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

Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

blog.laptopmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 194 posts

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#141

Post by est »

xtacy wrote: post #52
cookiecaper wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why couldn't you implement P2P in JavaScript? You'd have to work around browser sandboxing that prevents access to the disk, but you can do that by installing as an extension. I think a JS-based torrent client is reasonable. "New features" is not a good answer; it might stave things off a bit longer, but the real problem in Flash is that Adobe is choking it to death and only really provides first-class support on Win…

With Google pushing for NativeClient, P2P within the browser could very much be possible with a proper security model. http://code.google.com/p/nativeclient

I assume NaCl is only a sandboxing executing environment, not a IO platform?

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#142

Post by toddheasley »

dusklight wrote: post #120

Even if Jobs is right about the technical shortcomings of flash, that doesn't change the fundamental fact. It should be YOUR choice whether you want to run flash on your phone, not his. He has no obligation to provide help to get it working, but neither should he be actively preventing even the possibility of flash (or any other software) through legal and procedural means.

It is YOUR choice, which you can exercise by not buying an iOS device.

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#143

Post by wazoox »

wtallis wrote: post #131
orangecat wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CS5 (released April 2010) was the first version of the suite that was fully Mac OS X native. (Mac OS X was released March 2001). By that standard, iTunes still isn't native. Apple always positioned Carbon as a fully supported and native framework. They even promised 64-bit Carbon support in Leopard before yanking the rug out right before it shipped, which no doubt rendered a lot of work by Adobe useless. I would have…

Apple said Carbon was a fully supported framework because that's what their developers needed to hear in order to switch to OS X. In reality, even Adobe was smart enough to not use Carbon for any big new projects (Lightroom uses Cocoa on OS X). By the time Apple pulled the plug on 64-bit Carbon, it was clear that the only reasons for its continued existence were Microsoft Office and Adobe CS. Apple was well on their…

  > Apple was well on their way to having a suitable 
  > replacement for Office, and their Pro Apps suite was 
  > missing only the hole that CS fills.
Apple Final Cut Pro is a carbon application, too. You need really good reason to rewrite large parts of a big applications.

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#144

Post by robryan »

est wrote: post #138
illumin8 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you watched the Apple HTML5 demos on an iPad? It's actually revolutionary to see what they can do with the limited hardware. Being able to touch and drag a 3d model around at 30 fps without stuttering? I can't even do that on a lot of PCs with Flash.

> Being able to touch and drag a 3d model around at 30 fps without stuttering? I can't even do that on a lot of PCs with Flash. Then can you explain why setting font size to 200 on this HTML5 demo http://www.ponticstar.com/projects/burning-words/ then my browser is slowing down to unusable? I've seen burning words demo in Flash 4 from 2000 and it's very smooth even on a PIII machine.

Without examining the code it's hard to jump to conclusions, was the flash version really rendering the effect pixel by pixel as I'd imagine the HTML5 one is?

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#145

Post by delackner »

hippich wrote: post #38

easiest way to kill flash - to offer it, but it should be slow, buggy and crash often. then everyone will think about flash as something bad and stop using it. So Android platform actually tries to kill flash =) Not just talking about is as jobs.

There is a large risk that people will decide that the terrible experience they have with browsing (a flash-heavy site) on Android phones is because of Android, and not because of Flash ads hanging their browser.

When you tell someone "flash just doesn't work on the iPhone, because flash is crap" it may not be true. But most people seem to be perfectly content with this experience, leading to a positive impression of the phone and industry-leading satisfaction.

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#146

Post by Daishiman »

diego_moita wrote: post #133
Daishiman wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you insane? I've had to develop a CRUD application in Silverlight, and it was dauntingly slow in comparison to Ruby and Python frameworks, and the tooling is still behind the rest of the C# frameworks. I made a blog post a few weeks ago on the matter: http://www.andresosinski.com.ar/blog_view_entry/?id=6

Well, 3 points: 1) in most of your post you argue against the performance of VS2010 and how slow it is to edit XAML, not the performance of your Silverlight code/application. I take that it was as good as mine. And I think that this is what is being discussed here. 2) I agree that VS2010 is indeed much slower than previous versions, although I didn't experience something as terrible as you. But I am running it in a 3…

Partially so. However much Silverlight might fill a niche for rich media, the fact is that 99% of the use cases will be for internal business applications, where it fails spectacularly. And in the case of ubiquitous media apps, it's simple: Siverlight is not nor will it ever be ubiquitous.

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#147

Post by jasongullickson »

cookiecaper wrote: post #23

Adobe is seriously doing it all wrong. They have to open-source the Flash Player and everything around it now. They can keep the IDE proprietary if that floats their boat, it's just a premium authoring tool, but the only way to save Flash is to open-source like NOW. HTML5 is still young enough that an open Flash Player and standard and protocol (RTMP) would effectively kill it. Open-sourcing would open so many doors.…

I think this goes 180 degrees in the wrong direction.

Based on what I've heard, the real reason anyone uses flash anymore is because of the authoring tools, not the runtime.

Instead of open-sourcing the flash player, build a development/authoring tool for HTML5 of equal or higher quality than the Adobe tools and open-source that...then watch this debate become irrelevant a year from now...

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#148

Post by mikeklaas »

pcestrada wrote: post #105

If the problem is one of performance, then each generation of mobile phone should close the gap on reaching an acceptable level of performance for the Flash player. Moore's law may be Adobe's friend in this case.

Moore's law is nobody's friend in mobile applications where the limiting factor is performance/watt.

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#149

Post by jbm »

elblanco wrote: post #124
illumin8 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you watched the Apple HTML5 demos on an iPad? It's actually revolutionary to see what they can do with the limited hardware. Being able to touch and drag a 3d model around at 30 fps without stuttering? I can't even do that on a lot of PCs with Flash.

Here ya go. Give this a try and let us know how it runs. http://xplsv.com/prods/demos/xplsv_orsotheysay/

I noted everyone saying it was crashing their browser / etc.., but it worked perfectly on my computer (dual core, cheap video card, Chrome).

Re: Mobile Flash Fail: Weak Android Player Proves Jobs Right

#150

Post by andybak »

illumin8 wrote: post #113
cookiecaper wrote: post #23

Adobe is seriously doing it all wrong. They have to open-source the Flash Player and everything around it now. They can keep the IDE proprietary if that floats their boat, it's just a premium authoring tool, but the only way to save Flash is to open-source like NOW. HTML5 is still young enough that an open Flash Player and standard and protocol (RTMP) would effectively kill it. Open-sourcing would open so many doors.…

This is a great idea, but I think Adobe might not want to open source it because they have sold Flash to content companies as a way to lock their streaming content down with DRM. Opening the specs and allowing anyone to play DRM content would let the "evil pirates" get their hands on all that sweet, sweet booty. By booty I mean streaming episodes of Hulu...

Are you saying that an it's impossible technically to have an open source DRM format? I'm not sure that follows, does it?
Post reply on HN