Support NeoGAF

[Marty Chinn]

Casual buyer hears buys Mac/Iphone/Ipad

Tries to run Flash website

Said Flash site crashes and/or causes Mac/Iphone/Ipad to freeze up because Flash runs like shit on Macs.

Consumer doesn't know what flash is, or how a plugin works, all they are going to do is assume Apple products are crap because it can't run a simple flash game

And it's that much better to have a website that says sorry you need flash before you can view me? The same people will say this is crap that I can't go to the website that I normally go to on my computer.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

And it's that much better to have a website that says sorry you need flash before you can view me? The same people will say this is crap that I can't go to the website that I normally go to on my computer.

is that a better alternative to having your computer freeze up or crash? Yes.

 

[mAcOdIn]

Casual buyer hears buys Mac/Iphone/Ipad

Tries to run Flash website

Said Flash site crashes and/or causes Mac/Iphone/Ipad to freeze up because Flash runs like shit on Macs.

Consumer doesn't know what flash is, or how a plugin works, all they are going to do is assume Apple products are crap because it can't run a simple flash game

You're right. Not being able to run the app at all makes the iPad/iPhone look much better to a dumb consumer. Being sent to a splash page where you're told your fancy iPad/iPhone will need to use the low bandwidth or non-flash version of a website is also much better to a dumb consumer.

If Apple had it set up to where ipad/iphone users were always automatically sent to the non-flash version of a site or never see what they're missing I'd say you have a point, but you really don't. Truth is Apple doesn't control the web, flash is a standard, like it or not, by matter of fact, despite what anyone feels.

Apple flat out not working with Adobe with Flash doesn't mean jack. Content providers who want their stuff on the iphone/ipad will make their app or use html 5 and content providers who can't be bothered to change their code or don't care about mobile users will not. We're not going to reach some magic land where Flash is killed off and everything relevant is moved to html 5 for any foreseeable future. All Apple is doing by standing their ground on this is further segment the mobile markets and make things a bigger pain to the consumer.

If idevices like the iPod and iPad were the only things on the internet then Apple would have the kind of control they act as if they have, at least the omission would be invisible to the consumer because they don't know they're not getting everything, I'm sure that's what Apple wants, you to use your iPhone, Ipad and Mac and never tell the difference between the experience but as long as they do that only the Apple loyalists will never feel the burn and everyone else is just left wondering what the fuck Apple's doing.

The consumer doesn't care about flash/html 5/W3C or anything, they just want the web they see on their desktops on their portable devices, anything less is a negative no matter who's fault it is. Apple should have done more to get Flash as opposed to just dropping it, even if they had to develop it themselves.

Edit: And if Apple's OS is so shitty that flash kills the OS, then that's Apples bad, flash's suckiness should be restrained to the web page not the whole damn phone/tablet.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

"This menu won't show up until I move my cursor over this box... ah fuck."

And if Apple's OS is so shitty that flash kills the OS

This is certainly logical on your part.

 

[Future]

It sucks that adobe can't make a flash lite, something that still can read most flash websites in a basic form. Not being able to access a damn menu sucks ass.

I turned on noscript for the family computer by accident and my family hated it, mostly cuz the lack of flash (I know it turns off other shit too). That said, the ipad may still be small enough to make people ignore it. It's not a replacement for the netbook, it's a new type of computing and we will see if people want it

 

[mrklaw]

I like apps just fine, what I don't like is arbitrary fragmentation of identical functionality into multiple apps that don't integrate or interconnect or share in any appreciable way. This is where the "Keep it simple" mantra breaks down.

In a way I agree with you - the web experience is partly about being able to bounce around different sites/bookmarks and that is broken if you need multiple apps.

however, I was very tempted recently to install Fluid to turn my most visitied bookmarks into standalone apps. You could argue that many of the more feature rich websites are treated like apps by users anyway - gmail for example.

So I don't think the situation is that clearcut.

 

[mAcOdIn]

"This menu won't show up until I move my cursor over this box... ah fuck."

This is certainly logical on your part.

