Adobe's Argument With Apple Escalates

[Dan Shive]

I really wish I could recall the source on this, but I read the Apple basically has to create a new market for itself due to trends in computer sales. Trends that, should they continue, will basically make mac computers unprofitable.

This is where ipods, ipads, etc come in, and in particular the app store. They get so much money from the app store that they opted in the past year to not add cameras to ipod touches due to wanting to keep hardware costs down so more people could buy them and subsequently buy apps, which is where the real money is for them.

Regardless of software issues, allowing Flash could seriously hurt them financially should people opt to play flash games and the like instead of their fancy apps. Given that the entire company's future is currently depending on itunes and related hardware, their refusal to allow Flash makes financial sense if nothing else.

 

[Low Key]

I don't get why Apple is heralded as the pinnacle of the computing world. Their machines are overpriced, pretty much all software released has to be ported over, and their Unix OS has been hacked faster than Microsoft's two times in a row [http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9072959/Mac_easiest_to_hack_says_10_000_winner]. Anyone saying PCs aren't as good at multimedia stuff hasn't used one for that purpose in a very long time, because they are excellent for that now. Frankly, anything Apple has put out in the past 5 years: computer, iPhone, iPod; has been shown up by their competitors. The only thing Apple has going for it are some patents, and quite honestly, none of them if tried by another company would have been seen as anything more than a fad. It's just that people are all over Steve Job's nuts for some odd reason.

Signed,
Former video editor for an ABC affiliate, and current network administrator.

/rant

 

[UlteriorMotive]

I worry that Apple is going into a messy anti-trust fight.
Along with the other situations such as the mess of the missing iPhone prototype, they haven't really engendered good relations.
In theory, denying access to others such as Adobe inevitably shrinks the market, allows Apple to charge higher prices, and turn in lower quality goods. Are Apple programs amazing and top notch? Who knows, that's a point of view.

In my opinion, Apple will lose if this turns towards litigation.

 

[pneuma08]

...others see this as a desperate, passive-aggressive attempt to turn the public opinion against Apple.

Well GUH it's an attempt to sway the public. The Internet is the new Roman mob.

Meanwhile, I find it reasonable that Adobe is up in arms against Apple for excluding Flash. Apple excluding Flash, however, is questionable.

Are you sure about that? I don't remember needing to download Flash when I got my laptop. Then again, that was almost a year ago, and I don't always trust my memory with small, unimportant things.

Laptops nowadays come with a lot of things preinstalled. If you ever wipe your HDD and do a fresh install, you'll have to grab it for your web browser (except with the latest version of Chrome now, purportedly).

 

[Heart of Darkness]

Are you sure about that? I don't remember needing to download Flash when I got my laptop. Then again, that was almost a year ago, and I don't always trust my memory with small, unimportant things.

Laptops nowadays come with a lot of things preinstalled. If you ever wipe your HDD and do a fresh install, you'll have to grab it for your web browser (except with the latest version of Chrome now, purportedly).

Ah, okay, that makes sense. Maybe next time I should do research before opening my mouth.

Dammit, now I feel like a newb...

 

[Alar]

It would make sense for Adobe to snub Apple from now on until Apple changes its mind. After all, they're free to do what they please with their software, within the limits of the law.

 

[OmegaZeroX]

I really wish I could recall the source on this, but I read the Apple basically has to create a new market for itself due to trends in computer sales. Trends that, should they continue, will basically make mac computers unprofitable.

This is where ipods, ipads, etc come in, and in particular the app store. They get so much money from the app store that they opted in the past year to not add cameras to ipod touches due to wanting to keep hardware costs down so more people could buy them and subsequently buy apps, which is where the real money is for them.

Regardless of software issues, allowing Flash could seriously hurt them financially should people opt to play flash games and the like instead of their fancy apps. Given that the entire company's future is currently depending on itunes and related hardware, their refusal to allow Flash makes financial sense if nothing else.

But what if not allowing Flash pushes people away from the company entirely? They would still be unable to make any money with their apps if nobody uses the devices. Would it not be more reasonable (and safe) to allow Flash and allow their consumers to have a choice that may or may not cause them problems in the future, than to potentially alienate them entirely?

 

[Cryo84R]

It's painfully obvious who in this thread knows what they are talking about and what's going on, and those who spew anti-apple talking points from the internet they read that one time they were bored.

Flash is terrible, and currently NO phone can run it well, if at all. The sooner we embrace open web standards, the better.

If anyone read Steve Jobs letter regarding why they don't use Flash anymore, you will realize they worked close together in the beginning era when computers were becoming something of a mainstay.

I find Adobe's security shoddy and fucked up. I don't like it really and I can't blame Apple for it. I am using an Iphone, the drawback is that I cannot sign in on my College intranet. For the rest, Apps and games work just fine.

A million times, this.

Now, asking someone to be informed about something may be like asking the rain not to be wet, but at LEAST read one side of the story.
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

 

[Dan Shive]

But what if not allowing Flash pushes people away from the company entirely? They would still be unable to make any money with their apps if nobody uses the devices. Would it not be more reasonable (and safe) to allow Flash and allow their consumers to have a choice that may or may not cause them problems in the future, than to potentially alienate them entirely?

