Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thoughts on Flash

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 522 posts

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#281

Post by digitallogic »

Qz wrote: post #72

This is where he loses me: "Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open." Adobe can just as easily say: "Though Flash products are proprietary, we strongly believe that standards pertaining to what software is allowed to run on your computer should be open." It's doublespeak either way, and it's crazy to think th…

"If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?"

If you have to make significant changes to the UI portion of your application, why not thrown the entire thing out and start from scratch with an extremely new (less mature) technology stack that you're probably complete unfamiliar with.

I believe Netscape got similar advice in the nineties.

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#282

Post by Kadin »

tptacek wrote: post #242
anatoly wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

So your argument appears to be that Apple, having chosen to build the most popular (by vendor support) browser library on the market on a GPL codebase, is less open than Microsoft.

The codebase is arguably more open but the platform as a whole is not.

I think the closed platform thing is a lot more troubling and has the potential to be worse for the market as a whole than if they had decided to build a proprietary browser but allowed other browsers on it.

(This is not to defend Microsoft's portable strategy, though; they've got the worst of both worlds. They have a shitty proprietary browser and then don't let you install anything else on it, AFAIK.)

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#283

Post by paul9290 »

Unfortunately, Mr. Jobs the average person does not care about why you don't offer it. They only care and know that what they are used to getting can not be had on your platform, but can & will be on other platforms.

This fact and doubled that you remain exclusive to AT&T may turn your juggernaut around and repeat history.

From a happy and estatic iPhone owner/developer; best thing on market hands down!

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#284

Post by evgen »

tomlin wrote: post #226
Zev wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Delays Your link makes it seem like an evangelist is playing loosely with words; "available for download" could simply mean beta/RC status, not ready for release everywhere. Battery Life From your link: The results are amazing: I can watch a 4 hours and a half flash movie, without interruption, with a bright screen (no sleep mode) and sound !!! From Steve Jobs post: The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for examp…

It is true that some of these links are from evangelists. But we're not saying Steve Jobs is neutral are we? Battery Life: It's a bit of hyperbole. We don't watch videos on the iPhone for 10 hours. Would it matter if Flash could play videos for 11 hours? It is a misdirection or a sidestep of an original claim that Flash would kill the iPhone inside of 2 hours. Touch/Scroll: Another sidestep. A Flash issue? With that…

Battery Life: It's a bit of hyperbole. We don't watch videos on the iPhone for 10 hours. Would it matter if Flash could play videos for 11 hours? It is a misdirection or a sidestep of an original claim that Flash would kill the iPhone inside of 2 hours.

If a phone can watch 4 1/2 hours of flash in software before the battery is drained this means that watching a two hour movie will eat half of my battery. By comparison I can watch a two hour movie using hardware decoding and still have 80% of my battery left.

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#285

Post by barrkel »

bsergean wrote: post #144
va_coder wrote: post #104

It continues to amaze me that Jobs, as CEO of the 2nd largest company by market cap, is more technical than many of the managers I have had.

Conclusion: being a great CEO in a tech company requires to have a solid tech background. Eric Schmidt wrote flex (yacc friend), Adobe founders were kick ass phds, Bill Gates comes to mind too.

Eric Schmidt co-wrote lex, not flex.

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#286

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #259
anatoly wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, my argument is that your argument is misleading because it ignores the fact that Apple doesn't have a choice in keeping Webkit open. It's possible that they would want to and possible they would not want to, if they had a choice. When they originally chose KHTML to base Webkit on, in 2002, years before the first iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone OS, etc., their attitute towards being open may have been different t…

Apple has been a (or, THE) driving force behind Webkit for some time now. They weren't forced to start with LGPL code. They did because they were comfortable working under the GPL. I object to the subtext here, of "Apple only does open source when they're dragged into it". No, in fact, Apple has been a vocal and active open source contributor for many years now, to a far far greater extent than Microsoft. I started w…

[deleted]

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#287

Post by grinich »

joshwa wrote: post #74

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…

I built a demo using PastryKit. See it here: http://michaelgrinich.com/pastrytweets/

Code is here: http://github.com/grinich/pastrytweets

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#288

Post by chc »

tomlin wrote: post #235
zweben wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is it will only ever directly effect products made by the same company. A device from HP or Microsoft will never be hurt by an issue with a closed Apple platform. If there are issues with Flash, it will hurt every company using Flash, and there is nothing those companies can do about it other than bug Adobe to fix it or drop Flash support.

I don't disagree that Flash has the potential to create issues. The argument just suffers from the fallacy of composition. The standoff motif is getting old. We're talking about software, not cold war against another country. Apple doesn't want you to notice Steve behind the curtain. With Adobe we tend to pick and choose what we agree with and ignore the points that don't support our bias.

In what way is saying "Flash has problems, therefore putting Flash on your platform will expose it to those problems" a fallacy of composition? I don't see it at all. It's not wrongly attributing an attribute of one small part of Flash to the whole. Or are you saying the fallacy is somewhere else?

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#289

Post by tomlin »

potatolicious wrote: post #271
tomlin wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is true that some of these links are from evangelists. But we're not saying Steve Jobs is neutral are we? Battery Life: It's a bit of hyperbole. We don't watch videos on the iPhone for 10 hours. Would it matter if Flash could play videos for 11 hours? It is a misdirection or a sidestep of an original claim that Flash would kill the iPhone inside of 2 hours. Touch/Scroll: Another sidestep. A Flash issue? With that…

> "We don't watch videos on the iPhone for 10 hours." We do other things on the iPhone. I don't want to make the choice between watching a video and then restricting my own usage just so my phone has enough juice to make a call. I'd rather watch videos and use my phone, and the more power efficient everything is, the more the user can do this. To put it in perspective, if Apple's numbers are to be believed, running F…

> a:hover is no longer (it certainly used to be) a common tool used for site navigation. Which is to say, rollover dropdown menus are out like parachute pants - it's a non-issue on the web today. Just about every site works with "clicks", which is Apple's primary form of interaction with websites on touch devices.

This is precisely what I am talking about. We slice the pear in the middle and somehow end up choosing one side over another. True, a:hover is a deprecated form of menu control in HTML, but it is in Flash, too. Again, how you use the tool. Damning an entire developer base based on miscreant use is not a compelling argument. Sorry, but it isn't.

Re: Thoughts on Flash

#290

Post by gaius »

telemachos wrote: post #275
tomlin wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thought: Proprietary isn't bad. Open isn't great. Proprietary vs. open is bad. Proprietary + open is great. Proprietary implementations are a (sometimes) necessary interstitial step towards great open implementations. Save the "VS." narrative for Street Fighter II.

I'm not flaming, trolling or baiting, but I am curious: under what circumstances do you think proprietary implementations are necessary?

If your implementation relies on technology that you have licensed from a third party.
Post reply on HN