Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
Just asking because I know the Apple fanboys like to post here. My rant
is offtopic for these newsgroups but the fanboys might know of a more
appropriate newsgroup...
In article <270520101442332603%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam@nospam.invalid says...
>
> In article <MPG.266886d4e6f96531989944@news.justthe.net>, Steve Sobol
> <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
>
> > Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
> > blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>
> comp.mobile.ipad
Steve Sobol wrote:
> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>
> Just asking because I know the Apple fanboys like to post here. My rant
> is offtopic for these newsgroups but the fanboys might know of a more
> appropriate newsgroup...
>
>
alt.nothing.important.to.say comes immediately to mind...
On Thu, 27 May 2010 17:50:44 -0400, Shaun <sosies@double.net> wrote in
<htmpfk$v9n$1@news.albasani.net>:
>Steve Sobol wrote:
>> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
>> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>>
>> Just asking because I know the Apple fanboys like to post here. My rant
>> is offtopic for these newsgroups but the fanboys might know of a more
>> appropriate newsgroup...
>
>alt.nothing.important.to.say comes immediately to mind...
Steve Sobol wrote on [Thu, 27 May 2010 14:41:08 -0700]:
> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>
> Just asking because I know the Apple fanboys like to post here. My rant
> is offtopic for these newsgroups but the fanboys might know of a more
> appropriate newsgroup...
Now that's just a tease.
Is it the line about "the whole web in your hands"?
On 27/05/10 2:41 PM, Steve Sobol wrote:
> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
LOL, they should not be saying what they're saying in that ad. I'm
pretty sure I know exactly what you're referring to. And no doubt
intentional, not just an innocent mistake, they do it just to annoy Adobe.
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4bff40fb$0$1628$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> On 27/05/10 2:41 PM, Steve Sobol wrote:
>> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
>> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>
> LOL, they should not be saying what they're saying in that ad. I'm pretty
> sure I know exactly what you're referring to. And no doubt intentional,
> not just an innocent mistake, they do it just to annoy Adobe.
And, IIRC, they actually say "every web page." I suspect it can go to every
page- it just can't do much with a number of them when it gets there!
On 27/05/10 10:31 PM, Todd Allcock wrote:
> "SMS"<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4bff40fb$0$1628$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> On 27/05/10 2:41 PM, Steve Sobol wrote:
>>> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
>>> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>>
>> LOL, they should not be saying what they're saying in that ad. I'm pretty
>> sure I know exactly what you're referring to. And no doubt intentional,
>> not just an innocent mistake, they do it just to annoy Adobe.
>
> And, IIRC, they actually say "every web page." I suspect it can go to every
> page- it just can't do much with a number of them when it gets there!
Well on a lot of the pages there are Flash and non-Flash sections, so it
can at least do a little.
While the lack of Flash is a serious drawback of the iPad/iPhone/iPod
Touch, I'm kind of rooting for Apple in this fight since they have the
installed base that could encourage web developers to move away from
Flash. OTOH, Android now able to do Flash, it's going to be a big
selling point for those phones. I expect that most of the new tablets
about to hit the market will also support Flash. The
Android/Google/Verizon tablet looks interesting because hopefully
Verizon set 3G pricing similar to what AT&T did for 3G pricing on the iPad.
> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>
> Just asking because I know the Apple fanboys like to post here. My rant
> is offtopic for these newsgroups but the fanboys might know of a more
> appropriate newsgroup...
Apple wouldn't lie, that would be unethical... The iPad works with every
webpage, that's 100% true... if a few are still using a proprietary
format to display "spam"... that's not Apple's fault, it's Adobe's.
Go complain to Adobe for not being open like Apple, otherwise you are
barking up the wrong tree...
In news:apony-37B7C3.12474029052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com
Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
> Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
>
>> Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
>> blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
>>
>> Just asking because I know the Apple fanboys like to post here. My
>> rant is offtopic for these newsgroups but the fanboys might know of a
>> more appropriate newsgroup...
>
> Apple wouldn't lie, that would be unethical...
Umm... Sure.
> The iPad works with every webpage, that's 100% true...
For a peculiar definition of "works."
> if a few are still using a proprietary format to display "spam"
The entire Hulu web site is "spam?" Hunu?
> ... that's not Apple's fault, it's Adobe's.
Strange... The Web browsers I use on my Windows PC have no problem with
either format. How does the Web browser supplied with Macs cope with
Flash?
> Go complain to Adobe for not being open like Apple, otherwise you are
> barking up the wrong tree...
In article <Xns9D87912C8FA73VeebleFetzer@216.250.188.140>, Bert Hyman
<bert@iphouse.com> wrote:
> > if a few are still using a proprietary format to display "spam"
>
> The entire Hulu web site is "spam?" Hunu?
hulu blocks mobile devices, so even if the ipad had flash, it would not
work.
> > ... that's not Apple's fault, it's Adobe's.
>
> Strange... The Web browsers I use on my Windows PC have no problem with
> either format. How does the Web browser supplied with Macs cope with
> Flash?
flash is adobe's product, not apple's and the mobile version of flash
is not even beta (should be next month). adobe said it will be done by
the end of the year.
how could apple offer flash when adobe hasn't finished developing it?
In article <apony-37B7C3.12474029052010@n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com>, apony@pasture.com says...