How is it not? I'm going by what you guys are saying, I don't have an iphone or ipad, so if someone says it crashes the whole thing is that wrong? Does flash crash the phone or not? Irregardless, a problem with flash, if there is one, should be confined to the browser, period.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Does flash crash the phone or not?

I'll load up the Flash player on my iPhone and get back to you.

Irregardless, a problem with flash, if there is one, should be confined to the browser, period.

This assumes Flash is a browser thing. It's not. It's a plugin for your computer that just happens to be most often accessed in a browser.

 

[Marty Chinn]

is that a better alternative to having your computer freeze up or crash? Yes.

Sounds more like to me that you're choosing between eating crap or drinking piss. Both suck, and both reflect badly on Apple. It seems silly to make the point you just did as if it was a good thing.

Let's not act like Safari doesn't crash on the iPhone either. If the OS is good enough, it should recovery nicely.

 

[mAcOdIn]

I'll load up the Flash player on my iPhone and get back to you.

Sarcasm is fun .

Seriously though, everyone seems to be running on assumptions. It's assumed that flash would suck on the ipad/iphone because it sucks on the mac, is that correct? Or are people saying that it will crash/freeze on the iphone/ipad talking form experience about some unreleased build or some shit?

Because from where I stand it's all a bunch of hyperbole.

This assumes Flash is a browser thing. It's not. It's a plugin for your computer that just happens to be most often accessed in a browser.

Fair enough statement but that doesn't change much. Flash should not have sufficient privileges to take down the OS. Microsoft has been moving towards making it to where single programs can't bring down the OS, is Apple not headed that direction then?

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Sarcasm is fun .

Seriously though, everyone seems to be running on assumptions. It's assumed that flash would suck on the ipad/iphone because it sucks on the mac, is that correct? Or are people saying that it will crash/freeze on the iphone/ipad talking form experience about some unreleased build or some shit?

Because from where I stand it's all a bunch of hyperbole.

When Safari crashes, that's Apple's problem. When Flash crashes, it's Adobe's problem to fix and Apple's problem to assume Adobe will fix it. Adobe and Macromedia had over a decade to get Flash right and they haven't, so why put that trust on them?

It's RealPlayer 2010.

 

[mAcOdIn]

When Safari crashes, that's Apple's problem. When Flash crashes, it's Adobe's problem to fix and Apple's problem to assume Adobe will fix it. Adobe and Macromedia had over a decade to get Flash right and they haven't, so why put that trust on them?

It's RealPlayer 2010.

Flash crashing is Adobe's fault, I'll give you that, Flash taking down the OS with it, well that'd be Adobe and Apple's fault.

 

[mrkgoo]

And it's that much better to have a website that says sorry you need flash before you can view me? The same people will say this is crap that I can't go to the website that I normally go to on my computer.

It's a fair point, but Apple has always been about the user experience. Obviously it hasn't always panned out for the better, but it's their philosophy - they either have it working they want it to or they don't at all. That is they'd probably rather have limited functionality that 'works' well over extended functionality that doesn't.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Oh! Hi guys! What are we talking about? Flash?!? Again?!?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Sounds more like to me that you're choosing between eating crap or drinking piss. Both suck, and both reflect badly on Apple. It seems silly to make the point you just did as if it was a good thing.

Let's not act like Safari doesn't crash on the iPhone either. If the OS is good enough, it should recovery nicely.

I wasn't speaking from my own perspective. This thread turned into people wondering why Apple would do things the way they did and I was throwing that out there. If I am trying to sell computers, would I rather that everytime my consumers went to Hulu their computer crashed, or that some box would pop up saying "This is incompatible" or "You need XXX plug-in". I know that on the oldass PCs we have at work, people get the "you need an up to date plug-in" message all the time and they just move on and go to Ebay or twitter or whatever time waster they have. If their computer crashed all the time or froze up they'd probaby be a little more annoyed.

 

[mAcOdIn]

Homer's face in that is so freaking weird, it's almost frightening.

