5 ms·

Adobe reacts to Apple's about-face

36 points by kreek 16y ago

Groxx 16y ago
Surprisingly civil, for all the fun that was occurring earlier. It's probably the best statement they can make on this.
- cmelbye 16y ago
  Except for the fact that they're still blaming Apple for lack of Flash in the browser.
  - daeken 16y ago
    They can't go without mentioning it, though, and they can't exactly say "But remember, there's still no Flash in the browser, because we haven't yet made a plugin that works well." This really was the best statement they could make. (That said, I think the claims of how bad the mobile plugin is are drastically overblown -- it works nicely on my Droid)
swombat 16y ago
Apple’s restriction on Flash content running in the browser on iOS devices remains in place Yeah right. More like: Adobe's incapacity to build a suitable mobile Flash plugin, one that doesn't suck and which won't make the web experience feel like walking through molasses, remains in place.
- Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
  I honestly believe that if Adobe got a version of Flash running on Android which overcame Apple's objections (battery life, UI, stability) then Apple would take another look at it, but right now we're a long way from that. For now the choice is between no Flash on the iPhone, and seriously buggy Flash on Android. For what I want (and I accept others are different) there's really no difference between these two options - if I can't rely on it, I'm not interested. I'd be interested to know what the view of the engineers inside Adobe is though. From everything I see and hear what's shipped so far is bad enough that it probably shouldn't have been released into the wild. Were they aware of that and was it pressure from the top that forced them to release it as it is? Or are the problems things which result from the significant scaling up of the number of devices and users? And do they have faith that these things can be solved before HTML5 gets a big enough foothold that they've got a real fight on their hands? Getting back on topic, does the ability to compile Flash code to a native iPhone app actually undermine the need for Flash in the browser? If the biggest players can just release an app which reuses their existing code and fulfils the specific need they have, do they care that it's not through the browser?
  - potatolicious 16y ago
    > "If the biggest players can just release an app which reuses their existing code and fulfils the specific need they have, do they care that it's not through the browser?" Mmm, the reusing code bit may only be partially true. Note that in today's App Review Guidelines there is a specific mention that apps must abide by Apple's HIG in order to qualify. In other words, ugly apps, or apps that don't abide by Apple's usability standards, will not be allowed in the App Store. IMHO this is a good thing - I personally despise one-size-fits all UI design... it maintains the weaknesses of all targeted platforms while being completely unable to leverage the strengths of any. Truly atrocious. In any case, simply turning your Flash app into something that runs on an iPhone may not be sufficient to get Apple's seal of approval.
    - extension 16y ago
      Ah, it all falls into place. Apple implicitly allows Flash apps while making it clear that the shitty cross platform stuff they were afraid of will not get through. Adobe claims that some CS5 apps have already been accepted. Any examples?
    - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
      I accept that it's not a simple case of recompiling for iPhone but there will be large chunks of code, particularly around non-UI elements which can be reused. I guess it will also allow these companies to reuse existing skills as much as existing code.
    - minalecs 16y ago
      Just guessing but I think the biggest market will be for flash will be for games development.
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      You wouldn't need apples seal of approval though, would you? All you'd need is a web page with the flash app embedded in it. I really wonder how much of apples anti-flash stance is due to the fact that it would allow instant bypass of the app store and another way to get apps on the iphone. The whole battery life and user experience argument is nonsense, if a user wants or needs something they should simply get it.
- frou_dh 16y ago
  The whole of iOS 4 running on my iPhone 3G feels like walking through molasses, so don't Apple hold themselves to the same bar? (I haven't installed this week's firmware update yet. I hope that does in fact improve things)
  - nanairo 16y ago
    But it so happen that Apple can do something about that, but can't do anything if Flash ruins the user experience. Case in point on the Mac side Flash was (and is?) horrible but Adobe couldn't seem to give it a second thought.
  - mullr 16y ago
    (Yes, it does. You should install it.)
    - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
      (But it's still slower than iOS 3, so consider downgrading/not bothering upgrading in the first place unless you really need the 1 or 2 features of iOS 4 that they actually provide to your phone)
  - mkramlich 16y ago
    You should install 4.1 on your 3G and I think it will fix it. I too experienced the "freezes from hell" with iOS 4.0 running on my 3G, but ever since upgrading to 4.1 on Wednesday I've had no more freezes.
- rakkhi 16y ago
  Adobe are going to have to work on reviews like this if they ever want Apple to approve Flash on the iOs browser http://newteevee.com/2010/08/31/video-flash-on-android-is-startlingly-bad/ http://newteevee.com/2010/08/31/video-flash-on-android-is-st...
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - ergo98 16y ago
