Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Mike Mehta (Back in action)
1631 Followers
Matt Daniel
1612 Followers
David Wayne Osedach
1505 Followers
Wijdan Rohail
720 Followers
quickdigger
5219 Followers
Drew Hendricks
10029 Followers
Jake Rocheleau
2459 Followers
smurfzSep 9, 2010
meh, i still want native Flash support in Safari
velvetheadSep 9, 2010
Why? Have you seen the reviews of Flash on Android? Be careful what you wish for.
enantiodromiaSep 9, 2010
I was just looking through the Android Market last night, at the Flash reviews. It's pretty ugly.
stealthspcSep 9, 2010
I've jailbroken my iPhone and tried flash. It's a joke at most. I don't see how it could ever operate decently.
solistusSep 10, 2010
Flash is inefficient, proprietary bulls**t that only ever caught on because it was the only game in town for things like video players for a while. iOS has plenty of ways to access video content, including native apps from just about every content-providing website or service you might otherwise want Flash for. To make matters worse, Flash apps are designed with mouse behavior in mind. Developers would have to design their Flash apps to be compatible with multitouch-based devices, but if they're gonna do that they may as well use a better technology than Flash to do it.
stignordasSep 9, 2010
I hope this means Apple and Adobe will start playing nice again.
enantiodromiaSep 9, 2010
I hope Adobe is allowed to fail for producing decades of buggy software which has stolen many hours of my life.
solistusSep 10, 2010
Apple is playing nice. Adobe has a s**tTY product and is in denial about it. Apple has had an open challenge to them for over a year now: show us one consumer handheld device, just one, with good Flash stability and performance. Still waiting.
danbarkerSep 9, 2010
Transparent != apple. I think the headline writter was shocked and confused.
enantiodromiaSep 9, 2010
yeah. going with a MACH kernel and basing your OS on BSD is the epitome of opaqueness, unlike Widows and Adobe, who post all of their source online for free.
torisutanSep 9, 2010
Oh, so THAT'S why Windows and Flash and Acrobat keep having so many security flaws! Silly software developers, posting your code online for free is like putting the password to your computer on the bottom corner of your screen, you're just asking someone to screw with your s**t.
I think I'll stick with Mac, I've had one error in the whole time I've owned Apple products and it only required a reboot to fix.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
isa9191Sep 9, 2010
so your basically saying you don't know how to use a computer... you sound like a soccer mom now.
solistusSep 10, 2010
...*facepalm* Sarcasm detection fail.
Apple's OS X is built on open-source code. MS and Adobe products aren't. Open source code is FAR more secure in general than proprietary code. Sure, "bad guys" can see any flaws that exist, but so can everyone else. They can then fix those flaws for you. That's the whole point of open-source code; to let more eyes see it to perfect every detail. Apple also keeps some code proprietary as needed, but the idea that open source code is less secure is just bulls**t propaganda from commercial software vendors who see it as a major threat to their profit margins. See the rise of software like OpenOffice, or the Linux operating system.
elwoodbluesSep 9, 2010
more rss spam.
danbarkerSep 9, 2010
Don't Care.
torisutanSep 9, 2010
More revolter spam.
nickedynickSep 10, 2010
Wait, if 278 people dugg it then how exactly is this spam?
solistusSep 10, 2010
Prior to v4, to get on not only the front page, but the top in all stories list, on a Friday afternoon no less, would take several times that many diggs. And that was WITH people having the option to bury stories to subtract from that total.
More importantly, it's also a very low quality source - it spouts absolute nonsense like claiming that JavaScript was banned on iOS prior to this announcement (presumably they meant Java, but anyone who doesn't understand how important that distinction is has no business writing an article about web and mobile app development). The discussion of Flash is not only biased but barely coherent: "Even if there are better alternatives to Flash, like HTML5, for arguments sake, still, many top websites already use Flash and it is not as easy for them to re-program web applications to make the switch to another platform."
Gotta love that sentence construction, for argument's sake, still, and the phrase "it is not as easy..." normally means you're gonna compare two things, which the author apparently forgot to do.
There are tons of high quality sources about this major tech news story, yet the one that makes FP is this one, and it makes it with a pathetic number of diggs to become a top 5 story in all categories. So yeah, Digg v4 sucks.
16x9Sep 9, 2010
Good! From what I've read Adobe has been busting ass to make Flash run efficiently on these tiny devices. Regardless of Apple's motivations, I'm happy as hell to see that the iDevices will again be able to run native apps that were created in the Flash ecosystem.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
enantiodromiaSep 9, 2010
Well they failed then, because Flash is horrific on Android.
torisutanSep 9, 2010
Yeah, but there are only like two Android devices that have the same power as the 3GS or the iPhone 4, so maybe it will run better with more power?
bugmenot2Sep 9, 2010
Devices that are as fast or faster than the 3GS and iPhone 4:
From HTC: Droid Incredible, EVO 4G, Desire
From Motorola: Droid, Droid 2, Droid X
From Samsung: Galaxy S variants (Captivate, Fascinate, Vibrant, Epic 4G)
Flash works decently. Flash animations run great, but games still need some work. 480p embedded YouTube videos will run fine, but higher res will be choppy.
evilmooseSep 9, 2010
Reported for spam and buried.
extravagantSep 9, 2010
i don't understand why developers can't choose whatever platform they want..... how is apple helping anyone with its restrictions? as an iphone 4 owner, why should my friends s**tty BlackBerry support Flash videos/content within BB browser and my superior iphone can't do it? come on mr. jobs...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
enantiodromiaSep 9, 2010
ask your friends how often they actually use Flash on their RIM devices. then ask your Android friends how well Flash is running on their devices.
