YO DAWG WE'RE GONNA BE OPEN RIGHT NOW", it's a gradual process, you start small and go forward with it.
How so? How gradual is locking down the IPhone platform to make him more money and prevent openness? Is it a process of gradually allowing new technologies that a group can entirely lock down to their platform some step towards openness or is it using open technologies as a tool to distance themselves from openness? If they were so serious about openness as they claim they would not be moving so gradually.
Adobe has open sourced the Flash platform. Anybody can write their own Flash player right now using the open API that Adobe has published and therefore play and develop Flash media not use Adobe products. How is that not open? How is that some how less open than the IPhone platform?
While, yes, the iPhone has one hell of a chastity belt on it, it's there for a reason.
To force people to use the app store instead of allowing people to use free open source software like any other platform.
Perhaps this is the beginning of a new chapter in Apple history, this may be the first step to them becoming a much more open standards based company.
They don't get to have their cake and eat it too. They either wish to participate in the openness, which clearly they are not, or they wish to hang it around people's neck like a noose. I thinking this talk of openness is entirely a fabrication to keep the app store locked down tight only. If Jobs could control, regulate, and limit things like Flash on his platform he would be all over it instead of HTML5, and that is entirely contradictory to openness.
You can't just say "YO DAWG WE'RE GONNA BE OPEN RIGHT NOW", it's a gradual process, you start small and go forward with it.
How so? How gradual is locking down the IPhone platform to make him more money and prevent openness? Is it a process of gradually allowing new technologies that a group can entirely lock down to their platform some step towards openness or is it using open technologies as a tool to distance themselves from openness? If they were so serious about openness as they claim they would not be moving so gradually.
To force people to use the app store instead of allowing people to use free open source software like any other platform.
That's the purpose of the App Store.
Adobe has open sourced the Flash platform. Anybody can write their own Flash player right now using the open API that Adobe has published and therefore play and develop Flash media not use Adobe products. How is that not open? How is that some how less open than the IPhone platform?
How is this, in any way, conducive to this debate? You can make your own, however, you are still using Adobe's technology, it being open does not negate the fact that Adobe still owns Flash.
They don't get to have their cake and eat it too.
Apple does not disclose their plans, particularly with the iPhone. You never know, they may want to become a more open company, none of us know what Jobs is thinking. If he wants to use this as a cat's paw to get out of using Flash, so be it.
How so? How gradual is locking down the IPhone platform to make him more money and prevent openness?
Any company owner that believes that they can go from closed to open overnight needs to put in a Psych ward. One cannot go from closed to open overnight, it's like learning to drive, you're not God's gift to the road after one hour of lessons, hell, after a hundred hours of practice, you're not very good. If you start open, it's easy, if you start closed, it's such a monstrous paradigm shift that changes the very foundations that which a company is based on takes a while to fully complete.
That's the purpose of the App Store.
Adobe has open sourced the Flash platform. Anybody can write their own Flash player right now using the open API that Adobe has published and therefore play and develop Flash media not use Adobe products. How is that not open? How is that some how less open than the IPhone platform?
How is this, in any way, conducive to this debate? You can make your own, however, you are still using Adobe's technology, it being open does not negate the fact that Adobe still owns Flash.
They don't get to have their cake and eat it too.
Apple does not disclose their plans, particularly with the iPhone. You never know, they may want to become a more open company, none of us know what Jobs is thinking. If he wants to use this as a cat's paw to get out of using Flash, so be it.
How so? How gradual is locking down the IPhone platform to make him more money and prevent openness?
Any company owner that believes that they can go from closed to open overnight needs to put in a Psych ward. One cannot go from closed to open overnight, it's like learning to drive, you're not God's gift to the road after one hour of lessons, hell, after a hundred hours of practice, you're not very good. If you start open, it's easy, if you start closed, it's such a monstrous paradigm shift that changes the very foundations that which a company is based on takes a while to fully complete.
View all replies
Apple sucks, Adobe sucks. Both for different reasons.
End of discussion.
End of discussion.
windows ands linux also suck, what's your point?
Linux isn't a company.
It can suck even if it isn't a company.
Yes, but we were talking about companies.
And?
There's Red Hat and Canonical. I like Ubuntu, just for servers though, it's a bit of bitch to use as anything but a server or kiosk, machines designed for one purpose.
I think this discussion is heading off topic and becoming a rant about things you don't like. personally I don't think Apples move is going to kill flash and more importantly I don't think anything can kill flash. flash will be around to stay but it's definitely not going to be playing a role in web development and mobile like it once did( at least in web development ). there really isn't any programs quite like flash and it does extremely well dominating the game and animation niche.