Is Apple "hostile", or "indifferent" to Flash?

I wonder.

Users are reporting increased elevated temperatures when upgrading to Lion and using Flash online.

Adobe is explaining this in press releases that they find that Apple has disabled hardware acceleration in Lion for Flash, resulting in increased CPU activity to compensate, hence causing more heat from the processor.

It makes we wonder whether Apple is outright hostile to Flash, and almost equates its use to "jailbreaking", which they are constantly trying to battle. I always thrught they were indifferent or subtle in their non-support of Flash for the reasons that Mr Jobs has expressed. But over and over, it would almost seem that Apple is actually making efforts to make use of Flash nearly impossible.

 

I would have to say hostile.

OSX/iOS seems to be the ONLY platforms/OS's with flash issues. I have used it in Ubuntu, BSD ( of which OSX is derived from ), Solaris and of course Windows. and I dont have it but have used it many times on my daughters Samsung Android phone.

personal experience matches this author in many sites
Flash 10.1 "better than HTML5" on mobile, says man - Runs better on Apple | TechEye
where flash seems to run faster .... and now my real kicker, I have in iPhone 4 ( jailbroken ) it runs flash perfectly well and I can run youtube ect better off of flash on an i device ... go figure

for iOS I can understand as Flash opens a huge backdoor allowing people to run flash apps freely off of websites and not needing to get them from the app store ( financially ), but in OSX I really dont get it.

 

not having Flash is a great thing. I personally disable this crappy "feature" on all of my devices, whether it is a PC, Mac or Android phone.

Less adds, more battery life and scrolling is way smoother on Android with all traces of flash players removed from the phone.

Can't wait for it to die already. All it does it eat extra power, cause security issues and crash the browser.

I dont care how apple feels about flash, but i am openly hostile about it, independent of the platform.

 

Well said!!!

 

I would say hostile.

The thing I dislike about flash, is that the content added is rarely of relevance, and if its of relevance handicapped people that use screen readers or other tech wont be able to use the site.

Flash is always disabled by default with me

 

It's not Apple's job to decide for me whether or not I want to use Flash, and to cause additional problems with Flash to try to influence my decision. This reminds me of the 1990s allegation that Microsoft deliberately altered or manipulated its API to cause problems with Netscape Navigator. That would have been wrong even if Internet Explorer was a better browser than Netscape was, right? I fail to see how this is different, and saying that "Flash isn't good anyway" doesn't make it any better.

 

Adobe is full of it. Apple made some changes and Flash is programmed so poorly, that parts of it broke, and instead of saying an update will be coming, they instead point their finger at Apple.

 

It's not about Apple deciding for you, it's about the experience to the end user. You can go right ahead and install Flash when you buy a new Mac or install Lion so why are you basically defending Adobe for not making any effort to update their apps for Lion? That's just plain lazy on their part and they are showing a lack of care for the very customers that are defending them.

 

HL Dan--

"Apple has disabled hardware acceleration in Lion for Flash" -- that's not Adobe being "lazy" and failing to update their apps for OSX Lion. That's Apple programming Flash-unfriendliness right into OSX Lion.

OS X Lion update kills Flash Player hardware acceleration and more - SlashGear

 

You may want to check out Macrumors front page news which would explain my response to your post. Adobe is at fault here. It's not just about running Flash. They didn't update any of their suite for any of Lion's new features and Adobe's Mac customers are livid.

 

I don't see how that justifies what Apple did. If anything, it just makes it seem like petty retaliation.

Example: I'll lay money that Blizzard didn't update Starcraft II or World of Warcraft to take advantage of any of OSX Lion's new features. Should Apple deactivate hardware acceleration for Blizzard products as well, or make other changes just to make these games run worse than they did in Snow Leopard?

If Microsoft Office was not updated to take advantage of OSX Lion's new features, should Apple make changes in OSX Lion that make Office run worse than it did in Snow Leopard?

 

Forget it, some people are just apple cultists who worship at the altar of steve jobs.

