5 ms·

Steve Jobs predicted this in 2010 - https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

tosseraccount 12y ago
Steve may have been a tad unrepresentative that "open video" issue. Remember, this is the guy that controlled QuickTime and never opened it up. That was a bit of problem for open video supporters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company
- micampe 12y ago
  “The International Organization for Standardization approved the QuickTime file format as the basis of the MPEG-4 file format. The MPEG-4 file format specification was created on the basis of the QuickTime format specification published in 2001.” — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickTime_File_Format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickTime_File_Format
  - tosseraccount 12y ago
    Not so fast there ... This registration authority for code-points in "MP4 Family" files is Apple Inc. and it is named in Annex D (informative) in MPEG-4 Part 12.[18] (from your link) Apple did in fact control Quicktime AND keep it very proprietary. To insinuate that they were pro open source on video is revisionism.
    - micampe 12y ago
      That just means that Apple manages this list: http://www.mp4ra.org/atoms.html http://www.mp4ra.org/atoms.html The file format is still an ISO standard and pretty much anything reads it. Even Apple itself doesn't use the Quicktime container anymore (and hasn't for years). I didn't insinuate anything regarding open source, which doesn't appear anywhere in the part I quoted. Edit: Oh, I noticed you significantly modified your first comment, that's why you now talk about open source when I never did. When I responded your comment read: “From the guy that tried to force QuickTime on us?”.
      - tosseraccount 12y ago
        And got whacked for it.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- micampe 12y ago
  This comment originally read: ”From the guy that tried to force QuickTime on us?”, and that was the comment I was responding to. Also, the events described in your link all took place while Jobs was not at Apple.
  - tosseraccount 12y ago
    Fair enough. Looks like some Apple fanatics are out today. If you criticize apple ; you have to be careful otherwise you get whited out pretty quick. So I toned it down. My point was the Steve Jobs complaining about proprietary video is very ironic ... when he was pedaling his own proprietary video tech.
    - micampe 12y ago
      Oh please, stop it with the fanatics. The first version of your comment is not only incorrect but also not the type and tone of contribution appreciated on HN, and you have been here long enough to know it.
      - tosseraccount 12y ago
        You don't remember the "Apple Software Update" programs on windows that you couldn't get rid of? C'mon man.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
- tosseraccount 12y ago
  From Apple itself ... "proprietary acceleration techniques" http://web.archive.org/web/20010605082836/www.pa.msu.edu/~hamlin/facts/1stltr.html http://web.archive.org/web/20010605082836/www.pa.msu.edu/~ha...
  - micampe 12y ago
    > Thursday, February 9, 1995 Steve Jobs was not at Apple between 1985 and 1997.
  - tosseraccount 12y ago
    https://lists.apple.com/archives/QuickTime-VR/2004/Jul/msg00113.html https://lists.apple.com/archives/QuickTime-VR/2004/Jul/msg00... <i>More than 250 million copies of QuickTime 6 have been downloaded in > less than two years since its release. According to Frost & Sullivans > 2004 Global Media Streaming Platform Report, between 2002 and 2003 > Microsofts and Real Networks worldwide market share percentages were > either stable or declining while QuickTimes market share increased to > 36.8 percent, a close second to Microsoft. Real Networks came in third > place with less than 25 percent of the worldwide streaming market > share.</i> Apple was never an "open source/open technology" white knight in video.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
jsight 12y ago
So did anyone with a pulse. :) The only part that garnered widespread opposition was the sixth point ("the most important reason"). Apple later reversed course on that particular position.
- epistasis 12y ago
  There were an awful lot of people, with hot blood and full pulses, that objected to things other than the sixth point. I think it was a mixture of several types of people, among these one type perhaps being those that would object to anything Steve Jobs said, and another type perhaps being those that had never experienced the misery of Flash on non-Windows platforms.
  - schoen 12y ago
    I think the parent commenter meant that disagreement with Apple on point six was widespread, rather than that disagreement with Adobe on point six was (uniquely) widespread.
- MichaelApproved 12y ago
  That's some impressive revisionist history. The whole reason Steve published that list was because of the backlash Apple received for not supporting Flash.
  - jsight 12y ago
    And yet in his own words, the "most important reason" was to prevent other companies from using cross-platform libraries (such as Adobe Air) on the platform. That reason was reversed, and Adobe Air (including what was essentially compiled Flash) became available on iOS. (see daring fireball for more information: http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flas...)
    - revscat 12y ago
      It was never reversed, and you're missing the point. Flash as a runtime environment -- with its own stack, VM, APIs, and process ID -- was never allowed on iOS, and only barely was available on other mobile devices. What you linked to was Air, which allowed you to write applications in ActionScript and then generate Objective-C. This is worlds away from a reversal. You were still using Cocoa to interact with the device, not Flash.
higherpurpose 12y ago
Having one of the most popular platforms in the world not accept Flash kind of helped that "prediction" a little bit.
- TillE 12y ago
  The complete failure of Flash on Android was probably a bigger factor. A web technology could conceivably survive without iOS support, but not when you've proved the point that it's inappropriate for any mobile platform.

