Ladies and Gentlemen
Will Apple's new iPad support Adobe Flash when it ships in March? Not if you trust Steve Jobs' much-picked-over presentation in San Francisco on Wednesday - or the current EULA attached to the device's beta SDK. But for some reason, the marketing materials on the Apple website tell a different story. If you watch Apple's promo …
I'd be stunned if this was anything more than a marketing mock-up.
Even if it isn't, who cares? Flash on the Mac is a bear, a resource pig and a source of crashes and my Windows experience isn't all that better.
Please consider the following:
1. I like to watch video clips and slideshows on the internet, I do so every day.
2. I like to write and record my own music and videos and publish them myself.
3. My kids like to play games, and I like those games to not cost anything.
4. I like to have the freedom to choose what I see on the internet.
5. I don't like forced censorship.
6. I have a modern computer, I don't care about CPU usage, it doesn't matter.
7. Everything sometimes crashes, even me.
I fully support the freedom of choice for media consumption, and the greater degree to which any device gives me that choice is something I appreciate.
Obviously Apple think differently.
I think its quite likely that the video on the iPad was edited in afterwards, that way you don't see that the version he is using is merely a cardboard prototype.
Since Flash is the bane of modern web browsing, even a small stand against the tide should be welcomed, even a rather Canute-ish one!
Consequences arising thereform:
1 - Apple and Adobe get it together to run a sanitised variant of Flash on iPhone and iPad and ...
2 - Silverlight runs on Safari yes? Silverlight starts to replace Flash in a mega way
3 - Adobe does an iPad
4 - ?
It will be interesting to see what resolutions, if any, present themselves
This is a total FAIL of the blogger who came up with this. ALL ADVERTISING VIDEOS HAVE "SIMULATED" VIDEO SEQUENCES, as it is extremely difficult to record a video of something showing a video.
The screen sequences were probably recorded on a desktop computer with a full browser, and that is what you are seeing. This probably wasn't even done intentionally to confuse people, just an oversight by the video editors.
1 - Apple to Adobe "No you can't play with your toys in our backyard. Go and play with your toys in your backyard! Besides, when your toys poop they make very big poops yes?"
2 - Uh-huh baby. Safari runs Silverlight on a Mac but not on an iPhone hence not on an iPad?
3 - Same holds and I admit it might be interesting. Maybe the google meets the Adobe and Flash prevails or maybe not?
I wonder what a Flash/Air (Adobe AIR that is) iPad wannabee would be capable of? Developers? Bringing that sort of cohesion together in Apple of chip fab, hardware, firmware and software must be sort of easier than what other organisations can do. Ubuntu to the rescue perhaps? (or perhaps not?)
obviously Steve's iPad will have Flash, and multitasking, and a camera, and Apple will send him a new one every time the screen is dirty.
But Steve is better than us so what do you expect.
The screenshot / videos portraying the New York Times are showing off NYT's custom APPLICATION for the iPad. The Safari (Webkit) based browser on the iPhone / iPad do NOT support flash at this time.
However - NYT has developed a native application for viewing their online content. This application supports viewing video in formats natively playable by the iPad hardware (probably mpeg4 / h.264).
If one were to view the NYT website in the web browser of an iPad it will not support flash, and the embedded videos will not work. NYT has worked around this problem by providing a way to view their content outside of the web browser, and provide alternate formats of the videos when using their app.
Isn't there a NYT app for the iPad? The app may allow video where Safari doesn't, and that could be what they are showing in the promo.
Wasn't the New York Times accessed by a downloaded app with Apple's blessing? Maybe they only allow the video in concert with the paid for app? Or maybe, and much more likely, I'm completely confused and wrong and will gladly admit so.
That's definitely Safari. The NYT app doesn't have a URL box or Google search and has its controls at the bottom.
Not that I give a crap personally. Flash needs to be dragged outside and shot, IMHO. The web survived the fall of Java just fine, and I don't think anyone greatly misses RealPlayer either. My guess is that banner ads will tick on just fine when Flash has likewise been relegated to the legacy pile.
Video streaming is a dogs dinner right now, but that will change, even if only by sites supporting dual formats for Ogg Theora and H.264.
Either way, no flowers.
There are reports of mass disturbances/orgies at the foot of Mount Sinai. Apparently, this occured when an iMoses did not manage to get his iTablets to display his flash enabled presentation of the ten commandments.
Developers can't use flash. But if flash is already on the browser then it will play the nyt website just fine. The two conditions can exist at the same time. I doubt that is the case though with the video which may well be mocked up, but the rule of 3rd party develoment are different from apples internal dev rules.
I hope so, and if it kills of bloody pdf's as well then I really will be celebrating.
Its real.No sh*t. I saw when mr Jobs just scrolled over the "lego"- unsupported plugin- cube. Live.Embarrassing. It has come that far. Even steve admits his own fanbois are stupid. Whooha, no more $$ for you steve!Try again. And screw your b*tch AT&T, screw iTunes and screw you steve. I played my itunes on way too many igadgets by now. Stop! Stop! Stop! You were as original as the latest version of the Old Testament. What happenend to Apple?Getting all laid back counting $$.? Too late already when you got that far (ref MS).
