Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
On Wednesday 05 May 2010 05:57:04 you wrote: Mea culpa. Everytime Flash plugin crashes and Firefox says Ooops, do you want me to send the info about this crash to Apple? How do you know it's not FireFox crashing ? -- Tom Chiverton Helping to greatly maximize virtual advanced interdependent users as part of the IT team of the year 2010, '09 and '08 This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at Halliwells LLP, 3 Hardman Square, Spinningfields, Manchester, M3 3EB. A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office together with a list of those non members who are referred to as partners. We use the word ?partner? to refer to a member of the LLP, or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 2500. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Very valid point! Other than giving Adobe a feature request, any changes you introduce to the format would be unlikely to be read by the most popular swf player. However, if you wanted to introduce a chance to HTML5; how would you do that? Does anyone, other than a few companies on the committee have any say into the spec? --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, mitek17 mite...@... wrote: Hi Jeff, Seriously, you can not see the difference between published and open? No kidding? If I want to introduce some changes in SWF format, what should I do to achieve this?. PS Please don't use Why do you need this, anyway(c) as this is a copyrighted answer in Apple community. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Jeffry Houser jeff@ wrote: What restrictions are placed upon the SWF format? None so far as I know. You can take the spec and do whatever you want with it; including creating alternate IDEs and alternate players. You might be able to argue that it is not a standard in the same way that HTML or SVG is. But, that doesn't make it non-open. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton guy@ wrote: It's PUBLISHED. That's not the same as OPEN. Open formats, like SVG, are generally developed by a standards organisation, with input from any interested parties. Open formats, by definition, can be used without restriction by anyone. Proprietary formats, like Flash, are defined and controlled by private organisations, like Adobe. They may publish their format spec to encourage use of it, but they don't hand over control of it to a standards organisation. So Flash is a published, but proprietary, format. HTML and SVG, are open formats. Guy On 04/05/2010, at 11:31 PM, Jeffry Houser wrote: This is actually wrong. the SWF format is open and documented for all to use ( http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/ ). Are you aware of any restrictions placed upon use of the specification that do not make it open? Adobe's Flash Player, on the other hand, is very proprietary. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton guy@ wrote: On 04/05/2010, at 9:39 AM, Oleg Sivokon wrote: SWF is not a proprietary format, Yes. It. Is.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
i would like to chime in on this point. What restrictions are placed upon the SWF format? None so far as I know. You can take the spec and do whatever you want with it; including creating alternate IDEs and alternate players. You might be able to argue that it is not a standard in the same way that HTML or SVG is. But, that doesn't make it non-open. -- I somehow doubt the people on red5, woza and such would spend so much time not reading the specs if it was really that open. (you are not allowed to reverse engineer the rmtp(t/s) etc protocols. Projects Like phpAMF were (and legally i think still might be in legal black holes were nothing has been confirmed or denied about their position). Also, think of all those hidden API's which Breeze and Adobe Connect use or the ability to connect directly via TCP to other clients without buying an extremely expensive server. HTML 5 is much more open than all of this, yes people have API's which are browser specific, but really what is the point of that (that is as good as deploying with gears (in the past, now this api is built into chrome). Also to note, we have been developing and extending a product written in flex with full QA cycles for more than a year now and we have had several browser specific bugs. (although compared to html much much less), but more tricky to fix. I love Flash and have love developing for the platform, this is the 10th year since I started with swf's and I clearly see good things coming out of HTML 5 and the openness of the standard. I think the tools we use to develop in Flash and Flex are way behind similar toolsets for other languages and testing, OMG, automated testing is a F-ing pain in the @5s compared to html. Just remember how sad we all were when Tamarin/ ECMAScript 4 was canned. j:pn \\no comment
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Sorry, cannot miss this one :) I think the tools we use to develop in Flash and Flex are way behind similar toolsets for other languages Please be specific, are you comparing Flash to Inkscape? Are you for real? I mean, if it's not Inkscape, then it should be Blend (but we are then back again to the proprietary world), because what other tools did you have in mind when speaking of vector graphics on the web? I don't agree with you saying that AS editors are bad as a whole. This is clearly a very subjective judgement. I would rate FlashDevelop for instance as third best editor I've ever seen with Visual Studio and MonoDevelop being the better ones (I cannot decide on the order :) And all sorts of Eclipse / NetBeans / MPS somewhere much further down the list. Let us take every thing in proportion, there is bad and there is not perfect and these two are clearly different things.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:57 AM, mitek17 wrote: Mea culpa. Everytime Flash plugin crashes and Firefox says Ooops, do you want me to send the info about this crash to Apple? I click on Yes, please. The question was what is factual wrong in Jobs message. To which I responded that the claim that Flash can crash an operating system is incorrect because it runs in the wrong ring so it can't even do so. For an introduction to the subject see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_%28computer_security%29 Your claim of Flash crashing an application has no relevance for that, and does nothing to prove Jobs right. Jochem -- Jochem van Dieten http://jochem.vandieten.net/
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
With way behind I am referring to the whole eco-system : profiler (contains rant), crappy automated testing tools (qtp?) and docs about the api's for people trying to write their own (flex mokey) More comprehensive documentation on extending Flex builder API - helping people extend their tool instead of making it more difficult. On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Oleg Sivokon olegsivo...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry, cannot miss this one :) I think the tools we use to develop in Flash and Flex are way behind similar toolsets for other languages Please be specific, are you comparing Flash to Inkscape? Are you for real? I mean, if it's not Inkscape, then it should be Blend (but we are then back again to the proprietary world), because what other tools did you have in mind when speaking of vector graphics on the web? I don't agree with you saying that AS editors are bad as a whole. This is clearly a very subjective judgement. I would rate FlashDevelop for instance as third best editor I've ever seen with Visual Studio and MonoDevelop being the better ones (I cannot decide on the order :) And all sorts of Eclipse / NetBeans / MPS somewhere much further down the list. Let us take every thing in proportion, there is bad and there is not perfect and these two are clearly different things. -- j:pn \\no comment
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Jeffry Houser wrote: Very valid point! Other than giving Adobe a feature request, any changes you introduce to the format would be unlikely to be read by the most popular swf player. However, if you wanted to introduce a chance to HTML5; how would you do that? You join the relevant mailinglist and provide your input. The rest is up to the quality of your proposition. Jochem -- Jochem van Dieten http://jochem.vandieten.net/
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
With way behind I am referring to the whole eco-system : profiler (contains rant), crappy automated testing tools (qtp?) and docs about the api's for people trying to write their own (flex mokey) More comprehensive documentation on extending Flex builder API - helping people extend their tool instead of making it more difficult. OK... maybe writing plugins for Flex Builder is difficult - I don't know. The world doesn't spin around Flash Builder. I've written two plugins for FlashDevelop so far, and it is easy! So, maybe you are not looking in the right direction? Why do you want to do something difficult, while there is another way of doing the exact same thing with less efforts?
