Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Flash Is Not a Right

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the so-very-hungry dept.

Apple 850

medcalf notes that game designer Ian Bogost enters the debate about Flash by saying "[A] large number of developers seem to think that they have the right to make software for the iPhone (or for anything else) in Flash, or in another high-level environment of their choosing. Literally, the right, not just the convenience or the opportunity. And many of them are quite churlish about the matter. This strikes me as a very strange sort of attitude to adopt. There's no question that Flash is useful and popular, and it has a large and committed user base. There's also no question that it's often convenient to be able to program for different platforms using environments one already knows. And likewise, there's a long history of creating OS stubs or wrappers or other sorts of gizmos to make it possible to run code 'alien' to a platform in a fashion that makes it feel more native. But what does it say about the state of programming practice writ large when so many developers believe that their 'rights' are trampled because they cannot write programs for a particular device in a particular language? Or that their 'freedom' as creators is squelched for the same reason?"

cancel ×

850 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (5, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113354)

That's what happens when you choose a closed platform.

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113368)

That's what happens when you choose a closed platform.

You mean Flash?

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113400)

That's what happens when you choose a closed platform.

You mean Flash?

Yo dawg, we heard you like closed platforms...

Two senses of "closed." (4, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113450)

Flash may be proprietary itself, but there's a large extent to which it doesn't dictate what you can do with it.

Apple dictates what software you can develop for their mobile products to an absurd level -- everything from what tools you may use to what kind of morality is appropriate (no porn for you).

I don't like either of them, and I am glad to see Apple kill Flash, but I despise the way they're doing it.

Re:Two senses of "closed." (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113646)

Just keep this in mind: Apple used Fairplay DRM to kill the use of WMA and DRM in the music industry. Apple's insanity isn't all bad.

Re:Two senses of "closed." (2, Insightful)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113714)

Dude RTFA seriously. I mean WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR POINT? If people do not like developing under these rules then they don't have to and won't. But most people don't mind which is why there are tons of iPhone apps. You may not like it but the fact is no one cares. Don't develop for Apple. No one will miss you. No one needs you. And you are certainly not entitled to everything. This goes for everyone. Get the fuck over it. I bet half the people who bitch on Slashdot aren't even devs but children trying to be edgy (the majority of Flash "developers"). It's this stupid "me me me" crap that pervades everything here and let me tell you, it's worse than the made up demons of Apple and Facebook people feel entitled to hate as well.

Re:Two senses of "closed." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113844)

You are a lost soul

Because Flash is such an open platform? (1)

wiredog (43288) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113510)

<sarcasm/>

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (5, Insightful)

EvilNTUser (573674) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113610)

That's what happens when you choose a closed platform.

Exactly, but TFA is one big strawman. The argument is that closed platforms are bad, not that open platforms are a right. We can call Apple assholes without trying to revoke their business license.

Hell, I hate Flash too. But there's a huge difference between not actively supporting a technology and doing your best to ensure people can't use it even when they want to.

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (4, Funny)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113936)

We can call Apple assholes

Appholes is more Appropriate.

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113692)

Adobe is also under the impression that Flash is a proprietary platform.

That's what happens when you choose two closed platforms. Never mind that they both see themselves as benevolent dictators.

Apple controls the "java" on their machines too.

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (2, Insightful)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113694)

I read the title as "Flash is not right". A more appealing as well as truthful title all round.

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113758)

RTFA

That's what happens when you don't know how to program! You choose one language one platform over all others.

Besides what's the big deal doesn't Droid support Flash. Won't Droid have a bigger market than iPhone because of this?

Or is the reality that Flash developers are screwed because Apple has sounded the death knell for Flash and soon other smart phones will follow, like Microsoft. Now Flash developers will have to learn another language, like the rest of us because time stands still for noone.

Re:You signed away this "right" by picking Apple. (1)

diesel66 (254283) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113792)

Then choose another platform to work with! I really wish everyone would quit whining about lack of flash, walled gardens, no ports, and so on. If you don't like it, don't buy it, don't develop for it. Simple.

BTW: to the guy who said he runs PhotoShop on his netbook: Show me someone who does their PS work on a netbook, and I will show you a moron.

I have a dream (1)

s73v3r (963317) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113384)

I have a dream. That one day, little iPhones, and little Android phones, may one day access the same content. I have a dream, that one day, applications will be judged not by the language of their source code, but by the content of their functionality and aesthetics. I have a dream today.

Re:I have a dream (1)

jornak (1377831) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113456)

Let freedom ring from the Blue Screens of Windows to the Cracked Displays of iPhones!

Re:I have a dream (1)

ADRA (37398) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113808)

Hey, only Apple's allowed to appeal to your animal instincts of conformity and self-importance!

What a prick... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113390)

Anyone else not a fan of this guy's holier-than-thou attitude?

Re:What a prick... (0, Troll)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113760)

Um Slashdot has the holier than thou attitude. They think it is their God given right to do whatever they want. They believe in open source software which extends to the idea that they should have control of the iPhone platform and that downloading pirated content isn't stealing.

It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (4, Insightful)

mrchaotica (681592) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113392)

Using your own device in whatever manner you wish is your right!

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (5, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113426)

Yea and you can write the program and use it on the iPhone with any tool you want.
You just can not sell it in their store.
But you can use it on your phone all you want.

