[opendtv] Re: Apple dashes hopes of Flash on iPhone
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:47:01 -0400
At 11:32 AM -0700 4/22/10, Kon Wilms wrote:
> QuickTime is an essential resource for many, if not most digital content
authoring applications on the Mac, and offers most of the same facilities on
the PC. I am not talking about runtime applications; I AM talking about an
architecture that supports digital media content with the ability to plug-in
resources that are critical to content producers. For example, Panasonic has
developed a range of QuickTime codecs to support its P2 product line.
That's fine. You don't need HTML5 for that. Just embed quicktime
player in the page like has always been done.
Sorry, but we got off on a tangent here. I was
not talking about QuickTime and HTML5. You
misunderstood what I said about the importance of
QuickTime when working with Adobe apps, and I was
trying to explain...
http://www.opensourcemediaframework.com/
I must be missing something!
Yes. This particular piece of the pie is open
source, but it all builds upon Adobe's
proprietary IP as it relates to FLASH.
Because you're making stuff up. Here, let me copy/paste from one such
effort (Adobe's media player framework):
Q. Under which open source license is OSMF offered?
A. MPL Version 1.1 will govern the use of the OSMF code. This license
is used by many open source projects that need to balance the needs of
the open source community and commercial software vendors. MPL and its
derivatives (Eclipse Public License and Common Public License) are
used by many well-known open source projects, including the Flex® SDK,
with both thriving open source communities and significant commercial
users.
I still don't get it. Adobe is not placing FLASH
in open source, only the code to allow developers
to build customized FLASH players. Adobe still
benefits from Flash and the necessary licenses to
use it.
Am I missing something here?
Apple is heavily committed to the multi-touch interface and the ways in
which it is already transforming the way we interact with devices and
applications. They are enhancing the OS and APIs on a continuous basis in
order to maintain their leadership position.
Ok so you're saying they are expanding their vendor lock-in. Gotcha.
Should everyone have the right to simply copy everything Apple does?
It's not like Microsoft (and many other vendors)
ever used vendor lock-in to gain competitive
advantage. Seems to me that Adobe is trying to
lock-in developers with FLASH.
Why would Steve WANT to support a technology that makes apps look and feel
the same across every competing platform?
Maybe I'm missing your point, but he does.
HUH? I think Apple is currently suing several
vendors who are trying to copy various
multi-touch fetures of the iPhone OS.
To me, Open Source is really more about a commitment by those who have a
vested interest to maintain and improve on the resource that is being put
into the public domain.
You understand little about Open Source then. But that's fine, most
people don't. I have to deal with people on a daily basis who think
OSS is just 'free to do with as I please'.
The SwampHead website is built on Joomla, an Open Source CMS. I appreciate
the power of the tools and the efforts of everyone who has contributed to
the project. But I also recognize that this is a different world in terms of
product support. And I would also note that there are many Jooml plug-ins
for proprietary technologies.
That's why they are plugins.
Then I see no reason why HTML5 cannot also work
WITH proprietary technologies like Windows Media,
QuickTime and FLASH...
I believe that we are experiencing the same kind of foot dragging backlash
in the PC market that we have seen with broadcasters trying to hold onto
"their legacy" during the transition to Digital TV. Dominant standards can
hang around for a long time, but eventually they are replaced by the next
big thing.
Which is why I left the broadcast space entirely. No sense flogging a
dead horse for rich video applications.
Yup.
Could it be that some people find the degree of control Apple exerts over
its platforms to be a benefit?
Just because lemmings follow each other over the cliff, doesn't mean
it is right.
Sorry, but Apple customers do not fit the
lemmings mold. A very high percentage of digital
media content creation takes place on Macs; these
folks choose the best tools for their jobs and
the Mac has consistently been the better
environment for content creation. That being
said, the situation on the PC is greatly improved
over what it was a decade ago when it comes to
working with content creation applications.
Customers do appreciate the fact that Apple
platforms experience less attacks, are easier to
use and maintain, and are very stable. This is
particularly true for the iOS platforms. It may
help to think in terms of the users who do not
want to endure the experience of working with a
PC and its derivatives. Some folks actually like
not having to deal with that level of complexity.
And parents like the fact that Apple provides
them with tools to help manage the use of their
devices and the content which they can buy to run
on it.
I'm not saying that your comfort with the PC is
displaced. It is simply an alternative that you
are comfortable with.
> How did this discussion suddenly change to Rich Internet Applications?
It always was. *You* tried to make the point that Apple tools (XCode)
could easily be a replacement for developers using Flash. XCode has no
RIA tools that even come close to what Flash has.
No YOU brought this up. Apple is not trying to
build RIAs. At lest not for now. They have
created an environment for developers to create
applications for their mobile devices and an
infrastructure to sell and support them.
Obviously some of these apps compete with RIAs
that can run on other platforms. Apple does not
want developers to create applications that are
the same as every other platform; they want
developers to be able to exploit new APIs as
quickly as possible for THEIR devices.
> And it is equally clear that FLASH and AIR are competing with Silverlight
and Java for market share in RIAs.
Silverlight is doomed (HTML5 video tags will eliminate it). Java has
its share for servlet applications and Android and that's about it.
Neither of these development environments have the same RIA toolset
Flash does.
