The web will prevail, Steve Jobs will swallow it and the market will leave them no choice but top let Flash in the browser or become has been. Only fart apps developers need AppSore, companies and corporation are tired of the walled garden because they do not need it.

Check this performance test about Flash vs HTML:

More Battery Testing with Flash for Mobile
http://workflowflash.com/37770/more-battery-testing-with-flash-for-mobile.php

Check how much Steve Jobs and its armada of lunatics are full of shit about Flash dead:

Flash & Mobile Are Big Winners of the Royal Wedding
http://gigaom.com/video/flash-mobile-royal-wedding/

Check where the future is, it’s not called Apple it’s called the mobile web:

Why Rush for an iPad App? Fortune’s New Web App Starts With Your Browser
http://adage.com/article/mediaworks/fortune-builds-app-browser-ipad-app-store/227362/

Keep carrying the water for Jobs, sooner than later you will realize you are making a fool of yourself for anyone in the know. Good luck!

For everyone else, join the fight:
http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Adobe-Flash-Player-on-iPad-3888327

You–indeed, all of us–have the freedom to not choose an iOS device. Apple has the freedom to configure devices of its own design in any way it wants. Why do you think your will should be imposed on others?

Apple’s support for and promotion of HTML5 is an endorsement (and boon) to the open web philosophy. I am pleased that at least Apple is pushing things along this direction. I’m also pleased to see that even Adobe has finally seen the light and now supports HTML5 authoring in its latest CS 5.5 edition.

Flash’s impact on energy consumption, and system performance, reliability, security, and privacy is not acceptable. I wish all platform owners and their partners would shun Flash. The world would be a better place.

Time to pick up some exciting new skills, Stephane…

http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

And some reality check about Flash:
http://youtube.com/adobeflexengineer

http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

And some reality check about Flash:
http://youtube.com/adobeflexengineer

Here, educate yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/adobeflexengineer

Here, educate yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/adobeflexengineer

http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

This is how everyone can help force Apple to allow Flash and stop spreading the lies:

1/ Voice your opinion on my response to Steve Jobs’ war on Flash:
Thought on Apple, Flash developer responds to Steve Jobs’ Thought on Flash:
http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

2/ Join the fight on LinkedIn, We demand Flash Player on iPad, iPhone, iPod:

http://tinyurl.com/3qywwdf

3/ Follow the fight on Twitter:

http://www.twitter.com/flexengineer

This is how you can help:

1/ Voice your opinion on my response to Steve Jobs’ war on Flash:
Thought on Apple, Flash developer responds to Steve Jobs’ Thought on Flash:
http://tinyurl.com/65w3bop

2/ Join the fight on LinkedIn, We demand Flash Player on iPad, iPhone, iPod:

http://tinyurl.com/3qywwdf

3/ Follow the fight on Twitter:

http://www.twitter.com/flexengineer

Lemme tell you something. On the Android, Flash stinks. Period.

It may play simplistic video swfs “okay”. But the full web experience, as Adobe touts it, will not be enjoyable. Trust me. The sites I’ve developed for desktop PCs look horrible on Android, the mouse interactivity IS a problem ( you can’t reliably zoom in and press those tiny buttons with your fat finger ), and the frame rate seems to be around 3 fps.

It angers me how the ignorant defend Adobe, and slam Apple for simply being logical.

Getting to the iPhone exporter for Flash… I also develop iPhone games, mainly with the Corona SDK. I took a simple game I did in flash a year ago, exported it from CS5, put it on the iPhone, and it stank. Poor frame rate, laggy interaction. Would you want to pay money for something that performs like that? So, instead of living with that, I port the code to Lua for Corona, and get 60fps on the actual device.

Adobe makes you want feel for them. That they’re hurt by Apple. What a crock.

