Apple Slaps Developers In The Face

David Jimerson said:
No, no, no, no, no. We will not be doing any general Apple-bashing nor getting into a Mac vs. PC debate. If you have comments on the SPECIFICS of this matter, fine. But generally bashing companies? No.
Click to expand...

I hate all computers. Instruments of Satan. Eventually we will all be hardwired into a computer. "Matrix" was not far off. But I think the builders will not be plugging the terminal in at the base of the skull. Think lower geography.

Hell, they do it now when I go buy stuff for the computer. There are 2 lines, one for "with vaseline" and one "for without".



Hmmmmmm. parody of "Matrix"?
 
Last edited:
mobhb said:
Apple blows. Always has, always will. Why even bother with this commie company when they have a 4% desktop marketshare anyway. I've always looked for alternatives to the "Apple ecosystem". I bought a Zune HD because I don't want be an iSlave.
Click to expand...

I thought we were discussing flash?

The point is that flash is a memory hog, grabs resources, runs down battery life on mobile devices and is generally obnoxious.

HTML 5 serves the same purpose, but doesn't grab the resources.

Why wouldn't a company insist in a programming protocol that attentuates the shortcomings of flash while maintaining compatibility and, prolonging battery life?

This is a good read: http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/html-5-could-it-kill-flash-and-silverlight-291

I prefer an open versus proprietary web standard.
 
Last edited:
David S. said:
I thought we were discussing flash?

The point is that flash is a memory hog, grabs resources, runs down battery life on mobile devices and is generally obnoxious.

HTML 5 serves the same purpose, but doesn't grab the resources.

Why wouldn't a company insist in a programming protocol that attentuates the shortcomings of flash while maintaining compatibility and, prolonging battery life?

This is a good read: http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/html-5-could-it-kill-flash-and-silverlight-291

I prefer an open versus proprietary web standard.
Click to expand...

I could probably buy that if they didn't have their own proprietary format they insist on -- Quicktime. Among every other proprietary inclination of theirs.
 
David Jimerson said:
I could probably buy that if they didn't have their own proprietary format they insist on -- Quicktime. Among every other proprietary inclination of theirs.
Click to expand...

In a perfect world, there would be one video standard.

However, a video standard is different that an open proprietary web protocol for creating applications.

I see a difference there.

HTML 5 is open.

Flash isn't. And Flash creates significant issues for mobile devices.

I thought we were discussing HTML 5 development versus Flash development, not any company's insistence on proprietary containers for using its video products.
 
David S. said:
I thought we were discussing HTML 5 development versus Flash development
Click to expand...

Seems to me there are numerous issues being discussed, and at play, other than just that. As I said above, Adobe has ample reason to be galled by how this went down.


not any company's insistence on proprietary containers for using its video products.
Click to expand...
Just responding to what you yourself said.

I'd buy arguments about memory requirements. I don't buy that "openness" has anything to do with it.
 
Isn't HTML 5 an open web standard?

In any case, this sounds a little like an attack on Apple, rather than a discussion.

And that generally provides more heat than light.

Best and enough for me
 
Last edited:
No, I think it's a discussion of a current event which is actually quite relevant to the weekend we're gearing up for, with the CS5 launch event only days away. No one has gotten heated yet, and with careful moderation, they won't. :)
 
From what I've read there may be reasoning behind locking the apps down to only these code bases and excluding flash based apps. While there could be multiple factors at play, I may be that the primary reason has little to do with thwarting Adobe and more to do with the newly introduced changes to multi-tasking.

The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.

"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe.
Click to expand...

~ From Apple Insider:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ps_in_iphone_4_0_related_to_multitasking.html


It is also worth pointing out that Apple has NOT slapped developers in the face, despite what the post title reads. Since there are only a very small handful of apps on the app store built from flash coding (from pre-release versions of CS5, as I understand it), it's not like developers have been left out in the cold needing to rewrite thousands of apps. While this may hurt Adobe, Apple has made it clear to developers what will work for the iProducts and what will not. This helps developers before investing into expensive software that may not meet their needs.

