Never miss an update Follow AppleInsider
Monday, July 09, 2007, 06:25 pm
iPhone workshop sparks grassroots development
While Apple has yet to host any programming conferences of its own for the iPhone, the unofficial iPhoneDevCamp has already produced a collection of web apps that signaled a quick start to the development community.Adobe, Yahoo, and numerous other companies as well as hobbyists spent the past weekend at the event held on Adobe's San Francisco campus, helping each other optimize web-based programs and more traditional websites for the days-old Apple communicator.
In some cases, the iPhone's limits have proven frustrating, which organizers themselves revealed in the BarCamp-inspired gathering's opening speech (PDF). Although Apple's web interface follows web standards to the letter and includes the promised ties to calling, e-mail, and maps, any non-Apple plugins -- including Flash, Java, and SVG vector images -- were already known to be unsupported as of July.
The iPhone's ability to dynamically resize the browser window depending on the physical angle has also created a unique problem for coders who want to fit their site to the iPhone's 320x480 screen: site designers have to include a special exception that detects a change in the site resolution, developers found.
Nevertheless, some developers have already created miniature web programs that bypass several of the perceived limits. Although many of the programs fall into the categories of web games or equivalents to Mac OS X Dashboard widgets, a few utilities have effectively tried to replace full-fledged programs that would otherwise be needed.
Among the examples readied for the weekend were SonicLiving + iTMS, which lets its users browse, sample, and queue up songs to buy later through the iTunes Store's shopping cart method; iPhogo, a Flickr-like utility that uploads iPhone photos to the web through e-mail; and Telekinesis, a remote control suite that steers iTunes music and captures images from the desktop or the iSight camera. Many of these utilities often require a workaround such as other web servers or Mac apps installed outside of the actual phone.
But while the software on display at iPhoneDevCamp has represented a significant step forward for expanding the iPhone beyond its 12 core programs, Adobe itself disclaimed the event from the beginning by placing some of the responsibility for nurturing the phone's development community at Apple's door.
"We suggest that folks speak to Apple directly about what technologies the iPhone will support and integrate," the company says in its FAQ for the event. "Naturally we believe that support for Flash is essential for any mobile device that wants to deliver a great experience for customers."
On Topic: General
- Google reportedly mulling $1B Waze bid, could spark bidding war with Facebook
- Rumor: Apple outlines new in-house repair policy in note to Brazilian AASPs
- Apple: Samsung shirked FRAND obligations, filed suit before making a licensing offer
- Apple announces WWDC 2013 keynote for Monday, June 10
- Apple on pace to double lobbying spending on taxes, other issues
Previous Comments View All
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64 
Not to mention that Apple is pushing h.264 as a video format standard, and are going to great lengths to get youtube videos re-encoded. Why would they want to include Flash on the iPhone when that would detract from that movement?
Not to mention that Apple is pushing h.264 as a video format standard, and are going to great lengths to get youtube videos re-encoded. Why would they want to include Flash on the iPhone when that would detract from that movement?
Ask Steve Jobs, he went on record to say that Flash support was a possibility, even though Flash is not necessary to show YouTube videos.
Quote:
Markoff: And what are you thinking about Flash and Java?
Jobs: Javas not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. Its this big heavyweight ball and chain.
Markoff: Flash?
Jobs: Well, you might see that.
Markoff: What about YouTube
Jobs: Yeah, YouTubeof course. But you dont need to have Flash to show YouTube. All you need to do is deal with YouTube. And plus, we could get em to up their video resolution at the same time, by using h.264 instead of the old codec.
Jobs: Javas not worth building in. Nobody uses Java anymore. Its this big heavyweight ball and chain.
Markoff: Flash?
Jobs: Well, you might see that.
Markoff: What about YouTube
Jobs: Yeah, YouTubeof course. But you dont need to have Flash to show YouTube. All you need to do is deal with YouTube. And plus, we could get em to up their video resolution at the same time, by using h.264 instead of the old codec.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64
Oops, slip of the toungue. What they meant to say was:
"Naturally, we believe that Flash on iPhone is in Adobe's best interest, and we want all of you developers to bug Apple about it."
