Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

HTML5 at 46% (We need flash)

  • 26-05-2010 7:18am
    #1
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 586 ✭✭✭


    New York Times article / ReadWriteWeb
    46% of Web Users Are Ready for HTML5.
    Internet Explorer is responsible for most of the non-compatible machines. It's going to take a long time for HTML5 to get much beyond 60% because lots of corporate networks and lots of light users won't bother upgrading. With flash available on 96% of machines, Apple will one day bite the bullet, just like Sony, who eventually started selling VHS.

    http://www.nytimes.com/external/readwriteweb/2010/05/25/25readwriteweb-46-of-web-users-are-ready-for-html5-60106.html


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,592 ✭✭✭✭Dont be at yourself


    I don't think we should let the technological luddites dictate the technology that goes into our gadgets. A huge number of people are still using IE6, but it would be madness to suggest that IE6 dictate web standards.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    ^^That guy. What he said. That guy right there.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 586 ✭✭✭conolan


    I don't think we should let the technological luddites dictate the technology that goes into our gadgets. A huge number of people are still using IE6, but it would be madness to suggest that IE6 dictate web standards.

    I suggest that the audience dictate the how the content is delivered, not the techies. Techies can offer goodies and try to entice the 'luddites' but shutting them out in large numbers is not good for business.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,592 ✭✭✭✭Dont be at yourself


    conolan wrote: »
    I suggest that the audience dictate the how the content is delivered, not the techies.

    Indeed. And the audience have overwhelmingly dictated that they don't care about flash not being on the iphone and ipad - look at the sales figures for proof. It's only the techies that are moaning about lack of flash support.
    Techies can offer goodies and try to entice the 'luddites' but shutting them out in large numbers is not good for business.

    Depends what the business is, and what the target market is. Apple's forward thinking has probably won them more customers than it has lost them. They're ruthless in culling old technologies (floppy disc), and quick to adopt new ones. This doesn't sit well with those content with old tech, but then Apple isn't really concerned with them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,441 ✭✭✭✭jesus_thats_gre


    I don't think we should let the technological luddites dictate the technology that goes into our gadgets. A huge number of people are still using IE6, but it would be madness to suggest that IE6 dictate web standards.

    I don't think we should allow anyone to dictate what technologies go into our gadgets, including Apple.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Fat_Fingers


    Apple's forward thinking has probably won them more customers than it has lost them. They're ruthless in culling old technologies (floppy disc), and quick to adopt new ones. This doesn't sit well with those content with old tech, but then Apple isn't really concerned with them.

    Tehehehe, Apple at the forefront of the new tech?!? Come on now. When comes to cutting edge , new features Apple is always lagging behind or Simple ignoring most common used features cos Steve said so.

    Apple does come up with great thing every so often but they are hardly forward thinking all the time. They only "quickly " adopt stuff that they have 100% control over.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 12,781 Mod ✭✭✭✭Zascar


    Microsh1t should just decommission IE6 etc and force an upgrade to a higher version. Better still abandon it all together. IE is a horrible piece of software an anyone still using it just doesn't know any better...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,592 ✭✭✭✭Dont be at yourself


    I don't think we should allow anyone to dictate what technologies go into our gadgets, including Apple.

    Yeah, but we don't. There will soon be plenty of tablets that support Flash on the market, and the customer can choose for themselves.
    Tehehehe, Apple at the forefront of the new tech?!? Come on now. When comes to cutting edge , new features Apple is always lagging behind or Simple ignoring most common used features cos Steve said so.

    Firewire, built-in webcams, backlit keyboards, multitouch mice, trackpads and touchscreens and LED screens were all adopted by Apple before most. They're also heavily behind LightPeak, which is as high tech as it gets at the moment in consumer electronics. On a more mundane level, they also seem to get first dibs on Intel chips, months before PC manufacturers.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    Don't forget SCSI and the original Newton Message Pad!

