241–250 of 522 posts
I love this. Apple clearly laid out their reasoning, using facts and persuasive argument. The world needs more of this. Obviously, there is some spin in the post, and I don't completely agree with 100% of it, but I love the level of discourse.
John Gruber has been making these exact points. This could basically be ghost written by Gruber and we wouldn't know the difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple makes Bill Gates look like Richard Stallman? Let me ask you something. How many of Microsoft's competitors are building products that compete directly with Microsoft core offerings using the source code to Internet Explorer?
None, because the source code to Internet Explorer isn't based on an LGPL library and so can be kept proprietary. Now, how many Microsoft OSes refuse to run in a virtualization environment on non-approved hardware? How many treat such execution as a license violation?
> For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. right. And the Finder - a piece of Software central to OSX was using Carbon until... when exactly? At most 6 months prior to when CS5 came out. iTunes - a corner stone of the iPhone software world? Still on Carbon. If I hate one thing, it's hypocrisy. Aside of that, nice…
As a Flash developer myself, it only makes me second guess myself more. Not because it presents a new point of view, but that non-technical people will now harp in on the issue, and I'll have to once more explain why I'm developing on a 'dying' platform.
The thing that scares me though, is that if I want to move on in my programming career, should I be learning another proprietary platform to develop iPhone apps? Seems like Android is the alternative to that, but I just can't get rid of my iPhone.
Want to use Google Analytics? Sorry. Need Flash.
Want to see StreetView? Need Flash.
Hulu? Need Flash.
Aviary? Need Flash.
Games? Need Flash.
Apple's answer to everything but video is to buy it from the App Store. Really? Buying shit from the App Store is not the Internet I signed up for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
* Flash websites will have to be rewritten because it relies on 'rollovers', which is not part of Apple's 'revolutionary' touch interface: overblown for two reasons - a) few stuff will have to be rewritten (many videos show desktop Flash content working on mobile phones without a problem); and b) this is not a problem with Flash, as any JS/HTML-based interface that relies on rollovers has the same issues. * Flash is…
"Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world." Clearly nonsense. I'm willing to bet that there are many, many more games and entertainment apps written in Flash alone than there are on the app store.
Is that a position for or against keeping flash off the iPhone, iPod and iPad?
If they're going to pitch HTML5 as an alternative to Flash (and, implicitly, the iPhoneOS API), then why not let them compete directly with Cocoa Touch apps? Why not offer HTML5 developers a way to take advantage of the App Store's monetization and discoverability? Apple already provides some amazing documentation and tutorials for making offline-capable mobile web apps, but they're still treated by Apple as the bast…
Can't you create a barebones cocoa touch app that basically just shows safari, and your app runs inside that as ja and HTML?
I've jumped to the conclusions on the article and this puzzled me: "The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content." Because media outlets are forced to make their videos available to the iPhone without being able to use Flash, this means that Flash is no longer needed?