 

Those software titles you mentioned are bad examples for your argument. Just a quick example as to why, those games and MS Office don't affect the performance of your computer and games don't need Versions or Auto Resume for that matter. They've gotten along just fine without. Adobe stuff is for creation and they have a much larger audience in the Mac community than even Microsoft so it's Adobe who needs to drop their prejudices and do a better job with Flash and update their highly expensive suite to accommodate their Lion customers. So funny how Adobe makes one assumption with no proof of reason but they deliberately did nothing to update their software for Apple's latest OS.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion but 95% of Macrumors forum members disagree with you. There's no excuse for what Adobe has and has not done, other than a malicious attack against Apple which hurts their customers rather than Apple itself.

 

How has adobe got a bigger audience for Mac than windows especially for flash?

 

Adobe didn't maliciously attack Apple by not making changes to their software when OSX Lion was supposed to be backwards-compatible with Snow Leopard software. Maybe they didn't serve their customers as well as they could have, but they're not "attacking" Apple by not having different versions of software ready to do the day of OSX Lion's release.

Apple "attacked" Adobe by making changes in OSX Lion that appear solely designed to hurt the performance of Adobe software, when the operating system is otherwise backwards-compatible with other Snow-Leopard-vintage software.

Adobe may or may not have been lazy (if no other third-party company had new versions of their software ready to roll out yesterday, I hate to blame Adobe for not doing so either), but the only company "attacking" another company here is Apple.

 

You didn't read my post at all. I never said anything of the sort.

This type of post explains why you misread my other post.

 

I don't think you know what is going on here... show some proof where Apple did anything wrong.

You keep saying Apple killed hardware acceleration in Flash on purpose... where is the proof? I cannot find where Apple did any such thing. Apple made standard updates, and Adobe has had many many months to test and fix their buggy software. Yes it should have worked fine on 10.7 without killing hardware acceleration, but if history is any indicator, then the only reason that Adobe is having a problem now is their own fault for their poor programming in the first place and not following Apple's guidelines for programming on OSX. If they use established frameworks and APIs correctly, this wouldn't have happened... but Adobe cuts corners in programming all the time.

 

What's the alternative...that it accidentally disabled hardware acceleration on an incredibly-common piece of software (the software that drives YouTube, for criminy sakes), and didn't notice all the way through testing until OSX Lion was released to the public?

It's not like Adobe changed anything to cause Flash to no longer be able to use hardware acceleration in Apple machines. As people have been quick to point out, Flash didn't change at all when OSX Lion was released.

 

I guess I don't see what the big deal is. I haven't come across anything showing that Apple specifically went after Adobe and Flash with Lion. Apple updated their OS and Adobe has yet to update their software and plug-in. The same thing happened to my 2008 HP netbook. It has a Broadcom chip in it that supports the playback of 1080p videos (even full on Blu-ray movies). My netbook came with Windows XP on it and Adobe took their sweet time supporting my hardware (even though it was the first netbook on the market that could playback HD videos without problems). I then upgraded to Windows 7 and Flash hardware acceleration stopped working. I had to wait a full 4 months for Adobe to resolve the problem. So did Microsoft maliciously go after Adobe to kill off hardware acceleration on my netbook by releasing Windows 7? No. That is just par for the course when upgrading OS's.

I am not saying that Apple is perfect and their relationship with Adobe has been on a love-hate basis but Adobe had plenty of time to figure out what would happen when Lion came out yet they haven't done anything yet.

 

Both Adobe & Apple are Industry leaders. The difference between the two is that only Adobe makes products that no other company on the planet can come close to.

The same can not be said for Apple. If Adobe pulled all products from apple, people would be upset but they'd ditch the mac before they ditched Photoshop, Illustrator, & InDesign.

Apple shouldn't poke the beast too hard. But if Adobe really wanted to get back at Apple, they would develop their programs for Linux.

 

You're not looking at this in a business way at all, you're only looking at this personally. Adobe doesn't make programs for the Mac as a favor to Apple. Adobe is in business to make money and it would be a huge loss for Adobe if they discontinued Mac support. They would lose a lot of money and cause an enormous stir. It's about the customer, not about Apple.

