[Miko]

I'm a bit surprised nobody has mentioned this yet since it has been one of the main technologies absent from mobile Safari and many lesser mobile OS devices are now jumping on board. I'm curious as to why Apple is deciding not to let Adobe Flash run on the iPhone's Safari app, sure being able to easily port your Flash games to apps that will run on the iPhone is great, but what about those of us that want a Flash experience while browsing Safari?

I understand the concerns on the performance, but couldn't they treat it like Quicktime vids in Safari and have a Flash player launch to view the content then drop them back into the Safari page when done?

[SpecMode]

In my not-so-humble opinion, a complete and utter lack of Flash is one of the best features MobileSafari has going for it. I've had more problems with Flash over the years on the desktop than I've bothered to count, far more than any other single browser feature, and I'll be damned if I have to deal with them on my mobile browser as well.

So, count me among those glad it won't be coming to the iPhone anytime soon.

And, to answer your added question: you're still running third-party content in a wrapper, only in a full-screen window instead of in the browser view itself. It's no less badly-behaved, unstable, and slow just because it has its own window to play with. So again, no thanks.

[dmegatool]

What about a clickToFlash ? Like when you're fucked, you could use it...

[Miko]

Oh I agree that most Flash content is of no use to me, but I would still like to have an option and decide for myself for those times where I would like to view the Flash content. There are many vids that use Flash that I would like to be able to watch when using the iPhone.

A click to view Flash like feature should be built into Safari IMO.

[SpecMode]

Instead of building in mobile browser support for a plugin known to bring modern dual-core desktop machines to their knees, why not push content providers to use newer multimedia standards? You don't need Flash to stream video anymore - HTML5 already provides that functionality.

There are too many badly-designed and badly-coded video players out there using Flash to beat my computer into submission. If they aren't supported on my phone, I can get by without them. If the providers really want that extra traffic, they can get with the times and start pushing the new technologies instead of needlessly extending the life of a standard that really, really needs to die. </soapbox>

[kieran]

Hopefully the fact that MobileSafari doesn't have flash will just hasten it's demise. I can't wait to browse the web and not have to deal with any sort of Flash being used.

I've come across a lot of all Flash sites and I refuse to visit them again.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Miko I'm a bit surprised nobody has mentioned this yet since it has been one of the main technologies absent from mobile Safari and many lesser mobile OS devices are now jumping on board. I'm curious as to why Apple is deciding not to let Adobe Flash run on the iPhone's Safari app, sure being able to easily port your Flash games to apps that will run on the iPhone is great, but what about those of us that want a Flash experience while browsing Safari?

I'm pretty sure this topic has come up here once or twice since the iPhone came out.

Like others have said, performance is a big player here as well as promoting open standards, but let's not forget that Flash is the #1 cause of crashes in Mac OS X according to Bertrand Serlet. It was Adobe Flash that prompted Apple to build plugin sandboxing for 10.6. Adobe has a stellar track record and I sure as hell wouldn't want it anywhere near my phone.

Originally Posted by Miko I understand the concerns on the performance, but couldn't they treat it like Quicktime vids in Safari and have a Flash player launch to view the content then drop them back into the Safari page when done?

That would be completely useless for most uses of Flash: ads, buttons, navigation, menus. The only cases in which that would have any useful benefit would be for games and for videos.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by dmegatool What about a clickToFlash ? Like when you're fucked, you could use it...

Except that ClickToFlash doesn't work on the iPhone because plugins aren't supported.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Brad It was Adobe Flash that prompted Apple to build plugin sandboxing for 10.6.

Sort of, but not just because of crashes (i.e. the Flash plug-in crashing not taking your whole browser down with it), but also architectures. The plug-in gets to be 32-bit while the browser runs in 64-bit mode.

Originally Posted by Brad Except that ClickToFlash doesn't work on the iPhone because plugins aren't supported.

In fact, there's no such thing as embedded video playback either. The only thing the Safari movie player icon does is launch an external player.

[Miko]

Originally Posted by Brad That would be completely useless for most uses of Flash: ads, buttons, navigation, menus. The only cases in which that would have any useful benefit would be for games and for videos.

OK, but I think its safe to say each user should be able to say what they consider completely useless when it come to viewing web content. Apple needs to at least let us decide for ourself instead of blocking it completely. When the iPhone first came out there wasn't a decent mobile Flash runtime hell not even decent mobile web browsers, now that there are they need to deal with it so it works well on the device.

