Flash 10.1 for Android beta unveiled: Hulu a no-show, Froyo now a minimum requirement
What was once just one echelon above a myth is now finally coming to fruition. Adobe is pushing out a beta of its Flash 10.1 player alongside Google's own beta for Android 2.2 "Froyo." The general release for Flash is still on track for June, according to Anup Murarka of the Mobile and Devices team. The announcement doesn't come without caveats, however, and the bad news is that Froyo is now a minimum requirement -- according to Murarka, the APIs needed for its software only now exist in 2.2. Also not on the docket? Hulu -- it's being blocked due to content licensing issues, and our inquiries with that company turned up nil. Flash 10.1 will be available as a Marketplace download, but Adobe intends to work with as many OEMs as possible to preload it on devices so it's there at purchase. Speaking of OEMs, Murarka teased that we should expect announcements later this month and the next regarding Flash integration in TVs. Be sure to head on after the break as we talk a little more in-depth with Murarka about 10.1.
As for all there is to see, hear, and do with Froyo, Google's big keynote is going on now -- stay tuned, and in the meantime, why not check out our hands-on impressions of Android 2.2! Oh, and did we mention Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch is gonna be on this week's Engadget Show?
As for all there is to see, hear, and do with Froyo, Google's big keynote is going on now -- stay tuned, and in the meantime, why not check out our hands-on impressions of Android 2.2! Oh, and did we mention Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch is gonna be on this week's Engadget Show?
Why not 2.1?
There are API changes in the OS that Flash is dependent on, and if we're able to find alternatives, then certainly we'd look to support Eclair as well. At this point, the APIs we need are only in Froyo. A good example is outside of the browser, our Air team have been working with Eclair and think they can continue to support a significant chunk of Air SDK. The Air SDK should be usable on an Eclair platform.
So devices that'll support Froyo will be able to download flash 10.1 plugin. Other pop Android devices, we're working with those OEMs / Google to determine specific timing.
For devices already in market, Flash 10.1 player is separate from Froyo. For future devices, our goal is to work with OEMs [and not Google] in integrating Flash 10.1 from the get-go. On some platforms, you may see it as system software update, but specifically on Android, it'll be marked as available download for free from Android market... but it's also tagged as system component / update because we're utilizing browser-specific APIs not generally available. There is work under way for other platforms, so we are still working with the Symbian teams, the RIM team for BlackBerries, Palm webOS, [and] Windows Phone. You'll see first desktops and OS platforms, smartphones, [and then] we do have TV work later as well... you should see announcements later this month and next month from OEMs for TV integration.
Beyond Froyo, what are the specific hardware requirements for 10.1?
There are API changes in the OS that Flash is dependent on, and if we're able to find alternatives, then certainly we'd look to support Eclair as well. At this point, the APIs we need are only in Froyo. A good example is outside of the browser, our Air team have been working with Eclair and think they can continue to support a significant chunk of Air SDK. The Air SDK should be usable on an Eclair platform.
So devices that'll support Froyo will be able to download flash 10.1 plugin. Other pop Android devices, we're working with those OEMs / Google to determine specific timing.
For devices already in market, Flash 10.1 player is separate from Froyo. For future devices, our goal is to work with OEMs [and not Google] in integrating Flash 10.1 from the get-go. On some platforms, you may see it as system software update, but specifically on Android, it'll be marked as available download for free from Android market... but it's also tagged as system component / update because we're utilizing browser-specific APIs not generally available. There is work under way for other platforms, so we are still working with the Symbian teams, the RIM team for BlackBerries, Palm webOS, [and] Windows Phone. You'll see first desktops and OS platforms, smartphones, [and then] we do have TV work later as well... you should see announcements later this month and next month from OEMs for TV integration.
Beyond Froyo, what are the specific hardware requirements for 10.1?
