Can we file a class action against Apple?

[FlashLackey]

Are we witnessing Steve Jobs' swan song?

Some of the more obvious corrections:

The word "open" in this context is in regard to what developers are able to do with the technology. Not whether or not the platform is proprietary. In other words, if you buy flash, you can make whatever you want with it and put it right onto the net without anyones approval. Not the case with Apple.

If there are 50k games in the App Store, there are easily 500k flash games on the internet.

Flash is very prevalent on the internet. The burden to make a mobile device that delivers the internet is on the mobile device developers. We, the consumers of mobile devices, have routinely asked every mobile device developer to show us Flash performing well on THEIR device. We have never seen it. That's Apple's fault. Not Adobe's. Until they can come through with that, they ought to more correctly advertise their product as delivering "partial internet browsing."

As Jobs points out, Flash supports H.264. What sense does it make to say that the old video form kills the battery. Isn't it better that it's at least an option to see old content? Eating more battery life is better than seeing zero. And new content can be made for the more efficient video in the future.

"Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices." This is not true by any stretch of the imagination. There may be some sites that rely on roll-overs for actions. But, that would be an atypical UI. Rollovers are mostly used for aesthetic purposes. Regular clicks would suffice for most designs.

The "dependency" argument makes no sense either. The Apple products could support Flash IN ADDITION to any other platform they like. So, new cutting edge features that they want would be just as immediately available to developers as they are now. The difference would be that developers could choose what they want to learn, wait for and develop in. If using these cutting edge features immediately is anything anyone values, then Apple should have nothing to fear from developers preferring to use a third party platform.

If their motivation is to provide the most advanced applications, they would allow Flash. While many transitions, effects, capabilities can be implemented in the platforms their products allow, there aren't as many developers that can do so as there are in Flash. Allowing Flash would greatly broaden the talent pool that is making applications (as well as reduce the cost). The market of developers aren't going to adapt their skill-set to the whims of Steve Jobs. Not in a free market where some other platform will be willing to tap that skill-set as-is.

Flash is quite capable for touch devices. There are many award winning examples of this.

Being able to watch video is not the measure of whether or not Flash is still "necessary." It's not a matter of necessity but of suitability. Flash is very well suited for mobile devices of all kinds and will find it's way there whether Steve Jobs wants to author it out of the future or not. This is for the same reason that many developers find Flash more suitable for many types of projects on the internet, where they have many options for accomplishing the same goals.

Perhaps Steve Jobs should focus more on how the internet is being used and what platforms developers prefer to use. That way, he can avoid making himself part of the past.

Flashlackey
April, 2010

[Frets]

Okay, I will retract my previous statement about gambling addiction as not everyone who gambles is gshock.

Honestly I feel your pain Josh. But I will pass on this bit of knowledge tendered from my years in management.

You only have so much time and energies in a day or a year or a lifetime. Rather then focusing your energies on an area that you have no control over. You may as well invest your energies where they will do the most good. Hating on the inaccessability of the market won't bring you closer to it. Sometimes it's just better to focus on what you can do in a given situation then what you can't. Even if the only thing you can do is walk away.

[FlashLackey]

Frets. I think that would be easier for developers to do if it wasn't for the way Apple handled this situation. The publish-to-iPhone feature in flash has been public knowledge for at least a year, with no mention from Apple that they would block it's use until now.

I think that it's valid to be disappointed by that. Speaking out about disappointing moves by major players should be part of any industry community.

And that is exactly what I think Steve Jobs is missing. Eventually, the buzz about this will die down. People will "get over it" and focus on what they can do in this new, unexpected situation. However, it seems like he thinks that this will come in the form of everyone learning the more obscure processes available developing for iPhones. In reality, I think it's much more likely that some other phone will pick up that market-share.

Coincidentally, I was planning on buying two iPhones when the new ones come out this year. Now, I'm leaning toward getting something else.

[Frets]

FL I don't disagree with you. I get all the stuff you are saying.

I'm just stating to Josh that complaining isn't going to resolve anything. Tomorrow the sun will rise and even though it's a new day nothing will change at apple. If it means that ipad/iphone users get crappy versions of apps while everyone else gets nice ones then learn to live with it.

