Quantcast

Don't have an account? Register Now! Forgot password?

Columns

Murphy's Law: Adobe Flash's Fightin' Words

comment Commentsprint Printemail EmailDeliciousDiggStumbleUponRedditFacebookSlashdot

Zinnnng!

It's been nearly a week since I last reported about Apple's reluctance to allow its users access to the Flash platform. Apple--and Steve Jobs himself--has reportedly claimed that the instability of Flash was the driving factor behind Apple's ripping of this app straight off of its mobile devices (including the brand-new iPad) in favor of an HTML5-based solution for interactive content.

Although Adobe seemed to be letting Jobs' alleged tirade against Flash earlier this week go unanswered, ‘twas not meant to be. Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch has since responded in the company's official "Executive Perspectives" blog. I'm not much of a betting man (nightmares of CES losses haunt me to this day), but perhaps you are: Just which way do you think Lynch points the finger of blame for Flash's absence on--quote unquote--"a recent magical device."

Here we go again!

Everyone Loves Flash

For what it's worth, Lynch does correctly address the big watershed moment that Flash adoption currently faces. This almost seems like an contradiction in itself--if Lynch is to be believed, Flash currently runs on 98 percent of connected computers and powers the whiz-bang content of more than 85 percent of the Web's top sites. Obviously, Flash is big.

Keep in mind, however, that these statistics are primarily concerned with computers accessing the Web. Call them what you will, but devices like the iPad and the iPhone don't fit this description. Unlike a computer, you can't exactly go installing new frameworks and architectures on a closed device like the iPhone. Depending on the manufacturer and/or the limits of the underlying technology, you simply don't have the kind of support to freely download and install executables to expand your core functionality. These closed products aren't thumbing their nose at the open-source world. It's just how they're built.

To Adobe, it's not up to them to create a more open framework--that already exists by virtue of Flash's extraordinarily wide audience. Flash is the standard for video. Nobody's arguing about Flash, yet everyone seems to be split into camps supporting either the Ogg Theora or H.264 formats of HTML5. This still isn't sufficient of enough cause to kill either format in favor of the other. Lynch sees a concurrent future for both Flash and HTML5, provided other companies do their part to make the Web an "open environment," as he phrases it.

"We have shown that Flash technology is starting to work on these devices today by enabling standalone applications for the iPhone to be built on Flash. In fact, some of these apps are already available in the Apple App Store such as FickleBlox and Chroma Circuit. This same solution will work on the iPad as well. We are ready to enable Flash in the browser on these devices if and when Apple chooses to allow that for its users, but to date we have not had the required cooperation from Apple to make this happen."

Them's fightin' words.

Steve Jobs Does Not Love Flash

Will Steve Jobs ultimately care? No. Will Apple let an allegedly buggy application ruin the performance of its devices, when the very marketing behind said devices relates to their impressive usability? No. Will Flash open up its player for anyone to fork at will? No--nor can they, given that they can't openly distribute the codices the player uses.

Is there a solution? Well... no. In fact, many believe that this is the dying argument, the last puff of exhaust hanging in the air after the HTML5 van has sped off into the sunset. If the Flash player is truly as convoluted and buggy as Apple claims, why would the company want to step back and reinvent the wheel if it can instead pave the way forward with a truly open framework for content delivery?

Flash might exist throughout the future of the Web, but I don't forsee a future where Apple and Adobe go prancing around 1 Infinite Loop hand-in-hand. But when it comes to other devices--especially the true "computers" I talked about earlier--Flash has gained enough of a head start to keep it as the prevailing protocol for years to come. And if the company was to opt to phase out the closed Flash player out in favor of an HTML5/Javascript solution... well, that'd be a real zinger indeed.

 

David Murphy (@ Acererak) is a technology journalist and former Maximum PC editor. He writes weekly columns about the wide world of open-source as well as weekly roundups of awesome, freebie software. Befriend him on Twitter, especially if you have an awesome app or game you're dying to recommend!

COMMENTS
avatarSchool-Yard Kids

Considering the number of rumors floating of how hackers will be utilizing any and all opportunities to exploit Flash - not to mention what they have already done, considering the number f friends who've lately had to take their PC's to the repair shop from a few virus they're getting while playing the games - it's almost justifiable for Apple not to give Adobe the greenlight for Flash on their products.  That said, both Adobe and Apple are being as grown-up as grade-school kids in the middle of a fight - both have right sides, both have wrong sides, and neither are working towards an agreeable solution, slinging names and fists instead.  Too bad both sides seem to have inserted their mouths, egos - their whole heads - up their rectums, though it makes me curious how a fight of that proportion would work... 

Login or register to post comments
avatarI would say Apple should

I would say Apple should just allow Flash as an optional feature on the iPhone, but when the sh*t hits the fan the customers will be calling them, not Adobe. So I can also see why they would want to avoid Flash. Customers won't care who created the problem, its Apple that will get the grief.

Login or register to post comments
avatarwhere does silverlight come in?

Maybe I'm not really sure what Silverlight is aimed at, but my understanding so far is that it is a competitor to flash. Where do they stand in all this yelling?

Login or register to post comments
avatarSilverlight is also able to

Silverlight is also able to stream and deliver media much like Flash, but has an additional strength in it's ability to provide Line of Business (LoB) apps. It allows for feature rich client-side apps in the browser, developed in languages like C# and VB which are extremely popular and allow many developers to pick up the new technology without learning a new one (Action script).

I've developed in silverlight (C#) myself, and it's very enjoyable. Downright fun and rewarding.

