Apples war on Adobe

conolan

This NYTimes articles points out a sneaky condition in Apples new developer agreement. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/a-change-at-apple-causes-trouble-for-adobe/?hpw

Essentially, you must use Apple's tools to create content for iPhone and iPad therefore shutting out the new CS5 Flash feature that allows flash to export native iPhone code.

This means lots of developers familiar with flash will not be able to create iPhone apps without having to master Apples dev code.

Apple are bad closed architecture people, just like Microsoft.

whiterebel

conolan wrote: »

This NYTimes articles points out a sneaky condition in Apples new developer agreement. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/a-change-at-apple-causes-trouble-for-adobe/?hpw

Essentially, you must use Apple's tools to create content for iPhone and iPad therefore shutting out the new CS5 Flash feature that allows flash to export native iPhone code.

This means lots of developers familiar with flash will not be able to create iPhone apps without having to master Apples dev code.

Apple are bad closed architecture people, just like Microsoft.

For not wanting their machines crashing and running slower? Good.

Red Alert

What's flash's main use for? It's actually ads. So less Flash means less ads.

Adobe does a terrible job of making flash on Macs and Linux work: people also complain to their phone's manufacturer not Adobe, and I suspect Apple doesn't want to have to deal with complaints about Adobe's buggy software.

Flash is proprietary - it's not an open standard. HTML5 is, and that's what Apple are promoting. So in spite of their control freakery (App Store), banning Flash from the base OS is a good step.

Gregor Samsa

Red Alert wrote: »

So in spite of their control freakery (App Store), banning Flash from the base OS is a good step.

That's not what the OP is talking about.

They're talking about Adobe's plan to have a feature in Flash CS5 that would allow developers compile their Flash apps as native iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad apps, so that they could put them up on the App store (they'd need a an Apple Dev account to do this bit, obviously).

Basically use Flash as a dev tool to make apps. Which was a nice idea, because it opened up app development to the many web developers out there, and gave an easy path for sites that rely on Flash to easily make an App to allow iPhone OS users to access them.

Leiva

phutyle wrote: »

That's not what the OP is talking about.

They're talking about Adobe's plan to have a feature in Flash CS5 that would allow developers compile their Flash apps as native iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad apps, so that they could put them up on the App store (they'd need a an Apple Dev account to do this bit, obviously).

Basically use Flash as a dev tool to make apps. Which was a nice idea, because it opened up app development to the many web developers out there, and gave an easy path for sites that rely on Flash to easily make an App to allow iPhone OS users to access them.

Apples gripe is if you are gonna use Flash as a dev tool for an App then there is nothing stopping you making the same app say for Android .
Apple don't want that :rolleyes: , if your making a app for 4.0 your gonna make it for Apple , and Apple alone .
Next Steve will have us wearing JOBS PAJAMA's , and photgraphic evidence of same as a requirement prior to purchase of any Apple products

conolan

Red Alert wrote: »

What's flash's main use for? It's actually ads. So less Flash means less ads.

Lots of little games, photo galleries, simple animation that can't be achieved with animated gifs etc etc.

Flash has its problems, but it's also extremely versatile. Forget about flash as streaming video, it's the scripting in flash that makes it so useful.

seamus

conolan wrote: »

Essentially, you must use Apple's tools to create content for iPhone and iPad therefore shutting out the new CS5 Flash feature that allows flash to export native iPhone code.

I don't know much about CS5 or the apple dev tools, but if CS5 exports the code (as opposed to a compiled binary), then there shouldn't be a problem.

Programatically translated programs are notoriously inefficient, and since Apple's main gripe with flash is its inefficiency, there should be no surprise that they are not allowing direct-to-binary translations of other code.

Apple's compiler no doubt contains safeguards and optimisers that CS5 couldn't possibly have. As I've said before, the nature of this device and it's target market is that everything falls back to Apple. A slow app is Apple's fault in the eyes of the consumer.

conolan

It looks like its binary, but presumably Adobe could rejig their packager for iPhone (their term) to create C++ or similar that could then be imported into Apple Dev Kit for compiling.

