Adobe says iPhone / iPad adoption and 'alternative technologies' (cough, HTML5) could harm its business
By Nilay Patel 
posted April 9th 2010 11:50AM
posted April 9th 2010 11:50AM
Now, Adobe has to make doom-and-gloom statements in its SEC filings -- it also says that slowing PC sales or a failure to keep up with desktop OS development could harm its business -- but the timing is crazy here, since just yesterday Apple changed the iPhone OS 4 SDK agreement to block devs from using the upcoming Flash CS5 iPhone cross-compiler to build iPhone apps. What's more, Apple's also using HTML5 for its new iAd platform, which could potentially undo Flash's stranglehold on online advertising as well. Yeah, we'd say all that plus the recent push for HTML5 video across the web -- and from Microsoft -- could harm Adobe's business just a little. Better hope that final version of Flash Player 10.1 is everything we'd hoped and dreamed of, because Adobe's going to have to make a real stand here.
flash 10.1 should get rid of the computer usage problems. Tests have showed it to be faster than html5 on every system (except a mac since they don't allow adobe to access graphics acceleration). Of course html5 looks good, its brand new. Wait 2 years, it will be worthless again. Adobe updates every year to keep current. HTML, 10 years. If you get rid of flash, you will regret it in a couple years if not before
@dswatson83
You sir hit the nail on the head.
And why doesn't Apple allow Adobe to access graphics acceleration? Quicktime! So those graphics API's aren't shared intentionally, to keep Flash from being the same performance on a Mac as it's PC cousin. And we wonder why Flash is a dog on a Mac...
I can smell an antitrust lawsuit ready to happen... in 5... 4...
@dswatson83
Apple has made it very easy to use graphic card acceleration. Just look up OpenCL if you are a programmer like me.
they did NOT say HTML5 would harm them. they said Apple is doing harm by encouraging people to use HTML5 "as an alternative" to Flash,
which really isn't necessary, nor is it even beneficial in many cases
Adobe has been working on ways to implement HTML5 using its own products like Illustrator, Dreamweaver, and of course Flash. http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2009/10/sneak_peek_ai_fl_dw_canvas.html
@ror, correct me if i'm wrong but both the Illustrator and the Dreamweaver have alternatives, while the Adobe's Flash development tools do not.
If the HTML5 video tag catches up, 90% of incentives to have the Flash installed would be gone, making developers less eager to use the Flash and more willing to use the HTML5, a standard de jure, instead.
The Flash would surely live on, but the profits from the development tools are going to shrink along with diminishing Flash's install base.
As frustrating as this decision to block apps made in flash and converted to native code is, they are correct that allowing programmers to use Flash as a starting point for iPhone apps is bad for Apple. It starts to create the same problem they are trying to get rid of on the Mac by killing flash there: it allows software development for their platform to be guided by another company. If Flash-based ports on the iPhone caught on, Adobe would have to keep changing their tools every time Apple made a change to their OS. Adobe wouldn't always be able to keep up, and apps would lag behind, possibly breaking. Developers unfamiliar with native iPhone development would be reliant on a middleman to keep their software up to date and either customers would suffer or it would force Apple to slow down and make sure Adobe is keeping up. They really do not want this, so they stopped it before it became a problem. Sucks that they had to do it, and in a way I'm against it, but it could certainly lead to problems if they allowed it so I can't blame them for wanting to keep it from becoming an issue.
@Zweben And based on recent development of Adobe's key products on Mac.
This company is not to be trusted. Not by me. Certainly not by Steve Jobs.
@Zweben
Whatever, this is just a word for word repeat of Gruber's article. Besides, it's a defense of what's good for apple, not consumers, even though apple is claiming their push away from flash is some altruistic mission for the consumer good. I could make similar arguments that the Iraq war was really good for defense contractors so therefore it makes sense, but on what planet are we all here for the benefit of defense contractors and apple?
@Zweben That spider has 1 too many legs
@tpbftw
Seems to me it has one too few.
The day I, as a webdeveloper, can stop worrying about flash, will be a good day.
If only browsers would start following CSS standards better aswell..
Between Photoshop, Premiere, and Adobe Reader, I hardly think Adobe will tank if Flash does. However I don't think that really has a viable chance of happening. If Google continues to back Flash like I think they will this technology war is far from over. HTML5 hasn't won anything aside from the support of Apple.
@kenny goo
Exactly. People are acting as though Flash is Adobe's only product. Remember, Flash was a fairly recent acquisition for them.