Same goes for Microsoft, sometimes I just love when people say, "Apple should stop those ads against Microsoft or Microsoft might stop making Office for Mac".
Give me a break, it's all about business and making money, nobody is doing anyone a favor.

Macs are selling extremely well and many people are adopting OS X as their only and main OS. It would be foolish for companies like Adobe and Microsoft to yank software out of personal feelings or if they feel attacked by Apple. That would be really dumb.

Adobe must conform to Apple's and Microsoft's OS's. Their software needs an OS to run on so Apple doesn't have to kiss the heels of Adobe. Apple could buy out Adobe 10 fold and Adobe knows that.
Also while I have no statical proof of this, IMO, a Mac user is more apt to buying software over a Windows user. The fact that there are more Windows users makes it a lot worse. Many of them will result to bit torrent to get their Adobe Creative Suite. Yes, Mac users can do it as well but it's the PC world that modifies Registries and installs serial key generators in order to use pirated software which results in a loss of a sale to the developer.

If Adobe thought they could make a substantial business alone with Windows customers they wouldn't have come back to the Mac.

 

Adobe is the only reason why Apple is still around. If they don't watch where they tread, Adobe could easily pull their product lines off of Apple and onto a different platform. It won't take people long to stop pretending that image/video editing works better on a Mac.

 

And then you woke up.

 

So true. I own several Macs but can't stand Apple's locked down strategy towards some things (flash and Blu-ray). I don't like Flash adds either but Fedex, Bestbuy and Bank of America's Sitekey security app all require flash. It's annoying to have to workaround Apple to get stuff done.

And yes, some us still like optical media.

Cheers,

 

You're 12, right? 13 tops.

Anyway...

Fellow Windows users: if Microsoft launched Windows 7 and Flash was broken because Adobe didn't bother to update Flash Player for proper Windows 7 compatibility, would your reaction be to suggest that Microsoft were to blame? Despite the full year of Windows 7 beta testing where Adobe could have made their software work and tested it fully?

Of course you wouldn't. Because you're not a tool. Right? Right.

So why is this any different? You people are talking loudly to drown out the simple reality that you don't seem to want to hear: Apple had Lion in beta testing for the last 8 months. In that extensive period of time, Adobe did nothing to test or update Flash Player in order to work properly with Lion. So Lion launches and Flash is partially broken. Now they cry foul...but who's fault is it really?

The answer to the question so mind-bogglingly simple that I don't understand how there's any confusion at all. Apple provided an extensive Beta period for which software made by all sorts of developers was tested and adjusted as necessary to work with the new OS, just as developers did for the launch of Windows 7. Adobe did nothing and assumed everything would work, despite all the core changes Apple made. They were wrong...and now they want people to buy the excuse that it's somehow Apple's fault...as if they did something between the last developer preview version and yesterday's launch version to gimp their app. C'mon, son.

Anyone who believe that load of crap believes it because they want to. IE, haters gonna. Kinda pathetic.

As for the question in the topic title: I'm pretty sure Apple is somewhere between "indifferent" and "hostile"...but only with regards to Flash Player I think that is so because Adobe has struggled to develop bug-free versions of its plug-in for OS X...and it's failed to do so consistently. They've struggled in the mobile market. As such, it's no surprise that there is a lack of faith in their ability to magically produce a truly stable version of Flash Player in Cupertino.

Apple is just fine with Adobe with regards to their other software.

 

Actually i am. Flash is part of adobe's business. If apple goes out of its way to limit and try to end flash then they're attacking adobe's business. It's not personal at all on either part.

Furthermore you need to stop thinking little fish (because adobe's business isn't little fish) The single user sitting in their dorm room using a cracked version of photoshop isn't their target demographic. Nor do they really care about that user at all. It's the major media houses, publishers, design firms, marketing, graphic and photography departments & companies that they're after. Major clients in almost all industries who spend millions of dollars on software and hardware. Currently, most of this audience uses Apple Products, but only because they have a choice. Take away the choice and the industries will complain, but they will switch to the platform that these products are available on.

