Adobe has said it won't be developing any more versions of its packager, which allowed Flash applications to be recompiled for the iPhone. Instead Android will be its focus in the future. Apple doesn't want Flash on the iPhone, so Adobe fitted its development platform with "Packager for iPhone" which compiles Flash apps into …
Great news for iPhone. Terrible news for Android.
maybe now they will have time to get it working properly with firefox? or maybe not
Let me be first to say...
Wooooooooooooo, no flash on iPhone,
<partys like flash is dead>
The reason Apple are against the idea is simple: Developers must use Cocoa Touch APIs, Apple can improve these APIs over time, tune for performance (or new hardware) and Apple remain in control of the iPhone's destiny. Layers that get between an app and Cocoa Touch introduce a dependancy that Apple cannot control, and mean that part of the iPhone experience is a "closed box" to them - the success of the iPhone OS platform is far to important to them.
But this is only part of the story, Apple also want developers to create UI's customised for the iPhone (and now iPad) a "cookie-cutter" application development environment would have eroded that - Apple understand that the success of the iPhone is actually a story about the success of two things: The development environment (yes, Objective-C is actually really nice to develop in) and the iPhone UI.
they should pull Photoshop off the Mac as well.
if only just for a laugh.
Cue scene in Adobe HQ boardroom:
CxO #1: "Hey guys! I have this awesome way to get back at Apple - let's cut off CS and make Apple beg for mercy!"
CxO #2: "Err, that would cut off about 25% or so of our income, plus it opens a gargantuan hole for competitors to create a market in. Even Apple could build something."
CxO #1: "Umm, err, umm..." (taps into email: "Dear Flash evangelists: please relay to the world that Steve Jobs is a poopyhead! Kindly put in the usual disclaimers about it not being our official position, etc.") There - problem solved!
That would be hilarious.
no flash makes money for app store
the lack of Flash forces people to use apple's SDK and thus to publish apps through the app store, this is a huge amount of money for apple.
this is why, if I were to upgrade from my now ageing Nokai E71, I'd consider an n900, to get a truly hacker-friendly phone and not a crippled device like an iphone or pre (and please don't suggest jail-breaking, I have considered it but it's not a sustainable option).
Are you clueless?
Any app produced through Adobe's Flash Packager would still have had to go through the App Store approval process, thus you'd still need a dev account, have paid your $99 and done what every other dev has to do to get their app approved. You appear to conflate developing a Flash app for the iPhone with somehow magically bypassing the App Store - just stupid!
Second, Apple make no money from the App Store, just like they make no money from iTunes. You appear to have no understanding how this ecosystem works, yet you feel confident enough to pass comment, thus making yourself look most foolish.
I highly recommend it
As an N900 user, I can say one thing about that phone. It kicks ASS!
apple makes no money from the app store?
Really? so how is that apple makes no money from the app store if they get 30% for every app sold!! I am sure all are not free and if there were 1 billion downloads am sure they made some money.
Without Adobe Photoshop, Apple would probably have ceased to exist years ago.
I wonder if they'll decide to stop bringing out new versions for Mac, now that would be funny!
There's no 'u' in irony
I doubt it.
Adobe needs Apple way more than Apple needs Adobe.
But I'm a generous man, and we'll entertain your hypothesis for the time being.
ADOBE: Ha ha! Have at you! No more Photoshop for Mac! Take that, you turtleneck-wearing, goateed Beatnik hipster scum!
GOATEED BEATNIK HIPSTER SCUM: Oh, botheration. /fires up Parallels
ADOBE: Damn and blast!
GOATEED BEATNIK HIPSTER SCUM: /sips decaff Soy latte
Chance would be a fine thing
there's no point to most of the functionality introduced in new versions of PS anyway, and the annual upgrade tax is pretty fucking wearing. FOAD Adobe, and stay dead.
The problem is...
...Jobs is concentrating too much on making people purchase an app for every little function they need or want for their phone. Meanwhile, iPhone users are becoming removed from the general freedom of the Net.
If I fancy a game of Space Invaders, I can just visit a Flash Games site using Skyfire on my HD2. An iPhone user would have to line Steve's pockets to do a similar thing.
The iPhone is ultimately a tool to milk people of the folding stuff in their wallets. And it's very good at that.
99% of iPhone app functions can be performed on other phones by a monkey capable of typing into google and then saving the page as a bookmark for later direct access.
Keep flash off phones.
"If I fancy a game of Space Invaders, I can just visit a Flash Games site using Skyfire on my HD2."
If I fancy a game of Space Invaders, I can just download the fee app from the internet onto my HTC Touch HD. Don't need flash for that.
While I am in *no way* an Apple fan (I own no Apple products), I applaud anything that kills this damn-awful product - while Flash might have made sense in the old days of 'net development, it is now bloated and unnecessary. Much like the PDF formats, in fact - what started of as a good idea soon had scope-creep plastered all over it and now is a bloated piece of junk (the ability to store and run an executable inside a PDF? who came up with *that* one?)