    The only thing that worries me is that Flash is more than just video. It's apps/games too. And for that reason I think Apple should be doing something to include it. Warn people it's a resource hog, but include it anyway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 742 ✭✭✭Pixelcraft


    Zascar wrote: »
    Microsh1t should just decommission IE6 etc and force an upgrade to a higher version. Better still abandon it all together. IE is a horrible piece of software an anyone still using it just doesn't know any better...

    They have abandoned ie6, but you can't force people to upgrade unless the provision for that was build into ie6/old windows in the first place.

    Plenty of people use ie6 because they have to, they're in a corporation with an IT department who doesn't want the expense or hassle of upgrading, or they need to use an old web app that works in ie6 only.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭PeakOutput


    I don't think we should allow anyone to dictate what technologies go into our gadgets, including Apple.

    so the makers of the products shouldnt decide what they make.......interesting


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 590 ✭✭✭blaz


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    so the makers of the products shouldnt decide what they make.......interesting

    No, the makers of products shouldn't decide how users use their products.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Fat_Fingers


    Firewire, built-in webcams, backlit keyboards, multitouch mice, trackpads and touchscreens and LED screens were all adopted by Apple before most. They're also heavily behind LightPeak, which is as high tech as it gets at the moment in consumer electronics. On a more mundane level, they also seem to get first dibs on Intel chips, months before PC manufacturers.

    Sure they get a few right, thats what i said anyway. They are also behind some spectacular flopps. Apple is rarely the pioneer, but they refine and perfect good ideas that are poorly implemented in other products.

    Heavily behind LightPeak? What i heard is that Intel had simply asked Apple for feedback as part of its usual requests for outside input.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,592 ✭✭✭✭Dont be at yourself


    Sure they get a few right, thats what i said anyway. They are also behind some spectacular flopps. Apple is rarely the pioneer, but they refine and perfect good ideas that are poorly implemented in other products.

    Heavily behind LightPeak? What i heard is that Intel had simply asked Apple for feedback as part of its usual requests for outside input.

    "Engadget has learned -- thanks to an extremely reliable source -- that not only is Apple complicit in the development of Light Peak, but the company actually brought the concept to Intel and asked them to create it. More to the point, the new standard will play a hugely important role in upcoming products from Cupertino. "

    http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/26/exclusive-apple-dictated-light-peak-creation-to-intel-could-be/
    The only thing that worries me is that Flash is more than just video. It's apps/games too. And for that reason I think Apple should be doing something to include it. Warn people it's a resource hog, but include it anyway.

    It's a fair point, but even if flash was supported, 90& of flash apps and games would need to be rebuilt anyway, because they're designed for a keyboard and mouse. They often have rollover animations or keyboard controls. If they have to be reprogrammed anyway, why not design them from the ground up for the iphone/ipad featureset and compile them so they'll manage the resources better.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,441 ✭✭✭✭jesus_thats_gre


    PeakOutput wrote: »
    so the makers of the products shouldnt decide what they make.......interesting

    You know that isn't what was meant.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 586 ✭✭✭conolan


    Here's a reason why we need flash on iPhone. Way back in 2003 I created a flash application. It's for Dublin Bay sailors, very niche. But it allows people see the complex course that is set for racing yachts, the course only being decided at last minute while boats are already on the water. It also works out on the fly the distance and direction between each mark. And it grabbed realtime wind data from a website, plus tides. I'd love to be able to modify it slightly for iPhone screen and publish it. But Steve won't let me.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    conolan wrote: »
    Here's a reason why we need flash on iPhone. Way back in 2003 I created a flash application. It's for Dublin Bay sailors, very niche. But it allows people see the complex course that is set for racing yachts, the course only being decided at last minute while boats are already on the water. It also works out on the fly the distance and direction between each mark. And it grabbed realtime wind data from a website, plus tides. I'd love to be able to modify it slightly for iPhone screen and publish it. But Steve won't let me.

    1. Apple invented the friggin' thing, they can make whatever rules they like for it.

    2. If you ran your app on the iPhone it would suck. Not because it's a bad app - sounds cool enough actually - but because it's a Flash based app running on mobile OSX. Om nom nom resources.

