someone from Microsoft just came out and said that the future of the web is HTML5 because of "security" - which Jobs said as well.
wrt Apple, the only way Adobe can put pressure on Apple is if they get Flash working on ALL other devices AND slow down the HTML5/H.264 train - one way to do that easily that I can see would be to partner with someone like Facebook to make developing FB apps a breeze in Flash. In addition to what you mentioned about Hulu or Netflix, etc. If they can make those must-use sites, then it'll get the iLemmings to finally stand up and question their devices. JMO On 4/30/10, Levi Wallach <[email protected]> wrote: > It makes sense they would target Android first, since it's the current main > competition to iPhone (at least in the US). Well, maybe BB has more users, > but seems like Android is growing in numbers faster than BB, no? I think HP > buying Palm gives it more legitimacy in such areas (so that it's now > mentioned a bit more along with the others although in the past it wasn't), > but I can see them bringing it out in Android first. It would be great if > they could bring it out on multiple platforms at the same time, but given > the incredible delays so far, that seems unlikely. > > But it's definitely something they needed to do yesterday. Apple (or really > Jobs) has something against Flash/Adobe and neither good relations with > their developers or users will dissuade them from their task to discredit > Flash as a viable option on mobile devices. > > About the only thing that MIGHT get them to change their minds would be if > Flash was made available on these other platforms and then some very popular > games/apps were developed (or just taken from the web), as well as sites > like Hulu (and even Netflix - if they haven's signed some evil exclusivity > deal with Apple) become accessible for streaming to these devices. Only > then and if Apple wasn't able to provide viable alternatives to these > sites/apps, would the complaints start piling up enough to start effecting > sales of the devices. Those are big ifs. A lot of people put up with > Apple's shenanigans (and relent to their decisions) because they make > well-designed hardware and software and their marketing is incredible. Some > may grumble a bit, but most not enough to chuck their Apple product and go > with something else. You need some SERIOUS leverage in order to sway Apple > in a direction that they stubbornly don't want to go, and even then, they > will of course make something up about how this was their plan all along, or > they are only changing their tune because something changed in the > environment to make it possible.... > > > Levi Wallach > blog: http://twelveblackcodemonkeys.com > tweet me @dvdmon (http://twitter.com/dvdmon) > > > On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Tony Cooke <[email protected]>wrote: > >> " . . . .Kevin Lynch, Adobe's chief technology officer, wrote in a blog >> posting: "We feel confident that were Apple and Adobe to work together >> as we are with a number of other partners, we could provide a terrific >> experience with Flash on the iPhone, iPad and iPod touch." >> >> Currently, none of these products can run the Flash technology which is >> used on many websites to power media players, games and other animations. >> >> However, added Mr Lynch, Adobe has decided to shift its focus to get >> Flash working well on gadgets made by Google, RIM, Palm, Microsoft, >> Nokia and others. >> >> He said Adobe expected to release Flash Player 10.1 on Google's Android >> operating system in May and then for it to be on general release in >> June. . . . ." >> >> More detail here:- >> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/10093314.stm >> >> -- >> Tony Cooke >> www.tonycooke.co.uk >> contactable at tony.j.cookeATgooglemailDOTcom >> Lottery: A tax on people who don't understand statistics.
