Why aren’t people as upset with Adobe and the proprietary Flash standard as they are with Apple for not supporting it. The way I see it, people are upset that the iPhone and iPad are a “closed system where Apple dictates what is presented or allowed to run on ‘your’ devices” but that is exactly what is involved with Flash and PDF support. If you don’t allow a system hog of a service to run on your machine, you don’t get the goods. You certainly don’t have the ability to do with it whatever you want since its clipped together in a package. Sure, there are things you can do to get the content out of those packages, but for the most part, no one does that. They shovel the PDF or link to the Flash. No one mails an SWF to their friends. Not to mention it requires an entire download to consume the content. And if you want to build something in Flash, good luck. At least Apple tools are completely free.
Daring Fireball linked to Robert Scoble, both of them discussing the issue of Flash not running or being adopted by the iPhone and iPad and they bring up the points I’ve made as well. Either people will adopt the standards, or they’ll create a dedicated application which people truly do love to obtain. I love purchasing or getting a free “app for that” because it shows a level of dedication to the consumer of a site or product. Plus, the level of customization is great. You can push new updates through the channel, and you can offer in-app purchases without much issue. Flash, as far as I know, doesn’t allow you any commercial extension, just the glitz of a pretty interface and I hate not being able to either link directly to a store item, or copy and paste the description. There might be ways around this, but it isn’t as easy as just copying it and pasting it. I stopped paying attention to Flash awhile back, so things may have changed. It doesn’t grow with you, it only consumes more resources. I think most adoptions of Flash are because someone sold them on an idea instead of shown just how really ineffective Flash is on consumption of anything other than the prettiness of a site. Great for Art sites, but that can be duplicated in myriad ways.
I’m not a programmer, I hire them to make what I need when I need something. Programmers have a particular take on things. As a consumer of all things technological, I have a different angle. It brings me back to the idea that people are so upset about Flash not being adopted. The reason why people use Flash is not for ease of adoption, it is for protection of their product. They don’t want to let you easily copy their work. Why aren’t people so upset about that? Who cares about Hulu? They are using a Flash based doorway to keep you from consuming easily. Are people upset about their use of Flash? It certainly doesn’t seem so. Same thing with Disney, which has their own App to deliver their product. And it all is available on the iPad. So, everyone who is lauding the acceptance of all goods to the Android platform; the only way you can extend that to a laptop is to be a hacker of one level or another, or a script kiddy who will be absolutely torn asunder as soon as it fails to install properly. That is why Apple monitors what is delivered. For the most part, there are few problems with the products delivered. Albeit, there have been problems with what changes once it is purchased.
Daring Fireball linked to Robert Scoble, have the programmers take on things, and I will bet that coders are more interested in programming for a solid and easy to develop for platform than for something that has a shred of market share, is attuned more towards hackers and technophiles, or in Microsoft’s case, are having a hard time following through on paying developers.
Scoble says:
A few problems, though:
1. We haven’t seen the new Flash implementation for mobile phones.
2. We don’t know how well Google will do in its fight for mindshare against Apple (and, so far, Google has been coming in #2).
3. Even if the implementation is freaking awesome and Google makes headway with it Apple will still have close to 100 million devices that won’t have Flash on them by the end of the year.
4. Developers care about getting paid and so far Apple’s platform is better at getting them paid than other platforms. Will this change this year? Unknown.
5. Even if Adobe does everything perfectly and so does Google, Flash still has a major black eye amongst many developers. Can Adobe talk developers into supporting Flash with all of the angst I’m seeing about it? Luke says yes, but I’m still not sure.
For number one: No one has seen the future of the iPad, but if the iPod is any example, it is all win. Of course, we have Apple TV to counter that.
For number two: Google would probably rather adopt HTML5 and standards, non-proprietary platforms. Either that, or it will adopt anything that doesn’t cost them some overwhelming amount of money.
For number three: That is the key ingredient, the number of installed consumers. When you talk to everyday Joe’s, you’ll notice they don’t know Android from a hole in the wall, nor Google from the search engine. They do know Apple and its quality, its products, and the iPhone. It threw a hint into the air, and the world sniffed hard until it was making people pass out due to lack of oxygen.
For number four: There are rumors of Microsoft developers not getting paid. I haven’t heard of such things for the Apple platform. That alone is reason to shy away from Microsoft development for anything it develops. Android/Google development is a fraction of the offer for developers. Apple wins.
For number five: I don’t think Flash will gain any followers. They don’t offer anything for the platform adoption. Everything done in Flash can be done elsewhere. As a consumer, it slows down sites. It is frustrating when I have to install a plug-in. That alone means that it is the colorful candy coating on the site instead of the milk chocolate filling.
Daring Fireball says:
What’s Hulu going to do? Sit there and wait? Whine about the blue boxes? Or do the practical thing and write software that delivers video to iPhone OS? The answer is obvious. Hulu doesn’t care about what’s good for Adobe. They care about what’s good for Hulu. Hulu isn’t a Flash site, it’s a video site. Developers go where the users are.
From the consumer point of view, Hulu truly is not a Flash site. Consumers don’t care, unless it doesn’t work. When you look at the surface, you say “Damn! Apple doesn’t support Hulu?” Well, that isn’t the case, Hulu doesn’t support the Apple platform. Since Hulu has raw material that CAN definitely be consumed via an App; you have to turn the evaluation around. Who isn’t supporting what? Why should Hulu be limited to those who need a third party application? Why does Hulu have to run its entire platform on the gaping hole of Flash? As a consumer, I’d rather just watch the movie or show.
Ultimately, coders have had to program for each edition of Microsoft Internet Explorer, and we know that holes were found in every version since its creation. Coders have to code for Adobe Flash, which adds a slower layer, and Google had to develop an entire function and Adobe had to interact so that Flash can be parsed for search. That is amazing that someone went to that level to enable inclusion into a search engine. It is obvious that Apple “could” support Flash, but why should it? Consumers really don’t care. Not only will Hulu develop for the Apple Platform eventually, they could charge for it, or make it free and include banner advertisements which will garner greater long term revenue, probably better than the interstitials that are presented on Hulu.com, not to mention the pre- and post-roll advertisements. As Hulu has been adopted more and more, I have noticed more advertisements. Perhaps the Apple platform will allow them to drop some of those interstitials.
What do you think?
Related posts:
You must log in to post a comment.