4 ms·

Adobe's ad : We Love Apple

21 points by bjonathan 16y ago

jrnkntl 16y ago
http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveAltHead_728x90_std.swf http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveAltHead_728x90_... and http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveTechTandem_300x250_std.swf http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveTechTandem_300x... are the ads on that page.
ElliotH 16y ago
This is classy stuff. In my opinion a good way of responding to Jobs' criticsm. Adobe have gone up in my estimation.
refik 16y ago
there is a website for apple and adobe debate http://applevsadobe.net http://applevsadobe.net
Terretta 16y ago
"What we don't love is anybody taking away your freedom to choose what you create, how you create it, and what you experience on the web." Adobe, you are not the web. Your apps are not the web. And if anyone chooses to make a device that consumers can choose to use, they are free to not have your commercial software on it. Adobe, a few years ago you yourselves refused to release parts of your "Creative Suite" for the Mac. You refused to maintain feature parity across platforms. I was free to create how I liked, as long as I liked Windows. When you did that, my designer employees needed to switch their computers to Windows to offer certain features customers wanted. We resented you taking away our freedom, and we didn't forget. Adobe, today you are arguing to take away my freedom to use a device that doesn't include your commercial product, Flash. I chose that device because it supports installable HTML5 apps I can build with notepad. A child in Africa can build apps for my iPhone using a text terminal. I don't want that child to have to buy Creative Suite for a price measured in thousands of dollars. Adobe, you saying this is about freedom and choice is just like the recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) milk producers arguing that their milk must be sold in organic markets. The organic market is free to not stock your milk, and I'm free to shop at a market that makes that choice. Anyone who disagrees can shop at the many more markets, and buy the many more brands of milk, that agree with you. Adobe, stop dictating that to be free, I must choose Adobe.
- nailer 16y ago
  (accidentally upmodded you) You seem to be saying that by offering people the ability to view flash content, Adobe is forcing people to view Flash content. They're not the same thing.
  - Terretta 16y ago
    If I want to view Flash on my smartphone today, I can buy... Well, if I want to view Flash on my smartphone later this year, I'll buy an Android phone. I will have that freedom of choice. Adobe's handwaving is confusing people. Analysts report more Android phones are getting sold than iPhones. There is choice. Your remark fails to consider the Whole Foods Market example. Whole Foods should be free to manage their own brand and inventory. Nobody should force Whole Foods to offer milk made using rBGH, regardless of whether offering it means people have to buy it.
    - pwhelan 16y ago
      Whole Foods milk is a disingenuous comparison. There is a fundamental difference in the product and the ethics involved by using hormones. A more proper comparison would be saying something along the lines of "Ranchers can only have worn jeans when working on the farm and in the processing plant -- no khakis or anything else." One can produce organic milk wearing whatever they want -- the end product is still the same. One can produce quality applications with various tools -- the end product is still good. If Apple has a problem with the quality of the applications then it should reject them from the store. It simply doesn't compare to making a fundamentally different product.
      - Terretta 16y ago
        On the contrary, I deliberately selected this example because the farmers using hormones to mass produce milk fast have successfully lobbied to force the organic milk farmers to label their organic milk saying "There's no proof the hormone milk is bad." It's the same argument here. The hormones accelerate milk production, like the cross-platform dev tools, and the end result is claimed to be the same, like you just claimed. Defensiveness about production methods and indistinguishable product still don't mean Whole Foods has to stock milk made that way.
barredo 16y ago
I think Adobe is at 3rd phase in the Kübler-Ross model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model 1. Denial – "I feel fine."; "This can't be happening, not to me." 2. Anger – "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; "Who is to blame?" 3. Bargaining – "Just let me live to see my children graduate."; "I'll do anything for a few more years."; "I will give my life savings if..." "I understand I will die, but if I could just have more time..." 4. Depression – "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to die... What's the point?"; "I miss my loved one, why go on?" 5. Acceptance – "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well prepare for it."
mambodog 16y ago
I'm just finishing up developing a Flash-based rich media website. My target audience includes a large contingent of 'art people' so performance on Mac is fairly important. "We love Apple"? Seeing the jerky, sluggish performance and massive CPU spikes on Mac OS I find it hard to believe this sentiment.
- FluidDjango 16y ago
  True, actions speak louder than words as indicators of sentiment. To purchase a banner ad expressing a sentiment is only a tactic. ...and a tactic toward what end is completely unclear to me. If I were an Apple shareholder I would expect to receive little benefit from Adobe sending Ars a few buck for a banner ad that doesn't indicate a commitment to creating more effective apps for Macs, phones, etc. that Adobe has been in past. EDIT: And now that I visit http://money.cnn.com/ http://money.cnn.com/ I discover that they're throwing money for cnn banners too. EDIT2: Sorry, I did not click on the banner (never feel inclined to on any banner ad). Which reveals the punch line: The banner actually means, "We love Apple... but... (their behavior is unacceptable)."
- qjz 16y ago
  I'm curious: If you knew Flash was going to be problematic for a large part of your target audience, why did you choose to base your project on it?
  - mambodog 16y ago
    For a start, I didn't realise the extent of Flash's Mac woes. I'm familiar with the problems with CPU usage during video playback (hence I implemented YouTube's relatively solid player in the site), and since switching to Mac as my main OS recently I've had a few browser crashes (mainly caused by blip.tv) but this was eye-opening. Also, there was a desired level of 'WOW'/impressiveness from the client that I don't think I could have met without Flash. I'm a Flash developer after all, and while I am also proficient with HTML & CSS, between the current state of browsers and my limited JS skills it just wasn't going to happen any other way. To be fair, it only got really bad when I implemented Google Maps' 3D API for AS3, but even with that, it is still silky smooth on Windows. Needless to say, I am watching the progress of CSS3 & JS/Canvas as they becomes a more viable alternative. At the very least, it can be evenly slow across all platforms ;)
ironkeith 16y ago
I tried that link on my phone and got redirected to the "mobile" home page, then couldn't find the article in question. I'm pretty sure people from ars are in here, if so: please fix this. I read 90% of my news on my phone during down time. Thanks.
- iclelland 16y ago
  I don't think it's an article. Looks like it's just a banner ad from Adobe. And it's a Flash banner ad, BTW, so don't even bother trying on your phone ;)
ams6110 16y ago
I guess the ad is invisible if you don't have a Flash plugin enabled....
maukdaddy 16y ago
The overuse of the "freedom" argument reeks of GWB.

