Adobe Blasts Apple Over iPad

[ray=out]

Isn't the whole HTML5 > Flash arguement like saying blu-ray is the future, let's ignore DVDs now. Sure, blu-ray is argueably better but while a significant portion of consumers still use DVDs you sure as hell better be compatible with both if you're going to charge a large amount of money.

Damn I make weird analogies.

As for no multi-tasking that's just stupid, most of the R&D for parts like whatever processor it's using (for example) will of been done to optimise multi-tasking... All aboard the overly expensive fail train!

 

[Chewster]

The thing that chaps my ass the hardest about Apple and their useless DRM restrictions is that they have already more or less admitted that the limits do little to curb piracy, which is what is at the heart of this issue to begin with.

If it weren't for their main hipster base of customers, I don't know what they'd do.

 

[Ranthus]

Well, the iPad looks like a Work In Progress, so I'm just going to hold off getting annoyed about no flash until it's released. But if it does end up with no flash, then they lose tons of sales. Bad decision for them.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Considering that Flash has had so many security issues that even Homeland Security issued an alert about it [http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2009/07/26/homeland-security-issues-vulnerability-notice-adobe-flash/], I can hardly blame Apple for not wanting it on their hardware.

That said, I expect it won't take long at all for someone to figure out a workaround.

 

[solidstatemind]

I think Apple just fucked up. Badly.

Not only is this thing just a big iTouch with a snicker-inducing name, explain to me why this isn't way worse than what MS did in the United States v. Microsoft [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_anti-trust_case] case.

It's one thing to monopolize your own hardware and leave competitors free to produce a rival hardware platform. That's basically what game consoles are. It's totally different when you've got a virtual monopoly over all PC hardware regardless of manufacturer, and lever that position to knock off competitors in different software markets.

Excluding Flash sort of sucks for Apple customers, on the other hand don't you think it's a little obnoxious for "75% of the internet" to rely on one proprietary format?

To draw the parallel correctly, you have to remember that the basis of the suit against Microsoft was not related to their dominance of being bundled with OEM hardware, it was that IE being included and being free supposedly prevented a competitive enviornment for other companies' web browsers.

In fact, what Microsoft did wasn't nearly as egregious as what Apple is doing: Windows customers were not prevented from installing and using another browser, MS was just banking on the fact that most people would not wish to either spend the money on a new browser or invest the time involved in downloading one. (This was before the widespread availability of high speed Internet, after all.) In short, MS was guilty of thinking that people would be lazy.

In this situation, Apple is actively preventing the use of popular and common software in order to drive people towards alternatives that make Apple money. Way worse.

But not that it matters. I doubt the iPad is going to be sucessful. It's just not that revolutionary of a concept, and as other people have posted, it actually has competitors right from the start, unlike the iPod and the iPhone.

 

[Geoffrey42]

Flash is awful to start with, so while I can't attribute any suggestion of goodwill toward mankind to Apple's stance, I also can't entirely fault them for it. Plus, Adobe isn't exactly master of "opening up things to let people do as they please".

The world will be better off when Flash is dead, so for now, the person being a jerk to someone who is also a jerk is someone I won't be so angry at for being jerks in their own right.

Also, even in Apple's full-fledged computing products, Flash isn't exactly warmly welcome. Why be so suddenly surprised or angered that Apple left out support on the iPad? Shocked and dismayed by the obvious, much?

 

[Treblaine]

I think Apple just fucked up. Badly.

Not only is this thing just a big iTouch with a snicker-inducing name, explain to me why this isn't way worse than what MS did in the United States v. Microsoft [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_anti-trust_case] case.

Because that's just legal-law details... very little relevance to the consumers.

This... this is just totally not what we want and we're angry (are we angry?) that Apple missed an amazing opportunity. They could have released basically a macbook in a Tablet form but no they had to get greedy and say "no flash for you, only video via apple approved apps.. paid for by YOU!"

 

[Treblaine]

It's just not that revolutionary of a concept, and as other people have posted, it actually has competitors right from the start, unlike the iPod and the iPhone.

Oh no, iPad is revolutionary... not in a good way though.

I can already see this is going to go down in history as Apple's biggest blunder if not the biggest tech blunders in years. Heck of a way to start of the decade in tech though maybe for the best.

