No more iphone support.....

[tomsamson]

Guys, you´re missing the point regarding the talk about battery usage.
Sure, there are many things that eat up battery life and so any app that uses more of the device´s functionalities and ressources will drain the battery quicker than when its in idle mode chilling.
The point regarding flash being special there is that flash is using up way more resources when handling way simpler stuff compared to when doing the same as a native app in well done manner or even when doing it using a better middleware solution.
Again, Adobe can say this is not true but anyone with a highend desktop who has played some for flash terms in depth action intense 2d games can have a look at his memory and cpu usage and easily see that flash is a heavy ressource drainer when a machine uses up that much resources to run basic content while when done in other ways a ten year older machine could easily run, let´s say starcraft with way more going on easily.

To me personally the battery drainer side doesn´t matter that much itself, to me those points that are most valid regarding what Apple said against flash are:

-lack of performance and stability compared to other solutions
-with adobe´s way of doing cross platform deploy one can´t use the device´s capabilities to the max at all. Even when disregarding the performance side, just looking at the api/ software side this is quite a bummer:
When going the Adobe Flash/Air deploy way for devices one basically can only use those features and those api/sdk elements possible on the devices which Adobe implemented and exposed via its own API.
That means many features of the device and device´s sdk/ OS can not be used. If you´d for example have a look at which features of the iPhone sdk Adobe´s exporter supported you´d see that one can´t do many, many things in an app made with the Adobe exporter which are possible with the iPhone sdk, why, even many things seen as total standard for every iPhone app, because Adobe hasn´t integrated them in their AS api.
Likewise it could also be expected the same is the case for Android OS deploy and would also be the case when iPhone OS 4.0 ships which has many new features, which then of course again people using the Adobe exporter would not be able to use until if ever Adobe implements and exposes them via their own api.
As developer it annoys me when i can´t use all the features of a device and its OS unless Adobe feels like implementing them on their end and seeing it from Apple´s stance i totally understand it that they wouldn´t be happy with Adobe dictating when app developers can use features Apple has created for its devices and OS.

-Another thing i find fascinating about this whole discussion is that i´ve seen no one else bring up how limiting Adobe is towards the developer community.
Adobe and Adobe close people have done a good job at blaming Apple all the way for wanting to control what developers develop how for which platform and Adobe on the other side would be oh so generous in allowing oh so much freedom to develop anything for anything.

Is Adobe really giving us so much choice?
Last time i checked they were the company who´d like everyone to use their tools no matter for which platform they develop and they go even further in controlling things by not just controlling which tools you ideally use to create content no matter for what, nay, they also dictate which language you use, cause they haven´t even considered supporting AS1 and 2 onwards (not even to think about adding support for more languages, haha), nay, with the flash/air deploy to devices you´re forced to only use AS3 on many.
So where´s the freedom of choice there?

[Incrue]

If the problem was battery, then make a rule about battery
If its performance, then make one rule about performance
Why not?
Tom, you know apple gaves a lame excuse.
( btw, im not taking adobe side on that, its more like i dislike both)

[tomsamson]

Regarding making a rule about performance or battery usage, well,that´s not really well doable at all. How should they then test and approve apps? Let each run until the battery is empty or compare the performance of each with the performance of ones they think are fine for a particular use case?
As i said, not really feasable, seems way more reasonable to me that they exclude middleware which is already prooven to generally produce content which doesn´t perform as it should regarding the content it runs.

No, i don´t think Apple gave lame excuses for why they don´t want flash on there at all.
I think several points Apple brought up are perfectly understandable when its about flash, in fact several of them are things many seasoned flash developers have been moaning about for several years.
I think Apple would just be exaggerating if they´d not only ban flash now but also other middleware which contrary to flash actually produces well performing content and also allows to use all the features of the device/sdk/os.

Regarding flash itself i think the only right move Adobe can do is finally becoming serious and believable again by being honest about the problems that undeniably exist and really properly addresses them on all the platforms flash runs on so that more and more people want flash content as native or browser content instead of less and less.
I don´t see that happening though cause the same people there who lied about issues for years are continuing to do so as always as if nothing happened.

[Incrue]

No, i don´t think Apple gave lame excuses for why they don´t want flash on there at all.

The most important excuse, as Steve Jobs said, was:

letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform.

Thats an stupid excuse because it has nothing to do with flash.Its a generalization, and if its true then unity games are what, sub games?Nonsense.

[tomsamson]

Well, its not clear yet which middleware is affected because its not clear yet what Apple sees as something being an intermediary layer and something cross compiled.
It could be any middleware, it could just as well be none of those which at the end produce an xcode project.
We´ll see with time.

[Incrue]

Im not that optimistic
Its been a month since the Unity CEO said: 'next week we gonna have a meeting with Apple guys to see how to solve this'
http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/04/14/...date/#comments
And nothing untill now

[tomsamson]

Well, they can´t say much until more things are completely official.
I have a good feeling though because still daily many unity made games get released on the App Store of which also many get featured by Apple.
Again, we all don´t know until things are official, just my view on it.

[Squize]

Are there still new Unity games going on the AppStore ? As everyone would have had to agree to the new agreement now, including the 331 part, that means by submitting a game they're in breach of that.

Squize.

[tomsamson]

Yes, there are unity made games submitted to the app store daily and yes, some of them get featured by Apple regularly and as said before many people have spent a lot of time discussing what exactly the apple rule change means and whether it forbids middleware such as unity or not. So yeah, you're a bit quick with saying those are breaching something until that is final and clear.

[Squize]

Well no, they are breaching the 331 part, just 'cause Apple is turning a blind eye / not enforcing it yet, 331 is clear and it doesn't include Unity.