What kind of world would it be if the desktop Safari blocked Flash because it's prone to crash?

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Miko OK, but I think its safe to say each user should be able to say what they consider completely useless when it come to viewing web content. Apple needs to at least let us decide for ourself instead of blocking it completely. When the iPhone first came out there wasn't a decent mobile Flash runtime hell not even decent mobile web browsers, now that there are they need to deal with it so it works well on the device.

Er... *Apple* needs to deal with it? Try *Adobe* needing to deal with it.

*IFF* Adobe somehow added magic pixie dust to their product and made it efficient, robust, and able to work well on a handheld device (which remains to be proven, 10.1 isn't out yet... and frankly, I'm really really skeptical of this...), then I wouldn't *LOATHE* the idea of it on my phone... I just wouldn't *like* it.

Promoting open standards is important. Flash is a lock-in proprietary wrapper that adds damned little value any more, particularly to the user. Devs who have a vested interest in their knowledge investment love it, but I know of few else who do.

The fact of the matter is, the Flash player is quite possibly the most god awful piece of software I have the ill fortune to have to deal with on a daily basis. (And I use Lotus Notes at work.) It's poorly written, poorly planned, (hell they can't even make an installer worth a damn,) it crashes when used *as intended*, it's a resource hog, and if it weren't for the fact that they've managed to convince nose picking web developers that it's the kewlest thing ever, I wouldn't touch it with Paris Hilton on a stick.

What kind of world would it be if the desktop Safari blocked Flash because it's prone to crash?

Improved. In fact, that's exactly what I do: block Flash. I'm not *that* desperate for porn.

How about this: what kind of world is it where lazy and ill informed web developers ram a shitty product down my throat, and don't let me tell them to fucking move to open standards that matter instead of the stinking festering pile of infected fecal matter they're currently shoveling?

[kieran]

Originally Posted by Miko What kind of world would it be if the desktop Safari blocked Flash because it's prone to crash?

A world that I want to live in! I already block Flash as it is in Safari, so I really wouldn't notice too much.


As far as Apple letting it's users decide what they want to put on their device, since when does the company do that? Apple (ie: Jobs) has always made the decisions that he wants and I have mostly agreed with him.

The problem with putting Flash on the iPhone is that if it kills battery life and crashes, the users are going to blame Apple, not Adobe. Jobs would just rather not have Flash on the iPhone and hopefully the rest of the world just moves on from Flash.

[Kickaha]

The problem with putting Flash on the iPhone is that if it kills battery life and crashes, the users are going to blame Apple, not Adobe.

Exactly! Look at this discussion... "Why won't Apple let me take this shitty broken product that barely works and shove it into one of the crown jewels of their phone app suite? Waaaaaah!"

When the real question is: "Why the hell can't Adobe make a piece of software that doesn't suck so damned badly?"

If Flash was a decent piece of software, that'd be one thing. But it's not.

Imagine you run Apple Restaurant. You're highly rated. People come from all around for your apple pie. Some people like it with ice cream, some with a slice of cheddar on top. You provide both, and have chosen high quality versions of each for the diners.

Adobe Cheese, the local cheese monopolist, wants a piece of this action, so they run a massive PR campaign to convince everyone that they don't want cheddar, they want swiss. Then they only provide you with the crappiest, moldiest, worm-ridden swiss they have.

Your customers are demanding swiss on their apple pie, but you know that if you serve what Adobe is offering, it will ruin *YOUR* already successful product. Sure, you lose some customers in the short term, but the alternative is to destroy your entire reputation.

What's your choice?

[Satchmo]

Originally Posted by SpecMode Instead of building in mobile browser support for a plugin known to bring modern dual-core desktop machines to their knees, why not push content providers to use newer multimedia standards? You don't need Flash to stream video anymore - HTML5 already provides that functionality.

This will only happen if and when the iPhone owns the market. With this recent announcement that Blackberry, Google, and others climbing onboard the Flash train, it looks like a long road ahead to doing away with Flash--mobile or otherwise.

[Miko]

Originally Posted by Kickaha How about this: what kind of world is it where lazy and ill informed web developers ram a shitty product down my throat, and don't let me tell them to fucking move to open standards that matter instead of the stinking festering pile of infected fecal matter they're currently shoveling?

