8 ms·

I always understood the "inherit" part as "Who can find and patch the security vulnerabilities that affect his clients?". And since Flash was a closed source 3r

by yonixw 5y ago

I always understood the "inherit" part as "Who can find and patch the security vulnerabilities that affect his clients?". And since Flash was a closed source 3rd party plugin, it meant that the Safari team is dependent on them. Both for discovery and fixing bugs. Meanwhile, HTML5 and each Browser's Core (Webkit, Chromium etc.) is open source. This kind of closed-source vs open-source+open-spec is indeed inherit to the product. I liked Flash too.. but the reason we don't have "HTML5 Flash" is only due to business decisions from Adobe headquarters. Since Steve Jobs prediction was correct (even if by chance) that power-wise, HTML5+JS=FLASH.

shkkmo 5y ago
FYI, "inherit" is not the right word, you want "inherent"
rendall 5y ago
> "I always understood the "inherent" part as ..." This comes off as a just-so story to explain Apple's actions. That Apple would criticize Flash for being closed-source is absurd, but that people would repeat that as a valid criticism is baffling. By the way, only the run-time was closed source. Build tools, language, was all open-source. You didn't even need Flash to compile a swf. > power-wise, HTML5+JS=FLASH I'm not sure what you're saying here. "power-wise"? What does that mean? HTML5 has in over 12 years never been able to deliver the experience that Flash does. They are completely different things. Jobs' successfully conflating them in everyone's mind is a testament to his power as an influencer. Awesome, really.
- hulitu 5y ago
  >That Apple would criticize Flash for being closed-source is absurd, but that people would repeat that as a valid criticism is baffling. That's how propaganda works. You need a lie and some newspapers to amplify it. Jobs was a "good" propagandist.
  - yonixw 5y ago
    Can you both help us understand your stance, instead of throwing political words? In his open letter [1], Steve Jobs specifies his open source contribution for HTML5 and the Webkit browsers. Meanwhile Adobe itself did not contribute any. All the available tools noted above were not officials. He was very correct at the time. Also noted in the letter, the incentives in play are actually the opposite of what you have said, as how Apple and Adobe work together bringing Adobe software to Mac. Why would Steve Jobs hurt any Adobe product, isn't it hurting the MAC demographic at the time (artists)? As there was never any Apple software competing with Adobe. IMHO, it's more likely that flash on mobile were to be a real problem holding the iPad\iPhone back if supported. So much so, Steve had to publish it and gain support from the outside world. Because I doubt any C-Level executive would be behind him destroying the mutual relationship with adobe. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20200430094807/https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200430094807/https://www.apple...

by yonixw 5y ago

shkkmo 5y ago

FYI, "inherit" is not the right word, you want "inherent"

rendall 5y ago

> "I always understood the "inherent" part as ..." This comes off as a just-so story to explain Apple's actions. That Apple would criticize Flash for being closed-source is absurd, but that people would repeat that as a valid criticism is baffling. By the way, only the run-time was closed source. Build tools, language, was all open-source. You didn't even need Flash to compile a swf. > power-wise, HTML5+JS=FLASH I'm not sure what you're saying here. "power-wise"? What does that mean? HTML5 has in over 12 years never been able to deliver the experience that Flash does. They are completely different things. Jobs' successfully conflating them in everyone's mind is a testament to his power as an influencer. Awesome, really.

hulitu 5y ago
>That Apple would criticize Flash for being closed-source is absurd, but that people would repeat that as a valid criticism is baffling. That's how propaganda works. You need a lie and some newspapers to amplify it. Jobs was a "good" propagandist.
- yonixw 5y ago
  Can you both help us understand your stance, instead of throwing political words? In his open letter [1], Steve Jobs specifies his open source contribution for HTML5 and the Webkit browsers. Meanwhile Adobe itself did not contribute any. All the available tools noted above were not officials. He was very correct at the time. Also noted in the letter, the incentives in play are actually the opposite of what you have said, as how Apple and Adobe work together bringing Adobe software to Mac. Why would Steve Jobs hurt any Adobe product, isn't it hurting the MAC demographic at the time (artists)? As there was never any Apple software competing with Adobe. IMHO, it's more likely that flash on mobile were to be a real problem holding the iPad\iPhone back if supported. So much so, Steve had to publish it and gain support from the outside world. Because I doubt any C-Level executive would be behind him destroying the mutual relationship with adobe. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20200430094807/https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200430094807/https://www.apple...