Daniel Eran Dilger at the intersection of Technology & the Liberal Arts
Random header image... Refresh for more!

Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash

Daniel Eran Dilger

Here’s segment two in my series taking on iPad myths: no the iPad doesn’t need to supply Adobe’s Flash runtime.

Also read the article: AppleInsider | Inside Apple’s iPad: Adobe Flash

Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch
Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped and under-delivered
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 5. It’s just a Tablet PC or Kindle
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 6. It needs HDMI for HD video output
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 7. It needs cameras
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 8. It’s a curse for mobile developers
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 9. It can’t multitask
Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 10. It needs Mac OS X

Dear Adobe: 2. It’s a myth that the iPad needs Flash.

Well, obviously Adobe would like to have Flash on The Tablet, given how the iPhone made it clear that Flash was clearly unnecessary on a cell phone. How will we visit the websites of German discos or play really awful games targeted at children and neanderthals? Never mind that Adobe can’t manage to create a Flash client that actually works on anything but the 1990s Windows desktop, or that Flash itself is nothing but a crutch for Photoshop artists who can’t be bothered to learn how to create real web content.

The most shocking thing isn’t that Adobe is weeping over its clearly lost fortunes, but rather that so many tech writers are still shamelessly trying to push the idea that Flash is important, a full three years after the iPhone very successfully debuted without it. You’ll recall I was The First Person to point out that Apple wasn’t “working” to get Flash on the iPhone, but rather and very clearly striving to move developers away from Flash, despite the vague things Jobs said about Flash being too big and Flash Light being too small. Jobs wasn’t working out how to get Flash ‘just right’ on the iPhone, he was actively weaning users off Flash off entirely.

The iPhone Threat to Adobe, Microsoft, Sun, Real, BREW, Symbian
Gone in a Flash: More on Apple’s iPhone Web Plans

While prominent pundits kept insisting that a version of Flash for iPhone was imminent, I repeated over and over–citing more and more damning evidence each time–that Apple was only working very hard to kill Flash, starting on the smartphone. Flash is the primary reason Safari crashes, and even accounts for the vast majority of Apple’s Mac OS X crash reports. Anyone who knows how to run Activity Monitor can observe that even the most trivial use of Flash within in a webpage eats up extraordinary resources.

Flash Wars: Adobe in the History and Future of Flash
HTML5 assault on Adobe Flash heats up with ClickToFlash

If Greenpeace were anything other than a greenwashing bunch of donation collectors, it would target Flash as a bigger environmental threat than PVC and BFRs combined, just by the composite amount of energy it consumes to do absolutely nothing of value. Anyone who cheerleads for Flash is either deeply indebted to a third-rate art school, a stockholder of Adobe, or a delusional moron. And all you sock puppets posting about how your children desperately want to play Flash games but can’t on the iPhone: go to a pet store and get a gnaw bone for your kid at and let them play with that instead. It will be more fun for them and less catastrophic for our earth.

The fact that a variety of websites standardized on Flash as a lowest-common denominator for serving video is not proof Flash needs to stay in existence. We’re three years closer to the obsolescence of Flash as a runtime. That’s why several big sites are moving away from Flash in imitation of Apple, which was among the first to scour its video-heavy website from Flash dependence. The lack of Flash on the iPhone and iPod touch and now the iPad is creating a market for open, non-Flash HTML5 web content. Google is also pushing for an end to Flash, although less aggressively. Few companies are as ballsy as Apple.

Why Apple is betting on HTML 5: a web history

If you’ve been paying attention for the last few decades, you’ll recall that the same kind of people criticized the Mac for not running DOS apps, because they simply didn’t get it. Flash is much less important today than DOS was back then.

Yes, I see the irony of my video segment being delivered via Flash because I hosted it on YouTube, but note that the iPhone (and the iPad, if you’re Steve Colbert or somebody else with the good fortune to have gotten one) has no problem playing it because Google delivers YouTube videos as H.264 on devices that don’t support Flash.


1 RNKLN { 02.01.10 at 2:23 pm }

75 Million iPhones and iPods touch mean 75 Million users (give or take a few million) that can’t be reached with advertisements using Flash. That’s another reason why Flash will start to disappear.

2 stormj { 02.01.10 at 2:29 pm }

Right… there’s a YouTube HTML5 beta that you can participate in by checking it out.

Flash was what people would have made Java if they had known in advance what it would really be used for. So it’s a early 2000s solution to a 1990s problem.

I wonder if the haters wouldn’t have found reasons to ask how the iPad could be a big move forward if it refused to abandon technology from a few decades ago. No one got a floppy drive after the iMac came out without one, even in their PCs.

I think you should rename this series “Top 10 FUD Talking Points Kicked Up By Apple’s Competitors And Believed By Geek Pundits.”

Myths at least usually are the product of some collective cultural perception. These iPad criticisms are all manufactured as if this was a political campaign, probably by the same kind of people, except maybe the jokes about it’s name. (;

3 J0hN { 02.01.10 at 2:29 pm }

I HATE FLASH, for the one reason that is is a massive resourse hog.
My MacBook gets crazy hot when i have multiple tabs/windows with flash in them.
Flash on the iPad would be a disaster because it would drain the battery just showing some ads.

4 stevemobs { 02.01.10 at 2:33 pm }

you are my hero.

“Anyone who cheerleads for Flash is either deeply indebted to a third-rate art school, a stockholder of Adobe, or a delusional moron. ”

i love it.

5 miloh { 02.01.10 at 2:34 pm }


Kinda liking the new video thing. It adds a new dimension to the magazine. One suggestion, however. Cut around the dead parts where you’re trying to collect your thoughts. It’s a perfectly acceptable technique, one that’s regularly seen in professional video production. Just watch nearly any documentary on Discovery or interview on the news. Almost everyone can be seen to do it if you pay attention. Some producers try to hide the cuts with subtle dissolves or even morphing. Others, however, don’t bother and throw in stylish transitions like zooms or flashes. Pretty much anything is better than dead air. It looks unprepared.

Other than that, keep up the good reporting. :)

6 clochard42 { 02.01.10 at 2:43 pm }

Good post and great video. Was eagerly awaiting a comment about this topic. While I won’t always be able to view your videos – take much longer than reading – I really appreciate them. Good, that you don’t cut them which allows to see how your thoughts crystallize. Your videos are displayed using flash right now – hope that Youtube allows for HTML5 video embedding soon.

Another opportunity to start a flame war here – please no. Too much has been written about it already. iPad won’t have flash. I really would like to have a serious discussion about the implications.
I’ve installed a flash blocker for some time now and somehow don’t visit sites that depend so heavily on flash, so I really don’t know. Can someone give me samples of at least fairly “good” or somehow “important” sites that are implemented in flash? And please don’t include sites that
- are already working on HTML5 versions (e.g. YouTube, Vimeo)
- have a mobile version that runs fine on iPhone which has no flash either (e.g. clipfish.de)
- host games that can easily be ported to App-Store or where similar free (yes, that’s free of charge) Apps are available on iTunes.
- work fine, but only some flashing ads are missing

7 qka { 02.01.10 at 2:58 pm }


Please consider including a direct link to YouTube for your videos. Correct me if I’m wrong, but when you embed them in your page, it uses Flash. If we can go straight to YouTube, and we have signed up for HTML 5, then we can watch the video in H.264, and put our actions where are mouthes are.

