Adobe and Greystripe partner for ads that convert Flash to HTML5
By Sean Hollister 
posted June 8th 2010 1:24AM
posted June 8th 2010 1:24AM
When you complain about Apple's products lacking Flash support, we figure you're talking about games and video, but web developers have to make a living too, right? That's why Greystripe and Adobe are working together to bring ads to iDevices all around, with an intriguing technology that might one day enable the real reasons we want Flash as well. Like the Smokescreen demo we saw last week, Greystripe can reportedly transcode the banned content to HTML5 on the fly, and it's apparently impressive enough that Adobe's signed on to create an interactive, crossplatform ad solution (also on Android and Java devices) priced and marketed specifically to rival Apple's own. With Apple's distinguished record as keeper of the walled garden, we'll see how well that goes, but we're definitely interested in other possibilities for the company's code. Full press release after the break. Greystripe Delivers Adobe Flash Authored Ads Across iPhone, iPad, Android and Mobile Web
San Francisco, CA – June 7, 2010 – The leading independent mobile advertising network, Greystripe, announced today they are collaborating with Adobe to provide rich media, interactive ad solutions across Android, iPhone, iPad and the mobile web. Greystripe is working with Adobe to widen support for these ad solutions across the digital advertising ecosystem, which will be detailed in forthcoming announcements.
The ad solution is comparable to Apple's recently introduced iAds unit; however, unlike iAds, they will be authored with Adobe® Flash® authoring tools, priced at a fraction of the cost, and come in both expandable banner and full screen interstitial formats. Since Flash is the standard for developing rich media digital advertising, these solutions will give brand advertisers and digital agencies the ability to retain full control over ad development, reduce costs by preserving existing workflows while enabling support for HTML5, provide advertisers reach across all major desktop and mobile platforms, and decrease the time between ad concept and delivery.
"Our collaboration with Adobe underscores our commitment to bringing engaging, rich media, cross platform ad solutions to our advertisers," said Michael Chang, CEO, Greystripe. "We're thrilled to announce this proven alternative to iAds and offer digital agencies and brand advertisers the broadest possible reach across platforms and devices worldwide."
"We are committed to providing agencies the best tools and a consistent and ubiquitous Flash runtime to create digital ads and deliver them across desktop and mobile platforms," said Ricky Liversidge, vice president, Product Marketing, Flash Platform at Adobe. "By working with Greystripe, a leading provider of Flash authored advertising for mobile devices, we enable agencies to benefit from the power of the Flash platform while also targeting devices with HTML5."
Greystripe will offer its technology to deliver Flash authored ads as HTML5 to mobile devices that do not support Flash Player (such as the iPhone and iPad); these ads will be supported in both applications and on the mobile web. Greystripe's new technology for Apple's Safari web browser will allow real-time transcoding of Flash authored creative work to HTML5. For Flash enabled devices, tablets, and smartphones like the Nexus One with Android OS 2.2, Flash authored ads will be easily delivered through Greystripe's ad network, which consists of over 2,500 mobile applications across iPhone, iPad, Android and Java.
For more information, please visit www.greystripe.com/flashads.
What the hell adobe, i realize that it seems like a great feature, but i honestly dont want my i devices being plagued with stupid adds that sometimes who not so "clean" images... Infact i hate the adds in general, if you can convert all the videos to html 5 im all with you, but screw the adds.
@Hell Angel
wow... really?
If you don't want ads, don't visit sites that have ads. Ads pay for the site to exist. If you removed the ability to create ads flash or otherwise, you remove the revenue stream and sites like engadget wouldn't exist.
Also the ads would be there whether Adobe added this functionality or not.. if they didn't do this, ad creators would go elsewhere.
So if Adobe didn't do this, you'd have one less reason to complain about what you don't know.. Adobe wouldn't be competing, and you'd still have the ads.
@paulfalgout
Engadget basically only has 3 ads, 1 on the very top, one on the top left, and one on the very bottom..
I can personally guarentee, the revenue that those ads bring in are only in the 10s, meaning less than $100 each month (and thats basically a guarentee, Engadget if you can prove me wrong, I will be amazed)
I agree with what you say, about how devs need revenue to keep sites up.
but your over exaggerating the concept.. Devs only need a few bucks to keep a website running per month, so basically a simple google ad will have you covered.
@paulfalgout
But understand, that these developers are already getting revenue from actual computers such as macs and pcs, it will not make any difference if they add it to iphones, and ipads, it will just make the web page look less clean.
@paulfalgout
maybe its kinda hard to think that way when you have Firefox with AdBlock Plus running
@Technologeee
And adblock works great to make all three disappear.
@Technologeee
I used to run a site where we had only four "major" ads. One on our front page, two on our forums and some in-text ads scattered around for guests. With those four ads alone, we made about $100/mo, and our traffic was nowhere near that of Engadget's (Engadget is currently 365 on Alexa, we were up in the 60,000 range).
