Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th May 2010 10:45 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless While most of us here on the OSNews team are proponents of HTML5, we're all fully aware that Flash serves an important role on the web today, and will most likely continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Flash has a rather spotty record when it comes to performance, and so far, hasn't been able to run well on mobile devices. It seems this is about to change, as an Adobe evangelist has showed off Flash 10.1 on Android 2.2 (Froyo) running on the Nexus One. And eerlijk is eerlijk, it looks pretty darn impressive, especially considering how far they've come.
Thread beginning with comment 423785
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Hilarious
by kaiwai on Tue 11th May 2010 11:55 UTC in reply to "Hilarious"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

You mock Steve Jobs for his comments on Flash, then agree with him on Flash's foibles, make up your mind, you are beginning to look a bit silly.


Um, I read the article and Thom quite clearly states that Flash had problems *IN THE PAST* but now things have improved. You know, how about assessing something based on the present rather than what happened 10 years ago.

More important Steve Jobs has no right to dictate what a person can and can't load onto their iPhone; I find it funny that so many here whine about how terrible it is but has it stopped them from going out and purchasing an iPhone, iPad or iPod Touch? If a person wants to load on Flash than it is there right - the moment that the device leaves the store, the customer owns it. If owning it involves the desire to install a battery sucking, CPU hogging, bandwidth hogging, browser crashing plugin, then so be it.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Hilarious
by mrhasbean on Tue 11th May 2010 13:25 in reply to "RE: Hilarious"
mrhasbean Member since:
2006-04-03

If owning it involves the desire to install a battery sucking, CPU hogging, bandwidth hogging, browser crashing plugin, then so be it.


And then scream like a banshee at the DEVICE creator because their battery melts after 10 minutes or the device gets rooted and someone buys 10k worth of goodies using their credit card details that were stored on the thing.

Joe and Joanne Lunchbucket will NEVER blame the software for these things, it will ALWAYS be the hardware, and therefore the company that makes the hardware. Anyone with significant experience in computer support knows this, it's always "this stupid computer", never "this stupid program". Apple achieve their customer satisfaction levels by creating environments that, for their target audience, just work. And yes, sometimes that makes them restrictive in areas, but that's their market. Expecting them to change their successful model to please the minority who either don't or won't use their products anyway is just foolish.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Hilarious
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 11th May 2010 13:30 in reply to "RE[2]: Hilarious"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Joe and Joanne Lunchbucket will NEVER blame the software for these things, it will ALWAYS be the hardware, and therefore the company that makes the hardware.


So... Basic freedoms and age-old conventions (i.e., the device I buy is MINE, and if I want to shove it up my behind, I should be able to) should just be thrown out because Apple could possibly get complaints?

Of course, this also has to do with the downright retarded American justice system, with its massive damage suits and the likes. Maybe you guys ought to fix that instead of giving companies this much power. Fight the cause, not the symptoms.

Edited 2010-05-11 13:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Hilarious
by kaiwai on Wed 12th May 2010 00:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Hilarious"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

And then scream like a banshee at the DEVICE creator because their battery melts after 10 minutes or the device gets rooted and someone buys 10k worth of goodies using their credit card details that were stored on the thing.

Joe and Joanne Lunchbucket will NEVER blame the software for these things, it will ALWAYS be the hardware, and therefore the company that makes the hardware. Anyone with significant experience in computer support knows this, it's always "this stupid computer", never "this stupid program". Apple achieve their customer satisfaction levels by creating environments that, for their target audience, just work. And yes, sometimes that makes them restrictive in areas, but that's their market. Expecting them to change their successful model to please the minority who either don't or won't use their products anyway is just foolish.


And you don't think that happens already? Please, if someone complains and uploads their 'comment' onto an internet forum or blog and I can assure you within a few seconds a legion of fanboys will rip them a new one. I don't see any traction of complaints other than the same sort of complaints that people have about Mac and Windows computers that are shared around the metaphorical coffee table. End users are going to be idiots regardless - and all the restrictions only serve to frustrate those who have their act together.

