6 ms·

The day Apple won the Flash fight

30 points by Kavan 15y ago

tomlin 15y ago
> Basically, Adobe is acknowledging Apple has won when it comes to Flash. Why does this article have to have a "vs." narrative? Is it possible that Adobe just wants to succeed and will do what it takes to gain profits? And I'm not so sure Apple has won just yet. If a device were to gain the traction necessary to gain enough marketshare (you saw a bit of this with HP's TouchPad), we support Flash is a pretty decent incentive for the average consumer who isn't caught up in the HTML5 vs. Flash war (read: every average person).
- wmeredith 15y ago
  Uh, I'm pretty sure the average person doesn't know (or care) what Flash is.
  - watty 15y ago
    Agreed, my mom still doesn't understand why her "Smilebox" doesn't work on her iPad (video slideshow software).
  - tomlin 15y ago
    Agreed. Further to my point, the average person will take a look at a lego block vs. the video they want to see and make their assumptions and decisions based on that, assuming other factors match or exceed iPad's.
- yardie 15y ago
  If Flash was as strong as an incentive as you claim it is than iPad sales should have leveled off once Android tablets came to be. we support Flash hasn't turned out to be as big as an incentive as Android tablet makers had hoped. As far as I'm concerned most people are waiting for the >200 android tablet, Flash or no Flash. For the time being it's an iPad market and Adobe has to pivot around that. I believe in the beginning Apple wasn't against the idea of Flash, but Adobe couldn't deliver (they didn't deliver anything until almost 3 years later) and by the time they did deliver something Apple realized they could do without.
  - tomlin 15y ago
    Right, except the Android tablets are not better than an iPad (read: no individual Android branded tablet has exceeded the sales of the iPad). Apple's position in the market isn't static. If a competing product came out and was better than iPad's offerings (read: matching engineering, design and ecosystem brilliance) people would certainly entertain a different product. Now add Flash. You can't see how that would be possible?
- tomelders 15y ago
  Well considering the rhetoric from Apple & Adobe regarding iOS and flash, it's definitely been an "us vs them" scenario. Adobe were very quick to publicly criticise Apple for not supporting Flash in iOS, and Apple were very quick to respond with equally stern comments. So I think the author is correct to frame it in those terms. As for the article, I think it's very balanced. Yes, this is a "win" for Apple, because Adobe have adapted to iOS, not the other way around, and Adobe have been very clear on this issue. They wanted iOS to support flash. But the article also goes on to say that this is a big step forward for Adobe. Which it is, and that's a positive comment for Adobe. And finally, "we support Flash is a pretty decent incentive for the average consumer who isn't caught up in the HTML5 vs. Flash war" Wh.... wh..... what?
  - tomlin 15y ago
    > Adobe were very quick to publicly criticize Apple for not supporting Flash in iOS, and Apple were very quick to respond with equally stern comments. It should be right vs. wrong, not "I have an iPad, so therefore..." The vs. narrative is ridiculous because both companies muddy up the facts. How can you be on either company's side? Both sides mask intentions and facts. Adobe isn't for any particular user's innovation. And Apple is not for open, web-based apps. Try and upload an image or file from your iPhone from Safari. See how the standardized file input doesn't work? Not exactly enticing me to create a web-based app for the iOS. When you come to defend Adobe and Apple based on their false intentions, you just further falsify the industry as a whole. Dissension is the highest form of patriotism. It's okay to be critical when it's appropriate.
    - tomelders 15y ago
      I have my own opinion on Flash, but I don't think I was defending one or the other in that comment. The point was, it was absolutely an Adobe vs Apple battle of wills scenario. We can debate wether the "vs" mentality was right or wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that Apple and Adobe went head to head, very publicly, over this issue. And Apple won, I don't see any other realistic or pragmatic way to call it.
too_many_gregs 15y ago
This article is written very childishly and is completely devoid of anything non opinion. This person is obviously neither a market strategist, nor a competent reporter.
0x12 15y ago
Apple did not win anything, Adobe just decided to support a device which has a large enough user base to be 'worth it'. If Apple had sold a few hundred thousand of these then this would have never happened.
- kentbuckle 15y ago
  Isn't that the point of the article? Apple sold enough devices to get Adobe to change their content delivery strategy?
  - watty 15y ago
    This is just for video, most websites already support non-Flash video using one of the hundreds of Javascript frameworks.
funkah 15y ago
Before the iPhone it seemed like everyone agreed that Flash sucked, but after iOS that was taken to be some kind of Apple fanboy position. Which is to say, plenty of people with no particular allegiance to Apple have been unhappy with Flash for a long time, so there is no need to paint this as some kind of unilateral war on Apple's part. Flash is crappy and it's finally, slowly dying, that's all.
- RyanMcGreal 15y ago
  Unlike most people who grumbled about Flash, Apple actually made the strategic decision not to support it any more on its mobile OS. I'm not a huge fan of Apple, but I admire and respect them for taking this calculated risk.