All of the artwork in every iPhone app or html5 ad is very likely made with Photoshop and/or Illustrator, and most of the non-Flash animation in all those html5 videos is made with Adobe After Effects. It will suck for them, but Adobe's not going anywhere.
@beenyweenies Exactly. lol. What are people gonna use then? mspaint.exe?
I think Adobe should pull development of future CSs for Apple starting now. Being that Apple is supposed to be a "designers" computer and Adobe is the industry standard software for print and digital imagery.
@DC MIKE They won't pull out. Even if they do I'll reboot under Windows.
@(Unverified) You won't be doing that for too much longer when Apple starts building it's own chips again.
@Toshi "It worries me how many people are willing to blindly follow this turtle neck wearing douche bag."
That line made my day.
@DC MIKE
Do you think Adobe makes no money from Mac versions of CS? They are making lots of $$ from CS for Macs and they wouldn't give it up. Plus that would make them look really bad basically abandoning their customers. At least Apple has some legitimate excuse for not using flash.
I do feel that Apple should work with Adobe to bring some sort of flash support to ipad/iphone. The problem here is you got to arrogant companies wanting to "win" and it looks like Apple is making some headway with Adobe statements like this...
@Tosh
"Who knows, it could be Stevie himself that has stopped flash from working properly on macs by denying access to key parts of the OS." - Yup, that's exactly what's been going on with Flash and the inability to access graphics acceleration API's used by Quicktime... Conflict of interest? Certainly looks like it.
@pvito Sure they make lots of money but remember... Macs are only 10% of the market and Apple is openly hostile towards them. Is it abandoning your customers when you announce that a computer maker is denying you access to the GPU and you don't feel as though you can provide a proper software suite on such a closed platform? They can let their customer base know that they can always move forward to the next version which will be optimized for use on a different computing platform with a preferred partner.
I'm just saying, it depends on how much skin Apple makes Adobe lose regarding Flash. It might be easier to drop Apple and mount a counter-move that may allow them to see more money down the road. If Apple pisses off enough companies through law suits and raw deals it could bite them in the ass. But a minimum 10% loss in sales is BIG.
@D W
You should not comment if you are not a programmer that knows these things.
PS. If you are a programmer then look up OpenCL. Basically Apple has made it very easy to use graphics acceleration with Snow Leopard.
Perhaps it's time to float the idea of PhotoShop no longer being available on the Mac platform.
On the surface it would seem like that might hurt Adobe, but let's be honest; take away the art communities baby on the Mac platform and every artist thinking of getting a Mac is going to pause and reconsider for a moment. Yeah there are VM solutions, but with PC's being cheaper and not needing some intermediate software to run the design suite, which would you buy; Mac or PC?
@ChristianD Between Pixelmator and DrawIt, I haven't opened Photoshop in over 6 months. Adobe can shove off as far as I'm concerned. I don't need them. If Apple encouraging the use of an open standard for web content is putting the hurt on Adobe's bottom line, then maybe Adobe should catch on to the fact that their proprietary development and delivery platform is a pile of crap that nobody actually enjoys dealing with.
Instead of whining about their adopted bastard child Flash, why doesn't Adobe use their resources to create HTML5 development and animation software?
It's going to harm your business? I believe it's called competition
at least you still have acrobat!
*** BREAKING NEWS - FLASH REALLY DOES SUCK ***
Go to a site with many flash ads and the browser freezes and takes 5x longer to load (regardless if it is IE or Firefox).
If Adobe would get off their lazy fat asses and optimize it, then it would be worth supporting.
Optimize or Die Adobe!!
@laynat just to test that, i did so on my 1Ghz Athlon X2 4600+ and, nope, no freezing or any problems.
internet browsing, ur doing it wrong.
@laynat
Do you really think if Flash were optimized Apple would allow it in the iPhone?
Fools! Only I am able to make doom and gloom announcements! Damn you Adobe and your foolish technology! Doom has still not figured out what the difference was in my Adobe Photoshop CS4 and CS3!
I bet if Steve Jobs suddenly said that flash is the greatest thing ever, many, many users will also suddenly claim the same. Majority of the people started hating flash simply because Steve said so.
For example, i remember flash on my Pentium 3, IV, Athlon X2 4600+ and now Core 2 Quad. Untill i got the PC with the Core 2 Q. The other systems barely had any ram and were severely underclocked due to heat issues. I NEVER had problems with flash.