Provided... (3, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113488)

You can do that, provided you pay for their development kit (isn't that a yearly subscription?), or jailbreak your own phone.

Re:Provided... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113618)

No. The Dev kit is free for download. Way to flame though.

Re:Provided... (2, Informative)

tylersoze (789256) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113818)

Actually that's not a flame. The only way to download the SDK is if you pay to become an iPhone developer and even if you did acquire the SDK through other means, you'd still need a certificate from Apple to actually run it on your phone. The only other option is to jailbreak the phone.

Re:Provided... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32114028)

No it's not. A free dev account is all you need to get the kit. The betas require a paid subscription though.

Re:Provided... (2, Informative)

bonez_net11 (472640) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113858)

I believe the free dev kit doesn't enable installations. The paid version does. Which at this time would also get you the iPhone OS 4.

Re:Provided... (3, Informative)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113918)

The SDK is free, but you have to buy a code signing certificate from Apple ($99) in order for software to be allowed to run and install on the device during development, but yes once you do that you can install whatever you want on your own device.

Re:Provided... (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113722)

Sure. So?

You can do what you want to your TV, but you will have to pay for any replacements and not be covered under any warranty.

Re:Provided... (1, Insightful)

Shadow of Eternity (795165) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113864)

Close. All that analogy is missing is the point that the behavior that would require you to buy replacements and lose warranty coverage is watching a different channel.

Re:Provided... (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113880)

You do not have to pay your TV maker for the right to modify your TV, although it will void your warranty. I would not have much of a problem if Apple would simply follow a similar approach, and allow people to hack their iPads and simply not provide assistance when something goes wrong (or demand payment for such assistance).

Re:Provided... (3, Informative)

WilyCoder (736280) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113754)

The devkit is free but you are limited to using the iPhone simulator. If you want to dump your code to an actual device then you need to pay the $99 fee.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (4, Insightful)

jcheezem (96097) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113470)

True - but look at the end user agreement for the software.

You don't own it.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113538)

That's where you're getting it wrong. It's not your device. You are paying Apple for the privilege to touch Steve Job's baby with your greasy thumbs. You should feel grateful that Jesus Jobs has bestowed upon you the magnificence of his brain power. All should COWER before the great Jobs of OZ!

Where was I?

Oh yeah.

Buy an Android phone.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113548)

Right, I think I will sue microsoft since Word isn't on my linux box, because that violates my "rights".

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113944)

but there are legal ways around running Word on your Linux box - install a virtual machine, install Windows, and install Word. Remember Apple does not even let you do that on their iDevices.

So where does it stop? They could end up saying you have to use an Apple computer to write the Apps becuase they expect you to know the Apple "experience." The could require you to submit all of th esoursew code in some strange Apple format and deny your App because they had plan for something similar. The could start saying once you submit the source code, it really becoames property of Apple and you have no recourse or your App will be automatically rejected - remember cash on hand means they can buy some expensive lawyers you never could.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (2, Insightful)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113674)

I want to run Flash on my microwave - who do I complain to since I can't. I want to use my device in whatever manner I want to, just as you say - I want to run Flash on my microwave.

And, if you can't see the similarity between my far-fetched comment and using Flash on one of Apple's devices, then you aren't looking at the entire picture.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (2, Insightful)

amorsen (7485) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113790)

The manufacturer of your microwave isn't actively going out of its way to block flash. You can legally sell flash for the microwave oven; software installation is a chore but the playing field is level for everyone. You don't sign an EULA when you buy your microwave.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (2, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113946)

Does your microwave producer actively prevent you from installing software on your microwave? No, they do not -- they may not provide you with tools or documentation, but there is nothing built into the microwave that thwarts efforts to install third party code.

Apple, on the other hand, deliberately and actively works to prevent you from running unapproved software on the iPhone/iPad.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (1)

wolrahnaes (632574) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113776)

Using your own device in whatever manner you wish is your right!

And you can. Jailbreaking takes one single click. Putting whatever content you want on Apple's App Store is not your right, it's Apple's right to have whatever arbitrary restrictions they want.

Not defending their often stupid policies, but it is their store and they can choose to offer only the programs they want to.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (2, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32114006)

So let people install software from sources other than the apps store. You know, they way I can add any repositories to my Fedora system, or even just install software without using yum or rpm? I am not saying Apple needs to provide support for people who choose to do that, and they could even program the iPad to warn people about a loss of warranty or support if they choose to enable third party software sources, but the fact that they are actively working against the installation of third party software is a problem.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (1)

Anonymusing (1450747) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113874)

Using your own device in whatever manner you wish is your right!

Absolutely. You are free to build, use, and program your own multitouch smartphone that runs Flash, slices bread, makes reservations at impossibly busy restaurants, and teleports attractive nymphomaniacs directly into your bedroom. Or, you can buy this off-the-shelf thing that is far more limited, but has less development time. Either way, you know what you're getting when you buy it.

Oh, and that restaurant you just made a reservation at for you and your nympho? They require that you're wearing a tie. A real tie, not just a clip-on.

Re:It's called "PERSONAL PROPERTY," Apple! (1)

dtml-try MyNick (453562) | more than 4 years ago | (#32114016)

Using your own device in whatever manner you wish is your right!

Nobody is denying that. No one can and will stop you from writing your own flashcompiler and run it on your iphone.