The main issue is that as soon as Apple allows flash on their devices, they lose control of their content. Apple drives customers to their iTunes store and App store and makes a ton of money from the developers and from the music industry for the privledge of showing up in the Apple ecosystem. Once Flash is introduced into the mix, users will have a vast library of content (videos, games, etc…) that is accessible outside the Apple ecosystem and Apple will lose profits since content creators will have a choice to either post their products for free on the internet in a location of their choosing, or pay Apple to let them live in the App Store where they can be easily viewed by Apple’s large user base. Most will still probably end up in the App store for obvious reasons, but it opens up a huge vulnerability for Apple, and for a company that focuses so intently on marketing as much as everything else, it’s not worth the possiblity of losing a slice of that pie…

Adobe and Apple are both big businesses, and big businesses tend to do whatever makes them the most money.

Just my two cents.

and postscript format wasn’t originally adobe or was it (one of the topologies for pdf’s)? lol

look, adobe is just as bad or as stubborn as apple on this one, remember dreamweaver for html? who gobbled that up or macromedia? which really sucks cause i liked those cheap STAND ALONE apps that weren’t slapped into something called CS3, etc and apple is just as bad, this is more of a staring game… we just have to see who blinks first.

competition is usually good for business, but if they’re forcing one into the other then where is the competition or growth, just bloat…

The only standard they are working in is a double-standard… oooh.

“Jobs lists six extremely well-argued points”
Well argued for those without knowledge about the technology maybe, but in reality they are all FUD with almost no substance.
Check the following links which refutes each of his points:
google steve-jobs-is-full-of-it
google jobs-lies-in-thoughts-on-flash

“Flash can be buggy, when it runs without hardware acceleration it eats battery life”.
JavaScript can be buggy and eat battery, C++ can be buggy and eat battery , Objective C can be buggy and eat battery. The question is how easy is it to develop a stable and efficient application, and are there any limitations when it comes to performance and efficiency.
Jobs presents HTML5 as an alternative to Flash. I have ancountered a great number of buggy JavaScript applications that takes a lot of CPU power for simple tasks.
Fact is that since JavaScript is the scripting language used for HTML5 makes it substantially harder to make stable and efficient applications since it’s based on an older version of ECMAScript compared to Actionscript, and hence it lack many OOP features and does not have static typing. That leads to buggy code and comparatively bad performance.
And canvas as well as svg is very inefficient compared to Flash when it comes to rendering graphics.
Every benchmark I have seen comparing Flash and HTML5 show this clearly.
Here are a couple:
google flash-outperforms-html5-on-mobile-devices
google themaninblue animation benchmarking

“while Flash is most certainly a proprietary standard, it is a standard”
The swf format is open. The Flex SDK is open source. You are free to develop you own Flash Player. What many people do is confuse “open” with a requirement to have development steered by a committee. In practice WHATWG is consisting of mainly three companies, Apple, Opera and Mozilla. If you want them to add something to the specification it’s not that easy. Adobe cooperates with a lot of companies when working on the Flash Player, and does take in feedback from developers.
But if you are not happy with Adobe, you are free to develop your own player without needing a license. Say you are not happy with WHATWG and want to make changes to the canvas, then it’s not as easy. Canvas is a technology where Apple has retained intellectual property rights. When it becomes a W3C recommendation (expected to happen 2022) it will be covered by the W3C royalty-free license, provided the implementation adheres to the specification. So in reality you are not free to make changes as you like to HTML5.
On top of that you rely on proprietary codecs for video and audio, and will have to do in the future as well since Apple and MS will not include WebM and ogg with their browsers.
Adobe on the other hand has announced that they will add WebM support to Flash.
So it’s not as back and white as saying Flash is closed and HTML5 is open, you could easily argue that it’s the other way around.

“Flash content rarely works well on phones, and there is no clear answer for content developers who need to straddle multiple formats for full coverage of desktops, phones, and Apple devices.”
In my experience most Flash content does work well on my Galaxy S with the recent versions of Flash Player 10.1. There are exceptions, but that is true for HTML sites as well, especially HTML5 sites.
Case in point, have a look at this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4
And since Apple now allowed apps made with Flash using the iPhone packager, it’s now a very viable way of straddling multiple platforms.
Sure there are limitations, but compared to the alternatives the reach is superior.