Jobs is a hard headed person. I've worked for hard headed people before who will throw good money after bad on ideas without merit. Jobs will never admit he's wrong. Even if it cuts into sales. Let us not forget that Jobs was fired from Apple before due to his uncooperative spirit. When he returned to apple he was not at the top of the food chain. Then, CEO Gil Amelio was ousted by the board of directors.

[FlashLackey]

My bad. I misunderstood what you were saying.

I agree. It's tough to imagine Jobs changing his mind. But, you never know. At least it helps to vent a little about this so others know they aren't the only ones disappointed.

[Ralgoth]

I like Apple, but I never had any intention of buying an iPhone/iPad until Adobe announced that Flash CS5 would be able to publish iPhone apps. For that past four years I've been developing a game that I've been dreaming about since UO's heyday. When word started to spread that flash would publish iPhone apps, I immediately went to the drawing board and came up with smaller complimentary apps that users can play to advance their characters.

The apps weren't designed for androids, they were thought up with the iPhone in mind. As a longstanding flash developer, I have a sense of pride in my creations. If there are problems with the methods I use in an app, i rewrite them until its as optimized as possible. I don't need some company exec to tell me my app sucks because he doesn't like the company that the language originated from.

There are over 100 apps in the iStore developed using the cs5 beta. They made it through the elimination process and run fine on all platforms. If you're affraid of customers blaiming the iPhone for bad apps created using flash, then why not categorize or tag the apps in the iStore. If someone consistantly has a bad experience with apps originating from flash, then they'll stop buying those apps and Adobe's rep will be hurt, not Apple's.

Now, not only will I not be buying an iPhone or iPad, but I won't be paying the $100 annual developer fee that Apple requires either, and they won't see a dime from anyone purchasing my apps on their store. Now multiply that times the number of flash developers out there who are in the same boat.

[Frets]

Honestly, All you will be doing is letting the competition walk al over you. Apple doesn't care about getting the $100 from you. Someone who is a little hungrier will make the money you didn't. Maybe they are less concerned with cross-platform consistency.

it's like the gibson-epihone model.
Gibson manufactuers guitars inside the U.S. that are very expensive. Gibson licenses Epiphones that are manufactured in China and Korea. The reason why epiphones cost less is that everyone knows they are not real gibsons and Gibson enforces a lower standard on to the instrument. Epiphones are not cheap guitars. There are plenty off off-brand LP's as well as other models that are spec'd to a higher standard yet cost less. However every Epi - salesman will tell the public that epi's are better then other knock offs because they are licensed by Gibson.

So it goes with apps. Co-brand your products. Market the better product to the platform that supports it and market your lesser product to the "i" market place under different product names. You make money selling to all markets, customsers know they are getting something less/ inferior by using an iphone/ipad.

[joshstrike]

Frets, that was wisely said and I'm pretty sure that's how the market will end up sorting this out over time. I agree with FL nonetheless that it is nice to vent and realize we're all in the same boat here. During the CS5 beta I was looking very seriously at how best to optimize certain pieces of code to run as native iphone apps; luckily, I didn't sink a whole lot of time into actually doing it, and instead wrote some div- and canvas-based scene graphs to make it easier to slap something useful together with dashcode if and when I do need to develop a side-program for the "i"-market.

I think what's so frustrating about this is that over the years there's been a painfully slow but steady progression toward making our lives as developers easier through cross-platform tools. There's also a historical sense in the computer and portable markets that, if the hardware's out there, you as a developer can write whatever you want for it, and the hardware manufacturer or OS maker can't stop you.

With solutions like Wine and Air for cross-platform work, Flash, JavaFX and Unity3D for in-browser stuff, the world that was coming together looked like a place where the hardware was really irrelevant, and we didn't have to break our backs doing everything twice or three times anymore to achieve the same result on multiple platforms. And then Apple gets this enormous share of the mobile market and here they come actually threatening to go after jailbreakers with DMCA violations, and shutting down developers who've sunk countless hours and huge sums of money into developing apps they don't approve of.

It's really no different from if Sony sold a cd walkman that would only play Sony CDs and threatened consumers that tinkering with it to play other CDs would be illegal. It's a nasty business practice that hurts musicians more than the consumers, because we all know that most consumers will be happy listening to just the major bands signed to Sony and won't even bother to find out what else is out there.

I do agree that the market will sort it out eventually, but I still think that's an optimistic view.

[Frets]

I am not disagreeing with you. I think the whole thing is a bad strategy for apple. It hurts you, it hurts apple in the long run and it short changes the users.

Honestly I'm in a similar boat with a hardware firm. They have been failing on promises to deliver a product for almost a year now. They also promised sdk's would be released for the product 9 months ago. So far no hardware no firmware and no sdk's. Just a rolling ball of hype and an endless stream of excuses. For all I know If the hardware makes it to market the company may retract the non existant sdk's and handle app dev internally for a greater roi.

[gerbick]

If not iPad... then who? HP Slate... gone. MS Courier... gone.

Starting to really dislike my options for that form factor.

[Frets]

Mine has nothing to do with the tablet field.

Honestly I've had enough of touch screen typing on a POS. The only thing worse is jog wheel text entry.

Although I did find the ipad and archos usage in CSI:NY amusing.

My issues are separate and have to do with the music instrument industry.
I could be the greatest evolution in the last 15 years or it could be all pie in the sky.

[jAQUAN]

Do you really have needs that make you think, "Gee if I only had a touch screen." ?

[Frets]

Honestly I can see some things that would be better served on a touch screen.

Getting back to pos.
I can recall before the advent of touch screen pos registered waitresses would look down at a keyboard key in orders and walk away without so much as looking at the screen to verify what they were doing before pressing send. You wouldn't believe the amount of waisted orders that were submitted and had to be redone. The advent of the touch screen pos reduced costs because the servers were forced to look at the screen when they hit the send button.

[joshstrike]

I had a job for awhile doing photo touch-ups on a large Wacom screen (hooked up to a mac). This was back in 2002 or so. If you've never used one of those, they are awesome. It's painting with light. It's so much faster and so much more precise even than using a regular wacom tablet.

That to me is the killer app for a slate -- design and illustration. But it requires much more precise parallax than what the iPad apparently delivers; it requires at least 256 levels of pressure sensitivity where the iPad has only one; and obviously it requires a platform that supports applications made by Adobe. Or at least some very serious apps that are up to the level of Illustrator and Photoshop CS4. (Or wait! Maybe you could do your design with open online tools like Aviary! Oops, sorry, requires Flash).

So basically as a designer, illustrator and as a coder, the iPad is exactly the opposite of everything I ever wanted in a tablet.

[jAQUAN]

I wonder how well macbooks would sell if adobe apps were no longer available.

[hanratty21]

That to me is the killer app for a slate -- design and illustration.

Exactly. To you. The focus of this product is much broader than just the design/development set. I think the problem is that people, for a long time, got used to Apple putting out products that were for those who were into design/development/creative/advertising/architecture/artwork/etc. areas and now they are focused on the bottom line, which means getting their products into as many hands as possible...not just as many designers as possible.

I wonder how well macbooks would sell if adobe apps were no longer available.

Like hotcakes...just like they are now. Their macbook (pro, etc.) market share is increasing every quarter, which is, in my opinion, the main reason that their stock is creeping towards $300 now. This is a big ticket item that they continue to put into more and more hands, regardless of profession as the key element is good usability/design and high quality. People don't mind spending a little more on a personal computer if it gives them everything they want. This may turn into a self fulfilling prophecy where the more people that have one, the more that will continue to switch to an osx based machine. Only time will tell on this one.

*edit* All of that being said, I do NOT agree with any of Jobs' anti flash rhetoric. I don't think it will hurt their cause, but I also don't like it.

[jAQUAN]

That's a thin defense. Computer use on the non-creative side differs less than ever. Don't get me wrong, I'm quickly becoming a fan of the mac again but it has its annoyances. Mail.app and Pages suck. For the average to business user, Apples appeal comes mainly from a sexier enclosure.

[hanratty21]

That's a thin defense....Mail.app and Pages suck....

Suck or not, it's happening. OS X usage went from 10.2% in December '09 to 10.9% in January '10. That's a massive move in one month. While 10.2 or 10.9 may not sound like a ton, the move itself represents a 7% increase in one month.