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Flash is an API. People can write programs that don't work using it. Same thing with HTML/JavaScript: I can write an application that doesn't work and then someone can point Safari at my application. Does that mean Jobs should ban HTML/JavaScript? - Mitch Gart --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, mitek17 mite...@... wrote: Mea culpa. Everytime Flash plugin crashes and Firefox says Ooops, do you want me to send the info about this crash to Apple? I click on Yes, please. Do you want me to stop doing this, to improve the Flash image? PS I have to admit, I am doing it several times a day, so maybe that's why Jobs thinks it is so bad Cheers, Dmitri.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
This is actually wrong. the SWF format is open and documented for all to use ( http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/ ). Are you aware of any restrictions placed upon use of the specification that do not make it open? Adobe's Flash Player, on the other hand, is very proprietary. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: On 04/05/2010, at 9:39 AM, Oleg Sivokon wrote: SWF is not a proprietary format, Yes. It. Is.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
And this is the point the moderators should step in to shut this thread down. We've brought ourselves to the no it isn't, yes it is arguing point guys. Can we please let this thread die with a little dignity, and we can all jump in on the next one, unless someone wants to make a blog post where we can continue this in the comments ;) Gk.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
It's PUBLISHED. That's not the same as OPEN. Open formats, like SVG, are generally developed by a standards organisation, with input from any interested parties. Open formats, by definition, can be used without restriction by anyone. Proprietary formats, like Flash, are defined and controlled by private organisations, like Adobe. They may publish their format spec to encourage use of it, but they don't hand over control of it to a standards organisation. So Flash is a published, but proprietary, format. HTML and SVG, are open formats. Guy On 04/05/2010, at 11:31 PM, Jeffry Houser wrote: This is actually wrong. the SWF format is open and documented for all to use ( http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/ ). Are you aware of any restrictions placed upon use of the specification that do not make it open? Adobe's Flash Player, on the other hand, is very proprietary. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: On 04/05/2010, at 9:39 AM, Oleg Sivokon wrote: SWF is not a proprietary format, Yes. It. Is.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
What restrictions are placed upon the SWF format? None so far as I know. You can take the spec and do whatever you want with it; including creating alternate IDEs and alternate players. You might be able to argue that it is not a standard in the same way that HTML or SVG is. But, that doesn't make it non-open. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: It's PUBLISHED. That's not the same as OPEN. Open formats, like SVG, are generally developed by a standards organisation, with input from any interested parties. Open formats, by definition, can be used without restriction by anyone. Proprietary formats, like Flash, are defined and controlled by private organisations, like Adobe. They may publish their format spec to encourage use of it, but they don't hand over control of it to a standards organisation. So Flash is a published, but proprietary, format. HTML and SVG, are open formats. Guy On 04/05/2010, at 11:31 PM, Jeffry Houser wrote: This is actually wrong. the SWF format is open and documented for all to use ( http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/ ). Are you aware of any restrictions placed upon use of the specification that do not make it open? Adobe's Flash Player, on the other hand, is very proprietary. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton guy@ wrote: On 04/05/2010, at 9:39 AM, Oleg Sivokon wrote: SWF is not a proprietary format, Yes. It. Is.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
OK, I will say no more. We are really not reaching a decision here and not listening to each other, so, there's no point to continue.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I think open and closed is too broad... and their definitions are moot. If anything Flash is a daywalker. A half breed. Its a creature of the night but it can exist during the day. It doesn't have to feed on human blood but you wouldn't want to be around him when he's hungry. especially on the feast of a thousand moons. unless of course you've been turned. and in vampire society there's pure blood and non-pure blood (the turned). pure bloods are born-vampires, offspring that were conceived between two turn-blood or born vampires. both carries with it a specific connotation that is reflected in their society and hierarchy. ...what were we talking about? On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Guy Morton g...@alchemy.com.au wrote: It's PUBLISHED. That's not the same as OPEN. Open formats, like SVG, are generally developed by a standards organisation, with input from any interested parties. Open formats, by definition, can be used without restriction by anyone. Proprietary formats, like Flash, are defined and controlled by private organisations, like Adobe. They may publish their format spec to encourage use of it, but they don't hand over control of it to a standards organisation. So Flash is a published, but proprietary, format. HTML and SVG, are open formats. Guy On 04/05/2010, at 11:31 PM, Jeffry Houser wrote: This is actually wrong. the SWF format is open and documented for all to use ( http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/ ). Are you aware of any restrictions placed upon use of the specification that do not make it open? Adobe's Flash Player, on the other hand, is very proprietary. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: On 04/05/2010, at 9:39 AM, Oleg Sivokon wrote: SWF is not a proprietary format, Yes. It. Is.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I think open and closed is too broad... and their definitions are moot. If anything Flash is a daywalker. A half breed. Its a creature of the night but it can exist during the day. It doesn't have to feed on human blood but you wouldn't want to be around him when he's hungry. especially on the feast of a thousand moons. unless of course you've been turned. and in vampire society there's pure blood and non-pure blood (the turned). pure bloods are born-vampires, offspring that were conceived between two turn-blood or born vampires. both carries with it a specific connotation that is reflected in their society and hierarchy. ...what were we talking about? hehehe
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I am failing to see what the issue is on having a proprietary player is anyways. If the company is as devoted to making it better (as adobe seems to be with the whole flash platform experience) what is the issue? Most companies I know that product web/software products are closed and proprietary. Ever seen the inner workings of MS Word or iPhoto? I am all about committee standard projects and open source projects. Keeps my budget down, but I am also just as ok with a company that makes a product that I enjoy both as a developer and as a user. (Insert Kool-Aid joke here). Also can't help but giggle when Steve talks about openness. This coming from the company that produces a phone where you can't even replace the battery or screen. Also, wasn't he the guy who tried to sue people for installing Mac OS on non Mac machines? Also, don't bitch about plugins when your Quicktime is a plug in too... If Steve Jobs doesn't want Flash Player on the iWhatever, so be it. Stick to your guns and call it a life. Stop beating it publicly. I am bored with it. Plenty of other Phones out there that will support it. Trick is to make them better and the mobile experience better so the iWhatever falls short. That is on us, the developers and designers of Flash media, to do. Committee standards are fine and there are a lot of things in the web universe that are governed by committee. BUT having some things are just fine when controlled by a company dedicated to improving and refining the product. Seems ever since Steve Jobs opened his iMouth there is a negative vibe about Abode solely owning a product thats its done a pretty good job at improving. Keep it closed, keep it proprietary, and keep it coming. (Even though they are opening a lot of it up). With our without the iWhatever support, Flash will continue along side of HTML5. I am still keen on Flash Player since I don't have to worry about if the browser supports JS or not. My stuff always renders the same as long as the plugin is there. Jingle...jingle...there is my 2 cents (which worth about half of that)
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I just dont care. I have never went out my way to support Mac, ever. I think i made a mac screensaver once. Sorry guys im just not interested in it. Lets buy an apple which doesnt run anything versus a pc which does everything you throw at it. No thanks. If iplatform wont support flash, then who really cares? We never have been able to so whats the problem? Do people think you would be building a house of gold bars just because you make some pod/pad/phone apps? Have you even see the app store? 96% of it is total garbage. Even if you could make a flash app, its almost invisible in a sea of garbage. As keith peters once commented its like winning the lottery to get it right. Leave him to it. When HTML5 has 3d libraries and physics engines then ill consider the move, right now its not about technology. People will always download the flash runtime because it has a healthy community and its not a burden for the user. People are used to it. If you make a good app, people will embrace the platform it runs on. A 2+mb player or whatever isnt going to burden anyone in 2020. Its so far off that its comical. On 4 May 2010 17:42, Wally Kolcz wko...@isavepets.com wrote: I am failing to see what the issue is on having a proprietary player is anyways. If the company is as devoted to making it better (as adobe seems to be with the whole flash platform experience) what is the issue? Most companies I know that product web/software products are closed and proprietary. Ever seen the inner workings of MS Word or iPhoto? I am all about committee standard projects and open source projects. Keeps my budget down, but I am also just as ok with a company that makes a product that I enjoy both as a developer and as a user. (Insert Kool-Aid joke here). Also can't help but giggle when Steve talks about openness. This coming from the company that produces a phone where you can't even replace the battery or screen. Also, wasn't he the guy who tried to sue people for installing Mac OS on non Mac machines? Also, don't bitch about plugins when your Quicktime is a plug in too... If Steve Jobs doesn't want Flash Player on the iWhatever, so be it. Stick to your guns and call it a life. Stop beating it publicly. I am bored with it. Plenty of other Phones out there that will support it. Trick is to make them better and the mobile experience better so the iWhatever falls short. That is on us, the developers and designers of Flash media, to do. Committee standards are fine and there are a lot of things in the web universe that are governed by committee. BUT having some things are just fine when controlled by a company dedicated to improving and refining the product. Seems ever since Steve Jobs opened his iMouth there is a negative vibe about Abode solely owning a product thats its done a pretty good job at improving. Keep it closed, keep it proprietary, and keep it coming. (Even though they are opening a lot of it up). With our without the iWhatever support, Flash will continue along side of HTML5. I am still keen on Flash Player since I don't have to worry about if the browser supports JS or not. My stuff always renders the same as long as the plugin is there. Jingle...jingle...there is my 2 cents (which worth about half of that)
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