I love blanket statements. I'm not advocating the poor use of Flash currently found on the internet, but I have also seen and visited flash sites/components that I find useful and no not p0rn. I hate credit score, are you single? and male enhancement ads as much as the next person.

I also believe it would be nice to move on to a open standard like HTML5, but Flash like it or not is a dominate plugin used on 90% of the computers out there now. Adobe while not perfect, seems to have created a version that is ideal for both desktop and mobile devices. I'm simply stating that Apple should give you the option to use it(have it off by default). Just like how they give you the option to use 3G or Edge complete with a disclaimer that 3G will decrease the battery usage, but provides faster data speeds.

[rollercoaster375]

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic..._to_the_iPhone

I'm just desperately hoping that Apple won't allow any more of these apps into the app store, now that they know this is possible.

[Luca]

What's the big deal? If you don't like Flash apps, don't use them. Every other smartphone supports Flash and it's pretty widespread on the web (Ever heard of YouTube? And yes, I am aware that the iPhone has a YouTube app).

Or are you concerned that you'll buy a promising-looking app only to discover that it is a poorly-written Flash app? Because that seems silly, given that ANY app can be crappy regardless of whether it's Flash or not.

[kieran]

I'm fine with this. If it gets more developers on the iPhone, it's a good thing.

If the apps aren't good, they won't sell, regardless of how they're built.

More competition is always a good thing.

[Luca]

Threads merged. I figured we didn't need two "Flash on iPhone" threads.

[Wyatt]

Originally Posted by kieran If the apps aren't good, they won't sell, regardless of how they're built.

Unless they make fart noises.

Seriously, though, I don't have a problem with it. You can make quality stuff with Flash. Most people don't, but some do. I don't have any problem with it. I don't buy apps that are shitty, so I'm not concerned at all.

There are tons of resources out there for researching an app before you buy, if you want to. I don't see any reason to be upset about any app being there. The apps that aren't there are a much bigger concern for me, but that's better left for a different thread.

(No, I'm not talking about Flash player. I still don't want it in my browser. If they allow it, I sure as hell hope it has some sort of Click To Flash-like behavior.)

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Miko I love blanket statements. I'm not advocating the poor use of Flash currently found on the internet, but I have also seen and visited flash sites/components that I find useful and no not p0rn. I hate credit score, are you single? and male enhancement ads as much as the next person. I also believe it would be nice to move on to a open standard like HTML5, but Flash like it or not is a dominate plugin used on 90% of the computers out there now.

Stop and ask yourself 'why'? Why is Flash seen as a necessary critical technology for the web, but QuickTime is decried as a horrible proprietary pile of poo by a lot of people, when the latter has, quite plainly, done more to push open standards that give people choice than the former?

As for the marketshare justification - Windows is the dominant OS, in about the same ratio. Does that mean we should all ditch our Macs and move to Windows?

Adobe while not perfect, seems to have created a version that is ideal for both desktop and mobile devices.

You have a very strange definition for 'ideal'...

Buggy... crash prone... resource hog... not one of these fits 'ideal'.

If and when Adobe learns how to write software, I'll reconsider my opinion, but as it stands, today, Flash isn't worth the bytes on my drive.

I'm simply stating that Apple should give you the option to use it(have it off by default). Just like how they give you the option to use 3G or Edge complete with a disclaimer that 3G will decrease the battery usage, but provides faster data speeds.

Read my analogy again - what would you do as the owner of the restaurant?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Satchmo This will only happen if and when the iPhone owns the market.

As far as mindshare goes, it has been owning the market for a long time. As far as actual browser usage goes, it has been well above 50%.

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by Luca What's the big deal? If you don't like Flash apps, don't use them. Every other smartphone supports Flash and it's pretty widespread on the web (Ever heard of YouTube? And yes, I am aware that the iPhone has a YouTube app). (...)

I think the problem is that once Flash is available to the iPhone, then all the less idealistic web-developers will start using it for their mobile sites. And that would in turn cause more users to install it and then again entice more developers to use it. And before you know it, Flash on the iPhone will be just as necessary as on the Mac.

I think this is a good case for some "Apple knows best" policy.

[Miko]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Stop and ask yourself 'why'? Why is Flash seen as a necessary critical technology for the web, but QuickTime is decried as a horrible proprietary pile of poo by a lot of people, when the latter has, quite plainly, done more to push open standards that give people choice than the former?

