tsk tsk, fail
A person from adobe can't even photoshop the menu bar into the right orientation. ^^
The Flash mob over at Adobe has escalated its attack on Apple for Cupertino's refusal to allow Flash on the iPad. If one picture is worth a thousand words, one Flasher has just launched a 12,000-word volley of derision. On TheFlashBlog, Adobe platform evangelist Lee Brimelow's web site for all things Flashy, you can now find …
A person from adobe can't even photoshop the menu bar into the right orientation. ^^
The site on the right uses the pornotube VOD delivery platform which by the way is a good indicator of what GooTube will be in 6 months or so. GooTube tends to deliver the same stuff businesswise as them after 6-9 months delay.
So pornotube itself would have been a more appropriate example.
Anyway... We should get used to it. Welcome to Web 3.0 distopia - The web censored by the puritans - a kiddie (and anti-gov) safe media: no A size cup tits if porn, no subversive talk, no ordinary cittizen commenting when not desired. Comply. Consume. Porn only in missionary position. Dissent only when so permitted and when the tablet has allowed you to use the keyboard to dissent.
Apple is only "delivering the vision" of the North American (and by coincidence antipodean) taleban here, it is not actually authoring the vision. It is doing pretty good job though... When you combine it with what Google is doing we may end up screaming for Microsoft of Billy The Borg to come back.
Are you 'amanfromMars1' and have you just discovered the "Post anonymously?" checkbox?
The brave evangelist has already removed the Bang Bros image, apologizing for "offending."
At least on an iPad, Bang Bros parts its legos.
Wimp... For f*** sake he actually had it pixelated beyond recognition and it was still not enough to satisfy the mid-Wester redneck taleban. What's next? Amish porn only?
Well no surprise there then - no doubt un-ashamed monopolist tendencies are OK if you can do no evil. Stack 'em high, sell 'em cheap, control the future; block your competitors. You can only have what we control and be damned happy doing it.
What a pity - it would have been so easy for them to have taken a different tack (even Open source). And I was thinking of buying one ... maybe I will wait and see what the Android Alternative will be ...
How in the name of GPL can you do a open source and Flash?
Actually you've hit upon the exact reason Apple hate Flash; they don't have the source. On the Mac version of Safari the Flash plugin is the leading cause of crashes, and Apple can't do anything to remedy the situation.
If Apple wanted to improve the experience of Flash on their systems they could join the Open Screen Project, like many others have done, and work together with Adobe. But they don't. The question is why?
As far as I am aware, only Apple, Microsoft et al have problems with wonky, bloated, buggy Flash.
So MS have signed up - who are the others? OS manufacturers? Probably not, I'll wager.
Flash sucks, get used to it.
Typical Apple dictatorship trying to prevent end users doing what they want to do with the device that THEY have bought from Apple.
It's their device they should be allowed to install what they want on it not have some dictatorship company acting like they still own the device when it's been sold.
So the web on iPad is without Flash, that has certainly put me off ever wanting to buy one then.
Have Apple ever taken a look at the internet if you turn Flash off? The majority of sites are just big blank blocks, mainly because web developers don't see any point in incorporating a non-flash version of their site.
I was recently working on one company's website and was told to not bother putting the non-flash images in, and after developing a problem with Flash on my laptop and having to disable it I quickly found out that this wasn't the only company that doesn't bother to make websites accessible to those without Flash player.
I really frown on companies who don't bother with supporting users with older machines that either can't run Flash, or not thinking about people with disabilities who use screen readers that can't cope with Flash, but I think Apple are being really silly locking out Flash from the iPad.
I seem to remember the PSP when it first came out with a lack of Flash and it wasn't long before Flash was put on the PSP as the web browser on the PSP was useless without Flash, same thing could happen with the iPad if Apple aren't careful.
>Have Apple ever taken a look at the internet if you turn Flash off? The majority of sites are just big blank blocks, mainly because web developers don't see any point in incorporating a non-flash version of their site.
Apple may not, but a few days ago I found a flash blocker for my MacBook. Bye bye flash.