Flash has been a huge stinker on mobile so far. Why should Apple knowingly include something well documented to suck on their devices, just to appease the countless idiots who don't even know what they are outraged about in the first place?
torisutanSep 9, 2010
I've never understood why people want flash on their mobile devices. Flash is quite literally a glorified compressed .gif with interactivity, but on the mobile web it would take forever to download a flash movie/game. Most of them are around 50-60 megabytes, and for those of you who have tried to download an app over 10 megabytes from the App Store, you know that you need wifi to get it before your battery dies. If you jailbroke your phone and download it via the EDGE or even 3G network you'll be waiting about 30 minutes at least for the whole thing to download.
Flash just isn't feasible on the current mobile networks, nor on the current mobile phones. Besides, when tools exist to port flash content into an iPhone app or an Android app that runs natively, why bother with flash? Sure, it's against App Store policy (or was, I haven't read the article yet lol) to use the converter in Flash Developer to make an iPhone app, but it's not difficult to make it there and customize it with the official dev kit so they can't tell the difference.
phairohSep 9, 2010
It would be nice if the person writing about a technical issue could be a technical writer as this article has quite a few errors regarding the technologies involved. In addition, it's written horribly... FTA:
"Even if there are better alternatives to Flash, like HTML5, for arguments sake, still, many top websites already use Flash and it is not as easy for them to re-program web applications to make the switch to another platform. It would also be a costly process, and they really don’t have that much of an incentive, at least for now, to switch given that the majority of the other smartphones will support Flash anyway."
Worst. Paragraph. Ever.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ryebryeSep 9, 2010
Yeah. Especially since this article has nothing to even do with Flash on the web - just compiled apps.
torisutanSep 9, 2010
Actually, that paragraph followed the rules of the English language, just in a way that you, who has grown up in a world where grammar isn't as particularly important as nuance and word choice, find to be distractingly strange to read.
lemonfireSep 9, 2010
Who cares about Flash. Give me Google Voice instead.
solistusSep 10, 2010
Kay. m.google.com/voice . Works on iPhone, has for some time, Apple's only concern was having a native app that replaced too much of the native UI for such a core phone feature as voice calls. You can dislike that explanation if you like but if you actually cared about Google Voice you'd know that it's been fully available to use on iOS for ages.
lemonfireSep 13, 2010
I do care and I'm very well aware of the web site. I think it's silly by Apple and/or AT&T to not allow the app in the first place. However, rumors suggest that this may change soon. Again though I really don't care about Flash.
maatttmannSep 9, 2010
why r u idiots trying to kill Digg? u come here bashing EVERYTHING on the front page, u spam the comments Digg V4 sux.....just freak off already... go to to Reddit, Kevin Rose already told u to do just that
Closed AccountSep 10, 2010
Digg is already dead.
bigviSep 11, 2010
and yet you are still here
diggsmckenzieSep 10, 2010
You're no syntaxgs...
solistusSep 10, 2010
Some of us haven't given up hope that Digg v3's feature set may return. This article is crap. It claims Javascript was previously banned on iOS, then moves on to repeat Adobe talking points on mobile Flash performance in hilariously broken syntax, for argument's sake, still, without backing them up or mentioning Apple's counter-arguments. What I walked away from this article knowing is that the author A) loves Adobe and B) doesn't know much about iOS products or web development.
cthellisSep 9, 2010
This is in no way "Apple will now run Flash on iOS." This is "Apple will allow app code from 3rd party compilers, which will Adobe's Packager to be used: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/packagerforiphone/
We are unlikely to see Flash running on Safari any time soon, if ever.
torisutanSep 9, 2010
Sweet, now there's no reason to get Flash on my iPhone! I mean, why would I want Flash running, then have it run a game or movie (twice the processing power needed!), when I can simply compile the flash code into an iPhone app and have the same movie or game run natively with no extra process in the way?
Not to mention that HTML 5 is rapidly becoming a viable alternative to Flash, and it would much easier for Apple to simply update mobile Safari (and for Google to update mobile Chrome, or whatever they use on Android) to fully support HTML5. *shrug* I'm just sayin...
solistusSep 10, 2010
Mobile Safari already has pretty robust HTML5 support.
technopunditSep 9, 2010
I wish Steve Jobs was transparent ... and silent!
remingtonhSep 9, 2010
flash works awesome on my evo4g hasn't crashed once. now I can see flash ads in all their animated glory.
Closed AccountSep 10, 2010
f**k Adobe, bunch of pussies.
nickedynickSep 10, 2010
This really smacks of Jobs realising he's made a mistake in constructing a black box approval system. Publicly they're saying they're not worried by Android, and are trying to discredit it, but internally I reckon they're bricking it.
solistusSep 10, 2010
When have they said they're "not worried" about Android? Android is quite obviously their main market competitor and I've never seen Apple deny that. They market their products as better than Android, of course, but it would be ludicrous to suggest that Apple's business strategy in the mobile market isn't heavily influenced by Android. I doubt they're "bricking it," though - their stock is at an all-time high, sales of all 3 iOS product families are astronomically high and still rising, and they're getting fawning press right now between this announcement and the new iTouch being an awesomesauce smartphone replacement.
bombfrogSep 10, 2010
The guidelines basically say "if we like it, it's in, if we don't like it it's not". When are people going to stop putting up with this s**t. Why do the Apple-tards still keep buying their products?
genadySep 10, 2010
Probably because they work.
solistusSep 10, 2010
Apple has always used closed software ecosystems. If you don't see the appeal, you're not the target market. Some people like having first party support extend to large aspects of using third party software. The new iOS 4.1 jailbreak is impossible to close without modifying the hardware, so if you really care about running apps that Apple has rejected, there are options.
ikayhanSep 10, 2010
GV Mobile+ please!