Ask yourself why does it have to be one or the other? I have never said Flash was necessary only why block it completly?

Originally Posted by Kickaha As for the marketshare justification - Windows is the dominant OS, in about the same ratio. Does that mean we should all ditch our Macs and move to Windows?

Operating systems are far different from web browsers and the publicly accessible content found on them. You invest in Windows or OSX you don't invest in a video of your favorite product reviews.

Originally Posted by Kickaha You have a very strange definition for 'ideal'... Buggy... crash prone... resource hog... not one of these fits 'ideal'. If and when Adobe learns how to write software, I'll reconsider my opinion, but as it stands, today, Flash isn't worth the bytes on my drive.

So does Google, Palm, RIM, Symbian and "gulp" Microsoft then.

Originally Posted by Kickaha Read my analogy again - what would you do as the owner of the restaurant?

I would give them an OPTION! to have whatever cheese they want and let the chips or pie rather fall where they may.

Enough said, we have to agree to disagree. I'm not saying Flash is the end all be all of your web experience, but if they have it running on other mobile devices why not allow it as an option; you know those cute little toggle buttons under settings to allow Flash content. as long as the user knows what the consequences of running Flash will be on the device.

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Miko Ask yourself why does it have to be one or the other? I have never said Flash was necessary only why block it completly?

IMO, because it's something that will degrade the user experience horribly, and when Safari crashes, it *WON'T* be Adobe that people blame. I don't blame Apple one bit for dodging that target on their back.

Operating systems are far different from web browsers and the publicly accessible content found on them. You invest in Windows or OSX you don't invest in a video of your favorite product reviews.

But you do invest in the media playback system, right? It wasn't so long ago that Adobe was pushing SWF as a movie distribution format, remember... I don't think they've ever really given up on that. Thin end of the wedge and all... Think long-term, not short-term. Flash being ubiquitous isn't good for anyone except Adobe, especially not the users.

So does Google, Palm, RIM, Symbian and "gulp" Microsoft then.

I'm not entirely sure what this even means in response to the line that was above it.

I would give them an OPTION! to have whatever cheese they want and let the chips or pie rather fall where they may.

Seriously? "Here's your apple pie with moldy cheese on it..." You'd seriously do that? I don't think you're thinking it through very well. No, you'd simply say "That's not on our menu because we can't get the ingredients that we would serve to our dog, much less our customers." Or you'd go out of business as word of mouth spread that your dishes have gone downhill, that the cheese was moldy, that the experience sucked...

Enough said, we have to agree to disagree. I'm not saying Flash is the end all be all of your web experience, but if they have it running on other mobile devices why not allow it as an option; you know those cute little toggle buttons under settings to allow Flash content. as long as the user knows what the consequences of running Flash will be on the device.

You're assuming a hell of a lot of the user.

[zippy]

Originally Posted by Miko as long as the user knows what the consequences of running Flash will be on the device.

That's the problem right there. Users don't know. They only go to a web site that says: you need to have Flash installed, blah blah blah, click OK and never grasp that Flash is the thing causing them problems.

Especially if it's not that particular site which is problematic. Once Flash is on and enabled, they won't know if a site has Flash content or not. They'll just start to encounter more sites that are slow/buggy. And they'll blame the device for that.

Of course as it is, they are encountering sites that don't work properly because of the lack of Flash, and they are more than likely blaming Apple for this. It's a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't for Apple.

Still, I am 100% behind any effort to move the bar forward so... Flash on the iPhone? No Thank You.

[Miko]

Originally Posted by zippy That's the problem right there. Users don't know. They only go to a web site that says: you need to have Flash installed, blah blah blah, click OK and never grasp that Flash is the thing causing them problems.

Check my post above where I said they can implement it as a setting the same way they do 3G, but off by default. "Just like how they give you the option to use 3G or Edge complete with a disclaimer that 3G will decrease the battery usage, but provides faster data speeds." There would be a disclaimer stating how running Flash would affect the phone's performance. If they don't know or understand this then perhaps they shouldn't be using the phone in the first place.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Miko If they don't know or understand this then perhaps they shouldn't be using the phone in the first place.

And if people don't understand how to write commands, they shouldn't get a computer. GUIs are toys.

[Miko]

Funny

[Kickaha]

Originally Posted by Miko If they don't know or understand this then perhaps they shouldn't be using the phone in the first place.

Just a guess... you're a developer, aren't you?