The best part is that HTML5 video is going to be based on H.264 - which is not only a proprietary codec, BUT COSTS MONEY! At least flash is free. Here's an excerpt of what happened with gif: The web in 1999 was a lot smaller than it is today, so a lot of people don’t remember what happened back when Unisys decided to start to enforce their GIF-related patentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gif#Unisys_and_LZW_patent_enforcement. GIF was already widely used on the web as a fundamental web technology. Much like the codecs we’re talking about today it wasn’t in any particular spec but thanks to network effects it was in use basically everywhere. Unisys was asking some web site owners $5,000-$7,500 to able to use GIFs on their sites. Note that these patents expired about five years ago, so this isn’t an issue today, but it’s still instructive. It’s scary to think of a world where you would have to fork up $5000 just to be able to use images on a web site. Think about all of the opportunity, the weblogs, the search engines (even Google!) and all the other the simple ideas that became major services that would never have been started because of a huge tax being put on being able to use a*fundamental* web technology. It makes the web as a democratic technology distinctly un-democratic. from ( http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/weblog/2010/01/html5-video-and-h-264-what-history-tells-us-and-why-were-standing-with-the-web/ )
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I love how people with little or no actual experience of the Mac platform apparently know what it can and can't do. I'm writing this on a an iMac that's running Mac OSX and Windows XP at the same time. Can your PC do that? That was a rhetorical question, by the way. If you don't see any benefits to open standards then you're just not interested in looking, in which case there is no point in talking about them to you. And yes, good apps and a 2Mb runtime, no problem, I'm sure there will continue to be a market for them. On 05/05/2010, at 6:57 AM, Clark Stevenson wrote: I just dont care. I have never went out my way to support Mac, ever. I think i made a mac screensaver once. Sorry guys im just not interested in it. Lets buy an apple which doesnt run anything versus a pc which does everything you throw at it. No thanks. If iplatform wont support flash, then who really cares? We never have been able to so whats the problem? Do people think you would be building a house of gold bars just because you make some pod/pad/phone apps? Have you even see the app store? 96% of it is total garbage. Even if you could make a flash app, its almost invisible in a sea of garbage. As keith peters once commented its like winning the lottery to get it right. Leave him to it. When HTML5 has 3d libraries and physics engines then ill consider the move, right now its not about technology. People will always download the flash runtime because it has a healthy community and its not a burden for the user. People are used to it. If you make a good app, people will embrace the platform it runs on. A 2+mb player or whatever isnt going to burden anyone in 2020. Its so far off that its comical. On 4 May 2010 17:42, Wally Kolcz wko...@isavepets.com wrote: I am failing to see what the issue is on having a proprietary player is anyways. If the company is as devoted to making it better (as adobe seems to be with the whole flash platform experience) what is the issue? Most companies I know that product web/software products are closed and proprietary. Ever seen the inner workings of MS Word or iPhoto? I am all about committee standard projects and open source projects. Keeps my budget down, but I am also just as ok with a company that makes a product that I enjoy both as a developer and as a user. (Insert Kool-Aid joke here). Also can't help but giggle when Steve talks about openness. This coming from the company that produces a phone where you can't even replace the battery or screen. Also, wasn't he the guy who tried to sue people for installing Mac OS on non Mac machines? Also, don't bitch about plugins when your Quicktime is a plug in too... If Steve Jobs doesn't want Flash Player on the iWhatever, so be it. Stick to your guns and call it a life. Stop beating it publicly. I am bored with it. Plenty of other Phones out there that will support it. Trick is to make them better and the mobile experience better so the iWhatever falls short. That is on us, the developers and designers of Flash media, to do. Committee standards are fine and there are a lot of things in the web universe that are governed by committee. BUT having some things are just fine when controlled by a company dedicated to improving and refining the product. Seems ever since Steve Jobs opened his iMouth there is a negative vibe about Abode solely owning a product thats its done a pretty good job at improving. Keep it closed, keep it proprietary, and keep it coming. (Even though they are opening a lot of it up). With our without the iWhatever support, Flash will continue along side of HTML5. I am still keen on Flash Player since I don't have to worry about if the browser supports JS or not. My stuff always renders the same as long as the plugin is there. Jingle...jingle...there is my 2 cents (which worth about half of that)
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I agree that's a risk and would prefer to see some clear direction as to how patents covering h.264 will be enforced in the future. Flash decodes h.264 video so it will still get swept up in the same issues as HTML5 will, should those issues arise, so I don't see how Flash is the answer to this problem. On 05/05/2010, at 8:43 AM, Baz wrote: The best part is that HTML5 video is going to be based on H.264 - which is not only a proprietary codec, BUT COSTS MONEY! At least flash is free. Here's an excerpt of what happened with gif: The web in 1999 was a lot smaller than it is today, so a lot of people don’t remember what happened back when Unisys decided to start to enforce their GIF-related patents. GIF was already widely used on the web as a fundamental web technology. Much like the codecs we’re talking about today it wasn’t in any particular spec but thanks to network effects it was in use basically everywhere. Unisys was asking some web site owners $5,000-$7,500 to able to use GIFs on their sites. Note that these patents expired about five years ago, so this isn’t an issue today, but it’s still instructive. It’s scary to think of a world where you would have to fork up $5000 just to be able to use images on a web site. Think about all of the opportunity, the weblogs, the search engines (even Google!) and all the other the simple ideas that became major services that would never have been started because of a huge tax being put on being able to use afundamental web technology. It makes the web as a democratic technology distinctly un-democratic. from (http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/weblog/2010/01/html5-video-and-h-264-what-history-tells-us-and-why-were-standing-with-the-web/)
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Hi Jeff, Seriously, you can not see the difference between published and open? No kidding? If I want to introduce some changes in SWF format, what should I do to achieve this?. PS Please don't use Why do you need this, anyway(c) as this is a copyrighted answer in Apple community. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Jeffry Houser j...@... wrote: What restrictions are placed upon the SWF format? None so far as I know. You can take the spec and do whatever you want with it; including creating alternate IDEs and alternate players. You might be able to argue that it is not a standard in the same way that HTML or SVG is. But, that doesn't make it non-open. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton guy@ wrote: It's PUBLISHED. That's not the same as OPEN. Open formats, like SVG, are generally developed by a standards organisation, with input from any interested parties. Open formats, by definition, can be used without restriction by anyone. Proprietary formats, like Flash, are defined and controlled by private organisations, like Adobe. They may publish their format spec to encourage use of it, but they don't hand over control of it to a standards organisation. So Flash is a published, but proprietary, format. HTML and SVG, are open formats. Guy On 04/05/2010, at 11:31 PM, Jeffry Houser wrote: This is actually wrong. the SWF format is open and documented for all to use ( http://www.adobe.com/devnet/swf/ ). Are you aware of any restrictions placed upon use of the specification that do not make it open? Adobe's Flash Player, on the other hand, is very proprietary. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton guy@ wrote: On 04/05/2010, at 9:39 AM, Oleg Sivokon wrote: SWF is not a proprietary format, Yes. It. Is.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Mea culpa. Everytime Flash plugin crashes and Firefox says Ooops, do you want me to send the info about this crash to Apple? I click on Yes, please. Do you want me to stop doing this, to improve the Flash image? PS I have to admit, I am doing it several times a day, so maybe that's why Jobs thinks it is so bad Cheers, Dmitri. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Jochem van Dieten joch...@... wrote: On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:55 AM, Guy Morton wrote: On 30/04/2010, at 6:22 PM, Tom Chiverton wrote: That article is so wrong, in so many places, but the corrections will never get the same exposure. Good tactic, unfortunately. I'm interested to know where you think he is factually wrong. I believe Steve Jobs is factually wrong in the following claim: We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. On a modern Operating System a userland application can not crash the system. Only errors in hardware or in privileged processes (the kernel and drivers) running in ring 0 can crash can operating system. Ring 3 code can not. Now I immediately believe him if he wants to claim that Flash is the number one reason Safari or Camino crashes. But the only way I can imagine Flash crashing the system is if Mac OS X allows userland applications access to hardware. And operating systems that allow that deserve to crash. Jochem -- Jochem van Dieten http://jochem.vandieten.net/
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
OK, if you really-really don't understand the problem, let me rephrase it: one company (A) developing proprietary tools devices refuses to use another's company(B) proprietary product on their proprietary devices. What's the problem? No problem! PS The real problem is that company B believes that they have developed a technology standard which should be used and adopted to the same level as HTML or XML or TCP/IP. Well, this is a company B problem. And unfortunately this is our(developers) problem as well. Cheers, Dmitri. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Wally Kolcz wko...@... wrote: I am failing to see what the issue is on having a proprietary player is anyways. If the company is as devoted to making it better (as adobe seems to be with the whole flash platform experience) what is the issue? Most companies I know that product web/software products are closed and proprietary. Ever seen the inner workings of MS Word or iPhoto? I am all about committee standard projects and open source projects. Keeps my budget down, but I am also just as ok with a company that makes a product that I enjoy both as a developer and as a user. (Insert Kool-Aid joke here). Also can't help but giggle when Steve talks about openness. This coming from the company that produces a phone where you can't even replace the battery or screen. Also, wasn't he the guy who tried to sue people for installing Mac OS on non Mac machines? Also, don't bitch about plugins when your Quicktime is a plug in too... If Steve Jobs doesn't want Flash Player on the iWhatever, so be it. Stick to your guns and call it a life. Stop beating it publicly. I am bored with it. Plenty of other Phones out there that will support it. Trick is to make them better and the mobile experience better so the iWhatever falls short. That is on us, the developers and designers of Flash media, to do. Committee standards are fine and there are a lot of things in the web universe that are governed by committee. BUT having some things are just fine when controlled by a company dedicated to improving and refining the product. Seems ever since Steve Jobs opened his iMouth there is a negative vibe about Abode solely owning a product thats its done a pretty good job at improving. Keep it closed, keep it proprietary, and keep it coming. (Even though they are opening a lot of it up). With our without the iWhatever support, Flash will continue along side of HTML5. I am still keen on Flash Player since I don't have to worry about if the browser supports JS or not. My stuff always renders the same as long as the plugin is there. Jingle...jingle...there is my 2 cents (which worth about half of that)