Now, my MacBook doesn't do a hair dryer impression when I read sites like El Reg for instance, with the huge numbers of flash ads they have. Or for that matter, any other site that has flash ads.
Ironically, I don't mind ads on websites, many have to make a living somehow, but that doesn't mean I want them to use 100% of my processor though. It doesn't mean that I want a gale of hot air from the back of my machine.
And as for porn - you ever tried to surf a porn site quietly when the fan is puffing its heart out? Why bother muting the screams of 'delight' from the ladies when the processor is busy heating the house and making more noise than a jack hammer!
I was asked yesterday by a friend what all the fuss about. So I showed her a music video on Youtube. I also showed her the fan speed on my processor. 2 minutes in, the fan is at 6,200rpm, the battery remaining has crashed through the floor, and she quickly understands why OSX users are frustrated with Flash. And then I mute the video - another exclamation about how loud the machine had become from its fans!
Maybe, just maybe, Adobe would put a little less effort into berating Apple for the audacity of not including its plugins, and put a similar energy into making a Flash plugin for OSX that actually works properly!
Maybe, Adobe employees could stop posting on their blog, and actually tackle the problem that OSX users face in their crap plugin!
"The majority of sites are just big blank blocks, mainly because web developers don't see any point in incorporating a non-flash version of their site."
I'll remember that next time I'm accessing El Reg, BBC News etc
The MAJORITY of sites don't use FLash AT ALL. (I wonder why, ha ha ha)
In fact, I'm trying to think of a website that is purely flash based. Can't do it. Can't even think of one where Flash is needed (except iPlayer)
"I was recently working on one company's website and was told to not bother putting the non-flash images in,"
We're you also asked to make sure it worked in IE5?
Yeah, but no one making you buy it mate?
Perhaps they are, is there someone next to you right now with a gun to your head forcing you onto the Apple site to buy Apple kit?!
Techno-lust is all it is! Pure and simple. You want it and you want it your way! Well tough luck the world doesn't work that way sonny.
If Apple want to cut off half the potential market by doing something you don't like, that's their own stupid fault, they must a have reason for it. They sell the device, they dictate the conditions the device comes with, don't like? Well f**k off and buy something else that does work the way you want it to!
Still want it though don't you? Then you turn around call people who buy it, "Sheeple"! Pot, this is Kettle, I think you have a lot in common.
"It's their device they should be allowed to install what they want on it..." Theoretically, a user can put what they want on the device, so long as it is a different OS to the one supplied. What you naysaying numb-nuts often forget is the "software licensing model". When one buys pretty much any device, you agree to and are bound by the terms of the developers license to use the software. Yes, the individual may own the hardware, but they sure as hell don't "own" the software on it, simply a license to use he software. This is even true of OSS. I suggest that you stop pontificating and read the various licenses out there.
"Have Apple ever taken a look at the internet if you turn Flash off?" Quite possibly. Stop and think about what you are saying. You are essentially suggesting that the majority of content is Flash based. It's not. The majority of ads are Flash based *IF* the flash plug-in is detected, funnily enough The Register on my desktop renders Flash ads and on my phone renders HTML ads. So, with a little bit of know-how the need for Flash is instantly mitigated. honestly JS, HTML and CSS are really easy to use - and if the individual developing/designing the site says they are a web designer/developer I'd at least expect them to know HTML and CSS. Which leads nicely to the fact that the 42 MILLION iPhone users that don't seem to miss Flash that much at all. Yes, I'm sure that there are some that do, but more damningly I bet a lot more don't even notice! So I guess one could argue that Apple do in fact have a vague idea of what they are doing. Flash is abhorrent. Microsoft have been unfairly accused of intentionally slowing web standards development down when the real culprits are the overcharging, bloatware making Adobe Systems Inc.
If this helps kill flash as the only way the website can be viewed - I could grow to like Apple a little (been browsing without flash for a couple of months now - it is surprising how little you need it if you aren't interested in adverts & videos)
I have no great love of flash but there is no denying that there is a veritable mountain of useful content for it. For free at the end of a url. Chances are that if there's an app for that for $$$, there is a flash app for that for nothing.
This is the only reason Apple denies flash on their systems. Same goes for Silverlight, Python, .NET, Java or any other alternative runtime that would allow users to make their own choices. Not just runtimes but apps that "compete" with Apple technology or offends their 3G providers - voip, IM, browsers etc.
Apple wants people to spend money in their store, and if that means stomping on customer rights, so be it. From a consumer perspective this behaviour is appalling.
While Apple's motives may well be mostly self-interest now, Adobe only has itself to blame for giving Apple the excuse to do this. The simple fact of the matter is that on OS X, Flash runs like a weeping bag of rancid dog's cocks when compared to the Windows version, even on the same hardware.
Adobe is currently trying to make much of how the speed deficit is not of their making, and that Apple doesn't expose the necessary APIs for hardware acceleration in the same way Windows does. This may be true, but hardware acceleration was only recently introduced in version 10. What, then, is the reason that previous versions of Flash ran so poorly under OS X, when the question of hardware acceleration was irrelevant?
Also, they conveniently ignore that fact that the Flash plug-in is the #1 cause of crashes in Mac browsers. How is that instability related in any way to the availability of hardware acceleration?
It doesn't work so good?
Flash is a resource hog especially on os x and I take t if allowed the iphone os maybe this will get adobe to sort it out.
My 2 Gtz macbook sounds like it wants to vacuum the house with sites with flash content.
Flash is cra;p ban it from the web
"Adobe lets you watch pornography on your computer. Thanks, Adobe!"
Adobe and p0rn eh? Let see...
Photoshop: Lets you "touch up" images to increase certain "proportions"
Flash: Lets you "watch" certain websites which often contain the words "porn" and "tube" or similar
Adobe Reader: Lets you read back copies of "Saucy Wives" or "Big Jugs Monthly" on your netbook (with membrane keyboard naturally)
Blimey! Adobe really is an innovative company after-all! My estimation of their worth has increased somewhat!
Paris, of course!
Ok, yes I know flash has its uses and that you can get some really good flash clips that are designed really well, but 90% of flash used on websites are always bug infested cpu heavy rubbish.
I won't be getting an iPad, or at least not yet (have an iphone) so I am kind of glad flash was blocked. Flash has been proven to be very unsecure and apple are trying to protect the clueless while also pushing for open internet standards (pinch of salt here)
Yes it turns out that the ones that do have a clue tend to be controlled as well but it's the many tards that ruined it for the few.
Before anyone says it, no I am not a "fanboi". I don't buy every Apple product under the sun just the ones I like and find useful.
- Sir Alien
Actually, the lack of flash on the successful Apple products is a good thing!
Firstly, flash (and other Adobe products like acrobat plug-in) have such a piss-poor security record that it can only help end users.
Secondly, it should encourage web designers and advertisers not to riddle their sites with flash for everything, hogging bandwidth and forcing users in to the piss-poor security of the flash player.
Thirdly, it might just get HTML-5 video and so one pushed forward leading to proper open standards for por..er video delivery and not relying on closed, questionable, 'Trojans' such as flash and silverlight.
Look are recent hacking contests, the common vector for falling Windows and MacOS (and likely LINUX as well) was a flash vulnerability. Of the sort that Adobe took 4 weeks to patch... Remember LINUX and MacOS users, even without any OS privileged escalation routes, a flash vulnerability still allows a single user's *own* account to be compromised!
Prior to removing the Bang Bros image, Mr Lee posts on his comments,
"I’m not playing up any porn angle. But it is HUGE part of the web and is almost entirely Flash-based. Plus I pixelated the screenshot in Photoshop. I thought it was nice work :)"
And there we have half of the problem with Flash. The authoring software requires no skill and only a modicum of intelligence to use, and doesn't care if your SWF has absolutely no skill or intelligent thought in it's construction.
Back when Flash wasn't on 99.9% of browsers, Flash "artists" used to do awesome stuff with it.
These days useless people use it for everything.
It's certainly *not* the web the way it was supposed to be browsed. That was HTML, and it did a fine job even on it's lonesome.
Can't take the iPad seriously with no Flash support. We need it for everything gem software simulations to animation. There are some alternatives but not as suitable for rapid development.
Flash Gordons alive
what no Ming the Merciless on the iPad - say it aint so.
for the last 3 or 4 months ive been running Click to Flash on my Mac and delighting in having grey boxes where the flash should be - about the only time i've clicked on the box to load the flash has been for you tube based video. and, guess what,you tube runs on the iDevices as they re-encoded everything into h264 realising that how big the apple market was and thats the way the apple wind was blowing .
admittedly I've no interest in playing browser based flash based games on my mac so its been a great experience being mostly flash free - no flickering distracting adds make aworld of difference
i recommend Click to Flash to all mac users
"guess what,you tube runs on the iDevices as they re-encoded everything into h264"
It only works on the youtube site, embedded videos (like some of the reviews on this site) don't work, you just get lego blocks.
Sure there are a lot of people who don't like/want flash but there are also people who want it. I use a flash block add-on for firefox, but I can click the box if I want to play a video. I don't have any such choice on my iPod touch. I'm sure there are people that will pass on an iPad once the find out they can't play farm vile on it.
..where I am starting to hope that both sides will lose.
Apple have put out some good machines in recent years (my unibody MBP is such a workhorse, utterly dependable, and I love my iPod touch), but they seem to be drowining in hubris again.
Adobe have been improving the performance (if not the security) of flash with lots of GPU acceleration, and sorting out the mess that is the linux plugin- but they're being obnoxious too.
Can has both taken down a peg plzkthx?
I just took a look at the blog post. No, I won't miss any of those.sites, and those are the best he can come up with? I use NoScript, so flash just gives a nice blank area which normally indicate where irritating ads would normally appear. Or, if it takes up most of the screen, indicates a worthless site I am unlikely to ever go back to.
I think I must be doing something wrong in my internet life if Flash can be so meh to me. Anyone know any sites worth visiting that use Flash for anything other than video playback? (Yes, I am guilty of lolcatting.)
It's all about the money. Apple makes their pennies from all the crap apps that run on iTunes, but they would have no control over flash websites which could offer the same apps (running over Flash) for free.
Why spend £9.99 on an application from iTunes when you can use your iWhatever to go to a Flash website (over 3G or W-Fi) and have the same content without the charge.
Seriously, open Flash, put down a button control, map that control to an mp3 with a "fart" sound, change the button controls text to "Push" and there you go, you just made 25% of the iTunes content, for free!
Apple don't care if you buy apps from the store or not. They care that you buy the iPad (iPhone, iMac, iWhatever). Their store isn't there to make much money - it's there as a reason for you to buy the iPhone/iPad.
Apple hate Flash because they don't have the ability to innovate it, to improve it, to make it at least as good as other platforms. Flash can make Apple's products look bad - and Apple can't stop it happening. I have Flash on my Nokia N810 - and seriously, most of the time it's too slow to be useful, and if I didn't know better I'd think it was indicative of the system's performance. Apple consider it better to have no Flash support rather than weak Flash support (which isn't very useful, and makes the product look bad).
As someone who has developed in Flash, I know that content written in Flash can be very poorly optimised - and that won't do any favours to a device like the iPad.
"Apple don't care if you buy apps from the store or not. ". Of course they do. They make a lot of money from people buying apps through their store. The only store.
"Apple hate Flash because they don't have the ability to innovate it, to improve it, to make it at least as good as other platforms.".
Flash is well enough documented and much of it is open sourced so that Apple could write their own version. As long as it was compatible with official Flash spec to some level no one would care. Heck they could take Gnash, fix it up and do some good by contributing their changes back just like they did with webkit. Besides, variations of this excuse are always heard when some monopoly is trying to rationalize why they don't support technology X, or they embrace & extend it into some bastardized form which is incompatible with the original. Microsoft's implementation of Java is a classic example of this.
"I know that content written in Flash can be very poorly optimised". Same goes for apps or HTML content. I could easily write some JS that bogs down the CPU and drains the battery. I daresay that many app store titles such as games take as many cycles as they can get. Again this is a poor excuse for not supporting a nearly ubiquitous web technology, especially if they were *that* concerned about such things they could make it an option in the browser which is switched off by default.