    http://blog.yafla.com/Flash_on_Android_Slightly_Better_Than_Shockingly_Bad/ http://blog.yafla.com/Flash_on_Android_Slightly_Better_Than_... Many web sites rely upon hover, don't operate with touch, and demand a keyboard. Most canvas demos (all the rage right now) make the highest of the high end smartphone absolutely beg for mercy, with a miserable experience that can choke a high end PC. Once every website is infected with heavily dynamic, non-segregated HTML5 ads, experiences will slow to a crawl. Nonetheless, I'd rather have the option of using the web than to have someone else tell me what's good for me using worst examples. Every justification used to try to pretend that Jobs' Flash embargo is good for consumers is just as applicable to web applications. I have Flash on my Android phone and I quite enjoy it, as, it seems, do most Android owners so equipped. It's far from a perfect experience, but it has come in very handy in a pinch many times. It strangely seems to be a lot of iPhone owners telling us how poor of an experience it provides.
  - kreek 16y ago
    Unless the same reviewers post updates that show Flash running just fine... http://newteevee.com/2010/09/02/is-flash-on-android-shockingly-bad-or-shockingly-great/ http://newteevee.com/2010/09/02/is-flash-on-android-shocking...
- moultano 16y ago
  On any other platform users would decide for themselves whether it's something they want. Why are you giving Apple a free pass here? The world doesn't need your, or Apple's, determination of whether flash sucks. It will figure that out on its own.
  - swombat 16y ago
    Please do list these "any other platforms" which are so open that the users can decide what they want on them. And please don't say "Android". http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/09/android-open/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/09/android-open/
    - CountHackulus 16y ago
      How about Maemo? Flash works fine on my N900.
    - moultano 16y ago
      Windows, Mac, Linux, some Android devices, etc.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- pilif 16y ago
  of course it'll compile to ARM code. That's what XCode does too. Applications you build for the iPhone using Objective-C are compiled to native ARM code. If you want to display something on the screen, you will have to use the native API (which, too, is native ARM code). What Adobe did here was to statically link a flash player to the flash movie. So what you install is basically the flash player capable of just playing that one movie of yours. It's still native code and doesn't load external code either, so it's fine with Apples new rules.
angusgr 16y ago
Apple still call the tune here, and can bring in further anti-Flash restrictions at any time they choose, retrospectively if they want. However, it's completely worth Adobe's while to react immediately in this fashion. That seems scary to me.
- angusgr 16y ago
  ... although, I suppose, the best thing Adobe can strategically do is aim for a raft of popular Flash-based apps in the App Store, thereby creating a barrier to any further anti-Flash restrictions.
- mcritz 16y ago
  Yeah, Apple doesn't have to approve apps written in Flash. Moreover, users that find a Flash app wanting can give it a negative rating.
  - tomjen3 16y ago
    Actually, unless it sucks they pretty much have to - otherwise the backslash against them is going to be way bigger than it was last time. And yes, users can give apps they don't like a bad rating, but that is something they can do no matter what language or framework the app is written in. Finally, there is no reason to expect that an App written in flash is a priori inferior to one written in objective c; especially not as a developer of a higher level language can spend more time matching the capabilities of his app to the expectations of its users.
younata 16y ago
"Adobe will continue to work to bring full web browsing with Flash Player 10.1" So, according to Adobe, by browsing with flash disabled, I'm missing out on the full web experience? Funny, I don't notice anything missing except a crapton of ads. On another note, I do hope that browsers will add the option to selectively enable/disable html5 audio/video, because that'll also get rid of ads coming in the future.
kreek 16y ago
Adobe posted a packager refresher for iPhone. "Now that we are once again committed to the iOS platform, we will work on tools and frameworks to make developing iOS applications much easier. I’m currently using early versions of these projects for Android development, and they are extremely easy to use and help to create a very efficient developer workflow." http://blogs.adobe.com/cantrell/archives/2010/09/packager-for-iphone-refresher.html http://blogs.adobe.com/cantrell/archives/2010/09/packager-fo...
rryyan 16y ago
There is an interesting comment: "Looks like the new policy would allow to have VM included in the app itself. Why not focus instead on the VM instead of this as3 to native code conversion (sure the innovation in one can already help the other but still it’s the VM which since in need of a bit more love)." [1] Now that Apple allows interpreters (as long as they run code packaged embedded in the app), I wonder if this approach would be easier for Adobe to maintain than the AS3-to-assembly compilation they do now. Arbitrary SWFs could be paired as data with a standard interpreter app. EDIT: I suppose this would make the packager a lot more like AIR for Android( http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/air2/android/ http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/air2/android/). [1]: http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2010/09/great-news-for-developers.html#comment-1250 http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2010/09/great-news-for-...