I wasn't speaking from my own perspective. This thread turned into people wondering why Apple would do things the way they did and I was throwing that out there. If I am trying to sell computers, would I rather that everytime my consumers went to Hulu their computer crashed, or that some box would pop up saying "This is incompatible" or "You need XXX plug-in". I know that on the oldass PCs we have at work, people get the "you need an up to date plug-in" message all the time and they just move on and go to Ebay or twitter or whatever time waster they have. If their computer crashed all the time or froze up they'd probaby be a little more annoyed.

Hey I know, why don't we just go back to text browsing! Then things would really be easy, no one trying to load some crazy 120mb picture or Saturn in their browser, no plugins, ah, such a simple experience that'd be for the end user.

 

[Marty Chinn]

It's a fair point, but Apple has always been about the user experience. Obviously it hasn't always panned out for the better, but it's their philosophy - they either have it working they want it to or they don't at all. That is they'd probably rather have limited functionality that 'works' well over extended functionality that doesn't.

I certainly accept that with my iPhone and it's a point I've learned to live with. What gets me is how people defend it and even justify it rather than at least just admitting it's a weak point and moving on. Not everything has to be perfect on an Apple device or justified.

 

[Boards of Canada]

How many crashes has the QuickTime plug-in caused?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

I certainly accept that with my iPhone and it's a point I've learned to live with. What gets me is how people defend it and even justify it rather than at least just admitting it's a weak point and moving on. Not everything has to be perfect on an Apple device or justified.

Just to clarify, I wasn't justifying it. I was just looking at it from a business perspective from Apple. They want to kill Flash and they don't want their own hardware to look weak.

 

[shantyman]

Flash crashing is Adobe's fault, I'll give you that, Flash taking down the OS with it, well that'd be Adobe and Apple's fault.

Since when does Flash crashing bring down the entire OS (Mac or Windows)?

This thread makes me want to poke my eyes out.

 

[mAcOdIn]

I certainly accept that with my iPhone and it's a point I've learned to live with. What gets me is how people defend it and even justify it rather than at least just admitting it's a weak point and moving on. Not everything has to be perfect on an Apple device or justified.

That's what I'm saying.

It is a negative but hardly a deal breaker, most mobile devices don't have proper flash either, I just don't like it being spun into some kind of positive like they're being done a favor by not having the option to even see if a website would have worked or not.

 

[Flo_Evans]

It sucks that adobe can't make a flash lite, something that still can read most flash websites in a basic form. Not being able to access a damn menu sucks ass.

I turned on noscript for the family computer by accident and my family hated it, mostly cuz the lack of flash (I know it turns off other shit too). That said, the ipad may still be small enough to make people ignore it. It's not a replacement for the netbook, it's a new type of computing and we will see if people want it

um.. they do...

http://www.adobe.com/products/flashlite/

Doesn't really work how you are describing it though, you have to publish specifically for flash lite. It can't just load any regular site.

And flash crashing is not usually adobes fault. Come the fuck on. Most of the time it's shitty code made by a flash developer.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I certainly accept that with my iPhone and it's a point I've learned to live with. What gets me is how people defend it and even justify it rather than at least just admitting it's a weak point and moving on. Not everything has to be perfect on an Apple device or justified.

I crack up at how you somehow read into this in every Apple debate. No one says or thinks that.

 

[mAcOdIn]

Since when does Flash crashing bring down the entire OS (Mac or Windows)?

This thread makes me want to poke my eyes out.

As I said, I was responding to someone who said "Said Flash site crashes and/or causes Mac/Iphone/Ipad to freeze up because Flash runs like shit on Macs."

 

[otake]

Why do you guys believe the BS? If Apple wanted to they could make Flash work on the iPad. This is software, it's all a matter of time investment and money. It's all business, clearly something is going on between Apple and Adobe.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Just to clarify, I wasn't justifying it. I was just looking at it from a business perspective from Apple. They want to kill Flash and they don't want their own hardware to look weak.

I apologize for misinterpreting what you said then.

I crack up at how you somehow read into this in every Apple debate. No one says or thinks that.