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
So much vitriol against poor Mr. Jobs. You'd swear he piddled in you guys' corn flakes. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Laurence lmacne...@... wrote: The whole reason I chose to learn Flex is that it (at the time) ran on every available platform. It was THE cross-platform language to learn. Come now. Jobs didn't advise you to learn Flash. That was your own initiative. In fact, I'm pretty sure if you'd asked Jobs, say, 3-5 years back which languages/frameworks you should learn, Flash would not have been one of them. And in fact, anyone with any sense would have advised you that it's silly to specialize in some company's proprietary software and expect that to be the be-all and end-all of your training. Really, should Jobs now subsidize your paycheck because you chose to focus entirely on a technology that has _always_ been buggy on Macs? My arguments are not specious -- I *was* a part of that market at one time. I'm being shut out of a market through NO FAULT OF MY OWN. Every Apple product in the world will soon have zero support for Flash -- that's NOT what I signed up for when I learned Flex. The MAIN REASON I learned Flex was for its cross-platform capabilites. I never had to worry about what system my programs were running on. Now Apple is gone from that equation -- ergo 25% of my customers just disappeared, unless I can get them all to buy PCs. Thanks, Steve! He hasn't shut you out. You are just refusing to adapt to the new rules. Go learn Objective C, or whatever Jobs wants you to learn if you want to stay in the Mac game. It's probably not hard to learn, either -- possibly even fun, if Jobs recommends it. It just really angers me if I were to own a device and some entity somewhere tells me I cannot run my own software on it. I would be ranting against MS or Linux just as angrily, if they were to suddenly come out and say I couldn't run a particular piece of software just because they don't like it anymore. (And, yes I read that article where MS says that HTML5 is the 'future of the internet.' They said nothing about removing Flash support from Microsoft Windows in that article. Steve Jobs IS going to remove Flash from all Apple products everywhere -- THAT'S my problem with this!) Newflash: Microsoft reserves the right to remove support for Flash if they decide it's in their long-term commercial interest to do so. Consider yourself warned. If you want to develop for the iP*, then learn objective C or use HTML5/Javascript. If you don't then don't. Again, it's a simple choice you can make. It's NOT a simple choice -- learning a whole other programming language is not a simple task. Before old Steve-o came out against Flash, I could write one program that would work on Windows, Linux, and Mac. Now Mac is gone from that equation -- thanks to some facist prick who thinks he knows everything that everyone else should do. Stop the name calling and hit the books, G. You sound a bit like a man with a pickaxe complaining that the construction companies have decided to use only jackhammers. Yes, technologies do change -- but it should be the free market that determines which technologies survive and which don't, not some ivory-tower egghead who determines by fiat what's best for everyone. THAT'S why I called Steve Jobs a bastard. Perhaps I should've said elitist bastard to make it clearer. I truly DESPISE it when ONE person has the power to mess up things in my life. If everyone decided ON THEIR OWN to stop using Adobe Flash, that would be a completely different story -- the majority would have spoken, and I could more easily accept the outcome. But Jobs is simply deciding that he knows best, and we're going to all follow him because he's so damn smart. THAT is not the free market! Come on, bro. It's capitalism at work. You don't like it, let's all lobby the government to take these sorts of decisions out of the hands of capricious executives -- and put them in the hands of the democratic majority, where they obviously belong. Technology will move forward so much faster without those pesky businessmen in the way.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
HTC HD2 sold out in a matter of days since it hit the US, now verizon and ATT are advertising it. Has flash, and since jobs rant i am very interested, especaiily given Iphones poor connectivity into the business office world. I think my company would applaud if they cut out flash because uor netwrk guys hate Macs Just another twisted tyrant showing his skin 2 centts Bill - Bill - On May 2, 2010, at 8:00 PM, Laurence lmacne...@comcast.net wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: Jeez...it's *three* devices, and you *do* have a choice... It's gonna be a hell of a lot more than just 3 portable devices, when Jobs removes Flash from OSX. That's every Mac in the world. There are a LOT of Macs out there... The whole reason I chose to learn Flex is that it (at the time) ran on every available platform. It was THE cross-platform language to learn. You're annoyed because you're being shut out of a market you want to be in, but your arguments as to why you should be allowed into that market are specious. My arguments are not specious -- I *was* a part of that market at one time. I'm being shut out of a market through NO FAULT OF MY OWN. Every Apple product in the world will soon have zero support for Flash -- that's NOT what I signed up for when I learned Flex. The MAIN REASON I learned Flex was for its cross-platform capabilites. I never had to worry about what system my programs were running on. Now Apple is gone from that equation -- ergo 25% of my customers just disappeared, unless I can get them all to buy PCs. Thanks, Steve! If you buy an iPod/Pad/Phone, you buy it as is, knowing what it can and can't do. It can't do Flash. If you don't like that, don't buy the device, it's really very simple. If you want to hack it to make it capable of running Flash, then sure, go ahead, no-one is going to sue you. You might not be able to claim on your warranty or update the OS once you do that but, yes, it's your choice if you want to go that way. Most people don't because most people can actually live without Flash, believe it or not. I agree with you here -- knowing in advance that it doesn't run Flash is a good thing, and people can then make a choice accordingly. It just really angers me if I were to own a device and some entity somewhere tells me I cannot run my own software on it. I would be ranting against MS or Linux just as angrily, if they were to suddenly come out and say I couldn't run a particular piece of software just because they don't like it anymore. (And, yes I read that article where MS says that HTML5 is the 'future of the internet.' They said nothing about removing Flash support from Microsoft Windows in that article. Steve Jobs IS going to remove Flash from all Apple products everywhere -- THAT'S my problem with this!) If you want to develop for the iP*, then learn objective C or use HTML5/Javascript. If you don't then don't. Again, it's a simple choice you can make. It's NOT a simple choice -- learning a whole other programming language is not a simple task. Before old Steve-o came out against Flash, I could write one program that would work on Windows, Linux, and Mac. Now Mac is gone from that equation -- thanks to some facist prick who thinks he knows everything that everyone else should do. Technologies change, sometimes their fortunes rise and sometimes they fall. Flash has been the undisputed winner in the RIA wars up till now. Jobs is betting the future of the iP* platform on HTML5. Maybe he's wrong about it, but maybe he isn't. Time will tell. Yes, technologies do change -- but it should be the free market that determines which technologies survive and which don't, not some ivory-tower egghead who determines by fiat what's best for everyone. THAT'S why I called Steve Jobs a bastard. Perhaps I should've said elitist bastard to make it clearer. I truly DESPISE it when ONE person has the power to mess up things in my life. If everyone decided ON THEIR OWN to stop using Adobe Flash, that would be a completely different story -- the majority would have spoken, and I could more easily accept the outcome. But Jobs is simply deciding that he knows best, and we're going to all follow him because he's so damn smart. THAT is not the free market!
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Where does it say that Apple is dropping support for plugins like Flash on Mac OSX? I can't see that happening. I can't even imagine how they'd do it if they wanted to. Guy On 03/05/2010, at 10:00 AM, Laurence wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: Jeez...it's *three* devices, and you *do* have a choice... It's gonna be a hell of a lot more than just 3 portable devices, when Jobs removes Flash from OSX. That's every Mac in the world. There are a LOT of Macs out there... The whole reason I chose to learn Flex is that it (at the time) ran on every available platform. It was THE cross-platform language to learn. You're annoyed because you're being shut out of a market you want to be in, but your arguments as to why you should be allowed into that market are specious. My arguments are not specious -- I *was* a part of that market at one time. I'm being shut out of a market through NO FAULT OF MY OWN. Every Apple product in the world will soon have zero support for Flash -- that's NOT what I signed up for when I learned Flex. The MAIN REASON I learned Flex was for its cross-platform capabilites. I never had to worry about what system my programs were running on. Now Apple is gone from that equation -- ergo 25% of my customers just disappeared, unless I can get them all to buy PCs. Thanks, Steve! If you buy an iPod/Pad/Phone, you buy it as is, knowing what it can and can't do. It can't do Flash. If you don't like that, don't buy the device, it's really very simple. If you want to hack it to make it capable of running Flash, then sure, go ahead, no-one is going to sue you. You might not be able to claim on your warranty or update the OS once you do that but, yes, it's your choice if you want to go that way. Most people don't because most people can actually live without Flash, believe it or not. I agree with you here -- knowing in advance that it doesn't run Flash is a good thing, and people can then make a choice accordingly. It just really angers me if I were to own a device and some entity somewhere tells me I cannot run my own software on it. I would be ranting against MS or Linux just as angrily, if they were to suddenly come out and say I couldn't run a particular piece of software just because they don't like it anymore. (And, yes I read that article where MS says that HTML5 is the 'future of the internet.' They said nothing about removing Flash support from Microsoft Windows in that article. Steve Jobs IS going to remove Flash from all Apple products everywhere -- THAT'S my problem with this!) If you want to develop for the iP*, then learn objective C or use HTML5/Javascript. If you don't then don't. Again, it's a simple choice you can make. It's NOT a simple choice -- learning a whole other programming language is not a simple task. Before old Steve-o came out against Flash, I could write one program that would work on Windows, Linux, and Mac. Now Mac is gone from that equation -- thanks to some facist prick who thinks he knows everything that everyone else should do. Technologies change, sometimes their fortunes rise and sometimes they fall. Flash has been the undisputed winner in the RIA wars up till now. Jobs is betting the future of the iP* platform on HTML5. Maybe he's wrong about it, but maybe he isn't. Time will tell. Yes, technologies do change -- but it should be the free market that determines which technologies survive and which don't, not some ivory-tower egghead who determines by fiat what's best for everyone. THAT'S why I called Steve Jobs a bastard. Perhaps I should've said elitist bastard to make it clearer. I truly DESPISE it when ONE person has the power to mess up things in my life. If everyone decided ON THEIR OWN to stop using Adobe Flash, that would be a completely different story -- the majority would have spoken, and I could more easily accept the outcome. But Jobs is simply deciding that he knows best, and we're going to all follow him because he's so damn smart. THAT is not the free market!
