Adobe: Flash for Mac Is Getting Better–Really!
“We are ready to enable Flash in the browser on [the iPhone and iPad] if and when Apple chooses to allow that for its users, but to date we have not had the required cooperation from Apple to make this happen.”
Apple’s refusal to support Flash on the iPhone–and soon the iPad as well–might not be a death knell for Flash, but it will surely hasten its decline, if Adobe isn’t careful.
Certainly, the fact that the iPhone’s lack of Flash hasn’t really hurt it suggests that Flash may not be quite as important for the Web as Adobe (ADBE) would like us all to think. And now, with some new video players ably demonstrating the promise of HTML5–like this one–the company is clearly worried about Apple’s (AAPL) unflagging exclusion of Flash and CEO Steve Jobs’s recent, and quite vicious, dismissal of it.
So much so that Adobe is publicly promising to improve Flash’s performance on Mac systems. In comments appended to a blog post about the iPad’s lack of Flash support, Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch said his company is working to improve Flash performance on the Mac.
“Flash Player on Windows has historically been faster than the Mac, and it is for the most part the same code running in Flash for each operating system,” he wrote. “We have and continue to invest significant effort to make Mac OS optimizations to close this gap, and Apple has been helpful in working with us on this.”
Elaborating, Lynch catalogs progress to date. “Vector graphics rendering in Flash Player 10 now runs almost exactly the same in terms of CPU usage across Mac and Windows, which is due to this work. In Flash Player 10.1 we are moving to CoreAnimation, which will further reduce CPU usage and we believe will get us to the point where Mac will be faster than Windows for graphics rendering….With Flash Player 10.1, we are optimizing video rendering further on the Mac and expect to reduce CPU usage by half, bringing Mac and Windows closer to parity for video.”
Welcome news. But enough to prompt Apple to suddenly reverse course and begin supporting Flash on its mobile devices? That seems unlikely. Apple’s repudiation of Flash on the iPhone and iPad seems–to me, anyway–quite a bit like its repudiation of floppy drives in the first iMacs. It’s a move that inevitably generates great controversy and criticism, but ultimately proves to be ahead of its time.
Comments
It's not about the technology, it's about business. Flash offers an alternative content distribution model. Apple wants users locked to App Store, Book Store, iTunes Store. Thus no Flash.
However there is a Kindle reader for iPhone… will there be one for iPad to compete with Book Store?
Posted by jdifonzo at February 9th, 2010 at 3:16 amAdobe is taking the blame for Flash, but actually the company to blame is Macromedia. But since Adobe bought out Macromedia a few years ago, it inherited both the good and the bad. I did some Flash development a few years back and I was surprised that the software was not able to trap some events that were officially supported. How can you do event driven programming when the event processing is buggy? Macromedia even failed to provide an acceptable video player for their FLV video playback – though many users were complaining.
The current version of Flash for developers released by Adobe is much improved. On the whole, I believe Adobe will deliver on its promise to give us a robust, reliable, and optimized Flash 10.1 product.
Apple may be exploiting past problems with Flash for business reasons, but since Apple owns only 5% of the global phone market, its refusal to include Flash on the iPhone and iPad should not affect the Flash market. Most people still use their desktop and laptop computers as the primary means to do serious web browsing on the Internet, and in that market, Flash is the de facto standard.
Posted by Andrew Augustine at February 9th, 2010 at 3:34 am> We are ready to enable Flash in the browser on
> [the iPhone and iPad]
If that is the case, then why is there no Flash on the other smartphones? Why did mobile Firefox have to disable their FlashPlayer because of performance and stability issues?
I just don't buy that FlashPlayer for iPhone is technically up to the standard of the iPhone software stack. Not at all.
Posted by JohnDoey at February 9th, 2010 at 3:41 amThe same Kindle app that runs on iPhone runs on iPad already. They're the same apps. There are many, many other book readers also. There are also hundreds of non-Apple music players and video players. There are also iPhone apps that were made 100% with Adobe Flash running on iPhone and iPad and being sold by Apple in the App Store. So you are 100% wrong.
It is about the technology. Consider that iPhone and iPad are iPods. Are you saying that iPods can't play video? That iPods need a third-party software plug-in to play video? No, they do not.