Login or register to post comments
avatarI agree

I like that it makes programming web applications more accessible to normal software developers, and doesn't require a massive amount of training to get up and running (unless you don't already know C#, Java, VB, etc.).

________________________________________________________________________________

Please deposit your pride, life, and other garbage in the receptacles at the back of the theater before you leave. Thanks!

Login or register to post comments
avatarI agree with Adobe

I understand that Jobs is trying to keep the specialized OS of the iPhone and iPad prestine, but this is kind of ridiculous.  While I do agree that Flash can be a little...special...at times, it's not as bad as it used to be; and I think Apple is being a bit too heavy handed with the whole "Flash is obsolete" idea.

As for switching to HTML5; I wouldn't be surprised if it did overtake Flash.  However, I don't think it'll be as quick as Apple thinks.

________________________________________________________________________________

Please deposit your pride, life, and other garbage in the receptacles at the back of the theater before you leave. Thanks!

Login or register to post comments
avatarMust be a Windows 32-bit user

No offense but the only platform flash runs "OK" on Win32.  Every other platform no matter if it's linux, os x, bsd, etc etc have no or extremely poor flash support.  Adobe simply does not understand anything but Win32 nowdays.  Where as pretty much every platform out there can run HTML5 no matter if it's mobile, desktop, embedded.

Login or register to post comments
avatarWhat...?

None taken; but you must use neither, because - contrary to your statements - I've had problems running Flash on both 32-bit and 64-bit systems.  However, as with all software, the problems go away as the code grows more mature and efficient.  As of today, I haven't noticed a difference in performance between Flash on my 32-bit, or 64-bit systems.

As for the poor support for other OSs; If I were Adobe, I too would spend a majority of my resources on the OS with the highest user base.  I don't know, that kind of makes the most sense to me...

And you're right; HTML5 is understood by almost any internet connected device.  Which is why it will most likely overtake Flash - but not in the amount of time Apple seems to think.

________________________________________________________________________________

Please deposit your pride, life, and other garbage in the receptacles at the back of the theater before you leave. Thanks!

Login or register to post comments
avatar64-bit OS but still using 32-bit browser

Well I doubt your using Flash in windows on a Win64 browser since there is no 64-bit Windows flash plugin.  Your running a 32-bit version of your browser with a 32-bit plugin on through Wow64 emulation.  Other OS's use 64-bit browsers (although if you want you can downgrade to a 32-bit browser as well but that causes all kinds of headaches having to carry 2 versions of Java and other plugins as well)

Login or register to post comments
avatarStick to a point please.

Your original argument was that Flash only runs "OK" on 32-bit systems.  I responded by stating that I've noticed no difference between it running in a 32 or 64-bit Windows environment.  Your original argument didn't state that the 32-bit version of Flash runs better than the 64-bit version (if that's what you meant, you should have said that); instead, you claimed that Flash only runs well in a 32-bit Windows environment, which from my experience, is not the case.

Firefox and Explorer have 64-bit versions, but they still don't run as well as Chrome in my opinion (even though it's still 32-bit for Windows).

________________________________________________________________________________

Please deposit your pride, life, and other garbage in the receptacles at the back of the theater before you leave. Thanks!

Login or register to post comments
avatarAnd again there is no 64-bit version of Flash for windows

The ONLY available version for Windows is 32-bit and utilizes the Win32 API.

Linux has a alpha 64-bit version.

Login or register to post comments
avatarYou might want to look up what Win32 is

I never said it was only running fine on 32-bit systems.

 Win32 is NOT a abbreviation for a 32-bit version of windows. Win32 is the 32-bit API for windows. 

Look it up on wikipedia if you have to.  Search for Windows API.

Time for you to follow your own signature.

Login or register to post comments
avatarAgain, say what you mean...and remember what you said...

TITLE:  MUST BE A WINDOWS 32-BIT USER

COMMENT:  "...but the only platform flash runs "OK" on [is] Win32.  Every other platform no matter if it's linux, os x, bsd, etc etc have no or extremely poor flash support.  Adobe simply does not understand anything but Win32 nowdays."

version (noun) - a particular form or variant of something.

platform (noun) - a major piece of software, as an operating system, an operating environment, or a database, under which various smaller application programs can be designed to run.

Again, in your initial argument, you didn't state that you were talking about the differences between 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the Flash software.  Your initial post implied that Flash for any platform other than 32-bit Windows (which predominantly uses Win32), isn't adequately supported by Adobe; you even have it in the title.  If you want to argue that Adobe's Flash division is stupidly comfortable with 32-bit programming, then I'll agree with you; but don't start on one point, then tweak it slightly so that your argument seems right.

Stop being ridiculous. 

________________________________________________________________________________

Please deposit your pride, life, and other garbage in the receptacles at the back of the theater before you leave. Thanks!

Login or register to post comments
avatarThere is no 64-bit version of flash for windows.

Again THERE IS NO 64-BIT VERSION of the FLASH PLUGIN for windows.

Login or register to post comments
avatarI never said there was...

Obviously, reading comprehension is not your forte.  Please re-read the thread from the beginning.

________________________________________________________________________________

Please deposit your pride, life, and other garbage in the receptacles at the back of the theater before you leave. Thanks!

Login or register to post comments
avatarI like this...

I like this dispute over 32 vs 64 OS with plugins for browsers and how it relates to Apple's upcoming products favoring HTML5. It is interesting.

Login or register to post comments
This Month's Issue
FEATURE Build a Crazy-Fast $647 PCFEATURE Six Single-Band 802.11n Routers ReviewedHOW TOTweak BitTorrent and FirefoxFEATUREClose Look at ClarkdaleWHITE PAPERLCD Panel Technology