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Everybody is talking about learning another language. That's the easy part. It's porting an entire application that has several 100,000 lines of code. That's that hard part. Someone mentioned losing flash support on all Macs. Is that true? I hope not. I have over a million users using my flash app and about 25% of them have macs. That would be bad.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
First time I explicitly that Apple would prevent Flash from being installed on Macs. The specific rumor I heard was that the next version of OSX would move to an App store model similar to their devices. It sounds so lubricious I can't imagine it being true. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Battershall, Jeff jeff.battersh...@... wrote: Let's not get carried away here - no way is Apple going to stop supporting Flash on the Mac. That's one of those sky is falling' rumors that always start up when something like this happens.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Allegedly, Steve my turtle neck has cut off the blood to my brain Jobs denied this in an email, but given the way the question was worded (will you confirm that...) and the answer (nope), it's not done much to stem the rumours! Gk. From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcod...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jeffry Houser Sent: 03 May 2010 16:04 To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs First time I explicitly that Apple would prevent Flash from being installed on Macs. The specific rumor I heard was that the next version of OSX would move to an App store model similar to their devices. It sounds so lubricious I can't imagine it being true.
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
If we are swapping rumours though... I liked the one that Apple had demanded a truly ridiculous sum of money from Adobe yearly to allow Flash on the iPhone, and when Adobe refused to pay up, SJ made it his mission to prevent it from happening! I'd call it a tithe, but that brings far too many religious connotations to be associated with Jobs... Gk.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
There are 2 distinct and separate anti-Adobe issues from Apple. One is the anti-flash stance, which we have been focusing on in this thread - but a separate and important second issue is Apple disallowing *NATIVE* IPHONE BINARIES that are created using CS5: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/logged_in/abansod_iphone.html. So just to be 1000% clear, you write code in AS3, then the compiler outputs a pure iphone binary - there is no Flash, no runtime, no swf - nothing. So my question is, how would Apple even know what tools I used to create an app? What if I made my own code generator in objective C, is that allowed? Are they also going to say I'm not allowed to use notepad to write my code? Cheers, Baz On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 8:15 AM, Gregor Kiddie gregor.kid...@channeladvisor.com wrote: If we are swapping rumours though... I liked the one that Apple had demanded a truly ridiculous sum of money from Adobe yearly to allow Flash on the iPhone, and when Adobe refused to pay up, SJ made it his mission to prevent it from happening! I’d call it a tithe, but that brings far too many religious connotations to be associated with Jobs... Gk.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I think you meant ludicrous... lubricious |loōˈbri sh əs| (also lubricous |ˈloōbrikəs|) adjective 1 offensively displaying or intended to arouse sexual desire. 2 smooth and slippery with oil or a similar substance. :-) On 04/05/2010, at 1:04 AM, Jeffry Houser wrote: First time I explicitly that Apple would prevent Flash from being installed on Macs. The specific rumor I heard was that the next version of OSX would move to an App store model similar to their devices. It sounds so lubricious I can't imagine it being true. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Battershall, Jeff jeff.battersh...@... wrote: Let's not get carried away here - no way is Apple going to stop supporting Flash on the Mac. That's one of those sky is falling' rumors that always start up when something like this happens.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I'm pretty new to Flash so I don't know all the technical details under the covers (e.g. Flash is buggy on Macs, who supported what video format first, etc) but one thing that strikes me as odd in the manifesto published by Apple is the attack of Flash for not being open. That strikes me as hypocrisy. The people defending Apple on these threads are basically saying we, as developers targeting these devices, need to go learn some limited set of languages hand-picked by people at a corporation. That's not open. Further, the corporation controls the distribution of software through the Apple Store. If the corporation doesn't like our software for some reason they won't allow it. That's not open. As we all now know now the corporation will not only control the distribution of end user applications it will also be actively involved in censoring the software platforms that may be used on the devices...even to the point of not allowing Flash of J2ME, two of the most widely used platforms out there. That's not open. If you think Apple is going to win and corner the market on mobile devices for eternity go learn Objective C and whatever obscure languages they come up with. I personally am not going to put all my eggs in one basket in case Apple ends up with 20% of the market share instead of 90%. IMO truly open devices will always be out there and they have a built in advantage over proprietary technologies like i*.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Amy amyblankens...@... wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, mitek17 mitek17@ wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Seth Caldwell wiz@ wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Get cracking at what? Steve Jobs is on record as saying that no matter what Adobe does with the player, the iPhone and iTampon won't support it. -Amy Frankly, I figured all this flap over Flash was because they wanted to try to force Adobe to make Flash-player open-source... And now you're saying that even if Adobe does that, they still won't allow Flash on their devices? That's stupid and stubborn of Jobs... And besides, if I own a device (I don't own any Apple devices, but if I did) I should be allowed to run whatever software I want to on it. It's MY device, not his. I own it, not him -- if he wants to give me one, and pay the monthly service for it, then he can tell me what I can run on it. Only then. Basically what Jobs is doing is screwing himself out of any potential business that I would ever give him. (For the project I'm working on now, we had plans to purchase about 50 iPads to use on-site. That's not gonna happen now... Glad doin' business with you, Steve -- we'll be buying Google or Dell tablets when they are available.) And it also pisses me off that everyone talks about video on Flash, as if that's the only thing it does. Jobs is singlehandedly ruining OUR jobs as Flex developers. That's really what it boils down to -- he's trying to put us out of business. We already can't write apps for Apple's portable devices -- and when he cuts off Flash support in OSX, there goes every Mac in the world. Thanks for ruining my job, Steve. Bastard. Laurence MacNeill Mableton, Georgia, USA
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Jeez...it's *three* devices, and you *do* have a choice... You're annoyed because you're being shut out of a market you want to be in, but your arguments as to why you should be allowed into that market are specious. If you buy an iPod/Pad/Phone, you buy it as is, knowing what it can and can't do. It can't do Flash. If you don't like that, don't buy the device, it's really very simple. If you want to hack it to make it capable of running Flash, then sure, go ahead, no-one is going to sue you. You might not be able to claim on your warranty or update the OS once you do that but, yes, it's your choice if you want to go that way. Most people don't because most people can actually live without Flash, believe it or not. If you want to develop for the iP*, then learn objective C or use HTML5/Javascript. If you don't then don't. Again, it's a simple choice you can make. Technologies change, sometimes their fortunes rise and sometimes they fall. Flash has been the undisputed winner in the RIA wars up till now. Jobs is betting the future of the iP* platform on HTML5. Maybe he's wrong about it, but maybe he isn't. Time will tell. Guy On 03/05/2010, at 8:22 AM, Laurence wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Amy amyblankens...@... wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, mitek17 mitek17@ wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Seth Caldwell wiz@ wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Get cracking at what? Steve Jobs is on record as saying that no matter what Adobe does with the player, the iPhone and iTampon won't support it. -Amy Frankly, I figured all this flap over Flash was because they wanted to try to force Adobe to make Flash-player open-source... And now you're saying that even if Adobe does that, they still won't allow Flash on their devices? That's stupid and stubborn of Jobs... And besides, if I own a device (I don't own any Apple devices, but if I did) I should be allowed to run whatever software I want to on it. It's MY device, not his. I own it, not him -- if he wants to give me one, and pay the monthly service for it, then he can tell me what I can run on it. Only then. Basically what Jobs is doing is screwing himself out of any potential business that I would ever give him. (For the project I'm working on now, we had plans to purchase about 50 iPads to use on-site. That's not gonna happen now... Glad doin' business with you, Steve -- we'll be buying Google or Dell tablets when they are available.) And it also pisses me off that everyone talks about video on Flash, as if that's the only thing it does. Jobs is singlehandedly ruining OUR jobs as Flex developers. That's really what it boils down to -- he's trying to put us out of business. We already can't write apps for Apple's portable devices -- and when he cuts off Flash support in OSX, there goes every Mac in the world. Thanks for ruining my job, Steve. Bastard. Laurence MacNeill Mableton, Georgia, USA
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