Right to use your device as you see fit (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113434)

I don't see a problem with Apple not allowing a built-in or "Apple Store" version of Flash, per your arguments in TFA. What I *do* have a problem though, is when a device I *own* won't let me install a piece of software that *I* want to install. And when I say I have a problem with it, that means I don't own an iPhone/iPad, and I educate my less-informed family members and friends of what I feel is pertinent to all consumers, whether they know it is or not.

I don't have the right to make Apple give flash. (1)

BlueKitties (1541613) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113438)

I do have the right to put flash on my personal cell phone.

Re:I don't have the right to make Apple give flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113640)

You sure do!

Now get back to us when you put Flash on a Motorola MC750

Re:I don't have the right to make Apple give flash (1)

ranolen (581431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113648)

You do have the right, but by doing so, Apple also has the right to no longer support your personal cell phone... Not that I think it is right, but it's what happens.

Re:I don't have the right to make Apple give flash (1)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113698)

I do have the right to put flash on my personal cell phone.

And, if Adobe ever releases a version that runs on the iPhone, Apple won't try to stop you. Assuming you can figure out how to do it, of course.

Re:I don't have the right to make Apple give flash (1)

amorsen (7485) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113834)

And, if Adobe ever releases a version that runs on the iPhone, Apple won't try to stop you.

That's the problem, Apple stops that from happening.

Re:I don't have the right to make Apple give flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113728)

RIght, you can put flash on your own phone... oh wait there ISN'T a working version of flash for anyone's phone yet.

Re:I don't have the right to make Apple give flash (1)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113824)

No you don't. My old flip didn't have Flash either. It wasn't my right to have Flash. I knew there was no Flash when I bought the iPhone.

Well (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113446)

Or that their "freedom" as creators is squelched for the same reason?"

The more restrictions that are placed on your creation, the less choices you have in creating it.

Is it really necessary to state something this obvious? HTML5 is the way of the future, Flash is the way of today. Why not support both?

Prediction (1)

WilyCoder (736280) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113460)

With all the FOSS and linux zealots on this site, I predict this topic will hit 1000+ replies :p

Re:Prediction (2, Funny)

medcalf (68293) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113498)

Heh. Would I get an achievement for that one?

Re:Prediction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113662)

With all the FOSS and linux zealots on this site, I predict this topic will hit 1000+ replies :p

Correction: With all the Apple astroturfers and fainbois on this site, I predict this topic will hit 1000+ replies. Which it won't.

Apple's locked platform is of little interest to linux and open source developers. Same goes for Adobe's. D'uh!

Software Freedom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113482)

I was under the impression that a large part of the /. audience are firm believers in Software Freedom, which should include writing software in any language/environment for any platform, or writing tools to enable such development if none are available.

Also, they would be against provisions prohibiting such activity in any sort of License Agreement, or EULA.

They probably don't like paying for the tools to write even native code for any platform.

They probably just hate Steve Jobs.

Re:Software Freedom (1)

logjon (1411219) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113982)

Software freedom involves a lack of proprietary, closed garbage.

IT'S CALLED TRANSLATED CODE, NOT THE SAME! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113484)

The issue isn't that flash is or isn't a "right". I don't care if there is flash player for IPhone or not. The issue is that Jobs is basically telling us what kind of IDE we can use. Apple wants to stomp developers who would build something out in a high-level environment/language, and then translate it to another language that is more appropriate for their target platform.
Jobs has obfuscated this with his letter because he's trying to hide some very nasty politics/business practices.

I'll tell you what is my right... (1)

Schnoogs (1087081) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113496)

...my right to purchase and develop for one of Apple's competitors.

no, sorry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113532)

The iPad is a wed device. One of its primary purposes is to deliver the web to people. It is reasonable for web developers to expect that common web technologies will be implemented on a web device. It's not like we're asking to program a graphing calculator in LISP or something.

The interesting part to me... (3, Informative)

medcalf (68293) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113542)

is Ian's discussion of creativity in programming, and whether platform limitations enhance or retard that creativity, and in what ways.

Apple's right (1)

RandomMonkey (908328) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113546)

It is not a right to be able to program in any language on any platform. I may even say it is a privilege to be able to program at all on a closed platform such as Apple.

It is however Apple's right to shoot themselves in the foot by becoming an even more closed juggernaut like Microsoft. These companies can literally have no long term future if they keep it up.

Hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113550)

But what does it say about the state of programming practice writ large when so many developers believe that their "rights" are trampled because they cannot write programs for a particular device in a particular lan

Really not trying to be rude. And this is going to sound snobbish: are we considering people who do "Adobe Flash" to be programmers now?

Confusion Over Source of Ire (4, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113552)

Flash Is Not a Right

There seems to be some confusion here. I don't recall the argument being that developers thought it was a right, the argument was that it is a tool that is useful and can probably run with little effort on Apple's mobile devices. So it was perceived that Apple was deliberately stunting some developers. Now, I think Java's been outlawed as well so you should be just as upset about that. Now, as a consumer, the iPad is right out of the question as here we have two empowering functionalities disabled for no apparent reason on my device. And it looks like they're going to do everything they can to stop Java and Flash from ever running on iPads.

The outcry is not that Apple is revoking a right but simply that they are deliberately crippling a product ... and for what reason? Well, Jobs gives a few reasons but a lot of people assume it's marketshare and money. I happen to side with the latter group and find that despicable under the assumption that it would not take much to get Java or Flash running on an iPad.

