Comments on: Wired demo running on AIR, Android, & GPU

By: Mark Alan Thomas

Mark Alan Thomas — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:29:04 +0000

If this were running as “HTML5″ in Safari on an iPad, you’d think it was great, despite Safari being a runtime that’s interpreting layout & interactive code. AIR lets designers and developers use tools they already know to create multitouch, GPU-acclerated presentations that run across platforms (iPad, Android, Windows, etc.).
Flash is never going to be on the iPad no matter how much Adobe kicks and screams about not being able to drag the iPad down to a dodgy cross-platform ghetto.
But good luck with Android and do enjoy Windows.
And you’re right, if this were HTML5 in Safari it would be great. But you gloss over the fact that multitouch on the iPad has nothing to do with HTML5 or Safari. The iPad’s multitouch GPU-accellerated coolness is a core functionality which works without the added complexity of a third-party runtime (Flash) taking over the screen and turning the platform into sketchtastic trash.
My point being that AIR and Flash serve no purpose on the iPad other than to drag it down to the junk level of lesser platforms and to make it easier for tasteless Flash developers to not write proper iPad apps.
Screw that.

By: Mark Alan Thomas

Mark Alan Thomas — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 11:05:31 +0000

The point is that if you aren’t having to essentially start from scratch for each platform, you can adjust things like platform specific features and UI needs more easily.
This never happens. When developers are allowed to write once, run anywhere, what always happens is that Lowest Common Denominator Syndrome takes over and the best platform is dragged down to the level of the worst.

By: alex kent

alex kent — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 12:07:59 +0000

john, i think your example is flawed. you show a demo of a tablet device playing a stand alone semi-native AIR application. this is exactly the type of application which is currently available (and selling) in apple's app store. this is a different thing to the big 'flash on iphone' argument, which is about the Flash runtime within Safari. it appears to me that running a single app well is not the same as running the flash runtime concurrent with the safari html/js runtime for all those videos, ads, and (yes) entire sites on the web. [So, if Runtime A runs great until it's hosted by Runtime B, are we to fault Runtime A? Yes, if A comes from Adobe and B from someone with more ardent fans. The reality is that it takes two to tango, and Flash performance is dependent on the capabilities/limitations of its host. FWIW, I fully expect Flash Player 10.1 to run great inside browsers, mobile or otherwise. --J.] on a technical note, when there are several separate flash elements a webpage, does the flash runtime create multiple instances of itself ? (i understand that flash panels in Photoshop CS4 are each individual instances of the runtime). [In short, yes, but the Flash team is making great improvements. Check out this 3-minute explanation of what they're up to. --J.]

By: Brandon

Brandon — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:26:09 +0000

Or is it your fault for going with Apple in the first place? It just seems so silly that when alternatives exist, people would not speak with their wallets and get something else.
I avoid Apple on principle. Their products are pretty sleek, and at times impressive, but the arrogance and social stigma associated with Apple is not just a stereotype, it is the truth.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:11:46 +0000

That’s an interesting take on it, Eric. It’s funny how Apple has received a lot of complaints for a large number of would be customers that these platforms don’t support Flash, and yet their response is, “we think Adobe is a crappy company, so we don’t care what the consumer wants.” Whatever happened to giving the customer what they wanted?

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:00:50 +0000

Jeven,
It’s a business. Apple is after money. So is Adobe. Once you realize that, you might just have woken up to reality. You say there is no conspiracy?? I disagree, if you believe that a business looking after themselves don’t conspire to maximize profits, then you are in for a rude awakening. There are constant reports of Apple rejecting apps because they don’t like how it portrays them. They are allowed to, it’s their store. Apple keeps their cut from the sale of apps in the app store. If they allow Flash and Flex apps, then they lose control over the apps because now any user can just go to flash enabled url in the browser and use the app. That bypasses the app store entirely. So am I saying there is a conspiracy? Yes. It’s business. Apple is looking after their bottom line to get more money out of you and other users.
If you think that Apple is your friend, you right, but you have to pay them to be your friend first. Same with Adobe… Same with Microsoft… Same with Google… (Google may have free services, but they are still being paid for by consumers who click on Ads, and business who pay them for the ads).
FYI the Flex SDK is open source. You don’t have to buy Adobe’s Flex or Flash suite to develop flash applications.
Also, Flash CS5 will include the ability to compile apps directly to the iPhone format, but, Apple still has to approve it in their app store. It’s not a developer friendly process.

