Android 2.2 will invite you to visit 'Flash-enabled' sites, rub Apple's nose in it
By Vlad Savov 
posted May 18th 2010 3:07AM
posted May 18th 2010 3:07AM
posted May 18th 2010 3:07AM
powered by gdgt
Google Android 4.0
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.
@cherryboom So you're saying Android users are dumb because cell phone companies are shitty? Doesn't the iPhone . . . come with a contract from . . . a cell phone company? I'm confused. Essentially what you're saying is, Android, which is on every major network, with multiple models and price ranges for different kinds of users, sucks. While the iPhone, which is one price, one unit, and under only one company, is awesome? Sorry champ, I just don't see your point.
@cherryboom ...major troll you are...oh yeah!!!
If reality contradicts Steve. Steve blew it.
Sent from my middle finger.
@Anatidae
"This is because Android is quickly becoming the most sold/used modern smartphone OS"
Which one? This is what I don't understand about Android. I'm perfectly happy to concede that it is becoming the most popular smartphone OS but it seems to me that you can't depend on any particular version of the OS being installed on handsets. Contrast this with the iPhone and basically everyone has the current version of the iPhone OS.
Mind you, the situation with the iPhone looks like it will change next month with the original device being locked-out of the iPhone OS 4.0 update. However, the fragmentation of the platform shouldn't be anywhere near as bad.
How is this a "debate". Look Mr. Jobs, you may (or may not) be right that Flash uses too much battery power or crashes too much. But I want the OPTION of going to a Flash site. If it DOES suck, I may not go back, or turn Flash off, but I want the OPTION. I don't like being told that Mr. Jobs doesn't like Flash so I can't even have the option to use it. Consumer choice is always better.
As far as the sites being "mobile" enhanced...that's 99% because of screen size. A "full" web page, even if you can display it on a 3.1" screen, isn't useful. Sure the webkit browsers do a GREAT job of rendering, and you can 'zoom' into columns and such, but you probably don't WANT the full web page designed to be viewed on a 20" monitor on a 3" screen. Again, nice to have the option (and MOST mobile web sites, like CNN, give you the option to jump to the 'full' version if you want).
Apple isn't the only company snubbing them, though. They're obviously the most vocal about it, but still...
Then again, the whole struggle is one big power-grab. No one really has the benefit of the internet and the people in mind.
So weird. I get the push back against apple for it's obstinent stance, but why all the joy for a victory by another corporate behemoth and its closed standard? I thought geek site commenters were all about open standards.
@popstand ...open standarts? Really? But only if they sway ad revenue towards iAds, no? How about a less dubious "open source"?
Last time anyone checked you can code actionscript online for free and Flex sdk is open source. So can "open standarts".
Take the doublespeak deuche argument and go "Open standart" "apple".
@popstand Nope. it's all about defending whatever dumb company managed to suck $500 bucks out of your bank account, whether the product is good, bad, or indifferent. Apple is so gnarly, Google is such a philanthropist, Microsoft makes great chocolate chip cookies. Enough already jackasses! We get it, you like whatever company. Guess what? THEY DON"T LIKE YOU. THEY LIKE YOUR MONEY. So enough with the xoxo horseshit already.
@fast Dude, are you drunk? Please read my post again and direct your attention to the part where I say "I get the push back against apple". I was agreeing with that sentiment, not arguing to the contrary. Reading comprehension is your friend.
@mattmilone I agree, that's why I find these threads so bewildering. This insecurity about whichever product someone owns is sort of pathetic. Isn't the good news that we have a choice in the first place? It would do us no good if any one of these platforms "won out" in the end. The one area where universal adoption tends to benefit everybody is in the open standards department, and I don't see how celebrating a victory for Adobe gets us closer to this goal.
@popstand Reading comprehension would be your friend...if you were able to comprehend my post. Sorry, your dad or mom were doing meth or whatever it was and you ended up like that. If you try really hard and read it again I am shure you still will not get it. No worries. And about me being drunk, not really.
@fast You can't even spell, so I win by default, you sad, sad, man...
@LandMine Hare Good!!!! Cuz u r never getting it. :)
irrelevant...