Couple the above with the fact that there are a lot of social games out there and lightweight games running Flash already that might have hoped the iPad would just automagically support their game and I think you understand why there's so much backlash for lack of Flash. It's not a right but it lack of Flash on the iPad is a wet blanket to many.

Re:Confusion Over Source of Ire (1)

Shagg (99693) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113656)

The outcry is not that Apple is revoking a right but simply that they are deliberately crippling a product ... and for what reason?

They don't need a reason.

Re:Confusion Over Source of Ire (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113720)

The outcry is not that Apple is revoking a right but simply that they are deliberately crippling a product ... and for what reason?

They don't need a reason.

Then they don't need my business.

Re:Confusion Over Source of Ire (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113924)

The outcry is not that Apple is revoking a right but simply that they are deliberately crippling a product ... and for what reason?

They don't need a reason.

Then they don't need my business.

Don't worry, the one thing this country isn't about to run out of is idiots that believe whatever the talking heads and hipsters tell them. Apple will do just fine.

Re:Confusion Over Source of Ire (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113986)

Then they don't need my business.

Their sales figures agree with you.

Re:Confusion Over Source of Ire (1)

logjon (1411219) | more than 4 years ago | (#32114024)

I've said that about apple for a long time.

Re:Confusion Over Source of Ire (1, Insightful)

Webz (210489) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113888)

The outcry is not that Apple is revoking a right but simply that they are deliberately crippling a product.

How are they crippling the product? People seem to have this assumption that open is better. I say no. It's just like a gated community. There's a barrier of entry higher than zero. It's to keep the riff raff out.

Oh man, Apple must be doing so badly. Check out the wild, wild success of all those open devices. Get real. Openness is not the end all be all of these types of devices. Is openness important? Sure, to some people. But it's probably not THAT important to the many other people that are willing to spend money.

Why don't YOU prove that the lack of openness correlates to the lack of quality, since that's what you and many other people seem to be implying.

Re:Confusion Over Source of Ire (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32114034)

Flash for all its problems, is truly more platform independent than javascript, css, etc. Write once, play on many devices and OSes.

Straw man (1)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113580)

But what does it say about the state of programming practice writ large when so many developers believe that their "rights" are trampled because they cannot write programs for a particular device in a particular language? Or that their "freedom" as creators is squelched for the same reason?

This is a strawman. Nobody complains about the simple fact that they can't use it. The basis of their arguments is that the capability is arbitrarily denied to them on an otherwise capable device. In that context complaining about lack of freedom is justified.

Re:Straw man (1)

jjohnson (62583) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113854)

Bogost's point is that it's not an issue of freedom. "Freedom" simply isn't applicable here, and trying to discuss it in those terms just betrays the sense of entitlement and "I have a right..." that Bogost identifies. You don't have the freedom to write iApps in Flash in the same sense that I don't have the freedom to sell the shoes I make through Sears. They could sell my shoes, but its entirely within their discretion not to do so.

Finally someone calls it out in public (1, Insightful)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113584)

Of course this article is tagged troll; the three people or so on Slashdot who try and explain this every Apple discussion know what's it's like to make sense in a sea of selfishness and entitlement.

Re:Finally someone calls it out in public (4, Funny)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113658)

You too? I thought I was the only one who was always right about everything! Welcome to the cool club, my man.

"what does it say..." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113590)

"But what does it say about the state of programming practice writ large when so many developers believe that their "rights" are trampled because they cannot write programs for a particular device in a particular language? Or that their "freedom" as creators is squelched for the same reason?"

I may be over-simplifying here, but I think it says those developers are whiny, princess bitches.

It's THE social consciousness of today (4, Interesting)

xclay (924789) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113592)

The new popularism around entitlement for the betterment of one's own convenience or laziness has been around since they invented computers, it's no surprise.

Committed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113596)

Flash [...] has a large and committed user base

I very much doubt that the sufferers^Wusers of Flash are committed to it. I very much doubt that 99% of the virtual farming Flash users give a virtual shit about what makes their farms go.

Or, maybe the OP meant that they should be committed.

It's because Apple can't let go... and design... (1)

CodePwned (1630439) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113636)

Bam

http://www.pcworld.com/article/173092/3_reasons_why_iphone_wont_get_adobe_flash.html [pcworld.com]

Apple has ALWAYS been know to be control freaks. They know best mantra. Instead of listening to their customer base on what they want Apple did it's usual tactics of "Apple knows best". The other problem is the backwards compatibility to older iphones. It's literally a technical limitation where users would not have a "seemless" experience. aka their hardware is insufficient to provide a non laggy user experience with flash.

Flash however, like any language, can be written very poorly and Apple is afraid that they can't put enough protections in place should a bad app get on the phone. Security exploits etc...

I don't like Apple. Never have never will... I did buy an itouch because the user interface was great until I realized I couldn't get pictures OFF of it. Now it sits in my room and my Droid happily replaced it.

Apple has a great product but there are MUCH better products out there now than the iphone, with much better service, at much better prices.

Cya iphone.

Re:It's because Apple can't let go... and design.. (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113770)

Yes they have been very controlling. In the last 2 years they seem to have bumped it to 11.

Re:It's because Apple can't let go... and design.. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113922)

You know there is this nifty function in iTunes that lets you sync your iPod Touch with you computer including pictures. So, you may wanna actually wanna learn how to you use your "iTouch" before you start bitching about its limitations.