Thanks, and keep up the good work!

8 calamod { 02.01.10 at 2:59 pm }

Don’t know if you have all ten of these mapped out, but please consider writing about the “Apple wants to charge more for ebooks” myth. To wit, Amazon wanted to prevent publishers from setting the prices for e-books. They were willing to do so even at a loss, because it meant that they would become the only show in town for ebooks. Despite the fact that Apple tried to force a similar deal on the record labels, the fact that Amazon attempted to contractually prevent publishers from charging different prices at a different online retailer clearly separates the two situations from one another.

Couldn’t find a better place to post this. Sorry.

9 gus2000 { 02.01.10 at 3:02 pm }

“Anyone who cheerleads for Flash is … a delusional moron.”

Oh snap, pt. 2

10 nat { 02.01.10 at 3:11 pm }

Agreed with miloh, cut out the dead air. Don’t leave your YouTube videos roughly drafted, too, Dan. :D

You could also add some pictures of what you’re talking about—say, the HTML5 logo or the H.264 logo or Flash’s logo—so you don’t have to stare into the camera the entire time.

As for Flash games, they are pretty popular but I would say most of them use either just the keyboard or just the mouse, while far fewer use both keyboard and mouse.

That means the Flash games that make use of just a mouse can be rejiggered to use the iPad’s multitouch display while the ones that use just a keyboard can either implement onscreen buttons or better yet, use a paired BT keyboard.

Everything else can pretty much be handled with H.264 video, JS and HTML5 Canvas. The Zune HD lacks Flash, the Palm Pre lacks Flash, and the newly introduced Nexus One lacks Flash too, so this clearly isn’t just an “Apple-being-Apple” thing, as many people are trying to imply.

11 clochard42 { 02.01.10 at 3:18 pm }

@calamod: Was about to suggest more or less the same: “Apple does x to make profit from iTunes”, with x being: Prevent free flash games from running on the iPad, selling apps, content, movies, books, etc.
After reading some blogs, people seem to overrate the profit generated by the iTunes store. Plenty of the apps are free or have a price of 1 or a few $. Credit card accounting and hosting alone will eat this.

12 gus2000 { 02.01.10 at 3:27 pm }

A typical PC consumes 50-250 watts. If running Flash increases power use by 10%, on a “typical” 120-watt PC, that’s 12 watts. Assuming that Flash is used for 1 hour per day on only 10% of the 1-billion PCs worldwide, that is 1.2 gigawatt hours of electricity per day. That’s almost enough to travel back in time!

In U.S. prices, that’s over $100,000 worth of electricity. Using carbon-fueled power would also result in over 1000 TONS of CO2 being released into the atmosphere. Per day.

Screw you, Adobe.

13 DesperateDan { 02.01.10 at 3:45 pm }

The nonsense being spewed about flash will soon go the way of the nonsense about no replaceable batteries and no physical keyboard. I’m starting to see plenty of “the death of flash” posts appearing all over the web, a sure sign that flash slowly heading the way of the Do-Do. Steve strikes again…

14 whmlco { 02.01.10 at 3:48 pm }

If you’re running Safari and want to block all of those annoying Flash ads, and save battery life on your MacBook, check out out the free Safari plugin called ClickToFlash.

“Using ClickToFlash, all of those icky Flash bits that have infected most webpages on the internets are replaced with a nice, smooth gradient and the word “Flash” set in a nice, pleasing font. When [and if] you want to view the Flash, just click on it!”


15 miloh { 02.01.10 at 3:52 pm }

Recently, I was working on a project that required various dynamic elements on a web-page like animations, drag-and-drop, fading, etc. It was interesting to note that when Googling for information on such topics almost none of the results had anything to do with Flash. It was all Javascript. At the very least, this suggests Flash isn’t as important as it once was.

16 ulicar { 02.01.10 at 3:58 pm }

It is quite embarrassing when you “do not need something”, and then in your advertising material, you show that something. D’oh we do not need flash, but let’s put flash content running in the advertising material, just so to mislead the potential customers. http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/01/ipad-flash/

“Some of Apple’s promotional material about the iPad implies the device’s Safari browser can load Adobe Flash content. However, demonstration units of the tablet, including the one presented by Steve Jobs, could not, and a consumer has already filed a complaint to the Federal Trade Commission alleging false advertising.“

What a fun this iPad proved to be.

17 nat { 02.01.10 at 4:01 pm }
18 ArrowJ { 02.01.10 at 4:06 pm }


Flash as a platform sucks…it just sucks. We can all agree with this. HTML 5 will hopefully be the savior we are all waiting for, but to say that, “…after three years of having no flash on the iphone, the only people that are really clambering for it, are people who create flash, people who are stock holders or have some other interest in adobe, or who don’t seem to understand what flash is and why it isn’t necessary…the only people that really are cheer leading for flash are the people that make money off it” is a little simplistic.

Imagine if Ford starting selling all its cars without AM/FM/CD/Satellite radios because there was a better technology to deliver that content on the horizon and the only people who really cared were the people making money off of radio. After all, you could still drive the vehicle and it has tons of other cool features. That would be just like an iPhone/iPod touch/iPad without Flash…just plain silly.

I absolutely love my freakin’ iPhone. I use my MacBook Pro at least 35-40% less since I bought the iPhone. It has increased my productivity and improved my life, but every single day of my life I have email messages and links in tweets, Facebook posts, and IM that I simply can’t view until I get home and get on the MacBook Pro. Flash sucks, but if I had it on my iPhone I could prop that number up to 60% and increase my productivity even more.

It’s wonderfully comforting to say that a solution is on the way, but in the mean time it sucks hard not having a full featured experience on my mobile browsing device…and now I can be assured that my iPad won’t fix the problem either.



19 jeromec { 02.01.10 at 4:14 pm }

Has anybody checkecked the release notes of the just released Fennec, aka. Firefox for mobile (go directly to the first known issue) here ?
“Due to performance problems using Adobe Flash within Firefox on many websites, especially those with multiple plug-ins on them, we have disabled plugins for Firefox for Maemo 1.0.”
The mozilla guys are more or less coming to the same conclusions as Apple :
Flash on a (even powerful) mobile device just degrades the overall browsing experience.

Not having Flash on the iPhone/iPad is a feature indeed.

20 ulicar { 02.01.10 at 4:31 pm }

@nat Fixed when somebody reported them for what they were doing.

I do not care about flash itself, but if you cannot access 75% of web multimedia, that sucks.

If Safari handled errors in the pluggin better, then it would not fail when flash fails. That is completely upside-down argument that somehow flash is responsible for safari crashes. That is like saying if application developers were better, windows would not crash so often. It might be true but Safari is Apple’s resoponsibility. If you are using safari anywhere you can use firefox, or opera, or chrome (full version), you must be mentaly ill.