you must be kidding. Gnash is not ready for use in commercial projects. Looking at the latest readme.txt: -Key events are not handled - Resizing browser window when plugin is running , will crash browser. Since 2005 they have not figured it out? This puppy must be put to sleep. PS And yes, exactly, we need flash.* sources :) Cheers! --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Oleg Sivokon olegsivo...@... wrote: @ mitek17 Erm... GNash? Why the heck do you need the player sources? You have the SWF specs - player is the program that plays SWF files, you can make your own... In fact, GNash does it already and is GNU program, the problem is flash.* (AS3) package which is a proprietary extension to ECMAScript. If you want Flash to be an open standard - this is what you should be asking for :) Sorry, it's just like asking for ICQ sources while you want to implement OSCAR or Jabber.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
mitek17 Yeah, I know that... well, I didn't say it's usable for commercial purposes. That's true it isn't. What I said is that, if it would matter more to Adobe these project exist and continue to develop, it would be better, for the image at least. Well, you know, MS doesn't really support MoonLite or Mono, but it kind of mentions it everywhere, and, well, to be honest, I don't know what the exact status of their relationship is :) But, they aren't fighting, or, at least so it seems :) I mean, that's great and most welcomed that Adobe have OSS initiatives, but, there are some times, when you know there's an error in the built-in classes - the most obvious are the one in the Sound constructor and ExternalInterface serialization routines - you can even see the damn thing in the playerglobals.swc, but you cannot help it's being there... I don't know how much of engineering powers are dedicated to the Linux version of FP for example, but, it sounds like not to much, and it also looks like they don't really communicate with the rest of the Linux community... and, to be honest, the Linux Flash Player made by Adobe is... well, if Mac users had that, I would side with Steven Jobs admirers in this topic :D It is truly the most buggy software I've got so far in my installation :) (right now for w/e reason it doesn't display any serif fonts at all for eg.) I hope the remark about flash.* sources wasn't sarcastic, I really believe that would help. Not that I know of any initiative of writing an alternative Flash Player (I'm not sure GNash is alive yet - one thing true - apt-get finds it so far), but, technically, that would made the language an OSS one. But, again, that must be some commercial concern, of which I don't have enough knowledge to say any more. Best. Oleg
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: Jeez...it's *three* devices, and you *do* have a choice... It's gonna be a hell of a lot more than just 3 portable devices, when Jobs removes Flash from OSX. That's every Mac in the world. There are a LOT of Macs out there... The whole reason I chose to learn Flex is that it (at the time) ran on every available platform. It was THE cross-platform language to learn. You're annoyed because you're being shut out of a market you want to be in, but your arguments as to why you should be allowed into that market are specious. My arguments are not specious -- I *was* a part of that market at one time. I'm being shut out of a market through NO FAULT OF MY OWN. Every Apple product in the world will soon have zero support for Flash -- that's NOT what I signed up for when I learned Flex. The MAIN REASON I learned Flex was for its cross-platform capabilites. I never had to worry about what system my programs were running on. Now Apple is gone from that equation -- ergo 25% of my customers just disappeared, unless I can get them all to buy PCs. Thanks, Steve! If you buy an iPod/Pad/Phone, you buy it as is, knowing what it can and can't do. It can't do Flash. If you don't like that, don't buy the device, it's really very simple. If you want to hack it to make it capable of running Flash, then sure, go ahead, no-one is going to sue you. You might not be able to claim on your warranty or update the OS once you do that but, yes, it's your choice if you want to go that way. Most people don't because most people can actually live without Flash, believe it or not. I agree with you here -- knowing in advance that it doesn't run Flash is a good thing, and people can then make a choice accordingly. It just really angers me if I were to own a device and some entity somewhere tells me I cannot run my own software on it. I would be ranting against MS or Linux just as angrily, if they were to suddenly come out and say I couldn't run a particular piece of software just because they don't like it anymore. (And, yes I read that article where MS says that HTML5 is the 'future of the internet.' They said nothing about removing Flash support from Microsoft Windows in that article. Steve Jobs IS going to remove Flash from all Apple products everywhere -- THAT'S my problem with this!) If you want to develop for the iP*, then learn objective C or use HTML5/Javascript. If you don't then don't. Again, it's a simple choice you can make. It's NOT a simple choice -- learning a whole other programming language is not a simple task. Before old Steve-o came out against Flash, I could write one program that would work on Windows, Linux, and Mac. Now Mac is gone from that equation -- thanks to some facist prick who thinks he knows everything that everyone else should do. Technologies change, sometimes their fortunes rise and sometimes they fall. Flash has been the undisputed winner in the RIA wars up till now. Jobs is betting the future of the iP* platform on HTML5. Maybe he's wrong about it, but maybe he isn't. Time will tell. Yes, technologies do change -- but it should be the free market that determines which technologies survive and which don't, not some ivory-tower egghead who determines by fiat what's best for everyone. THAT'S why I called Steve Jobs a bastard. Perhaps I should've said elitist bastard to make it clearer. I truly DESPISE it when ONE person has the power to mess up things in my life. If everyone decided ON THEIR OWN to stop using Adobe Flash, that would be a completely different story -- the majority would have spoken, and I could more easily accept the outcome. But Jobs is simply deciding that he knows best, and we're going to all follow him because he's so damn smart. THAT is not the free market!
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
On 01/05/2010, at 1:54 PM, Amy wrote: It may be low, but there's a certain amount of logic to it, considering when Steve Jobs was out, he was given a liver transplant. In ancient times, the liver was considered to be the seat of anger. MPO is that there's been a lot of angry behavior coming out of Apple lately, and not just aimed at Adobe. I'd say the anger has almost uniformly been directed *at* Apple (and Jobs). Re-read his articlethere are no angry words there. People who don't like Apple tend to see everything Apple does as an attack on them and their choices, but it's like the egocentric person who thinks everything is about them - Apple can be acting in their own interests and not in yours *without* wishing *you* harm. I don't see Apple lining people up and forcing them to buy iPods, iPads, iPhones or iMacs, so, y'know, people can and will vote with their feet if Apple does stuff they don't like. For me, not supporting Flash on iP*s doesn't outweigh the other good things about the platform and devices, and I like the new emphasis on supporting web standards. Guy
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Hi Jeff, We are talking about Flex, not about the Creative Suite, right? What about Flex Builder for Linux? Stability of the platform? Performance issues? Debugging tools? Bugs fixed? AIR? Personally I don't understand the value of AIR as soon as can't talk to the hardware. Walter, what's the point? Offline application for ebay? Why do you need to do the online shopping offline? This is an oxymoron. PS I am currently profiling an idling application which takes 30-60% of CPU time with no user code executed whatsoever ( according to the Profiler which sucks big time). Please don't tell me that Flex/Flash is perfect and does not need the improvements. The memory performance issues are the highest priorities for our project. I came from the hardcore C++ land and I know how to make efficient robust applications. With Flash/Flex - it's a game with no determined approach. Although, I had a look at Flex 4 and I liked i. But still, 300 000 lines app conversion is a separate project. Cheers, Dmitri. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Battershall, Jeff jeff.battersh...@... wrote: Mike, Adobe get cracking - are you kidding me They've just released a slew of new products in the last two months; they're nearly done on FP 10.1, Air 2.0, and forged an important alliance with Google. What more do you want them to do before you can say they've gotten cracking? Jeff -Original Message- From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcod...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mitek17 Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 12:33 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Seth Caldwell wiz@ wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Hey, what's with Linux support? What is happening with exception handling? are we there yet? No? Adobe, are you still busy with FX prefix? How many more years it will take to implement the feature which should appear first in any development platform. It took us YEARS (sic!) for voting, whinging and asking to fix the bugs and provide basic features. Printing support? Forget it, the company which invented PDF Postscript is too busy with something else. Adobe, please wake up and make your call, otherwise it will be too late. PS By waking up I don't mean submitting another pile of letters to FTC :) -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Alternative FAQ location: https://share.acrobat.com/adc/document.do?docid=942dbdc8-e469-446f-b4cf-1e62079f6847 Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, PFD Studio p...@... wrote: The talk about openness is completely disingenuous. Flash/Flex/ActionScript is vastly more open than any of the relevant Apple technologies. Here is just a short list of open source projects: -Apache -FreeBSD -Linux -PostgreSQL -Firefox - GNU -Eclipse etc etc etc You can't be half-pregnant. Flash is a proprietary platform and does not matter if Tamarin is open source and Flex is open source. Show us the source code of Flash Player and we will fix your bugs. Until then, please don't call Flash open. PS I don't care about openness of Apple products, we are talking here about Internet technology available on all platforms - Windows, Mac, Linux. Mac Windows are proprietary, Linux is not, so what?