We think that's a reasonable connection, certainly for android, tying Froyo to it. We've not yet seen Froyo on lower-end systems. If that happens, we may need to adjust [the requirements]. Right now that's a simple mapping to make, but there is a hardware requirement in terms of speed and capability. ARM11, Cortex A8, A9, Tegra / Atom-class processor. If you're running a 300MHz, it's gonna fall below our requirements. It'll perform terribly and may fail.
Hypothetically, will the program still let you try to run it?
I don't think there's a blanket popup preventing you from trying. It'll try to run. Another good example is if you have an adequate CPU but the memory's too low. If you try to run a browser with 8MB of RAM, [it won't work]. Without a body of devices, we can't really do comparative testing yet.
What about non-Android devices?
I think 600MHz+ class CPUs, 64MB RAM typically allocated for browser usage, perhaps more. Things that would fall easily into the top half of smartphone. We'll try to refine further when we finish working on each OS.
What are you doing to keep websites from blocking mobile Flash players, like Hulu?
Hulu is a legal issue. It's kind of similar to... folks have written about BBC iPlayer in the past. It's a great app, we understand the interest, but there's content licensing issues that prevent it for global or even mobile devices. It's not something that is a technical issue at all.
How does 10.1 compare to Flash Lite 4?
It continues as an available runtime. It is something that will be suitable for lower-end devices, and so it's not something that gets replaced on a wholesale basis. There is significant amount of similarity -- both support ActionScript 3, for example. But 10.1 is a true single code base with the desktop, whereas Flash Lite is an evolution of the same run-time for mobile we've developed for several years. So the way to think about it is, Flash Lite grew from mobile and has grown up, and here we're taking 10.1 and bringing from the desktop down.
Will there be a Flash Lite 5?
I can't say what happens, we're not ready to talk about future roadmaps. It's really depends on how the market evolves, how Flash involves, and what capabilities we can expect in these various platforms. To think more broadly, I expect smartphones to become cap and features in a broader range of platforms beyond top tier devices. I think it'll evolve over time. There'll continue to be a need for Flash Lite and on low end devices. I don't see it going away. but if those low-end devices end up with today's capabilities, then 10.1 could be a reasonable replacement in the future. We just don't know yet.
What about Flash Lite 4 for Android 2.1 Eclair?
That's up to the OEMs.



























Yay!
@viditbhargava You took the word out of my mouth. Come on 2.2 leak for xda!
@viditbhargava
Yay, let consumers decided what they want. Not a fruity company.
are those flash games ?
@viditbhargava that's what I first thought, but after seeing the demonstration of flash it I'm not so sure.
I'm pretty sure everyone here would agree that the web would be better if flash is replaced, and doing all this work to support it is just going to slow down the movement to a web without the need for plugins.
Also I read that adobe says to expect 3 hours battery life using flash, and that means using only flash? Is that true?
@Sam7 Yes. Even if Flash gets hardware acceleration, which will probably only work on some Android devices, it will still be a net battery drain IMHO.
@viditbhargava without showing how come we will get the idea?
@viditbhargava Flash on a cell phone? GOOOOOOODBYE BATTERY LIFE!!!!!!
@daytripper "not a fruity company"
I see what you did there. >_>
@Sam7
just don't be fooled to think rich media like you find in Flash is going to be any less draining on the battery in HTML5.
There is just the hard fact of animating and layering vector and bitmap graphics that eats CPU and battery power.
I would bet Flash is more optimized playing rich media content in general than any HTML5 browser right now.
It sounds as if Flash isn't the huge issue, but rich media, real time graphics on a mobile device?
@Anatidae If you are talking about laptops, HTML5 you tube HD video does indeed use a lot less battery than running a Hulu (so I assume flash) video. You can already test that right now. If you are talking about phones, I guess we'll have to wait and see.
@Narutogrey
Certainly depends on what type of laptop too right since once only JUST got hardware acceleration for video thanks to Apple.