21 sprockkets { 02.01.10 at 4:44 pm }

you guys are forgetting something, all hq videos are served with h.264, and Adobe flash plays them in that format. You can have the browser with HTML5 support and enabled in your prefs to use HTML5 as the player of H.264 stuff or use Flash.

The only reason why flash is necessary to the desktop is to prevent people from stealing content, such as The Daily Show. On an itouch that isn’t so much a problem because there is no way to save it, or on an ipad.

Still, I like homestarrunner.com, and it would suck if I can’t watch that on an apple device. You can’t possibly expect them to just drop flash support, seeing how perhaps SVG isn’t a suitable replacement.

22 ChuckO { 02.01.10 at 5:03 pm }

iPad just isn’t a geek product. What’s terrific about it is too subtle for the gadget freaks. When people start playing with these things in the store they are gonna sell like crazy. Every kid who couldn’t get his parents to spring for a MacBook will get one. This’ll be the perfect first computer. They’ll be great in the kitchen connected to the keyboard dock.

Mark my words. I nailed that this thing would be priced $500 and how disappointed everyone would be in comments on Dan’s pre-release tablet article.

23 shen { 02.01.10 at 5:14 pm }

“And all you sock puppets posting about how your children desperately want to play Flash games but can’t on the iPhone: go to a pet store and get a gnaw bone for your kid at and let them play with that instead. It will be more fun for them and less catastrophic for our earth.”

Also, the gnaw bone is more educational.

“Every kid who couldn’t get his parents to spring for a MacBook will get one”

With the exception of those damn facebook games, if I bought the lowest end iPad and the iWorks apps for both kids it would do 100% of what they use a computer for now, plus it would have apps they use iPod touches for* and would cost less to get them each one than getting a Single Macbook for them to share.

Hell if I planned it right the whole family could have iPads and we could use a single Mini as a server for the 5% of the things that the Pads couldn’t do.

*kids these days! How did they even afford their own iPods?!? I should make them buy their own iPads too!

24 brett_x { 02.01.10 at 5:18 pm }

Are there any GUI based apps for developing HTML5 animations? It seems to me there are a ton of companies that have art directors that have real knowledge developing Flash animations. I doubt they want those people to take the time to relearn a different technology just because Adobe owns it, it doesn’t run optimally and/or it won’t run on iPhones.

25 FreeRange { 02.01.10 at 5:25 pm }

@ArrowJ – its funny to hear you talk about amazing productivity increases with the iPhone, and then complain about not being able to access flash links in “tweets and facebook posts” – two of the biggest time wasters / productivity killers ever invented!

26 WebManWalking { 02.01.10 at 5:32 pm }

I’m pretty sure that YouTube uses H.264 for HD content, which you can access by tacking “&fmt=18″ onto the end of the URL. So you write a “bookmarklet” as follows: “javascript:if ((window.location.href +=’&fmt=18′).length > 0) alert(‘Here is the H.264 version you requested, sire.’);” (The purpose of the if is to avoid returning a value, which would cause Safari to display the value instead of the new page.) Save that URL as a bookmark and voila, you don’t need Flash to see YouTube videos on the iPhone, iPod Touch or iPad.

If you don’t like the hassle of selecting the bookmarklet from Safari’s bookmarks interface, you can create your own YouTube Viewer page that contains an IFrame with src=”http://www.youtube.com” and a hotlink bar of bookmarklets that you target to that frame. And voila, YouTube H.264 content is only a touch away, not a Bookmarks hunt-and-select away.

Why do so many want Apple to solve all of their trivial problems when you can solve them all yourself? They’re teaching HTML to 5th graders now, and JavaScript to 6th graders, who are typically smarter than a 5th grader.

27 WebManWalking { 02.01.10 at 5:37 pm }

P.S.: I suspect that the YouTube app does this to URLs internally. Over and over again, I hear people complain that they need Flash for YouTube, ignoring the existence of the YouTube app. (sigh) Well now you can tell them how they can have YouTube in Safari too, complete with pinch and swipe and such.

28 ArrowJ { 02.01.10 at 5:43 pm }


I have to admit I just added Facebook to make my list longer, and thus add fuel to the fire…fail. As for twitter, if you tweet what you ate for dinner and when it comes back out it certainly is useless. Used properly it can increase productivity…I’ve been doing it for a while now and I have less followers than follwees and I’m only following 35…most of which post only once in a while. If you follow everyone on the planet and let everyone follow you it gets silly.

Also, productivity is a relative word. You may mean by productive to earn more money, I may mean to gather or share more information…

29 ulicar { 02.01.10 at 6:27 pm }

@ WebManWalking did it ever happen to you to see “cannot play this video”. It happens more and more often inside the YouTube application (sigh)

@everybody You are talking about HTML5 as if safari mobile was handling it? You make me laugh so hard, I cry a little. What a dumb bunch.

30 miloh { 02.01.10 at 6:27 pm }

@ArrowJ — I agree completely that the definition of productivity varies from person to person. It seems to me that such subjectivity is regularly ignored in the iPad debate. Many feel the device would not be useful to them, which is fine, but a lot of them go on to assert that it wouldn’t be useful to anybody. That’s where their argument falls apart in my opinion. The arrogance of thinking they know what’s best for everyone is just mind-blowing.

31 jkundert { 02.01.10 at 6:44 pm }

Hmm, is there irony in the fact that your video that goes with this article is in Flash? I know you don’t have control of how YouTube embeds its content, but it’s a bit amusing to see Flash right up there at the top of this article!

32 John E { 02.01.10 at 7:23 pm }

gee Dan, why don’t you tell us what you really think of Flash fans?

but you’re very right of course – Flash is obsolete and doomed. the iPad is the death blow. print media companies will adopt its web specs for their new monetized app and iBooks products. media portals like Hulu will have to offer no-Flash web sites or custom apps too. FaceBook will find some other way to embed its games. once the momentum builds it will turn into rapid abandonment of Flash everywhere.

Adobe will cry of course. but they deserve it.

and for once you forgot to take a swing at MS with regard to Silverlight. but Apple (with Google’s help) is killing that one too, and not by accident.

33 nat { 02.01.10 at 8:55 pm }


Did you watch the iPad press conference, in which Jobs purposefully visited a site with Flash content and even scrolled right to the blue box with a smirk?

You know as well as anyone if you don’t have a Flash blocker, it’s often hard to distinguish between Flash and JS (aside from the terrible CPU consumption of the latter). Since the iPad likely doesn’t support Flash, the video was clearly a rendering taken from a Mac whose Flash content slipped past Apple.

Sorry it isn’t as exciting an explanation as a mass conspiracy theory.

34 ulicar { 02.01.10 at 9:22 pm }

@nat Sorry, but it is.