Flash sucks CPU, and therefore battery life. And 90% of the time it's a big waste of bandwidth and attention too. Gee, just what I wanted, scrolling, animating, flashing crappy ads -- now on my iPhone too! The longer Apple waits before putting Flash on the iPhone, the better, IMO. In fact, "never" would be a great release date as far as I'm concerned.
Not to mention that Apple is pushing h.264 as a video format standard, and are going to great lengths to get youtube videos re-encoded. Why would they want to include Flash on the iPhone when that would detract from that movement?
Oops, slip of the toungue. What they meant to say was:
"Naturally, we believe that Flash on iPhone is in Adobe's best interest, and we want all of you developers to bug Apple about it."
Flash sucks CPU, and therefore battery life. And 90% of the time it's a big waste of bandwidth and attention too. Gee, just what I wanted, scrolling, animating, flashing crappy ads -- now on my iPhone too! The longer Apple waits before putting Flash on the iPhone, the better, IMO. In fact, "never" would be a great release date as far as I'm concerned.
Not to mention that Apple is pushing h.264 as a video format standard, and are going to great lengths to get youtube videos re-encoded. Why would they want to include Flash on the iPhone when that would detract from that movement?
it is true that there is a lot of crap content that is made with Flash, but there is a lot of quality stuff too. For advanced media rich interfaces, it is the leading delivery platform - mainly because of it portability... this is a promise that can be made with multiple platforms, multiple browsers - not something that is capable by Java, JScript, or any other competing technology, with the possible exception of MS Silverlight (if not yet totally portable, will be soon).
Your argument for not supporting Flash is sort of like saying... hey developers, we want you to stick to Applescript to make applications and stay away from Obj-C. (example used only for illustrative purposes) There are a lot of apps out there made with Obj-C that are buggy and crash. Although this is a true statement, it ignores the fact that in order to do more powerful things, one has to use the more advanced tools and the fact that there are many very powerful prime time apps made with Obj-C.
With Flash, web developers can make a sight that autodetects the appropriate resolution and make a single target for all Flash compliant devices. iPhone should be able to run full Flash Player 9 and not have to run Flash Lite. Otherwise, you are asking Flash developers, who in reality are the standard that websites are built upon, (for Media rich sites) to make an exception for the iPhone so that we have just "iPhone" sites, and then other more grown up sites for full Flash compliant browsers.
...and here is why supporting Adobe is supporting Apple's health. If market share falls away from Adobe, it is going to be gained by Microsoft Silverlight. If Apple does not support Adobe, they are in effect almost directly supporting Microsoft.
For some people, Flash means video... specifically YouTube video. In this specific case, Apple has happened to shoved enough money into the machine to effect a change. Personally, I could care less about YouTube, almost never watch it, and I sure don't really want to see more advertisements... yet I find a compelling reason to have Flash support so I do get the "Real Internet" and mainly, because of my attraction to the Flash/Flex programmable capabilities of the runtime for RIA - effectively equivalent to the power of traditional applications, especially if the executable can be stored local on the iPhone's memory, rather than having to be served remotely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsvisser
it is true that there is a lot of crap content that is made with Flash, but there is a lot of quality stuff too. For advanced media rich interfaces, it is the leading delivery platform - mainly because of it portability... this is a promise that can be made with multiple platforms, multiple browsers - not something that is capable by Java, JScript, or any other competing technology, with the possible exception of MS Silverlight (if not yet totally portable, will be soon).
Your argument for not supporting Flash is sort of like saying... hey developers, we want you to stick to Applescript to make applications and stay away from Obj-C. (example used only for illustrative purposes) There are a lot of apps out there made with Obj-C that are buggy and crash. Although this is a true statement, it ignores the fact that in order to do more powerful things, one has to use the more advanced tools and the fact that there are many very powerful prime time apps made with Obj-C.
With Flash, web developers can make a sight that autodetects the appropriate resolution and make a single target for all Flash compliant devices. iPhone should be able to run full Flash Player 9 and not have to run Flash Lite. Otherwise, you are asking Flash developers, who in reality are the standard that websites are built upon, (for Media rich sites) to make an exception for the iPhone so that we have just "iPhone" sites, and then other more grown up sites for full Flash compliant browsers.