So you may want to rethink your estimate.
@HellFlyer
True, Adblock takes away the perspective...
@Hell Angel
are you willing to pay for all these videos?
@Technologeee those three to four ads engadget runs on its site are worth a lot, a LOT more than 100/month. try requesting their cpms. i wouldn't be surprised if they went for over 10 usd for just 1000 impressions!
@Technologeee
engadget's alexa rank is 365
abduzeedo.com has a rank of 4106
Their monthly ad sales are over $12k per month http://buysellads.com/buy/detail/125
And their advertisers are all fairly small potatoes.. Engadget advertisers are often major players and I'm sure they are paying quite a bit more
Advertising is a major form of revenue which is why many of the major players are so involved in it. To dismiss it is naive.
But enjoy your amazement.
@Hell Angel
when iOS4 comes out you'll have plenty of ads to enjoy!
@Hell Angel So Adobe is working to convert it's own content to HTML5 compatible? The writing is on the wall and Adobe sees it.
@Hell Angel In some ways I agree with you, and others I disagree.
I'm not opposed to ads in general. I run sites myself, I get the whole 'cover your costs' etc stuff. I'm not opposed to a banner on the top or bottom or side that is clearly an ad.
What I hate with a passion are embed pop ups in the text (like that stupid bing box) that you can trigger by accidentally rolling over a word. The window take over ads, the 'fly in' ads, the ones with obnoxious audio that autoplays etc. that's the crap I can do without.
That said, I'm snickering here because Adobe is so loathe to lose any money that they are basically selling out. What happened to taking a stand against Apple's 'it's junk' talk and making a working version of Full Flash that will run on mobile devices to prove Jobs wrong. That seems to be taking the back burner to all this HTML5 support.
Because that's what I wanted out of the whole flash fight, ads on my iPhone!!!
Ugh... I'm getting sick of this.
@MastrCake
Yup, iAds in July, and HTML5 versions of Flash adverts to follow! Woohoo! Ads galore!
@grandmainger
Awww man, I forgot about iAds...
Dammit!!!
@MastrCake
Its ok i ads are professional, not just some cheap source of flash based income, you will probably start liking them as you get more used to them.
@Hell Angel
lolwut
@Hell Angel I hope that cake that your trying to deliver is covered in a delicious coating of sarcasm frosting.
Awww... But I HATE sarcasm frosting!!! It's not real!!!
@Hell Angel
So as long as apple serves it up to you, it must be good eh? By the way, the comet is almost here, you should finish your juice now.
@Hell Angel ...that is just pathetic, if it's iads it's all cool, if it's the other folks, it's all bad...please fanboy.
Dammit ads are reaching our mobile devices...
WHY!!!!!
Adobe: "We're still relevant!"
Steve Jobs: "We're excited to introduce.... iPhoto Pro... the most magical photo editing application ever..."
Good-bye Photoshop... and Adobe's last reason for existing...
@Michael Scrip
I cant imagine a tool for the iPhone as powerful and as easy to manipulate as Photoshop..
It would be pretty cool to have a powerful photo editing tool with a setup similar to Photoshop on the iPhone, but it would never be easy, and if it was, it wouldnt be powerful.
Besides, isnt Photoshop only usable on a Mac and PC? Why would you even mention Photoshop or simply, a powerfull photo editing software concept for a handheld device? lol
@Michael Scrip It's actually called Aperture, and it's really only good for editing actual pictures. Can't make anything more than that.
@Technologeee
It was a joke.
My point was that Adobe seems to be doing all this stuff for HTML5 now... Dreamweaver for creating HTML5... and converting Flash ads to HTML5.
Adobe is holding firm with Flash... yet... they are gearing up to do more stuff with HTML5 too.
It's just an observation...
My snarky comment was to say that if a Photoshop competitor actually took a hold of the industry... Adobe would be in trouble. I don't think it will, however.
Think about it... if HTML5 becomes the standard... and ANY software can create content for it... and no one uses Photoshop anymore... what will Adobe be known for?
It's just a question... I know all that will never happen.
@Michael Scrip What are you talking about? HTML5 is a markup language. Photoshop is a photo editing software.
Adobe have to support HTML5, and they will, until the standards are finalised and used on the majority of web browsers.
@Michael Scrip Adobe has been on the forefront of developing HTML5 from the beginning, they just find it odd that apple would abandon flash altogether despite HTML5 being no where near ready to take over...
@mrpixel
Ok... lemme clarify my comment.
When someone mentions Adobe... what do you think of? Photoshop and Flash.
Imagine if Apple came out with a Photoshop competitor, priced it at $399, made it for Windows and Mac, and it could do 95% of what Photoshop could do today...
It's just a fantasy, I know. But hear me out.
And what if you could build all sorts of cool websites... and even ads, in HTML5.... all without needing Adobe Flash? Where would Adobe be then?
