[MacinTommy]

Here is the other part of the ad.

[jokell82]

Fixed.

[Stogieman]

Originally Posted by MacinTommy 

Here is the other part of the ad.

Says the company that bought Macromedia and killed Illustrator's competition.

RIP - Freehand

[pooka]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Any discussion about H264 acceleration in Flash is a waste of time. Why bother wrapping H264 in a Flash wrapper to begin with?

Ask Hulu.

[exca1ibur]

DRM, ads tracking, DRM, DRM etc.

Hulu says HTML5 'doesn't yet meet all of our customers' needs' -- Engadget

Now that the studios are starting to build their own HTML5 versions of serving video, we'll probably end up getting our video directly from the studios. Some can just cut out the middle man, or work around him.

[pooka]

DRM is available on iTunes content sans Flash. I have to assume it's a little more complicated than that.

[exca1ibur]

The DRM for iTunes content is contained in the file container. (.m4p). iTunes itself is the only app that plays these files. It's nothing more than a standard acc file with a DRM container.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Gee, just like I said months ago this would be the case:

Test shows Flash 10.1 bogging down Android 2.2 [video] | Electronista

[jobbies]

Screw flash it's annoying and a waste of my time.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by jobbies 

Screw flash it's annoying and a waste of my time.

I think what you mean to say is that the iPad is useless and waste of time WITHOUT flash

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Remember the shitstorm that some armchair programers here threw over Apple requiring non-flash coding in Apps?

Well it seems to be a rather easy task considering ADOBE made this so fast:
AppleInsider | Wired's iPad edition arrives, converted from Flash by Adobe

[The Final Dakar]

Am I reading this right? Adobe has software that can convert Flash to Objective-C?

[-Q-]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Am I reading this right? Adobe has software that can convert Flash to Objective-C?

I can't tell. Reading the linked editor's letter seems to say that Wired used Adobe tech to create both the print issue and the digital issues (with more interactive features) with the same applications. But I can't tell if it also means that Adobe has created a way to develop Objective-C apps (or content for those apps) or if it is Flash-based.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by -Q- 

I can't tell. Reading the linked editor's letter seems to say that Wired used Adobe tech to create both the print issue and the digital issues (with more interactive features) with the same applications. But I can't tell if it also means that Adobe has created a way to develop Objective-C apps (or content for those apps) or if it is Flash-based.

That would be hilarious if it was Flash --> Obj-C, but rumour has it that it isn't.

Hard Labor: Adobe Rebuilds Its Wired Magazine App to Fit Apple’s Flash-Free Agenda | Peter Kafka | MediaMemo | AllThingsD

Specifically, Adobe is using Objective C for the new version of app, which originally was built using the Flash standard which Apple (AAPL) detests. That should presumably pass muster with Apple’s developer agreement, which specifically lists Objective C as an acceptable programming language for the iPhone and iPad.

Both Condé Nast and Adobe declined to comment. Condé previously offered an oblique statement earlier this month about its intentions to produce an Apple-approved Wired app with Adobe’s help.

The good news for Adobe is that it doesn’t have to write off all the time and effort it invested in the Condé Nast project. So if Apple approves the Wired app, it will have a solution that works for other clients that want to get their stuff onto the iPhone and iPad.

The bad news is that the whole point of the Condé Nast project was to create a platform that publishers could use once to produce digital publications that would work on a range of platforms. Now those hopes have been dashed.

[The Final Dakar]

Pretty funny if their developers just rewrote from scratch.

[jokell82]

It was created using Indesign CS5. Apparently they're going to release the method for creating it this year:
Introducing WIRED Magazine on iPad - Adobe Digital Publishing

[The Final Dakar]

NBC, Time Warner Tell Apple They're Sticking with Flash

According to The New York Post, "several large media companies, including Time Warner and NBC Universal" told Apple they aren't converting their video libraries to HTML5. They claim that doing so would be too expensive an undertaking and just not worth it, since Flash works on basically everything but Apple's devices.

NBC was also the company that Apple had a fun little war over their content in iTunes Store. Coincidence?

