8 ms·

MacBook Air ships without Flash

62 points by jankassens 16y ago

borism 16y ago
dudes, WTF?
cletus 16y ago
This is quite a shot across the bow by Apple. As the post says, all previous (and existing!) laptops and desktops ship with Flash preinstalled. Whereas I can understand the motivation for it missing from iDevices, this makes far less sense. This comes at about the same time that Apple deprecates Oracle's Java from OS X. Is this a general move against preinstalling third party libraries or unrelated? Perhaps it signals Apple's belief that both technologies are moribund, if not dying outright. Perhaps it stems from Apple's claim that Flash is bad for battery life. This can matter even when there aren't obvious Flash widgets on pages you visit. Flash is used for ads and any number of tracking processes. As much as some will love to pour hate on Apple for this move I think the real failure here belongs to Adobe who has been satisfied to sit on their laurels blaming Apple for victimizing them rather than delivering a compelling Flash experience on mobile devices or OS X (3+ years after the iPhone's release only now is full Flash running on mobile (Android) devices and reports are mixed on the experience).
- sigzero 16y ago
  "This comes at about the same time that Apple deprecates Oracle's Java from OS X." That isn't what they are doing at all. You read whatever you read incorrectly. Apple is deprecating their own version of Java on OSX.
  - nir 16y ago
    > Apple is deprecating their own version of Java on OSX Isn't it also the only version of Java known to run reliably on OSX?
    - protomyth 16y ago
      I would imagine Oracle will fix that problem.
      - malandrew 16y ago
        Somehow I don't think so. Oracle is a pure B2B play. Apple computers are still a rarity in the enterprise, and in those companies that do have Apple computers are most likely not Oracle's target market. Oracle might try to remedy this situation eventually, but my bet is that it will be too little, too late.
        protomyth 16y ago
        Oracle's products are available for OS X and they need Java for their installers / management consoles.
      - pohl 16y ago
        Indeed, they were somewhat forced to maintain their own port of Sun's JDK because Sun was in a position of power and Apple was perpetually "beleaguered" back then. In contrast, Sun had no choice but to put resources into maintaining the Windows version of the JDK. Perhaps Apple has grown to the point where they can expect Oracle to deliver the JDK on Mac if they want to have a presence there. If not Oracle, then the OpenJDK community. Either way, if it's wanted badly enough, it will happen. The long-shot bet would be an LLVM/VMKit implementation that is clean of Sun code.
      - nir 16y ago
        Maybe they will, maybe not. But for the moment Apple is effectively dropping Java support, and that's not a minor thing. I'm writing this on an MBP and might well post from a Macbook Air someday but I think Hacker News is giving Apple a very non-Hackerlike treatment. They're clearly moving their computers to a much more controlled iPhone/iPad model.
- rmc 16y ago
  > Perhaps it stems from Apple's claim that Flash is bad for battery life. This can matter even when there aren't obvious Flash widgets on pages you visit. Flash is used for ads and any number of tracking processes. If that's true, it still doesn't help mot users. I would guess that most users will install Flash pretty quickly after getting their laptop. They will then be subject to flash on all webpages, negating any battery savings.
- Someone 16y ago
  "Perhaps it stems from Apple's claim that Flash is bad for battery life" Supporting multiple similar runtimes (HTML+JavaScript vs Flash vs Java vs SilverLight vs somebody else's kitchen sink) may make sense, but eats disk space, and, once people start using them, RAM and CPU bandwidth (due to less sharing of code between programs). Including Flash and Java made sense a couple of years ago on the Mac, but when designing the iPhone, Apple, as they always do, revisited earlier decisions, and decided they should go. Given RAM constraints, I can see why. On these new MacBooks, I guess Flash was dropped not because of RAM constraints, but because the disk is relatively small. It is but a tiny part of that 64 GB, but they probably must make many small cuts to give the user as much space as possible for his own stuff.
- cosmicray 16y ago
  > Whereas I can understand the motivation for it missing from iDevices, this makes far less sense. How about support costs. If Apple doesn't supply it, and you install it, then have problems, who ya gonna call ? I'd say, call Adobe. Let their support call numbers spike off the chart.
- cale 16y ago
  Adobe needs a good kick in the ass. Spend a day in any of their flagship design apps and let the pain begin. Inconsistant UI, constant errors... their products have gone down hill and Flash is no exception. Adobe needs product leaders that care. I think Apple is not so subtly trying to send them that message.
- calloc 16y ago
  You might even be looking into it to far ... the last time Apple shipped Flash with their OS they pressed a vulnerable version onto their DVD's that were used to install the OS and that made them look bad. This time around that just won't be possible.
malandrew 16y ago
I use Click-to-Flash on my laptop and it's not until you install a plugin like that that you realize how inappropriately overused flash is. My biggest complaint is sIFR text replacement. Seriously, using Flash just to serve up a certain font for your H1 or H2 titles is complete and utter crap. While I do think that this is bad user experience for those buying the MacBook Air, it should help foster an overall better user experience for the Internet. With Flash not coming standard and Apple gaining so much market share, it will only be a matter of time before the percent of Flash enabled browsers falls enough that web developers need to start using more appropriate standards-based techniques. Adobe claims that Flash reaches 99% of browsers: http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/ http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/ Once that hits 95%, I think we'll start seeing a tipping point. About 68% of web browsers worldwide currently have partial HTML5 support (IE8+, Firefox 3.5+, Chrome 6.0+, Safari 5.0+, Opera 10+). That number is 72% in the US. I give it two years until Flash and HTML5 are at parity with one another.