This headline says it all: "Adobe and Greystripe partner for ads that convert Flash to HTML5"
Why not just build the ads in HTML5 to begin with? Why do we need Adobe Flash at all?
All I'm saying is that Steve Jobs could get pissed off enough to build his own Photoshop competitor... thus negating the need for Photoshop... and also in a few years we don't need Flash anymore either... because browsers can show ads and video in HTML5.
Then Adobe would be screwed.
(I know HTML5 is nowhere near ready, since many browsers don't support it... but there might be a time somewhere in the future where we don't need Adobe products)
@Michael Scrip no one uses photoshop anymore? i just spent the last 3 weeks barely sleeping using Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects and Premiere.. all of which are products that have no equal, you seriously think that because Apple doesnt like flash it renders Adobe obsolete? thats unbelievable
@Michael Scrip They would be just fine considering their Creative Suite is 18 programs deep... you obviously dont know what youre talking about so please just stop
@Michael Scrip By the Way here is an amazing and intuitive tol you can use to create HTML5 websites... its made by Adobe http://cs5.org/?p=1028
@SteveyAyo -- "no one uses photoshop anymore? you obviously dont know what youre talking about so please just stop"
I said WHAT IF some other software came along to unseat Photoshop from its throne...
And WHAT IF people stopped using Flash to create ads and video...
I use Photoshop and Dreamweaver every day... and Premiere a few times a week too. (CS3 on Windows)
I'm just hypothesizing a future where Adobe Flash doesn't control 98% of interactive web content... and where $700 Photoshop doesn't rule the industry.
I also said multiple times that this is never gonna happen anyway... so relax...
@Michael Scrip
"Why not just build the ads in HTML5 to begin with? Why do we need Adobe Flash at all?"
You know, it is not a problem making web browsers (passive programs) which support a work in progress standard BUT it would be a huge problem making contents that could be obsolete just because the future standard need to be change. It would just create a total mess where outdated code from outdated specifications would need to be left on the net because some people still use old web browser.
So it is easier to just use a stable final code (flash) and change the way your browser read that content on the fly.
@Michael Scrip Adobe would still have: Illustrator , InDesign , Acrobat 9 Pro, Flash Catalyst , Flash Professional , Flash Builder 4 Standard, Dreamweaver , Fireworks , Contribute , Premiere Pro , OnLocation , Encore , After Effects , and Soundbooth.
And even if Apple were to make an alternative to Photoshop, I doubt it would even overtake Photoshop. There are tons of Photoshop alternatives, from freeware (Paint.net) commercial (Pixelmator, Paintshop Pro X3), online (Aviary), and even open source (G.I.M.P.)
Not even with the rampant piracy of Adobe products not one those alternatives come close to Photoshop's market share.
Long rant short: Adobe isn't going anywhere soon bro-cha-cho.
@Zalgo
Which is why I said multiple times that this is never gonna happen anyway... it's just a conversation.
Photoshop = awesome
but does Flash = awesome too?
@Michael Scrip Yes. Because time wasters (online games) are created in Flash, Flash helps pay for the sites I visit, and flash pays for porn.
And when Flash eventually fades away we will be left with ads. Just made with HTML5 and still as obnoxious as ever. For example: http://tuckwat.com/blog/html5/annoying-html5-ads/
@Michael Scrip Outside of itunes, which was due to the iphone etc, Apple doesn't make Windows software. With some research they could probably find a couple of companies that are trying to create competing products for Mac, buy them and create a 'photo' suite akin to how ilife, iwork, Final Cut Studio etc work. Let the market decide.
but those products would have to be seriously awesome because Photoshop et al are super ingrained in the professional world. If you do any kind of graphics, advertising etc you are expected to know the whole suite. If you don't, you won't get hired.
Even if Apple's suite was less than, perhaps having a rising competitor would bring down Adobe's prices, because right now their little monopoly allows them to charge insane amounts. And a lower price would make many folks very very happy
Is it possible to have an ap that kills all ads?
@Crusader Rabbit
... NO.
@Crusader Rabbit
Trust me, once iOS4 comes out, Geohot and the devs will get cracking on a perminant OS exploit, and all the bad things about the new OS will go away forever.
Im pretty sure Geohot has an exploit that may work for iOS4, one that he has never shown to anyone, and will release it once iOS4 is mainstream.
Going to need mobile version of adblock plus.
@epicsurge Don't think it would be possible. It would have to kill the whole site or disable javascript.
Here we go again Flash vs HTML5
Oh dear. Apple, adBlock for mobile Safari please!
By the way people, Adobe Lightroom 3 is out. :)
@pika2000
Crap... that means my Lightroom 3 Beta just expired too...
Does anyone use Lightroom and like it?
@Michael Scrip
Why do you use lightroom? You just said in a comment above that Adobe's "last reason for existing" was photoshop (which is ridiculous)
Shouldn't you just stick with iphoto?
If you people don't like Adobe's products why not just stop using them?