So much of your life is brought to you through adobe products. Here are a few examples:

Almost every professional book, magazine, newspaper, flyer, advertisement etc. in the last 10 years has been formatted with InDesign. Every photo in every magazine, book, billboard, store display, etc. has touched up and edited in Photoshop. Every logo, graphic, t-shirt, etc. been finalized in Illustrator. Every website you see was first mocked up in Fireworks or Photoshop.Every movie and t.v. show effect graphic etc. has been touched up or added with After Effects or Flash.

Sure Apple has Final Cut Pro (which is important in the industry) but since it's just a clone of Premier Pro (designed by the same guy) It's hardly a program that will make people buy a mac over a pc.

I do not agree with you that apple doesn't have to kiss the heels of software makers. A platform is only as good as the software available for it. If your business relies on mario kart you don't buy a playstation.

I am not suggesting that Apple is about to lose Adobe support or products, all I'm saying that they can't afford to lose it. No OS can afford not to have adobe support. If Linux had Adobe support It's my opinion it would be much more popular than it is. I also believe if that were the case, Linux would cut into Apple's market share just as much if not more than Microsoft's.

People need Adobe, OSX is just personal preference.

 

Blah blah blah.

Let me help you with this: Shareholders.

Let me help you further: Market Cap ( Apple | Adobe)

Businesses don't operate from hurt feelings. They operate from bottom line and they work to make money for themselves, their shareholders and their bond holders.

Adobe has to conform the OSes they want to sell their products on. They will continue to do so no matter what Microsoft and Apple say about them because it's about the money and the consumers on the other end of those OSes are creating Adobe's revenue. Their shareholders wouldn't stand for them abandoning Windows OR OS X because they'd be cutting their nose off to spite their face.

If you had any understanding of business at all, you wouldn't have written that post or the one before it. You speculate on impossibilities as if they were valid commentaries. They are not.

Adobe will fix their Flash Player, whether they continue bi*ching about Apple or not. If for no other reason than because a broken Flash player continues to propel HTML5 to the forefront...and more HTML5 attention hurts Adobe.

As for your point about Adobe's other software: Yes, Creative Suite is great. No, Adobe wouldn't pull any of their relevant software from OS X for all the afore stated reasons. Nobody is saying Adobe Systems, Inc. is irrelevant (though HLdan was right in saying Apple could buy them out entirely with just a small portion of their CASH RESERVES!), but many feel their Adobe Flash Player IS becoming more and more irrelevant as the days go by. 2 different things. Disliking one product does not mean disliking the entire company or their other software. Duh.

Again, you shouldn't need anyone to tell you these basic things about business, Flash or anything else. I'd be happy to point you to some economics books, as I think it would help you not write ridiculous posts like that again.

 

get chrome. or install flash.

do you have a blu ray drive that is 9.5mm height? if you have you'll be rich, since you are going to be the only that has it.

Adobe is the one to blame for the lack of flash hardware acceleration. Its bad code. When a new OS comes, you have to see what you need to change in your program for it work.

Its simple as that.

I hardly see what this fuss is all about.

 

Firstly, amongst wanting to switch to a better OS, FCP was many of the reasons why professionals switched from PC to Mac, but I like how you'd like to think otherwise. You lost me claiming FCP was a clone of Premiere Pro. Yeah....Try and convince people what you're saying is true. It won't happen. Same reasons why you can't convince diehard Windows users that Office for Mac is the same as the Windows version since both are made by the same company, Microsoft.

That's nice that you gave Adobe all of that credit for publications we read and all the rest of that nonsense, then you follow up with a line that had me laughing'. "A platform is only as good as the software available for it." While that's true somewhat, others can also say "What good is the software without a supporting platform". See, unlike it being much more difficult to say, "F it", I'll switch over to Windows since Adobe is no longer with the Mac platform, it's much easier to dump Adobe and look alternatives as you so humbly put it saying Premiere Pro is the on par alternative to Final Cut....See, your argument lost twice.

 

Allow me to put it in a simple form so you don't get lost.

Adobe is more important than Apple. Adobe doesn't have a Microsoft to compete with.