"The iPhone is ultimately a tool to milk people of the folding stuff in their wallets. And it's very good at that."
and the gullible english follow like sheeeep.............
It just proves you can sell anything to an englishman, just hype it up, and they'll eat out of your hand.
I've read on several other tech blogs that, to allow multitasking, Apple has to pull some interesting tricks. These tricks don't work with non-standard applications (e.g., ones created in Flash or other languages). Second hand information, I know, but the best I have.
"Such things are probably collateral damage to Apple, who clearly intended the changes to hit Adobe's Flash" - how do you figure this? Aren't Adobe just the most high-profile recipients of said collateral damage?
I highly doubt Apple would allow their strategy to be directed by a vendetta against Adobe, or anyone else.
"I highly doubt Apple would allow their strategy to be directed by a vendetta against Adobe, or anyone else."
BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAAA. Have you been paying attention AT ALL ?
Only VB.Net allowed
Can you imagine the outcry if Microsoft tried to apply such ridiculous licensing to its OS's ?
Isn't it about time Apple were investigated and held to account on anti-trust and unfair business issues ?
Nice. Now also stop developing Photoshop so that the only legit reason to own a Mac is taken away. Do it Adobe!
..unless Adobe codes their stuff for Linux it would mean people moving to Windows. I'm not quite convinced it is a good idea to move people onto a platform that STILL needs the sticky plaster of anti-virus to be suitable for online use..
I heard the new T&C also require all function names in Objective C to begin with "steveSays" and male developers are required to pee sitting down. Also, eating fish and chips wrapped in newspaper is out if you want your apps accepted. A crying shame, I tell you.
"Ain't Gonna Work With Steve No More"
Cheers Reg, now I've got Hue & frigging Cry going round in my skull.
Still, at least it's their good one.
I've programmed in Java and C++ and more recently AS3. AS3 is as close to a "proper language" as you're going to get. I'm keen to give Objective-C a try some time soon, but don't want to fork out for a Mac to compile Apps.
I don't think Objective-C is Mac specific
You can try cocotron:
GNU will do
GCC will do ObjC, GNUstep will give you various bits of NeXTStep like things, and even runs under Windows.
Wait a sec..
Wait a second, I coulda sworn that Adobe was going to sue apple over flash. Even the Reg copy-pasted the jist of the ITworld article here.
You're missing a lot of facts in this article.
1. Apple didn't change the rules. They never allowed runtimes or intemediate layers. Adobe tried to do an end run and Apple wouldn't let them.
2. Flash doesn't work on ANY mobile device. Even 10.1 is likely to work only on a tiny percentage of the highest end phones. It's not Apple's fault that Adobe has been unable to write a version of Flash that works on mobile devices.
3. The Adobe converter doesn't make sense. Flash doesn't work on any mobile devices today, so why do they think that adding another layer makes it work any better?
The writing has been on the wall for 3 years since the iPhone came out. Adobe could have either fixed Flash or they could have had CS5 support html 5, but they declined.
Apple has excelled on creating a great user experience and Adobe has yet to convince anyone that they are a part of that.
*Bzzert* Basic fact checking FAIL
I like the way...
"2. Flash doesn't work on ANY mobile device."
Is immediately contradicted by...
"Even 10.1 is likely to work only on a tiny percentage of the highest end phones."
And then back to...
"It's not Apple's fault that Adobe has been unable to write a version of Flash that works on mobile devices."
Uh-huh....so you seriously believe there isn't a mobile version of Flash? So I wasn't using Flash 2 years ago on my previous phone, and I totally can't see those Flash games on my current phone.
And this never happened:
Judging by the defence of Apple, the doublespeak and the complete detatchment from reality, I'm gonna bet you've got an iPhone. Either way, you're talking out of your ass.
missing one less fact
Flash works on Android....
Logic - try it some time.
'Flash does not work on ANY mobile device' does not contradict ' SOME DAY Adobe might have a version of Flash'. There's this little thing called 'time' that you seem to be unaware of. TODAY, no mobile phone runs a full version of Flash. SOME DAY, Adobe says that a tiny percentage of today's phones will be able to run Flash.
I love your crunchgear article. It says that Flash will SOME DAY come to Android and you seem to think that means that Android has Flash today. Once again, please have someone explain the concept of 'today' and 'some day' to you.
The rest is simply your misunderstanding of how Flash works. I specifically referred to a FULL version of flash - which does not exist on any phone today. Yes, there is a mobile version of Flash, but it is so limited as to be useless. If you have to rewrite the page to work in the limited subset of mobile Flash, you might as well rewrite it to not use Flash at all. Most Flash pages don't work on mobile Flash.
The fact that you're wrong?
Your 'fact' is wrong.
There is currently no full version of Flash on any mobile phone. Flash 10.1 is supposed to come to Android some time later this year, but it has already been delayed several times - and in its current form, it is reported to be slow and choppy.
So, your statement that 'Flash works on Android' is just more of the Adobe FUD that fills these forums.
We all know that Apple doesn't want Flash because then people could access a myriad Flash based apps and games online rather than (paying for the use of) apps from the app store...
