It would be cool if i could post the last few things i said there before i was thrown out.
Since i´m not allowed to do that its a moot point to reply to you, all i can do is say that´s at best partially true.
Printable View
It would be cool if i could post the last few things i said there before i was thrown out.
Since i´m not allowed to do that its a moot point to reply to you, all i can do is say that´s at best partially true.
I understand Flash not being supported on an iPhone/iPod, but I feel that the reason why it's not on the iPad is more political than technical. Anyway, I do'nt think that Flash will play a role on the success/failure of the iPad. The key question is "do I really need an iPad at home?". My answer right now is "no, because I have already a laptop", but I could change my mind after I try it.
What about director, unity or java, does this i thing suport it?
nevermind, found the answer already
http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/02/01/...e-ipad-cometh/
yeah, it doesn´t support any third party browser plugin, so any tech that should go on there and can´t be done without needing a browser plugin has to have a deploy path to be turned into a native app so one can as developer use it on the own devices or submit it to the app store so that everyone can use it on his/ her device.
No matter if one likes it or not, Apple has a pretty straightforward approach regarding tech they see as outdated or not good enough: They just cut it or don´t include it in their newer devices.
They were for example one of the first to leave out floppy drives from their desktop machines, still don´t add bluray drives and release things like the Air which doesn´t come with any optical drive.
If that were true they would close shop because everything they sell is outdated and behind times compared to the PC side. Take mac book pro for example, it's ridiculously behind times compared to what one can get on the PC side. i7 chips, better, newer video cards with more options, and so on.Quote:
Apple has a pretty straightforward approach regarding tech they see as outdated or not good enough: They just cut it or don´t include it in their newer devices.
iPad is an already obsolete technology and it's not even out yet ( a $500 - $1000 device that runs just one app at a time, doesn't let you view 95 % of web that requires any kind of animation, games... )
Apple just wants to control what and who makes money, that's all. They don't see flash as outdated, they see it as competition to what they want to do.
Same with blue ray. They want it do die so people are eventually forced to use iTunes and Apple store instead of blue ray DVDs.
Hope it's okay to add on to this thread since it addressed some of the issues I am concerned about when I did a search.Quote:
Originally Posted by flashisland
I publish a webcomic that is basically a slide show of about 20-25 panels, each with text and images in a single Flash SWF. The panels are not JPG images with text because Google is pretty good about reading the text inside the Flash SWF.
With the coming of iPad I did some research on alternatives to Flash, and the quote above captures what seems to be the consensus with HTML5. Which makes it pretty clumsy for me since I would have to manage a much more complicated file system just to build the slideshow. And since I'm updating three times a week, that very quickly turns into hundreds of files to manage.
So, from what I've gleaned from CS5, is it true that CS5 will end up providing Flash on the iPad? I'd much rather stick with Flash than try to do my webcomic in HTML5. And wow, I just got pounded on Boing Boing for saying so!
That's partially right. CS5 doesn't actually publish it in Flash but converts it to an iPad/iPhone application. You'd then need to give away/sell your application in the App store for users to view it. Keep in mind that you'll need to be an Apple developer to do this though, which does cost some money.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomwood
Hmmm...
That seems clumsy too for a webcomic since it kills the serendipity of finding things by surfing around.
I guess I'm back to a slideshow then. I think I'll export an image sequence from Flash and use MooTools or JQuery to set up the slideshow. Now I'll also have to add a browser detector and a new section of my webpage just for the iPad. Thanks Apple.
tomwood,
Maybe even CS5's iPod/iPad export option would be OK in this case? I imagine a simple slideshow as you've described it would not be too performance intensive, so it might just be the perfect candidate to export from Flash to iPad/iPod.
There is a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation about HTML 5, so don't let those steampunk-ukulele cultists at Boing Boing get you down ;) HTML 5 can't replace Flash for web apps, and no one has yet figured out the video codec licensing issues, which could be its achilles heel. Plus, Google is backing Flash:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/30/fla...in-api-coming/
Thanks dandylion,
The CS5 export sounds promising. I'll be honest and say I haven't followed its development too closely so I'm not aware of all the features yet.
The webcomic is linked in my signature if you want to see what I'm doing. (Not trawling for hits, but it is there.) It's a pretty basic slideshow.
But the cs5 export creates an app though, right? A one time standalone app. So it would be making one app for each webcomic the way he is doing it now, which would be silly and mean each one would have to go through the apple approval process, insane.
So unless you use html5/javascript, ipad just isn't going to be reading your webcomic. Or quite possible I don't understand what the ipad export does...
Ipad owners have to realize that their device is lacking, not the website. The reasons to not allow flash really boil down to greed, if people could use flash on the device, 90% of the appstore would be redundant. This will become pretty obvious to the market if another high profile tablet comes out that handles flash just fine, like the HP slate. Courier looks awesome, but probably won't be a very good web device, more a notebook productivity replacement for the office.