@daytripper
Give me a break. Not every company aims for a "Yeh, it's almost there" experience for its users. I'm sure geeks don't give a damn if it almost works, but most consumers wouldn't care for that type of stuttering junk for videos. If Adobe delivers a really good version of Flash for its users, then more power to them. Now that version 2.2 is the minimum for Flash 10.1, there are going to be a lot of older Android model smartphone users left out in the cold. So what about them? They'll just need to upgrade.
Before you start crowing about Android being #1, make sure that mobile Flash is working perfectly for all sites that work with desktop Flash.
@MosesusedaniPad
Aww.. Starting to get hot in the HTML5 or death club? Never mind.. You can still feel special when your phone is the only one that doesn't do the whole internet, and your tablet is the one that needs an app to watch Youtube videos. After all.. Steve says you don't need flash right?
Simply put.. Even partial flash is better than the iProduct "No flash in any form, under any circumstances". And while some will find it initially unstable or possibly even of limited use, it will be enough to allow browsing of websites that use flash, and that is what is important.
The iPhone "user experience" is in reality, a method of stopping any developer pushing the hardware to the point where it starts to complain. If you like that, great. If not.. Join the free world.
Watching flash videos full screen for three hours.. Corner case. Especially on a phone.
Going to a site and being actually able to navigate through it.. Much more important.
@viditbhargava I'm still waiting for that day, when all the android devices will have the latest android platform. Now I can see the tremors on SJ's face. http://j.mp/2-2-froyo-unleashed
It's like Life Day has come early this year
@Lord Vader Flash Episode IV: A New Hope
This will be a day long remembered. We have seen the end of Eclair and will soon see the end of fragmentation.
@Lord Vader Indeed, Lord Vader. Now the fools running older versions of Android will be forced to upgrade to Froyo. It is all coming to plan...
@daftrok. *Everything is proceeding according to plan
@Lord Vader ummm... don't you mean "Everything That Has Transpired Has Done So According To My Design!"
*hides*
@Lord Vader
the first rule of SWHS is you shall not talk about SWHS
the second rule of SWHS is you shall not talk about SWHS
I hate you for brining it up, with the passion of 1000 suns
Wow Android does what iDon't...
So whats a brotha gotta do to get his hands on froyo beta? I want flash ASAP haha
@ryonavin
yea!!!! i want it stat!
My dreams have come true
@RonaldusMagnus
What? Flash sucks. It will suck your bandwidth and your battery dry. I heard from a reputable source that Flash won't work on mobile devices since it relies on mouseovers events, which phones can't do.
Flash is old, from a time of mice and keyboards. Some flash apps even require your mouse to have two (2!) buttons!
Flash should die in a fire. My friend and guiding light Steve says so.
@Kamalot
"I heard from a reputable source that Flash won't work on mobile devices since it relies on mouseovers events, which phones can't do."
Yes they can. Incidentally Flash 9.4 runs on Nokia's N900.
Maybe you should actually find out what devices can do rather than listening to your mates?
@Kamalot Two buttons? I'm pretty sure when I right click in a flash application, It brings up a menu that isn't accessible by flash.
So, I'm guessing the EVO will drop with 2.1? If so, I hope Sprint pushes the update for 2.2 soon after.
@Grape Drink With the extensive customization HTC does to Android with the Sense UI it generally takes a while for updates like this to roll out, assuming the carrier allows it. For example, the Hero update to 2.1 is just being released by Sprint now. Google made it available at the beginning of January. So a reasonable assumption would be a delay of 4-5 months. Since the Evo is coming on June 4th, I'd start looking for the 2.2 update for it around mid October. Assuming Flash doesn't add any extra delays to this update, and Sprint doesn't freak out over the free Wifi hotspot application included in 2.2...
@Fanfoot
Yeah, I'm watching/reading the EVO review right now, and I noticed it will roll out with 2.1. That is a long time to wait for an update. Hopefully Sprint will not delay the update. It would be a bummer to have an EVO knowing there is a newer version of Android.