At the end of the day for better or worse Flash is an essential part of the web experience and Apple are shutting it out for their own selfish commercial interests and no other reason.
Actually, Adobe holds a number of Flash-related patents, making it difficult if not impossible to create an open-source clone. I was involved in researching this (not for Apple) and had to recommend against trying it.
Of course, Apple could take the approach they did with Eminem and just do it and let Adobe take them to court. It would take years to move through the system, giving plenty of time for HTML5 or whatever to supplant Flash.
Flash, first and foremost ain't a standard numb-nuts. It certainly isn't "an essential part of the web experience"! What a load of bollocks! Why should Apple make their own version of it?! Adobe should ante up and for a change WRITE DECENT SOFTWARE instead of the half-arsed bloated shite they like to publish these days.
"Apple are shutting it out for their own selfish commercial interests and no other reason." Based on what? The App Store? Apple's CFO, Peter Oppenheimer, said in their last financial report that the App Store and iTunes store are being run "a bit over break-even" (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/26/app_store/). So that theory is shot down easily! They would run the both as loss leaders were it necessary. Apple DO NOT MAKE MONEY out of either the Apps or iTunes Stores. The final nail in you arse-hat theory is that Apple originally intended 3rd party apps to be delivered via the web using JS and HTML, which you have conveniently ignored. There was as much furore over the lack of 3rd party apps on the original iPhone platform as there is currently over the lack of Flash support. Could the actual FACT (a concept that seems foreign to you and your ilk) of the matter be as Apple have already stated? That Flash is insecure, buggy and unstable on the Mac platform and as a result they have decided not to implement it in the iPhone OS.
Flash is a DEFACTO standard numb-nuts, it's pretty much everywhere, despite Jobs having his head up his a***.
The App Store may break even, but it sells hardware for Apple. Now if Apple allowed Flash then possibly less people would buy from the App store, and then it would start losing money (i.e. become a COST) instead of just breaking even, eating into Apples profits.
So YES, Apple makes money from the App store because it helps them make a profit from their hardware. Think things through before you state so called "FACTS".
and it means "in practice, but not necessarily ordained by law", which also means that it is not recognised as such by anybody other than those that claim the contrary. Simply, IT AIN'T A RECOGNISED STANDARD! I, and clearly many others couldn't give a rat's pube whether or not is's a "de facto standard"...
"Now if Apple allowed Flash then possibly less people would buy from the App store, and then it would start losing money (i.e. become a COST) instead of just breaking even, eating into Apples profits." Or possibly not. Whose to say? That's not really how the App or iTunes store works though, as well you know. You are correct in attesting that Apple run both to sell iDevices, but as I'm sure I stated, they would run it as a loss leader if required. Think about silly rabbit! The way that apps were originally intended to be deployed in the iPhone OS was as *WEB APPS!!!* which would mean *NO REVENUE AT ALL!!* (see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/26/google_voice_iphone_palm/ for an example). The App store subsidises itself. Apps sold and $99 paid by every developer covers the costs. No developers, no App store. Except there are quite a number of developers already, aren't there? In fact I can recall developers demanding an SDK so 3rd party apps *could* be developed for the new platform. No-one has vociferously demanded Flash before, and to be perfectly honest, it appears that the noise is coming from the "anyone but Apple" crowd and Flash developers, unusual bedfellows. Whether or not an iDevice runs Flash is totally irrelevant to the App store or Apple's revenue generally. Evidence? The 80 odd million iPhone OS (iPhone + iPod touch) users out there.
Flash has a history of poor performance on Apple's platforms. It's insecure. It's unstable and buggy. This is also true for Linux and Windows. The ONLY crashes I have had in Windows 7 are a BSOD after the initial installation (Waddya know?! WHQL certified driver FAIL!!!) and browser crashes due to Flash before I had managed to install the excellent FlashBlock.
So by logically and rationally applying modus ponendo ponens, we can see that:
1. Flash is buggy, insecure and unstable. It has a history of causing problems on Apple platforms. It also has an impact on the battery life of poratble devices when used.
2. Apple already allow *unmoderated* 3rd party apps on the platform in the guise of WebApps. These WebApps are usually delivered for free or in a way that Apple recieve NO revenue.
3. Previously unmentioned, but one of the main uses of Flash, video delivery, is largly mitigated by the <video> tag in HTML5, pending agreements. Rich user experiences can be delivered with AJAX and other open frameworks, mitigating the need for Flash layer.
It can be logically deduced that Flash has been left off these devices not for fear of a loss of revenue, rather for purely technial reasons based on merit, or in the case of Flash, lack thereof. QED.
And create a wesbite showing how much faster downloads and the web in general would work in a world where Flash was never developed.
The point of the analogy being that some bits of Flash are good, but overall the experience is awful. And that just suddenly dumping it isn't without withdrawal problems. Or, ummm, something.
Flash is a trojan horse for being able to run arbitrary content.
Apple has said that that *this* is the reason they don't support it. The same was true for an app that had an emulator (Commodore 64 if I recall correctly). They don't want hacks taking over people's iPhones or iPads (and they don't want an anti-virus industry there either). So far they've been successful and I hope this keeps up.
How many "critical" exploits have been uncovered in Flash during the last year or so. Quite a few. Adobe's stuff is like swiss cheese (apologies to the Swiss).
The plural of Lego is Lego not Legos, the British get this but Americans do not.
Trying going to legos.com and you'll be politely redirected by the Danes.
Anyone with an i-phone can see that if you go to cnn.com, and other such sites. you get an optimized version of the page in question. To suggest that surfing the web on the ipad will result in huge numbers of :blue legos" is ridiculous and inaccurate.
Banning Flash will hopefully provoke Adobe to get their monstrosity working correctly and economically.
Or possibly, it will force websites to switch to better technology.
Excellent tactics, Apple!
Surely the pr0n sites simply switch to supporting HTML5 and their content can be delivered to Safari and Chrome browsers with H.264 codec, and to Firefox with Ogg Theora codec … leaving just Microsoft IE customers with Flash.
Funny, but many sites already adapt for iPhone/iPod touch.
Google Finance, for example, looks fine with a graph and just adds
"For the ubercool interactive charts, you need to install the Adobe Flash Player"
(Some sites go completely into "iPhone" mode, whilch will look silly on a screen of that size.)
Presumeably Apple are fully aware that Adobe Flash is the de-facto standard for videos and interactive animations etc. Surely therefore Apple would want to include Flash in their browser package for their users.
Likely scenarios are that Apple either:
1) Apple wants control over version roll-out and QA, and would like to write and distribute their own flash player - which would be good because the same package could contain their own audio video stuff in one neat package. In this case, the stopper would be Adobe wanting shed-loads of Dosh for the source code, licenses, royalties etc.
2) Apple recognises that if their platform is huge, then Adobe should pay money to Apple to make sure that their format still runs everywhere. In this scenario, Apple is probably wanting shed-loads of Dosh to allow distribution.
Simple, Two big players want to make some money off of one another! or am I missing something?
When a program crashes on a Mac, there's a little 'send a report' thing that pops up.
Enough people have send that report to Apple, and Apple has done enough datamining, to say, "Well, now, looks like Flash is causing most of the crashes of web browsers, including Safari!".
Add to that the fact that Apple had to create a new software architecture to run 32-bit Flash in 64-bit Safari in OS X 10.6, which I'm sure gave them massive headaches.
Flash is not adapting to the future; Apple is saying toodle-oo, here comes HTML5 and all its work, and the Devil take the hindmost, which is looking to be Adobe.
Too bad for them. Sort of.
Here, this says it better than I did: http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash
"Presumeably Apple are fully aware that Adobe Flash is the de-facto standard for videos..."
As for your dreamed-up scenarios, ha hah ah
Can you taste the sheer desperation emanating from Adobe... it's delicious. One of the primary markets for using Flash is about to evaporate from before their very eyes.
P.S. El Reg needs an Adobe Flash FAIL icon... I suggest a blue lego.
This is why i love the reg,
some new peice of technology and all they complain about is the lack of ability to view porn videos online
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017