Apple has monopolised the music player market and crushed innovation and dynamic pricing, I'd much rather see an even matched battle for the tablet ground, like how Microsoft and Sony are battling for the home console market each with huge incentive to offer a better + cheaper product.

 

[Treblaine]

Considering that Flash has had so many security issues that even Homeland Security issued an alert about it [http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2009/07/26/homeland-security-issues-vulnerability-notice-adobe-flash/], I can hardly blame Apple for not wanting it on their hardware.

That said, I expect it won't take long at all for someone to figure out a workaround.

Ah yes, Apple have completely altruistic reasons
/sarcasm

Excuse me while I and a billion other people don't give a damn and go watch some youtube videos and refresh twitter. Like hell I'm going to pay for an app for a cut down version of youtube.

 

[masterlink950]

Being a flash programmer I see this as an absolutely horrible decision. Flash is one of the biggest things you can use on the internet and not being capable of doing so is a mistake. Not to mention flash has only been getting bigger ever since they upgraded the programming language from AS2 to AS3. Flash is a monopoly, sure there is competitors, but Adobe is just too advance and is advancing their technology more quickly then almost any other internet application system.

Most people who are wondering if they want this thing will probably throw the idea away when they realize they cant watch youtube videos, or they cant player bloons like they were hoping to do so.

Of course the device will still be a raging success due to all the fanboys who would probably die for Apple. It's a sad state of affairs.

 

[Angron]

well that seems stupid on apples part, but i cant believe that they chose farmville as one of their examples of flashes awesomeness.

I think they chose it to get the point across to all those people who are obsessed with it that buying this wont let you do that on the go.

or at least i hope they didnt choose that as one of their examples of flashes awesome

 

[Narcogen]

This was out before the iPad with much better features ...
https://thejoojoo.com/

Only if you change the word "out" to mean "announced".

According to that site, the joojoo device (and people are making fun of 'iPad'? Sheesh, that's a lousy name) is shipping in the US in 8-10 weeks. The WiFi iPad is shipping in 8 weeks, and the 3G version in 12. So if we assume both predicted availability dates are correct, they are coming out pretty much simultaneously.

The company producing the joojoo appears to be a startup with no track record. While Apple sometimes has availability products, especially on popular new products, I'd say odds are pretty even that Apple will ship the iPad on time, while it would not be at all surprising if the joojoo was delayed. I actually don't know how long that page has said "8 to 10 weeks".

As for specs... the joojoo has a larger screen that shows more pixels, but has much less capacity (only 4Gb, more not available) and less claimed battery life (5 hours compared to the iPad's claimed 10). It does support Flash, which the iPad doesn't. The iPad has a 3G option, which the joojoo doesn't. The joojoo has a camera, which the iPad doesn't. The iPad weighs .6kg and the joojoo weighs 1.1kg-- almost twice as much, so there's a price to be paid for the extra pixels.

That doesn't really sound to me like hands-down "much better features". It sounds to me like it's different-- sometimes better than the iPad, sometimes not as good. Specifically, at the lowest price point, $499, the iPad trumps the joojoo with four times the storage space and faster wireless access (the joojoo does 802.11b/g while the iPad supports b/g/n.

For watching video I'm not sure what good the joojoo is despite the larger screen-- there's not enough storage space to hold much of anything, and the lack of WAN connectivity means you won't have access to anything not on the device when you leave WiFi range. They've obviously intended it for video with little compromise for other uses (hence the widescreen ratio, which Apple opted not to use on the iPad-(think of what that would look like in portrait orientation) but 4Gb isn't going to get you much widescreen HD content. If you have to stay in wifi range to watch, or load files on it one at a time, what's the point? How is that better than a dedicated video player or PC of some sort?

Both supposedly support multitouch but I think so far it's demonstrable that Apple is doing a better job in this area with the iPhone than most competitors are with similar devices; I wouldn't be surprised if the iPad's interface, once it is in the hands of more people, might generally end up being judged as superior to what ends up on the joojoo. Without access to either it's hard to tell.