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
@ mitek17 Erm... GNash? Why the heck do you need the player sources? You have the SWF specs - player is the program that plays SWF files, you can make your own... In fact, GNash does it already and is GNU program, the problem is flash.* (AS3) package which is a proprietary extension to ECMAScript. If you want Flash to be an open standard - this is what you should be asking for :) Sorry, it's just like asking for ICQ sources while you want to implement OSCAR or Jabber.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: On 01/05/2010, at 1:54 PM, Amy wrote: It may be low, but there's a certain amount of logic to it, considering when Steve Jobs was out, he was given a liver transplant. In ancient times, the liver was considered to be the seat of anger. MPO is that there's been a lot of angry behavior coming out of Apple lately, and not just aimed at Adobe. I'd say the anger has almost uniformly been directed *at* Apple (and Jobs). Re-read his articlethere are no angry words there. People who don't like Apple tend to see everything Apple does as an attack on them and their choices, but it's like the egocentric person who thinks everything is about them - Apple can be acting in their own interests and not in yours *without* wishing *you* harm. I don't see Apple lining people up and forcing them to buy iPods, iPads, iPhones or iMacs, so, y'know, people can and will vote with their feet if Apple does stuff they don't like. For me, not supporting Flash on iP*s doesn't outweigh the other good things about the platform and devices, and I like the new emphasis on supporting web standards. Where have you been, with his fights with almost everyone, from HTC to Gizmodo's editor? I also don't see Apple's anti-competitive practices as none of my business, just like it wasn't none of our business that big banks were selling toxic assets to their clients. No one was lining people up forcing them to take out mortgages they couldn't afford, and no one was lining people up forcing investors to buy securities based on those mortgages, but a lot of people who didn't choose to do either wound up paying the price. MPO is that if too many developers jump on the Apple boat, they could wind up choking off parts of the market that I believe will be better for everyone (and certainly me) if they succeed. I'm not going to sit around on my hands and not try to prevent that, to whatever extent I can. http://www.insideria.com/2010/04/what-bugs-me-about-apple.html -Amy
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Global exception handling is in FP 10.1 and AIR 2.0. There should be better printing APIs in AIR 2.0 as well. These new features are not leveraged in the Flex framework because they were not committed until too late in our schedule for Flex 4.0, but they were committed before Jobs starting posting about Flash. On 4/29/10 9:33 PM, mitek17 mite...@gmail.com wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com , Seth Caldwell w...@... wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Hey, what's with Linux support? What is happening with exception handling? are we there yet? No? Adobe, are you still busy with FX prefix? How many more years it will take to implement the feature which should appear first in any development platform. It took us YEARS (sic!) for voting, whinging and asking to fix the bugs and provide basic features. Printing support? Forget it, the company which invented PDF Postscript is too busy with something else. Adobe, please wake up and make your call, otherwise it will be too late. PS By waking up I don't mean submitting another pile of letters to FTC :) -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe System, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-444 Created: 06/21/07 03:43 PM Is it already available? 10.1 is still pre-release beta with no API available for GEH. Almost 3 years...And counting. Printing improvements in Flex 4? Well, we have to trasnform 300 000 lines of code into Flex 4 first to check it. Does it finally do a second pass on validNextPage()? Alex, a question for you. Does anyone at Flex SDK Team know what's happening with matrix transform and properties of Flex containers? Flash itself respects transform method and updates all properties correctly. Is there any reason why the Flex containers are not updating their own properies after transform? PS I am a strong Flex/Flash platform supporter and we are working on a huge project written in Flex 3 and I want to see Flex/Flash alive. But with the current state of developers support and overall approach to the platform I would say that Adobe is not going to make it. Cheers, Dmitri. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Alex Harui aha...@... wrote: Global exception handling is in FP 10.1 and AIR 2.0. There should be better printing APIs in AIR 2.0 as well. These new features are not leveraged in the Flex framework because they were not committed until too late in our schedule for Flex 4.0, but they were committed before Jobs starting posting about Flash. On 4/29/10 9:33 PM, mitek17 mite...@... wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com , Seth Caldwell wiz@ wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Hey, what's with Linux support? What is happening with exception handling? are we there yet? No? Adobe, are you still busy with FX prefix? How many more years it will take to implement the feature which should appear first in any development platform. It took us YEARS (sic!) for voting, whinging and asking to fix the bugs and provide basic features. Printing support? Forget it, the company which invented PDF Postscript is too busy with something else. Adobe, please wake up and make your call, otherwise it will be too late. PS By waking up I don't mean submitting another pile of letters to FTC :) -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe System, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
RE: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Mike, Adobe get cracking - are you kidding me They've just released a slew of new products in the last two months; they're nearly done on FP 10.1, Air 2.0, and forged an important alliance with Google. What more do you want them to do before you can say they've gotten cracking? Jeff -Original Message- From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:flexcod...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mitek17 Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 12:33 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Seth Caldwell w...@... wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Hey, what's with Linux support? What is happening with exception handling? are we there yet? No? Adobe, are you still busy with FX prefix? How many more years it will take to implement the feature which should appear first in any development platform. It took us YEARS (sic!) for voting, whinging and asking to fix the bugs and provide basic features. Printing support? Forget it, the company which invented PDF Postscript is too busy with something else. Adobe, please wake up and make your call, otherwise it will be too late. PS By waking up I don't mean submitting another pile of letters to FTC :) -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Alternative FAQ location: https://share.acrobat.com/adc/document.do?docid=942dbdc8-e469-446f-b4cf-1e62079f6847 Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, mitek17 mite...@... wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Seth Caldwell wiz@ wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Get cracking at what? Steve Jobs is on record as saying that no matter what Adobe does with the player, the iPhone and iTampon won't support it. -Amy
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
The talk about openness is completely disingenuous. Flash/Flex/ActionScript is vastly more open than any of the relevant Apple technologies. Moreover, what Jobs really wants is for Quicktime to be the video technology of choice. I believe Apple will eventually have to cave to market pressure on this one. Unfortunately, the delay is a pain in the neck for everyone. -pd
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
There are no printing improvements in Flex 4. AIR 2.0 supposedly has some new APIs you can use instead of our print code and it might have landed in 10.1 but I haven’t verified. GEH is doc’d here: http://help.adobe.com/en_US/FlashPlatform//reference/actionscript/3/flash/events/UncaughtErrorEvents.html. However, it still may not do what you think it will. GEH is not being given a high priority since the release players don’t display exception dialogs. If you have a specific bug with our transform code (assuming you are using our APIs to alter the transform), file a bug or start a new thread or post a link to an old thread. I didn’t do the transform code so I can’t answer. On 4/30/10 12:36 AM, mitek17 mite...@gmail.com wrote: https://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FP-444 Created: 06/21/07 03:43 PM Is it already available? 10.1 is still pre-release beta with no API available for GEH. Almost 3 years...And counting. Printing improvements in Flex 4? Well, we have to trasnform 300 000 lines of code into Flex 4 first to check it. Does it finally do a second pass on validNextPage()? Alex, a question for you. Does anyone at Flex SDK Team know what's happening with matrix transform and properties of Flex containers? Flash itself respects transform method and updates all properties correctly. Is there any reason why the Flex containers are not updating their own properies after transform? PS I am a strong Flex/Flash platform supporter and we are working on a huge project written in Flex 3 and I want to see Flex/Flash alive. But with the current state of developers support and overall approach to the platform I would say that Adobe is not going to make it. Cheers, Dmitri. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com , Alex Harui aha...@... wrote: Global exception handling is in FP 10.1 and AIR 2.0. There should be better printing APIs in AIR 2.0 as well. These new features are not leveraged in the Flex framework because they were not committed until too late in our schedule for Flex 4.0, but they were committed before Jobs starting posting about Flash. On 4/29/10 9:33 PM, mitek17 mite...@... wrote: --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com , Seth Caldwell wiz@ wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Hey, what's with Linux support? What is happening with exception handling? are we there yet? No? Adobe, are you still busy with FX prefix? How many more years it will take to implement the feature which should appear first in any development platform. It took us YEARS (sic!) for voting, whinging and asking to fix the bugs and provide basic features. Printing support? Forget it, the company which invented PDF Postscript is too busy with something else. Adobe, please wake up and make your call, otherwise it will be too late. PS By waking up I don't mean submitting another pile of letters to FTC :) -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe System, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe System, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I get it, Steve, no Flash on iWhatever...now just shut up.. My job and life will move right along. Wasn't he supposed to be dead by now or something...or did he replace his cancer with a iBodyPart...what a douche. On 4/30/2010 11:50 AM, PFD Studio wrote: The talk about openness is completely disingenuous. Flash/Flex/ActionScript is vastly more open than any of the relevant Apple technologies. Moreover, what Jobs really wants is for Quicktime to be the video technology of choice. I believe Apple will eventually have to cave to market pressure on this one. Unfortunately, the delay is a pain in the neck for everyone. -pd
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Oh dude, come on, that's low. Either agree or disagree with what he says (I agree with most of it - HTML5 et al can replace the need for a lot of what Flash often does, and it's support is growing and standards are good for all of us) but don't make it personal. Guy On 01/05/2010, at 5:17 AM, Wally Kolcz wrote: I get it, Steve, no Flash on iWhatever...now just shut up.. My job and life will move right along. Wasn't he supposed to be dead by now or something...or did he replace his cancer with a iBodyPart...what a douche. On 4/30/2010 11:50 AM, PFD Studio wrote: The talk about openness is completely disingenuous. Flash/Flex/ActionScript is vastly more open than any of the relevant Apple technologies. Moreover, what Jobs really wants is for Quicktime to be the video technology of choice. I believe Apple will eventually have to cave to market pressure on this one. Unfortunately, the delay is a pain in the neck for everyone. -pd