Again, growth like that is what is driving their stock close to $300 per share. I don't expect them to put up numbers like that each month, but they have been steadily increasing for years, and the growth trend seems to be speeding up as well. I don't know what the 'cap' is, but in North America, they seem to be the setting the trends, unlike their Windows installed counterparts.

http://blog.quantcast.com/quantcast/.../os-share.html

[joshstrike]

OS X is a great unix GUI, but it isn't the only one. It's the only one that supports the Adobe suite, and that's why I use it. Hanratty, I totally agree that consumers in general don't need this kind of specialty kit to fetch their mail, watch videos, download music, tweet, etc. But then, they also don't need the iPhone platform to do that; any modern platform will do the same thing.

I'm someone who doesn't spend time on my computer for pleasure. Reading and debate, occasionally, but this is the only board I'm an active member of. I don't own an iPhone, or even a smart phone; my choice is a black and white motorola handheld and a dozen pre-paid SIM cards for different countries. I don't watch movies on my laptop, don't have a friendster account (or facebook, or whatever). I don't buy things online. I don't actually buy things, period, other than food, booze and smokes. I've worn the same jeans for ten years.

I know I'm at the far extreme in one direction, but I also know a lot of people for whom computers are tools, not sources of entertainment. Those people are in the business of creating the computerized entertainment that the brain-dead masses out there take for granted, and have no interest in actually being sucked into it.

We're also the ones who are willing to drop thousands of dollars on a single software license, because productivity is the whole game.

I can't disagree with you that the "i" platforms are significant consumer time-wasting devices with excellent sales in that area. But it's hard to see how they can be used productively. As fun a toy as it seems, I just don't believe I could be more productive with one of these devices; they are mostly be a new way to waste time.

When I buy a new mac for my business, the first thing I do is delete all the applications that come with it except for the utilities. Then I install the creative suite and a handful of other necessary apps like Thunderbird, FF, Bean and Parallels. And then I get down to business.

Not all consumers are created equal. Apple used to understand that. It used to reserve its condescension for the iPhoto grandpas and Garage band retards, while providing serious working people with great solutions. I would venture to say that more than half the people who used to buy Macs were design professionals. While we always thought it odd and vaguely disturbing that they treated their dumber consumers like children, it never mattered to us. Now that they want to treat us that way, it's pretty insulting.

Oh and the worst isn't here yet. Wait until Apple buys Adobe. That's the day I think I'll go back to making my layouts with an exacto blade and a glue stick.

[hanratty21]

I would venture to say that more than half the people who used to buy Macs were design professionals. While we always thought it odd and vaguely disturbing that they treated their dumber consumers like children, it never mattered to us. Now that they want to treat us that way, it's pretty insulting.

I couldn't agree with you more on that stat. It's also a trend that is rapidly changing, good or bad. You should find the CNBC special called 'Macheads.' They interviewed a lot of Apple-faithfuls who all were saying this very thing. Their feeling was that Apple should forget about the total sales and go back to focusing on the small designer-type fans who 'built' their business. I guess we're about to see how this all pans out since Apple evidently doesn't think they are doing anything wrong and I'd expect to see a lot more consumer-based products than design/centric products coming from them.

Hanratty, I totally agree that consumers in general don't need this kind of specialty kit to fetch their mail, watch videos, download music, tweet, etc. But then, they also don't need the iPhone platform to do that; any modern platform will do the same thing.

Sadly, you are correct...they don't NEED the iPhone platform to do that. Sheep, however, are still sheep...and the sheep don't need the platform, but WANT the platform. And they want it badly. The last big stat I saw was that they're converting iPhone users to OS X users. As their Windows based PC's slow down/get old/require replacement, the sheep-ish iPhone users are jumping on the Mac bandwagon in a brand trend. They like the way their iPhone works and to them it translates into a justification to make the switch for their PC too.

The tide is strong and Apple may continue to ride out this storm in the way that just about everyone on this board doesn't want to see. Again...time will tell. I've made no secret of my being a huge Blackberry fan. In my company, most people get a free BB with unlimited use...yet I see many people turn it off at 5:00 pm in favor of their personal iPhone (at upwards of $75/month out of pocket.) A shocking trend indeed.