Alternatives to the App Store exist! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113642)

All this whining is killing me. It's completely possible. Using one such example Pie Guy [tumblr.com] . Games can be created and loaded into the iwhatever without the apple store.

If Adobe wants to cater to these people, they need to just alter what their development tools do. Instead of whining about being weaseled out they should adopt their tools to the new standard.

I mean, have you ever heard a hardware company complaining about adopting to metric standards???

I don't develop. I hack, and I mean that in the non-hollywood fashion of - I rip out little peices of code I see and duct tape them together into something I like. As someone who primarily deals in IT, that works great for me. I'm an awesome, albeit, young administrator still learning tons but I know half of this field involves manning up and finding a way.

If you don't wanna find a way, play your old game by you old rules.

I'm sick of it.

If you don't like it, quit buying Apple. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113652)

When I wrote code for a living, My employer without exception, told me which language and tools I would use. When I was an IS Manager, I frequently wrote RFPs that specified the use of specific tools. My friends who own retail stores put limitations on their suppliers. Apple in choosing to not stock items that aren't in keeping with their "No Flash" policy is no different from your corner shopkeeper refusing to stock merchandise made in China. If you don't like it, quit buying Apple.

If you think HTML5 is ready to replace Flash... (2, Interesting)

seanalltogether (1071602) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113706)

think again [craftymind.com]

Skirting the issue (2, Interesting)

dpilot (134227) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113710)

Bogust suggests that cross-platform software may be making developers lazy, and turning software into one big cross-platform monoculture.

That may be true, but he's missing the real issue. As long as those products are viewed as some sort of computing device, one expects them to do what computing devices do, and the hardware is capable of that. Computing devices, those that are Turing complete, are general purpose. The platform may impose constraints like speed and memory - consider them to be challenges. (limitations by another name)

No, the real issue here is that one buys a piece of hardware which is a general purpose computing device, with very livable hardware constraints.
THEN the provider artificially constrains that system.

Here's the issue another way...
We're used to buying physical things, which become ours, and we can do with as we please.
We're used to buying books, movies, and music, and understand that we're not supposed to make illegitimate copies of them. (The question of what constitutes "illegitimate" is a quagmire, of course.)

More and more physical things come with embedded computing devices. Those embedded computing devices run software. Those who wrote the software are making more obvious limitations upon the "permissible" use of that hardware that is shipped with their software.

The iStuff wasn't the beginning of this trend, merely the current, most blatant example. But remember, it's getting hard to find any item of significance that doesn't have some sort of embedded computing these days. Imagine if practically everything you buy comes with license restrictions. artificially limiting what you can do with the product, enhancing the makers' revenue streams, etc. Since I have "car analogy" in my signature, imagine a car (with built-in GPS, of course) that starts bucking, misfiring, and generally misbehaving when you drive into a non-dealer repair or aftermarket accessory shop.

Re:Skirting the issue (1)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113882)

General-purpose "openly" programmable machines may be owned by the purchasor for a short while, but quickly become used for other's nefarious purposes.

An appliance, like your toaster, will always be nothing more than a toaster and will never turn against you. It might burn your toast once in a while, but it isn't capable of stealing all the money in your bank account. Your general-purpose computer can do this.

The mission, as much as you might not like it, is to move the general population away from things they cannot and will never program and give them appliances which cannot harm them - or anyone else. WebTV and the Mail Station were attempts at this which failed. The iPhone is one which apparently succeeding.

Sounds like a Case of the Spostas (5, Insightful)

tarsi210 (70325) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113810)

Why does this strike me that this is more about a bunch of so-called, "developers," who are getting all huffy about not being able to easily whack out Whack-A-Mole and Fart apps for the i(Pad|Touch|Phone), than about a true fight for a "right" to develop as you please? So develop stuff in Flash -- you just won't be able to publish it via these devices. Why is this a big surprise? It's not as if Apple's hidden the fact that Flash isn't supported. It's not like you USED to be able to use it and now you can't -- they've been VERY open about their dick-waving with Adobe.

Hey -- I want it to have Flash, too. I'd like to have a Ferrari, but it's just not in the cards, ya know?

A million baby entrepreneurs thought that the iPad would SURELY have to allow the use of Flash and they were already counting the stacks of bills in their minds garnered from the various apps they were going to whack out in a hurry using Flash; now that dream has been shattered and they're getting all surly about it. Wah.

What a stupid question (1)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113812)

But what does it say about the state of programming practice writ large when so many developers believe that their "rights" are trampled because they cannot write programs for a particular device in a particular language? Or that their "freedom" as creators is squelched for the same reason?

It says Apple violated a well-established social norm, aka, a "right".

The Fundemental Problem is (1)

Spacecase (121674) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113820)

Apple wants it's products to be unique and have different capabilities compared to other companies products. In fact Apple is famous for having unique features and exploiting that fact till the competition catches up. If Apple spends tons of money making a new feature for the iPhone or iPad like a new hardware 3D accelerator and release it to their developer community, they would want to see this special ability used in the software created for their product. If a significant portion of the developer community uses Flash or a Flash translation layer to make their programs , then Apple is at the whims of Adobe if they decide to support the new feature. Adobe might say hmmm only the new iPhone ultra 2000 has the 3D accelerator system, and it would cost us money to develop for it, but the majority of phones do not have this feature we should probably just skip it. Then when consumers compare the new Android phone and the new iPhone they will say "hey these things work exactly the same for the programs I want to run" This might be good for Adobe, and the cheaper non-3D accelerated phones, but it would be devastating for Apple. You do not want your developers coding to the lowest common denominator in terms of functionality and features. You want the developer to exploit your strengths in the products they make.