Nobody here is trying to defend and justify the lack of Flash here? Are you reading the same thread? We've had anything from:

1) There's an app for that
2) Flash sucks, better to not have it
3) We can now finally move to HTML5
4) Most of the popular sites don't use flash anyway
5) etc.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Why do you guys believe the BS? If Apple wanted to they could make Flash work on the iPad. This is software, it's all a matter of time investment and money. It's all business, clearly something is going on between Apple and Adobe.

Why would Apple take their time/money/resources to make Flash work when they don't want Flash around?

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Nobody here is trying to defend and justify the lack of Flash here? Are you reading the same thread? We've had anything from:

1) There's an app for that
2) Flash sucks, better to not have it
3) We can now finally move to HTML5
4) Most of the popular sites don't use flash anyway
5) etc.

I mean how you wrote that no one will just admit it's a weak point and move on, and the implication that we believe everything Apple does to be perfect.

Thinking of you, I can't remember a time you've ever conceded a debate or rationally discussed opposing viewpoints to your own. You just type the same thing forever until everyone gets tired of discussing it. But you expect others that aren't on your side to just admit defeat every time. It's funny, that's all.

 

[numble]

Why do you guys believe the BS? If Apple wanted to they could make Flash work on the iPad. This is software, it's all a matter of time investment and money. It's all business, clearly something is going on between Apple and Adobe.

I'm still waiting for someone to make it work well on Mac OS.

 

[mAcOdIn]

Why do you guys believe the BS? If Apple wanted to they could make Flash work on the iPad. This is software, it's all a matter of time investment and money. It's all business, clearly something is going on between Apple and Adobe.

Well I think there's truth to this but also a little gray. While I'm positive that Apple could have gotten Flash in some form or fashion on the ipad what is unknown is how well it'd be. Would Adobe develop it with it lagging behind the windows one like on many other devices? Would Apple have to pay to get a crippled Flash? Would Apple have to pay just for the right to develop it themselves? There's a lot of unknowns.

If I were Apple and Adobe wanted money to develop Flash on the iPad I'd probably turn them down as well, it sucks on the Wii, sucks on the PS3, I'll go a head and take everyone's word and assume it sucks on the Mac, but if Adobe would have allowed Apple to develop the Flash plugin I think that would have been good, then you got just as good a chance of getting good flash as you do html 5.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Does anyone else remember when we all used Adobe Reader for PDFs?

Good times. Adobe rules.

 

[Vic]

Does anyone else remember when we all used Adobe Reader for PDFs?

Good times. Adobe rules.

I still do...




What, there's better???


edit: wait, is this sarcasm I detect here?

 

[Marty Chinn]

I mean how you wrote that no one will just admit it's a weak point and move on, and the implication that we believe everything Apple does to be perfect.

Thinking of you, I can't remember a time you've ever conceded a debate or rationally discussed opposing viewpoints to your own. You just type the same thing forever until everyone gets tired of discussing it. But you expect others that aren't on your side to just admit defeat every time. It's funny, that's all.

I concede all the time. I, in fact, like it when in a debate that I'm proven wrong. If the search was working, I could probably find you posts that support that. But let's not get side tracked here, are you trying to say people aren't defending and justifying the lack of Flash? I honestly don't see how you can say it's a positive thing to cut off an aspect of the web like that. I can certainly understand various reasoning for it but that doesn't mean the end result is good even though I understand it.

 

[Flo_Evans]

"This menu won't show up until I move my cursor over this box... ah fuck."

This is not really exclusive to flash... plenty of (shit) menus based on JS or ajax use "onmouseover"

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Consumer doesn't know what flash is, or how a plugin works, all they are going to do is assume Apple products are crap because it can't run a simple flash game

And if Apple's OS is so shitty that flash kills the OS, then that's Apples bad, flash's suckiness should be restrained to the web page not the whole damn phone/tablet.

:lol Nice comeback.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I honestly don't see how you can say it's a positive thing to cut off an aspect of the web like that.

It's not a part of the web. That's the whole debate. Some can see that and understand the principles behind not including it, and others just want it all now. RealPlayer 2010, Adobe rules, Apple rules, etc etc etc x1000.