  - chico_dusty 15y ago
    Well, the other community grumbling about flash is Linux, and they don't have marketshare enough to matter to anyone.
- tomelders 15y ago
  I've been racking my brain to try and make sense of why som many people seem to have forgotten just what Flash did to the web, and that's it. Pro-Flash is the polite face of Anti-Apple.
  - watty 15y ago
    There's no doubt Flash transformed the web but not all of it was good. Flash was (and still is) buggy - how many browsers have crashed and how many vulnerabilities has the Flash plugin introduced?
    - tomelders 15y ago
      Sorry, I wasn't clear. What I think flash did to the web was bad, and in my view held the internet back five years.
  - 15y ago
jinushaun 15y ago
People seems to forget that Adobe is a company that makes tools. For Adobe, it has never been Flash versus HTML5. It's about giving tools that people are willing to buy or upgrade to. Even if the iPhone had never existed, Adobe would still be adding HTML5 and mobile support for their products.
- windsurfer 15y ago
  Indeed. Adobe is already making some html5 tools, as well as allowing cross compilation of fla files to swf and html5. They actually want flash to die too, since the patent licensing of SWF is quite expensive, complicated, and restrictive. Adobe has actually been saying this, too, but no one is listening.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- grahamr 15y ago
  I think it was Adobe that forgot it was a company that makes tools. They did make it Flash versus HTML5, and are now realizing that they should have been agnostic as a toolmaker.
  - watty 15y ago
    Flash existed long before HTML5, there was no platform for the tools. They revolutionized the web and HTML5 is catching up
- seanalltogether 15y ago
  Precisely. I work for an agency that has the chance to invite different teams from adobe into our office every 6 months or so. Many people might not realize this but when they come to your office they are looking to hear what you have to say, they are not there to push an agenda of how they envision the future. They have a whole process of looking over your latest work and hearing about where it went good and where it went bad. They discuss new features that may or may not be of interest to you, and then finish of by asking where you would personally choose to invest in adobe if you had the opportunity. They actually want to know if given the opportunity to be their bosses, what would you direct them to work on. This is why this article strikes me so odd, because Adobe didn't lose anything, they asked their partners what they could build for them, and clearly video streaming to ios was a top feature request.
recoiledsnake 15y ago
It's been more than a year after Jobs' post disparaging Flash and promising that HTML5 can fill much of the gap. While it has improved, HTML5 on iOS still lags behind a lot. Apple wins the Flash fight when Angry Birds can run on HTML5. Maybe that is what they're afraid of.
- Anechoic 15y ago
  >Maybe that is what they're afraid of. Who is "they" in this statement?
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    Apple.
- ugh 15y ago
  Why is that necessary? Angry Birds works just fine as an iOS app. For Flash to become obsolete feature parity of HTML5 is not necessary. If most use cases are covered and if the number of devices without Flash provide enough incentive for content producers and publishers to do without Flash it’s very possible that Flash will disappear slowly.
  - recoiledsnake 15y ago
    Angry Birds was just an example for the level of functionality (graphics, animations etc.).
    - ugh 15y ago
      Sure, but why exactly is that level of functionality necessary? It would be wrong to assume that HTML5 needs feature parity.
- doomlaser 15y ago
  Angry Birds already runs on HTML5. http://chrome.angrybirds.com/ http://chrome.angrybirds.com/
doomlaser 15y ago
I find this a little ironic as today Apple also chose to highlight a Flash app as its iPad Game of The Week: http://yfrog.com/nxvz8p http://yfrog.com/nxvz8p Machinarium is a popular flash game that runs on iPad through Adobe AIR for mobile. My guess is we'll see a lot more native Flash games on the app store as processor speed increases, and even more impressive work when Flash 11 ships its Stage3D GPU acceleration for mobile (part of the Molehill project).
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
  - doomlaser 15y ago
    But the point is that they didn't port! The game is running in a self-contained Flash environment.
watty 15y ago
Fluff article, really despise these immature "wars" and biased blogs. I own an Android phone, iPad, Touchpad, and a Windows laptop. I use the best technology I can and let results decide my decisions rather than brand loyalty. The new Media Server is for video content only - your iOS device will still be missing Flash content. Competent websites have already solved this problem. I'm all for HTML5 taking over as long as browser compatibility is maintained and developer tools improve for both designers and developers. For now, Flash wins in the performance, cross-browser compatibility, and developer tools. http://www.craftymind.com/guimark3/ http://www.craftymind.com/guimark3/
Causalien 15y ago
From an ActionScript developer's point of view it still takes too long to develop anything interactive in html5. So for the sake of time cost/income, I'll continue to push interactive content out in flash, while using html5 for linear stuff. With the recent news of unity for flash, the whole thing is about to embark on a new adventure.