You could make a reader app for your comic series and then just send it content when it comes available. You wouldn't need a separate app for each comic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alluvian
Tomwood, looking at your comic, you could very easily build a web-based reader for it with just a dozen or so lines of javascript. That might solve your problem easily. No need to worry with Flash plug-ins or apps :)
I looked into Javascript slideshows and this one based on MooTools looked the most promising:
http://mootools.net/forge/p/slideshow
Mainly because it can swap DIVs in addition to images. (Others may also, this one was explicit about saying it could.)
My Flash SWF is about 45KB for a 20-25 panel comic. The only way I see to keep the total file size in the same range is to NOT use a series of JPG images for each panel, which would be about ten times the KB.
What I'd need to do is set up the blue background in a DIV using a 1 pixel wide rectangle with the blue gradient and use x-repeat in the background CSS.
Then set up my two heads as PNG image files (with alpha) that are used over and over in alternate DIVs so it's just two files for the images.
Then, the tricky part, set up DIVs for each of the text blocks and float them left or right. The crappy part here is that I'm forced back to Dreamweaver so I can preview the text layout like I can in Flash.
Sound like the right approach?
Lots of workaround work here! This is going in the wrong direction!
I have noted that the new html5 can play video, but a video file like an mov, mp4 is not a load of assets loaded with js, it's a single container secure from anyone opening it in the same way as a js for a game to look at the code.
Therefore, if html5 still needs to launch a single container file for video, why not html5 launch a single file format like swf with all assets including the code for a game? Better still, games and videos. If they could make sure html5 loads in their file format for video rather than mp4, mov then they can secure Flash?
To play video in Firefox, don't you need to install an addon to play video anyway?
So, html5 is just replacing the download of one thing with another. The download of video codec instead of flash plugin?
google ports quake 2 to html5
http://code.google.com/p/quake2-gwt-port/
That's a really good point. Everyone is complaining that Flash isn't open source but neither are these video codecs. Essentially it would be the same as if HTML5 could play flash files without the Flash plug-in.Quote:
Originally Posted by programicks
BlinkOk, I saw that port a few days ago. From the video it looks very impressive, so clearly you can make games using HTML5. The question is whether you'd rather mess around with HTML5 at this point or just use a technology that already exists (Flash). Just because you can make games in HTML5 doesn't mean that you should or that it would even be cost-effective from a development standpoint. However I can see these type of HTML5 games taking off if Apple continues to play their game at refusing Flash on their devices. Basically you're "solving" a problem that Apple created, when actually the existing solution (Flash) is a better technology to begin with.
apple doesn't want any games to run in the browser. they don't make any money off it.
The Quake port utilizes WebGL which gives hardware accelerated graphics, so in that respect HTML5 has one up on Flash.
Im a MAC user, and I love it!
Never crashes and never see a virus, is a great system and I aslo run PC in the same computer (just to play battlefield heroes and run 3D MAX)
I love MAC and I love FLASH, so I have to blame both companies for what they are doing, fighting! No one is perfect, both of them arent, they have to fix too many things, I think they toghether can make huge thinks (also I can add google tecnologies to this team), so they need to stop fighting and fix their problems in their products and between them as companies
I wont stop using flash, but ill take a look to html5, as i did with unity or java, and im exited about CS5 to make some ipad apps
I supose you run Windows isnt it?Quote:
Originally Posted by scheletro
yeap, sorry, I know both are PC, but some people hear or read PC and they think in windows
I wonder how this will turn out: http://pinchzoom.com/blog/items/view...lity-layerquot
and what if anything Adobe says to that when they announce CS5 on Monday.
Sounds like that would cover Unity iPhone too, wouldn't it?
%$#& Apple.
“Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited.” - Apple’s new iPhone 4 Agreement, Section 3.3.1 could mean Apple will ban apps made with Adobe’s Flash-to-iPhone compiler, Titanium, and PhoneGap"
Yes, there was speculation about this months ago when the CS5 -> iPhone feature was first announced. Even under current agreements it's probably "illegal".
Yes, various middleware solutions seem to get the kick out there, i wonder if Apple will change its mind on that one, since a lot of that middleware is used to create many of the most selling apps on the store.
I imagine what they actually want is block out technologies that don´t go the xcode way, so if they change that point to something like only solutions are allowed which produce an xcode project at the end then lots of middleware would still be fine, let´s see.
For flash it looks bad in either case.
How the heck can they know where or how i made my code?
What difference does it makes if i use notepad to do the same code that unity or flash would do?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...mono_apps.htmlQuote:
has now been expanded to include prohibitions on developing iPhone apps in other languages or in other development environments that are then translated or cross-compiled into native iPhone apps.
Seems Apple wants to kick adobe's ass but the way they do it will also afect unity's games
I wonder whats next.Maybe only allow games made when the programmer is using the amazing Apple's chairs?
techcrunch is also talking about it : http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/08/adobe-flash-apple-sdk/
It seems that Apple has declared war to Adobe.
Well the new developer agreemnt is really obscure. What do we call "a translation or compatibility layer" ? In the end it's an iPhone binary and that's all. So now Apple want to control the way we code ? Why couldn't I develop a layer/library to help me produce iPhone apps quicker ? That's non sense .
to Incrue:
Apple can pretty easily see whether Flash CS5 was used to create an app as the resulting app has an a good bit different setup than what a usual xcode made app looks like internally. During approval process for apps they already use a system that detects whether an app uses private apis etc so they can also check for this the same way.
Regarding the topic in general more recent updates on various outlets indicate that its probably really mostly about blocking app creation ways which don´t create an xcode project at the end though no one is sure at this point of course and since its a beta OS version agreement clause most seem to expect it will be clarified and updated before the release version hits.
to Sietjp: Initially i was totally on your train of thought, too, i thought it was crazy business that it would be controlled which languages and tools one uses to develop for a particular device.
Having thought about it, i still don´t like the thought, but i realized, hey, its actually not something that unusual, its made by all sorts or companies creating all sorts of devices.
Like most things ranging from zune to home consoles actually.
Still, even if its actually common practice for many other device types its sad to see such things spreaded.
And yes, i totally agree, its hard not to see this as direct slap against Adobe since it would be crazy chance that its pure coincidence that that thing gets out 4 days before Adobe announces the release of its CS5 of which for flash the main big feature is deploying iphone apps..
definatelyQuote:
Originally Posted by Sietjp
Tom, if thats what they want then you know this will affect stuntman bob too, dont you?
Yeah, for the developerbase its of course great when we can use any language/ middleware we´re most comfortable with.
On the other side i can imagine why Apple doesn´t like that (and again, i´m not happy with that clause by Apple, i´m just trying to understand their reasoning) :
Some things made with some technologies are probably more difficult/ time consuming to test and approve for Apple, next to other downsides that could potentially occur like an app made with a different language/ middleware maybe performing way worse and that way leading to more device or app freezes/crashes or the batteries draining much quicker when the cpu or gpu is getting constantly hammered in non performance savey/ optimized way.
Then there´s also the side that of course it has a big benefit for Apple that the officially endorsed ways to create iPhone/ iPod touch /iPad apps all are centered around using a mac as development platform.
Its of course way less nice for them financially when someone doesn´t need a mac to create apps for these devices.
For the actual end consumer of apps i´m not sure whether its a good or bad thing, being able to create apps quicker and roll out cross platform apps on the devices quicker, too sure also leads to a bigger amount of shovelware but at the same time it also means a larger selection of good apps in shorter timespan.
Well, no matter from which side one tackles it, its a tricky fishy topic and definately requires an update and clarification from Apple´s side.
As much as this sucks for Adobe, hopefully it will teach them a lesson to focus on making Flash better/faster/more features rather than worrying about the iPhone/iPad. I'm so sick of them pushing poor products out each product cycle.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomsamson
One of the commenters over at Boing Boing said they thought that Adobe would eventually create a development tool for HTML5 that would make all this moot anyway. Is something like that in development? Flash is perfect for what I do and I really don't want to have to republish in another format just for the iPad now. But if there was a program like Flash that output the same user experience in HTML5 that would be okay. I'd buy that.
I'm totally with you there.Quote:
Originally Posted by flashisland
Why is Adobe they spending so much time and effort trying to play catch-up with Apple and promoting its (a competitor's) product as a major feature of CS5?
It almost seems like Adobe doesn't believe in Flash anymore either.
It's really amazing how little work they've done to improve the Player over the last decade.
The player should be be 100 times faster and 100 leaner by now, and run on a device as small as a digital watch.
Oh, it's fun to rant! :) What a fun thread!
I haven't used Fireworks in years, but when I first started using it, that was one of its advertised features. You could design the layout of the website and it would automatically create the HTML and JavaScript for you. (HTML 5 is just another incarnation of HTML+JavaScript.) It handled all the interactivity automatically. Dreamweaver did the same, but was a bit more code-y.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomwood
The only problem was, the code that these applications output was terrible. Nobody outside of design schools ever used it because it was really slow and impossible to debug or extend. Maybe this is still a feature of Fireworks? I have no idea. But if someone manages to really do this right, it could go somewhere.
Like the same way that Catalyst creates interactive SWFs without having to look at any code. For basic interactivity, it's great.
But I think that ultimately if you want to work in "HTML 5" you're going to have to learn JavaScript. There's not real substitute for getting your hands dirty with real code. Sadly, Javascript is like coding in AS1.0... I will never go back there! :)
Also, I think that having one tool to publish to all platforms is unrealistic. It's a great idea, but will never happen. There's just too much competition and the companies that could make these tools (like Adobe) have very short attention spans.
I think we'll just have to resign ourselves to learning a handful of technologies (AS3.0, Objective C, JavaScript, C++) and choose the best one for the job. Or, just specialise in one, and live with the limitations.
That's not so bad. There's still plenty of work for COBOL programmers ;)
I agree there are too much work to do on web and we are worring about just one device, but I wonder.... can we load our flash app without passing trough Itunes store? maybe make apps for some direct clients?
I think apple won this one and i wont fight more, i hope CS5 have more great features and not only ipod apps, by this time they could have a great developing tool and is still a baby
They should work on speed and stability on any device and flash alone will make his road again
"It's really amazing how little work they've done to improve the Player over the last decade."
Indeed - Flash 10 clearly is not much better than Flash 5...