This is not really exclusive to flash... plenty of (shit) menus based on JS or ajax use "onmouseover"

I know you understand because you put "shit" there to clarify, but good ones will serve a link as backup. That's just where Flash fails hard for me as a web designer, because you often have to fake good standards like that instead of your work naturally falling back to it when you do it right.

 

[SuperPac]

You know, when I go to a restaurant site on my iPhone and get the blue brick icon, I never think "Apple sucks why don't they support flash." I'm thinking, "what the fuck this restaurant designed their entire website around one plugin even to view text information like locations, menu, hours, etc.?" There is no reason to have EVERYTHING in Flash.

If it wasn't a plugin that's so ubiquitous as Flash is I'd feel the same way about any website, viewing on a mobile device or not. If viewing any content on a (non-video-based) site relies entirely on the installation of one plugin, that's ridiculous. Shockwave, Silverlight, Quicktime, whatever.

(I'm hoping Apple will start announcing/showing more stuff about the iPad so we can move away from the Flash debate. Launch date, preorders, anything. Please?)

 

[mAcOdIn]

You know, when I go to a restaurant site on my iPhone and get the blue brick icon, I never think "Apple sucks why don't they support flash." I'm thinking, "what the fuck this restaurant designed their entire website around one plugin even to view text information like locations, menu, hours, etc.?" There is no reason to have EVERYTHING in Flash.

If it wasn't a plugin that's so ubiquitous as Flash is I'd feel the same way about any website, viewing on a mobile device or not. If viewing any content on a (non-video-based) site relies entirely on the installation of one plugin, that's ridiculous. Shockwave, Silverlight, Quicktime, whatever.

Now that's my number one hatred of the web, sites that take content or a layout that should be fast and clean and fucking go off the hook with it in some lame attempt to look cool. No one but the web designer really thinks that's cool, people don't go to a restaurant's website to be wowed or have some kind of experience, they go to get information, that should require no plugin.

 

[kaching]

"Keep it simple" in the way you're considering it would have kept us on IE6 for longer.

What? No. The way I'm considering it is that, within the alternative application framework they are already building, already used as the defense for the lack of Flash ("there's an app for that") they need to make more of an effort to match the convenience of the application framework they propose to leave behind. Less need for the user to worry about their point of entry, extensive hyperlinking between apps that provides the user a breadcrumb trail to go back to what they were doing, etc.

Keeping it simple in the ideological way Apple and others see it is to remove plugins and have the web be only the web. Use the web standard ways of displaying videos, vector graphics, sound, and animation. It's an incredibly simple thing to do that is only complicated by a plugin existing that has become a crutch. Think RealPlayer.

Plugins have been around as long as Javascript has, longer than CSS has, as far as the web being the web goes, and I'm sure you don't want the web to be the web without Javascript, or CSS. Plugins are as much a part of the W3C standard now as anything proposed for HTML5.

And the standards don't get blocked simply because of plugin owners. They get blocked and take years upon years to finalize because ALL of the companies who have a hand in them engage in backroom politics to try to leverage their vision of the next standard over everyone else's.

 

[Marty Chinn]

You know, when I go to a restaurant site on my iPhone and get the blue brick icon, I never think "Apple sucks why don't they support flash." I'm thinking, "what the fuck this restaurant designed their entire website around one plugin even to view text information like locations, menu, hours, etc.?" There is no reason to have EVERYTHING in Flash.

If it wasn't a plugin that's so ubiquitous as Flash is I'd feel the same way about any website, viewing on a mobile device or not. If viewing any content on a (non-video-based) site relies entirely on the installation of one plugin, that's ridiculous. Shockwave, Silverlight, Quicktime, whatever.

You know, I don't think that either. In fact I think like you do. But just a second ago we were talking about what the average person thinks and that person IS going to have that kind of thinking when they can't view the site they want on an Apple device. Just like they would blame Apple if Flash constantly crashed the iPad. It goes both ways. Regardless of whose fault it is, it still sucks that I'm cut off from finding out information while on my phone.