As for me, you're right - I won't use their products and I'm happier for it. I have a MacBook and iMac (soon to be replaced by Windows 7 based computers) but I'll never own an iPod Touch or an iPhone. I've voted with my wallet - but your assumption is based on perfect information. Lets face it, the average person is as thick as two short planks and wouldn't know what he or she is missing unless they had the knowledge. Who gets screwed in the end are the clueless end user who is missing out on something they never knew about and developers who want to target the customer but can't because of ridiculous restrictions. The end user might not be able to see the damage of such behaviour to themselves but there is damage. Yes, it does sound condescending but that is the reality - 90% of the population are mouth breathers with the top 10% hanging out here knowing what the alternatives are, with the 90% pretty much dependent on the top 10% to guide them in a particular direction. How many times have you been asked for advice regarding purchasing a computer? purchasing a phone? purchasing almost anything that you've become the 'first port of call' when dispensing advice like sort of guru.

Edited 2010-05-12 01:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Hilarious
by Cody Evans on Tue 11th May 2010 14:02 in reply to "RE: Hilarious"
Cody Evans Member since:
2009-08-14

the moment that the device leaves the store, the customer owns it.


Under Apple's EULA, by using the device, you agree that you don't own the device and that your leasing it from Apple. And in the US, the EULA has the same legal standing as a signed contract...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Hilarious
by elsewhere on Wed 12th May 2010 06:54 in reply to "RE[2]: Hilarious"
elsewhere Member since:
2005-07-13

And in the US, the EULA has the same legal standing as a signed contract...


No, it doesn't. There have been court decisions on both sides of the fence, and nothing ground-breakingly precedent setting.

Contract law is contract law, and a given EULA has to meet the criteria within a given jurisdiction.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Hilarious
by Tony Swash on Tue 11th May 2010 15:27 in reply to "RE: Hilarious"
Tony Swash Member since:
2009-08-22

Um, I read the article and Thom quite clearly states that Flash had problems *IN THE PAST* but now things have improved. You know, how about assessing something based on the present rather than what happened 10 years ago.

More important Steve Jobs has no right to dictate what a person can and can't load onto their iPhone; I find it funny that so many here whine about how terrible it is but has it stopped them from going out and purchasing an iPhone, iPad or iPod Touch? If a person wants to load on Flash than it is there right - the moment that the device leaves the store, the customer owns it. If owning it involves the desire to install a battery sucking, CPU hogging, bandwidth hogging, browser crashing plugin, then so be it.


You do realise that this is all academic so far because Adobe have failed to released a version of Flash that can run on any phone let alone the iPhone?

Lets see - As a responsible company with a responsible attitude to your customers do you:

(a) promise to open your platform to some as yet unreleased piece of software (from a company with a history of releasing buggy inefficient version of the same software on the desktop) on a wing and prayer based on some vapourware demo that shows a buggy piece of crap

- or -

(b) say "no thanks we pass on that one"

And before people start with the "installing flash is my human right" type of pomposity remember that the bulk of iPhone users, when browsing the web and confronted with "you need to click here to install flash plugin to view this site" message, will probably click OK. Then they will wonder why their iPhone is running so slowly, and why it keeps crashing, then blame Apple for selling them a piece of crap.

Why do people in places like OSNews, who apparently are so devoted to openness, spend so much time defending a monopolistic and unnecessary piece of proprietary shabbiness like Flash?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Hilarious
by kaiwai on Wed 12th May 2010 04:58 in reply to "RE[2]: Hilarious"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

You do realise that this is all academic so far because Adobe have failed to released a version of Flash that can run on any phone let alone the iPhone?


Again, what is it with your fixation on the past? they're developing Flash 10.1 for such devices today, companies are working through the 'Open Screen Project' - and as seen in the demonstration, they're getting results. The only thing you seem to be hell bent on is ranting about what has happened in the past when your focus should on what is Adobe and partners doing now, and the delivery of it. All evidence shows that Apple was right to be sceptical of Flash based on what existed before 10.1, but the circumstances have changed; there is no Flash Light and Flash desktop, there is only 'Flash'. Flash is being developed and yes it has taken along time because surprise, surprise, its very complex stuff! (something throwing more man power at won't fix).

For the record I don't support Flash or Silverlight; in a perfect world HTML5 would be completed by now, all the h264 patent holders would donate it to W3C for the good of humanity and so on. But we don't live in that world, we live in this world - patents up the wazoo, companies following their own self interest for the benefit of their shareholders and end customers wanting solutions that allow quick turn around from idea into a website (Flash and Silverlight). Therefore, because I live in this real world, I have to deal with what is here - Silverlight and Flash, for better or worse.

Edited 2010-05-12 05:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2