First, non-techie average people like housewives, teens, my dad, etc... (meaning, not all of you reading this blog, but rather another 157.23 million people in the US) don't/won't do a lot of surfing on their phones, simply from a real estate limitation. No smartphone is very good for web-browsing, no matter how 'good' the browser is, let's face it.... The screen is fine for email, basic browsing, stock checking, a few useful apps (driving navigation and Golf GPS work wonderfully for me and have saved me $300 on other devices), music and size-compromised video in a pinch.
People will move to slate devices, many predict they will be as common as the home computer and will get used even more than the current home comp. The fact that any particular slate device can't show flash sites (despite having more real estate) and that a cellphone CAN, is largely irrelevant to those 157 million people I spoke of.
@rocketrob ...must be hard getting an opinion on that from 157 million people you speak of, without using a gross generalization like you do.
Plus you think the future is people going around with small sized boards that can't run the best in rich media delivery like games, video, interactive sites etc. Like Bill saying a small amount of ram would be everything anyone would ever need. Or Steve saying made up crap about Flash.
In your mind the future is having a limp experience on the web. I can see how some of those 157 million you speak of will pass on that, really, they already do.
As for no smartphone being very good at web browsing, I can tell you first hand, without the help of imaginary millions, that the HD2 and the n900 win over any other device out there and the coming EVO looks like a total win too. Won't even go into the new dual snapdragon plat coming out soon because I don't think you and those 157 million can swallow so much crow at this present time even. Why not accept that apple over streched on the power grab and now google are coming for their ass. Just get over it, 157 million...
@rocketrob yes... and if the 157 mill ppl u speak of have any friends using other smartphones and happen to share a link to site having a cool video.... all those 157 mill ppl realize that for some reason they can't see wat their friends r seeing, some of those 157 mill ppl wont be upgrading to the next version of the same device.
@watswrongwiththesecompanies
As summed up nicely by another realist, your avg Joe doesn't care about Limewire, Bittorrent, tethering, Flash-based porn sites, App Store approval policies, or all the other techno bull that we nerds typically care about. Most people want a simple, light-weight, accessible touch-screen computer/phone with no viruses, spyware, defragmenting, user account control, or maintenance to worry about.
99% user satisfaction from iphone 3gs users, despite this terrible, evil omission of Flash and the inability to link to all those supposed videos that people point them to. (82% 'highly satisfied') If that doesn't indicate that lack of flash is irrelevant, I don't know what is.
Let's face it, Flash is/was largely a proprietary workaround for HTML limitations, it was wise for Adobe to exploit such limitations to make $$$, (msoft being late to the game with Silverlight which is gonna die), and that's the only reason they push it, not to be some sort of benefactor to the world. It's wiser still for Apple to exercise their leverage to try and marginalize it as they lead the market for mobile devices. Flash wasn't going to be around forever, something or somebody had to initiate its downfall.
If a mobile phone is turning into more and more of a PC, then why the fuck should website developers have to create multiple versions of their website just so that it works on specific devices. What if Google tomorrow decides to block flash and html5? Should I be creating another version of the same website to please Google? What if WinPho7 is a big sales hit and MS decides to only allow Silverlight and block the hell out of every other platform. Well, apparently their reasoning would be that flash and html5 r resource hogs and silverlight will run best on winpho devices, which quite honestly might be true cuz they developed the freaking platform. Their answers to our compaints might be similar to apple's - "Take it or Leave it".
So.. stop thinking that Apple/Google/MS r saints and that they r protecting u from the evils of internet. The internet has always been evil, people r fine with it. Nobody needs a father figure to regulate their internet usage on mobile devices. If companies like apple had any say in internet policies back then, we would still be living in a well (protected... and ignorant).
Before anyone jumps to conclusions... I am not a fan of flash.... but if a major % of sites use it.. let them use it. its the site developer's decision to choose the tool best for his job.
@watswrongwiththesecompanies
well said
Mmmmm Droid 2.2....
Now all I need is a surprise update for my EVO 4G on launch day. That'd be one quality climax.
Has anyone here even *tried* Flash on a multitouch screen?