Since 2007, the video format in FlashPlayer has been ISO MPEG-4 H.264, the same one that plays in QuickTime Player, iTunes, iPod, iPhone, iPad, YouTube, Blu-Ray, Podcasts, other smartphones, game consoles, every device that plays video. The 2005-2007 FLV video format that is proprietary to Adobe (and which has been deprecated by Adobe because it has no HD sizes) is still used too much, especially considering it takes about 5x the bandwidth of ISO MPEG-4.
The one and only reason you see a blue lego in the Web browser sometimes on an iPhone or Android or other smartphone instead of video is that the website publisher has hidden the video inside a FlashPlayer video player instead of just serving the video directly to your device. They did that because Windows does not have its own ISO MPEG-4 H.264 video player, unlike all other devices, and the page was essentially designed for Windows. Since FlashPlayer is put in the page by JavaScript, it is very simple to put in the logic “if no FlashPlayer, then put in the video directly instead of a FlashPlayer.”
Adobe has been playing a PR game but they have no technical leg to stand on. The iPod/iPhone/iPad already has a hardware video player, just like other smartphones and many other devices, including the NVIDIA GPU's in many PC's. It takes 5% of the computer power and 5% of the battery to play the video in hardware instead of in Flash, so website publishers are asking an awful lot of you to run a FlashPlayer on your mobile device just to see their video. When you consider that sites that are still serving FLV are also asking for 5x the bandwidth, Flash is really, really not friendly to mobile users.
If you are thinking it is not the website publisher's fault, consider that YouTube runs on iPhone for 3 years now, and runs on iPod and iPad also. And it runs on Macs with great efficiency. When you switch your desktop YouTube from Flash to HTML5, you can see your battery use go down. Adobe unfortunately has been absent from HTML5, just like Microsoft. It has succeeded far beyond their expectations because it's on all the mobiles, all Macs, and in Firefox.
By the way, it is not just Apple devices that don't run Flash. The other mobile devices are not all running FlashPlayer either. So when you take this opportunity to Apple bash you just look foolish. Especially considering that Flash actually does run on the iPhone, in the native app platform, through the App Store. Adobe's Photoshop Mobile for iPhone was made 100% in Flash, as were hundreds of other apps. Apple is fine with Flash running on iPhone, just not as the video player, because there is already a hardware-based video player on iPhone that is better than Flash in every way except for backwards-compatibility with website that are still serving video like it's 2005.
Posted by JohnDoey at February 9th, 2010 at 3:56 amWhoo, what a rant!
Dude, flash is NOT about video. It's a runtime platform for applications — including media.
Plenty of Apple devices run flash, every desktop and laptop they make, in fact!
Apple's also famous for flipping App Store policies as it suits them. Why can I have Skype and Fring on my iPhone but not Google Voice???
So I think it's possible that they could dither on this and somehow deny kindle reader on iPad.
If they allow Flash then Adobe or someone else can build an App Store for Flash apps, or a Book Store for Flash books, or a Music Store for Flash audio and video.
Since there's no Flash, you can't do it. Like I said, the Kindle Reader is kind of an anomaly. It's one place I can actually buy content for my iPhone (directly) not from Apple. See, I can buy music from Amazon but I have to do that on my PC and they hack it into iTunes and then I have to sync it to my iPhone. There's no Amazon Music Store on iPhone or iPod. That's not an accident. It's Apple's restriction.
So you missed my point entirely. This is not a technical issue and it has nothing to do with the ability to render content. It's about business and locking in customers.
Posted by jdifonzo at February 9th, 2010 at 4:08 amApple has 5% of the mobile phone market, but 95% of mobile browsing is done with an Apple device. So it has already affected Flash. Adobe's Flash evangelist quite famously mocked up some iPad screens showing about a dozen sites not running on iPad because they are Flash sites, but when somebody actually used an iPad to look at those sites, they found that 10 of the 12 run fine on Apple's mobile platform already because when the sites see a device without Flash, they just send the video directly to the device, which can play it natively in hardware.
The ultimate problem for Adobe is this:
* HTML now has its own API for not only inserting a video into a page, but controlling it, and this is fully supported in Safari, Chrome, Firefox, and Opera
* hardware-based ISO MPEG-4 H.264 video players have been built into EVERYTHING over the past few years … not just mobile devices, but also game consoles, and even PC GPU's, and these hardware players play video with much greater efficiency and longer battery life than FlashPlayer
* the video format in FlashPlayer since 2007 is ISO MPEG-4 H.264 … the same standard video that plays everywhere in hardware … so why do we need Flash?