- jacquesm 16y ago
  I've heard - and seen - the same argument made with respect to Flash on one side and HTML4 + JavaScript on the other side. I'm the biggest flash hater there is, I only started using it November last year for one specific feature that we no longer could talk our way around (video+audio) and it is really amusing to see history repeat like this. Adobe isn't going anywhere, and, unfortunately, neither is flash. 'just' video is not going to suddenly make everybody drop flash. > While I do think that this is bad user experience for those buying the MacBook Air, it should help foster an overall better user experience for the Internet. Reducing the user experience for any group does not increase the user experience for the whole. What it might do is foster standardization in the long run. But don't forget that Apple is not doing this from the good of their heart to help open standards, but simply because flash competes with the App store. It is no coincidence that flash gets dropped from the MBA at the same time that the app store for the Mac gets launched.
  - brownleej 16y ago
    How does Flash compete with the App Store more than HTML5? Since Apple has been promoting HTML5 web apps, especially those targeting Mobile Safari, I find it hard to believe that their hatred of Flash comes from a desire to protect the App Store. I take Apple at their word that it's because of Flash's atrocious performance, which as a Mac user I can attest to. I don't agree with this decision, though. I think the best way to handle Flash is to build ClickToFlash functionality directly into the browser.
code_duck 16y ago
Firefox and Chrome will install Flash for you quite easily (or actually, Chrome has it built in, doesn't it?). However, I suppose 60% of Mac users prefer Safari. Does Safari have a plug in finder service like Firefox, if so, does it locate Flash for you? Oh, as the article notes, Windows doesn't ship with Flash installed, either. Does this mean anything at all? No.
- WalterGR 16y ago
  Oh, as the article notes, Windows doesn't ship with Flash installed, either. XP does. I don't know about Vista and 7. Presumably some large percentage of Windows desktops and laptops are sold with Flash pre-installed.
  - Keyframe 16y ago
    7 also doesn't ship with Flash.
  - slantyyz 16y ago
    At the very least, I was forced to perform an annoying upgrade of a painfully outdated version of Flash that came on the XP install media. In that case, it's the same effort as an install.
- kj12345 16y ago
  The main way to get Flash is through alternative content placed inside an <object> tag which should be displayed when a player is not found. So normally a download button would appear, in the screenshot though it looks like Engadget just wrote bad embedding code.
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  On Safari market share, maybe the Mac OS X App store will have the unintended effect of promoting free (non-pay) software such as Firefox, Chrome and Opera, assuming there isn't some convenient rule that prevents including them.
- Samuel_Michon 16y ago
forensic 16y ago
Apple is getting power drunk :[ They might be the next evil empire. What they really should do is ship with both flash and Click-To-Flash. That would be serving the users best.
- adolph 16y ago
  That is a pretty hilarious/interesting idea. If Apple doesn't do that maybe Adobe will license and start packaging Click-To-Flash with the Flash plugin. That would be very nice and pro-consumer on Adobe's part.
  - redrobot5050 16y ago
    Apple wouldn't do it because making the user's have to click to load content without an intuitive explanation isn't "easy to use". Adobe wouldn't do it, because a large majority of their customers build annoying flash ads.
GHFigs 16y ago
Another way of saying this is "MacBook Air ships without common cause of poor browser performance and crashes."
lutorm 16y ago
I thought the headline meant that the now HD-less Air also shipped without flash memory. That seemed a tad more serious...
smackfu 16y ago
How does this help the consumer?
- uriel 16y ago
  Anythings that helps people stay away from Flash should be very welcome.
protomyth 16y ago
This might go back to the problems with the Flash plug-in that shipped with OS X 10.6. At the time, due to needing to get the discs made, 10.6 ended up shipping with a Flash plug-in with a security problem. If I remember correctly, the patch Apple shipped was shortly vulnerable too due to another security problem. I wonder if they've made a judgement that the basic installs of OS X will be like iOS and not contain 3rd party software that they can't control.
- tvon 16y ago
  Yup, there was a big fuss and all the headlines were sure to focus on "security vulnerability" and "Apple". Color me unsurprised at this move...
b3b0p 16y ago
I don't see the problem. Flash is 3rd party add-on. It doesn't perform wonderful and has some issues. More users are using Apple products and have noticed it's not the best experience. It has been stated and somewhat emphasized by Apple and the media to the general public that HTML5 embedded video is the future. See for example: http://www.apple.com/ipad/ready-for-ipad/ http://www.apple.com/ipad/ready-for-ipad/ The way I see it this is just your typical forward looking / future innovation push move by Apple.
rbranson 16y ago
I read this as "MacBook Air ships without Flash [Memory]" as if someone got a MacBook Air without an SSD inside.
- jankassens 16y ago
  Sorry, I should have added Adobe. Unfortunately, I can't edit the title.
emehrkay 16y ago
Funny because I watched the video of them talking about the air (white bkg, shots of machining etc) and they kept mentioning how much that they loved flash. They were talking about flash memory
oomkiller 16y ago
This will probably improve security. If they shipped Flash on the device, there is a very good chance that it would be out of date (and insecure) by the time someone buys it.
- wzdd 16y ago
  And in fact this has happened in the past: http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA07-192A.html http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA07-192A.html Seems like a good reason not to ship it with the OS.
YooLi 16y ago
Not true, the MacBook Air ships with plenty of Flash :) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1816749 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1816749

62 points by jankassens 16y ago

dudes, WTF?

This is quite a shot across the bow by Apple. As the post says, all previous (and existing!) laptops and desktops ship with Flash preinstalled. Whereas I can understand the motivation for it missing from iDevices, this makes far less sense. This comes at about the same time that Apple deprecates Oracle's Java from OS X. Is this a general move against preinstalling third party libraries or unrelated? Perhaps it signals Apple's belief that both technologies are moribund, if not dying outright. Perhaps it stems from Apple's claim that Flash is bad for battery life. This can matter even when there aren't obvious Flash widgets on pages you visit. Flash is used for ads and any number of tracking processes. As much as some will love to pour hate on Apple for this move I think the real failure here belongs to Adobe who has been satisfied to sit on their laurels blaming Apple for victimizing them rather than delivering a compelling Flash experience on mobile devices or OS X (3+ years after the iPhone's release only now is full Flash running on mobile (Android) devices and reports are mixed on the experience).

sigzero 16y ago
"This comes at about the same time that Apple deprecates Oracle's Java from OS X." That isn't what they are doing at all. You read whatever you read incorrectly. Apple is deprecating their own version of Java on OSX.
- nir 16y ago
  > Apple is deprecating their own version of Java on OSX Isn't it also the only version of Java known to run reliably on OSX?
  - protomyth 16y ago
    I would imagine Oracle will fix that problem.
    - malandrew 16y ago
      Somehow I don't think so. Oracle is a pure B2B play. Apple computers are still a rarity in the enterprise, and in those companies that do have Apple computers are most likely not Oracle's target market. Oracle might try to remedy this situation eventually, but my bet is that it will be too little, too late.
      - protomyth 16y ago
        Oracle's products are available for OS X and they need Java for their installers / management consoles.
    - pohl 16y ago
      Indeed, they were somewhat forced to maintain their own port of Sun's JDK because Sun was in a position of power and Apple was perpetually "beleaguered" back then. In contrast, Sun had no choice but to put resources into maintaining the Windows version of the JDK. Perhaps Apple has grown to the point where they can expect Oracle to deliver the JDK on Mac if they want to have a presence there. If not Oracle, then the OpenJDK community. Either way, if it's wanted badly enough, it will happen. The long-shot bet would be an LLVM/VMKit implementation that is clean of Sun code.
    - nir 16y ago
      Maybe they will, maybe not. But for the moment Apple is effectively dropping Java support, and that's not a minor thing. I'm writing this on an MBP and might well post from a Macbook Air someday but I think Hacker News is giving Apple a very non-Hackerlike treatment. They're clearly moving their computers to a much more controlled iPhone/iPad model.
rmc 16y ago
> Perhaps it stems from Apple's claim that Flash is bad for battery life. This can matter even when there aren't obvious Flash widgets on pages you visit. Flash is used for ads and any number of tracking processes. If that's true, it still doesn't help mot users. I would guess that most users will install Flash pretty quickly after getting their laptop. They will then be subject to flash on all webpages, negating any battery savings.
Someone 16y ago
"Perhaps it stems from Apple's claim that Flash is bad for battery life" Supporting multiple similar runtimes (HTML+JavaScript vs Flash vs Java vs SilverLight vs somebody else's kitchen sink) may make sense, but eats disk space, and, once people start using them, RAM and CPU bandwidth (due to less sharing of code between programs). Including Flash and Java made sense a couple of years ago on the Mac, but when designing the iPhone, Apple, as they always do, revisited earlier decisions, and decided they should go. Given RAM constraints, I can see why. On these new MacBooks, I guess Flash was dropped not because of RAM constraints, but because the disk is relatively small. It is but a tiny part of that 64 GB, but they probably must make many small cuts to give the user as much space as possible for his own stuff.