Spacecase

an interesting perspective (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113838)

This seems to be the ethical equivalent to 'opt out' instead of 'opt in'. More freedom (or 'rights') should be the default, not the other way around.

Re:an interesting perspective (1)

jjohnson (62583) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113998)

The right to sell Flash apps for the iPhone is an example of a positive right--your right implies an obligation on another party's part to facilitate it (as opposed to a negative right, where other parties are simply obligated to abstain from preventing your exercise of the right).

Freedom of speech is a negative right--you can talk all you want, and I'm only doing something wrong if I prevent you from talking. Health Care is a positive right (if you think it's a right, as most do in Canada)--your right to health care creates an obligation on me to fund it through my taxes.

More negative rights should be the default, but casually sanctifying positive rights is a recipe for less freedom, not more, because you're placing active obligations on everyone else. Flash devs don't want the right to write Flash apps, they want the right to be supported by Apple on the iPhone, and that's what Apple is denying.

Flash translators, are there any? (1)

smoothnorman (1670542) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113898)

Sitting at a point of near perfect ignorance about this, are there any programs available for translating Flash into a format that is more acceptable (to Apple)? I've dealt with lots of crufty old numerical and molecular file formats where such-and-such a software suite refuses to import or accept a not-invented-here format and I've often found or written a translator or filter to get from one to the other. Can it be that there is nothing remotely adequate for getting from Flash to MPEG-4 or H.264 or whatever? Because if there are such, why is there such a fuss? and if there aren't such, why hasn't one of you brilliant coders written one for some potential income?

Um, sheeyah I'm churlish! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32113902)

"[A] large number of developers seem to think that they have the right to make software for the iPhone (or for anything else) in Flash, or in another high-level environment of their choosing. Literally, the right, not just the convenience or the opportunity. And many of them are quite churlish about the matter. This strikes me as a very strange sort of attitude to adopt."

I'm quite churlish because A) I bought the thing, and B) I should be able to code it in whatever the !%^!^ I want. That doesn't mean that Apple has to specifically support it in any technical way at all, but to actually legally prohibit it is stupid and unnecessary.

To voice the inevitable analogy, it isn't Ford's fault if I want to bolt something onto their car in an unapproved manner that they don't like, and Ford doesn't have to do a fricking thing to make it easier for me. But to legally prohibit me from doing so with MY PURCHASE is dumb, and probably itself illegal.

The irony in all this is the fact that I have zero interest in writing Flash applications or having them run on an iPhone or iPod Touch anyway, but I would like the flexibility to run interpreted languages if that fits the task at hand.

It's part of monopoly/anti-trust laws (4, Insightful)

GameMaster (148118) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113934)

First off, IANAL but, In the US, we have anti-trust laws designed to stop companies from doing this kind of stuff. The don't, necessarily, require the company to have X% market-share before some of the laws apply. Has Apple crossed the line here? I don't know, I guess we'll find out when the recently announced legal issues resolve themselves. The point is that there are laws that limit how much a company can control what you do with a product you've purchase from them even when it comes to your future use of that product with their services. A prime example is in the automotive industry. Car makers aren't allowed to just void your warranty for not using "Ford" brand gasoline; "Ford" brand tires; "Ford" brand spark plugs; etc. They don't get to void the warranty just because you installed an after-market tail pipe or radio. From my perspective, I can see them having the right to refuse to host a Flash plug-in on the iTunes store (though, Microsoft's recent issues in the EU with providing a list of alternative browsers might suggest possible issues for Apple in the EU) but the thing I see as most contentious would be their refusal to allow anyone to install software onto the device that isn't provided through iTunes and their, active, banning of users that jailbreak their device. This is the behavior that I can see the US government/courts coming down hard on.

Bundled Browser (0, Flamebait)

Dwyden7 (1805998) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113950)

Yes, I find it rather annoying that the thousands of flash sites i could go to do not work and will never work on my phone. What i find more annoying is that I am forced to use the Safari browser. The browser is pre-bundled. Sound familiar to anyone? The difference here is that unlike with windows where i could go download opera or firefox and use that browser instead, there is no option to do that with the iPhone or more appropriately, the iPad. Where is the class action now?

You forget (1)

meerling (1487879) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113956)

Apple made their ijunk devices, but for them to try and dictate what language or development package you use to create your apps is not a right that Apple has.
It is little different than a car manufacturer trying to tell you which brand of gas you can use on your car.

If that needs any more explanation, it is a very long conversation where a variety of things have to be explained to you, and I don't have that kind of patience.

How 2014 will be like 1984 (1, Flamebait)

ADRA (37398) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113972)

The government (in this case Apple) is telling you how to communicate. ObjectiveC is the new Newspeak, thanks a lot apple!