We are in a transitional time between HTML4 and HTML5. Flash provided the ISO MPEG-4 H.264 player for HTML4, but in HTML5 the video is put directly into the page and the browser or device plays it much more efficiently.
This should all be great news for Adobe, because they should make a ton of money selling HTML5 development tools. However, they bet against HTML5, they tried to protect the past at the expense of the future and they lost the bet. Nobody saw the explosion of HTML5 on mobiles doing an end run around Internet Explorer on the desktop. Nobody imagined that YouTube would be porting their HTML5 mobile site to the desktop right now and telling users to upgrade their browser to a modern HTML5 browser like Safari, Chrome, Firefox or Opera.
The future for Flash is as a cross-platform mobile app development tool. There are many iPhone apps made with Flash. There is no reason why Flash can't also spit out Blackberry apps and Android apps and even HTML5 apps. It's been making Windows and Mac apps for over 10 years. It's only FlashPlayer that is no longer required. It's been replaced by the combination of HTML5 API's for audio, video, vectors, and animations and by hardware-based MPEG-4 video support. Good riddance. So it's a case of Flash is dead, long live Flash. It's up to Adobe if they take the opportunities to bring Flash into the future.
Posted by JohnDoey at February 9th, 2010 at 4:08 amWhile there's plenty of politics, to be sure, the reality is that Flash sucks on the Mac (although I will say that Adobe AIR is materially more reliable, if a bit of a resource hog), and is the number one cause of browser crashes on both Safari and Firefox.
In other words, if you're Apple why would want a runtime that has already proven to be a slog on one of your platforms?
More to the point, if you are Apple and you have the history that you do with Adobe:
1) Seeing products like Photoshop and Illustrator, that were born on the Mac, become second-class citizens to their Windows siblings (albeit for sound business reasons by Adobe, but hey, payback's a b-tch!)
2) Flash on the Mac has been given the care and feeding of a third-class citizen
Why wouldn't you keep that Cow in the Barn, so to speak?
Posted by hypermark at February 9th, 2010 at 4:18 amFlash 10.1 has already been developed for the Palm Pre smartphone and a beta version is expected sometime this month (Feb 2010). Google's Android phones will also support Flash 10.1. So yes, Adobe is ready to move Flash over to the iPhone if Apple is welcoming.
Posted by Andrew Augustine at February 9th, 2010 at 4:20 amBecause the plugin runs perfectly well on all other platforms – hence Apple is crap and is not able to handle it. Since the apps run FINE on other platforms – there is therefore nothing buggy in the app or player – since the only variation is the os – APPLE – it is therefore logical that it is apple who is at fault.
Posted by Sam R at February 9th, 2010 at 4:22 amThis is EXACTLY what has been stated by ADOBE – they are seeking to work with Apple to help them fix their garbage systems to run the stuff but are unwilling – whose fault is that.
If you REALLY believe that the reason Flash sucks on the Mac because of some endemic failing of the Mac OS, I would suggest that you are “confused,” inasmuch as the same garbage system (as you put it) is what iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are derived from, and tens of thousands of developers sing high praises for the platform itself, which has spawned over 100K media, gaming and communication intensive apps (and a thriving “iPhone Economy”) in just 18+ months.
Plenty question Apple's business policies and politics, but not their platform prowess.
Posted by hypermark at February 9th, 2010 at 4:31 amSorry – you are wrong.
Flash has some of the most sophisticated video controls on the market – by miles. nothing comes close certainly not html5 – and claiming so is an absolute lie.
Further html5 will not be available as a STANDARD for at least two if not three more years – in which time people will realise that platforms such as Maemo 5 – if you dont know what this is then stop posting – will have destroyed iPhone.
Flash is geared to running on the GPU – therefore all your points regarding hardware are mute – flash 10.1 runs on HARDWARE.
Flash is significantly more than a video player – and focusing on this only shows your incredibly limited understanding of technology and the web. It is by far and away the most powerful tool for dynamic develooment – cabale of interacting and delivering its own sockets (flash 10), its own peer 2 peer networking and peer clouding (flash 10), and much, MUCH more which html5 can not do.