Gregor Samsa

Adobe say they're going ahead with the Packager for iPhone, and the launch of CS5. so maybe they are exporting C-whatever code, but up to now, all the indications are that the Packager creates an executable. We'll know more when Adobe launch it April 12th.

iPhone applications built with the Packager for iPhone are compiled into standard, native iPhone executables, just like any other iPhone application

Source: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashcs5/appsfor_iphone/

Red Alert

It could be that it generates the code and then runs the GCC compiler from the command-line. That wouldn't be beyond possibility.

Inquitus

Apple wont allow flash on iphone as it would enable apps (esp Games) and other content outside of appstore and their control.

Apple won't allow CS5 as a dev tool, because they have turned into dicks worse than Microsoft and Intel.

Google however is doing a brave job of giving apple the finger by using html 5 to bend apple over:

Google voice after Apple rejected it from Appstore.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/google_voice_on_the_iphone_is_html5_good_enough.php

QuakeII via html5 (not April fools despite the date thats in it)

http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/open_source/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=224201220

I'll buy an iPhone v4 if its close to the Android flagship handsets in specs as iPhone OS still has an edge on Android in the OS and in the Appstore, but in 12mths Android will have turned both of those round, and quite frankly apple can go fook themselves, and I for one will be glad to see their smartphone marketshare evapourate.

Eoin_Sheehy

First is that Apple are blocking off a huge part of the internet but this is now getting smaller with the introduction of HTM5. The lack of Flash is a bit annoying but hopefully it'll soon be obsolete, and Flash is very buggy and is crashing a lot on our laptop so there is sanity to Steve Jobs' decision. Now though it seems that Apples war with Adobe is becoming more than just about Flash which is very interesting...

Leiva

FLASH MY ARSE !

BrianD

Eoin_Sheehy wrote: »

First is that Apple are blocking off a huge part of the internet but this is now getting smaller with the introduction of HTM5. The lack of Flash is a bit annoying but hopefully it'll soon be obsolete, and Flash is very buggy and is crashing a lot on our laptop so there is sanity to Steve Jobs' decision. Now though it seems that Apples war with Adobe is becoming more than just about Flash which is very interesting...

I think this is more of a business decision (that doesn'y benefit consumers) rather than a technical decision. Apple could support flash and HTML5 in the long term (as it still years away).

I always thought that Apple and Adobe were almost synonomous in the past given that Apples strong market was in the design community as Abobe's software. When did it start to sour?

54kroc

If Microsoft carried on the way Apple does there would be uproar and no doubt the EU would be fining them but Apple seem to get away with it.

pphheerroonn

I can't see any valid reason why Apple would make this move. Steve Jobs really does just have it out for Adobe. The iPad advertised as the best way to view the web. Without flash or java thats just not true. And using HTML 5 support as an excuse is rubbish... It won't outright replace flash on the net anytime soon.

Honestly I don't think Apple have the resources to handle the huge increase in Apps they would have to review from the new army of developers that would exist.

I do a fair bit of work in Flash and was looking forward to some iPhone fun. Poor show Apple!

Pittens

If Microsoft carried on the way Apple does there would be uproar and no doubt the EU would be fining them but Apple seem to get away with it.

MS is a monopoly OS provider. apple is banning flash from an unproven gadget. Kindle does not allow Flash. Nor anything but it's own API. So it goes. It is also not a monopoly.


Flash developers should learn objective C. I think the barrier to entry in the App Store is too low anyway, and Apple should be more prescriptive, not less. Generally when I work in companies where there are web designers and middleware, or backend programmers. Only one of these groups would have serious degrees in Software Engineering. not the Flash goobers.

Obviously, for performance reasons, Obj C would have been prefered anyway for serious work, so the Flash Devs would end up prodcuing the muck.

( not that you cant produce muck in Obj C, but it is a requirement in Flash).

whiterebel

cork45 wrote: »

If Microsoft carried on the way Apple does there would be uproar and no doubt the EU would be fining them but Apple seem to get away with it.

They probably aren't because Apple aren't actually doing anything wrong. Just a thought.....:rolleyes:

philiporeilly

BrianD wrote: »

I think this is more of a business decision (that doesn'y benefit consumers) rather than a technical decision. Apple could support flash and HTML5 in the long term (as it still years away).

