Linked by David Adams on Wed 9th Nov 2011 06:34 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "Sources close to Adobe that have been briefed on the company's future development plans have revealed this forthcoming announcement to ZDNet: Our future work with Flash on mobile devices will be focused on enabling Flash developers to package native apps with Adobe AIR for all the major app stores. We will no longer adapt Flash Player for mobile devices to new browser, OS version or device configurations.. . ."
Thread beginning with comment 496633
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Oh Nooooooooooooooooo!
by jackeebleu on Wed 9th Nov 2011 10:39 UTC
jackeebleu
Member since:
2006-01-26

Jobs was right? You mean Flash on mobile devices really did stink? It really did drain batteries on precious mobile devices? Wow. Oh well, chalk another up to the dead guy.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Oh Nooooooooooooooooo!
by BushLin on Wed 9th Nov 2011 13:20 in reply to "Oh Nooooooooooooooooo!"
BushLin Member since:
2011-01-26

Well, by Jobs' own doing, Flash on Apple's mobile devices doesn't exist at all.
So now Adobe are changing their tools so existing flash code can run on devices without flash player, I wonder why they might want to do that?

Personally, I've not had good experiences from Adobe across a number of products and I'd like to see proper open standards on the web but...

That means HTML 5 not being butchered by Microsoft/Apple/MPEG LA and I see Apple's behaviour as disingenuous and hypocritical.

The following quote is the kind of thing that makes my blood boil, Apple want all the benefits of open standards but still lock people into their expensive and proprietary systems. They even do it with hardware ffs.

Taken from:
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

"...Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.

First, there’s “Open”.

Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.

Apple has many proprietary products too... (excuses) ... HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member."

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Oh Nooooooooooooooooo!
by frderi on Wed 9th Nov 2011 21:07 in reply to "RE: Oh Nooooooooooooooooo!"
frderi Member since:
2011-06-17

Neither did any other plugin. In most cases saying no to old tech pushes new tech forward. This is a good thing.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: Oh Nooooooooooooooooo!
by tomcat on Wed 9th Nov 2011 22:29 in reply to "Oh Nooooooooooooooooo!"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Jobs was right? You mean Flash on mobile devices really did stink? It really did drain batteries on precious mobile devices? Wow. Oh well, chalk another up to the dead guy.


No, Jobs was full of crap. This was not an opinion based on technical merit. Flash was no better or worse than most native (as opposed to plug-in) software-based technology. But Flash posed a threat to Apple's application platform, which is why Jobs had to kill it. He couldn't have the Apple App Store filling up with Adobe apps.

Reply Parent Score: 4