Few years ago there was an advert with a bullit in slomo and I think mitsubishi car. That advert had to be removed because it was misleading. Apple advert HAD to be removed because it was misleading, and not because Apple wanted to do it. They actually made them because they wanted you to see them, not because they wanted to remove them. As jkundert said, it is quite ironic that RD is using flash to talk about how flash is not necessary. :)

Anyway http://faultline.org/index.php/site/item/incendiary/ it is about as roughly drafted as it can get :) I will have to find if they actually did this based on rd :)

35 enzos { 02.01.10 at 9:27 pm }

Cf. a pair of quotes 400 years apart:
>”Great products, according to Mr. Jobs, are triumphs of “taste.” And taste, he explains, is a byproduct of study, observation and being steeped in the culture of the past and present, of “trying to expose yourself to the best things humans have done and then bring those things into what you are doing.”

and Ben Jonson on the 17th C. version of the geek:

I deny not, but that these men, who
always seek to do more than enough, may some time happen on some
thing that is good, and great; but very seldom; and when it
comes it doth not recompense the rest of their ill. It sticks
out, perhaps, and is more eminent, because all is sordid and
vile about it: as lights are more discerned in a thick darkness,
than a faint shadow. I speak not this, out of a hope to do good
to any man against his will; for I know, if it were put to the
question of theirs and mine, the worse would find more
suffrages: because the most favour common errors. But I give
thee this warning, that there is a great difference between
those, that, to gain the opinion of copy, utter all they can,
however unfitly; and those that use election and a mean. For it
is only the disease of the unskilful, to think rude things
greater than polished; or scattered more numerous than composed.
-”The Alchemist” (1610)

36 frankeee { 02.01.10 at 9:30 pm }

Hey Daniel,

I think this is the future right here right now – keep going doing your video thingy! It’s so much more personal than only the written text (which is of course not to be neglected).

Oh, did anyone tell you, you look like a young version of Rubens Barichello – the F1 driver. Works for me, I live in Australia, Albert Park, home of the F1 circus every March and I’m a huge fan!

The only shite thing is (and this is funny – wait!):
I always donwload youtube’s via a Greasemonkey plugin – turns out it downloads it as FLV – which in return opens the annoying Adobe Media Player – which in return screws up Little Snitch by asking to update, check, download, check again, update again etc every 3 seconds. I can not even click that fast!

Just a thought with a smile!

37 Dorotea { 02.01.10 at 9:32 pm }

Damn. I had to enable plugins in Safari to listen to the video. Didn’t see it at first.. just oddly spaced article. Don’t do that again Daniel.!!!!

38 nat { 02.01.10 at 9:43 pm }

*aside from the terrible CPU consumption of the latter

39 nat { 02.01.10 at 9:44 pm }

Bah, I meant to replace latter with former, lol.

40 frankeee { 02.01.10 at 9:51 pm }

man – i’m just watching it! no gay thing here – but yeah: i love u, buddy! this is so ‘real’ – consider going pro with your video casts and put up a makeshift black backdrop (a black bed linen will do, 15 bucks), one spot can (20 bucks) and a diffusing light source (white bed linen and halogen spot – 35 bucks). And your set to go – keep the little fuck ups in editing – makes it so much more natural!

41 nat { 02.01.10 at 9:52 pm }

@ ulicar,

Who told Apple to take them down? I don’t recall that.

I do recall a few sites making mention of it and someone filing a lawsuit. I don’t remember a judge telling them a thing but it doesn’t really matter either way.

It’s a very simple mistake to make when the screen capturing is being done on a Mac running Flash, which is obviously what they were using, otherwise there would have been no blue blocks on NYT’s site during the onstage demo.

42 frankeee { 02.01.10 at 10:07 pm }

sorry – i have to comment one last time – apart from the Flash ‘subject’ – which: yes – exactly – screw it if you have dumb children or dumb husbands who think they NEED it (shit games and even more shitter porn). here’s it what how i think your video cast will greatly benefit from: the aforementioned backdrop (keep the webcam – looks intriguing) – but no, cut out the fuck ups but in a cool way – like an x-fade with audio always starting a touch earlier. just an idea! then maybe do it like the German Tagesschau – in a H264 compliant webcast.

Awesome man!

43 frankeee { 02.01.10 at 10:16 pm }

nat and ulicer: this ain’t no twitter guys! i don’t feel the love! could this be ‘it’?

44 frankeee { 02.01.10 at 10:23 pm }

ps: i hate this whole @thingythingy – it’s annoying the crap out of me!
i know we all got dumber and dumber by using shitty little keyboards from the past on our mobile phones, but can we at least resume to some form of communicational aesthetics when there is a keyboard available, I mean, just a little? on a side note: the iphone is helping me a great deal doing so – although it fucks up mixed languages (I use frequently) – facebook app the worst offender!

45 frankeee { 02.01.10 at 10:31 pm }

man i am so sorry for littering this thread now – but after the vid i just started getting through the text: the greenpeace stuff is simply genius!!!! absofuckinglutely! hey – roughlydrafted could do with a black background and silver writing – just so there is no backlash!

46 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.01.10 at 10:36 pm }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Dear SAI: 3. It’s a myth that the iPad is [...]

47 enzos { 02.01.10 at 11:45 pm }

I’m with my manic compatriot on the Rubens B. thing. And you probably should do some editing (e..g the counting thing at 1.22). Been posting a few Handicam clips to Youtube myself and iMovie makes it very easy to polish your product.


48 Berend Schotanus { 02.02.10 at 12:45 am }

Well, you hit probably the right tone about Flash with deservedly tons of positive reactions.

Part I liked most is the DOS comparison. It is probably the same kind of people programming Flash now, that used to program DOS, same programming style, same attitude.

49 beanie { 02.02.10 at 12:53 am }

Daniel Eran Dilger wrote:
“The lack of Flash on the iPhone and iPod touch and now the iPad is creating a market for open, non-Flash HTML5 web content.”

If HTML5 is delivered as text files, I do not see anything worth-while using it since the source code is easily viewed. iPhone Web Apps count is around 4000. So not many developers choose to make Web Apps that work on the iPhone.

Daniel Eran Dilger wrote:
“Google is also pushing for an end to Flash, although less aggressively.”

Google is a member of the Adobe’s Open Screen Project. Adobe will probably release full Flash 10.1 for Android and other mobile phones pretty soon.

Flash 10.1 has not even been released yet. It is the first version to support full Flash on mobile. It has GPU acceleration. It has mobile features such as multi-touch, gestures, accelerometer, and screen-orientation. There is a beta available.

A developer can write once on Flash 10.1 and have it run on desktop, and mobile phones such as Android, WinPhone, Symbian, PalmPre, and BlackBerry. That is way easier than trying to write apps for every platform.

50 niqin { 02.02.10 at 1:16 am }

You may: “see the irony of my video segment being delivered via Flash because I hosted it on YouTube…” but I don’t especially as I can’y see how I can avoid Flash on my Mac with Safari which I thought supported HTML5.

51 Maniac { 02.02.10 at 4:20 am }

Excellent writing again Daniel. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve thrown up just a little while watching some gaudy Flash animation some web site. Frantically searching for that all-important Skip Intro button.

