4 ms·
Steve was right very briefly but in hindsight it's pretty irrational to expect a piece of software to not run on a powerful CPU without contrived restrictions l
by benologist 7y ago
Steve was right very briefly but in hindsight it's pretty irrational to expect a piece of software to not run on a powerful CPU without contrived restrictions like being "banned". We'd have the full Adobe Flash IDE on the iPad next year if Jobs had no grudge and we just waited for the software and hardware to improve. Photoshop's halfway there and SQL Server made it to Linux and Windows made it to ARM.
- slig 7y agoFlash did not run properly on powerful desktop Macs back in the day, how could he expect that Adobe would sort it out for the iPhone?
- benologist 7y agoThe solution was to wait for the software to get better, the hardware to get better, the batteries to get better - today the Flash IDE could run on Windows tablets not much bigger than the iPad Mini, authoring content where before it couldn't even play it back.
- slig 7y agoWhy should Apple wait for some other company when they were perfectly capable of shipping something way better? Adobe had the opportunity, and they missed.
- benologist 7y agoI think a better question is why should Apple persecute anybody's software? Especially just because it's not yet performing well on a new, power-sipping processor and architecture. It will be years before anything complex runs well on their watches, that's a stupid reason to sabotage anyone's efforts.
- slig 7y agoAdobe could have made a great player for the Mac, but they deliberately chose not to. It was awful, power hungry and laggy on Apple desktops and Macbooks. Adobe didn't care about the Mac ecosystem, the player was/is closed source and Apple couldn't not do anything. Why on Earth should Apple invest on a tech that is proven to not work reliably on their platform. Adobe blew it, Apple just made the right decision.