cosmicray 16y ago
> Whereas I can understand the motivation for it missing from iDevices, this makes far less sense. How about support costs. If Apple doesn't supply it, and you install it, then have problems, who ya gonna call ? I'd say, call Adobe. Let their support call numbers spike off the chart.
cale 16y ago
Adobe needs a good kick in the ass. Spend a day in any of their flagship design apps and let the pain begin. Inconsistant UI, constant errors... their products have gone down hill and Flash is no exception. Adobe needs product leaders that care. I think Apple is not so subtly trying to send them that message.
calloc 16y ago
You might even be looking into it to far ... the last time Apple shipped Flash with their OS they pressed a vulnerable version onto their DVD's that were used to install the OS and that made them look bad. This time around that just won't be possible.

malandrew 16y ago

I use Click-to-Flash on my laptop and it's not until you install a plugin like that that you realize how inappropriately overused flash is. My biggest complaint is sIFR text replacement. Seriously, using Flash just to serve up a certain font for your H1 or H2 titles is complete and utter crap. While I do think that this is bad user experience for those buying the MacBook Air, it should help foster an overall better user experience for the Internet. With Flash not coming standard and Apple gaining so much market share, it will only be a matter of time before the percent of Flash enabled browsers falls enough that web developers need to start using more appropriate standards-based techniques. Adobe claims that Flash reaches 99% of browsers: http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/ http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/ Once that hits 95%, I think we'll start seeing a tipping point. About 68% of web browsers worldwide currently have partial HTML5 support (IE8+, Firefox 3.5+, Chrome 6.0+, Safari 5.0+, Opera 10+). That number is 72% in the US. I give it two years until Flash and HTML5 are at parity with one another.

jacquesm 16y ago
I've heard - and seen - the same argument made with respect to Flash on one side and HTML4 + JavaScript on the other side. I'm the biggest flash hater there is, I only started using it November last year for one specific feature that we no longer could talk our way around (video+audio) and it is really amusing to see history repeat like this. Adobe isn't going anywhere, and, unfortunately, neither is flash. 'just' video is not going to suddenly make everybody drop flash. > While I do think that this is bad user experience for those buying the MacBook Air, it should help foster an overall better user experience for the Internet. Reducing the user experience for any group does not increase the user experience for the whole. What it might do is foster standardization in the long run. But don't forget that Apple is not doing this from the good of their heart to help open standards, but simply because flash competes with the App store. It is no coincidence that flash gets dropped from the MBA at the same time that the app store for the Mac gets launched.
- brownleej 16y ago
  How does Flash compete with the App Store more than HTML5? Since Apple has been promoting HTML5 web apps, especially those targeting Mobile Safari, I find it hard to believe that their hatred of Flash comes from a desire to protect the App Store. I take Apple at their word that it's because of Flash's atrocious performance, which as a Mac user I can attest to. I don't agree with this decision, though. I think the best way to handle Flash is to build ClickToFlash functionality directly into the browser.

code_duck 16y ago

Firefox and Chrome will install Flash for you quite easily (or actually, Chrome has it built in, doesn't it?). However, I suppose 60% of Mac users prefer Safari. Does Safari have a plug in finder service like Firefox, if so, does it locate Flash for you? Oh, as the article notes, Windows doesn't ship with Flash installed, either. Does this mean anything at all? No.

WalterGR 16y ago
Oh, as the article notes, Windows doesn't ship with Flash installed, either. XP does. I don't know about Vista and 7. Presumably some large percentage of Windows desktops and laptops are sold with Flash pre-installed.
- Keyframe 16y ago
  7 also doesn't ship with Flash.
- slantyyz 16y ago
  At the very least, I was forced to perform an annoying upgrade of a painfully outdated version of Flash that came on the XP install media. In that case, it's the same effort as an install.
kj12345 16y ago
The main way to get Flash is through alternative content placed inside an <object> tag which should be displayed when a player is not found. So normally a download button would appear, in the screenshot though it looks like Engadget just wrote bad embedding code.
ZeroGravitas 16y ago
On Safari market share, maybe the Mac OS X App store will have the unintended effect of promoting free (non-pay) software such as Firefox, Chrome and Opera, assuming there isn't some convenient rule that prevents including them.
Samuel_Michon 16y ago

forensic 16y ago

Apple is getting power drunk :[ They might be the next evil empire. What they really should do is ship with both flash and Click-To-Flash. That would be serving the users best.

adolph 16y ago
That is a pretty hilarious/interesting idea. If Apple doesn't do that maybe Adobe will license and start packaging Click-To-Flash with the Flash plugin. That would be very nice and pro-consumer on Adobe's part.
- redrobot5050 16y ago
  Apple wouldn't do it because making the user's have to click to load content without an intuitive explanation isn't "easy to use". Adobe wouldn't do it, because a large majority of their customers build annoying flash ads.

GHFigs 16y ago

Another way of saying this is "MacBook Air ships without common cause of poor browser performance and crashes."

lutorm 16y ago

I thought the headline meant that the now HD-less Air also shipped without flash memory. That seemed a tad more serious...

smackfu 16y ago

How does this help the consumer?

uriel 16y ago
Anythings that helps people stay away from Flash should be very welcome.

protomyth 16y ago

This might go back to the problems with the Flash plug-in that shipped with OS X 10.6. At the time, due to needing to get the discs made, 10.6 ended up shipping with a Flash plug-in with a security problem. If I remember correctly, the patch Apple shipped was shortly vulnerable too due to another security problem. I wonder if they've made a judgement that the basic installs of OS X will be like iOS and not contain 3rd party software that they can't control.

tvon 16y ago
Yup, there was a big fuss and all the headlines were sure to focus on "security vulnerability" and "Apple". Color me unsurprised at this move...

b3b0p 16y ago

I don't see the problem. Flash is 3rd party add-on. It doesn't perform wonderful and has some issues. More users are using Apple products and have noticed it's not the best experience. It has been stated and somewhat emphasized by Apple and the media to the general public that HTML5 embedded video is the future. See for example: http://www.apple.com/ipad/ready-for-ipad/ http://www.apple.com/ipad/ready-for-ipad/ The way I see it this is just your typical forward looking / future innovation push move by Apple.

rbranson 16y ago

I read this as "MacBook Air ships without Flash [Memory]" as if someone got a MacBook Air without an SSD inside.

jankassens 16y ago
Sorry, I should have added Adobe. Unfortunately, I can't edit the title.

emehrkay 16y ago

Funny because I watched the video of them talking about the air (white bkg, shots of machining etc) and they kept mentioning how much that they loved flash. They were talking about flash memory

oomkiller 16y ago

This will probably improve security. If they shipped Flash on the device, there is a very good chance that it would be out of date (and insecure) by the time someone buys it.

wzdd 16y ago
And in fact this has happened in the past: http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA07-192A.html http://www.us-cert.gov/cas/techalerts/TA07-192A.html Seems like a good reason not to ship it with the OS.

YooLi 16y ago

Not true, the MacBook Air ships with plenty of Flash :) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1816749 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1816749