“It is fair to make the case that the consumer experience on a cross-platform app might be compromised relative to a native app.”
There are tons of apps written with Objective-C which does not use the gyroscope, do they compromise the consumer experience as well?
Of course not. Very specific functionality like that is only needed for very specific applications. Trust the developers to use Objective-C if that exposes functionality that is useful for their application, if it’s not available using other tools.

“Adobe also has to stop denigrating HTML5 (one session at Adobe’s upcoming developer conference is titled, “HTML5: Half-baked, Baked, or Ready for the Table?”)”
Adobe has not been “denigrating” HTML5, quite the opposite. They are working on implementing support for it in their tools and made a lot of statements about it being an important part of the future of the web. Is it “ready for the table” today? Anyone with a clue about the subject has to say no. Can you provide any examples of serious commercial applications using HTML5 today?
Companies like YouTube has declared they HTML5 is not ready for prime-time: google flash-and-html5-tag to read the statement from YouTube regarding HTML5′s current viability.
Apart from the limitations and performance issues with HTML5, there just aren’t enough users with browsers with HTML5 support today to make it “ready for the table”, and it will take many years before that is the case. Admitting that is hardly “denigrating”.

“Adobe needs to fix the lingering problems with Flash (such as SEO — Google’s index spiders don’t know how to parse Flash content and largely ignore it.)”
Google does index Flash now. That functionality is mostly useless though, but that is not due to issues with Flash or search engines. You have the same issues with AJAX and HTML5 applications. A regular HTML page has content made available in clearly defined locations which can be easily discovered and linked to by following hyperlinks within a page. Many applications does not have the same clear paths, and you access the content by advanced interaction.
If your application does have clearly definable states that could be indexed you have no need for Adobe or Google to do anything. It’s anyway good practice to separate contents and presentation, and if you do that you can provide the data you feed to your Flash application as HTML for search engines and users without Flash. Using for example SWFAddress you can ensure that you tie the results to corresponding state in you Flash applications.

How much were you paid by Adobe?!

Another apologist article for the crap that is Flash. Flash has had years to get it’s mobile act together but still hasn’t!

For my company and the 5 companies tied into us: NO FLASH ALLOWED for webpages! Period!

Enough with blaming Apple! This is not Apple’s fault but Adobe for having an incredibly below par product.

And enough with these ridiculous comments about “open development” by people who have no clue what they are talking about.

“Jobs lists six extremely well-argued points”
Well argued for those without knowledge about the technology maybe, but in reality they are all FUD with almost no substance.
Check the following links which refutes each of his points:
http://blog.leefernandes.com/flash/steve-jobs-is-full-of-it/
http://www.blixtsystems.com/2010/04/jobs-lies-in-thoughts-on-flash/

“Flash can be buggy, when it runs without hardware acceleration it eats battery life”.
JavaScript can be buggy and eat battery, C++ can be buggy and eat battery , Objective C can be buggy and eat battery. The question is how easy is it to develop a stable and efficient application, and are there any limitations when it comes to performance and efficiency.
Jobs presents HTML5 as an alternative to Flash. I have ancountered a great number of buggy JavaScript applications that takes a lot of CPU power for simple tasks.
Fact is that since JavaScript is the scripting language used for HTML5 makes it substantially harder to make stable and efficient applications since it’s based on an older version of ECMAScript compared to Actionscript, and hence it lack many OOP features and does not have static typing. That leads to buggy code and comparatively bad performance.
And canvas as well as svg is very inefficient compared to Flash when it comes to rendering graphics.
Every benchmark I have seen comparing Flash and HTML5 show this clearly.
Here are a couple:
http://www.blackcj.com/blog/2010/09/17/flash-outperforms-html5-on-mobile-devices/
http://www.themaninblue.com/writing/perspective/2010/03/22/