21 points by bjonathan 16y ago

http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveAltHead_728x90_std.swf http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveAltHead_728x90_... and http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveTechTandem_300x250_std.swf http://s0.2mdn.net/1295336/Adobe_Flash_WeLoveTechTandem_300x... are the ads on that page.

ElliotH 16y ago

This is classy stuff. In my opinion a good way of responding to Jobs' criticsm. Adobe have gone up in my estimation.

refik 16y ago

there is a website for apple and adobe debate http://applevsadobe.net http://applevsadobe.net

Terretta 16y ago

"What we don't love is anybody taking away your freedom to choose what you create, how you create it, and what you experience on the web." Adobe, you are not the web. Your apps are not the web. And if anyone chooses to make a device that consumers can choose to use, they are free to not have your commercial software on it. Adobe, a few years ago you yourselves refused to release parts of your "Creative Suite" for the Mac. You refused to maintain feature parity across platforms. I was free to create how I liked, as long as I liked Windows. When you did that, my designer employees needed to switch their computers to Windows to offer certain features customers wanted. We resented you taking away our freedom, and we didn't forget. Adobe, today you are arguing to take away my freedom to use a device that doesn't include your commercial product, Flash. I chose that device because it supports installable HTML5 apps I can build with notepad. A child in Africa can build apps for my iPhone using a text terminal. I don't want that child to have to buy Creative Suite for a price measured in thousands of dollars. Adobe, you saying this is about freedom and choice is just like the recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) milk producers arguing that their milk must be sold in organic markets. The organic market is free to not stock your milk, and I'm free to shop at a market that makes that choice. Anyone who disagrees can shop at the many more markets, and buy the many more brands of milk, that agree with you. Adobe, stop dictating that to be free, I must choose Adobe.

