
Apple engineer reveals the real reason Jobs didn’t allow Flash on the iPhone - cft
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/apple-engineer-reveals-real-reason-steve-jobs-didn-202507266.html
======
stephenr
While it's somewhat interesting to hear first hand information from what's
arguably one of the defining moments of the last decade of the web, I can't
work out what crazy logic allows the following to make sense:

> Burroughs relays that Jobs’ vehement refusal to support the technology may
> have had less to do with security considerations and more to do with the
> fact that Adobe, as a partner, couldn’t be relied upon to address said
> security issues

The tweet's referenced actually compare the public "poor UI/power consumption"
reason to a "lack of open dialog" with Adobe, which meant Steve (and thus
Apple) couldn't count on Adobe to respond in a timely manner to security
issues.

That is the absolute definition of a security consideration. How/when the
vendor responds (if at all) to security issues is absolutely in and of itself
a security issue, when the answer seems to be "silently and with no
words/never".

------
mkhpalm
A good article from Yahoo.

“However, the decision was the right one based on both technical reasons and
that Adobe was a shi __y partner. Almost a decade later, it turns out that
Steve Jobs was right. Flash is dead and Adobe is a still a shi __y partner.”