“while Flash is most certainly a proprietary standard, it is a standard”
The swf format is open. The Flex SDK is open source. You are free to develop you own Flash Player. What many people do is confuse “open” with a requirement to have development steered by a committee. In practice WHATWG is consisting of mainly three companies, Apple, Opera and Mozilla. If you want them to add something to the specification it’s not that easy. Adobe cooperates with a lot of companies when working on the Flash Player, and does take in feedback from developers.
But if you are not happy with Adobe, you are free to develop your own player without needing a license. Say you are not happy with WHATWG and want to make changes to the canvas, then it’s not as easy. Canvas is a technology where Apple has retained intellectual property rights. When it becomes a W3C recommendation (expected to happen 2022) it will be covered by the W3C royalty-free license, provided the implementation adheres to the specification. So in reality you are not free to make changes as you like to HTML5.
On top of that you rely on proprietary codecs for video and audio, and will have to do in the future as well since Apple and MS will not include WebM and ogg with their browsers.
Adobe on the other hand has announced that they will add WebM support to Flash.
So it’s not as back and white as saying Flash is closed and HTML5 is open, you could easily argue that it’s the other way around.

“Flash content rarely works well on phones, and there is no clear answer for content developers who need to straddle multiple formats for full coverage of desktops, phones, and Apple devices.”
In my experience most Flash content does work well on my Galaxy S with the recent versions of Flash Player 10.1. There are exceptions, but that is true for HTML sites as well, especially HTML5 sites.
Case in point, have a look at this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4
And since Apple now allowed apps made with Flash using the iPhone packager, it’s now a very viable way of straddling multiple platforms.
Sure there are limitations, but compared to the alternatives the reach is superior.

“It is fair to make the case that the consumer experience on a cross-platform app might be compromised relative to a native app.”
There are tons of apps written with Objective-C which does not use the gyroscope, do they compromise the consumer experience as well?
Of course not. Very specific functionality like that is only needed for very specific applications. Trust the developers to use Objective-C if that exposes functionality that is useful for their application, if it’s not available using other tools.

“Adobe also has to stop denigrating HTML5 (one session at Adobe’s upcoming developer conference is titled, “HTML5: Half-baked, Baked, or Ready for the Table?”)”
Adobe has not been “denigrating” HTML5, quite the opposite. They are working on implementing support for it in their tools and made a lot of statements about it being an important part of the future of the web. Is it “ready for the table” today? Anyone with a clue about the subject has to say no. Can you provide any examples of serious commercial applications using HTML5 today?
Companies like YouTube has declared they HTML5 is not ready for prime-time: http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html
Apart from the limitations and performance issues with HTML5, there just aren’t enough users with browsers with HTML5 support today to make it “ready for the table”, and it will take many years before that is the case. Admitting that is hardly “denigrating”.

“Adobe needs to fix the lingering problems with Flash (such as SEO — Google’s index spiders don’t know how to parse Flash content and largely ignore it.)”
Google does index Flash now. That functionality is mostly useless though, but that is not due to issues with Flash or search engines. You have the same issues with AJAX and HTML5 applications. A regular HTML page has content made available in clearly defined locations which can be easily discovered and linked to by following hyperlinks within a page. Many applications does not have the same clear paths, and you access the content by advanced interaction.
If your application does have clearly definable states that could be indexed you have no need for Adobe or Google to do anything. It’s anyway good practice to separate contents and presentation, and if you do that you can provide the data you feed to your Flash application as HTML for search engines and users without Flash. Using for example SWFAddress you can ensure that you tie the results to corresponding state in you Flash applications.

Apple does need to be receptive, but Adobe needs to stop acting like a proprietary plugin “must” be included on every platform in the world and throwing a tantrum when its crash-prone and often slow software isn’t automatically accepted.