nailer 16y ago
(accidentally upmodded you) You seem to be saying that by offering people the ability to view flash content, Adobe is forcing people to view Flash content. They're not the same thing.
- Terretta 16y ago
  If I want to view Flash on my smartphone today, I can buy... Well, if I want to view Flash on my smartphone later this year, I'll buy an Android phone. I will have that freedom of choice. Adobe's handwaving is confusing people. Analysts report more Android phones are getting sold than iPhones. There is choice. Your remark fails to consider the Whole Foods Market example. Whole Foods should be free to manage their own brand and inventory. Nobody should force Whole Foods to offer milk made using rBGH, regardless of whether offering it means people have to buy it.
  - pwhelan 16y ago
    Whole Foods milk is a disingenuous comparison. There is a fundamental difference in the product and the ethics involved by using hormones. A more proper comparison would be saying something along the lines of "Ranchers can only have worn jeans when working on the farm and in the processing plant -- no khakis or anything else." One can produce organic milk wearing whatever they want -- the end product is still the same. One can produce quality applications with various tools -- the end product is still good. If Apple has a problem with the quality of the applications then it should reject them from the store. It simply doesn't compare to making a fundamentally different product.
    - Terretta 16y ago
      On the contrary, I deliberately selected this example because the farmers using hormones to mass produce milk fast have successfully lobbied to force the organic milk farmers to label their organic milk saying "There's no proof the hormone milk is bad." It's the same argument here. The hormones accelerate milk production, like the cross-platform dev tools, and the end result is claimed to be the same, like you just claimed. Defensiveness about production methods and indistinguishable product still don't mean Whole Foods has to stock milk made that way.

barredo 16y ago

I think Adobe is at 3rd phase in the Kübler-Ross model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model 1. Denial – "I feel fine."; "This can't be happening, not to me." 2. Anger – "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; "Who is to blame?" 3. Bargaining – "Just let me live to see my children graduate."; "I'll do anything for a few more years."; "I will give my life savings if..." "I understand I will die, but if I could just have more time..." 4. Depression – "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to die... What's the point?"; "I miss my loved one, why go on?" 5. Acceptance – "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it, I may as well prepare for it."

mambodog 16y ago

I'm just finishing up developing a Flash-based rich media website. My target audience includes a large contingent of 'art people' so performance on Mac is fairly important. "We love Apple"? Seeing the jerky, sluggish performance and massive CPU spikes on Mac OS I find it hard to believe this sentiment.

FluidDjango 16y ago
True, actions speak louder than words as indicators of sentiment. To purchase a banner ad expressing a sentiment is only a tactic. ...and a tactic toward what end is completely unclear to me. If I were an Apple shareholder I would expect to receive little benefit from Adobe sending Ars a few buck for a banner ad that doesn't indicate a commitment to creating more effective apps for Macs, phones, etc. that Adobe has been in past. EDIT: And now that I visit http://money.cnn.com/ http://money.cnn.com/ I discover that they're throwing money for cnn banners too. EDIT2: Sorry, I did not click on the banner (never feel inclined to on any banner ad). Which reveals the punch line: The banner actually means, "We love Apple... but... (their behavior is unacceptable)."
qjz 16y ago
I'm curious: If you knew Flash was going to be problematic for a large part of your target audience, why did you choose to base your project on it?
- mambodog 16y ago
  For a start, I didn't realise the extent of Flash's Mac woes. I'm familiar with the problems with CPU usage during video playback (hence I implemented YouTube's relatively solid player in the site), and since switching to Mac as my main OS recently I've had a few browser crashes (mainly caused by blip.tv) but this was eye-opening. Also, there was a desired level of 'WOW'/impressiveness from the client that I don't think I could have met without Flash. I'm a Flash developer after all, and while I am also proficient with HTML & CSS, between the current state of browsers and my limited JS skills it just wasn't going to happen any other way. To be fair, it only got really bad when I implemented Google Maps' 3D API for AS3, but even with that, it is still silky smooth on Windows. Needless to say, I am watching the progress of CSS3 & JS/Canvas as they becomes a more viable alternative. At the very least, it can be evenly slow across all platforms ;)

ironkeith 16y ago

I tried that link on my phone and got redirected to the "mobile" home page, then couldn't find the article in question. I'm pretty sure people from ars are in here, if so: please fix this. I read 90% of my news on my phone during down time. Thanks.

iclelland 16y ago
I don't think it's an article. Looks like it's just a banner ad from Adobe. And it's a Flash banner ad, BTW, so don't even bother trying on your phone ;)

ams6110 16y ago

I guess the ad is invisible if you don't have a Flash plugin enabled....

maukdaddy 16y ago

The overuse of the "freedom" argument reeks of GWB.