This will be my first Andriod/Sense experience. I have been looking forward to it, but this is sort of a bad start....not a show stopper though..
@Fanfoot, Sense UI is a small part of the issue, the bigger issues are the different carrier bands. The Samsung Moment on Sprint does not have Sense UI, it got 2.1 a week before the Sprint Hero.
@Grape Drink Also, I guess I should have said 4-5 months after Froyo actually comes out. Since we apprently don't have even a target release date yet, mid October is probably VERY optimistic. Since Flash apparently isn't done yet--it doesn't even have hardware offload in the version Engadget tested, it seems likely it'll be at least another 2-4 months before Froyo actually comes out. Which means you might not see a 2.2 release for the Evo this year at all...
@Fanfoot
Flash 10.1 for Android is separate from Froyo, however only Froyo has the required APIs needed for Flash 10.1. It's a separate download on the Android market, assuming that your smartphone OEM doesn't pre-install it for you.
Froyo and Flash? Fragmentation anyone? Another epic fail from Google.
Next year this pack of privacy thieves won't even be allowed into the EU.
@Ariel Bender. I don't think there will be an EU next year...
@iucidium: Perhaps. Then again, Google sanctioned? That's the smart play.
Can't we get an Android free Engadget link? geeeeeeeeeeez! Android android android, enough already! It's totally relevant, but I want to complain anyhow!
Just j/k, keep up the good work.
@TexRob http://www.engadget.com/exclude/google :P
They talk about being open and supporting HTML5 then support a proprietary plugin. Talk about talking out of both sides of the mouth. Keep pushing Flash, Google. Keep doing it. When batteries burn out and device performance suffers, I hope they don't just blame manufacturers, I hope they blame you.
Even if I was on Android, which I am not, I would do everything to disable this on my phone.
@ipaladin
Like .H264 is open source. Stop being a puppet.
@daytripper I never claimed H.264 was open source. Don't put words in my mouth. Personally I'd rather see Ogg Theora win out... but remember the licensing issues. If patents were violated from H.264 in developing Theora, this could be an ugly fight. It's just far more complex than that.
@ipaladin
The batteries burn out ? lol then don't play games all together. you always have the option to disable flash if you find any issue but on the other hand you don't have the option to install flash on the iPhone OS let alone disable it. go back to your hippy i community you jealous iphone owner. now you feel the wrath of being deprives the rights to do anything you want with your device that you paid for aren't you ? and FYI HTML5 uses more CPU power than flash. go check the benchmarks then talk savvy.
@jdm28690 HTML5 using more battery power than Flash? Right. Under what propaganda does this happen? BTW, I know precisely what I'm getting into when I buy an iPhone. Now I'm not against Android, I think it's good to have competition. Flash is pushing a closed system onto a supposedly open one. That's a fact. Flash is no better than Active X. If Adobe wants openness, they should open the source code of Flash and submit it to be part of HTML5. At that point I would be OK with using Flash.
@ipaladin
You defeated your self right there, they SUPPORT it not ENFORCE it.
@ipaladin
Are you complete delusional fool or what ? you should know by now that HTML5 strained android more than flash did,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUWo19BcC7s&feature=player_embedded
Check HTML5 canvans on the ipad's a4 1GHz and it stutters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4
@tobsmonster2 I stand corrected on that. Still, I can see a lot of users who are savvy like your typical Engadget commenter turning Flash off because of the battery life issues. Those who are not savvy will have Flash on then see their battery life drained and wonder what happened.
@jdm28690 One user's experience isn't the same as testing conclusively and scientifically. Adobe itself has said that Flash would shorten battery life to three hours. I can't see Android devices having battery life that short with HTML5. I do like the Android OS, I just hate Flash.
@ipaladin
You're paranoid, being said already HTML5 uses more cpu power therefore uses more battery. if you own an iphone why do you feel to ridicule what google does ? neither google nor adobe is forcing you to use flash, that's why it's a plug-in so you can disable it.