1-0 for the Uncle Festers. Yay..another Apple TV. Wow.....the end.Pity.Sad.Over it.Business as usual tomorrow.
We need to set a standard movie piccy format!
How many (more) years will this take.
You know, while content producers want DRM and patented encoding techniques advance more quickly than those that are unencumbered.
The video on the Apple site has been updated to show the infamous "blue lego" (2min 6secs in)
I think the average Joe is willing to accept that their phone doesn't support Flash, but they wont be happy at all if they can't use Flash on their iPad. I think the advent of the iPad will eventually force Apple to support Flash.
I hope they don't though. I really would like to see Flash disappear from the Internet.
Flash is crap. HTML 5 is the way to go. Open standards for developers and users.
Unfortunately a codec has not been mandated yet, the parties involved are torn between h264 (closed) and Theora (open)
...to get people to tell the truth.
Apple has changed the video now. As of noon GMT on 30-10-2010, it's showing footage of browsing the NYT times site with the Flash plugin lego.
I thought I would have a look at apple's videos to see what the iFuss was about, but they wanted me to install quicktime. Sod that.
I suppose i will never know.
recall that NYT has announced it is moving to paid content next year, and has worked closely with Apple to develop its app. plus the OS displayed is 3.2 - not yet available for public with v4 pending
those holes will disappear and we will pay gladly to fill them
Anyone else noticed that the video on Apple's site has been edited. Check out 1:15 - 1:18 on the Apple video and the same on the You Tube video. As if by magic, the Flash has gone...
It seems as if NYT is available courtesy of Adobe AIR too
I'm interested to see where this goes. Strictly speaking is "printf" an interpreter, and so is a regex..
Apple have history in shall we say "doctoring" their adverts to embellish the capabilities of their phone and music players. I suspect they just tried to blag this one too...
As someone once said - you can't polish a t*rd, but you can sprinkle glitter on it....
"Apple have history in shall we say "doctoring" their adverts to embellish the capabilities of their phone and music player"
Yeah and nobody else does this right? Funny, I don't remember being mobbed by five beautiful women last time I used X brand deodorant, and my new car can't transform into a robot. Damn those ads!
Yep, if a web page is laden with Flash videos, it's going to make your browser choke - but why is that the fault of the platform?
It's got sweet fuck all to do with Adobe and Flash, it's got everything to do with the idiots who put the website together - why can't some of you people grok this very simply concept?
Hmmm, I know why, because you think it's 'geek cool' to hate Flash - you've seen the hardcore penguin zealots bitch and moan about flash as they clutch their precious terminals to their ying-yang or wolf enblazoned 1980's style black t-shirts.
Stupid Stupid Stupid - your shooting the messenger.
Flash has become, like it or not, the defacto standard for multimedia on the web - but it's also become the most misunderstood technology.
The moment there's a dodgy slew of flash enabled adverts, the blinkered, closeted "I have no friends" Linux brigade bash (excuse the pun) flash into the ground, stupidly confusing the issue with microsoft style FUD.
Flash - it's here to stay and it's coming to an iPad near you, unless you like t-shirts with wolves and ying-yangs, in which case, your Mom is calling you for dinner....
Someone has issues with the Toy Unix, much?
Funny, I'm sure Linux supports flash.. and being flashed onto lots of different devices. Probably including the Ipad. So much for yin yang T shirts.. actually, right now it's a plain grey.
Interesting reading people's take on Flash's future in light of Apple deciding it's persona non grata in its ithings. Personally I think HTML5 will remove many of the reasons for it's use in the browser; but mentioning Silverlight as a possible replacement is crazy. It may have a place hooking into .net apps but it's hardly a speck on the horizon to the average Creative person.
More likely web designers will code sites to sniff out ipad users and present them with a simpler, static, non-flash version of the site.
I would have liked to do a false advertising complaint. Oh well.
I've never had a problem with flash on my PC's and I don't quite *get* why I shouldn't be able to view *whatever* content is on a site I'm visiting.
All for Open Standards mind you, and standardization for the future, but it would be irritating as hell to have content not available, or have an old but useful website not available because some browser restricts my viewing options
I'm a web designer that's never used flash because I do know it's crap on a number of levels, but as a web user I just want to view sites as they are intended to be viewed, and have them "just work" .. ok ?
how about we start screaming about some of the real problems on the web .. like the MANY pages that refuse to load or lock up because some stupid advert on the page won't load !
..would be "what kind of lazy 'tard waits for adverts to load, or even sees them at all?". Then I realised that someone using a locked-down platform to browse doesn't just get to throw Adblock Plus into the mix.
I think I just talked myself out of wanting an iPad. Maybe I'll indulge in an n900 or something. The lack of ad filtering is fine on a tiny screen as I just use it to check for train fail, or read BBC news while bored- but anything big enough to actually browse around- no thanks. The Intarwebs are far too busy, flashing and obnoxious with ads unfiltered. I do not wish to pay to have a linux box colocated, to run a filtering http proxy, either.
