Thursday, January 28, 2010
Why No Flash in the iPad?
Apple may be shutting out Flash--and much of the Web--to protect the App Store.
By Erica Naone
When Apple revealed the iPad many people were quick to point out that, like the iPhone, it lacks support for Adobe's Flash software. It's a little shocking that a device Apple has billed as "the best way to experience Web, e-mail, and photos" doesn't support such a important and commonly used Web plug-in.
Flash is sometimes cited as a security concern, but it's hard to believe that Apple, with all its engineering and design genius, couldn't find a way to address that issue without blocking off so much functionality.
Adobe certainly seems indignant. Adrian Ludwig, Adobe's group manager of Flash Platform product marketing, wrote in a blog post:
[...] without Flash support, iPad users will not be able to access the full range of web content, including over 70% of games and 75% of video on the web. If I want to use the iPad to connect to Disney, Hulu, Miniclip, Farmville, ESPN, Kongregate, or JibJab--not to mention the millions of other sites on the web--I'll be out of luck.
Adobe does have a solution for frustrated developers. Its Packager for iPhone software converts applications written in ActionScript 3 to a format that will run on the iPhone. In fact, this solution may shed some light on why Apple chose to block Flash in the first place.
Perhaps, if Flash were supported, and it were easy to access rich applications through the browser, users wouldn't download quite so much from the App Store. Earlier this week, by launching a Web version of its Google Voice software, Google showed exactly how disruptive a powerful web application can be to Apple's tight control over the software that runs on its devices.
Google turned to HTML 5 to power this application through the browser, but Flash is even more powerful and versatile. Apple may hope to keep developers focused on tailoring software for its hardware, rather than building them on a more ubiquitous platform--the Web.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Comments
It is well know that Adobe Flash is the #1 contributor to Apple's crash logs, over and above everything else.
Now consider how you use flash, well you don't. You use a browser that has been extended by a third party, that Apple has zero control over. So when your browser crashes due to a poorly written plugin, you don't think to yourself, oh stupid flash, you think of stupid Safari, stupid Apple I thought these things were supposed to be good. To me it's up to Adobe to lift it's game on the stability front on the OS-X platform. Then it's in Apple court to implement a stable build of Flash in the standard distribution of Safari for iPhone/iPad. No there should not be a plugin system for Safari on the iPad or the iPhone. It is wonderfully stable at the moment, and let's keep it that way.
PS. No I don't work for apple, and I think there are a lot of other things that kinda sux about the devices, and lack of flash is one of them, I just don't blame Apple for not implementing it.
whalec
01/28/2010
Posts:1
jschlesser
01/28/2010
Posts:1
bhuntley
01/28/2010
Posts:1
Efficiency is largely in the hands of developers. FlashPlayer delivers some serious power. But you know the deal: great power comes with great responsibility.
Adobe has created the platform. Granted, some of the content people build for that platform is garbage. But you don't throw out the tool because of a few bad workmen. (Unless you're Apple, apparently.)
sdelamater
01/31/2010
Posts:1
I was actually happy to see that blue brick yesterday. Furthermore, on my Macintosh™ I have the ClickToFlash plug-in installed to guard my browser from running any Flash® that I don't require to accomplish my task. For sites that make heavy use of Flash®, I have created a Fluid instance to isolate it from my other browser windows. And if you don't mind me twisting the knife one more time before I go, Adobe® owes Macintosh™ users the same speed of execution as Windows® users, not the slow CPU-sucking experience that we get.
Now, if Flash® were Open-Source, then the nerds of the world could lend a hand and fix it up for you. At least Apple™'s closed-source OS and application software is good and fast, and while it's not cheap, neither is it expensive. Adobe® Flash® is merely free. That's not enough.
So, to summarize: If Adobe® wants respect, it will have to be earned by providing something worth having.
solak.v
01/28/2010
Posts:3
Apple is pulling up on their side by having new versions of Safari (on Mac OS X) insulate the browser application as a whole from crashes that happen in one window/tab, just as Google's Chrome has done. I don't see Adobe showing that kind of direction.
solak.v
01/28/2010
Posts:3
redfood
01/28/2010
Posts:1
Users don't care about the technology that makes the games run, they just want to play. There is no shortage of content on the internet. So long as there are games that work, they (on average) won't care that there are games that don't.
solak.v
01/28/2010
Posts:3
NormM
01/28/2010
Posts:1
_mark
01/29/2010
Posts:1
kevin.lani...
01/28/2010
Posts:1
fedenham
01/29/2010
Posts:1
Matthew Pu...
01/29/2010
Posts:35
It's all about the best user experience for the greatest number of people at apple. They could easily implement it, but the benefits don't outweigh the overall negative experience of short battery life, crashes, slowdown of system responsiveness, etc. And like the earlier poster said, you wouldn't associate those with poor flash site programmers, you would just have a negative iPhone experience.
Jhowlin
01/29/2010
Posts:1
NO FLASH on iPod/iPhone/iPad.
Don't need it. Don't want it.
julielewis
01/29/2010
Posts:1
Viv
01/29/2010
Posts:24
But it is also a fact that the "App Store filter" keeps unstable, undesirable, and just plain stupid applications from getting through. The overall average quality of applications on Apple devices would surely drop significantly if they were to allow Flash apps.
babernethy
01/29/2010
Posts:1
They actively encouraged web apps and continue to do so even though it does not provide any revenue. They also have one of the fastest implementations of javascript in the market so that developers can make multimedia web apps.
That means performance, battery are the only reason for the missing plug-in. Apple is a company and does try to make a profit in most cases. But not in this case. Its purely technical and thank god they block it. More power to HTML5 which is just as capable. Apple is pushing an open standard in this case.
sdidla
01/29/2010
Posts:1
There are some bad flash apps around just like there are $0.99 iPood Apps that should be FREEware because they are still pretty sad even after getting through the Apple approval gauntlet... pinwheels and waiting...
mynameisno...
01/31/2010
Posts:1
chila
02/01/2010
Posts:4
There certainly are issues with battery life, performance and bugs in Flash but I think the fundamental reason that Flash is not on the iPhone and iPad is video. Steve Jobs wants to control media delivery on the Internet and Flash Video is a primary competitor so Steve Jobs wants to do whatever he can to prevent Flash from becoming strong with mobile devices.
My impression is that YouTube added MPEG support to their web site as part of their deal to get on the iPhone.
It's impressive that Apple can take the high ground by limiting the choices of the users of their devices. It's tells us a lot about the perception of the Adobe brand vs the Apple brand.
I think people should demand support for all the important media types in particular Flash provides a very useful balance to the patent fueled oligopoly of MPEG Licensing Authority.
jonathang
02/05/2010
Posts:1
playhard10
02/19/2010
Posts:1