[Spheric Harlot]

Wasn't TimeWarner the company that spent a fortune on AOL?

They have a dead-on sense of judgement in technology trends. I'm sure Steve Jobs is turning in his grave.

[The Final Dakar]

Next thing you'll know they'll buy Adobe because Flash is "going places".

[::maroma::]

I've seen this movie before. These "large media companies" will hold off as long as they can out of fear of change. Then, just when they are about to be left behind for good, they'll get on board and play catch up.

Of course these companies don't want to do the work that would be required to make this change. That would cost money (gasp!). But lets not forget how these same companies acted in the recent past. When faced with an inevitable shift in the way they do business, they cower in the corner like frightened wounded animals.

Whether or not HTML5 wins over Flash, or if another technology comes along to replace them all, these gigantic old-world companies will always be horrified of change. The rest of the industry has to pull them along kicking and screaming.

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by ::maroma:: 

Whether or not HTML5 wins over Flash, or if another technology comes along to replace them all, these gigantic old-world companies will always be horrified of change. The rest of the industry has to pull them along kicking and screaming.

..or they can be as successful as newspaper companies are today.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by ::maroma:: 

I've seen this movie before. These "large media companies" will hold off as long as they can out of fear of change. Then, just when they are about to be left behind for good, they'll get on board and play catch up.

Exactly, they are caught of guard and are not prepared to handle current trends so they try to cater to people who fear change and don't upgrade often by putting on a face that the old way is better.

Sony JUST stopped making floppy disks 2 months ago which is a scary thought.

In the end it will just hurt them not Apple as the iPad is selling like mad as is.

It is actually blowing my mind how quickly flash is being ditched by most companies. I couldn't stop laughing when I read how Adobe re-wrote the wired App in the proper programming language instead of flash. They know they are screwed as despite all their bitching and ad campaign against Apple's flash stance the iPad is selling better than anything else out there and will only grow more and more.

Of course all the armchair flash programmers here still think the iPad is useless without flash and boy have they ever turned out to be correct

[Cold Warrior]

I was looking at Steve's magazine covers and some had links to the articles. I ran across this one in Wired, 1996. Replace Java with Flash and Microsoft with Adobe and you have Apple's viewpoint and historical insight into their strategy.

Some choice quotes but really the whole interview is insightful:

Originally Posted by Steve

...anything that slows down the Web reaching ubiquity allows Microsoft to catch up. If Microsoft catches up, it's far worse than the fact the Web can't do word processing. Those things can be fixed later.
There's a window now that will close. If you don't cross the finish line in the next two years, Microsoft will own the Web. And that will be the end of it.

Apple knew probably years ago that Flash was a threat. Its decisions and development choices -- probably devised years ago -- are in the right time and place to ensure Flash doesn't close the web.

Originally Posted by Steve

There won't be just one standard. There'll be several; they're all going to fight; each one has its problems. So it's going to be very easy to say why just one shouldn't be the standard. And a fractured Web community will play right into Microsoft's hands.

HTML5 is the community's salvation from Flash. A lack of capabilities and standards allowed Macromedia's Flash to blow up and Adobe's Flash to continue. Apple is using its muscle to shape a unification of the community.

Originally Posted by Steve

A force of self-interest throughout the industry made Windows ubiquitous. Compaq and all these different vendors made Windows ubiquitous. They didn't know how to spell software, but they wanted to put something on their machines. That made Windows ubiquitous.

Sites and vendors used Flash because it was in their self-interest to use a ubiquitous product. iPhone and iPad have had such a profound effect that, out of self-interest to reach Apple's influential and affluent customers, sites and vendors have redesigned for compatibility.

Flash will never come to iPhone or iPad. 2009 was Peak Flash.

[turtle777]

Nice viewpoint, CW.

-t

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior 

Flash will never come to iPhone or iPad. 2009 was Peak Flash.

Agreed... which means that Flash will be around for many more years, and will be the only option for some sites for the near future.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Agreed... which means that Flash will be around for many more years, and will be the only option for some sites for the near future.