...and here is why supporting Adobe is supporting Apple's health. If market share falls away from Adobe, it is going to be gained by Microsoft Silverlight. If Apple does not support Adobe, they are in effect almost directly supporting Microsoft.
For some people, Flash means video... specifically YouTube video. In this specific case, Apple has happened to shoved enough money into the machine to effect a change. Personally, I could care less about YouTube, almost never watch it, and I sure don't really want to see more advertisements... yet I find a compelling reason to have Flash support so I do get the "Real Internet" and mainly, because of my attraction to the Flash/Flex programmable capabilities of the runtime for RIA - effectively equivalent to the power of traditional applications, especially if the executable can be stored local on the iPhone's memory, rather than having to be served remotely.
it is true that there is a lot of crap content that is made with Flash, but there is a lot of quality stuff too. For advanced media rich interfaces, it is the leading delivery platform - mainly because of it portability... this is a promise that can be made with multiple platforms, multiple browsers - not something that is capable by Java, JScript, or any other competing technology, with the possible exception of MS Silverlight (if not yet totally portable, will be soon).
Your argument for not supporting Flash is sort of like saying... hey developers, we want you to stick to Applescript to make applications and stay away from Obj-C. (example used only for illustrative purposes) There are a lot of apps out there made with Obj-C that are buggy and crash. Although this is a true statement, it ignores the fact that in order to do more powerful things, one has to use the more advanced tools and the fact that there are many very powerful prime time apps made with Obj-C.
With Flash, web developers can make a sight that autodetects the appropriate resolution and make a single target for all Flash compliant devices. iPhone should be able to run full Flash Player 9 and not have to run Flash Lite. Otherwise, you are asking Flash developers, who in reality are the standard that websites are built upon, (for Media rich sites) to make an exception for the iPhone so that we have just "iPhone" sites, and then other more grown up sites for full Flash compliant browsers.
...and here is why supporting Adobe is supporting Apple's health. If market share falls away from Adobe, it is going to be gained by Microsoft Silverlight. If Apple does not support Adobe, they are in effect almost directly supporting Microsoft.
For some people, Flash means video... specifically YouTube video. In this specific case, Apple has happened to shoved enough money into the machine to effect a change. Personally, I could care less about YouTube, almost never watch it, and I sure don't really want to see more advertisements... yet I find a compelling reason to have Flash support so I do get the "Real Internet" and mainly, because of my attraction to the Flash/Flex programmable capabilities of the runtime for RIA - effectively equivalent to the power of traditional applications, especially if the executable can be stored local on the iPhone's memory, rather than having to be served remotely.
Couldn't agree with you more. Many people think that h.264 is somehow going to "magically" replace Flash (try building a site entirely in h.264 while handling data from a php file, xml, etc.) or because Apple had YouTube make copies (remember the YouTube site still uses Flash) of their videos in the h.264 format as well as in the Flash FLV format, that somehow this meant that Apple is never going to support Flash. Nothing could be further from reality. The iPhone was not released supporting Flash because their wasn't a version of Flash available that wouldn't eat a good chunk of iPhone's battery life (as well as why 3G wasn't supported among other reasons). H.264 was used since it relies mostly on hardware/software and uses a lot less battery compared to FLV video or Flash in general. Rumor has it that there is a version of Flash coming doesn't the pike that uses a less CPU power and is made specifically for the iPhone's OS X. I guess we'll just have to wait and see on that one.
Flash is much more than animated cartoon sites and crappy banners. When are people going to start realizing that? If that's all there was to them, why do you think that the omission of Flash on the iPhone has been one of the top 3 complaints on the iPhone? So people can see animated cartoons and crappy banners? I don't think so, I don't think so . . .