    3. 'Steve' would happily have the app on in his App Store, but not in such a way that it performs badly. What happens if you open the doors to Flash in the App Store? You get thousands of apps that suck to use and people stop downloading apps.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    It's a fair point, but even if flash was supported, 90& of flash apps and games would need to be rebuilt anyway, because they're designed for a keyboard and mouse. They often have rollover animations or keyboard controls.

    They wouldn't have to be redesigned. The flash engine for mobile devices would just need to have a different interpreter for the mouseover event - ie, swiping your finger constantly and not lifting it, and then interpreting a tap as a click. Once the engine is changed, the existing swf files could then be run as normal. How do you think they're doing it with Android?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,407 ✭✭✭✭justsomebloke


    banquo wrote: »
    3. 'Steve' would happily have the app on in his App Store, but not in such a way that it performs badly. What happens if you open the doors to Flash in the App Store? You get thousands of apps that suck to use and people stop downloading apps.

    Or just maybe you only allow people to use flash on the internet and not let developers use it to create apps.


    At the moment there is no impedance for Apple to use Flash, cause well till now as none of their competitors products used it. No competing smart phone has it and eh well there is no actual competing slate for the ipad yet.

    However with Froyo now released we will find out if the consumer market actually want it. Sony, Motorolla, Vodafone, Dell, HTC, Samsung and Acer have all produced Android phone and chances are that over the next year they will all bring out 2.2 handsets and maybe tablets that have flash. We should also be seeing a range of tablets from vendors based on this.

    So over the next eyar consumer demand will dictate whether or not consumers want and need flash. In my honest opinion though for phones I can't see it being that much of a biggy however on Tablets I think it needs to be a nessecity as Flash isn't going anyway where over the next couple of years and we will probably be on 6G by there time the majority of the web has moved on


    edit actually geingerbread man or what ever it is will probably handle flash better so will be a better indication especially as it may be released by year end and so well before 5G which we assume will be out this time next year


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Fat_Fingers


    banquo wrote: »
    3. 'Steve' would happily have the app on in his App Store, but not in such a way that it performs badly. What happens if you open the doors to Flash in the App Store? You get thousands of apps that suck to use and people stop downloading apps.

    Flash, no flash it doesn't really matter. Apple will not allow Flash as they can't control what users have access to. You say allowing flash would open door to thousands of crap apps. I think App store is doing quite a good job of providing thousands of crap apps already. Look at the crap like Talking Carl, I beer, ifart, ipoop... i mean seriously. Then tons of web sites packaged as apps.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,176 ✭✭✭vinnycoyne


    Which means it'd only get worse...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,592 ✭✭✭✭Dont be at yourself


    They wouldn't have to be redesigned. The flash engine for mobile devices would just need to have a different interpreter for the mouseover event - ie, swiping your finger constantly and not lifting it, and then interpreting a tap as a click. Once the engine is changed, the existing swf files could then be run as normal. How do you think they're doing it with Android?

    Nonetheless, they're not designed with a multi-touch screen in mind. Holding down and swiping your finger completely negates the whole point of a multi-touch interface. It's a botch job, a quick fix, and is completely anathema to the user experience expected from an Apple device.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    Nonetheless, they're not designed with a multi-touch screen in mind. Holding down and swiping your finger completely negates the whole point of a multi-touch interface. It's a botch job, a quick fix, and is completely anathema to the user experience expected from an Apple device.

    How does holding down your finger and swiping negate a multi touch interface? You're just doing what you'd do with a mouse. Working through it in my imagination, it seems quite a natural thing to do.

    As regards flash opening the floodgates for crap apps - it's not the apps we're interested in. We just want flash in our browsers so we can access the entire web.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,592 ✭✭✭✭Dont be at yourself


    How does holding down your finger and swiping negate a multi touch interface? You're just doing what you'd do with a mouse.

    The answer is in your question. The mouse, as a pointing device, was a substitute for your own fingers and hands for when technology was unable to register these inputs directly. It was a virtual finger that you had to move across the screen to point and click at things you wanted to press.