And J0hN: I had the same MacBook Pro overheating + short battery life problem until I set Safari to launch in 32-bit mode. Apparently the Flash plug-in runs much better in 32-bit mode. (Navigate to Safari, do Get Info on it, and make sure the “Open in 32-bit mode” check box is checked.

And better yet, you could also install ClickToFlash, which blocks Flash content from loading. A subtle gray gradient box appears instead, until you explicitly click on it to play the Flash video. Just google ClickToFlash to find it.

52 zanjero { 02.02.10 at 4:24 am }

One major point of not including Flash on a touch-device might be the following. On PC you have point and click. On touch (ipod, iphone, ipad) you have only click/touch. There is no way of just pointing without releasing a click. Since flash distinguishes between pointing and clicking (remember all this awfull scrollbars where you just put the pointer above an arrow, and without clicking the scrolling begins) there is no easy way to use flash on a touch device. How could you emulate the difference between pointing and clicking on a touch interface in a consistent manner? Users get confused by inconsistent behaviour of web-elements. And since they would hardly know that flash is to blame, they would blame Safari/Apple. Apple does not – understandably – like being blamed. So they put one (flash’s hunger for resources, lame usability, lack of real usefulness) and one (no reasonable usage via touch) together and came to the conclusion: zero flash is the best sum.

53 WebManWalking { 02.02.10 at 10:11 am }

To frankeee on Greasemonkey:

I assume because of Greasemonkey that you’re talking about Firefox on the Mac, not about Safari on the iPxxs. It’s my understanding that Greasemonkey runs user scripts on a URL-criterion basis. You might want to read my earlier post about IFrame and a bookmarklet, which is very similar.

I don’t know if Greasemonkey lets you load jQuery in the user space, but if it does, this command installs an onclick handler into every hotlink on a [presumably YouTube] page:

$(document).ready(function(){$(“a[href]“).click(function(){ ((your script goes here)) })});

Then, in your script, you can examine this.href to see if it’s a hotlink to a YouTube URL that doesn’t already contain “&fmt=18″ and append it to this.href before returning true. I’d imagine the script would have to get a bit more elaborate to limit it to only video hotlinks, but you get the idea.

54 sprockkets { 02.02.10 at 1:03 pm }

niqin, all versions of safari support HTML5, including mobile since OS 3.0. Even if a site didn’t use HTML5 tags, they still can use the traditional quicktime tag to load a video in any apple product.
Try it yourself:http://camendesign.com/code/video_for_everybody/test.html

Works as expected on an 32GB itouch.

55 WebManWalking { 02.02.10 at 1:20 pm }

sprockkets: Not all of HTML5, sad to say.

I’m pretty sure that Safari doesn’t support custom data attributes (data-customname=”value”, referenced from within the element as this.dataset.customname) nor Web Forms 2.0 yet.

Boy, would I be an ecstatic Web Developer if anybody besides Opera 10 supported Web Forms 2.0.

56 ShabbaRanks { 02.02.10 at 1:24 pm }

Can someone tell me why certain people hate Safari so much?

57 sprockkets { 02.02.10 at 2:10 pm }

ok well that makes sense about FULL HTML5 compat, but at least when it comes to video tags vs. the whole Flash video debate, Apple has you covered.

58 bartb { 02.02.10 at 2:11 pm }

For people who think they need Flash to do cool animations, check out these demo’s:

http://www.satine.org/research/webkit/snowleopard/snowstack.html (keep pressing the right arrowkey)

(you’ll need Safari, Chrome, or Opera)

The only thing we need is some good CSS3 authoring software (Adobe?).

59 miloh { 02.02.10 at 2:26 pm }

@ShabbaRanks — Probably for the same reason that I observe many people to hate Apple products in general. It works, just not for them. It’s this qualifier that really gets under their skin. They see potential value but dislike not being in the targeted audience. It makes them feel left out and ignored, which is really just a symptom of entitlement since there’s no rule anywhere that says they have to be included in the first place.

60 ShabbaRanks { 02.02.10 at 5:45 pm }

I’ve always liked Safari. It’s quicker than every other browser I’ve tried. Renders pages excellently too. It’s never baulked at any websites. Security seems adequate, not Chrome or Firefox levels but good enough.
Chrome still stinks of Beta. Firefox is significantly slower and I have no interest in add-ons.
For me it’s Safari 99% of the time. If I’m online banking it’s Firefox or Chrome, just because Safari once got locked in a loop on a maliciously crafted website and when tested on the same site, it was handled easily by both Chrome and Firefox.

61 Derek Currie { 02.03.10 at 12:22 pm }

After Flash is dead, next on my hit list: JavaScript. Well, and of course that walking and talking security threat called ActiveX. But fortunately on Mac, we don’t give a rat’s about ActiveX.

The problem with JavaScript is that it is invasive into your computer. It allows hackers to crack your Mac, as has been witnessed at the PWN-2-OWN contests. Sucker a LUSER onto your infection website and you are able to take advantages of security holes in Internet browsers and operating systems to take over, or at the very least access your files.

Why does JavaScript SUCK BAD?

We have to point one finger at Netscape, who invented LiveScript, the original name for JavaScript before the marketing morons took charge. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the Java programming language. The LiveScript scripting language was supposed to be safe and non-invasive. Oops.

But what really destroyed JavaScript was Microsoft’s usual need to pretend they have better ideas about anything, which they rarely do. Therefore, Microsoft perpetrated the catastrophe called JScript, an elaboration on JavaScript. And of course initially only Internet Explorer could read it. This was in the days when MS wanted to win the browser warz and kill all contenders, probably in an attempt to hide their terrible self-esteem resulting from the fact that they were the very last major computer company to catch up with the Internet.

A similar catastrophe could have happened to Java itself if Microsoft’s mutant clone called J++ had been allowed to live. Instead Sun Microsystems had it destroyed buy lawsuit injection.

There are plenty of superior and safe scripting languages that are compatible with the Internet. We are required to move to them and dump JavaScript entirely. Or so I dream…

62 miloh { 02.03.10 at 12:30 pm }

@Derek Currie — I wish more people in the world stated their position as you just have. You were clear that it was your personal view and nothing more. I think many don’t understand just how hostile and negative they come across with their absolute, universal statements. Well written. :)

63 lowededwookie { 02.03.10 at 3:48 pm }

That bit about giving the kids a chew toy was so freaking funny.

Man I wish you came up with more relentless comments like that.

64 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped and under-delivered — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.03.10 at 5:11 pm }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was [...]

65 FreeRange { 02.03.10 at 7:54 pm }

Another great post on why Apple should avoid Flash is one of Daniel’s previous articles related to Flash and MSFT… Lets hope for a quick death to the Flash pig.


66 WebManWalking { 02.04.10 at 10:10 am }

Almost all non-MSIE JavaScript malware vector problems would go away if browsers accepted a list (in the HTML) of trusted sites from which JavaScript may be loaded, and of course made that list unalterable by JavaScript. (It probably wouldn’t be sufficient protection for that petri dish called Microsoft Internet Explorer, but I don’t use it, so I don’t care.) There’s already a proposal on the table as to the format of that list.