Their relationship is beneficial to both, but Adobe would still thrive without Apple. I don't believe the opposite is true.

 

It's obvious you don't work professionally in the graphics, publishing, and multimedia industry.

 

What a shock, this thread has turned into an anti-apple tirade. That never happens around here.

Adobe has had Lion previews and developer builds since 2010 and to this date, the only software on my mac running Loin that is still in beta is, you guess it, Adobe Flash Player.

You can blame Apple all you want, but when every other software maker, small and big, known and obscure, have all updated their software for Lion and Adobe, with all their might and resources have not, well there's something wrong on Adobe's end I think. I'd hate to say it but frankly it almost seems as though Adobe is purposely releasing crappy Mac software and turning around and pointing fingers at Apple to gain some positive PR points against them. And god knows, they need it. And this is coming from a long time Adobe fan and user.

 

And obviously you don't either since you think it's just as easy for someone to dump FCP and use Premiere Pro along with you thinking Adobe could just easily drop Mac support because they feel butt hurt about Apple calling them out about Flash. Your business sense amazes me.

 

Out of curiosity, what changes did Microsoft make to Office for OSX Lion? What changes did Google make to Picasa? What changes did Mozilla make to Thunderbird? What changes did Blizzard make to Starcraft II and World of Warcraft?

I just couldn't find any info online, and thought you might have the details.

 

I'm not sure what your point is in asking that question but out of the products you listed I only use MSFT Office and that works fine under Lion, no need for an update.

 

Looks like Adobe has finally retracted its ridiculous statement - MR. I used to think so highly of Adobe but boy have they ever sunken to new lows recently.

 

software that was programmed correctly usually has no issues. many titles have been updated for Lion... and some have not. I have noticed Chrome is very problematic right now on Lion for one. Almost all Adobe titles are having problems, not just Flash. this happened back with 10.5 to 10.6 too... Adobe's bad programmers just never keep up.

 

Hope you put plenty of seasoning on that plate of crow you're gonna have to eat. You were saying about what Apple did? You were defending Adobe for what reason?? You're just what Adobe needs, a customer that will back them up even if they put out lies to bring down Apple.
Gotta love Adobe for retracting their statement in regards to that lie they told. LOL. Enjoy your crow.
Adobe Retracts Claim Suggesting Lion May Lack Support for Flash Hardware Acceleration - MacRumors Forums

 

Well, if the story that was the basis of this thread was false information, then the conclusions I reached based upon that false information were obviously incorrect too. Not sure what else you want me to say?

 

Finding out facts from "multiple" sources before spewing out so much Apple hate would be the right thing to do in the future. . Even the original Macrumors article stated by Adobe said it was " Possibly due to Apple disabling hardware acceleration".

The Mac forum gets a ton of unjustifiable Apple hate from the Windows forum and you were no exception. You argued me down about how Apple screwed Adobe. Even if it were true you were overly passionate showing hate for Apple, but you got owned in the end.

 

People with no other purpose than to hate never miss an opportunity, do they?

It's the hope to hate that draws them. Kinda warped, really.

 

Hmmm, r u saying chrome can run flash sites wo flash installed? I'll check that.

I'm aware of the 9.5mm size limit. However, iMac and macpro could have had bluray for years. It's not a huge deal since I carry my windows laptop too.

Cheers,

 

No opinion on what Apple actually did, but I'd be skeptical that Adobe had evidence to support its assertion even without the retraction.

If it was really the case that Apple disabled hardware acceleration for Flash for no other reason than to handicap Adobe products, and Adobe had actual evidence of that...I'd think that Adobe would be a LOT more vocal. They'd be screaming bloody murder in both the media and courts.

Instead, all we get is one vague tech note.

 

flash is built in in chrome.

I remember when several programs broke with the transition from win xp to vista, and win xp to win 7, the vista to win 7 transition was smoother, but some programs also didnt work.

I still hardly see what all this fuss is about, when the OS changes you verify what you need to be supported fully by the new OS, thats what all companies did and do. To scream like that is kind of pathetic.