    With a touch-screen, there's no need for that virtual finger. I see what I want to press, and I just press it. I don't need to drag a virtual pointer over to click it. It defeats the whole purpose. It removes the whole entire reason for a touchscreen interface.
    As regards flash opening the floodgates for crap apps - it's not the apps we're interested in. We just want flash in our browsers so we can access the entire web.

    The web is moving to open standards. Googe, Youtube, Vimeo and virtually all of the big content providers offer their content in open, accessible ways. BBC announced just today that iPlayer will be iPad-accessilbe. Apple should be commended for driving forward the opening of the web.

    If we have Flash, should we have Windows Media support too? Silverlight? Should we include every mickey-mouse codec and browser plug-in? Or should we instead push towards everyone adopting open standards. Apple are doing the latter. And it's working.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    Indeed. And the audience have overwhelmingly dictated that they don't care about flash not being on the iphone and ipad - look at the sales figures for proof. It's only the techies that are moaning about lack of flash support.

    I don't think that the majority of iPhone buyers (or other smartphones) know what Flash or HTML 5 is. They are just buying a phone that does stuff. Then the find out that it doesn't do some stuff after the fact.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    The answer is in your question. The mouse, as a pointing device, was a substitute for your own fingers and hands for when technology was unable to register these inputs directly. It was a virtual finger that you had to move across the screen to point and click at things you wanted to press. With a touch-screen, there's no need for that virtual finger. I see what I want to press, and I just press it. I don't need to drag a virtual pointer over to click it. It defeats the whole purpose. It removes the whole entire reason for a touchscreen interface.

    I don't agree. Your saying that if you want to click something just click it. That's fine for an app that's designed for that. Take Simon the Sorcerer - the app. There are items in lets say the wizards room, and if you put your finger on the screen and drag it around it'll magnify items that can be used in the room. So the practise works quite well depending on what it's used for - it works brilliantly in the SMS app when you want to change a letter, press, hold, and the magnifying glass comes up, keep holding and dragging to the correct letter and then you can change it. Apple could have used any variation of method to achieve this, but they thought that putting your finger on the screen and dragging it around was the best method possible - so why shouldn't it be for flash also? Different apps will have different UIs, and you can't say that your interpretation, or mine will work for everything 100% of the time.
    If we have Flash, should we have Windows Media support too? Silverlight? Should we include every mickey-mouse codec and browser plug-in? Or should we instead push towards everyone adopting open standards. Apple are doing the latter. And it's working.

    Sorry, that's fanboy nonsense - Apple are correct in whatever they do? I'm an apple fan like anyone, but I do believe in accessibility for the web too. Silverlight probably should be included. It's going to be around for a few years, flash should for the same reason. They're dominant online media plugins. Windows Media and all the other ones, not so much these days. But Flash is what gives content rich sites their zing ... and without it the web will look dull. Sure, in a few years (And it will be a few years) we'll end up with HTML5 everywhere, but in the interim using an iPhone, or an iPad will be a bland experience to browse.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,441 ✭✭✭✭jesus_thats_gre


    BrianD wrote: »
    I don't think that the majority of iPhone buyers (or other smartphones) know what Flash or HTML 5 is. They are just buying a phone that does stuff. Then the find out that it doesn't do some stuff after the fact.

    I would love to have seen what would have happeend if Youtube didn't make their content available in the h264 format. No youtube would have forced their hand I reckon.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Fat_Fingers


