3 ms·

It's interesting to draw an analogy between this and Apple's lack of support for Flash, especially given the lack of support for the prior but the large amount

by halo 17y ago

It's interesting to draw an analogy between this and Apple's lack of support for Flash, especially given the lack of support for the prior but the large amount of support for the latter on here. I can only conclude you think it's equally selfish for Apple to cripple the experience of their users so their ideological views can prevail (and that they won't anyway). I can also conclude that you don't think that the deliberate weakening of the #1 smartphone browser over such trivial matters is a win either, ideological or otherwise.

alextgordon 17y ago
That's not quite a fair analogy. If Apple allowed Flash on the iPhone, it would have real consequences: lower battery life, higher RAM usage. I don't doubt for a minute that there's an ideological component as well - Apple want to see Flash gone. But at least that decision is based on technological problems with Flash. On the other hand, if Firefox were to support OS H.264 decoders, it would harm nothing but Mozilla's ideologies.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- halo 17y ago
  The technical problems are trivially overcome by requiring the user to press a button to activate Flash and/or providing an option, so that's pretty much moot.
  - evgen 17y ago
    Pressing a button does not change the abysmal performance of Flash on a Mac, why would one expect it to change this problem on a iPhone? The positions being taken by Mozilla and Apple in these cases are similar, but Apple's technical justification has merit while Mozilla's political stance has no technical merit to hide behind.
    - middayc 17y ago
      I have flash lite on my shitty noname nokia I bought for 20 eur, I can play youtube videos on webpages, and it even played some flash games I made with HaXe. I am certain iPhone has much better cpu than this ordinary phone, so I don't see technical merits in apple's decision but exclusiveness and closing itself in walled garden. same for java btw..
- middayc 17y ago
  If in couple of years all web clients support only patented video codecs (which will happen if Mozilla doesn't succed here). Imagine doing a video startup or anything related to video that isn't irrelevant then.

by halo 17y ago

alextgordon 17y ago

That's not quite a fair analogy. If Apple allowed Flash on the iPhone, it would have real consequences: lower battery life, higher RAM usage. I don't doubt for a minute that there's an ideological component as well - Apple want to see Flash gone. But at least that decision is based on technological problems with Flash. On the other hand, if Firefox were to support OS H.264 decoders, it would harm nothing but Mozilla's ideologies.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
halo 17y ago
The technical problems are trivially overcome by requiring the user to press a button to activate Flash and/or providing an option, so that's pretty much moot.
- evgen 17y ago
  Pressing a button does not change the abysmal performance of Flash on a Mac, why would one expect it to change this problem on a iPhone? The positions being taken by Mozilla and Apple in these cases are similar, but Apple's technical justification has merit while Mozilla's political stance has no technical merit to hide behind.
  - middayc 17y ago
    I have flash lite on my shitty noname nokia I bought for 20 eur, I can play youtube videos on webpages, and it even played some flash games I made with HaXe. I am certain iPhone has much better cpu than this ordinary phone, so I don't see technical merits in apple's decision but exclusiveness and closing itself in walled garden. same for java btw..
middayc 17y ago
If in couple of years all web clients support only patented video codecs (which will happen if Mozilla doesn't succed here). Imagine doing a video startup or anything related to video that isn't irrelevant then.