Yes, I know some sites need the income, but if they actually gave a shi'ite, they'd not just slather themselves with flashing malware-riddled syndicated stuff, but take measures to be a little more discriminating in an attempt to avoid alienating their own readers. The theory that ads are self-limiting because people will go elsewhere suffers from the fact that the worst-behaving actor in a market-like system tends to derive the most benefit and set the pace, even at the risk of destroying the market itself (see also the recent recession and banking crash).
I digress, but it comes down to this.. The iPad has a big enough screen and a nice enough interface that you'd want to use it a lot. However paying through the nose for a screen full of flashing Shell and Jaguar ads and the occasional "Punch The Monkey"/scareware ad doesn't sound like my idea of fun.
So, while I might own a few bits of Apple kil, I have just talked myself out of wanting this one. Thanks :)
Apple doesn't seem to care that it's Balkanizing the Internet here and also seems to think that they are big enough to get away with this. If a Microsoft or Linux version did this, there would be a screams and moans would be nearly unanimous. However, because it's Apple it gets excused. Sure, proprietary plug-ins suck bu they are part of the landscape everyone expects to move across with a web browser.
It's funny/interesting that Apple didn't want to show off their true vision of a non-flash web.
The only choice for adobe's flash's survival on the long term, is to open source the flash player, so it can be ported to other architectures by the Linux community.
It is either opensourcing, or death, if they do opensource, flash will get performance fixed and made a de-facto web standard.
While we're at it why don't we just get rid of that other cumbersome beast, the GUI.
That way, us designers can at last stop using computers altogether and return to a more meaningful existence say, hunting and gathering.
Meantime back at the Ranch all you developers and academics can spend the rest of your days typing yourselves to death trying to shift a few files around.
Flash doesn't make bad websites, bad designers do, but I am certain online advertising will vanish once Flash is dead and buried.
No really, I do..
Typing is a Girls Blouse interface and I blame punch cards for starting the rot. Real men don't need anything more than LEDs and toggle switches. Monochrome 1 pixel porn sucks though.
Your point is valid sir, nothing really wrong with flash since it is the best we've had so far as a mechanism to deliver certain content. Of course, like anything, flash can be used in good ways and bad ways and HTML5 or whatever is next will be deployed just as poorly, if not even worse.
Likely much of the stuff written for HTML5 will be ported from flash designs giving you the worst of both worlds.
I don't know if these observations are universal:
NYT on Safari on Mac Pro on OS 10.6.2
some images rendered in Flash have options
on Safari on iPhone one of the five available images appears but with no Flash interaction and no lego cube alert
on NYT app on iPhone no images appear at all it is or in the limited observation made, appears to present text only with no image based links
Not a robust scientific observation but at least one workaround seems to be in place (place static place holder image without Flash interaction as a means to present general appearance without lego cube)
This is remarkably sad, but not surprising.
What are the real reasons?
Adobe is protecting their Flash source code and not sharing it with other OS corporations for obvious reasons. So why doesn't Adobe just optimize Flash themselves in their own labs to ensure that Flash works with Apple and Linux?
Does Apple have to pay out a licensing fee to Adobe if we want to see Flash content driving up the costs of Apple products?
Is Flash really that buggy? I know it runs decently on Windows, but sucks on Apple and simple does not run on Linux OS's.
Adobe is profiting from their online App Store. Flash can be used to create games and applications which may compete with Apple's own apps such as telephone software, etc. Does Apple see Flash as competition?
Does Apple only wants applications and games running on their system that only THEY can approve of and if you paid for it ONLY from Apple? What's with all of this absolute control over everything?
Flash has had issues with vulnerability problems. Does Apple believe that Flash can compromise their systems causing them to be hacked or jail-broken?
Is Apple secretly developing their own Flash killer that's going to compete with HTML 5, Flash and Silvermicrosoftwhatever?
I'm not sure how one can load their own MP3 or video collection to the iPad yet as the connectors are apparently proprietary or absent. Does Apple only want music and video content playing on their device that was only purchased through them? Has Apple received the usual DMCA warnings and legal threats from the media corporations that forbids them from making it easy for anyone to load up and play content that they have ripped themselves?
I'm not quite sure if Apple is being Florence Nightingale in trying to lead the way to force the planet to adopt HTML 5. I'm sensing something else is going on that Apple does not want to talk about, and I suspect it's related to their desire for controlling it's devices, users, security and their profit bottom line.
*shrug* I won't buy the iTampon...er...iPad. I've never felt comfortable with any corporation that isn't upfront about their objectives, deceptive and wants to control absolutely everything taking away my choices.
Also I keep seeing conflicting images of the ipad.
Some images show the ipad as rectangular and some show the ipad
as being square.
Either the ipad is square or rectangular or there are 2 diff models.
Or someone doe snot know how to take a picture properly.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018