Whereas I have no doubt Apple could support flash on the iPhone if they wanted, I believe that the changes to the Dev terms are for solely technical reasons and have nothing to do with their current squabble with Adobe.

iPhone OS 4 has many new API's (1500+) such as multitasking etc which require apps to be natively compiled using their SDK. Apps compiled using other methods such as flash cannot be controlled by the OS to take advantage of these new features. I believe that Apple is correct in this case.

Leiva

philiporeilly wrote: »

iPhone OS 4 has many new API's (1500+) such as multitasking etc which require apps to be natively compiled using their SDK. Apps compiled using other methods such as flash cannot be controlled by OS APPLE.

.

philiporeilly

This should make sense for anyone involved in programming:

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

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


In other words for the Apps to work with multi-tasking or other APIs they need to be compiled using the SDK designed for that platform.

Gregor Samsa

BrianD wrote: »

I always thought that Apple and Adobe were almost synonomous in the past given that Apples strong market was in the design community as Abobe's software. When did it start to sour?

Apple stood on Adobe's toes by releasing Final Cut Pro non linear visor editing software in 1999. Adobe retalliated by dropping Mac support for Premiere back in 2003, although they picked it back up in 2007, at that stage Apple's Final Cut Pro was fully established, and I doubt Premier ever got anywhere near it's old Mac Market share back. Apple and Adobe also compete with Aperture/Lightroom. So despite the early history between the two companies (lots of Adobe's early software was Mac only), I'd say there's no love lost between them at this stage.

Pittens

So despite the early history between the two companies (lots of Adobe's early software was Mac only), I'd say there's no love lost between them at this stage.

It really comes from the transition to Mac OS X. The pre-developer releases were available for 2 years before the OS X release, easily enough time to redevelop in Carbon ( the updated version of the Mac OS 9 toolbox ported to OS X). It really could have been done in a man week.

They releaed a year after OS X was released. 3 years after they could have had a version running ( with help from Apple). I think Apple (beleagured at the time) saw Adobe as trying to kill them.

Eire Go Brach

It could be Adobe's Fault. Interesting read Here

banquo

1. Apple are far smaller than Microsoft - if everyone in the world used an iPad then it would be a monopoly issue. But it's far from it.

2. Flash is used for Ads, Games and streaming Videos. Apple want you to purchase games and videos from the App Store and iTunes, not play them online or stream shows from Hulu, etc. And now they have their own iAds.

3. Flash doesn't run well on OSX. It's about quality of experience.

4. Flash would drain the battery, and Apple wouldn't be able to advertise the 10hr battery life if they included Flash.

5. iPad is not a replacement for a computer. This closed system with Apple approving everything means (for the most part) a much, much smoother user experience.

pphheerroonn

Interesting move by Adobe: http://www.neowin.net/news/flash-cs5-will-export-to-html5-canvas

Maybe flash could be replaced outright...

conolan

That export to HTML5 replaces only linear animations. Any programming (which is the real strength of flash) won't be helped by this.

Interesting to see that Google analytics use flash to show reports and allow users configure the date ranges, locations etc. within a flash module. That's the power of flash.

Red Alert

Flash is proprietary, HTML5 isn't. Why should apple be upholding a proprietary standard that isn't their own and isn't optimized for their devices? Remember, people will still use flash as long as it's available - so by having a large market share of devices unable to use this slow and buggy technology it will hopefully accelerate its demise.

Oafley Jones

http://stopthemadnessstevejobs.com/wordpress/

Leiva

Oafley Jones wrote: »

http://stopthemadnessstevejobs.com/wordpress/

From the above article ... Has this statement got any truth ??

"Your decision to disallow middleware, and effectively shut down thousands of indie developers is unfair and unjust."

Fingleberries

I understand that people focus primarily on the lack of Flash support, but I belive that it is anything that executes code, or has the possiblity to do so, outside of an approved App Store app that is prohibited.