That is all I am going to say on the subject because every time I get more into this subject, I get railed by other members and told I should "upgrade my resume" (being that I am a Flash developer) since "Flash is on it's way out." So I will stop here and say no more.
oh wow, iPhogo is getting a little attention. i've been a member here for awhile but not an active poster... i'm one of the guys workin on this side project.
we had the idea last week... my buddy Dimitry programmed it and attended the iPhone dev session. what is currently on the site is a very, very rough framework of what we have planned... we're switching hosts right now because it's been pretty slow today.
thanks for link AI!! We should have some really cool stuff next week... <3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64
Flash sucks CPU, and therefore battery life. And 90% of the time it's a big waste of bandwidth and attention too. Gee, just what I wanted, scrolling, animating, flashing crappy ads -- now on my iPhone too! The longer Apple waits before putting Flash on the iPhone, the better, IMO. In fact, "never" would be a great release date as far as I'm concerned.
Flash sucks CPU, and therefore battery life. And 90% of the time it's a big waste of bandwidth and attention too. Gee, just what I wanted, scrolling, animating, flashing crappy ads -- now on my iPhone too! The longer Apple waits before putting Flash on the iPhone, the better, IMO. In fact, "never" would be a great release date as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah, because we can't be given that much choice to do what we want....
I usually appreciate Jobs' desire for tight control as things emerge, but this isn't new technology and there should be iPhones sitting in Adobe labs with Flash beta testing apps, not just waiting for hacks.
Same with Java ... why not let some java folks just play around and see if something comes up? You could always put them under contract to that they don't pull a Microsoft on you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoC
Couldn't agree with you more. Many people think that h.264 is somehow going to "magically" replace Flash (try building a site entirely in h.264 while handling data from a php file, xml, etc.) or because Apple had YouTube make copies (remember the YouTube site still uses Flash) of their videos in the h.264 format as well as in the Flash FLV format, that somehow this meant that Apple is never going to support Flash. Nothing could be further from reality. The iPhone was not released supporting Flash because their wasn't a version of Flash available that wouldn't eat a good chunk of iPhone's battery life (as well as why 3G wasn't supported among other reasons). H.264 was used since it relies mostly on hardware/software and uses a lot less battery compared to FLV video or Flash in general. Rumor has it that there is a version of Flash coming doesn't the pike that uses a less CPU power and is made specifically for the iPhone's OS X. I guess we'll just have to wait and see on that one.
Flash is much more than animated cartoon sites and crappy banners. When are people going to start realizing that? If that's all there was to them, why do you think that the omission of Flash on the iPhone has been one of the top 3 complaints on the iPhone? So people can see animated cartoons and crappy banners? I don't think so, I don't think so . . .
That is all I am going to say on the subject because every time I get more into this subject, I get railed by other members and told I should "upgrade my resume" (being that I am a Flash developer) since "Flash is on it's way out." So I will stop here and say no more.
Couldn't agree with you more. Many people think that h.264 is somehow going to "magically" replace Flash (try building a site entirely in h.264 while handling data from a php file, xml, etc.) or because Apple had YouTube make copies (remember the YouTube site still uses Flash) of their videos in the h.264 format as well as in the Flash FLV format, that somehow this meant that Apple is never going to support Flash. Nothing could be further from reality. The iPhone was not released supporting Flash because their wasn't a version of Flash available that wouldn't eat a good chunk of iPhone's battery life (as well as why 3G wasn't supported among other reasons). H.264 was used since it relies mostly on hardware/software and uses a lot less battery compared to FLV video or Flash in general. Rumor has it that there is a version of Flash coming doesn't the pike that uses a less CPU power and is made specifically for the iPhone's OS X. I guess we'll just have to wait and see on that one.
Flash is much more than animated cartoon sites and crappy banners. When are people going to start realizing that? If that's all there was to them, why do you think that the omission of Flash on the iPhone has been one of the top 3 complaints on the iPhone? So people can see animated cartoons and crappy banners? I don't think so, I don't think so . . .
That is all I am going to say on the subject because every time I get more into this subject, I get railed by other members and told I should "upgrade my resume" (being that I am a Flash developer) since "Flash is on it's way out." So I will stop here and say no more.
You are missing the larger point here. It doesn't matter that Flash is powerful, or that it's popular. It only matters that Adobe owns and controls it. Therefore, it does Apple no good to support it on iPhone.