That’s what you do to problems. You fix them. You don’t throw everything away because it’s too much effort. You have to fight entropy. Running away from it doesn’t work.

67 Derek Currie { 02.04.10 at 4:14 pm }

WebManWalking sez: “Almost all non-MSIE JavaScript malware vector problems would go away if browsers accepted a list (in the HTML) of trusted sites…”

There are such things. Of course, as with any SPAM white list or black list, they change daily and have a lag time. Google provide such a list. I believe that is the one Safari uses in its site verification. McAfee also have one which can be used via their FireFox extension (which oddly you have to get yourself from the McAfee site. FireFox does NOT list it, a real shame). It would be great for there to be a collective public list, which is I believe what WMW is referring to.

As for ‘running away’, um huh? Health in anything requires eradication of disease vectors. JavaScript qualifies as a disease of the Internet. Flash qualifies as a disease of the Internet. ActiveX, Internet Explorer, Trojan horses, tracker cookies, software and hardware security holes, viruses, worms, adware, spyware…. These are all diseases. They create a lack of ease across the Internet. Running away means letting them exist while you go hide somewhere and pretend they aren’t out there, ready to end your ease.

My POV: I have three degrees in the field of biology. One of my specialties in that field is pathology. I also study flaws in human perception and their consequences.

68 Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.04.10 at 6:09 pm }

[...] iPad isn’t just a big iPod touch. Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

69 daGUY { 02.04.10 at 10:13 pm }

To anyone who thinks the iPad will fail because it doesn’t support Flash, I offer a very simple proof:

Three years ago, the original iPhone cost $499 – with a *contract* – and was a success despite lacking Flash support. Since then, mobile device support for Flash has gone DOWN due to the millions of iPhones (and iPod Touches) sold since – and now today, the iPad is being sold for the same price *without* a contract.

So, there is LESS of a case to be made for Flash support today, not more of one. And since the iPhone was already a success without it, it stands to reason that the iPad will be too.

70 FM { 02.04.10 at 10:57 pm }

Flash wil NEVER be on iPhone OS, bet on that.

The matter is an old corporate unresolved “issue” between Apple and Adobe.

The advanced operating system Apple conceived after Mac OS 9 (Rhapsody) based on NeXT technologies was planned to be delivered on 1998.

Because of some BIG Application Developers (Adobe, Microsoft, others) who boycotted this original plan, Apple was FORCED to make another software strategy (Mac OS X) which involved porting and renewing lots of old technologies (all Carbon stuff) and make them work seamlessly with the NeXT technologies.

This change of strategy costed Apple about 5 years and 5 major system releases to seamlessly integrate this older technologies (Carbon, a.k.a. “cleaned” Mac OS 9 API) in the advanced NeXT foundations.

In the making of iPhone OS the original Rhapsody plan was finally executed, lots of older technologies were left behind, including those made for backwards compatibility (all Carbon frameworks) and new technologies were developed like Core Animation. iPhone OS is conceptually closer to NeXT’s OPENSTEP than Mac OS 9.

1. First reason for NO Flash is Simplicity. Why should Apple support a technology which is really not required? Steve Jobs has been quoted to say something like “Design is NOT about how things LOOK, but instead is about how things WORK.”

Other two reasons are the cost of the partnership, Adobe is simply too heavy for Apple…
2. Why should Apple help a company who didn’t help them… in the most critical moment??

3. Why should Apple help a company who supported a competitor and discontinued some of its software for the Apple platform… in the most critical moment??

4. Why should Apple help a company (Adobe) who made them WASTE 5 full years of technological advancement??

There’s no reason for Apple to do anything to help Adobe. None at all. No technological, nor standards-support, nor market need, and above all the cost of the partnership.

Again, loud and clear, Adobe Flash will NEVER be on iPhone OS! BET ON THAT!

@Dan, What’s your hosting provider? Your site e-mails travel lightspeed!!

71 WebManWalking { 02.05.10 at 2:41 am }

No, you misunderstand. Perhaps I should explain:

The white list that’s currently in the works is controlled by the Web Developer, not by Google or McAfee. Suppose you’re serving up your own page, which contains your own JavaScript, but you’d like to use code.jquery.com to serve up jQuery because they have a content delivery network that actually loads faster than your own server. You could specify “I want the browser to trust this site’s JavaScripts and code.jquery.com, and THAT’S IT. Don’t load JavaScripts from ANYWHERE ELSE.” Tight as a drum.

Malicious JavaScript (often introduced onto your page by cross-site scripting attack) is able to load malware by creating a new HTMLElement of type script, with src attribute pointing off to the malware server, and attaching the HTMLElement to the DOM. But that malware server isn’t on your list (your own server or code.jquery.com). So the browser doesn’t honor the request to load the rest of the malware package.

You don’t need a master list of every trustable server imaginable. In fact, you can, if you wish, disallow all servers except your own. Then, even if a cross-site scripting attack succeeds at getting served up by your server, it can’t infect your users.

This new HTML and browser feature blocks 1/2 of script replication, so that the script can’t go browser to server to browser to server.

That said, if you’re using a Mac anyway, I see no reason to turn off JavaScript and deny yourself the richness that it adds to the Web experience. Why be so scared of malware? What are we, Windows users? Instead, read some of Daniel’s articles on anti-virus vendors’ scaremongering.

72 ObamaPacman { 02.05.10 at 1:32 pm }
73 geolight { 02.06.10 at 6:36 am }

Okay, so for some reason everybody thinks that flash is only used for little games, port for for profit businesses. Regardless flash is great or not, rubbish or not, the reality it serves a purpose and it is very helpful in educational institutions and Libraries for demonstrations and skills improvements. There are non-for profits. it is fascinating that he elects to ignore the education sector completely! just because he might only use Facebook games or similar thing and porn, thus know nothing else, does not mean that the rest of us just use flash for those things too! most kids sites that have educational and teaching themes are flash based too, so yes, some of them might look like games for kids, but they are really educational too. oooh and His video! wow… ever heard of editing mate! amazing quality…

this post has nothing to do with the fact if Flash is great or not as a software, I don’t really care, I am talking about it is used.

[I understand that Flash is widely used, just as horse drawn carriages were once the primary means of getting around. I'm envisioning a world where we don't have to trudge through all the crap just to cross the road. - Dan]

74 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 6. It needs HDMI for HD video output Daniel Eran Dilger Here’s segment five in my series taking on iPad myths: no the iPad isn’t just a Microsoft Tablet PC or Amazon Kindle copycat. Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. I { 02.08.10 at 1:11 am }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

75 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 5. It’s just a Tablet PC or Kindle — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.08.10 at 2:42 am }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

76 United States of Generica { 02.08.10 at 7:03 am }

Dan, I hate Flash as much as the next person — run flash-blocker on my Macs and PCs — and I agree with almost everything you said, but…

You made a comment that is wrong, but you said you might not know because you don’t have kids. My kids are under 10 years old, and their internet experience is completely managed by Flash.

All the games they play are delivered via Flash, just go to any of the GirlsGoGames sites and you’ll see hundreds of games, there are dozens of such sites; similarly in the UK the BBC’s kids site has hundreds of Flash based games and activities (as does Disney, Nickelodeon, et al) … and you’ll be surprise how sophisticated some of these are (even using pretty good 3D stuff, like games consoles). My kids and all their friends use these sites, my business partners and work colleagues kids all use Flash games sites too.

Moreover, they watch television on the laptop and not on the HDTV; again, it’s streamed through Flash.

Now, here in the UK the BBC delivers iPlayer to iPhone via H.264 streams and I am sure they will do the same with iPad; but the other broadcasters do not, and I haven’t heard of Hulu (which my American friends kids watch) doing this.

It’s going to be a long time before all that content is recreated in HTML5; so as much as I want to give my kids iPads, they are not interested and want to keep using their parents laptops and their desktops, purely because of Flash support.

That’s not to say that even if there was Flash support there wouldn’t be issues, as most of these games rely on keyboard and mouse support (e.g. hover over function) rather than finger input.

77 bonze { 02.09.10 at 6:38 pm }


78 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 8. It’s a curse for mobile developers — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.12.10 at 5:44 pm }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

79 ObamaPacman { 02.15.10 at 11:10 am }

In other news, Microsoft’s new iphone wannabe DOES NOT HAVE FLASH. It’s doomed to failure because of it lacks flash!

80 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 9. It can’t multitask — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.17.10 at 12:55 pm }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

81 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 7. It needs cameras — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.17.10 at 12:57 pm }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

82 planetMitch { 02.19.10 at 2:55 pm }

Your statements are interesting tho clearly misguided. Our company does a bunch of business application development (ever hear of Rich Internet Applications (RIA)?) in Adobe’s Flex (which deploys as flash) because it is cross browser agnostic and delivers great UI. I’ve yet to see that done with HTML 5 — maybe it will, but it isn’t there yet.

[Heard of MobileMe? How about Google Docs? Saying HTML5 features aren't here yet any you have to use Flash is like Microsoft saying Mac features aren't on PCs yet and so you need to use Windows. - Dan]

Plus, you really don’t have kids because (as other commenters have pointed out) there’s a huge number of kids sites that are done totally in flash and they’re quite appealing. My daughter complains constantly because she can’t get to her sites on the iPhone while we’re away from the house. Maybe eventually since Steve hates Flash so much those sites will migrate to something else, but for now, she’s disappointed in Apple and Steve because of this issue.

[For every moronic Flash game you can dig up, I can give you a very good and much more appealing iPhone app. Again, you seem to be digging through turds to find kernels of corn. I'd suggest looking for your vegetables at a farmer's market or grocery store. - Dan]

So, there are lots of people who are interested in flash that aren’t making a living selling flash or ads. You’ve missed the whole point because you’re not using flash the same way millions of others are who enjoy it.

[I addressed who the existing users of Flash are in the piece - Dan]

83 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 2. It needs Flash, segment 2 — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.19.10 at 10:29 pm }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

84 hd1080i { 02.21.10 at 2:22 pm }

from my weblogs – iphone traffic is .01% – not a mission critical impact , not going to cause change yet anyhow. You got the rest of the points right, excellent work, i know it takes some effort so i donated, and i hope you keep your voice of reason going on this. Only 1 thing, the multitouch is in cs5 and is not in html5.

I would love to see a spec for html5 that had multitouch carefully defined. Maybe we can help do that, since the forum there will accept some input at this time, and it should be a unified js call supported by mobile browsers in a unified way. I think its important, since from what i have learned in using flash cs5 multitouch on my hp touchsmart, it really is a new world of cool that awaits us, and the toolin out there like appcellerator is just as clunky as flash is.

85 crownmultimedia { 02.22.10 at 12:12 am }

Thanks for compiling such an informative blog. I am curious as to how I should approach the task of developing a magazine reader app. I have a client that is interested in transitioning their publication to the iPad in digital format, but I am undecided on what I should use to build such an app. Any suggestions?

Best Regards,

86 mohrt { 02.25.10 at 4:07 pm }

Another important aspect why Flash should not be on the iPhone or iPad: Flash is not friendly with touch-based user interaction. The moment you allow Flash on the device, you just took ten steps backwards in the user experience.

87 Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 10. It needs Mac OS X — RoughlyDrafted Magazine { 02.26.10 at 3:23 pm }

[...] Myth of Apple’s iPad: 1. It’s just a big iPod touch Ten Myth of Apple’s iPad: 2. iPad needs Adobe Flash Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 3. It’s ad-evil Ten Myths of Apple’s iPad: 4. It was over-hyped [...]

88 beenyweenies { 03.10.10 at 4:39 pm }

I think you’re missing the big picture on Flash entirely.

Yes, serving video on web sites with something standards-based (like HTML5) sounds great. The argument seems to be two fold – we need something open source and more resource-efficient than Flash. But before everyone plows over the anti-Flash cliff, just look at the facts. The only way HTML5 will provide truly open source video is if it relies on the decade-old, ridiculously outdated Ogg Theora codec. This codec is so inefficient that your Macbook will be screaming just as loud when trying to play web videos, they will look awful and the file size of those videos will be far higher. I should also add that its inefficiency makes it a total bust for mobile video. In terms of efficiency gain versus Flash, it solves nothing.

[Video on the Web doesn't have to be Open Source to be based on open standards. Ogg is a fringe left wing pipe dream that doesn't work on mobiles. - Dan]

The other option is h.264, which is every bit as proprietary as Flash, only Apple wins since the Quicktime Player is the primary delivery device for h.264 and always will be. See the connection? Apple wants to replace Flash’s massive dominance in video playback with their own dominance in the form of Quicktime, which will provide zero benefit to users or developers. Nothing will change in terms of the primary complaints mac people have about Flash.

[H.265 is not proprietary like Flash because it is not owned by a commercial entity. It's part of the ISO spec. So while IP is involved, it's openly licensed under nondiscriminatory terms. Which is nothing like Flash, a proprietary binary alternative to Web standards. QuickTime includes an implementation of H.264, but that has no relevance. Anyone can implement H.264, and there are open source implementations (x264). ]

As for general Flash content, ads are the top reason people like you seem to hate Flash. Ultimately you’re just cheering the death of the messenger for no good reason. If Flash goes away (which isn’t going to happen) then those ads will still be there, they’ll just be animated GIFs or something similar. What then, declare war on GIFs and JPGs? The problem is that people can and will use technologies in annoying or less than secure ways. That is the responsibility of content developers, not the providers of the tool set.

[Very sophisticated ads can be presented using JavaScript, which is an open standard (ECMAScript). There's no reason to use Flash for ads apart from convention.]