I'm sorry, but who's left in the tech world who can legitimately stand up for this farce of a company? I mean Microsoft still has its zealous FUD machines yes, but Apple's been fare more 'evil' the last few years than MS in the past 10.

it's because of Apple Rockband (1)

Aan Cocks (1696952) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113978)

Apple is working on a series of titles which they want to sell on their own and don't want to be beaten the punch. Of course these are titles which already have good market share. When you think of instrumental games, for instance, you immediately think of the quintessencial ROCKBAND. Apple won't pay for the licensing, but has their own plans for a clone product. When making clones, you don't want to make a clone of something already cloned to death on newgrounds, and Jobs knows this. In fact it's so familiar to Jobs that it's been mentioned at board meetings. See the following account of one such meeting:

Steve sipped his magic water, brow furrowed, listening with his head cocked to the side to the blather the record execs across the table were vomiting at him. The barfing had been ongoing for the better part of three hours, and Steve was bored. As he set his water bottle down, his mind meandered from the meeting to more interesting things. Dammit, Steve thought, this is my boardroom. It's about time they heard my speech!

Beside Steve in his stupor sat none other than Phil Schiller, mulleted and wearing his typical denim button-down, and John Rubenstein who was wearing a blue polo, collar-up, with iPod headphones snaking up over his hairy chest and pouring out the front of his collar. Not only was John the Senior Vice President of the iPod division, he was also a member.

As the meeting droned on, Phil noted the glazed look in John and Steve's eyes. Without moving a muscle, Phil fiddled with something underneath the table and a random burst of music exploded from John's neck. Before John could look down, however, the music stopped. Steve hadn't noticed and Phil looked over at John and smirked. John wondered when Phil had managed to take his Shuffle.

Clearing his throat, Steve rose from his chair, interrupting the record executives across from him. They looked up at Steve's blue-jeaned form, surprised. They watched as Steve strutted to the corner of the room and grabbed a new bottle of water out of a mini-fridge, uncapped it, and took a sip. He looked around him at all the expectant eyes, like baby birds held captive in a nest, and smiled.

"I have a little something to share with you today," Steve said, the fire coming back to his eyes. "We all do, in fact, and we're really excited to present this special Stevenote with you today."

Phil looked over to John and rolled his eyes. Having endured one too many Stevenotes, he wasn't what could be called very excited in the least. Stultified was probably a better term for what Phil was experiencing at the moment. John too had witnessed several private mini-keynotes where Steve Jobs had paraded around a boardroom and drove a point relentlessly home for hours on end.

Phil and John shrugged, helpless, and turned to Steve. At least it wasn't record company rhetoric.

"Gentlemen, today we stand here over two years after Apple and the recording industry made downloading music easy and legal," Steve began, not missing a beat. "And in two years we've grown in a really impressive way, and we've got some really impressive numbers to show you."

Without a word, Steve yanked a small device that looked like a black iPod Shuffle out of his pocket and clicked a button. Silently, metal armor appeared from the walls and covered the windows. The lights dimmed behind them, and a solid metal panel slid shut with a sucking sound over the doorway. One wall was lit by an unseen projector and down-tempo electronica started playing softly in the background.

The record executives looked around, frenzied, not sure what had just happened. Some grabbed for papers and shoved them into briefcases while others swung around in their chairs feeling for something to grab onto. They began muttering, asking one another what was going on, nerves on edge. One exec took his mobile phone out and opened it. He looked hysterical in the dim light.

"You'll see that your mobile phone's signal is jammed in here, as are all other means of external communication. Bluetooth and WiFi don't work, and the Ethernet cables to your laptops have been cut," Steve said to the executives. "You're all alone in here. All alone with just me, Phil, John, and the numbers."

Phil and John shook their heads in dismay.

Steve wasted no time in barraging the executives in an ejaculation of numbers. Tracks available through the iTunes music store: 500 million. Projected iPod sales for September quarter '05: 7.1 million. New countries the iTunes music store was available to in '05: 7. The list went on and on, the execs — as well as John and Phil — were wide-eyed and sweat-faced, drowning in the numerical overbalance.

After what seemed like years, but was actually only about sixty minutes, Steve stopped to sip his magic water and leaned on the opposite end of the board table, projector light casting charts and graphs across his chest. He pushed his glasses up onto his nose and smiled, making eye contact with the scared and helpless executives now willing to agree to almost anything just to be able to leave their prison.

"So, as you can see, the iTunes and iPod platform continues to grow at a fantastic rate. We're number one by a huge gap, and we still haven't tapped some countries' markets yet. And we're always adding better value to the platform as well. The Shuffle is selling like hotcakes, we're about to launch iTunes 5 with support for music videos, and —" Steve paused here for dramatic effect, looking around for good measure.

"And we're about to launch a totally new way to rock your cock off!" Steve shouted, smiling.

At this, John and Phil stood up and walked, wordlessly, heads down, toward the back of the room and began rummaging around in the dark. Steve joined them, their three forms busy as the room stood silent, almost painfully so, as the record execs hardly dared to breathe. There was a metal clink and a muttered curse from Phil as the fumbling stopped, and the three figures in the darkness rose.

Like a heart attack, arena lights blinded the room in a rainbow. Fog machines blasted their vapor into the air as power chords rang out, pummeling the ear drums of the executives, throwing them into chaos. It was like being at a concert, only much scarier. Steve, John, and Phil jumped up on the board table as, silhouetted by the lights and fog. The power chords stopped and all was still, save for some lingering fog.

Atop the boardroom table the three Apple executives stood transformed into rock gods. The last fingers of smoke eddied around their bodies, stark naked save for a weird series of electrodes and wires attached to their hairy penises and scrotums. The wires led back behind the three of them into the darkness. The record executives' mouths were agape. No one said a word; no one dared to breathe.