One of the biggest headaches we've all bee enduring over the past decade is due to the browser wars between IE and Netscape. When one company owns or controls a particular technology on the web, that control is ultimately wielded to create dominance on the web. IE's 80%+ market share is the root of most of the issues surrounding incompatibilities and inconsistencies with other browsers. This is why the W3C was started in the first place, and why Firefox is gaining ground in market share. People are tired of Microsoft's control.
Adobe wants to be another Microsoft with Flash. They want to own the web the way Microsoft continues to try to control the web with IE and now Silverlight. This has to be stopped.
Ajax and HTML 5 do and will offer an open, standard set of technologies for producing rich media applications for the Web. Because they are open, they will render equally everywhere, on every platform, on every device. This is how it should be.
With iPhone, Apple has a unique opportunity to help the adoption of standards (which is in Apple's own best interests, since it has so small a market share), rather than facilitating another Microsoft or Adobe monopoly. Which would you choose?
If Adobe were to reach critical mass with Flash as the definitive source of rich media on the web (a feat which Macromedia never came close to pulling off) where would that leave Apple? At the mercy of Adobe, who has a history of slow and lame Mac development when it sees fit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjoec123
You are missing the larger point here. It doesn't matter that Flash is powerful, or that it's popular. It only matters that Adobe owns and controls it. Therefore, it does Apple no good to support it on iPhone. If Adobe were to reach critical mass with Flash as the definitive source of rich media on the web (a feat which Macromedia never came close to pulling off) where would that leave Apple? At the mercy of Adobe, who has a history of slow and lame Mac development when it sees fit.
You are missing the larger point here. It doesn't matter that Flash is powerful, or that it's popular. It only matters that Adobe owns and controls it. Therefore, it does Apple no good to support it on iPhone. If Adobe were to reach critical mass with Flash as the definitive source of rich media on the web (a feat which Macromedia never came close to pulling off) where would that leave Apple? At the mercy of Adobe, who has a history of slow and lame Mac development when it sees fit.
You are wrong about that. Just look at the Mac OS and Quartz's implementation of pdf's in everything. Adobe controls pdf tech and Apple has to lisense it. It hasn't hurt Apple much; it actually helps to keep pdf's a standard. So why not the same with Flash unless Apple plans on its own Flash-killer.
Flash is good technology for a lot of what Apple could do and if it would actually optimize Core Animation for it, then it would become the BEST Flash development platform for the new era of graphics and video ... Flash adds to H.246 and to other QuickTime tech.
Apple and Adobe compete on several fronts but not on basic streaming of video content. Both need to keep MS at bey.
The solution here would be for Apple to release a real SDK for the iPhone rather than force the web on their development community. Developers ought to boycott the iPhone and these types of workshops until they do. What does Apple expect? So much effort into making the web compatible across different browsers and hardware, and easier to manipulate the style and layout of pages to what the designer wants to present ... then what does Apple want? For people to code web pages specifically for the iPhone??? Sure, maybe a handful of people will do this, but most web development these days is geared toward being cross platform and and across most browsers. Good web developers would and should scoff at the idea of coding web pages specifically for this device.
It'd be sad if this turns into a thread about Flash garbage. Give developers a real SDK and let Adobe write their own damn plug-in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacGregor
You are wrong about that. Just look at the Mac OS and Quartz's implementation of pdf's in everything. Adobe controls pdf tech and Apple has to lisense it. It hasn't hurt Apple much; it actually helps to keep pdf's a standard. So why not the same with Flash unless Apple plans on its own Flash-killer.
Flash is good technology for a lot of what Apple could do and if it would actually optimize Core Animation for it, then it would become the BEST Flash development platform for the new era of graphics and video ... Flash adds to H.246 and to other QuickTime tech.
Apple and Adobe compete on several fronts but not on basic streaming of video content. Both need to keep MS at bey.
You are wrong about that. Just look at the Mac OS and Quartz's implementation of pdf's in everything. Adobe controls pdf tech and Apple has to lisense it. It hasn't hurt Apple much; it actually helps to keep pdf's a standard. So why not the same with Flash unless Apple plans on its own Flash-killer.