In terms of resource hogging, several unbiased comparisons I’ve seen show that HTML5 video consumes around the same amount (7%+/-) of resources as Flash on virtually all system/browser configurations, except OSX. You can dislike Flash for this inefficiency, but Adobe claims they don’t have the access they need to optimize Flash for the mac. It is well documented that Microsoft backed Flash in the early days in an attempt to slow the advance of Quicktime, creating a bitter situation between Apple and the Flash product. Additionally, many argue that Apple wants to kill Flash because it could provide a viable alternative to 80% of the apps on the app store, apps that Apple currently makes money from. Flash-based RIAs delivered via browser would open a LOT of doors for a lot of developers, Apple just wouldn’t be able to extract a profit from every transaction or tell developers what types of apps are “worthy.”

[The "resource comparison" of Flash and H.264 was wildly flawed. Existing Flash video is not at all optimized for anything. Poor quality Flash (at the pinnacle of its lifecycle) on YouTube consumes less resources than Google's shoddy beta implementation of H.264, but only when vendors don't optimize for H.264 playback like Apple did in Safari.

There is nothing "well-documented" of Microsoft's propagation of Flash outside of what I've written on the subject. Also, it is completely ridiculous to suggest that Apple makes money from App Store titles that Flash would eat into, because Flash hasn't created any sort of legitimate, significant marketplace of useful software for any other mobile platform (and isn't used for anything on mobiles outside of a bunch of simplistic games) AND Apple doesn't make big money on the App Store; it exists to add value to the iPhone/iPod touch.

You spew conspiracy theories about Appel trying to extract profits from App Store titles, but ignore the fact that additional replacement of the Web with Flash/Flex/AIR would make the web subservient to Adobe, a far more incompetent and clueless enterprise than Apple, and at least equally as enraptured with DRM and proprietary control of everything. So everything you've said is absurd to a nauseating degree.

Isn't it time for you to head back to your Flash console to resume cranking out terrible anti-Web binaries? - Dan]

89 macmaniac { 03.10.10 at 7:50 pm }

way to go DAN…
people you must understand ipad is not a business touched where you sit in airport lobby, putting your power glass on try to show people you are a busy professional and trying to show you are working very hard on your notebook or touched
THIS IS A gadget to enjoy your multimedia, your photos, your ebook,window shopping OR blogging while sitting on your family room watching TV while eating drinking or may be sitting on airport lobby waiting to catch your flight.
not doing your business work or your office work on ipad.
if you think you are a busy person and needs lots of computing while on the go, just put your ipad in your bag and take out your business/ company notebook for which you did not even pay for it.
right ????
I can assure you guys, you will be blown away when you see it, I have seen it in as my bro works in bay area ( you know where he works, I just don’t wanna cause him any trouble)
I am an user of mac and own from powerbook to macbook pro to 27 inch i7, but I still use my 2001 series HP presario and also have sony Vaio also, But I never complained about windows.
it’s not bad, it’s just not FAST or powerful enough for me.
as for as flash thing goes who really wants flash oven in their computers, NOT ME !!! Stay Off it and use a free program call BASH FLASH, it was develop by Techspansion who made Visual Hub.
link here
save your battery please and get rid of oven in your system.
as for as camera goes I have heard from some good sources that a big group of developers is already working on a hack where they can use iphone camera as a source camera with bluetooth hack.
so trust our Great Iphone hackers and be positive

this is what i think ………

90 beenyweenies { 03.11.10 at 11:54 am }

Daniel, I respect your opinion and think you’re right on when it comes to many issues, but several of your responses to my post above resort to some pretty circular logic that you’ve used to defend other aspects of the iPad in a fairly unconvincing way.

“Very sophisticated ads can be presented using JavaScript, which is an open standard (ECMAScript). There’s no reason to use Flash for ads apart from convention.”

First of all, Flash (actionscript) is also based entirely on the open ECMA standard. Secondly, your original argument was that Flash enabled ad networks to spy on you with cookies etc. Can they not do the same thing with Javascript?

“(h.264) So while IP is involved, it’s openly licensed under nondiscriminatory terms. Which is nothing like Flash, a proprietary binary alternative to Web standards.”

Huh? You admit h.264 is NOT an open standard, and in the same sentence bash Flash for not being open standard. Both h.264 and Flash are protected under IP law and require some form of paid license to roll out. What’s the difference again, in terms of consumer/vendor benefit? If Flash is an “alternative to web standards” then what is h.264, given its paid licensing scheme?

“The “resource comparison” of Flash and H.264 was wildly flawed. Existing Flash video is not at all optimized for anything.”

Flash utilizes GPU acceleration quite well, and on the OS/browsers where it can properly do so, CPU utilization is the same OR BETTER than HTML5 video. Look, I own dozens of apple products, I’m typing this on my Mac Pro, and I love me some Apple. But some Apple fans are allowing themselves to be blinded to what is really going on here. Apple wants Flash dead (we can argue the reasons separately), and they are artificially creating the conditions under which average users THINK Flash is a resource hog. If Apple is actively preventing Adobe from optimizing Flash for the mac platform, how can you blame Adobe for that?

“Also, it is completely ridiculous to suggest that Apple makes money from App Store titles that Flash would eat into, because Flash hasn’t created any sort of legitimate, significant marketplace of useful software for any other mobile platform (and isn’t used for anything on mobiles outside of a bunch of simplistic games)”

This is a fairly disingenuous argument. OF COURSE there is no established, proven marketplace for mobile Flash apps, it wasn’t until the advent of the iPhone that Flash even made sense as a mobile platform. This argument is akin to saying “before the iPhone there was no proven marketplace for iPhone apps.”
You’re essentially arguing that Apple has no reason to fear Flash as a potential app store competitor because, well, Flash isn’t on the iPhone – good point! So let’s get it on the iPhone, with the option for users to disable it if they choose, and see what happens.
Let’s just get to the meat of the issue. If Flash had been on the iPhone from day one, do you really think there would be no successful, useful, iPhone specific, Flash-based apps? I understand there are complex security issues involved and I would be the first to suggest that all non-native apps to meet the same security requirements that “official” apps do. But having a fully closed system completely under Apple’s control where you pay the vig, learn a proprietary coding language (Cocoa Touch) and develop using proprietary tools is absolutely no different than the “closed binary” that you keep trashing Flash for being. In fact it’s far worse – Actionscript is based on the open ECMA standard, and Adobe does not sit on high like Caesar, deciding which apps using its product are acceptable or useful, preventing the ones that they don’t like from even coming to market. Talk about draconian!

“You spew conspiracy theories about Appel trying to extract profits from App Store titles, but ignore the fact that additional replacement of the Web with Flash/Flex/AIR would make the web subservient to Adobe, a far more incompetent and clueless enterprise than Apple, and at least equally as enraptured with DRM and proprietary control of everything.”

I really don’t know what you mean about making the web subservient to Adobe. I am talking about allowing Flash on the iPhone and iPad. If you support Apple’s closed system for putting content on those devices, it’s laughable to then argue against other closed platforms as though they are going to eat the internet.

As I said in the beginning, I fully respect your opinion and think there’s room for compromise on this issue. Why shouldn’t Apple just enable Flash on these devices and give users the option to disable it? If their core argument is that it’s a resource hog, let the users decide if that’s true and if they are willing to live with that in return for being able to access the entire internet.

You must log in to post a comment.