30 points by Kavan 15y ago

> Basically, Adobe is acknowledging Apple has won when it comes to Flash. Why does this article have to have a "vs." narrative? Is it possible that Adobe just wants to succeed and will do what it takes to gain profits? And I'm not so sure Apple has won just yet. If a device were to gain the traction necessary to gain enough marketshare (you saw a bit of this with HP's TouchPad), we support Flash is a pretty decent incentive for the average consumer who isn't caught up in the HTML5 vs. Flash war (read: every average person).

wmeredith 15y ago
Uh, I'm pretty sure the average person doesn't know (or care) what Flash is.
- watty 15y ago
  Agreed, my mom still doesn't understand why her "Smilebox" doesn't work on her iPad (video slideshow software).
- tomlin 15y ago
  Agreed. Further to my point, the average person will take a look at a lego block vs. the video they want to see and make their assumptions and decisions based on that, assuming other factors match or exceed iPad's.
yardie 15y ago
If Flash was as strong as an incentive as you claim it is than iPad sales should have leveled off once Android tablets came to be. we support Flash hasn't turned out to be as big as an incentive as Android tablet makers had hoped. As far as I'm concerned most people are waiting for the >200 android tablet, Flash or no Flash. For the time being it's an iPad market and Adobe has to pivot around that. I believe in the beginning Apple wasn't against the idea of Flash, but Adobe couldn't deliver (they didn't deliver anything until almost 3 years later) and by the time they did deliver something Apple realized they could do without.
- tomlin 15y ago
  Right, except the Android tablets are not better than an iPad (read: no individual Android branded tablet has exceeded the sales of the iPad). Apple's position in the market isn't static. If a competing product came out and was better than iPad's offerings (read: matching engineering, design and ecosystem brilliance) people would certainly entertain a different product. Now add Flash. You can't see how that would be possible?
tomelders 15y ago
Well considering the rhetoric from Apple & Adobe regarding iOS and flash, it's definitely been an "us vs them" scenario. Adobe were very quick to publicly criticise Apple for not supporting Flash in iOS, and Apple were very quick to respond with equally stern comments. So I think the author is correct to frame it in those terms. As for the article, I think it's very balanced. Yes, this is a "win" for Apple, because Adobe have adapted to iOS, not the other way around, and Adobe have been very clear on this issue. They wanted iOS to support flash. But the article also goes on to say that this is a big step forward for Adobe. Which it is, and that's a positive comment for Adobe. And finally, "we support Flash is a pretty decent incentive for the average consumer who isn't caught up in the HTML5 vs. Flash war" Wh.... wh..... what?
- tomlin 15y ago
  > Adobe were very quick to publicly criticize Apple for not supporting Flash in iOS, and Apple were very quick to respond with equally stern comments. It should be right vs. wrong, not "I have an iPad, so therefore..." The vs. narrative is ridiculous because both companies muddy up the facts. How can you be on either company's side? Both sides mask intentions and facts. Adobe isn't for any particular user's innovation. And Apple is not for open, web-based apps. Try and upload an image or file from your iPhone from Safari. See how the standardized file input doesn't work? Not exactly enticing me to create a web-based app for the iOS. When you come to defend Adobe and Apple based on their false intentions, you just further falsify the industry as a whole. Dissension is the highest form of patriotism. It's okay to be critical when it's appropriate.
  - tomelders 15y ago
    I have my own opinion on Flash, but I don't think I was defending one or the other in that comment. The point was, it was absolutely an Adobe vs Apple battle of wills scenario. We can debate wether the "vs" mentality was right or wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that Apple and Adobe went head to head, very publicly, over this issue. And Apple won, I don't see any other realistic or pragmatic way to call it.

too_many_gregs 15y ago

This article is written very childishly and is completely devoid of anything non opinion. This person is obviously neither a market strategist, nor a competent reporter.

0x12 15y ago

Apple did not win anything, Adobe just decided to support a device which has a large enough user base to be 'worth it'. If Apple had sold a few hundred thousand of these then this would have never happened.

kentbuckle 15y ago
Isn't that the point of the article? Apple sold enough devices to get Adobe to change their content delivery strategy?
- watty 15y ago
  This is just for video, most websites already support non-Flash video using one of the hundreds of Javascript frameworks.

funkah 15y ago

Before the iPhone it seemed like everyone agreed that Flash sucked, but after iOS that was taken to be some kind of Apple fanboy position. Which is to say, plenty of people with no particular allegiance to Apple have been unhappy with Flash for a long time, so there is no need to paint this as some kind of unilateral war on Apple's part. Flash is crappy and it's finally, slowly dying, that's all.