>
> Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
>
> > Is there an appropriate newsgroup where I can discuss a big, fat,
> > blatant lie floating around in Apple's iPad TV commercials?
> >
> > Just asking because I know the Apple fanboys like to post here. My rant
> > is offtopic for these newsgroups but the fanboys might know of a more
> > appropriate newsgroup...
>
> Apple wouldn't lie, that would be unethical... The iPad works with every
> webpage, that's 100% true... if a few are still using a proprietary
> format to display "spam"... that's not Apple's fault, it's Adobe's.
>
> Go complain to Adobe for not being open like Apple, otherwise you are
> barking up the wrong tree...
Really?
I get to prove Oxford's a moron? Whooo!
Hey Dumbass, if Apple is so open, how come they stopped supporting the
open-source Darwin project?
And exactly how much do you know about the SWF file format?
> Really?
>
> I get to prove Oxford's a moron? Whooo!
>
> Hey Dumbass, if Apple is so open, how come they stopped supporting the
> open-source Darwin project?
>
> And exactly how much do you know about the SWF file format?
they have never stopped the darwin project, they've actually expanded it
to include the iphone OS, so check facts next time.
> Strange... The Web browsers I use on my Windows PC have no problem with
> either format. How does the Web browser supplied with Macs cope with
> Flash?
Macs work better with Flash than PCs don't forget, and since when does
your Windows PC run on batteries? You seem to missing the point... Flash
can't work properly on mobile devices unless you want a 1 or 2 hour
charge, so learn what the problem is about... this will get you
started...
----
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobešs Flash products so
that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow
Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. 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. Adobe claims
that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the
opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, therešs ŗOpen˛.
Adobešs Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available
from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement,
pricing, etc. While Adobešs Flash products are widely available, this
does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe
and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a
closed system.
Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for
the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, 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.
Applešs mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power
implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard
that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web
developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and
transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like
Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards
committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began
with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete
open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web
browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google
uses it for Androidšs browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM
(Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone
web browser other than Microsoftšs uses WebKit. By making its WebKit
technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.
Second, therešs the ŗfull web˛.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access ŗthe
full web˛ because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they donšt
say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern
format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with
an estimated 40% of the webšs video, shines in an app bundled on all
Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube
discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo,
Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The
New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People,
National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users
arenšt missing much video.
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. There are more games
and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for
any other platform in the world.
Third, therešs reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security
records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one
reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these
problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We donšt want
to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads
by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have
routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile
device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it.
Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009,
then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they
say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but wešre
glad we didnšt hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?
Fourth, therešs battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must
decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much
power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder
called H.264 * an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD
player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix
and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost
all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that
is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The
difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for
up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5
hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them
without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Applešs
Safari and Googlešs Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look
great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
Fifth, therešs Touch.
Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using
fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on ŗrollovers˛, which pop
up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific
spot. Applešs revolutionary multi-touch interface doesnšt use a mouse,
and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to
be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to
rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like
HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the
problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support
touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major
technical drawbacks, and doesnšt support touch based devices, there is
an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods
and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video
and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers
to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of
software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results
in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the
platform. 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. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and
when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform
development tool. The third party 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 competitoršs platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobešs goal to
help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their
goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been
painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Applešs platforms. For example,
although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just
adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was
the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.
Our motivation is simple * we want to provide the most advanced and
innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand
directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the
world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so
developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful
applications. Everyone wins * we sell more devices because we have the
best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer
base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest
selection of apps on any platform.
Conclusions.
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.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Applešs mobile
devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or
consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Applešs App
Store proves that Flash isnšt necessary for tens of thousands of
developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on
mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on
creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple
for leaving the past behind.
In article <apony-0D270D.19231829052010@news.qwest.net>, Oxford
<apony@pasture.com> wrote:
> Macs work better with Flash than PCs don't forget,
nope. flash on pc has hardware acceleration, which is only starting to
appear on mac.
> and since when does
> your Windows PC run on batteries?
there are gazillions of pc laptops, all that run on batteries.
> You seem to missing the point... Flash
> can't work properly on mobile devices unless you want a 1 or 2 hour
> charge, so learn what the problem is about... this will get you
> started...
adobe claims three hours for mobile flash that's about to go beta.
In article <apony-0D270D.19231829052010@news.qwest.net>, apony@pasture.com says...
>
> Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
> > Strange... The Web browsers I use on my Windows PC have no problem with
> > either format. How does the Web browser supplied with Macs cope with
> > Flash?
>
> Macs work better with Flash than PCs don't forget, and since when does
> your Windows PC run on batteries? You seem to missing the point... Flash
> can't work properly on mobile devices unless you want a 1 or 2 hour
> charge, so learn what the problem is about... this will get you
> started...
My laptop runs on a battery. What'chu talkin about?
And while the Flash IDE and other development tools aren't open, the SWF
*file format* most definitely is, so your quote further down is
incorrect.
On Sat, 29 May 2010 19:23:18 -0600, Oxford <apony@pasture.com> wrote:
>----
>
>I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobešs Flash products so
>that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow
>Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
<snip>
I read all ~180 lines and now I feel icky. I need a shower.
Seriously, I have to give credit where it's due. Whoever wrote that is
a master of spin. BP could use some of that to tell us why we should
be thankful to have oil spewing into our Gulf waters.
iPad ad complaints - where to post? 
Linear Mode