I don't know if I agree. I used to, and I think I know where you are coming from. It is true that the gears often move slowly within business, but I think that this is a little different. For starters, those companies that are cranking out a steady stream of video content are probably a different kind of company than some stodgy business that still uses WinXP and IE 6 for stuff, they are a little more cutting edge.

The cost of moving to HTML5 driven video is really really low if you are not Hulu and just need to allow your users to playback video. Nothing could be easier than generating a video tag. Heck, you could even just add one line to code to include a Javascript function that would swap embed/ActiveX tags with video tags once this video has been re-encoded.

The big question is browser support. Microsoft has hired a guy to kill off IE 6, his goal is to make IE 6 usage 0%. The people that are using IE 6 probably have some reason to use IE 6, or else are simply too lazy to upgrade. If you can get these people to budge, moving from IE 7 to IE 8 or IE 8 to IE 9 is probably going to be less of a battle. IE 9, which is coming soon, will support HTML5 video and h.264. There is also Firefox, we'll have to wait and see what happens there.

There are a few obstacles such as the aforementioned, but I'm also impressed with how fast many companies have already moved to support HTML5 video. I guess the incentive is there. With the bar raised to the point where customers expect others to follow suit, it seems like all of this could happen sooner than later.

We'll see. I kind of agree with you, but I also think that it wouldn't be completely surprising if this transition happens quicker than one might think.

[Eug]

^^^ So, basically you've described how Flash is still used by many, and how it will still take some time to get rid of it.

So, as you said, you kind of agree with me. Yeah, it may be a quicker change than some of us were thinking, but "quick" still means years... just less of them.

In the interim, getting the iPad may be an OK option for some, but definitely not a priority for many others, myself included.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

The big question is browser support. Microsoft has hired a guy to kill off IE 6, his goal is to make IE 6 usage 0%. The people that are using IE 6 probably have some reason to use IE 6, or else are simply too lazy to upgrade. If you can get these people to budge, moving from IE 7 to IE 8 or IE 8 to IE 9 is probably going to be less of a battle. IE 9, which is coming soon, will support HTML5 video and h.264. There is also Firefox, we'll have to wait and see what happens there.

This I don't agree with. On Windows I primarily use Firefox (and as you mentioned, we still don't know what's happening with that), but sometimes use IE as a backup. I don't use any other browser on Windows. No Safari, no Chrome, no Opera, etc. On one machine, I still have IE 6, just because I never got around to upgrading it. On the others I use IE 7, because I didn't have any compelling reason to upgrade to IE 8. (My machines are still on XP. In fact, my entire workplace is still XP.) Hell, I didn't know IE 8 was out until some time later, and when I found out, I didn't care... and I'm a geek. I can imagine the average XP user having even less incentive to upgrade than a geek like me. Personally, I think IE 9 will take quite some time (in computer years at least) to become ubiquitous. Furthermore, I think a lot of that change will simply be from people upgrading their operating system and getting IE 9 in the future with Windows 7 by default, and most end users only do that when they buy a new machine.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

For all those who worried that h.264 will not stay royalty free:



MPEG LA - The Standard for Standards - Media

I'm sure some of the Ogg advocates are going to point out that this might change in 2016 once h.264 becomes the de facto standard.

It won't.

MPEG LA’s AVC License Will Not Charge Royalties for Internet Video That Is Free to End Users Through Life of License | Business Wire

[Eug]

Apple eases restrictions on apps

In the heated battle with Adobe, Apple has called a bit of a truce.

Apple (AAPL-Q263.070.150.06%) said Thursday it will allow developers of applications for its iPhones and iPads to use software such as Adobe (ADBE-Q32.863.5512.11%) Flash, a move that lifted Adobe’s share by 12 per cent on the promise of higher sales.

Even though iPhone and iPad users likely still won’t be able to view Flash content on their Web browsers, Apple is now allowing developers to use Flash tools in their design process. The move is a huge boon for Adobe, which is no longer shut out of the world’s most popular apps store.