36 points by kreek 16y ago

Groxx 16y ago

Surprisingly civil, for all the fun that was occurring earlier. It's probably the best statement they can make on this.

cmelbye 16y ago
Except for the fact that they're still blaming Apple for lack of Flash in the browser.
- daeken 16y ago
  They can't go without mentioning it, though, and they can't exactly say "But remember, there's still no Flash in the browser, because we haven't yet made a plugin that works well." This really was the best statement they could make. (That said, I think the claims of how bad the mobile plugin is are drastically overblown -- it works nicely on my Droid)

swombat 16y ago

Apple’s restriction on Flash content running in the browser on iOS devices remains in place Yeah right. More like: Adobe's incapacity to build a suitable mobile Flash plugin, one that doesn't suck and which won't make the web experience feel like walking through molasses, remains in place.

Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
I honestly believe that if Adobe got a version of Flash running on Android which overcame Apple's objections (battery life, UI, stability) then Apple would take another look at it, but right now we're a long way from that. For now the choice is between no Flash on the iPhone, and seriously buggy Flash on Android. For what I want (and I accept others are different) there's really no difference between these two options - if I can't rely on it, I'm not interested. I'd be interested to know what the view of the engineers inside Adobe is though. From everything I see and hear what's shipped so far is bad enough that it probably shouldn't have been released into the wild. Were they aware of that and was it pressure from the top that forced them to release it as it is? Or are the problems things which result from the significant scaling up of the number of devices and users? And do they have faith that these things can be solved before HTML5 gets a big enough foothold that they've got a real fight on their hands? Getting back on topic, does the ability to compile Flash code to a native iPhone app actually undermine the need for Flash in the browser? If the biggest players can just release an app which reuses their existing code and fulfils the specific need they have, do they care that it's not through the browser?
- potatolicious 16y ago
  > "If the biggest players can just release an app which reuses their existing code and fulfils the specific need they have, do they care that it's not through the browser?" Mmm, the reusing code bit may only be partially true. Note that in today's App Review Guidelines there is a specific mention that apps must abide by Apple's HIG in order to qualify. In other words, ugly apps, or apps that don't abide by Apple's usability standards, will not be allowed in the App Store. IMHO this is a good thing - I personally despise one-size-fits all UI design... it maintains the weaknesses of all targeted platforms while being completely unable to leverage the strengths of any. Truly atrocious. In any case, simply turning your Flash app into something that runs on an iPhone may not be sufficient to get Apple's seal of approval.
  - extension 16y ago
    Ah, it all falls into place. Apple implicitly allows Flash apps while making it clear that the shitty cross platform stuff they were afraid of will not get through. Adobe claims that some CS5 apps have already been accepted. Any examples?
  - Tyrannosaurs 16y ago
    I accept that it's not a simple case of recompiling for iPhone but there will be large chunks of code, particularly around non-UI elements which can be reused. I guess it will also allow these companies to reuse existing skills as much as existing code.
  - minalecs 16y ago
    Just guessing but I think the biggest market will be for flash will be for games development.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    You wouldn't need apples seal of approval though, would you? All you'd need is a web page with the flash app embedded in it. I really wonder how much of apples anti-flash stance is due to the fact that it would allow instant bypass of the app store and another way to get apps on the iphone. The whole battery life and user experience argument is nonsense, if a user wants or needs something they should simply get it.
frou_dh 16y ago
The whole of iOS 4 running on my iPhone 3G feels like walking through molasses, so don't Apple hold themselves to the same bar? (I haven't installed this week's firmware update yet. I hope that does in fact improve things)
- nanairo 16y ago
  But it so happen that Apple can do something about that, but can't do anything if Flash ruins the user experience. Case in point on the Mac side Flash was (and is?) horrible but Adobe couldn't seem to give it a second thought.
- mullr 16y ago
  (Yes, it does. You should install it.)
  - ZeroGravitas 16y ago
    (But it's still slower than iOS 3, so consider downgrading/not bothering upgrading in the first place unless you really need the 1 or 2 features of iOS 4 that they actually provide to your phone)
- mkramlich 16y ago
  You should install 4.1 on your 3G and I think it will fix it. I too experienced the "freezes from hell" with iOS 4.0 running on my 3G, but ever since upgrading to 4.1 on Wednesday I've had no more freezes.
rakkhi 16y ago
Adobe are going to have to work on reviews like this if they ever want Apple to approve Flash on the iOs browser http://newteevee.com/2010/08/31/video-flash-on-android-is-startlingly-bad/ http://newteevee.com/2010/08/31/video-flash-on-android-is-st...
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- ergo98 16y ago
  http://blog.yafla.com/Flash_on_Android_Slightly_Better_Than_Shockingly_Bad/ http://blog.yafla.com/Flash_on_Android_Slightly_Better_Than_... Many web sites rely upon hover, don't operate with touch, and demand a keyboard. Most canvas demos (all the rage right now) make the highest of the high end smartphone absolutely beg for mercy, with a miserable experience that can choke a high end PC. Once every website is infected with heavily dynamic, non-segregated HTML5 ads, experiences will slow to a crawl. Nonetheless, I'd rather have the option of using the web than to have someone else tell me what's good for me using worst examples. Every justification used to try to pretend that Jobs' Flash embargo is good for consumers is just as applicable to web applications. I have Flash on my Android phone and I quite enjoy it, as, it seems, do most Android owners so equipped. It's far from a perfect experience, but it has come in very handy in a pinch many times. It strangely seems to be a lot of iPhone owners telling us how poor of an experience it provides.
- kreek 16y ago
  Unless the same reviewers post updates that show Flash running just fine... http://newteevee.com/2010/09/02/is-flash-on-android-shockingly-bad-or-shockingly-great/ http://newteevee.com/2010/09/02/is-flash-on-android-shocking...
moultano 16y ago
On any other platform users would decide for themselves whether it's something they want. Why are you giving Apple a free pass here? The world doesn't need your, or Apple's, determination of whether flash sucks. It will figure that out on its own.
- swombat 16y ago
  Please do list these "any other platforms" which are so open that the users can decide what they want on them. And please don't say "Android". http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/09/android-open/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/09/android-open/
  - CountHackulus 16y ago
    How about Maemo? Flash works fine on my N900.
  - moultano 16y ago
    Windows, Mac, Linux, some Android devices, etc.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