The Commodore 64 emulator (now available in the app store) was originally rejected because users had the possibility to access the C64 OS itself. Highly dangerous ... A user would then have unrestricted access to do something like

10 print This Sucks;
20 goto 10

http://kotaku.com/5298652/iphone-c64-emulator-submitted-denied

While true, I mention it for lighthearted purposes only. All the earlier points are valid about Flash performance, Proprietary vs Open Standards, pseudo-Multitasking, battery life, and all that. But the real point at the centre of this is not Apple vs Adobe (which may also be a valid point), but it is primarily about control.

Apple get a slice of the action for every App sold. 4 billion downloads, means that it's is easy maths to want to control that market.

I would say that they want to have complete control over the app market before HTML5 becomes a ubiquotous standard in all web pages and the functionality is free again from apple control.

Free Apps are generally supported by in app Ads (usually by admob). Apple introduce iAds, again to have control and get themselves a 40% slice of the pie that they don't currently get anything for if it is a free app with ads provided by Admob.

He who controls the platform has the key to earning revenue from it.

Gregor Samsa

Apple haven't clarifed the situation yet (specifically in relation to Unity3D), so the striaght answer is that nobody knows.

Personally, I was very interested in Adobe's Packager for iPhone, because I don't know C, C++, or Objective-C, but I do know ActionScript, and I was looking forward to messing about with trying an iPhone app. I wasn't thinking of releasing or selling anything, just having a go for my own amusment. I suppose Apple's developer agreement doesn't actually stop me from doing this - I just won't be able to get the app onto the App store - so maybe it's no big deal for me.

conolan

phutyle wrote: »

Personally, I was very interested in Adobe's Packager for iPhone, because I don't know C, C++, or Objective-C, but I do know ActionScript, and I was looking forward to messing about with trying an iPhone app.

I presume that developers like phutyle (of whom there are many) will have to distribute their app to jailbroken phones because the legit channel will be unavailable. One more shot in the foot Apple.

Gregor Samsa

Well, Adobe have officially announced CS5, and it seems they've left Packager for iPhone in there, but with an important caveat.

Wide content distribution enhanced
Publish content virtually anywhere, using Adobe AIR® for desktop applications and mobile platforms including the iPhone®*, or Adobe Flash Player for browser-based experiences.

*Subject to Apple's current requirements and approval.

http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/flash/whatsnew/

So while you can use it to develop apps for the iPhone, there's no guarantee you'll be able to get them onto the iPhone, at least not through the App store.

Kingkong

cork45 wrote: »

If Microsoft carried on the way Apple does there would be uproar and no doubt the EU would be fining them but Apple seem to get away with it.

Damn straight, Apple are no better than Microsoft remember the war between Internet Explorer and Netscape!



Why is it Apple loving hippies always find an argument to excuse apple from being pricks.

Lets face facts here: Apple as a general rule are very selectively in letting third party software on their hardware.

Why arent we allowed to pick another web browser on the iphone, if microsoft was in apples shoes, the debate would be very different.

Gregor Samsa

Kingkong wrote: »

Why arent we allowed to pick another web browser on the iphone, if microsoft was in apples shoes, the debate would be very different.

Opera Mini is on the App store right now


see thread here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055882228

cornbb

mixednuts wrote: »

From the above article ... Has this statement got any truth ??

"Your decision to disallow middleware, and effectively shut down thousands of indie developers is unfair and unjust."

On the contrary, the App Store has empowered thousands of indie developers with an easy route-to-market.

phutyle wrote: »

Personally, I was very interested in Adobe's Packager for iPhone, because I don't know C, C++, or Objective-C, but I do know ActionScript, and I was looking forward to messing about with trying an iPhone app. I wasn't thinking of releasing or selling anything, just having a go for my own amusment. I suppose Apple's developer agreement doesn't actually stop me from doing this - I just won't be able to get the app onto the App store - so maybe it's no big deal for me.

Flash/ActionScript is simply a poor choice of technology with which to implement a mobile app. It cannot take advantage of the unique hardware, the multitouch interface, it has has a reputation for being buggy, it cannot be optimised to the degree that C-based languages can, and it adds wasteful additional layers of abstraction to the development process. Your app wouldn't be able to make use of multitouch, location, accelerometer APIs, all the things that commonly make iPhone apps immersive and fun.