 

[sbose22]

For me this really was a deal breaker. The "best online experience anywhere" is bullshit without flash

 

[DanDeFool]

What shreds of desire I had to purchase this thing just evaporated. Fuck you, Apple. Just like chaining the iPhone to AT&T, you've made this product completely worthless to me.

 

[capacollo]

This was out before the iPad with much better features ...
https://thejoojoo.com/

Only if you change the word "out" to mean "announced".

According to that site, the joojoo device (and people are making fun of 'iPad'? Sheesh, that's a lousy name) is shipping in the US in 8-10 weeks. The WiFi iPad is shipping in 8 weeks, and the 3G version in 12. So if we assume both predicted availability dates are correct, they are coming out pretty much simultaneously.

The company producing the joojoo appears to be a startup with no track record. While Apple sometimes has availability products, especially on popular new products, I'd say odds are pretty even that Apple will ship the iPad on time, while it would not be at all surprising if the joojoo was delayed. I actually don't know how long that page has said "8 to 10 weeks".

As for specs... the joojoo has a larger screen that shows more pixels, but has much less capacity (only 4Gb, more not available) and less claimed battery life (5 hours compared to the iPad's claimed 10). It does support Flash, which the iPad doesn't. The iPad has a 3G option, which the joojoo doesn't. The joojoo has a camera, which the iPad doesn't. The iPad weighs .6kg and the joojoo weighs 1.1kg-- almost twice as much, so there's a price to be paid for the extra pixels.

That doesn't really sound to me like hands-down "much better features". It sounds to me like it's different-- sometimes better than the iPad, sometimes not as good. Specifically, at the lowest price point, $499, the iPad trumps the joojoo with four times the storage space and faster wireless access (the joojoo does 802.11b/g while the iPad supports b/g/n.

For watching video I'm not sure what good the joojoo is despite the larger screen-- there's not enough storage space to hold much of anything, and the lack of WAN connectivity means you won't have access to anything not on the device when you leave WiFi range. They've obviously intended it for video with little compromise for other uses (hence the widescreen ratio, which Apple opted not to use on the iPad-(think of what that would look like in portrait orientation) but 4Gb isn't going to get you much widescreen HD content. If you have to stay in wifi range to watch, or load files on it one at a time, what's the point? How is that better than a dedicated video player or PC of some sort?

Both supposedly support multitouch but I think so far it's demonstrable that Apple is doing a better job in this area with the iPhone than most competitors are with similar devices; I wouldn't be surprised if the iPad's interface, once it is in the hands of more people, might generally end up being judged as superior to what ends up on the joojoo. Without access to either it's hard to tell.

Yes sorry, "announced". In terms of storage, youre correct but some of the features that should stand out are availability of an OS albeit a browser based one so multitasking, a major sticky point for some criticizing the iPad should be available but im speculating of course. Flash alone is a deal breaker to some and we know why Apple doesnt want to support it (to promote their content delivery system. Hopefully streaming content from a USB data storage shouldnt be an issue else why hype the support of HD content but who knows without more detailed technical spec. Id probably agree and say that the Apple multitouch interface would be far more superior and mature. I mentioned joojoo as to try and compare apples to apples because basically these devices are simply media portals in my opinion and nothing more (an example if ARCHOS http://www.archos.com/ who's been in the industry and mature in the the field of tablet pcs).

In any case, Id be more inclined to get a "table" PC that can fully support an OS (Windows and Linux would be great) which I think others were hoping for in the iPad as well.

 

[8bitlove2a03]

I want to put in my two bits, but since I'm not really in Apple's target audience and have no money (those two are connected I'm sure) I doubt anybody cares.

Anyways, I see this lack of Flash support as a major risky move on the part of Apple. While they're always going to be able to make money from their fanboys and rich clients who want to buy the "hippest" products, the mainstream users are getting snubbed by their business model of "control the platform, control the content, control the format". There is honestly no reason for them NOT to include the Flash format support other than simply wanting to control the content you use. And that's fine if you just want to keep your fan base plus whatever status-seeking big spenders you happen to pick up. But normal people pay the extra price for Apple products because they're superior to the other options on the market, or because it's the only available product that does everything they want. But since the iPad doesn't really do anything a laptop and Kindel can't do (and do better), normal people looking for a reader or computer are going to be turned off by it.