RyanMcGreal 15y ago
Unlike most people who grumbled about Flash, Apple actually made the strategic decision not to support it any more on its mobile OS. I'm not a huge fan of Apple, but I admire and respect them for taking this calculated risk.
- chico_dusty 15y ago
  Well, the other community grumbling about flash is Linux, and they don't have marketshare enough to matter to anyone.
tomelders 15y ago
I've been racking my brain to try and make sense of why som many people seem to have forgotten just what Flash did to the web, and that's it. Pro-Flash is the polite face of Anti-Apple.
- watty 15y ago
  There's no doubt Flash transformed the web but not all of it was good. Flash was (and still is) buggy - how many browsers have crashed and how many vulnerabilities has the Flash plugin introduced?
  - tomelders 15y ago
    Sorry, I wasn't clear. What I think flash did to the web was bad, and in my view held the internet back five years.
- 15y ago

jinushaun 15y ago

People seems to forget that Adobe is a company that makes tools. For Adobe, it has never been Flash versus HTML5. It's about giving tools that people are willing to buy or upgrade to. Even if the iPhone had never existed, Adobe would still be adding HTML5 and mobile support for their products.

windsurfer 15y ago
Indeed. Adobe is already making some html5 tools, as well as allowing cross compilation of fla files to swf and html5. They actually want flash to die too, since the patent licensing of SWF is quite expensive, complicated, and restrictive. Adobe has actually been saying this, too, but no one is listening.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
grahamr 15y ago
I think it was Adobe that forgot it was a company that makes tools. They did make it Flash versus HTML5, and are now realizing that they should have been agnostic as a toolmaker.
- watty 15y ago
  Flash existed long before HTML5, there was no platform for the tools. They revolutionized the web and HTML5 is catching up
seanalltogether 15y ago
Precisely. I work for an agency that has the chance to invite different teams from adobe into our office every 6 months or so. Many people might not realize this but when they come to your office they are looking to hear what you have to say, they are not there to push an agenda of how they envision the future. They have a whole process of looking over your latest work and hearing about where it went good and where it went bad. They discuss new features that may or may not be of interest to you, and then finish of by asking where you would personally choose to invest in adobe if you had the opportunity. They actually want to know if given the opportunity to be their bosses, what would you direct them to work on. This is why this article strikes me so odd, because Adobe didn't lose anything, they asked their partners what they could build for them, and clearly video streaming to ios was a top feature request.

recoiledsnake 15y ago

It's been more than a year after Jobs' post disparaging Flash and promising that HTML5 can fill much of the gap. While it has improved, HTML5 on iOS still lags behind a lot. Apple wins the Flash fight when Angry Birds can run on HTML5. Maybe that is what they're afraid of.

Anechoic 15y ago
>Maybe that is what they're afraid of. Who is "they" in this statement?
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  Apple.
ugh 15y ago
Why is that necessary? Angry Birds works just fine as an iOS app. For Flash to become obsolete feature parity of HTML5 is not necessary. If most use cases are covered and if the number of devices without Flash provide enough incentive for content producers and publishers to do without Flash it’s very possible that Flash will disappear slowly.
- recoiledsnake 15y ago
  Angry Birds was just an example for the level of functionality (graphics, animations etc.).
  - ugh 15y ago
    Sure, but why exactly is that level of functionality necessary? It would be wrong to assume that HTML5 needs feature parity.
doomlaser 15y ago
Angry Birds already runs on HTML5. http://chrome.angrybirds.com/ http://chrome.angrybirds.com/

doomlaser 15y ago

I find this a little ironic as today Apple also chose to highlight a Flash app as its iPad Game of The Week: http://yfrog.com/nxvz8p http://yfrog.com/nxvz8p Machinarium is a popular flash game that runs on iPad through Adobe AIR for mobile. My guess is we'll see a lot more native Flash games on the app store as processor speed increases, and even more impressive work when Flash 11 ships its Stage3D GPU acceleration for mobile (part of the Molehill project).

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- doomlaser 15y ago
  But the point is that they didn't port! The game is running in a self-contained Flash environment.

watty 15y ago

Fluff article, really despise these immature "wars" and biased blogs. I own an Android phone, iPad, Touchpad, and a Windows laptop. I use the best technology I can and let results decide my decisions rather than brand loyalty. The new Media Server is for video content only - your iOS device will still be missing Flash content. Competent websites have already solved this problem. I'm all for HTML5 taking over as long as browser compatibility is maintained and developer tools improve for both designers and developers. For now, Flash wins in the performance, cross-browser compatibility, and developer tools. http://www.craftymind.com/guimark3/ http://www.craftymind.com/guimark3/

Causalien 15y ago

From an ActionScript developer's point of view it still takes too long to develop anything interactive in html5. So for the sake of time cost/income, I'll continue to push interactive content out in flash, while using html5 for linear stuff. With the recent news of unity for flash, the whole thing is about to embark on a new adventure.