    some people keep banging on how flash is irrelevant and how Apple will just plow on without it and everyone will move to HTML5. Lets be realistic here. No flash on Iphone and Ipod, not big deal. Those devices only access web as add on feature not main function. I would not be spending any significant time looking the web pages on tinny screen.
    Now for the Ipad, main feature is web access (at least would be for me), screen is good size to properly enjoy web browsing experience. No flash here IMHO is a mistake. To deny access to 50% of the web content is not great. I want tablet but I will wait for other manufacture to release tablet that supports full web. Argument I hear all the time is that flash will be gone in 3-5 years. So what? I want tablet now that supports web now. This current Ipad generation will also be gone in 3-5 years. In 3-5 year I’ll just look what’s on the market then. I’m not spending lot of money on device now to be able to use it fully in 3-5 years when it will be obsolete anyway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,473 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    conolan wrote: »
    Here's a reason why we need flash on iPhone. Way back in 2003 I created a flash application. It's for Dublin Bay sailors, very niche. But it allows people see the complex course that is set for racing yachts, the course only being decided at last minute while boats are already on the water. It also works out on the fly the distance and direction between each mark. And it grabbed realtime wind data from a website, plus tides. I'd love to be able to modify it slightly for iPhone screen and publish it. But Steve won't let me.

    fúck him..do it on Android.


  • Advertisement
  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 7,486 ✭✭✭Red Alert


    The problem with flash is that it won't go away unless something like the iPad makes it. Its a dreadful resource hog, like everything else that Adobe make. It's also a big security risk by downloading and running bytecode on the otherwise locked down device. No thanks!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Leiva




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,763 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Android has now won the decisive battle of the phone OS war, apple is first to market in the tablet war, but give it 2 years and android will have won that war too.

    Closed systems, and trying to bend over your customers only works for so long. Give me one good reason, bar extra revenue and deals with mobile phone companies, that you can't use an iphone to tether an ipad to the net without jailbreaking the phone?

    I can use my phone as a wifi access point to allow my wifi iPad to be connected on the go, I can use it to view flash, I can use it to buy apps from anyone who sees fit to make them, **** you Steve Jobs.......I like your ipad, but you will always be a dick.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,790 ✭✭✭cornbb


    Different apps will have different UIs, and you can't say that your interpretation, or mine will work for everything 100% of the time.

    The multitouch paradigm requires a new set of human interface habits, and it is essential to the user experience that these are consistent across a platform. iPhone OS users, whether they are using apps or browsing the web, expect that a pinch will zoom, a swipe will pan, etc. Regardless of how an app's UI looks, if it is a good app than it will conform to these standards or conventions. So someone interacting with Flash on the iPhone would expect that dragging their finger across the UI would pan the view, not function as an awkward workaround to compensate for an input method that Flash assumes exists (a mouse pointer) but doesn't exist on a multitouch platform.

    "Traditional" GUI features a mouse, which can roll-over, context-click etc. iPhone multitouch can't do these things but can do things like receive input at several points on the view at once. Flash has been designed for the former. Trying to make it work for the latter is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

    But Flash is what gives content rich sites their zing ... and without it the web will look dull. Sure, in a few years (And it will be a few years) we'll end up with HTML5 everywhere, but in the interim using an iPhone, or an iPad will be a bland experience to browse.

    Judging from any reviews I've heard + face time with the iPad myself, the browsing experience is anything but bland. And I honestly can't ever recall missing Flash on the iPhone.

    Let's look at the most common usages of Flash that I've seen.

    1) Ads. Intrusive pieces of sh*t that can take over a page if your mouse cursor happens to float over one. The worst-designed ones can't even be dismissed. I tried reading this article this morning but couldn't as one of the Flash ads was blocking the text and I couldn't get rid of the damn thing.

    2) Video. As others have pointed out, there's already a shift towards HTML5 and other open codecs underway.

    3) Online games. Basically ways to kill 10 minutes during your lunchbreak. The app store is filled with thousands of these anyway, the majority of which will work better on the iPhone/iPad than Flash games would, given that they have been explicitly written for the platform, can use multi-touch, accelerometers etc.

    4) "Rich" content. Websites that welcome you with a jarring Flash animation and start playing sound without being prompted, these have me hunting for the "Skip Intro" button. Beloved of marketing companies.

    Admittedly there are a handful of Flash sites that I've seen that are pretty cool and would be missed (I love Ishkur's Guide). But these are the exceptions, the examples I listed above are the rule. I honestly believe that the net effect of Flash on the quality of the web is a negative one.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,790 ✭✭✭cornbb


    Inquitus wrote: »
    Android has now won the decisive battle of the phone OS war, apple is first to market in the tablet war, but give it 2 years and android will have won that war too.

