Flash coming to iPhone whether Apple likes it or not: Adobe

David Braue
17 February 2010, 10:23 AM


Adobe this week has expressed confidence Apple will cave eventually on its stubborn blocking of Flash on the iPhone.


It’s one of the IT industry’s great battles of wills: Adobe wants to get Flash on the hugely popular iPhone, and Apple has blocked the technology at every turn. But with growing consumer pressure on Apple to support Flash – and Apple needing to make a case for its upcoming iPad – Adobe this week has expressed confidence Apple will cave eventually.

Adobe has been proactive in recent months working with smartphone vendors to find ways of delivering Flash applications onto their devices. At this week’s Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, the company announced it is bringing its Air (Adobe Integrated Runtime) application platform to devices powered by Google’s Android and Research In Motion’s Blackberry OS operating systems, and possibly others.

“Our goal is to provide a consistent runtime that spans devices, inclusive of [mobile and] desktop operating systems,” Flash marketing director Adrian Ludwig said at the event, where Adobe is also demonstrating Flash Player 10.1, which will bring parity with the desktop versions of Flash and run on Windows Mobile, Android, Palm WebOS, Symbian, and BlackBerry OS powered devices.

Adobe has been locked in a battle of wills over Flash with Apple, which has previously claimed the technology is buggy and so processor-intensive that it would compromise the usability of the iPhone. Two years ago, for example, Steve Jobs slammed the platform during Apple’s annual shareholder meeting; he repeated the sentiments at a town hall meeting earlier this month, where he purportedly called Adobe a ‘lazy’ company

Adobe has denied the claims its software is buggy, and has said it is ready to go with a version of Flash on the iPhone but is being blocked by Apple from getting low-level access to the iPhone that’s necessary to properly implement Flash. As a workaround, Adobe has offered developers tools that encapsulate Flash applications in an iPhone-friendly application wrapper, allowing them to be delivered to customers through Apple’s App Store.

Apple’s motivations for blocking Flash have frequently been attributed to more commercial realities: because it provides an alternative and unmanaged way to get applications running on the phone, Flash could easily break Apple’s tightly controlled App Store, which features over 140,000 titles and recently marked its 3 billionth download.

Apple has not said what proportion of these are paid-for titles, but there is clearly enough revenues at stake that the company has been willing to continue blocking direct Flash applications.

Apple was caught up in an embarrassing situation after the January 28 iPad launch, when apparently-doctored product demonstrations showed the Flash-powered New York Times Web site running on the iPad – which also lacks Flash functionality. The situation sent Apple backpedalling and outraged fans who have been vociferous in their criticism of Apple for stonewalling.

The latest comments from Adobe suggest that, having failed in direct negotiations with Apple, the company is laying siege to the iPhone by Flash-enabling every other smartphone on the market. With Apple pushing the iPad as a complete Web browsing experience, the heat could be turned even higher.

“I suspect what will happen is that as we have more devices in the market… Apple will have more market pressure to include Flash on the iPhone,” head of Adobe’s platform business David Wadhwani said this week. “Apple would like to move rich content off the web and into its App Store, where it can more readily monetise it….Ultimately, the consumer will decide.”


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

optyk phyba (New user):

Adobe wont be happy until they have compromised every device out there.
HTML5 is where apple and others need to focus.
APC should help lead the charge to HTML5 here in Australia and get Flash consigned to the trash heap where it belongs.

17 February 2010, 3:56 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Reg Langford (New user):

Every time I go to a website which relies on Flash while browsing on my iPhone, I get pissed off with the website, NOT with Apple. The only "consumers" who are complaining about the lack of flash on iPhone are Adobe. It threatens their hegemony, and their bottom line, and no one likes that. Adobe needs to realise that Steve Jobs will NEVER cave on this issue, for many reasons, both technical and political. And the winners will be the very consumers which Adobe claims to be fighting for. There is no reason whatsoever that developers can't use the existing and upcoming standards to produce content that is every bit as good as flash; just look at some of Google's mobile-optimised solutions for good examples.