Another good advice is to understand a bit how the software works, not asking you all to know how to code something complex as an office package, just to understand that no matter what terrible is the code of the OS, you can still write good programs for it. See win xp. Server 2003 was much better as always

 

Shame you two have such a siege mentality. I have a MacBook Pro and still have my PowerBook G4 around as my back-up computer. Not really the profile of an anti-Apple troll, is it? This thread was started with a news story. I assumed the truth of the story and said what I thought. Story turned out to be not true (poor showing, Adobe). I'm not sure why both of you are acting like this was a brutally-won victory through one-on-one combat, or why you're tossing Apple-hating-troll accusations at a MacBook Pro owner. Seriously, get over yourselves.

 

I support Mitlov's attitude. He questions instead of simply accepting. Moreover, he defends his position until someone logically offers a persuasive argument to the contrary.

I don't perceive any "hate". I just see a mixture of frustration and a desire to solve the problem in the most logical manner.

I don't think any diversion to the mantra that "Apple can do no wrong" should be thought of as hateful or full of spite. As well, it is not out of line to persuade someone to a differing point of view.

If it were not for Mitlov, the question posed by this thread would have never been answered, and only remained in the realm of blind acceptance to faith.

 

The people in this thread should be more interested about the outcome... not who is at fault.

Truthfully, its both companies who share the blame in almost equal shares.

Apple has not been playing nicely with Adobe especially over flash, and now Adobe has not been playing nicely in slowing its development for OSX.

I will not defend Adobe's choices and development when it comes to flash... but on the other hand Lion may have thrown the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to backwards compatibility.

The real question is whether these two will kiss and make up or whether Adobe takes its ball and goes home.

Understand that it is Apple who cannot afford to play this game of chicken.

At my company, mac users are being told that they cannot upgrade to Lion or they are unsupported. Adobe purchases aren't slowing in the least. Mine won't be the only company to follow suit.

If the "flash" war escalates, Adobe may stop developing for Mac altogether as they decide it isn't profitable. Even worse would be as a previous poster surmised... Adobe develops for 'NIX instead of MacOS.

 

hardly. As I and others have answered.

There is no goodwill regarding the business decisions of both companies. Macs are still by large considered the machines to be used for several design areas, adobe wouldnt kill its cow by doing such a thoughtless move.

Moreover can be said that the perceived aggression by both companies are to me an alert since flash was innovative sometime ago, right now, not so much, its a standard to add some flavor to your web pages, however html5 can do pretty much what flash did and more. Another great thing, its maintained by 2 entities that are connected to web development and enterprises.

Another thing as I said, its the bad code of the program not the OS. Hardware acceleration has been added rather recent, and its backwards compatible even to win xp. Its hard to believe that it wouldnt be compatible nor coded to function on a new OS.

You have to pressure the one making the program not the OS

Sincerely as I said I hardly see whats this fuss is all about, its logical.

 

I never called you a troll neither did I accuse you of not being a Mac user so you get over yourself. Go back and check out the posts and see how it all started with you coming here pounding your chest saying Apple screwed Adobe which was completely wrong. Adobe is just plain lazy and they always have been.
They retracted that story which proves you wasted a lot of breath here and it's your bad for reading only ONE article and making it the only one that mattered. Just wondering if the tables had been turned and it was in fact Apple accusing Adobe of back-dooring them, I wonder how many articles would've it have taken you to be convinced the story was true? Just sayin'.

As I mentioned earlier, gather up your facts from multiple sources before coming here and spewing Apple hate. Your posts were extreme, but thanks for trying to justify it.

 

Uh yes, Blu-ray. There are a lot of reasons why Apple didn't make it an option. First, it's proprietary and would require royalties. Apple doesn't even like paying royalties for HDMI or USB 3.0, hence the royalty free mini Displayport and now Thunderbolt. Then, there was the format competition, which no doubt weakened Blu-ray. After all, if HD-DVD bit the dust, why buy into Blu-ray, which looked very weak a couple of years back? Now there is the probability that all optical disk drives will disappear. Will Blu-ray still matter in a couple more years? Probably not.