90% of ppl are computer illiterate, and they dont know about this HTML5 or flash, and they dont give a shit. All they want is their content. And Apple/Adobe are making this into a war.
oh and btw HTML5 will be finalized in 2020 - good luck with ever changing specifications till then.
Last freaking time a minority group (Apple) 9% market share of computers tries to set the standard. Cause the majority is supposed to do that.
@IvanP91
This is so true. To this day, flash runs perfectly fine on even very low end PCs. But the apple fans refuse to accept that maybe the problem is the macs, a vast minority of Internet connected computers, are the problem NOT flash.
The other primitive and utterly inane complaint against flash is "waaah, I don't like the ads." that's like saying I hate commercials so let's banish TVs. Get rid of flash, and I'm pretty sure there will still be ads you idiots, they will just be in html5 so you won't be able to block them like you can with flash. Either know the facts or keep your opinion to yourselves!
@beenyweenies The two low-end PCs I bought from Dell about 18 months ago would beg to differ with your assessment of Flash's performance on Windows boxes. Can't watch Hulu even at 360p without the fan going into overdrive... 480p lags like hell if more than a couple Firefox tabs are open.
@IvanP91 - I'm pretty sure Intel referred to the P4 with a 4, not a IV. #justsayin
@IvanP91
+10000000000
This all of a sudden hate of Flash is so contrived.
I think they wouldn't have to worry about business if the didn't charge $999 for Photoshop, and $2500 for creative suite... Ass holes.
@jellotime91 It's a professional software suite that's pirated in massive proportions. It's pretty much the industry standard. It's purchased by businesses and ends up as a write off in taxes.
The creative suite isn't meant to be a 7 programs for $7 economy-bin collection of applications.
@DC MIKE it doesn't matter. They don't need to charge $1000 for one program, and I guarantee you if they priced it APPROPRIATELY, there would be FAR LESS hacking and cracking going on.
@jellotime91 They don't charge $1000 for one program! It's $1500 or so for the entire master collection! As far as professional software goes that's how much it costs most times for about any pro quality package from software companies.
@DC MIKE Adobe Photoshop CS4 Extended - $999 USD
Adobe Creative Suite Master Collection CS4 - $2499
What are those then hm?
@Toshi first of all, I am a professional graphic designer.
Second, Adobe Photoshop Extended does costs $999.
Third, I don't use a Mac.
So shut up.
@jellotime91
Adobe knows as well as you or I that ONLY businesses buy their software. This is why they price the CS suite packages the way they do and make them EASILY crackable for the masses. If they tightened security, the masses will be forced to look for alternatives.
Think about it, even if they priced CS5 at $600 for the whole thing, will people who currently run pirated versions actually buy it? No. And businesses would still have to buy it even if it's priced at $2000. Pricing won't change anything. (Unless the drop is extremely - as in $99 for Photoshop Extended - which is not feasible for Adobe.)
Adobe loses very little because of the mass piracy of their software. In fact, a student pirating a copy of CS4 today may lead to him buying multiple licenses of the package when he graduates and lands a job in the real world. I think it's smart on Adobe's part to let the current model run.
@joe23521
Clarification: by "businesses", I also include full time professional freelancers.
@joe23521 "I think it's smart on Adobe's part to let the current model run." Yes, it is. And that is because there is no competition to PS. Which is a pity.
@jellotime91 Learn to shop. An upgrade costs around $1300 and the Master Suite straight up can be had for under $2K. Either way the suites contains 13 applications. You can do the math for cost each.
@jellotime91 Just so you know I'm an art director & a designer, and I use both Mac and PC.
@DC MIKE The tax write-off excuse is dumb. If you bought software for $1000 and your marginal tax rate is, say, 36%, then the net cost of the software is $640. If you buy the same software for $500, your net cost is $320. Yeah you get a bigger deduction with overpriced software but over-all you still spend more.
@(Unverified) EXACTLY.
Thank you.
Not all designers are making enough to comfortably drop tons of $$$ on Photoshop every time Adobe releases a new one. I'm only excited for CS5 because this time it seems like they are actually implementing NEW features, rather than what they've done in the past which is pretty much nothing except a stupid filter gallery.
@(Unverified) Either way... it's called the cost of doing business. You gotta pay to play.
I hate to break it to you , but no matter what profession you choose, professional grade tools will cost you more. And if you care about what you do, you get the best tools you can afford, to make the best product you can. (yeah, my grammar sucks).