Not accusing you of laziness, you just want to try it out which is fair enough, but any developer wishing to use Flash to roll out a single implementation of an app across multiple mobile platforms is just plain lazy. Its like using Microsoft Word to design a website. They should use tools more appropriate to each platform.

conolan wrote: »

I presume that developers like phutyle (of whom there are many) will have to distribute their app to jailbroken phones because the legit channel will be unavailable. One more shot in the foot Apple.

This strategy has been working well for Apple so far and there's no reason it won't continue to work well. If Apple were to allow cross-platform compilation, developers like phutyle would 1) be more likelier to submit substandard content, thus spoiling the iPhone user experience and 2) be more likely to submit the same content to other, competing mobile platforms. Apple currently has a substantial lead in the mobile app market. For most developers, if they are going to write an app for just one platform, it will likely be iPhone. Why would Apple make it easier for them to write for competing platforms? *That* would be shooting themselves in the foot.

Fingleberries

cornbb wrote: »

Apple currently has a substantial lead in the mobile app market. For most developers, if they are going to write an app for just one platform, it will likely be iPhone. Why would Apple make it easier for them to write for competing platforms? *That* would be shooting themselves in the foot.

That would be abuse of monopoly position.

"Microsoft has a substantial lead in the PC operating system market. Why would Microsoft make it easier for developers to write for competing platforms?"

Similar situation takes a very different slant, don't you think?

In fairness, I am just playing devils advocate here, as mentioned in my earlier post. The iPhone is a brilliant device, and Apple perhaps at a very high level, want to prevent users from having a bad App experience and blaming the iPhone. It also gives them the opportunity try to control the App market - purely a side benefit I am sure.

cornbb

Fingleberries wrote: »

That would be abuse of monopoly position.

"Microsoft has a substantial lead in the PC operating system market. Why would Microsoft make it easier for developers to write for competing platforms?"

Similar situation takes a very different slant, don't you think?

Not quite the same situation. There is no monopoly postition. While Apple are doing very well, there is definitely healthy competition in the smartphone market. Android are a very real threat to Apple, and RIM and others are still a presence (albeit a declining one). That does not compare to the desktop OS market where MS have been in a domineering position for decades.

Point taken though. If Apple screw this tactic up and finish up relegating themselves to the also-ran position that they ended up in after the battle with Microsoft in the 80s, they'll just have themselves to blame. Don't see that happening anytime soon though.

Leiva

Another nail in the Abobe/Apple Coffin ...

Fat_Fingers

Interesting debate. I as consumer only , not Apple fan boy or Apple hater don’t care about Apple vs Adobe. Phone devices are disposable i.e. can not be upgraded so next time I’m looking for replacement I will again compare market leaders against each other. If HTC or Nokia is better by then; then its good bye to Apple . Apple will be fine as long as they stay on top of the game. If they make another “AppleTV” disaster then consumers will not buy into it. Simple as.

I do wonder if there will be Apple after Steve Job is gone, that company seems to be run by iron fist of Steve, but once he’s gone will there be any direction left? I hope so.

Gregor Samsa

Fat_Fingers wrote: »

Phone devices are disposable i.e. can not be upgraded

That's largely true, but Apple do have a good track record of providing genuinely new functionality with OS upgrades, that work on at least some old models, so I think the iPhone is better in that regard than phones from many other manufacturers. I don't ever remember getting a software upgrade on any other phone i've owned, let alone one that added useful functionality.

But I take your point about the next phone you buy - checking out the competition and going with the best one is a wise move. Of course, Apple have pre-empted this with the App store. If you have a significant investment in Apps on the iPhone, you might think twice about ditching them all to go with Android and starting your collection all over again, for instance. But I suppose that could work both ways.

Fat_Fingers wrote: »

I do wonder if there will be Apple after Steve Job is gone, that company seems to be run by iron fist of Steve, but once he’s gone will there be any direction left? I hope so.

I think Steve Jobs' importance is overplayed a little. Sure, he turned the company completely around when he came back from (with) NeXT, but I think he's been instrumental inhelping install an ethos in the company that will carry on after him. I don't think Jobs has as important role to play in every single product and decision as is sometimes made out. Apple have a lot of very, very talented people working for them in all departments, and I think that matters more that the man at the top himself.