17 February 2010, 4:46 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Raindog (User):

Quoting Reg Langford:
Every time I go to a website which relies on Flash while browsing on my iPhone, I get pissed off with the website, NOT with Apple.

That is a lot of anger to carry through one lifetime


Quoting Reg Langford:
The only "consumers" who are complaining about the lack of flash on iPhone are Adobe.

Adobe ? Consumers? Well actually a lot are complaining, in fact you are too, even if you've chosen to direct your anger towards Adobe alone.


Quoting Reg Langford:
It threatens their hegemony

It's good to see your thesaurus has not suffered due to inoperative flash. :)


Quoting Reg Langford:
and their bottom line, and no one likes that.

Nobody likes bottom lines?


Quoting Reg Langford:
Adobe needs to realise that Steve Jobs will NEVER cave on this issue

I'm sure Adobe are losing lots of sleep over the stubborned of Skivvy Man.


Quoting Reg Langford:
both technical and political.

The politics of Flash, eh. "We shall Animate on the Beaches, We shall animate them on the desktops. But never shall we with and animate on our palm tops."


Quoting Reg Langford:
And the winners will be the very consumers

And how will this happen, end of the day schmuck consumers have ended up paying for buggy phone things unable to run half the websites they are should be able to view without flaw.


Quoting Reg Langford:
There is no reason whatsoever that developers can't use the existing and upcoming standards to produce content that is every bit as good as flash

Except of course until the reality of who will pay to recode all the millions of sites that have utilised flash technologies. Yes no reason at all, everyone knows developers just love dual coding their work to cater for multiple buggy platforms.

Raindog asks tech services to Rush a reality check to Reg.


20 February 2010, 9:51 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

apt.pupil (User):

Quoting Reg Langford:
There is no reason whatsoever that developers can't use the existing and upcoming standards to produce content that is every bit as good as flash

existing standards use either flash or silverlight to deliver interactive content(such as music, videos, banners, ect...).
And upcoming content will skip the need for flash altogether- that is true, however only the newset software will support HTML5, and even then Safari 4 for computers is the only browser currently able to correctly interpret the tags. HTML5 however is still in development, and therefore- is not quite something to fully rely on just yet. When its released developers will have a hard time migrating across because IE's 6 &7, and older versions of the other browsers simply will not load HTML5(i know IE6 and 7 stumble at the DTD from my own experiments on my own website)




Quoting Reg Langford:
just look at some of Google's mobile-optimised solutions for good examples.

mobile optimized content once again requires a second set of coding- though CSS makes the job slightly easier(but not much. i gave up on trying to get mobile- optimized content to load when it comes to embedded youtube players and other flash enabled content).

Before you go slagging off Adobe for having a solid platform that upwards of 90% of global developers have been using for years- i would ask you kindly to go and give HTML and CSS with proper web design for a few years and then go and stop doing the method that just works for you and the majority of your customers because of a stubborn CEO calling political potshots.




20 February 2010, 11:19 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Zig (New user):

I dont' know about how well Flash will run on the iPhone, but I agree with Steve Job's purported comment that Adobe is a lazy company.
They have been promising Flash Player for 64-bit browsers on 64-bit Windows for years and still haven't delivered. It is a joke.
I have a perfectly good 64-bit browser (fast) but have run a the 32-bit version (slower) simply because Adobe can't be bothered getting off their backsides and doing some work. Adobe's arrogant management should be pensioned off.
It will serve them right if HTML5 pushes Flash into oblivion.

17 February 2010, 5:10 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

AnthonyBrisbane (User):

Apple hardware is widely known to be very poor, as is their OS. Apple admit themselves that their systems aren't capable of running Flash reliably like other platforms can.

17 February 2010, 5:47 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Robin Perkins (New user):

Quoting AnthonyBrisbane:
Apple hardware is widely known to be very poor, as is their OS.

I thought you were writing a parody to begin with.... Flash doesn't work well on OS X not because of the hardware, not because of the software, but because Adobe is too lazy to optimise their code.


17 February 2010, 7:05 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

apt.pupil (User):

thats ok... come the complete release of HTML5, there will be absolutely no need for the use of FLASH at all on modern technology.

Adobe... your time on my computer(and hopefully mobiles phone not long thereafter) is limited.

However i wonder which Apple will prefer. HTML5 or FLASH?

one way or the other they will need to pick the lesser of 2 evils, and i believe i know which is the lesser.

19 February 2010, 6:24 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Phil in NZ (New user):

rubbish. Yes adobe flash is a bit so so but every other vendor has implemented it none the less. Its time Apple sucked it up and got on with it.



20 February 2010, 1:18 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

apt.pupil (User):

Quoting Phil in NZ:
Yes adobe flash is a bit so so

really? the only issues i have is the lack of 64 bit flash- which puts be back to the much slower 32 bit browsers, and the fact that the adobe updates often do not complete if left to their own devices. you need to coax the adobe updater to go beyond the 90% mark with praise, promises and blessings aplenty.

that being said- once it is actually on my pc and finally updated, i am yet to have any issues at all.




Quoting Phil in NZ:
Its time Apple sucked it up and got on with it.


i dunno if they will- or wait until HTML5- which is going to eventually be a FAR better method- once people are convinced to upgrade their browsers of course

20 February 2010, 2:19 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Phil in NZ (New user):

I get the HTML5 Thing is supposed to be far better option, and in time it *may* become mainstream, however we all know that it will be at least a whole generation of hardware before that happens. Apple never really got over the photoshop snub and thier userbase is paying the price. Sad really.

21 February 2010, 2:27 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

apt.pupil (User):

Quoting Phil in NZ:
I get the HTML5 Thing is supposed to be far better option, and in time it *may* become mainstream

that is bound to happen tbh. Just like XHTML has overtaken HTML4, HTML5 offers a whole lot more that will only add benefits to both the consumer experience and the developer's ease



Quoting Phil in NZ:
however we all know that it will be at least a whole generation of hardware before that happens

my bets is that it will take a new generation of Oses and browsers before HTML5 replaces XHTML as the standard.
What i believe will prevent Apple from supporting HTML5 in their iphones, ipod touch, ipads(menstrual joke witheld), and whatnot is the power of it. there is a HTML5 demo site that lets you do photo editing without the need for a flash plugin entirely. I will link you later- as its bookmarked on my home computer, not my work one


Quoting Phil in NZ:
Apple never really got over the photoshop snub and thier userbase is paying the price. Sad really.
what was this photoshop snub exactly? the Mac version of photoshop is far superior to the windows version- in plugins and what you can do with it- or so i have been repeatedly told by my mac fanboi colleagues




21 February 2010, 3:17 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

paul40 (New user):

I hope these 2 parties get it sorted out and soon,cause its us the iphone owners who are suffering.

21 February 2010, 6:32 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

apt.pupil (User):

Quoting paul40:
I hope these 2 parties get it sorted out and soon,cause its us the iphone owners who are suffering.

i'm still finding it funny how symbian got flash lite before Apple did



21 February 2010, 11:08 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

optyk phyba (New user):

flash developer on why flash doesnt work on apple iphone / ipad
visit link to read...
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/02/20/an-adobe-flash-developer-on-why-the-ipad-cant-use-flash/

sums it up perfectly for those who dont understand the situation.


24 February 2010, 1:35 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

jlwallis (New user):

Flash won't be expected anytime soon as Apple supply the browser safari and all updates, and they set the standards and allow whatever file type they like. It looks like it will all be going CSS3 anyways so flash will be out of the picture for a long time.

O well i have have been changing clients websites to support MP4 and even removing flash just for compatibility.

01 February 2011, 1:10 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user