This debate does my head in - no-one but a few developers has used Flash on an android phone yet, so let's not get ahead of ourselves here. MOST current Flash apps on the web rely on rollover behaviour for much of their finesse, but that is unsupported on even the best multitouch interface (I don't think even the most ardent android fan could doubt that's the iPhoneOS at present).
So let's calm down shall we? There are *few* (but not no) important uses of Flash on the web outside of video any more. And video can be better handled natively.
For those interactive tools that need Flash, and for the principle of choice, I wish the iPhoneOS supported it. But, having used both an iPhone and Android devices daily since both launched I really, really don't miss Flash. My Mum doesn't either.
And that's the point here really - Apple makes awesome mobile products for the mass market. My mum picked up my iPhone and could use it. Unsurprisingly, Apple has sold 10s of millions of them. Your typical consumer - i.e. not a single one of us here - simply doesn't care. It's irrelevant. They buy the best experience, or the products their friends recommend. Flash, I'm afraid, is becoming irrelevant in this space. If Apple don't support it, that's their choice - they're a company, not a government! If you don't like what they do, buy elsewhere. It's called competition, and it works.
Right now, Apple is winning big - by having simpler, more elegant products *for the regular consumer*. Android is doing well too, but when you look at the money being made in the industry, most of those Android phones are being sold at a heavy loss to drive sales. Both are great systems. I hope Google stops trying to copy the iPhoneOS and starts innovating more in their own direction - that way we'd get more space between the platforms and the choices for the consumer would be clearer.
Personally? If Flash dies to be replaced by something better, great. It's not a great technology under the hood, but Adobe has done a good job marketing it and driving its adoption for Ads and video. Take those away and I hardly ever need it any more - and, like most people, I'll always choose the non-Flash version of any site I visit if I get that choice...
@mkwilson68 no one really cares about your mom. I got flash running on browsers on an HD2 and an n900. No problem. Quit the cry ranting. No one gives a toss about apple and the "let's kill flash" mob. It's looking more pathetic and deviated then teabaggers already.
@fast
I care about his mum. Piss off with your stupid assumptions, he makes a good argument.
So glad I bought a Nexus One.
Can't wait to have Flash by the end of this week!
I also can't wait to see jobs grovel at adobe's feet once they start losing massive market share due to people (gasp) wanting to use Flash.
few more hours to go ...............................
@Kelmon
only iPhone 3GS is getting the 4.0 update.
get your facts right before ranting.
I think most of the frustration with Apple regarding Flash is that Apple won't even except an App that you made in flash and used a converter that converted it to Cocoa. I think that is also the main reason Adobe filed a complaint to the FCC. When people say things like, "It's your move Steve", I think they would all be quite satisfied if the Jobs would just allow conversion of Flash applications to Apple's programming language. But alas, his ego is so beyond huge that he basically just pisses down the backs of Actionscript programmers everywhere, and tells them that its rainin'.
@Bhima
Especially considering that the Flash compiler produces a NATIVE iPhone App. What's that mean? It means you would really not be able to tell the difference if you looked under the hood. Theoretically, he is also banning other cross platform compilers though with the new SDK (Appcelerator, Unity 3D, Monotouch), but so far it seems those might get to slide considering Jobs real motive is to unjustly target just Flash for reasons anyone with a brain should realize are purely monetary and not technical in any sense of the word.
@kaarn Well, if you can't tell by looking under the hood, then what's stopping people from just ignoring Apple's dev rules and doing it anyway?
I don't think it's that simple.
Am I the only one who is concerned about flash ads on a small touchscreen? Like the ones that pop out of nowhere on a lot of sites. I hope I am able to turn it off (if motorola even gives me the update.
@unf8605 you should note that Flash has nothing to do with that, although the ad itself could be Flash (or not), pop over/under ads are usually made by Javascript. A lot of people have the strange notion that if there was no more Flash, advertising would magically disappear from the web. Ummmmm, guess again. In fact, another reason Jobs would like to see Flash gone himself is so he would have lest competition for his very own iAds platform which will be built directly into the iPhone OS interface. Poooor iPhone users! And you wanted Flash gone!