From a friend who has done web development, doing it all in Flash I hear just is easier and cheaper for web developers and the business to get a nice good looking site up and running. Regardless of how much it sucks or not, it is very heavily present and it's silly to ignore that.

 

[otake]

Why would Apple take their time/money/resources to make Flash work when they don't want Flash around?

Because Flash is all over the internet and Apple included a browser in their product.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Plugins have been around as long as Javascript has, longer than CSS has, as far as the web being the web goes, and I'm sure you don't want the web to be the web without Javascript, or CSS. Plugins are as much a part of the W3C standard now as anything proposed for HTML5.

I feel the web is doing fine without ActiveX.

What? No. The way I'm considering it is that, within the alternative application framework they are already building, already used as the defense for the lack of Flash ("there's an app for that")

Your problem is you read our comments on apps as backup methods as if it were our preferred method. It's not. In a preferable, great world, the web would move on to HTML 5 or anything else which would replace Flash within the browser and we're all happy.

 

[otake]

You know, when I go to a restaurant site on my iPhone and get the blue brick icon, I never think "Apple sucks why don't they support flash." I'm thinking, "what the fuck this restaurant designed their entire website around one plugin even to view text information like locations, menu, hours, etc.?" There is no reason to have EVERYTHING in Flash.

If it wasn't a plugin that's so ubiquitous as Flash is I'd feel the same way about any website, viewing on a mobile device or not. If viewing any content on a (non-video-based) site relies entirely on the installation of one plugin, that's ridiculous. Shockwave, Silverlight, Quicktime, whatever.

(I'm hoping Apple will start announcing/showing more stuff about the iPad so we can move away from the Flash debate. Launch date, preorders, anything. Please?)

That's you. Most people aren't like that. People buy a device to enhance their lives, not be bothered by it. I want to like the Ipad as much as anyone else, but this lack of Flash is serious, pretending it's only exposes fanboyism.

 

[shantyman]

Whether you agree with Apple or not, please read this before making comments (It's already been posted):

http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash

Here’s the deal. On stage at the WWDC 2009 keynote address last June, Apple senior vice president of software engineering Bertrand Serlet was explaining the new web content plugin mechanism for Safari in Snow Leopard. Rather than run within Safari’s application process, web content plugins now run in their own process, so if they crash, they (usually) don’t crash Safari itself. You get a broken little rectangle in the page where the plugin was executing, but the browser itself stays running.

Apple did this for two reasons. Serlet’s stated reason on stage was “crash resistance”, as mentioned above. As for why such crash resistance was worth implementing, Serlet explained that, based on data from the Crash Reporter application built into Mac OS X — the thing that asks if you’d like to send crash data to Apple after a crash — the most frequent cause of crashes across all of Mac OS X are (or at least were, pre-Snow Leopard) “plugins”.

Serlet didn’t name any specific guilty plugins. Just “plugins”. But during the week at WWDC, I confirmed with several sources at Apple who are familiar with the aggregate Crash Reporter data, and they confirmed that “plugins” was a euphemism for “Flash”.

In other words, in Apple’s giant pile of aggregate crash reports — from all app crashes on all Macs from all users who click the button to send these reports to Apple — Flash accounts for more of them than anything else. That doesn’t mean Flash somehow causes crashes in any various app. Presumably, most of the time it’s Safari or some other browser playing Flash content. And it’s worth noting that this doesn’t necessarily mean Flash is particularly crash-prone or poorly engineered. Think of it as a formula like this:

total crashes = (crashing bugs) × (actual use)

Flash’s number and severity of crashing bugs could well be somewhat low and it would still account for a large number of total crashes because it’s actually used all the time — by any Mac user with Flash content playing in a web page. And, if Flash Player for Mac OS X actually is poorly-engineered overly-buggy code, well, that’s even worse.

But there’s another reason why Apple created this new external process architecture for web content plugins in Snow Leopard: it was the only way they could ship Safari and the WebKit framework as 64-bit binaries. Flash Player is only available as a 32-bit binary. (This is true for other third-party web content plugins, like Silverlight, but Flash is the only one that ships as part of the system.) 64-bit apps cannot run 32-bit plugins. Apple doesn’t have the source code to Flash, so only Adobe can make Flash Player 64-bit compatible. They haven’t yet. So if Apple wanted Safari to be 64-bit in Snow Leopard (and they did), they needed to run 32-bit plugins like Flash in a separate process.

Maybe you don’t believe Apple that web content plugins are the most frequent source of crashes on Mac OS X. Maybe you don’t believe me and my unnamed sources at Apple that it’s Flash in particular that accounts for this. That’s cool, skepticism is good. So then in that case, maybe Bertrand Serlet blamed “plugin crash resistance” for political reasons, just to stick a knife in Adobe’s back, and the only reason Apple went with this external-process architecture was for the 64-bit/32-bit incompatibility.

But that just shines a light on the fact that Flash is still a 32-bit binary despite the fact that Apple wants to go 64-bit system-wide. Flash remains 32-bit and there’s nothing Apple can do about it. Instead of being able to make Flash 64-bit themselves, Apple had to engineer an entirely new plugin architecture.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Because Flash is all over the internet .

Not for long if Apple has their way...which is why they are doing what they are doing. The Iphone is their weapon in their war against flash. The more iphones (and now ipads) sell and sell and sell, the less reliant companies will be able to be on Flash, and the smaller its presence will be. If Apple just gave in and helped get Flash working, they would no longer have this leverage. Is it shitty for the consumers in the short run? Yes, but it happens all the time. Its why Hulu doesn't work on PS3, or why Xbox360 had an HD-DVD player yet no Blu Ray add on.

 

[KnightM7]

I'm still waiting for someone to make it work well on Mac OS.

Seriously, when it comes to HD .flv video its better off if I just close my mac and open up my windows Netbook. Video isnt completely fluid but at least it wont freeze my computer.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Okay. I'm ready to take one for the team. I fully admit that not having Flash working on the iPhone/iPad is a weakness of the device compared to other, more fully featured products out there. The failure for it to work properly falls on both Adobe and Apple, for a variety of reasons. Adobe for not making Flash more efficient and Apple for being to restrictive on their requirements.

Some of us have chosen to accept this "weakness" of the iPad and move forward, fully knowing that that is the way it's going to be, and that we'll most likely have alternatives to assist us in getting on with our lives. Others can't seem to accept that it is a "drawback" of the device and just move on with theirs.

There. I said it. Does that make everyone (or anyone?) happy? Can we now move the discussion elsewhere?

 

[shantyman]

You know, when I go to a restaurant site on my iPhone and get the blue brick icon, I never think "Apple sucks why don't they support flash." I'm thinking, "what the fuck this restaurant designed their entire website around one plugin even to view text information like locations, menu, hours, etc.?" There is no reason to have EVERYTHING in Flash.

Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!

 

[otake]

Not for long if Apple has their way...which is why they are doing what they are doing. The Iphone is their weapon in their war against flash. The more iphones (and now ipads) sell and sell and sell, the less reliant companies will be able to be on Flash, and the smaller its presence will be. If Apple just gave in and helped get Flash working, they would no longer have this leverage. Is it shitty for the consumers in the short run? Yes, but it happens all the time. Its why Hulu doesn't work on PS3, or why Xbox360 had an HD-DVD player yet no Blu Ray add on.

Maybe you're right and in 4 or 5 years, Flash may be gone. That's still 4 or 5 years from now.

Weapon in war against flash- wtf are you thinking? You think Jobs has some personal vendetta against Adobe?!

 

[mAcOdIn]

There. I said it. Does that make everyone (or anyone?) happy? Can we now move the discussion elsewhere?

Well, what else is there to talk about lol?

Spoiler

Back to USB or the camera?

All seriousness, USB/data is still my main issue, I'm basically on hold until I find out if I can move data or not, if it's as closed a system as it sounds then I can't use it, if it's open just enough then I'm happy and can live sans Flash or E-ink.