pilif 16y ago
of course it'll compile to ARM code. That's what XCode does too. Applications you build for the iPhone using Objective-C are compiled to native ARM code. If you want to display something on the screen, you will have to use the native API (which, too, is native ARM code). What Adobe did here was to statically link a flash player to the flash movie. So what you install is basically the flash player capable of just playing that one movie of yours. It's still native code and doesn't load external code either, so it's fine with Apples new rules.

angusgr 16y ago

Apple still call the tune here, and can bring in further anti-Flash restrictions at any time they choose, retrospectively if they want. However, it's completely worth Adobe's while to react immediately in this fashion. That seems scary to me.

angusgr 16y ago
... although, I suppose, the best thing Adobe can strategically do is aim for a raft of popular Flash-based apps in the App Store, thereby creating a barrier to any further anti-Flash restrictions.
mcritz 16y ago
Yeah, Apple doesn't have to approve apps written in Flash. Moreover, users that find a Flash app wanting can give it a negative rating.
- tomjen3 16y ago
  Actually, unless it sucks they pretty much have to - otherwise the backslash against them is going to be way bigger than it was last time. And yes, users can give apps they don't like a bad rating, but that is something they can do no matter what language or framework the app is written in. Finally, there is no reason to expect that an App written in flash is a priori inferior to one written in objective c; especially not as a developer of a higher level language can spend more time matching the capabilities of his app to the expectations of its users.

younata 16y ago

"Adobe will continue to work to bring full web browsing with Flash Player 10.1" So, according to Adobe, by browsing with flash disabled, I'm missing out on the full web experience? Funny, I don't notice anything missing except a crapton of ads. On another note, I do hope that browsers will add the option to selectively enable/disable html5 audio/video, because that'll also get rid of ads coming in the future.

kreek 16y ago

Adobe posted a packager refresher for iPhone. "Now that we are once again committed to the iOS platform, we will work on tools and frameworks to make developing iOS applications much easier. I’m currently using early versions of these projects for Android development, and they are extremely easy to use and help to create a very efficient developer workflow." http://blogs.adobe.com/cantrell/archives/2010/09/packager-for-iphone-refresher.html http://blogs.adobe.com/cantrell/archives/2010/09/packager-fo...

rryyan 16y ago

There is an interesting comment: "Looks like the new policy would allow to have VM included in the app itself. Why not focus instead on the VM instead of this as3 to native code conversion (sure the innovation in one can already help the other but still it’s the VM which since in need of a bit more love)." [1] Now that Apple allows interpreters (as long as they run code packaged embedded in the app), I wonder if this approach would be easier for Adobe to maintain than the AS3-to-assembly compilation they do now. Arbitrary SWFs could be paired as data with a standard interpreter app. EDIT: I suppose this would make the packager a lot more like AIR for Android( http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/air2/android/ http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/air2/android/). [1]: http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2010/09/great-news-for-developers.html#comment-1250 http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2010/09/great-news-for-...