This is a valid "what if" scenario, but it doesn't seem to be the case given that they appear to be making money hand over fist. What's also true is that people who have already bought things from them that are non-transferable are likely to stick with them in spite of the flash issue so long as they want access to their previous purchases.

Point is, status quo without flash: making lots of money and getting people to buy things they can't transfer to non-"i" devices. I think it would take a boycott or a strong flash-enabled competitor to get them to reconsider (outside of that anti-trust suit being filed against them, anyway).

 

[Alar]

If Flash is so terrible, why is it that so many people use it and so many people enjoy products that it helps create? If it's that terrible, why not simply put that energy into making a better, safer, more efficient creation tool?

 

[The Shade]

This is going to end badly. There will be blood.

I. Eat. Your. APPLES! I EAT THEM UP!

If I have an apple... and you have an apple...

 

[Omnific One]

Yeah, I saw this on the NYTimes website. Interesting issue, though I don't have an iPhone.

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Ah, but who uses Flash anyway? It's not like things like youtube are popular, right?

Seriously, Flash may be a rather inefficient resource-hog, but it's still the easiest way to develop interactive things on the interwebz, or so I'm told by my geek buddies. Regardless, I don't really care what Apple does, as I have never (and probably will never) buy one of their products if the competitors do it better for less

 

[OmegaZeroX]

But what if not allowing Flash pushes people away from the company entirely? They would still be unable to make any money with their apps if nobody uses the devices. Would it not be more reasonable (and safe) to allow Flash and allow their consumers to have a choice that may or may not cause them problems in the future, than to potentially alienate them entirely?

This is a valid "what if" scenario, but it doesn't seem to be the case given that they appear to be making money hand over fist. What's also true is that people who have already bought things from them that are non-transferable are likely to stick with them in spite of the flash issue so long as they want access to their previous purchases.

Point is, status quo without flash: making lots of money and getting people to buy things they can't transfer to non-"i" devices. I think it would take a boycott or a strong flash-enabled competitor to get them to reconsider (outside of that anti-trust suit being filed against them, anyway).

What do you think are the chances of the Android OS, Palm's WebOS, or Microsoft's Windows Mobile platform being that competitor you mentioned?

 

[OmegaZeroX]

Ah, but who uses Flash anyway? It's not like things like youtube are popular, right?

Seriously, Flash may be a rather inefficient resource-hog, but it's still the easiest way to develop interactive things on the interwebz, or so I'm told by my geek buddies. Regardless, I don't really care what Apple does, as I have never (and probably will never) buy one of their products if the competitors do it better for less

I am equally inclined to avoid Apple, but I could care less about their price hikes. I actually dislike their user interface. I've tried using Macs and iPods several times, from the first Macs and iPods to their most recent developments, and I simply dislike their interfaces and product designs. iTunes is the only thing I can tolerate from them, and I only use that when a relative wants me to put music on one of their iPods.

 

[Zer_]

I really wish I could recall the source on this, but I read the Apple basically has to create a new market for itself due to trends in computer sales. Trends that, should they continue, will basically make mac computers unprofitable.

This is where ipods, ipads, etc come in, and in particular the app store. They get so much money from the app store that they opted in the past year to not add cameras to ipod touches due to wanting to keep hardware costs down so more people could buy them and subsequently buy apps, which is where the real money is for them.

Regardless of software issues, allowing Flash could seriously hurt them financially should people opt to play flash games and the like instead of their fancy apps. Given that the entire company's future is currently depending on itunes and related hardware, their refusal to allow Flash makes financial sense if nothing else.

People will still buy the appstore games because you need a Wi-Fi connection to get decent flash performance. Furthermore, 3g network plans still cost more than most people are willing to pay. So no, Apple has very little to worry about on that regard.

 

[RicoADF]

Neither side wants to give out and this is all going to end badly for the consumer...

Not if the consumer is, say, an Android OS user. Or a Microsoft user. >_>

Or are smart enough not to touch any Apple products because they've always been control freaks and freedom is the last thing you get on Apple products.

 

[Rainforce]

I think adobe in it's monopoly position is no one to talk...this could get interesting.

EDIT: the adcampaign against apple is quite disturbing....damn propaganda

 

[Dan Shive]

People will still buy the appstore games because you need a Wi-Fi connection to get decent flash performance. Furthermore, 3g network plans still cost more than most people are willing to pay. So no, Apple has very little to worry about on that regard.

I concur in the short term, but not in the long term. Wireless is, at least in theory, slated to become the norm given enough time, and Apple is thinking long-term. Their business model is an effort to keep themselves relevant in the long run; whatever their plans are, they go well beyond the here and now.

Of course, every point I'm making is based on speculation made by business people and not the official word of Apple. For all I know, the company's reasoning matches exactly what Steve Jobs is saying with no ulterior motives.

 

[ItsAPaul]

I don't see a problem with Apple wanting to fail, but I guess freedom nuts are willing to sue anyone these days.