So does this mean that FLASH wins and we should just forget about HTML5?
> Before Future Splach, Director et al begat
FLASH Apple WAS trying to develop
similar capabilties in QuickTime. I worked with the QuickTime group in 1997
...
that can be shared by applications, but killed the media layer idea. I guess
> you could say he opened the door for Flash...
To go back in time? Since Macromind Director was @ 1987.
I was just alluding to the evolutionary path that
led to what is FLASH today. In 1997 things had
not yet evolved to what we call FLASH today. The
market was still wide open.
Imagine a scenario where Apple releases a bunch of new features in their
iPhone SDK. Developers using the native platform have access to the new APIs
immediately, and can begin incorporating those features into their
applications.
But they won't, since their applications are
already released on the app store.
Huh?
Do you think they will not upgrade existing apps?
Most of the apps I have on my iPhone have been
upgraded at least twice between iOS releases. And
MANY developers are constantly creating new apps.
And new APIs enable new apps as well; this is
especially true given the new APIs in iOS v4 that
will allow multitasking and new location based
services.
Never mind the fact that Apple does *not* churn on their SDKs!!
The devices are cooked - they can't be expanded. You're the one always
touting this.
Talk about rubbish!
Apple often includes hardware capabilities that
are not unlocked until a future OS release. I
still have a 2G, but it does almost everything
that later models do except for GPS services.
This will change a bit now as some of the new OS
features require more computational power and
will not be backward compatible to the 2G and 3G
phones. But this is expected in most computing
devices - sooner or later the improved
performance and resources are used by developers
and older devices get replaced.
The cycle for phones has typically been two years
- I'll get three out of my 2G iPhone, which is a
very pleasant surprise.
Developers on an intermediary platform have to wait for the intermediary
platform vendor to implement the new features and expose it in their APIs.
The best case scenario is that the intermediary platform vendor figures out
how to implement the new features in a timely fashion, allowing their
developers to take advantage of them quickly.
You assume that a 3rd party would not be able to build a parser for
the SDK to handle most new features without a massive software point
release.
I'm not assuming anything. And there are
potential issues with new features that may not
be supported at all in the 3rd party applications.
Vendors with slow release cycles (I'm looking at you Adobe) end up creating
an additional delay before developers on their platform can take advantage
of the latest and greatest features from Apple. This is no good if Apple
wants to be on the cutting edge.
So now all their development is limited by Flash? Come off it.
Obviously not. Apple just does not want its
developers to depend on what Adobe supports.
And of course, the worst case scenario is that the intermediary platform
vendors never get around to implementing the new features, preventing all of
the developers on their platform using those features.
That doesn't even make sense.
It does to me. We are not talking about
developers using Apples tools. We are talking
about developers who buy into the Adobe tools so
they can write once and run everywhere. Adobe has
been guilty of dragging its feet with respect to
products for Apple platforms many times in the
past. And they are certainly responsible for the
poor quality of the MacOS FLASH plug-in.
Well not exactly. Every mobile platform out there utilizes Flash. They
realize that many sites are useless without ability to decode flash.
They realize that consumers want Flash support.
Apple is approaching an installed base of 100,000
million mobile devices that do not support Flash.
The company just reported its best second quarter
results every with a 90% increase in profits. The
stock is up 9% since Tuesday and S&P just
reported that Apple's market cap has passed
Microsoft (although this does not count the
shares held by Gates and Balmer).
And MANY consumers have FLASH, but turn it off
because of the fact that much of what it does is
irrelevant to the content they want at a web
site. I certainly have not found it difficult to
surf the web on my iPhone. The role that FLASH
plays is greatly overstated.
They don't base their business model on excluding one technology in
order to ensure that people pay more for theirs.
Uhhhhh... Apps for the iOS are typically MUCH
cheaper than PC apps. A very large percentage are
FREE. Apparently real customers are not too
concerned about the lack of FLASH support.
iTunes doesn't interoperate with anything except Apple. That is my point.
And the point is?
iTunes is an e-commerce platform that Apple
built. It runs quite nicely on PCs, in fact there
are more PC users than Mac users. You must be
talking about the fact that it is designed to
feed the iDevice ecosystem. Sounds like a good
business move to me consider Apple's market share
in digital music.
And by the way, iTunes music that is DRM free
(which is now most of it) can be played on any
devices that supports the industry standard AAC
format. You can also buy music for Devices from
Amazon. And Palm keeps playing games with Apple
with their iTune player for the Pre.
You bring up bugs, memory consumption, and crashes, and then you try
to say that iTunes is none of those? Please.
Do tell. I have never had an iTunes crash.
And is this worse than what the telcos were doing when they controlled the
apps on phones?
You said it. But you are quite happy to accept it this time around.
HUH? Yes Apple has control over the platform, but
they are not making the use of apps on their
devices painfully expensive like the telcos.
Apparently the millions who are buying these
devices and apps agree.
Actually yes to all of the above.
AND MOST IMPORTANT...must every new innovation carry baggage from the past?
the iPad does not have a floppy drive either...
Nor an elegant way for me to connect my DSLR to it in order to GET
photos INTO it. What use is display without acquisition.
Apple iPad Camera Connection Kit
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC531?mco=MTc0MjU1ODU
What were you saying about no USB or SD card reader?
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: