Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 9th Jun 2010 18:07 UTC
Google This was inevitable. AdMob founder and CEO Omar Hamoui has responded to Apple blocking AdMob from the iOS ecosystem. Unsurprisingly, Hamoui isn't particularly amused, claiming that not only is it bad for competition, it will also hurt developers and users alike.
Thread beginning with comment 429685
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Let ads die. Period.
by Neolander on Fri 11th Jun 2010 12:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Let ads die. Period."
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

AFAIK Chrome doesn't identify itself as Safari. It just identifies that it's webkit.

The first link when searching "chrome user agent" on google does not agree with you :
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-user-agent/

And as for webkit's tags, they're all open source and submitted to w3c - which, at the end of the day is preferable to waiting for the epically slow w3c to draft their own specs and massively more preferable to using Flash in the mean time.

So in the end you're just re-creating the Flash issue.

Because you can freely read about the Flash spec, the issue is that Adobe change it whenever they want, while screwing up everyone who does not use their implementation. There's the same issue for webkit tags : the spec is freely readable, but people from the webkit project may change it whenever they want...

Edited 2010-06-11 12:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Let ads die. Period.
by Laurence on Fri 11th Jun 2010 12:28 in reply to "RE[6]: Let ads die. Period."
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

The first link when searching "chrome user agent" on google does not agree with you : http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-user-agent//


Ok, now lets look at more than one build of Chrome:
http://www.useragentstring.com/pages/Chrome/

As you can see every single version identifies itself as Chrome with a few also adding Safari in there.
This is little different to how many other browsers worked when they were new and/or held small market shares.

So in the end you're just re-creating the Flash issue. Because you can freely read about the Flash spec, the issue is that Adobe change it whenever they want, while screwing up everyone who does not use their implementation. There's the same issue for webkit tags : the spec is freely readable, but people from the webkit project may change it whenever they want, and hence...


Only if we're complacent. The technology does need to move forward and much as I dislike Apple on the whole, they're doing a good job with HTML5. Ignoring Apple's enhancements entirely is somewhat like cutting your nose of to spite your face. A better approach would be to adopt with caution.

It's also worth noting that Flash is an open spec, not open source. Where as webkit /IS/ open source thus can be forked at any time if people don't like Apple's direction.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Let ads die. Period.
by Neolander on Fri 11th Jun 2010 12:51 in reply to "RE[7]: Let ads die. Period."
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Ok, now lets look at more than one build of Chrome:
http://www.useragentstring.com/pages/Chrome/

As you can see every single version identifies itself as Chrome with a few also adding Safari in there.

A few ? Search "safari" in the page and turn highlighting on. If I'm not mistaken, all those builds except for 6.0 identify themselves as Safari ! ;)

This is little different to how many other browsers worked when they were new and/or held small market shares.

Point taken. However, I just wanted to share that Chrome is identified as Safari on Apple's webpage *because* it uses that kind of trickery. Firefox, IE, or whatever browser which doesn't use the Safari name in its user agent string won't. And even using user agent trickery, Firefox wouldn't render the test properly, even if it implements all of the required HTML5 stuff, because that web page uses proprietary tags from webkit.

That's the issue many here have with this "HTML5" showcase.

Only if we're complacent. The technology does need to move forward and much as I dislike Apple on the whole, they're doing a good job with HTML5. Ignoring Apple's enhancements entirely is somewhat like cutting your nose of to spite your face. A better approach would be to adopt with caution.

Point taken again. Apple are doing very well with the HTML5 stuff, except when they push the H.264 codec forward. What requires extreme caution is that if we give Apple effective control on the HTML5 spec, bypassing independent authorities like the W3C, we end up giving them an anti-competitive advantage, because they can know the spec in advance before the other browsers and such...

It's also worth noting that Flash is an open spec, not open source. Where as webkit /IS/ open source thus can be forked at any time if people don't like Apple's direction.

Parts of the Flash ecosystem, like Flex and Tamarin, are open source. Things like Gnash and Swfdec are open-source implementations of (old) Flash specs. The issue with that is that those project will never reach maturation in the form of compatibility with flash contents, because each time they finally implement a spec, Adobe can upgrade it and makes sure that the new Adobe Flash in the Creative Suite makes SWFs that are incompatible with current versions of Gnash (while the flash player team, who has had access to the spec for a long time, already rolled out a new release of Flash player which does support the new SWFs).

You *can* fork webkit. But as an example, if Apple suddenly merges in Webkit trunk and starts to advertise a new feature which uses proprietary system calls to introduce an iDevice-specific feature (gyroscopic control or whatever), and if you are writing an Android fork of Webkit, you still have to re-code and debug the whole thing. In meantime, iDevices owner will laugh hard at those Android devices which do not support the open HTML5 spec by Apple, and Android users will have an angry look at you, the webkit port maintainer ^^

Edited 2010-06-11 12:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2