Flash 10 for smartphone beta coming this October
By Ross Miller 
posted June 22nd 2009 6:44PM
posted June 22nd 2009 6:44PM
posted June 22nd 2009 6:44PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Definitely want Flash player in my Google Ion but I also need a way to disable it.
Apple will probably make you buy their new 3G S Flash iPhone for only $299 next summer if you want you have an iPhone with flash.
I wasn't trying to be a jerk, it was meant as a joke. Maybe you should get a sense of humor, but I guess you can't help that.
You didn't state anything that the article hadn't already...hence, Captain Obvious.
btw, this was meant for IvanP91.
oh, and this commenting system SUCKS!!!
poo!
I'd feel a lot better about the possibilities of Flash on iPhone if Adobe could @)*!%# fix their piece of crap on OS X. What an inefficient waste.
Apple has turned down flash over and over. I don't see why. They didn't put multitasking on the 3GS because it would take memory up and cpu usage up. But if it slowing down we will just close apps. It's not that hard.
I want flash on the iPhone. They are going to be kicking themselves in the ass after. All of their competition is getting it. But that said 3GS is still the best phone out their, that's right.
They need to take their heads out of their asses, is all it comes down to. They did put a lot of nice features in the 3GS though.
Apple doesn't think you are smart enough to close apps and free up memory. Apple doesn't want you to have flash because then you will complain about how slow your browser is.
Haven't you realized by now? Apple knows what's best for you, so stfu and drink the goddam kool-aid already.
"Apple has turned down flash over and over. I don't see why."
Have you seen how well Flash performs on the Mac platform? If not then I suggest you do and then I believe the answer to your question will become apparent.
Apple is lagging because they know it will kill battery life. The
person that said you'll have to buy the next iPhone to get flash is probably right actually. They will need a much beefier battery to make it workable. The G1 has bad enough battery performance as it is. I'll be shocked if most people don't just turn off flash anyway.
You think the App Store will be huge now if Apple supported Flash from the start? Apple is doing pretty good without Flash thank you. Face it, Flash is becoming a dinosaur and a hog at that.
In October, Pre owners will enjoy Flash games ...too bad they can only play 1 hr per charge. Battery life for Pre already suck with no Flash. Flash banner ads will be the death sentence for all the Pres out there.
(3 web pages) X (2 flash banners) + Flash game + Pandora backup app = battery dead. ROFL
Keep telling yourself that iFanboy, the rest of us will be over here using our phones without having to worry if Jobs disapproves of what we want to use them for.
I love these Apple fanboys that are saying "Oh, we don't need Flash, that's for suckers!"
Just suck it up and admit that your company failed to deliver the premier online media platform on any of their devices, and that they will fall behind the competition in that aspect in the near future.
If you try to make sense, about Apple Fanboys you will end up in an insane asylum. They have their own set of logic and common sense rules, it is just sadly a fact.
Just wait until eventually Apple decides to support flash and then it will be the best idea in the history of humankind. For me is just amusing and fun to read the things they will say to feel better about themselves.
If you are saying that Adobe failed to deliver then I agree with you. If you are suggesting that Apple failed to deliver then you clearly don't know what the problem is.
Being that Apple and RIM were omitted from the list of prospects for implementation, I believe that there may be something special brewing for those 2 platforms.
Flash urgh. Old, slow, not open stadard. Adobe give it up already. HTML 5 includes streaming vector and media and is open standard.
You ever built something in that spaghetti monster.
Everyone cruds on about ms or apple. What about the giant foot of adobe forcing itself into everyones mouth. I've used their stuff for like nearly 20years, it's expensive, clunky and massive and non optional. Reminds me of ms word or apple iTunes.
i do agree that html could kill flash for streaming media. it seems like a good implementation with less licensing issues.
It will take a mighty long time before HTML 5 is ready, let alone able to kill off Flash.
Deal with it...you're stuck with Flash for a long while
@iDavey
Sigh, true, might take another 10 years.
Once upon a time I thought Flash had promise, only it just did what all monopoly software does, gets fat, lazy and muddled. Then Adobe got their hands on it who were already fat, lazy and muddled.
Maybe there should be a 10 year limit on IT companies, you know like politicians; if they stay in office they end up corrupt regardless of initial intent so they get the forced boot.
@iDavey
I think we all know what the problem is going be with adoption of HTML 5 - yes, we're looking at you, Internet Explorer...
Apple has banned Flash because it's a threat to their app store. I blogged this last year when it came up. http://idlemode.com/2008/09/30/flash-on-the-iphone-ars-technica-misses-the-point/
You hit the nail on the head, Apple doesn't care about its users, it cares about its profits and this is one of the most clear cut examples. All this noise about battery life or the quality of some flash sites being low is just that, noise. The users want Flash, Adobe would love to deliver it, would have done so on Day 1, but Jobs/Apple block it because it would threaten their strangehold on the platform.
How exactly would this hurt the App Store? Think about what you are saying.
Let's say you want to put a free app out there. In the App Store it will cost you $99 one time and you will be in the storefront and have an icon on the users home screen giving you better exposure. If you throw it on the web, you will have to host it yourself, market it yourself, and are not guaranteed an icon on the home screen lower your exposure to the user. Since most free apps are ad-supported, they need to be used in order for them to make money, and with the lower exposure of going on your vs the App Store would mean less revenue.