In fact to deliver even a fraction of what flash is capable of HTML5 has to interact with a plethora of server side tehcnologies, running on WHO knows what server, into WHO KNOWS what client, running on WHO KNOWS what OS – so in other words to work in html5 equivalent of flash you have to consider linux, IIS, mac, windows, palm, winos, maemo, Firefox, safari, IE, Javascript, ASP, Java, PHP – etc, etc, etc, etc or SIMPLY USE FLASH FOR EVERYTHING !!! Which one has more BUGS ?
Finaly flash is becoming ubiquitous across all platforms and is coming to television – should we put html on the TV – no because it would be MORONIC. It is delivering game consoles, driving super tankers, oil rig readouts, in car navs, DVD menus, and of course desktop, mobile – ONE format.
There is simply no comparison between html5 and flash – any argument what so ever is quite frankly ridiculous.
Posted by Sam R at February 9th, 2010 at 4:32 amFlash is on all smart phones and has been for five years.
Posted by Sam R at February 9th, 2010 at 4:33 amFurther flash is now being made available as a full version on Maemo5 – find out what you are talking about.
Which is still less than 10% of what is being developed for other phone platforms – which are all infinitely more powerful and have been so for years. Phone apps were around a very long time before Apple claimed they invented them. If you do your research all that is happening on the Apple iPhone is that customers are being charged for content that they would be able to FREELY ACCESS on the web via flash – but since it is blocked must PAY FOR THE PRIVILIDGE of accessing the same content by paying for and installing and app from the app store.
Posted by Sam R at February 9th, 2010 at 4:39 amFurther the total amount of iPhone apps would not even be a billionth of what is available in flash.
Finally your comment does not address the fundamental poprosition that it is apples operating system which is unable to handle the same content all other oeprating systems can – meaning it is therefore a failing of apple to handle this content. – Try and understand you have no idea what you are talking about – you are a a jonny come lately to the industry – as is the iPhone – there is nothing – NOTHING on the latest iPhone which i did not have on my Nokia n95 almost 5 years ago – except capacitive touch screen – finally iPhone is light years behind Nokia n900 – time you did some home work.
Ya got me. I have only been in the tech business since 1994 so that makes me a newbie.
Not sure how many mobile devices you have had over the years, but I can't personally think of a single application or name a single developer until iPhone came out. Maybe you can, and based upon your math, who is beating iPhone these days? Nokia? Not only is iPhone spectacularly more profitable than them, Nokia's stock is down 35% since iPhone was first announced whereas Apple's is up 105% so the market doesn't see it that way.
As to the fundamental proposition you put forth that Flash's problems are somehow Apple's fault, I'd say according to who? Adobe? Have they even gone on record saying that?
Regardless, the market is the ultimate arbiter of these things. If the masses considered lack of Flash a showstopper, we'd be hearing about it, or more fundamentally, we'd be seeing it in terms of lost sales and lost momentum for Apple.
It's just not happening. Now, maybe you are in the conspiracy bucket that Apple is just a marketing machine, and that consumers are lemmings, but follow their numbers quarter after quarter, product by product through a brutal recession, and I'd say the hard data speaks pretty clearly.
Relative to who “invented” what, I would say this. Most everything in tech is derivative of ideas that came before it. There is very little split the atom, totally new.
The hard part is making the piece parts work as a cohesive whole in a manner that satisfies customers, partners and investors.
I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people that consider the mobile business less interesting since iPhone rolled out.
Posted by hypermark at February 9th, 2010 at 5:09 amThis is just ignorant. Adobe has simply failed to optimise for OS X as it did for other platforms. His quote acknowledges this. “With Flash Player 10.1, we are optimizing video rendering further on the Mac and expect to reduce CPU usage by half, bringing Mac and Windows closer to parity for video.”
In other words, their failure to optimise in the past caused CPU usage to be twice what it could have and should have been. This is incontrovertible.
Posted by isotonic at February 9th, 2010 at 9:03 amNot to mention “”In Flash Player 10.1 we are moving to Core Animation, which will further reduce CPU usage and, we believe, will get us to the point where Mac will be faster than Windows for graphics rendering.”
Posted by isotonic at February 9th, 2010 at 9:05 am