By: Jerry

Jerry — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:41:03 +0000

To know that veterans of the print/publishing industry could conceivably layout magazine spreads with InDesign, and seamlessly port those spreads to a Flash/AIR developer who could make it sing & dance on a mobile device with GPU acceleration makes an excellent story for Adobe’s publishing customers in the new tablet marketplace.

By: Jeven

Jeven — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:50:50 +0000

What would be the benefit for Apple making free windows software awesome when they’re a hardware company…
“The real reason Steve doesn’t want Flash on his iPhone/iPad/iPod is because of the apps. He wants your money”
Firstly, as if anyone would be making flash web apps for the iPhone, the reason the app store is a success is because it lets any jerk monetize their work easily and provides all that content in one place. A load of Flash apps strewn across the internet wouldnt have had a fraction of the impact.
Secondly barely any of the existing Flash apps on the internet would work on a touchscreen anyway.
Thirdly apple makes no money off the development tools (99$ is sod all, definitely not a moneymaker) so apple wouldn’t care if you developed in Flash or Obj-c.
Maybe leave your tin foil hat at home next time because its not a massive conspiracy.

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:07:12 +0000

“Apple is screwing you over now.”
That’s interesting because as an Apple AND Adobe customer, it feels a lot more like Apple is screwing ME over. If they own 17% of the market and the other 83% can do something that I can’t because Steve says so, I’m the one who gets screwed for going with Apple – not Adobe.

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 09:03:19 +0000

“But if you went down that route the UI would suffer on the iPhone version and no one would want it.”
The point is that if you aren’t having to essentially start from scratch for each platform, you can adjust things like platform specific features and UI needs more easily.
This isn’t about not doing the work to suit the platform, it’s about taking some of the strain off the whole process so more platforms can be customized for.

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:21:46 +0000

Jeven,
Apple has been known for the same shoddy treatment of their Windows apps. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had problems with Quicktime, Quicktime Pro and iTunes. For all we know, the reason flash doesn’t run well on Apple is because of shoddy Apple programming. Don’t be so quick to crucify Adobe.
The real reason Steve doesn’t want Flash on his iPhone/iPad/iPod is because of the apps. He wants your money. And he’ll block anything that might induce competition so that he can maintain a monopoly.

By: gfhghffhg

gfhghffhg — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:28:39 +0000

“if the project only has enough money for an iPhone version that means no Android version of that application”
But if you went down that route the UI would suffer on the iPhone version and no one would want it.
You get what you pay for, and one button cross platform development is a false economy.

By: JEVEN SOBS

JEVEN SOBS — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:44:32 +0000

Don’t you get it Adobe?
Sure the iPad would handle Flash like this easily, but thats not the reason you are left out of the party. The real reason is the years of neglect you gave the plugin on the Mac platform that Apple is screwing you over now.
Think about the huge number of people who would have gone into Apple stores and gone on their horrible myspace page with about 12 pointless Flash widgets running in semi transparent HTML and the computer comes to a standstill because of your shoddy plugin, customer leaves thinking macs are garbage thanks to you.
Apple has deemed you incompetent and that you can’t be trusted to live up to their quality of experience expectations. Maybe if you had started putting the effort in you are now 4 years ago it would be a different story.

By: James Stuart Johnson

James Stuart Johnson — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 23:58:39 +0000

Usability would be a problem for some impaired individuals with limited motor skills. The device shown, also makes it appear difficult to navigate one handed without putting it down. Not ideal for note taking, drinking coffee or other common tasks while reading.

By: Mirko Maus

Mirko Maus — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:38:49 +0000

Wow! Cool!
But how about Fullscreen Flash Videos on Linux? No?
…