So, how about a pay app. Similar advantages to the free route for the App Store except you have to pay 30% to Apple. If you go your own, again, you have to host it, market it, and no guaranteed placement on the user's home screen. Also, now you have to come up with a pay system, whether it be your own, or you outsource it to PayPal or someone similar, who will take a part of your earnings like Apple.
As you can see the App Store is generally a much better option for a developer unless you can't get your app approved. Although, if it isn't approved, Apple was not going to make money on it anyway. It is no coincidence that the App Store has had the success it has. In short, Flash would not put even the slightest dent in the App Store.
It's odd that the main people who have a problem with Flash are Apple users.
And it's also weird that iTunes and Safari makes my PC buggier than a damn rotted log in the jungle of Lion King.
I may be working on conspiracies here...
But maybe...JUST MAYBE...Apple is making it so the non-Apple things mess up when fitted with Apple things just so you'd be tempted to use the Apple things, LOL.
They want you to use Quicktime, not Flash. They want you to use iTunes/Safari on a Mac, NOT Windows.
Because it's weird how all other browsers work fine on my laptop BUT Safari. =|
And when I open iTunes my computer starts freezing and hiccuping...
But with WMP or RealPlayer...my computer runs just fine...
Check for PEBCK Errors in your event log...
PEBCK - (Peb-k-kay) NerdSpeak Acronym: Problem Exists Between Chair and Keyboard.
Dear Adobe,
WTH is taking so long?
You can't slim down a bloated pile of shit.
Amen Jon Doe.
I'm starting to hate Adobe more and more as the years pass. Just about everything Adobe releases is bloated crap. The entire CS4 software suite was a waste of time.
Flash vs. silverlight. Which has less overhead?
On the Mac platform, Silverlight 2 has the least overhead in my tests. When playing video it seems to be about 20-40% more efficient than the current version of Adobe Flash. I am by no means a fan of Microsoft but I have to congratulate them on doing a better job in a couple of years with Silverlight than Adobe has in many, many years with Flash.
are you guys serious? FlashPlayer is already out for the PPC devices.
SkyFire works great on my HTC Touch Diamond! :P
http://www.skyfire.com/
All we need is HTML5, Adobe can go take a flying leap.
Flash is a development platform, which is against Apple's licensing agreements. Putting Flash on the iPhone/Touch as is would circumvent the AppStore and provide people other means of developing and using apps on the device without licensed developers and Apple getting their cut. Which isn't a good idea, free and open is for Android (and MS as amazing as it sounds) not for iPhone OS. So, unless Adobe comes up with a severely stripped down version that is truly only a viewer ported to Mobile Safari directly, then Apple will NEVER approve it for use on the iPhone/Touch.
I just wish the devteam would get with it and bring us an unlocked flash plugin. But I can live without Flash on my iPhone because at least I can see a full web page when I am browsing to all the non-flash sites.
Flash is certainly contrary to the current App Store guidelines but I absolutely guarantee that an exception would be made for it if Adobe could produce an efficient bit of code that could display Flash content with desktop performance (particularly for streaming videos) without requiring so much processor time and therefore draining your battery. Apple isn't deaf to the requests from its customers (slow, perhaps, but not deaf) and they know this is an important feature for a lot of potential customers. The question is, can Adobe deliver?
@kobioshi You're spot on. With FP10 support, support for AIR applications should follow shortly afterwards. Apple will never allow this. iPhone has never been about open source. Too much money is to be had by Apple through the app store. This will undoubtly start to level the playing field when anyone and everyone can start developing apps with flash, html, java, or flex all through AIR and distribute ANY content ANY way they wish. Take a second bite out of that apple.
Disagreed. Content providers can, and already do, provide applications through the App Store for free that do no earn Apple anything, aside from potentially more customers for their hardware. The problem with AIR is that it is based on Flash and it was never designed to do the things that they are trying to do with it now.
Besides, you only have to look at Safari (WebKit) to see that Apple is quite happy to participate in open-source projects and that is certainly a project that has served them very well.
As far as html5, we're still 5-10 years out, so for now flash video still rules the web.
Apple won't get flash, because like other standard internet tools, it would be a way around their closed system to non app-store games, and more so non itunes video and audio. Face it apple wants the iphone to be a close appliance they control ( like phone carriers ideals) where others (google, palm) see smart phones as what they should be, computers with special IO - that is, an open device to get you on the data cloud whether by voice, special data (gps, maps) or internet protocols (where flash comes in). It is a significant battle of our time - is our mobile computers going to be open like our main ones and the internet is or closed (ie. intergrated services) like apple and att want them.Like most of you, I for one spent many years helping to make computers and web access open and democratic, your device, your software and your access.
What we have hear is a good, ol' fashioned staring match between Adobe and Apple to see who blinks first. On the one hand, Adobe would clearly prefer that Apple accepts what they have produced currently. On the other hand we have Apple who knows that Adobe's current product is utter rubbish. Both companies need each other, particularly as the iPhone adoption rate continues. iPhone customers are demanding access to Flash content online and Adobe wants to be able to continue selling Flash development tools to content providers. But the longer Flash isn't available on the iPhone and the more people buy the device, the more you will see content providers delivering their content to iPhone customers through different means (e.g. video through QuickTime or perhaps even a dedicated App).
Given the current trend, my bet is that Adobe blinks first but whether they will be able to deliver a good product in time remains to be seen.
So I'll have FPX on my E71x? Yay!
Yay! Flash for my mobile phone!!
Oh wait, I have the most advanced mobile phone in the world, so I guess I won't get it.