    Android has been coming along in leaps in bounds, but nothing is decisive at this point surely. The era of smartphones is still young. You sound like the guy who though the war would be over by Christmas in 1939.

    Even if the iPhone is relegated to second place for the long-term, it's something that Apple have been comfortable with for decades anyway - the Mac may only have a small portion of the market share but Apple have been happily selling it to a loyal and happy userbase while all the generic PC manufacturers have been at each other's throats fighting over tiny profit margins. If Mac vs. PC history repeats itself, it will end up being the same with vendors selling hardware that runs Android.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,763 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    cornbb wrote: »
    Android has been coming along in leaps in bounds, but nothing is decisive at this point surely. The era of smartphones is still young. You sound like the guy who though the war would be over by Christmas in 1939.

    Even if the iPhone is relegated to second place for the long-term, it's something that Apple have been comfortable with for decades anyway - the Mac may only have a small portion of the market share but Apple have been happily selling it to a loyal and happy userbase while all the generic PC manufacturers have been at each other's throats fighting over tiny profit margins. If Mac vs. PC history repeats itself, it will end up being the same with vendors selling hardware that runs Android.

    iPhone makes up 35% odd of Apples Revenues, ipods another more than 30%, without sustaining this level of sales in those areas, Apple will go back to the irrelevant company it was not that long ago.

    Steve Jobs is ****ting on his customers, and he was able to get away with it for a long time as his products in alot of cases were clear market leaders, like the iphone used to be, but now its a closed, limited, less functional and poorer version of the android handsets, and he is in no position to continue ****ting on his customers as he is at the moment, the no tethering of an ipad to an iphone for no good reason being a clear example.....


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,790 ✭✭✭cornbb


    Inquitus wrote: »
    iPhone makes up 35% odd of Apples Revenues, ipods another more than 30%, without sustaining this level of sales in those areas, Apple will go back to the irrelevant company it was not that long ago.

    Steve Jobs is ****ting on his customers, and he was able to get away with it for a long time as his products in alot of cases were clear market leaders, like the iphone used to be, but now its a closed, limited, less functional and poorer version of the android handsets, and he is in no position to continue ****ting on his customers as he is at the moment, the no tethering of an ipad to an iphone for no good reason being a clear example.....

    He must be doing something right, if even critics who call him a piece of **** still profess to love their new ipads...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,763 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    cornbb wrote: »
    He must be doing something right, if even critics who call him a piece of **** still profess to love their new ipads...

    I just ditched my iPhone for an Android phone, no fear of me ever going back tbh, and quite simply because of the ridiculous restrictions he places on what I can do with my phone.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,584 ✭✭✭✭Creamy Goodness


    mixednuts wrote: »


    yup and apple push "open-ness"

    why the hell are they using safari specific hacks?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    cornbb wrote: »
    The multitouch paradigm requires a new set of human interface habits, and it is essential to the user experience that these are consistent across a platform.

    There's no requirement for consistency. Each app I've used has their own little nuances and quirks. The SMS app requires you to hold and drag your finger to move to a location within a word correct spelling mistakes. Then when we got copy and paste, there was a new function added, double tapping to select.

    There is no reason why a new set of controls can be implemented for flash just like double tap was implemented for copy and paste. And honestly, saying that we can't implement flash because the controls haven't been worked out is the most watered down excuse I've ever heard.

    Flash is on the web, I have web access on my iPhone, but I don't have access to flash. It's retarded. More so now that Android is on the ball with their rollout of it. That's like buying a car which has everything a normal car has, except headlights. But sure drive it in the daytime and it'll be grand.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Inquitus wrote: »
    I just ditched my iPhone for an Android phone, no fear of me ever going back tbh, and quite simply because of the ridiculous restrictions he places on what I can do with my phone.