tosseraccount 12y ago

Steve may have been a tad unrepresentative that "open video" issue. Remember, this is the guy that controlled QuickTime and never opened it up. That was a bit of problem for open video supporters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company

micampe 12y ago
“The International Organization for Standardization approved the QuickTime file format as the basis of the MPEG-4 file format. The MPEG-4 file format specification was created on the basis of the QuickTime format specification published in 2001.” — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickTime_File_Format http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuickTime_File_Format
- tosseraccount 12y ago
  Not so fast there ... This registration authority for code-points in "MP4 Family" files is Apple Inc. and it is named in Annex D (informative) in MPEG-4 Part 12.[18] (from your link) Apple did in fact control Quicktime AND keep it very proprietary. To insinuate that they were pro open source on video is revisionism.
  - micampe 12y ago
    That just means that Apple manages this list: http://www.mp4ra.org/atoms.html http://www.mp4ra.org/atoms.html The file format is still an ISO standard and pretty much anything reads it. Even Apple itself doesn't use the Quicktime container anymore (and hasn't for years). I didn't insinuate anything regarding open source, which doesn't appear anywhere in the part I quoted. Edit: Oh, I noticed you significantly modified your first comment, that's why you now talk about open source when I never did. When I responded your comment read: “From the guy that tried to force QuickTime on us?”.
    - tosseraccount 12y ago
      And got whacked for it.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
micampe 12y ago
This comment originally read: ”From the guy that tried to force QuickTime on us?”, and that was the comment I was responding to. Also, the events described in your link all took place while Jobs was not at Apple.
- tosseraccount 12y ago
  Fair enough. Looks like some Apple fanatics are out today. If you criticize apple ; you have to be careful otherwise you get whited out pretty quick. So I toned it down. My point was the Steve Jobs complaining about proprietary video is very ironic ... when he was pedaling his own proprietary video tech.
  - micampe 12y ago
    Oh please, stop it with the fanatics. The first version of your comment is not only incorrect but also not the type and tone of contribution appreciated on HN, and you have been here long enough to know it.
    - tosseraccount 12y ago
      You don't remember the "Apple Software Update" programs on windows that you couldn't get rid of? C'mon man.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
tosseraccount 12y ago
From Apple itself ... "proprietary acceleration techniques" http://web.archive.org/web/20010605082836/www.pa.msu.edu/~hamlin/facts/1stltr.html http://web.archive.org/web/20010605082836/www.pa.msu.edu/~ha...
- micampe 12y ago
  > Thursday, February 9, 1995 Steve Jobs was not at Apple between 1985 and 1997.
- tosseraccount 12y ago
  https://lists.apple.com/archives/QuickTime-VR/2004/Jul/msg00113.html https://lists.apple.com/archives/QuickTime-VR/2004/Jul/msg00... <i>More than 250 million copies of QuickTime 6 have been downloaded in > less than two years since its release. According to Frost & Sullivans > 2004 Global Media Streaming Platform Report, between 2002 and 2003 > Microsofts and Real Networks worldwide market share percentages were > either stable or declining while QuickTimes market share increased to > 36.8 percent, a close second to Microsoft. Real Networks came in third > place with less than 25 percent of the worldwide streaming market > share.</i> Apple was never an "open source/open technology" white knight in video.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

jsight 12y ago

So did anyone with a pulse. :) The only part that garnered widespread opposition was the sixth point ("the most important reason"). Apple later reversed course on that particular position.

epistasis 12y ago
There were an awful lot of people, with hot blood and full pulses, that objected to things other than the sixth point. I think it was a mixture of several types of people, among these one type perhaps being those that would object to anything Steve Jobs said, and another type perhaps being those that had never experienced the misery of Flash on non-Windows platforms.
- schoen 12y ago
  I think the parent commenter meant that disagreement with Apple on point six was widespread, rather than that disagreement with Adobe on point six was (uniquely) widespread.
MichaelApproved 12y ago
That's some impressive revisionist history. The whole reason Steve published that list was because of the backlash Apple received for not supporting Flash.
- jsight 12y ago
  And yet in his own words, the "most important reason" was to prevent other companies from using cross-platform libraries (such as Adobe Air) on the platform. That reason was reversed, and Adobe Air (including what was essentially compiled Flash) became available on iOS. (see daring fireball for more information: http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flash_compiler http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/iphone_agreement_bans_flas...)
  - revscat 12y ago
    It was never reversed, and you're missing the point. Flash as a runtime environment -- with its own stack, VM, APIs, and process ID -- was never allowed on iOS, and only barely was available on other mobile devices. What you linked to was Air, which allowed you to write applications in ActionScript and then generate Objective-C. This is worlds away from a reversal. You were still using Cocoa to interact with the device, not Flash.

higherpurpose 12y ago

Having one of the most popular platforms in the world not accept Flash kind of helped that "prediction" a little bit.

TillE 12y ago
The complete failure of Flash on Android was probably a bigger factor. A web technology could conceivably survive without iOS support, but not when you've proved the point that it's inappropriate for any mobile platform.