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
On 01/05/2010, at 1:50 AM, PFD Studio wrote: The talk about openness is completely disingenuous. Flash/Flex/ActionScript is vastly more open than any of the relevant Apple technologies. How do you figure that HTML5 is less open than Flash? Moreover, what Jobs really wants is for Quicktime to be the video technology of choice. And Adobe wants everyone to use Flash...but at least Apple is driving adoption of bona-fide standards. Flash is not an open standard. I believe Apple will eventually have to cave to market pressure on this one. Unfortunately, the delay is a pain in the neck for everyone. It's an interesting battle. I'd have to say Jobs is running a pretty ballsy line on it. At this stage it doesn't seem to be doing Apple any harm at all and it's certainly helping to raise the profile of HTML5 and the benefits of standards in general, which I think is a good thing. Guy -pd
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
mitek17 This is just a thought regarding matrix transformation applied to visual components in flex framework. Firstly, you cannot make it bindable, but not so fast... I find i perfect! Trying to animate flex components and make it smooth is a pain, especially because of binding and all the extra architecture added on top of DisplayObject properties. So, maybe even if you don't find it convenient, there may be a different point of view on this matter. Speaking in more general sense, there are bugs, of course, and especially painful are those of sound and timeline... But, the worst thing is that flash isn't progressing for real in last years. Flex framework is just a project built using the available tools - I don't think there is a point in asking flex people to do more or improve stuff... how flash behaves is in general above their responsibility... However, we have a bad example right next to us, which is Java... it totally looks like it is on it's way to became history - no improvements to the language in years, no new releases... I think that if Adobe won't work in direction of making more dramatic changes to the language and how the runtime works we may find ourselves one day obsoleted... That's precisely why I mentioned other technologies targeting flash platform, and I believe that if Adobe cooperated with them better we might hope for a different future :) Guy Morton. I've said that before, he is not wrong, he's just serving the facts in a way that will most likely give you a wrong impression. He never says that h.264 codec is proprietary, but after reading what he says you may think it is. It may also create a wrong impression, when he says that flash had recently learned to play those videos using h/w rendering. The technology was released about 6 years ago, but if you compare that to dinosaurs, than it may in fact sound like very recently :) Well, if you know the context, then it doesn't look that bad, but the less savvy people will understand it very differently. Oh, one more thing regarding the openness of the platform. On my Linux installation I have HaXe and SWFTools compilers, GNash player (I have Adobe's player too, but I'm testing against both players) and I do the coding in AXDT and VIM with AS language coloring - none of these tools has anything to do with Adobe, and all of them are OSS of different kinds. So, his statement about flash being proprietary is not correct, however, you may put many different meanings in that word, so, it may happen that some of those meanings would not be false... He also doesn't mention that what and how Apple had implemented in HTML5 is not a standard, because HTML5 isn't a standard. It is about to became standard in 2 years from now. You may call that pushing technology forward, but, then you would have to agree to call ActiveX a standard and a technology break-through... Is that called baked facts in proper English? :)
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
On 01/05/2010, at 11:37 AM, Oleg Sivokon wrote: Guy Morton. I've said that before, he is not wrong, he's just serving the facts in a way that will most likely give you a wrong impression. He never says that h.264 codec is proprietary, but after reading what he says you may think it is. I disagree with your reading of his post. He says nothing to indicate that h.264 is even SLIGHTLY proprietary. It may also create a wrong impression, when he says that flash had recently learned to play those videos using h/w rendering. The technology was released about 6 years ago, but if you compare that to dinosaurs, than it may in fact sound like very recently :) Well, if you know the context, then it doesn't look that bad, but the less savvy people will understand it very differently. He is pretty clearly speaking from the point of view of Flash's support of Apple's platforms. Oh, one more thing regarding the openness of the platform. On my Linux installation I have HaXe and SWFTools compilers, GNash player (I have Adobe's player too, but I'm testing against both players) and I do the coding in AXDT and VIM with AS language coloring - none of these tools has anything to do with Adobe, and all of them are OSS of different kinds. So, his statement about flash being proprietary is not correct, however, you may put many different meanings in that word, so, it may happen that some of those meanings would not be false... No, they're not. Flash is a proprietary *technology*. Only Adobe can say where it's heading, and how. There are open-source *tools* for making it, that's all. He also doesn't mention that what and how Apple had implemented in HTML5 is not a standard, because HTML5 isn't a standard. It is about to became standard in 2 years from now. You may call that pushing technology forward, but, then you would have to agree to call ActiveX a standard and a technology break-through... Is that called baked facts in proper English? :) If you've been around long enough to know how these things work you will see that they usually get a groundswell of support for elements of the proposal being built into browsers and used long before the w3c completes it's work. However, knowing what is proposed for the standard certainly helps to get all browsers aligned in terms of behaviour and capabilities, and the groundswell of support for various things is usually pretty obvious and reflects the demand for those features from developers and users. ActiveX was always a bad idea as it could never be ported to platforms other than Windows. The web is about interoperability, something it took MS a long time to figure out. Guy
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: Oh dude, come on, that's low. Either agree or disagree with what he says (I agree with most of it - HTML5 et al can replace the need for a lot of what Flash often does, and it's support is growing and standards are good for all of us) but don't make it personal. It may be low, but there's a certain amount of logic to it, considering when Steve Jobs was out, he was given a liver transplant. In ancient times, the liver was considered to be the seat of anger. MPO is that there's been a lot of angry behavior coming out of Apple lately, and not just aimed at Adobe.
Re: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
Just my 2 cents. The way I see it, I'd rather focus on creating better, bigger and greater applications with Adobe/Flex which my users/customers will love rather than sulk in a corner because some guy is imposing his stupidity on what I can provide. From: Amy amyblankens...@bellsouth.net To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 30 April, 2010 20:54:20 Subject: [flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs --- In flexcod...@yahoogro ups.com, Guy Morton g...@... wrote: Oh dude, come on, that's low. Either agree or disagree with what he says (I agree with most of it - HTML5 et al can replace the need for a lot of what Flash often does, and it's support is growing and standards are good for all of us) but don't make it personal. It may be low, but there's a certain amount of logic to it, considering when Steve Jobs was out, he was given a liver transplant. In ancient times, the liver was considered to be the seat of anger. MPO is that there's been a lot of angry behavior coming out of Apple lately, and not just aimed at Adobe.
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
I thought that this response showed the kind of class that we've come to expect from Adobe. http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2010/04/moving_forward.html http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations/2010/04/moving_forward.html -TH --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Oleg Sivokon olegsivo...@... wrote: I've got this same link from my friend, and it's funny how it serves the facts... well, flash was in fact the first to use h.264 codec for video on the web (could be that some other existed before, but the HTML5 wasn't the first, that's for sure), and it does use hardware rendering to display that on Windows. It is true it uses pure CPU rendering on Macs and both sides blame it on poor cooperation of the other side. I think, maybe one valid point that he makes is that Adobe didn't invest to much into mobile market until very recently... and, to be honest, flash rendering may be more optimized... like using platform available graphics tools - be it DirectX or OpenGL. It is also true that flash is kind of stuck in it's development... well, the language hadn't seen any significant change in years... But I don't think that what Apple cares about is how flash performs... not is it at all familiar with the situation around the product... For example I have Adobe tools to develop for flash on my Windows installation, but on Linux I have only non-Adobe tools, which is more by accident, but, anyway, this kind of contradicts what he says about non openess of the platform. I also think that the main profit from banning other popular development tools like .NET and Java from Macs Apple may hope for good revenues from selling their development tools... Think about that due to iProducts popularity the popularity of Obj-C grew a lot. It was a marginal language in terms of penetration until iPhone... So, they may hope to build a community of developers, who would develop in this language and thus became dependent on Apple's tools and the entire ecosystem... well, just like there's a lot of C# programmers in the world, not because it's the best language ever, but because of the demand. I think that Mac world sees the surrounding world from the entrenchment level, it's like after all those years! they are going to win one marketing war. They won't think about that their victory may turn into much larger loss on a general scale. Like, what good will come out of promoting obsolete technologies like HTML and JavaScript? And that's after it's been proven many times that the disadvantages are inherent to the technology and it is probably seeing it's last years... Well, for me going back to making web apps in HTML and JavaScript would be like dark ages comparing to any technology, not necessarily Flash, that offers compiled language and better integration with the native API... There may be to many marketing factors involved, of which I have little knowledge... and this may sound out of place... but, what would be if Abobe have cooperated with projects like HaXe and GNash? Or, offer to download the SWFTools' AS3 compiler along with Flex / Flash Builder? Or, at least bring their existence to the public attention somehow. What I'm saying is, this will not be a turning point in this pure battle of commercial interests, but, maybe it's a good time to put the plans of world domination aside and invest a bit more in the technical aspect of things?
[flexcoders] Re: Thoughts on Flash by Steve Jobs
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Seth Caldwell w...@... wrote: Steve is employing several tactics used by politicians. The iphone is not open. iPhone is a device, not a technology. Technology should be open, device software could be proprietary. Steve stresses it particularly, please read Job's message more throroughly. I hope that the pressure from Jobs will finally make Adobe get cracking. Hey, what's with Linux support? What is happening with exception handling? are we there yet? No? Adobe, are you still busy with FX prefix? How many more years it will take to implement the feature which should appear first in any development platform. It took us YEARS (sic!) for voting, whinging and asking to fix the bugs and provide basic features. Printing support? Forget it, the company which invented PDF Postscript is too busy with something else. Adobe, please wake up and make your call, otherwise it will be too late. PS By waking up I don't mean submitting another pile of letters to FTC :)