Besides the threat of an antitrust investigation, there are at least two other likely reasons why Apple backtracked on its previous position. The first is games. As smart phones become more powerful, the number of smart phone game apps is quickly growing. However, many games are designed using cross-platform tools, so designers can build games for more than one kind of smart phone. By previously limiting the use of such tools on its platforms, Apple effectively outlawed some of the most popular game-building software available, making life more difficult for many major game studios.

Apple’s policy change also comes at a time when the company is facing stiff competition from companies such as Google Inc. and Research In Motion Ltd. Google’s Android smart phone operating system now powers some of the most popular devices on the market, including units from HTC Corp. and Motorola Inc., and arguably represents the biggest threat to the iPhone’s popularity with consumers. RIM has shifted its focus to the consumer market, most recently with the release of its newest phone, the Torch. In effect, Apple’s more relaxed app rules give developers less incentive to abandon the company’s mobile devices for its competitors.

In addition to relaxing its development rules, Apple also publicly released the guidelines it uses to reject certain apps. The company had previously faced stiff criticism for what was seen as a fairly arbitrary rejection policy – Apple’s policy of rejecting certain content it deemed offensive or pornographic, in particular, opened the company to allegations of censorship.

Great News for Developers

Posted by Adobe Corporate Communications on September 9, 2010 5:03 PM in Business Professionals, Developers

Apple’s announcement today that it has lifted restrictions on its third-party developer guidelines has direct implications for Adobe’s Packager for iPhone, a feature in the Flash Professional CS5 authoring tool. This feature was created to enable Flash developers to quickly and easily deliver applications for iOS devices. The feature is available for developers to use today in Flash Professional CS5, and we will now resume development work on this feature for future releases.

This is great news for developers and we’re hearing from our developer community that Packager apps are already being approved for the App Store. We do want to point out that Apple’s restriction on Flash content running in the browser on iOS devices remains in place.

Adobe will continue to work to bring full web browsing with Flash Player 10.1 as well as standalone applications on AIR to a broad range of devices, working with key industry partners including Google, HTC, Microsoft, Motorola, Nokia, Palm/HP, RIM, Samsung and others.

[Randman]

No, because of all the pr over it. HTML5 or bust.

[Spheric Harlot]

This is not on iOS, but for 10.6.5, but it's pretty shocking IMO:



So. Much. Wasted. Time.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

This is not on iOS, but for 10.6.5, but it's pretty shocking IMO:



So. Much. Wasted. Time.

We shouldn't be running Apple's propriety code or open source?

[Eug]

Skyfire 2.0 transcodes Flash on their servers to HTML5

Neowin.net - SkyFire makes $1m after one week on App Store

We are very grateful for the demand. Within 5 hours, Skyfire for iPhone became the top grossing app, the third highest paid app overall and the top application in the Utilities category. Wow!

I won't be buying this though, at least not now. I hear the Flash support is rather poor at the moment. Furthermore I have the iPhone. Flash on the iPhone is less critical IMO. However, if they can update this to work well on the iPad, I'd consider buying an iPad.

The ironic part of this is that Apple takes $300000 of that million because they don't provide Flash on iOS.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

We shouldn't be running Apple's propriety code or open source?

Huh?

42 percent of the bugs covered are fixing support for Flash.

Wouldn't it have been nice to have that time spent on fixing IMAP support, or IPv6, or any number of other useful things?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Eug 

We shouldn't be running Apple's propriety code or open source?

No, Flash has required Apple a disproportionate amount of attention.

There are all sorts of security problems with Flash - not only fixable things, but things that are by design.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Huh?

42 percent of the bugs covered are fixing support for Flash.

It was a joke. The blue and orange pie slices are exactly the same size.

[Spheric Harlot]

Oh. Sorry.

[besson3c]

I think I missed it too

[Cool_Beanz]

Flash will only available when Adobe and Apple stop quarreling with each other! But I hope they stop soon...

[turtle777]

I hope it ever happens.

After 2.5 years with my iPhone, I haven't missed Flash at all.

-t