 |
|
|
| |
Steve Jobs: No Flash Support Is Not A Business-Driven Decision
by Kris Graft [PC, Console/PC]
|
|
| |
|
April 29, 2010
|
| |
As game developers and other iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad developers contemplate Apple's decision not to support Adobe's Flash, Apple CEO Steve Jobs has explained his company's decisions surrounding the platform.
"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," he wrote in a recent letter. "Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true."
Jobs categorized Flash as a closed platform, because anyone that wants to develop for Flash has to go through Adobe. "We strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards," Jobs said.
Flash has become a leading choice for game developers creating web-based games. With no support for iPhone or the new iPad, Flash games are out of luck, missing out on an audience comprised of millions of Apple mobile device owners.
But Jobs said that there are enough apps on Apple's devices to show that his company doesn't need to support the platform. "The 200,000 apps on Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games," he said.
"Flash was created during the PC era -- for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards -- all areas where Flash falls short," Jobs added.
"New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too)," he said. "Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind."
|
| |
|
|
And how can someone say they're embracing openness in an argument about why they're CLOSING out their platform to a developer? It boggles the mind.
And HTML5? Seriously? Try writing Farmville in HTML5, and see how far you get. Flash has upwards of 97% browser penetration these days, it's the logical choice for social gaming.
Not to mention this whole thing...
http://www.webmonkey.com/2008/09/html_5_won_t_be_ready_until_2022dot_yes__2022do
t/
First he says:
"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."
And how does he back up that claim?
"Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free."
And Apple controls them all -- a business advantage.
"If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features."
If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, it will be because they found those tools better than Apple’s. Trying to avoid open competition is a business-driven decision.
"The third party [cross-platform tool vendor] may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms."
Not only does that assume all vendors would only offer the lowest common denominator of cross-platform capabilities, what in the world is this argument if not a business decision aimed at preventing developers from creating products for someone else’s platform?
I have no love for Adobe or Flash, but it’s laughable to claim that denying Flash on Apple media products is anything other than a business-driven scheme intended to force cash- and time-strapped developers to develop solely for the iPhone/iPod/iPad.
-where-apples-revenue-comes-from-2010-4
Within the context of Apple's business, the entirety of iTunes (apps, music, movies and now books) accounts for so little. iTunes is just the added value you get with your iPod/iPhone/iPad.
Here's the problem: when I pick up zombieville (made with unity) and the framerate drops or the controls become unresponsive or it kills my battery, who do I blame? The developer. But average Joe iPhone user doesn't separate the software and the device, to him its just "this iPhone sucks." So yes, it is about business, namely protecting the iPhone experience and its business. Luckily the public is used to crappy cell service or the iPhone may have had a false started thanks to At&t's wonderful service.
As for flash and adobe, doesn't flash cost $700 while Xcode and all of Apple's SDK's cost $0? And don't tell me it 'requires a mac', what are you developing your flash apps on, an abacus? Punch cards?
Now I'm at a crossroad, because Apple has been slowly removing choices from OS X that I've been accustom to for about a decade and I've always respected Apple's overal effort and polishing of their OS. I own both PCs and Macs, but if this iTrash talk continues from Jobs this MacBook Pro I just bought will be my last Apple product. I really don't like the amount of HATE that Jobs has inspired on the pro-Mac sites. Now days it's we hate Adobe period... Ignorant morons...
I downloaded the Android SDK the other week and have spent my spare time familiarizing myself with it, so it's good-bye to XCode and hello TextMate(One GREAT thing about Macs) plus the Android bundle.
Anyways, here's to choice. I'm moving to Android's devices for my phone and PDA needs. I'm really tired of Job's lies and I hope his iEmpire gets knocked down a few notches so that he'll return Apple to the company I used to respect.
Don't forget advertising. Apple just revealed iAdds. They also filed a patent for OS level adverts that require the users's attention to move forward from what I recall.
They also introduced a gaming service that sounds kind of like MS's Live.
And there's plenty of garbage created in Objective C available through the App store that fits your Unity example.
You can also develop in FLEX for free -- which is open source. And technically "XCode" does cost the price of a Mac. Apple really annoyed me when they released the iPhone and said I'd need to upgrade to an Intel Mac just to develop for it.
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Flex+SDK;jsessionid=313F15CDF86
FCB0856DC3B35447CD570
We just need to wait until other operating systems get more popular where all hardware manufacturers like Nokia, Samsung etc. are invited (producing a touch pad device is not really a problem). The question is if it will be Windows Mobile, Android or maybe something else?
With this decision they are loosing their advantage so others will be able to catch up and leave them behind.
It's not just flash as in website, video, etc flash. No games made via the flash platform -- even ones which were made with it and then compiled into formats natural to the iPhone/iPad, which was a new feature CS5 was coming out with. And, I note, CS5 was due to come out four days after Apple made the announcement they were no longer allowing it, which means lots of developers who had games planned to hit the app store and had been doing them in Flash were left high and dry and unable to distribute. Not to mention I've heard (though I don't have the links on me, sorry) that they are culling previous flash-based games from the app store; if this is true, it means lots of developers with games out there ... won't have them out there anymore.
More then web surfing, it's a game development issue.
EVERYONE and their dog would put an app up there! It'd be TOO EASY. Suck it up and port your app. Put's hair on your knees!
He is saying: ok, we like to pick and choose a lot of stuff, from what software to what hardware you use (basically we have a closed system, but we like to think it is open). But, if your technology is open and popular, we will probably allow it on our iHardware. We won't however allow ANY third party to lock in people developing for our hardware (and therefore lock us in) to their technology, we don't want strings attached. We are the ones that may attach strings, not our third parties! It is our hardware, our success!
People get pissed off because Flash is very, very popular and they feel damaged because they have devoted so much time to learn this technology. But the fact is most people developing using Flash are in fact locked in to Adobe, they do pay for their productivity tools (altough they don't actually need to) because they feel like this is the better way to do it, and therefore they are locked in to them.
Apple thinks that Flash is really dangerous to their system, and could chain it to Adobe. They are absolutely right, if flash was allowed for the iHardware, it would become overnight the defacto standard, and Adobe would be calling the cards.
This business world is just evil, man. Evil.
PS: I said he have a point, not that he is "right".
-signed - 18 million people in just the last 3 months.
Flash? The average person doesn't care. I can order Pizza Hut and check my car insurance payment from my phone in a "flash"!! It's awesome- and that's all that matters.
repeat, THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS. MY PHONE. NOT FLASH.
Apple knows this.
First web task I tried on an iPad, price a car on Ford's website, failed. No Flash plugin available for this device.
Here's a good quote from Microsoft, made me laugh quite a bit...
"Flash does have some issues, particularly around reliability, security and performance," said Dean Hachamovitch, general manager for the Internet Explorer browser.