Posts Tagged: adobe apple flash

strategy / technology — 4 Comments
19
May 10

Adobe’s theater of the absurd

Companies do show their character when they enter into combat as Adobe and Apple have done. In theory, high-stakes pressure brings out the best in both sides.

Just a theory, mind you.

Apple gave us a straightforward open letter. Adobe rants about defending freedom, trots out the founders and even summons the ghost of Flash past.

On their truth about Flash page, Adobe “sets the record straight” and “clears up the misconceptions” — starting with this:

Touch. The Adobe Flash Player runtime was actually originally created as a technology for tablets with touch interfaces, and today, it has support for working on touch-based devices.

Wow. Shocker. Didn’t know that. Eager to learn more about Flash’s touch-DNA, I clicked read more, which whisked me to the personal, non-Adobe blog of Flash product manager Mike Chambers. Mike addresses the Top Flash Misconceptions, his first being that Flash doesn’t work on touch screens. “Ironic,” he says, because “Flash was originally created specifically for tablets with touch inputs.”

Yes. So I’ve heard. But again, there’s no further info, so I click yet another link to go deeper. Now I’m at Adobe’s official The History of Flash. However, I’m dumped in the middle of a story that obviously started elsewhere, where the writer speaks in first person but is never identified. Summoning my formidable detective skills, I check the address bar and see the name John Gay, a pioneer of Flash.

He’s talking about his work in pen computing, which had its origins in 1993, and how Macromedia’s Flash still contained much of the code that was written for pen computers. Okay. Thanks for sharing.

It’s interesting that Adobe opens its argument with the flourish that Flash was originally created for touch-based tablets — when the connection is so tenuous and so totally irrelevant to the issues today. Compare this again to the way Apple has presented its argument against Flash. Crisp and to the point.

After following these convoluted links, I’m actually more amazed with Flash than I was before. I was under the impression this technology had only been failing with touch devices for about three years. Turns out it’s more like 17.

advertising / technology — 18 Comments
17
May 10

Adobe: fighting logic with advertising

Aha. So the fight over Flash has turned into this: Apple’s CEO vs. Adobe’s ad agency.

On one side, Steve Jobs lays out his facts in an open letter. On the other, Adobe’s agency plays with design and poetic meter.

Apple states its case for the cost of a few electrons. Adobe spends a king’s ransom on full-page ads in major newspapers.

Sorry, this isn’t debate — it’s just an ad campaign. Even worse, it’s a campaign in which Adobe wraps itself in the flag of freedom, and casts itself as the champion of three million developers. (Three million developers who just happen to keep Adobe’s cash flow flowing.)

I’m sure Adobe would love to turn this into a debate about freedom — anything other than a debate about the merits of Flash. Problem is, freedom is not the issue. Creating the best user experience on iPhone is. And Adobe has failed to rise to that occasion for three years.

Both sides in this debate rely on proprietary technology. Steve Jobs, in his open letter, says Flash is proprietary, but adds, “Apple has many proprietary products too.” He goes on to explain that Apple can’t allow its mobile app development to depend on other companies which may or may not keep pace with iPhone’s capabilities. Since Adobe has failed to deliver a functional Flash for any mobile platform even today, that’s a valid concern.

Apple is 100% guilty of being controlling, and bless their little hearts for it.

“Create-once/deploy-everwhere” apps may have some appeal for developers, but homogenization is not a user advantage. Apple is doing what they’ve done forever — trying to create the best user experience. In doing so, they’re actually the only company who does provide choice.

Apple’s walled (and well manicured) garden of mobile devices is the choice beyond BlackBerrys, Droids, Nexus Ones and what-have-you. It offers that choice to users and developers. Apple’s ever-growing number of customers don’t seem to mind the exclusion of Flash, nor do its ever-growing number of happy shareholders.

When iPhones, iPods and iPads begin to falter, Apple might have reason to re-think their strategy. But even then that would require an Adobe capable of making Flash work right. At this point, all Apple can see are rising sales and an Internet that’s showing signs of moving away from Flash.

True, they also see a bunch of whiny ads from Adobe. But somehow I doubt they’re about to join the movement.