"We're proud to announce our new companion for GarageBand," Steve said, detaching the small control device from somewhere between his buttocks. "We're revolutionizing the way you can integrate an electric guitar and your Mac," he continued. He then pressed the button on his control pad, and the wall was lit by the image of a new iApp, complete with tuning dials and spectrographs. "Say hello to CockBand."

All eyes studied the screen intently, drinking in the new application's implications for the music industry. A slight draft blew through the room and John and Phil shifted their weight from one foot to another as the record execs' mouths slowly closed. Steve continued smiling, naked as a pioneer after a mountain-stream bath, as he replaced his control pad back into his butt-crack.

"The neat thing about CockBand is that it allows you to play guitar without actually having a guitar," Steve said, eyes sweeping over his captive audience. "Anyone can play guitar into their Mac so long as they have a penis and two testicles," Steve went on, his smile growing more and more leering with every word. "Thanks to a new Apple technology we like to call handJobs."

The record executives look to one another as if to ask if Mr. Jobs was being serious.

"handJobs started off as a way to control your Mac's desktop with a series of lewd pelvic thrusts and gyrations thanks to these special electrodes that attach to your penis and balls," Steve said, cradling his nut-sack in his hand to show the electrical attachments. "One day we were thinking of how to improve on GarageBand. We replaced the studio, how can we replace the instruments?"

Excited murmurs ran through the execs as the idea began to take hold on their heads. Phil's package was receding into his abdomen and he wished the air conditioning unit wouldn't run. He shivered slightly and accidentally played a minor chord. Steve strutted to the other end of the table, his jiggling cock and fun-bag producing strumming sounds from speakers around the room.

"So where handJobs was a way to replace both the mouse and InkWell paradigms, we found it to be a really neat way to implement a band without the hassle of instruments," Steve said. "We have support for lead, rhythm, and bass guitars, and we're testing support for violin, cello, and bass now. You can play drums on your thighs and eventually we'll support woodwind instruments as well."

"And now," Steve said, cupping his cock and balls in his hand. "I'll give you a proper demonstration."

Steve reached around and hit a button on the remote in his butt and a drum track started playing. Bopping his head, Steve began playing chords along with the beat, fingers strumming over his penis. He wind-milled a few times, Townsend-style, and then went into an incredibly fast solo à la Van Halen. He came to a screeching finale and started playing power chords while strutting about on the board table.

"Hey look at me!" Steve shouted, dancing around stroking his penis. "I'm playing guitar with my wiener!"

The record executives looked back and forth at one another, shrugged, then turned to Steve and stood up, thunderously applauding. A few whistles and cheers could be heard, and several execs stood on chairs and clapped above their heads. Steve grinned back at his audience. The spectrograph in CockBand came to life as Steve hit a few more power chords for good measure. The paradigm shift was beginning.

"Hey, Steve, can we put our clothes back on?" Phil asked, hugging himself and shaking. John stood next to him hunched over, teeth chattering, covering his genitals.

"Yeah, sure guys, we did it. We won't be seeing any iTunes Music Store track price hikes any time soon. These guys are going to be months figuring out what CockBand and handJobs mean!" Steve shouted back.

Phil and John slinked down off the table and into the back room, diving for their clothes. Steve turned back to the record execs, who were now all standing in their seats, jumping up and down, pumping their fists in the air. Steve hit another chord and they all went wild. He continued playing chord after chord, then went into another solo. The execs swayed lighters in the air, shouting for more.

CockBand had arrived, another industry-shaping hit for Steve Jobs and Apple Computer, Inc.

High Level Languages (4, Insightful)

zentec (204030) | more than 4 years ago | (#32113990)

I don't consider it a misunderstanding over their "right", but a complete lack of understanding of the platform for which they want to develop. There's a lost art of having to program devices with limited memory and energy budgets. Thanks to the desktop, the solution wasn't to code more efficiently and have the developer bear the pain, it was just far easier to push it to the user in the form of more memory and faster processors. And yes, more energy.

This can't be done on tiny devices, and the write-once run everywhere mantra comes at a hefty expense. I also agree with Jobs' point that high level abstractions and languages *do* reduce the application down to the lowest common denominator.

At some point, Adobe and their peers will want to start putting their libraries inside the iPhone OS. We've all seen how intrusive and bloated Adobe Reader has become, that's just the kind of behavior I hope to avoid on my phone. Sure, Flash would be nice, but am I willing to get it at the cost of allowing Adobe to modify files in the OS? The alternative is that these Flash applications carry the necessary libraries with them and these simply Flash games are now pushing tens of megabytes in girth.

Furthermore, where does it end? They permit Flash, then Java and hey what about .NET /CLR for applications? How about Visual Basic on the iPhone? Wait, that we've left out the Fortran programmers so we need to support them as well.

Here's an idea. Instead of being a "Flash Developer", how about you just be a developer and understand that a language is a tool and like all tools, there's a right one for the job. Tiny device programming is a different art form, one of where less really is more and it isn't necessarily an easy world in which to work.

Sorry to be a buzz kill.

Adobe, just jailbreak. (1)

Joe U (443617) | more than 4 years ago | (#32114012)

Adobe, write a jailbreak application that installs Flash.

Then, when they're sued by Apple, the DOJ gets involved.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>