4 ms·

This argument has been played to death, and Adobe never seem to let it go. The fact is, Apple owes Adobe nothing, and not including Flash was never a dig at Ado

This argument has been played to death, and Adobe never seem to let it go. The fact is, Apple owes Adobe nothing, and not including Flash was never a dig at Adobe as a company, but a choice that Apple made about Flash as a software package. Adobe seem to have taken it super personally, but the truth is that Flash on mobile devices just doesn't work in it's current form (speed and usability issues). Steve has said multiple times that the door isn't closed on Flash, they just need Adobe to prove it will perform like Apple expects.

brisance 15y ago
Not exactly. Apple changed their developer agreement such that programs that weren't developed using the iOS SDK weren't allowed on the App Store. They reversed the decision only later on, and now you can develop on Adobe AIR and have the LLVM-derived compiler (irony?) output code for iOS.
- olivercameron 15y ago
  With all of Flash's security issues, I am not surprised Apple doesn't let native Flash apps on their own store.
  - MartinCron 15y ago
    I think the security issues for flash in-browser (mobile safari) are more troublesome than security issues for apps in the app store. Apple can (in theory) validate that the things going through the app store aren't total malware. In-browser? You're on your own, for good or for bad.
    - pyre 15y ago
      Truly. We should disable JavaScript as well. Who knows what AJAX vulnerabilities might be in mobile Safari? Apple can't vet them all for malware. On that token, Apple can't vet all websites to make sure that their content doesn't misrepresent Apple as a company. They should probably just trash Mobile Safari altogether.
      - spicyj 15y ago
        But at least Apple can fix bugs when it finds them in its own products, whereas if there's a giant Flash security hole it can do nothing to fix it.
      - bonzoesc 15y ago
        The security model for AJAX is open, well-documented, and peer-reviewed. Safari implements the same-origin policy, various CSRF-mitigation standards, and tends to be updated quickly once exploits are found.
      - MartinCron 15y ago
        I didn't say that Apple should or shouldn't do anything. Just that apps from the App Store are potentially safer than things in-browser. Of course JavaScript apps pose similar risks, but as Apple controls the JS engine (unlike the Flash runtime) they feel safer that way.
- ugh 15y ago
  You seem to be talking about … different things, no?
powerje 15y ago
Saying Flash doesn't work due to speed and usability issues on Android seems like a stretch. I routinely use Flash on my Xoom and Nexus One with no issues. Where are you getting your information from?
jad 15y ago
Agreed. Also don't forget that no one really made much noise about the lack of Flash on iPhones. It wasn't until iPads also had no Flash that Adobe could more clearly see the writing on the wall and started making a lot of noise. What's more, Adobe would never have put this much effort into making Flash suck less on mobile platforms if Apple had decided that shitty Flash was better than no Flash and went ahead and shipped it with iOS.
roc 15y ago
> "Adobe seem to have taken it super personally" They took it very seriously, as well they should. It was clear that mobile, even then, was going to become so big as to start directing change on the desktop. If Flash is left out of mobile, Adobe's relevance is seriously threatened. That said, I think the 'personal' nature of their response is just posturing. They're taking a victim stance to stir up sympathy because, well, they can. The press will respond to that story far more readily than a straight technological disagreement. And boy have they. It's confusing the issue long enough for Adobe to adapt their authoring tools to kick out competent HTML5, which will protect their revenue stream in either case.

brisance 15y ago

Not exactly. Apple changed their developer agreement such that programs that weren't developed using the iOS SDK weren't allowed on the App Store. They reversed the decision only later on, and now you can develop on Adobe AIR and have the LLVM-derived compiler (irony?) output code for iOS.

olivercameron 15y ago
With all of Flash's security issues, I am not surprised Apple doesn't let native Flash apps on their own store.
- MartinCron 15y ago
  I think the security issues for flash in-browser (mobile safari) are more troublesome than security issues for apps in the app store. Apple can (in theory) validate that the things going through the app store aren't total malware. In-browser? You're on your own, for good or for bad.
  - pyre 15y ago
    Truly. We should disable JavaScript as well. Who knows what AJAX vulnerabilities might be in mobile Safari? Apple can't vet them all for malware. On that token, Apple can't vet all websites to make sure that their content doesn't misrepresent Apple as a company. They should probably just trash Mobile Safari altogether.
    - spicyj 15y ago
      But at least Apple can fix bugs when it finds them in its own products, whereas if there's a giant Flash security hole it can do nothing to fix it.
    - bonzoesc 15y ago
      The security model for AJAX is open, well-documented, and peer-reviewed. Safari implements the same-origin policy, various CSRF-mitigation standards, and tends to be updated quickly once exploits are found.
    - MartinCron 15y ago
      I didn't say that Apple should or shouldn't do anything. Just that apps from the App Store are potentially safer than things in-browser. Of course JavaScript apps pose similar risks, but as Apple controls the JS engine (unlike the Flash runtime) they feel safer that way.
ugh 15y ago
You seem to be talking about … different things, no?

powerje 15y ago

Saying Flash doesn't work due to speed and usability issues on Android seems like a stretch. I routinely use Flash on my Xoom and Nexus One with no issues. Where are you getting your information from?

jad 15y ago

Agreed. Also don't forget that no one really made much noise about the lack of Flash on iPhones. It wasn't until iPads also had no Flash that Adobe could more clearly see the writing on the wall and started making a lot of noise. What's more, Adobe would never have put this much effort into making Flash suck less on mobile platforms if Apple had decided that shitty Flash was better than no Flash and went ahead and shipped it with iOS.

roc 15y ago

> "Adobe seem to have taken it super personally" They took it very seriously, as well they should. It was clear that mobile, even then, was going to become so big as to start directing change on the desktop. If Flash is left out of mobile, Adobe's relevance is seriously threatened. That said, I think the 'personal' nature of their response is just posturing. They're taking a victim stance to stir up sympathy because, well, they can. The press will respond to that story far more readily than a straight technological disagreement. And boy have they. It's confusing the issue long enough for Adobe to adapt their authoring tools to kick out competent HTML5, which will protect their revenue stream in either case.