    Yet that didn't prevent you laying out several hundred euro for an iPad with the same ridiculous restrictions?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,763 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Graham wrote: »
    Yet that didn't prevent you laying out several hundred euro for an iPad with the same ridiculous restrictions?

    No alternatives available right now, superior android tablets will be out next year,and my ipad will be sold and replaced.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Leiva


    There's no requirement for consistency. .

    Very True but Apple are making sure that it won't be (finger swipes etc) consistant across different handsets :

    http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/apple/apple-s-latest-patent-outlines-the-future-of-multitouch-686284

    They have only gone and applied patent to certain finger movements :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    Am I the only person who thinks Apple refusing to put flash on their devices is like Eircom and O2 restricting access to sites online?


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Please note, the following post is a snippet from a Nielsen survey and does not necessarily represent my personal opinion:

    http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/iphone-vs-android/

    A new survey of U.S. smartphone owners found that 28 percent use a device running the iPhone OS, compared with just 9 percent on Google's Android mobile operating system.

    The study found that both Android and iPhone users are mostly male, but those on Android are typically younger, less wealthy and less educated. The survey discovered that 28 percent of Android users earned more than $100,000 a year, while 40 percent of iPhone users were in that income bracket. The average for all smartphones has 34 percent of users earning six-figure salaries.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,763 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Graham wrote: »
    Please note, the following post is a snippet from a Nielsen survey and does not necessarily represent my personal opinion:

    http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/iphone-vs-android/

    A new survey of U.S. smartphone owners found that 28 percent use a device running the iPhone OS, compared with just 9 percent on Google's Android mobile operating system.

    The study found that both Android and iPhone users are mostly male, but those on Android are typically younger, less wealthy and less educated. The survey discovered that 28 percent of Android users earned more than $100,000 a year, while 40 percent of iPhone users were in that income bracket. The average for all smartphones has 34 percent of users earning six-figure salaries.

    lol, love how you spun that.
    Although Android and iPhone users both skew male (Android users show a 54/46 gender split compared to iPhone’s 55/45), there are some striking differences. Android users tend to be slightly younger than their iPhone peers- 55% of Android users are under the age of 34 — while just 47% of iPhone users fall within the same demographic. As is usually the case, age is also a prime determinant of income and education, with Android users slightly less wealthy and less educated.

    Android users are slightly younger, therefore slightly less well educated and less well renumerated.......

    Obviously, despite being an iphone user, you buck the trend.........

    Anyways apples target market is the technotard, so its not very surprising their demographic is older and less capable on the technology front.....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Leiva


    So to summarise ...

    If your a <34yr old male fu*ktard you like to call the social welfare office from your HTC Android .

    If your a >34yr old male/female you like to call your broker from your iPhone which you purchased with your 6 figure salary .

    What a complete load of TOSH !

    True what they say ..8/10 people use statistics to win a debate :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,584 ✭✭✭✭Creamy Goodness


    "people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that".


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    What an odd response.

    My post contained no spin, just direct quotes from a Nielsen survey that I played absolutely no part in.

    As a self professed early iPad (technotard) owner yourself are you professing to be older or less capable????


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,763 ✭✭✭✭Inquitus


    Graham wrote: »
    What an odd response.

    My post contained no spin, just direct quotes from a Nielsen survey that I played absolutely no part in.

    As a self professed early iPad (technotard) owner yourself are you professing to be older or less capable????

    The study above is of smartphone owners, iPhone buyers are generally more technologically challenged than Android owners, Apple after all has always targeted the Technotard.

    I own an iPad, as there are no viable alternatives to the iPad in the tablet market at the moment. It is currently the best option in that space. The iPhone however is streets behind android these days, and given a choice of an iPhone or a more capable and similarly specced Android phone, it's no contest. My wife however, who is a technotard, is only capable of using an iPhone, and owns a 3GS.........


  • Hosted Moderators Posts: 7,486 ✭✭✭Red Alert


    Why are you complaining? Just don't buy an iPhone if Flash is that important to you. I haven't missed it so far.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement