Adobe’s Flash for iPhone Development Ends with CS5

| News

Adobe is including cross-compiler tools with its Creative Suite 5 launch that let developers convert their Flash apps into native iPhone apps. That feature looks to be short lived, however, because the company doesn’t plan on continuing to support its iPhone app builder thanks to changes in Apple’s app developer licensing agreement.

“We will still be shipping the ability to target the iPhone and iPad in Flash CS5, however, we are not currently planning any additional investments in that feature,” commented Adobe product manager Mike Chambers.

For now, it looks like Adobe will start shifting its focus away from the iPhone in favor of Google’s Android platform.

“Fortunately, the iPhone isn’t the only game in town,” Mr. Chambers said. “Android based phones have been doing well behind the success of the Motorola Droid and Nexus One, and there are a number of Android based tablets slated to be released this year. We are working closely with Google to bring both Flash Player 10.1 and Adobe AIR 2.0 to these devices, and thus far, the results have been very promising.”

From Mr. Chambers’s perspective, Apple is forcing developers into a closed and proprietary system when they develop for the iPhone — a claim that’s been made about Flash as well.

This isn’t the first time Adobe has developed Flash-related development tools only to abandon them after failing to successfully move into a market. The company’s Flash development application LiveMotion ended with a similar fate thanks to hobbled features compared to Macromedia’s own Flash development tools. At the time, Macromedia owned Flash and Adobe was hoping to compete with its own Flash and animation development tools.

Adobe’s change in plans stems from a change in Apple’s developer tools agreement that prohibits the use of cross-compilers to create iPhone native applications. While most of the media’s focus has been on Flash, other cross-compiler tools such as Unity and MonoTouch.

“While it appears that Apple may selectively enforce the terms, it is our belief that Apple will enforce those terms as they apply to content created with Flash CS5,” Mr. Chambers said. He added that developers with Flash cross-compiled titles on Apple’s App Store should expect to see their products pulled at some point in the future.

“We are at the beginning of a significant change in the industry,” he said, “and I believe that ultimately open platforms will win out over the type of closed, locked down platform that Apple is trying to create.”

Comments

Nemo

Apple’s rejoinder to Adobe’s argument that Apple’s prohibition against using cross compilers to develop apps for iPhone OS 4.0 is an attempt to lock in developers is as follows:  “Someone has it backwards—it is HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, and H.264 (all supported by the iPhone and iPad) that are open and standard, while Adobe’s Flash is closed and proprietary,” said [Apple’s] spokeswoman Trudy Miller in a statement.

Tiger

Nemo, say that fast three times. It’s a mouthful for one sentence.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

It’s interesting, because what it’s doing is getting Flash developers to actually compare the two platforms, iPhone and Android. Here’s an account from a developer who took his harp app from iPhone to Android.

The thing that really strikes me about this and other well-done Flash mobile apps is what a giant lie Apple and its ardent defenders have perpetrated about the important of “native” APIs. How would this app incorporate anything specifically “iPhoney”?

Of course, the other thing you have to confront is that the Flash app on iPhone is compiled to instructions the ARM processor executes inside the app sandbox (very close to the machine), while the same Flash app is compiled to Java byte code for Android, and still, perceived performance seems to be much better on Android.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

@Nemo, so why doesn’t Apple’s implementation of HTML5 even do <audio> tags reasonably on Mobile Safari? Here is an experiment you can do at home. Browse here in desktop Safari:

http://storyteller.realelibrary.com/iPhone

Navigate into any of the “RealeBooks”. They’ll all talk to you using the HTML5 standard <audio> tag.

Now, do the same thing on your iPhone. No sound. One of you standards geniuses, please explain that to me. And after you’re done not explaining that, please explain to me why you think Apple still has any moral high ground in this debate? It’s simply about controlling a revenue check point, that’s it.

Ethan

@Bosco the reason it doesn’t play is apple wants you to pay for it via their distribution model. The iDevices are all about the sanitized and monetized version of the internet that makes Apple $$$$. They just eat into your wallet. I use mac products but i avoid the iDevices as they are all about controlling you.

As a developer their cost of entry has been pushed to the level of only the large firms. Small devs can’t afford to take a chance of approval based on nebulas “rules” that can simply be changed with a new license release. Think about the dev who built a cool game via Unity. Their app will be pulled at some point in the next few months or their update will be denied because Apple demands them to rewrite the whole thing in 1 of 3 languages. Who knows what license ver 5 or 6 brings you. You must only use artwork in your app produced from an apple app? Any sounds used must be produced in Logic? Video only from FCP? They already hobbled any 3rd party ad platforms - at the same time releasing theirs.

Apple’s idea of the open web is not html5-it’s whatever makes them the most money. As soon as html5 slows the revenue down for some reason they will hobble it as well. It’s ALL about the App binary format that they control and make 30% off of. They are the new MicroSoft-just sleeker.

I figure that’s what you were pointing at but i figured i’d just be blunt for other readers.

ethan

?Someone has it backwards?it is HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, and H.264 (all supported by the iPhone and iPad) that are open and standard, while Adobe?s Flash is closed and proprietary,?

The problem there is Apple blocked apps produced from flash into the iPhone OS Native App format. HTML5, CSS, JavaScript, and H.264 have nothing to do with the packager Adobe produced in CS5. The packager does not produce flash/swf files, it produces a Native App binary per apples’s sdk specs. That’s why there are 100 or so of them in the App store now that work-it’s all arm bytecode (no flash player involved).

So what Apple did was to say “we will selectivley dicriminate against native app files based on how they were built not what tech is being used at runtime”. So your comment and the Apple spokesperson comment shows a total lack of understanding of the situation. We are talking about native apps and your babbling about apps running in the mobile safari app using standard web tech vs flash player running in the mobile safari. Apple’s iPhone OS Native App format is just as closed a format if Apple produces the app or the Adobe Packager generates the app.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Ethan, your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to convince the readers of MacObserver comments of basic, simple truths surrounding the lies that Apple dispenses and the fanboys perpetuate. However, you’re probably going to get blocked by the fiercest of them straight on. Some will question your ethics and morality. Others will wish serious harm to you because you dare to disagree with them and speak truth. Basically, you’re not going to escape alive, so you might as well stick around and try to burst some bubbles. This post will self-destruct in 10 seconds.

Ethan

@Bosco LOL, I’m firm in my position on Apple. Been using one since art school in 97. G3, G4 tower, white imac flat g4, then the core duo version, MBP core duo, airport base, airport express, time capsule, apple tv, 10 version of apple’s OS, etc. I’ve dug into the command line for years so the zealots are really just background noise to me. Their shrill voices are meaningless as the MS zealots are to me. 


Here is a sensible study of Apple’s stance:
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/steve-jobs-weighs-on-iphone-os-dev-controversy.ars

The reality is that with the iDevices and iPhone OS they have taken the control out of the user and at the same time increased the cost of entry for developers so that if Dev’s jump in, they are so far in they can’t leave. Once Apple has them they can dictate terms onto the dev who has to deal if they want to pay the mortgage and send their kid to college. It’s like working for the mob. I just do not think that it’s a method to long term sustainability, MS did it with their browser and ended up getting smacked down. Eventually the other platforms as a whole will generate enough potential revenue via a central code base that they will look at apple and say we are out. Not all devs of course-some love xcode and objective C and are big enough to have multiple branches of their code.

Also the market still needs to settle down and see what the split is with internet based apps (which will be the majority in my view ) vs native apps. On other platforms you’ll have 3rd options with flash in the browser or on the phone via the AIR runtime (which can host html apps via the builtin webkit engine), plus Titanium, Unity etc.

I’m using a Pre and it works fine (visually it’s really nice and synergy can’t be beat), i’ll jump to a blackberry if palm folds (hoping for the slider that was leaked). I’m looking forward to the Android tablets so there are options if you want to.

I do wonder if Apple will ever get so unhinged that they will apply this control to OS X. Sadly I’ll be selling all my hardware if they do and go over to Windows as adobe has their tools on that platform as well. I don’t love Windows but I love the Apple control even less. Hopefully they won’t.

Tiger

To no one in particular:

It’s actually quite funny how differently this story seems to play on Wall Street today than what is the discussion here.

Symbol   Price         Change   % Change
AAPL         259.22   +14.63   +5.98%
ADBE         34.92     -0.01   -0.03%

And a small sampling of current headlines like this:
Barclays Capital Raises AAPL Price Target to $315
UBS Pushes AAPL Target to $315 Per Share
Q2 Earnings Report Bumps AAPL 5.5%
Did Apple Ring In The Top Of This Market?
Apple Up on Earnings
Soaring iPhone Sales and Apple’s Stock Price: Here’s Comes $300

Not to mention in Education where the major publishers are lining up to port their products to iPad and iPhone OS 4.0 (Disclosure: I work at a University that is 70% PC, 28% Mac, and 2% Linux and have for more than 20 years)

So, my question is, why all the fascination with criticizing Apple here every single day? It’s obviously not in the cards for you. It’s not what you want. And there are plenty of alternatives for the iPhone, considering there are only 3 models of them in existence (the “prototypes in the wild” not withstanding). And there are many alternatives to the iPad.

So, if you don’t like the iPhone, buy an Android, or any other phone.
If you don’t like the iPad, buy an HP Slate, or any other netbook.

They sound like more what you want anyway. Here, read about it.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-20002773-64.html?tag=mncol;title

Unless you just enjoy coming to engage people daily. And that’s fine too. Do people ever really feel threatened enough to block somebody? I haven’t found anything anybody has said to sink to that level of discourse.

Ethan

Tiger, your right that everyone can buy what they want. If iPhone is not your thing you can buy other options as I pointed out.

To me the issue is when people distort the debate. Like when Nemo tried to use Trudy Miller’s message about open standards vs flash player as an answer to the discussion about Apple selectively blocking app binaries based on how they were compiled. Binary Apps are closed no matter how they are compiled so it has no bearing on the topic.  Which is about developer workflow control and not about html vs flash player content. That is a separate topic which he/she seems to not understand.

Nemo

Dear Bosco and Ethan:  Pointing to one minor problem with audio, if it is a problems, doesn’t overturn the sound and just reasons that Apple has for regulating how apps for its mobile devices are made.  Several writers (John Gruber, Jean-Louis Gass?e, Dan Dilger, and many others of similar expertise) who know a thing or two about writing software and computer science, dispute Bosco’s view that apps developed with Flash work just fine on Apple’s mobile devices.  Monsieur Gassee, in particular, offers a cogent explanation, based on his experience as an executive at Apple, how and why cross compilers not only make for bad applications but how, if they become ubiquitous, retard innovation on a platform.  Mr. Gassee relates how Adobe and others’ refusal to support Apple’s Cocoa framework forced Apple to do Carbon, which delayed the advancement of OS X for years.  That is an experience that Steve Jobs lived through and not one that he is liable to forget or repeat.  Mr. Gassee goes on to explain why cross compilers always fail to exploit the latest technologies of any innovative platform, because they go for a common denominator that will work on all platforms, which is great for lazy and/or cheap developers but that is awful for creating apps that fully exploit the features of an innovative OS.  Messrs. Gruber and Dilger are in accord with Mr. Gassee on both Adobe’s history with Apple and his arguments about why would be suicidal for Apple to take any course other than the one it has taken with Section 3.3.1 of SDK Agreement.

Mr. Jobs is determined not to relive that experience on the new frontier of mobile devices.  Apple will, as do the makers of game consoles, control its own fate by setting some minimal requirements for the tools used to make apps for its mobile devices so as to better ensure that those apps will function well on its mobile devices, fully exploit the advanced innovative features of those devices, and be prepared for the Apple’s future innovations and technological changes and, thus, won’t hinder Apple’s innovation.  Mr. Jobs also wants to cut Adobe down to size by developing and offering a competitive alternative to Flash, which presently has a better than 90% monopoly for video and interactive content on the web for traditional computers.  Mr. Jobs is determined that Adobe shall not replicate that monopoly on such content on mobile devices.  And it is my somewhat informed opinion that Jobs’ efforts to accomplish these things by, inter alia, prohibiting cross compilers are within the ambit of Apple’s legal rights, should Adobe wish to try the matter in federal district court. 

However, let admonish Adobe here:  Should it start an antitrust action against Apple, aside from that action most likely failing on the merits, it could quite easily lead to an inquiry into Adobe’s monopoly on video and interactive content with Flash and, particularly, whether its attempted prosecution of Apple is a perversion of antitrust law that attempts to use an antitrust lawsuit to prevent Apple from fielding new technologies to compete with Flash and AIR, which is the exact opposite of what antitrust law should do.

So Ethan and Bosco, however interesting it is to moot these points among ourselves, developers, who are going to develop for Apple’s mobile platforms, must comply with the parameters in the SDK Agreement.

Bosco, as for your technical question, supra, about why you can’t get sound from the iPhone, let me suggest that you avail yourself of the resources available to iPhone OS’s registered developers, if you still are one, and pose the question to Apple.  Though I am a reasonable bright chap, I haven’t written software in decades, so my speculations would be nothing more than that.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

@Nemo, Gruber, Gass?e, and Dilger know nothing about Computer Science, or perhaps their knowledge is at an ITT Tech level. I consider JLG a bit of a hero, and I appreciate his recent Monday Memo contribution. I’m a bit disappointed with blaming Adobe for Apple’s problems a decade ago though. Adobe had to be conservative. And if you simply do the scheduling math between Adobe’s historical release cycles (18 - 24 months) and Apple’s historical game-changing platform switches over the last decade (Carbon, Cocoa, Intel, 64-bit), you can account for all the “delays”. Furthermore, Adobe finally achieved long demanded (and part of JLG’s post-hoc criticism) platform feature parity last year and now the complaint is that cross-platform software is lowest common denominator. The logic of the complaint is unsound. And no, Adobe is not going to sue. They are going to look to early 90s history and go with the more open systems, which means everything that isn’t Apple right now. And by 2012, Apple will ask Adobe to port Flash to mobile devices and Adobe will take its time to do it right.

As for my particular example. That’s a concrete example of how Apple leadership is just disingenuous on this HTML5 issue. Of course I have notified the proper channels at Apple. The reply has been that audio is played modally by Quicktime like video is, not in the context of the web page itself. They did this by design. But they say that HTML5 can be a replacement for Flash with its “canvas” object. It only solves half the problem of Flash apps, if at all, on iPhone. That’s the point. If you choose to believe Apple is sincere in any engineering sense when confronted with evidence like that to the contrary, well, it’s your loss.

As Ethan said, Apple’s approach to this is nothing more that wanting to control a toll booth to monetize customers who already bought Apple products. That’s not bad in itself. Being disingenuous about it is bad. Most people might or might not be offended with the action itself. Most people would be offended about being lied to to justify it.

Ultimately, Apple’s chokepoint will crush itself from the economics of software development. As Ethan said, the big brands can bear the costs. The innovative high-risk stuff, however, will be developed at much lower costs for other platforms first, with iPhone as an afterthought. It’s unfortunate that most of Apple’s customers will ultimately suffer. It is satisfying though, that Apple’s ardent defenders will probably suffer more.

Ethan

Nemo, I point you back to the ars article I linked to.

Simply put, forcing developers to write in objective C, C or C++  does not mean that the developer will use advanced api’s as Apple rolls them out. They can still create crappy software with blessed languages and tooling, or choose not to use new API’s. Based on what I see on the app store there is plenty of poorly coded apps already. So your and others view that Apple is trying to control quality rings hallow at best.

Now for all I know Apple may rollout an sdk requirement to review an app’s codebase and tell the developer where he can improve the app or use the new APi’s etc. If they do I’m sure the developers will be trilled. Without that level of control-this current limitation makes no sense what so ever.

Since you value high profile developers, here:
http://37signals.com/svn/posts/2273-five-rational-arguments-against-apples-331-policy

You talk about apple offering up an alternative to Flash, show me where it is. As an elearning developer that must support multiple OS’s and browsers show me the tooling to build cost effective advanced animations, simulations, with audio, video and 3d? canvas, svg, js? Not finished as a spec, not supported on enough browsers, not implemeted the same on those browsers. I’m sure Jobs will just come out and say we don’t need any of that (more likely he’d say just put it in a big ass linear video using FCP), though my customers would disagree with that. No this is much more about making sure that all content is monetized through their channels to get their 30% and the best way to do that is to attack the tech that side steps it.

The developers who choose to dive in must be prepared for the power Apple will wield over them since they had to build a whole code base for one platform. Be prepared for unexpected costs when Apple says jump.  “Oh you used those APi’s for your app, well we removed them for these so you’ll need to add 40% more hours to your next dev cycle. Didn’t plan on that? Tough.” Cocoa/carbon is a perfect example-apple took it on the chin in that one, now they will make all the developers take it on the chin instead. Not all developers have the budget of an EA Sports. When Jobs says cross compilers hurt the platform just remember as a developer he’s really saying cross compilers hurt Apple’s bank account. Apple couldn’t care less about what developers want.

Your right: Developers must follow those SDK rules as it’s Apple’s walled garden. It’s a vertical monopoly of hardware, software, developer controls, content distribution controls, and content consumption controls. They need to get more market share but once they do the feds will come knocking, EU probably sooner.

And again I state that your first comment is pointless when we talk about the pros/cons of selective approval of Native App binaries (topic of Mike Chambers post) as they have nothing to do with the web tech that quote was speaking about.

Ethan

Gruber did work for bare bones and does have a degree in computer science. My stance is i just don’t agree with him on the whole cross compiling equals lazy, low quality etc. Preprocessing, abstractions, frameworks, cross compiling has been around forever and help reduce redundant code writing. Plenty of solid high quality apps have been built from those techniques for many OS’s for many years.

I wish Jobs would listen to himself:
“The third alternative is to abolish DRMs entirely. Imagine a world where every online store sells DRM-free music encoded in open licensable formats. In such a world, any player can play music purchased from any store, and any store can sell music which is playable on all players. This is clearly the best alternative for consumers, and Apple would embrace it in a heartbeat. If the big four music companies would license Apple their music without the requirement that it be protected with a DRM, we would switch to selling only DRM-free music on our iTunes store. Every iPod ever made will play this DRM-free music.”

That’s from his drm letter a couple years back. I guess he now feels that consumers are not better off with choice. No they are better off with apple choosing for them what apps are okay.

iBill

Considering Adobe’s history of support for their products on Apple’s platforms, I can’t blame Steve Jobs at all for not wanting to see Adobe gain traction in software development tools for iPhone OS. Apple’s actions in this regard make perfect sense based on what’s best for Apple.

burrito

lol.. you guys are the equivalent of “that guy” at almost any party who has to start a socio-political discussion when everyone’s on their fifth beer.

if posting on an apple fansite about how much you hate apple, and then complaining about being victimized floats your boat, well that’s great.. but you’ll have about as much luck as you would walking into a club in compton and going all bill o’reilly, complaining about all the rap music.

if you’re looking for a fight, i guess that’s one thing.. but you’re not converting any mactards, just making them think you’re a former debate student who can’t let high school go.

MacGnome

People can gripe all they want about Apple and Steve’s iron control grip.
You want to play with Apple’s toys, you must accept Steve’s rules. You want to make money on Steve’s toys, you have to accept his rules. If you can’t accept Steve’s rules, there are other great products in the market that you can develop for and make money.

When Steve is no longer the “king of handheld media developers,” then he will decide to compromise and start begging developers. But for now he is king and he will act like a king.

Free market works wonders on arrogance.

Ethan

sigh, @burrito. Please point to where I said I hated Apple.

I just disagree with the control they use on the iPhone OS platform. The problem is your equating my criticisms with hate. I used to do this back in college when I was a Mac user arguing with Windows user. As you get older and mature you realize how illogical that train of thought is. Everyone has the OS they want to use-I use OS X. My whole point is that users/developers should fully be aware of the limits that Apple puts on you in the iPhone OS and not gloss over them.

Who knows maybe a potential buyer googles about this and finds this discussion. Then they’ll go in with their eyes wide open.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Ethan, some people just can’t stand criticism of their religious beliefs or dissent within the ranks. One thing I can tell you is that there are far more people who depend on both Apple and Adobe for their livelihood than Mac fanbots who idolize King Steve. These customers are conflicted. On the one hand, their hardware supplier says their software supplier is lazy and incompetent. On the other hand, their software supplier just delivered a way for them to get their content onto the iPhone. And there are numerous examples of really nice apps compiled from Flash to iPhone, some in the App Store right now. On yet another hand, their hardware supplier will be banning these apps and other apps made the same way. There are a few characters here who fail to consider non-obvious downsides of Apple’s behavior. I think the best analog is Steeler fans who hope Byron Leftwich and Charlie Batch can hold them over until Almighty Ben returns from his innocent bathroom sexcapade suspension.

Ethan

As a Pats fan I shouldn’t pass judgement on the Steelers.

Snrub

Wow, Bosco, you post many gripes about fanboys but if anyone dissents with you they’re just pigeon holed as zealots. Apparently the fanboys aren’t the only ones who can’t stand critisism or dissent of their opinion.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

You obviously haven’t read me Snrub. Now you’vee pigeonholed yourself with burrito and MacGnome for not wanting to discuss/debate the issues, but just wanting to wage personal attacks. Whatever. See you in church.

Snrub

Been reading you for years. You are guilty of the very same zealotry you accuse the fanboys of, to bad you can’t see you have gotten just as bad as the fanboys you so don’t like. BTW, there was no personal attack made upon you, but obviously anyone who doesn’t agree with you is pigeonholed as “making personal attacks”.

In regards to discussing the issues online. I read everyone’s opinions and make up my own mind. But I’m not wasting my time trying to convince people of that my opinion is correct.  I don’t have a problem with people disagreeing with me.

Enjoy your church. Whatever.

burrito

@ethan

okay, you’re missing my point. you’re doing the debate-club-thing again. over use of the word “hate”, which wasn’t even the primary point.

another analogy.. it’s like going on a green day forum and trying to convince their fans that their music is not high art. wrong venue, people simply don’t give a f-.. and you can’t expect masters-thesis-level arguments, either.

full disclosure, i don’t 100% agree with apple, but i do really like them. however if i’m looking for discussion over tech philosophy, i don’t come to an apple fansite to do it. go to ars technica or something.. you come to a fansite to simply worship whatever it is you enjoy. there’s nothing wrong with that.

Ethan

I never planned on changing minds of the flock. I can’t imagine that any hard core macObserver readers don’t already own an ipod,iphoneand ipad anyways. Just making sure that there is a counterpoint (in Adobe’s defense) in the discussion for others to read who wander through. Like I said maybe someone comes along a goes hmmm “maybe I should think about this more before I hitch my wagon to apple’s products.”

I thought Bosco and I were having a nice conversation. I’m sorry the master level debate (which this is not) bothers you so much on this site, can’t really help you with that.

Nookster

Ethan and Bosco, I appreciate both your views.

Bearing in mind that this site is primarily to cover news and opinion, if people like yourselves didn’t grace us with yours, this place would suffer for it.

WIls

I don’t know how to make iphone apps, and I don’t want to take a lot of time to learn it.

I know how to make Flash and ActionScript based programs, though. I love working with Flash because I can get great results even from small effort input. CS5 has the intention to make that even easier than before with Flash Catalyst and all the interaction b/w the applications. With the ability to convert Flash into iphone apps, the possibility seemed endless.

Until I found out Apple won’t let it happen.

Flash would have been a easy to use tool for people to make apps with. A Flash user like myself would have gained entry to iphone apps development, which is now denied me.

And for what? Because Apple made a new stance against it. It isn’t because it is undoable. The tech is out there, been used, apps made, using the packager in CS5.

Some say it is because Apple wants to control the gate for money. Some say it is because it provides a higher quality bar. Reality is it doesnt matter.

Like some already said, there can still be crappily coded apps under Apple’s restrictions. And there are still stupid unimaginative apps in the app store that are properly coded. What is this quality control and does it really work in practice? I don’t think so.

I for 1 perfer the freedom to develop, the ease of development, and giving more people access to developing. Flash and stuff like unity made it possible.

Flash guys are still going to be making Flash stuff. It just means we can’t get them onto iphones. May be some stuff will suck, but some of us Flash guys will probably make something brilliant and cool. And they’ll not be on iphone apps because Apple said no.

Good thing though we can do it for other platforms. The Flash stuff will make it to the web and to apps on other mobile devices.

Bad thing is that we need to wait for 1 of those platforms, perhaps Android, to compete with iphone. And for their app store to evolve beyond its current limited state.

Wils

All I’m saying is, what a wasted opprotunity this is.

And the sad part is I don’t think this is even helpful to Apple. They might achieve even wider dominance than now if they allowed Flash and unity to continue working. The logic is this:

People make their stuff, they make it to iphone apps to sell because that is where the money is. iphone will have everything: the traditionally developed apps and these new crossplatform apps. Everything. Android will never be able to compete in terms of the number of apps available.

So if a rational person is getting a new smart phone and deciding b/w iphone and android phones, it is hard to turn away from iphone since it has basically everything Android has to offer, and then a hell of a lot more on top of that.

Right now, Apple is forcing people like me to make Android apps. I would have perfered to make iphone stuff because of money, but I can’t. So I’ll have to settle for Android and hope it catches on, and hope Google quickly evolve its sucky app store, where I can’t sell apps from Canada and only a select number of countries can buy apps anyway.

I might be a bit of a wait but I think Android will catch on. Because this situation reminds me of Apple computers vs IBM compatibles. Let’s face is, MAC was superior hardware and the OS was superior to Windows. Hell, Windows was just a cheap knock off. Apple was superior in every way. All except freedom. IBM compatible PC’s won.

This is history repeating itself. Apple’s iPhone what started it all, and is superior in almost every way. Other companies are just playing catch up. It didn’t stop PC’s from winning though.

To me, iPod was never good. I always found it restrictive and never liked it. It was hardly a superior experience to run of the mill mp3 players. The rise of iPod and everything Mac comes down to culture. Apple is extremely successful in creating a culture that everyone wants to be a part of. They materialized cool; iStuff is basically cool in matter form. And everyone wanted a piece of that. And everyone got a piece of that. And due to that, apps are made for it because it has such a large user base.

But none of it is rational. It wasn’t actually better; not by that much anyway to make it so far ahead of competition and create such market dominance. It was all because of culture and trend.

And because it is mostly culture, we have fanboy armies defending it. Not limited to this iphone issue, but since the beginning of Mac. Mac is an identity and thus people love it with a passion and defend it to death.

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Hey Wils, Do yourself a favor and pick up a Nexus One to replace your iPhone. You sound like a smart guy. I’m sure you can get over the minimal (re)learning curve. What you’ll discover is a phone you’ll just love. The iPhone feels stale and childish by comparison after a week with Nexus One.

Ethan

I also hear that the htc incredible is really quite good. Has newer multi touch sensors and has good specs with storage etc. If your looking for a test phone that would be good. Given if your wanting to support older android phones then a hero from sprint might be good as your low end tester too.

dominic

I wonder how this would affect the usability of the iPhone. How big is the market for Android-based phones anyway? Is that market comparable to the iPhone market? We are commercial mortgage lenders by the way.

Log-in to comment