

Confirmed: Apple and Adobe Collaborating on iPhone Flash - fauigerzigerk
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/confirmed_apple_and_adobe_coll.php

======
blasdel
So, not any more confirmed than the last five times an Adobe goon talked to
the press on the subject!

~~~
flashgordon
well atleast you didnt get rick-rolled this time. Clicked on the comments
first just to be safe!

------
allenbrunson
i don't believe it.

my guess is that adobe thinks that if they can convince everybody that flash
on the iphone is a fait accompli, then apple will be forced to allow it.

reading between the lines, i think apple's objection to flash is more
philosophical than technical. it's going to take more than this sort of PR
stunt to make it happen.

~~~
icefox
Not technical? Flash is a piece of junk that leaks memory, crashes and causes
your cpu to spike (less battery life). How is this a good thing on a iPhone?

~~~
allenbrunson
My impression is that Flash is pretty good (technically) on Windows, it's a
CPU hog on Macs, and somewhat crashy on Linux. Still, it could be worse. Think
RealVideo.

But that's kind of beside the point. I'm _guessing_ that Apple's real
objection to Flash on the iPhone is that they don't want Adobe to be in charge
of something that important. Apple likes to be in control of their own
destiny, and they're one of the few companies with the clout to get away with
something like that.

iPhone is a whole new platform, in a sense. If Apple keeps Flash off of it for
long enough, the developer community might make do with alternatives --
javascript, quicktime, etc -- so that Adobe's stranglehold on web media
doesn't carry over to the newly burgeoning iPhone world.

I'm guessing Adobe is all too aware of this possibility, which is why they're
lobbying so hard to get in there and assert their dominance.

~~~
bonaldi
If Adobe had bothered making a reasonable Flash player for the Mac, Apple
would have a much weaker public case for not including it on the iPhone. But
Adobe's long neglect of the Mac is now returning to bite them.

------
jacquesm
just one word: Standards.

Ok, a couple more: If everybody that does their very best to do the stuff they
do today in flash would seriously try their hand at JavaScript the need for
flash would be relegated to very few sites. And it wouldn't hurt to have
browsers support H.263/H.264 natively either.

~~~
swombat
If Javascript/HTML/CSS had the cross-browser support for scripting, display,
formatting, etc that Flash/Flex does, I'm sure more people would consider it a
serious option.

There are many things that can be done in Flex that are impossible or
extremely hard and fiddly in Javascript (and I'm not talking about animations,
but about user workflow tasks like uploading a bunch of files). There are many
other things that can easily be done in HTML/CSS/JS but don't _quite_ work
across all major browsers. That last 1% really kills you by taking a huge
chunk of time to fix.

Flex interfaces, on the other hand, work exactly the same no matter what
browser you're using. Many of our clients are still stuck on IE6 because of
corporate policies. Trying to reproduce our interface in Javascript would be
very hard and wouldn't work properly for most of them.

To paraphrase you, if Javascript had more of the capabilities of Flash maybe
Flash wouldn't be needed.

~~~
access_denied
On word: typefaces. (translation: vector fonts).

------
axod
If flash ever comes to the iPhone, and isn't absolutely opt-in, I will be
getting rid of my iPhone. No question. Do not want.

------
froo
I'll believe it when I actually see it - this has been said so many times
before its not funny.

------
notauser
This is only sort of good news.

On the one hand it provides Flash with a big advantage over silverlight, and
Flash has _much_ better support for:

\- End users not on Windows.

\- Programmatic generation without a Windows back end.

But it also makes pure JavaScript less attractive, and that is one of the
things that offers /real/ vendor politics free interoperability for rich web
apps in the future.

------
homme
To hell with both of them. Javafx, to be open sourced...

[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=javafx+open+source&...](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=javafx+open+source&aq=0&oq=javafx+op)

~~~
codeview
<http://opensource.adobe.com>

<http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/>

<http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flv/>

Not too bad . Right?

~~~
homme
Certainly not. I stand corrected, codeview.

Every time I read 'iPhone' I get a reflexive reaction to a closed, evil
gatekeeper keeping me from doing what I want to on the plaform, and projected
that onto Adobe. My bad.

------
Kitto
Fixing Flash for Mac would be even better - it's sloooow