I am talking about the ads that come down covering up the whole page moving around so you can't get rid of it, making noise, etc. These ads are made possible by flash, iAd and admob don't do this.
@unf8605 those ads are also made with JavaScript. They are in fact not made possible by Flash. The ad content MAY be Flash, but the actual drop down/over, DIV resize, etc is usually JavaScript.
@unf8605 javascript is an ecma related scripting language that allows for that behaviour. One phone brand in particular is planning to cash in on it big time...through javascript running on canvas in javascript.
Flash is not the greatest thing. It sometimes seems to be buggy and non responsive. If somebody don't like apple products than they don't have to buy them. I'm writing this from my iPod touch and i love it. I thought about getting a droid when I upgraded but I can't afford the expensive data plan that u are forced to get. If these companies want to sell more smartphones they need to lower the data plan prices and they will have more people buying them.
@Kratos09
Sometimes? It crashes in Google Chrome daily.... *sigh
i want to see how this effects the 3gs owners who are fed up with at&t service and locked down phone once those 2 year contracts expire.
bet the ipohne price in ebay sinks to about $20 for 2g, $50 for 3g and around $150 for 3gs
if they come unlocked that is...
So, when do i get THIS for my 800mhz Samsung Moment? I'd love to be able to put those mhz to use.
I'm switching to android, freedom over apple design any time.
@madwh
Pfft.. hahahaha
liar
>Ironically, a sizable number of the sites on the list are "mobile >optimized," meaning you won't be hitting their full desktop versions...
Ugh? What exactly does that mean? Are we going to see only so-called "mobile optimized" sites at the Google gathering tomorrow? Whatever happened to the "full web experience?"
Hopefully Engadget will run side by side comparisons of this with "real" flash intensive websites and "mobile optimized" ones with particular attention to CPU temperatures and battery life.
@LDD
Let's not be so ridiculous here. From comments, you never really know what to expect, but I would have expected more objective reporting from the author of this post. I guess I need to out to the author (and you) that it is not uncommon in to have a mobile optimized version of a site, no matter what it is built with, taking into account screen size, different layout, special mobile featres, etc. The Flash player 10.1 for mobile is in fact full Flash, but if a developer wants to make a mobile optimized version using it, I am sure there are other considerations (I have mentioned) other than what you can and can not do.
We don't need Android to be any slower. It's slow enough as it is, even with newer models like the Motorola Backflip, Cliq and Droid. With Flash, battery life will be even worse than it already is and the whole OS will even slower, more lag and buggy. No thanks.
I guess a lot of people here just got involved in this new generation of smartphone, because a lot of folks out here have been dealing with mobile internet surfing without Flash for a few years... And it's not really missed that much, with more and more support for alternative programming to Flash.
Adobe is scared here, and making a move to stop the marginalization of Flash. I'm of the opinion that I'd like to see Flash on my iPhone, with its use being my option. Doesn't seem like that's happening, though. I'm also curious to see the blogosphere a month after Flash "Lite" is finally available on these smaller, "lower-powered-than-computers" devices. I'm curious to see if many websites will be able to translate straight over to a WebOS device, or if the website creators will create special lightweight Flash versions on the wall.
The writing is on the wall - While some devices support Flash today, all devices will eventually support HTML5. As a dev, you have to be thinking about HTML5 as on the near horizon.
check this flash app made with flash: http://work.shpe.ro/?id2=00030012
some APIs for flash would be nice...
Here's a question...why do I need Flash on my app enabled mobile device?
c c c combo breaker
While you Apple Fanboys enjoy not having Flash, I will be view Hulu, and the like just fine on my Blackberry. BTW does anyone else find it ironic that the most proprietary company on the planet (Apple) is crusading for opensource? I guess it's as ironic as MAC OSX being UNIX-Based. Or the fact that Apple's hardware whenever Windows is installed, Windows actually works better. The best part is that people are seriously willing to spend hundred if not thousands of dollars extra on restricted access. Can someone please explain this new kind of Apple Logic that my Ubuntu/Blackberry brain doesn't know of?
@gigarath I realize that Flash 10.01 will take longer to get onto Blackberry, but at least it will support it in about 10 months or so. Apple can't say that now can they?