A huge opportunity for Silverlight?
Seems that way.
Not a chance
You're missing the point here.
The primary reason Apple is banning flash has nothing to do with performance or user experience (although I'll grant you it might be a bonus).
The primary reason is that flash & silverlight allow apps to be distributed via websites, rather than via the App$tore, which costs Apple money. So Silverlight won't be allowed either (aside from the fact that I haven't seen many silverlight-based apps yet)
I think Jobs is a complete Bastard, but I have to agree with the comments that Adobe Flash has seriously missed the boat on the mobile platform. The early Symbian implementations were so bad they were dropped from later phones.
Many of the "free" flash games, embedded into web pages aren't designed with touch in mind, requiring mouse (onmousexxx() actions etc.) or key press interaction.The equivalent disposable apps are more often or not available for free on the app store (Apple gain nothing from free, 30% of 0 is 0 afterall!). This has noting to do with bypassing revenue streams and everything to do with not allowing a third party to dictate the future development road map that shills a poor quality insecure product. It really is that simple, though admittedly the reality is less scandelous.
Now drop OSX. I bet the fanboys would love to get the fabulous "whole web" experience on their Macs too!
I'm kinda relieved
I once had high hopes for cross-platform development, but it only seems to be applicable to games (and high-end games at that). It seems Apple did too, investing a great deal implementing Java on the Mac for example. The results were almost universally hideous. I haven't used a single Java app that felt at home with everything else, and the net effect was a drain on my productivity.
Flash is in the same category, but worse. I've seen so few good uses of Flash that I finally resorted to using a plugin to block Flash content unless I explicitly click to load it (which almost never happens). I was dreading Flash in the iPhone because it would launch a tidal wave of junk on the App Store. I pity the Android users who are now in Adobe's sights...
There's been far too much hysteria over this issue. I strongly doubt Apple's development kit T&Cs will have *any* impact on high-profile game development kits or libraries. IMO this policy change is all about blocking low-end cross-platform 'fluff'. Apps that look like they belong on the iPhone will fly through the approval process.
Better brand than Apple
If only there was an android phone released by a cooler brand than Apple.
Apple is quite chavvy now in my opinion - sure it's a good piece of hardward - but walk in any city and it's reached critical mass - it used to stand out from the crowd - now it is the crown - it's as common as muck and I can get one for free off any mobile network I choose to call.
The big question, is that given a superior platform and hardward, which brand could topple Apple amongst cool circles.
For example a joint Android release by Adobe and B&O as a software/hardware combo would be a very exotic and desirable piece of kit.
I am furious with Apple- my local Apple store sold me a MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo just 2 weeks before the new i7 was released. Almost 2K that cost me, and if I'd waited just 2 weeks I'd have the latest model. They are scum as far as I am concerned and hope somebody takes them to task.
re: Better brand than Apple
"I am furious with Apple- my local Apple store sold me a MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo just 2 weeks before the new i7 was released. Almost 2K that cost me, and if I'd waited just 2 weeks I'd have the latest model. They are scum as far as I am concerned and hope somebody takes them to task."
What, you're annoyed that a newer bit of kit came out after you bought something? Or did you forget to select the 'joke alert' icon?
Apple store staff don't generally know about new kit that far ahead.
Do you know that you can (in the UK and US) return a product back to Apple within 14 days and get your money back? Here's a tip for the future, find out the cooling off period before making any big purchase.
Re: Better brand than Apple
Did you consider *returning* it? The same happened to me with a MacPro I ordered last year, right before the specs were upgraded. I called the Apple Store, explained the situation and they agreed to take it back. Since I ordered online, I had to pay shipping myself, but they gave me a full refund and I bought the current model.
Reason and civility goes a long way.
should ring up Dennis Ritchie and Bjarne Stroustrup, get them to ban C & C++ being used on the iPhone.
What do you mean that's ridiculous? Did you read the feckin' article?
Adobe gives up on the iPhone?
That's absolutely astonishing news. You mean that following on from the recent worldwide revelation that compiled Flash from CS5 will be rejected by Apple, you mean to tell me that Adobe AREN'T going to carry on pumping millions of dollars of development into CS5's ability to compile iPhone apps? You're must be kidding me!
Thank you, Reg. Thank you for sorting out this blinding piece of journalism that none of us could have possibly worked out for ourselves.
Unbelievable. Adobe discontinuing support for a platform they can't develop for anymore. Still can't get over it. Who'd have thought it? Such news...
why bother these days...really? they used to provide something special and unique. no longer.
Because I'm feeling surly
"why bother these days...really? they used to provide something special and unique. no longer."
They still do.... Of course "special" and "unique" around here are used to describe the
students strapped into the safety seats on the short bus.
I reckon that the underlying reason for all this is because Apple are the only company brave enough to try and stamp all over the abomination that is Flash.
Frankly (and I don't say this often), I bloody love Apple for it.
I also bloody love the FlashBlock add-on for Firefox which I recently discovered.
- Does Apple's iOS make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA
- Review Distro diaspora: Four flavours of Ubuntu unpacked