Flash is good technology for a lot of what Apple could do and if it would actually optimize Core Animation for it, then it would become the BEST Flash development platform for the new era of graphics and video ... Flash adds to H.246 and to other QuickTime tech.
Apple and Adobe compete on several fronts but not on basic streaming of video content. Both need to keep MS at bey.
PDF and Flash are not the same thing. PDF is an open standard, that anyone can use for free, provided they adhere to Adobe's guidelines. PDF has been around forever and it serves Apple well because you can easily share documents with your PC friends. If I recall, Adobe wasn't super happy about Apple using PDF with Quartz because Apple didn't license PDF from Adobe, but created its own version. Flash is different because it is not an open standard and it is not everywhere. It is interesting that Adobe just made Flex Open Source. I suspect Apple is pressuring Adobe to get something it wants. Apple often does that to Adobe to get licensing concessions.
Latest Apple Headlines
-
Google reportedly mulling $1B Waze bid, could spark bidding war with Facebook
~4 hours ago -
Apple expands iOS Maps' 3D Flyover coverage of California
~5 hours ago -
Rumor: Apple outlines new in-house repair policy in note to Brazilian AASPs
~6 hours ago -
Apple: Samsung shirked FRAND obligations, filed suit before making a licensing offer
~6 hours ago -
Rumor: Apple to vastly expand color options with this year's 'iPhone 5S' & low-cost iPhone
~8 hours ago - more...
Want to write for AppleInsider? Submit your application now!
Lowest Prices Anywhere!
| Model | Price | You Save |
|---|---|---|
| Core i5 MacBook Pros w/ Retina | ||
| 13" 2.5GHz/8GB/128GB | $1,406.48 | $292.52 |
| 13" 2.5GHz/8GB/256GB | $1,479.99 | $519.01 |
| 13" 2.5GHz/8GB/512GB | $1,699.99 | $799.01 |
| Core i7 MacBook Pros w/ Retina | ||
| 13" 2.9GHz/8GB/256GB | $1,599.99 | $599.01 |
| 13" 2.9GHz/8GB/512GB | $1,799.99 | $899.01 |
| 15" 2.3GHz/8GB/256GB | $1,899.99 | $299.01 |
| 15" 2.6GHz/8GB/512GB | $2,299.99 | $568.01 |
| 15" 2.7GHz/16GB/768GB | $2,699.99 | $499.01 |
| Model | White | Black | |
|---|---|---|---|
| iPad mini (WiFi only) | |||
| 16GB WiFi |  |
$329.99 | $329.99 |
| 32GB WiFi | |
$429.99 | $429.99 |
| 64GB WiFi | |
$529.99 | $529.99 |
| iPad mini (WiFi + 4G) | |||
 |
 |
 |
|
| 16GB 4G White | $459.99 | $459.99 | $459.99 |
| 32GB 4G White | $559.99 | $559.99 | $559.99 |
| 64GB 4G White | $659.99 | $659.99 | $659.99 |
| 16GB 4G Black | $459.99 | $459.99 | $459.99 |
| 32GB 4G Black | $559.99 | $559.99 | $559.99 |
| 64GB 4G Black | $659.99 | $659.99 | $659.99 |
Adobe says:
"We suggest that folks speak to Apple directly about what technologies the iPhone will support and integrate," the company says in its FAQ for the event. "Naturally we believe that support for Flash is essential for any mobile device that wants to deliver a great experience for customers."
Oops, slip of the toungue. What they meant to say was:
"Naturally, we believe that Flash on iPhone is in Adobe's best interest, and we want all of you developers to bug Apple about it."
Flash sucks CPU, and therefore battery life. And 90% of the time it's a big waste of bandwidth and attention too. Gee, just what I wanted, scrolling, animating, flashing crappy ads -- now on my iPhone too! The longer Apple waits before putting Flash on the iPhone, the better, IMO. In fact, "never" would be a great release date as far as I'm concerned.
Not to mention that Apple is pushing h.264 as a video format standard, and are going to great lengths to get youtube videos re-encoded. Why would they want to include Flash on the iPhone when that would detract from that movement?