Interesting to know that Unity powered games are still being submitted and accepted though, cheers.

Squize.

[Alluvian]

Yes, and all those unity games are on insanely thin ice as well. Apple could boot any one of them out of the appstore at any time for violating the terms. Apple has a history of being very selective in who they apply their rules to.

Remember kiddies, scantily clad women are BAD, unless you have a lot of money like Sports Illustrated or Playboy, then they are fun for the whole family.

Apple needs to get the message, that their phone/pad is NOTHING except a collection of apps, and you better treat those devs right or they will go somewhere else.

The Android platform has just passed up the Iphone OS in the market, and they are gaining, not losing steam. Sure that is across multiple providers, but devs don't care really, the number of eyes on product is now higher for Android. The sales figures of apps may still be better on Iphone though.

[edit:]
Actually fragmentation of the Android market IS a concern that Apple is only starting to see.

[dandylion13]

Does anyone know how, technically, Unity and Flash's SWF export compile apps?

I can understand that the SWF exporter might be a problem if it simply wraps an SWF in a virtual Flash player, which in turn is wrapped in a compiled app that runs the player (Argh!). That would explain the poor performance and huge file size. But I have no idea... does anyone know?

Maybe Unity compiles as clean C or C++. That would make it native iPhone app code, and so not be a problem... ? It would mean that it's not running a layer of interpretative middleware like the Flash app might be.

[tomsamson]

Guys, we´re repeating ourselves with the same questions and answers.
Squize: The Apple rule does leave some room for interpretation, so saying this is kicked out and this is still allowed for sure would be wrong in most cases, we´ll know for sure with time.
With Flash the state is clearer because Apple officials clearly openly said what they think about it and Adobe meanwhile also said officially they won´t develop their exporter further.
Bottomline is Apple obviously didn´t like what Adobe delivered and regarding a lot of other middleware its not fully sure yet what will get kicked out and what not.
Some middleware providers pushed back, others are doing potentially required changes to their setup to comply with rules as they become final.

[Incrue]

To be honest i hate cellphones but this
http://mochiland.com/articles/mochig...mobile-browser
looks smooth enough to me

[Incrue]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Msieshare1
21% of all wikipedia users are still using a brower from 2001
How exactly will html5 replace anything with that speed?

[tomsamson]

hey man, i don´t want to let you hanging there without any reply,
but it also gets tiring to argue over the same points.


I see a problem in that now actually several discussions are mixed into one which makes it difficult to get anywhere.

-There´s the point of whether html 5 should or could replace flash for each and everything flash is used for now on the desktop browser. I think that´s not possible anytime soon as said before.

Then there´s the point whether flash´s performance sucks on desktops or mobile devices.
That depends on what you expect, so if you´re fine with how it runs and what´s possible with it on the desktop browser and you´re fine with getting a fraction of that >performance< on highend smartphones, or if you stack it up against current html 5 performance on many ends, then yes, flash´s performance is fine.
If you compare it to what´s possible with other browser plugins on the same machine or when doing native apps for desktop or smartphones with other middleware, then flash´s performance is incredibly bad in comparison.
There´s a reason why Adobe brings up a performance comparison of flash stuff compared to html 5 stuff instead of bringing up a comparison to let´s say a unity browser game or a native app made with other middleware like need for speed on an iPhone compared to what was possible to get running smooth on an iPhone or android device when made in flash.

So whether flash or any other tech solution is a good choice for a game or a website etc depends on several things, like what´s your target audience, what target platform, which deployment way. Add to that which workflow you prefer and which solution allows to create the content in reasonable timeframe and least cumbersome workflow.
Many things to consider =)

Flash can be a great choice in some use cases and the worst possible in others.

[Incrue]

-There´s the point of whether html 5 should or could replace flash for each and everything flash is used for now on the desktop browser. I think that´s not possible anytime soon as said before.

Tom, then you agree that Steve Jobs gave lame excuses because that (html5 killing flash)was one of those

If you compare it to what´s possible with other browser plugins
on the same machine

I know it will sux, but, as much as i like what unity does, i also dislike that theres no microtransactions for him

[tomsamson]

Tom, then you agree that Steve Jobs gave lame excuses because that (html5 killing flash)was one of those

I think he was wrong in stating things in the vein that html 5 would be ready for doing all what is now done in flash.
That doesn´t mean i don´t think html 5 or something else will not kill flash´s
dominance for website usage or web game usage in the next few years.
I think he was totally right regarding complaining about flash´s ugly performance and stability, especially when compared to other plugins used for game developed or when the content is deployed as native app and therefore has to compete with native apps made with other solutions.

I know it will sux, but, as much as i like what unity does, i also dislike that theres no microtransactions for him

Micro transaction systems can be implemented in unity just like for use in other technologies, hence there are also various micro transaction systems made by various companies of which several are also available for use with unity.

[Incrue]

Micro transaction systems can be implemented in unity just like for use in other technologies, hence there are also various micro transaction systems made by various companies of which several are also available for use with unity.

I dont know, i just think that may be easy for the players to trust mochicoins that already have a big user base and distribution to many game portals

[tomsamson]

Yeah, well, if you mainly make money with micro transaction stuff it sure makes sense for some things to use one of the bigger systems like mochicoins or the facebook one or write your own, that´s a different topic though =)
The discussion is already convoluted enough as it is with people mixing flash performance and platform support woes with whether html 5 will replace it soon etc, i don´t think it helps to add in more and more comparison points , else people start comparing which platforms are supported with each tech, which run without need of plugin in which browsers soon etc etc
Just use what you think is a good option for a particular use case =)