On a side note, I think it is hardly fair to call Apple a "commie" company with their App Store. When you have 185,000 apps (18x more than the fully open Android platform) it's hard to argue they are being Nazis about things. That is a LOT of approved Apps. I for one appreciate the fact that they quality check the Apps and ascertain that every App released will work properly with the OS infrastructure and APIs such as multitasking etc. It keeps things clean and avoids crapware that has plagued PCs for decades. Sure, everything is a give and take, but I find the upsides to far outweigh any drawbacks to this model. The iProducts & App Store have certainly not failed to satisfy customers and developers alike. Beyond that, every developers knows what they are signing up for beforehand - no surprises there.

Seeing as how flash/AS3 is a propriety and closed programming language, I think this is better for the industry as a whole. Maybe not Adobe, and it's hard not to feel for them, but such as life, and if it's true what Apple Insider (and some other sites are reporting) then it's even harder to blame Apple for their call. After all, it is their brand, their App Store, etc. They have every right to set the rules, and developers and customers have every right to shop where they want.
 
mcgeedigital said:
Keeping pushing Apple.

Sounds like Adobe is getting ready to drop Apple....again.
Click to expand...

With the amount of market share Apple has with creative professionals, and the amount of time/effort Adobe has poured into rewriting their software for the Apple platform, I highly doubt that will happen. And frankly, it would hurt Adobe more than Apple - especially when you factor in Apple's bootcamp + parallels/vmware fusion, it wouldn't even close the door to running Adobe software on a Mac.
 
Hmmm

Apple vs Microsoft
Apple vs Google
Apple vs Adobe
Apple vs Amazon is next


I hope Apple isn't involved in too many stand offs.
 
In looking at the history between the two companies there is ample evidence that when Adobe makes decisions that don’t include Apple, it’s business. When Apple makes decisions that don’t include Adobe, it’s a face slap.
 
I remember back in 1996 when you couldn't read Apple without the word "beleaguered" preceding it.

Adobe made a crucial business decision. It declared that its primary development platform would be Windows; subsequently, every new application or major revision of a product was introduced for Windows first and followed months later, sometimes never at all, by a Mac version.

It didn't offer native OS X support for its Production apps for some time.

It withdrew Mac Premiere development. Skipped Mac versions of PS Elements.

In 2001 it resisted Macromedia's Flash development, then purchased the company and did an about face.

These are business decisions. Apple has every right to insist on maintaining the look and feel of its mobile apps, and to differentiate its mobile experience from Googles, RIM, etc.

Apple makes some bad decisions, just like every other company. But it's business, not personal.

I don't like the insistence on QT containers any more than wmv, flash, silverlight, real media or anything else.

But choice is good and it lets the marketplace eventually make the decisions.
 
When Apple bought out Spruce to make DVD Studio and shut down the windows development it left many of us that used Spruce out in the cold.

That left a bad taste in my mouth for Apple in general back in 2001.

You guys aren't actually arguing that Apple doesn't strong arm the competition into using only their products are you? I bet you were the same ones that complained that Bill Gates was evil by including IE in Windows back in the day. Funny how times have changed.
 
Last edited:
It does. Absolutely, but isn't that what capitalism is all about?

As to MS analogy, you are right on. Apple is a different company than it was when it wasn't profitable.

But as a publicly held company, it is in the business to make money.

Look at Shake. Terrible interface, great product, no development.

My guess is that Apple has a PS lookalike in development -- hedging its bets.

But PS Mac accounts for 50% of Adobe's PS sales, and it has a solid Mac based in its Creative apps.

I don't particularly like Premiere and can't work with Encore, but PS and AE are wonderful apps.

But yes, I think Apple is more like MS than ever before.
 
There are technical and business reasons for the flash issues, none of which amount to some pity slap in the face revenge move - if that's what it was, I would have a problem. However I have no problem with a company being business and tech savvy.

I see this as a positive: it helps Apple, it helps Apple shareholders, it helps Apple customers, and in the long term, the open platform will help the industry and developers alike (and as a result, will help all consumers).

I think it would be better for everyone, Adobe included, if they focused on developing top-tier web development tools open standards such as HTML5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top