Adobe to sue Apple 'within weeks,' says report

Adobe intends to sue Apple over the recent SDK change that bans iPhone and iPad applications translated from languages Steve Jobs doesn't like, according to a report citing sources close to Adobe. IT World reports that Adobe will sue Apple "within a few weeks," after the Jobsian cult not only barred native Flash from the …

[Anonymous Coward]

Adobe's faux pas

Adobe likes to say that 96% of all computers in the US have Flash installed. What it doesn’t say is that more than 60% of all smartphone web traffic, and 96% of all “Mobile Internet Device” (that’s a euphemism for “iPod touch”) traffic doesn’t run Flash at all.

Additionally, it’s not as if Adobe had created a great mobile Flash platform and Apple stomped all over it to be mean. Adobe didn’t have a mobile version of Flash that could even play Flash videos until Flash Lite 3 appeared, well after the release of the iPhone. Even then, that product couldn’t run most of the Flash content created for desktop PCs.

Adobe didn’t pass that hurdle until last summer, when it introduced an early version of Flash Player 10 for Android. But that version still doesn’t play back everything the PC version does. The latest 10.1 version for mobiles is supposed to do better, but it’s still in demo stages and requires a Cortex A8 class processor, meaning it only runs on Android or webOS devices from the last several months.

If Apple supported this, it could only run on the iPhone 3GS. So Adobe’s mobile strategy is actually just now emerging. Apple has been selling the iPhone for three full years now. There was no suitable version of Flash to sell, so Apple made its own plans.

To hear from the tech media people who feed from the Adobe propaganda machine like ducks being force fed for foie gras, you’d think Adobe has had a real mobile strategy all this time and Apple has just been playing the role of a conniving obstructionist.

The truth is that it’s Adobe’s fault there’s no Flash on the majority of mobiles, because the company was completely happy just misleading the world of pundits while talking instead of doing. Well it’s not 2007 anymore, it’s 2010, and that’s three years of work that everyone else has put into HTML5.

Adobe hasn’t done anything to earn the rights to cram the Internet back into the Flash box it likes to sit upon as it collects taxes from those creating content that only plays back via Adobe’s own players. Adobe never been on top of things in the mobile world, and the desktop version is not exactly doing all that much anymore either. As companies shift their resources from everything Flash to HTML5, Adobe’s desktop monopoly over interactive content will rapidly erode. It’s not Apple’s fault that’s happening, it’s Adobe’s. - source - Daniel Eran Dilger

[Anonymous Coward]

....tosh

>Adobe likes to say that 96% of all computers in the US have Flash installed.

They like to say 98% since that's the current figure - also while you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise due to the constant hype, even the Apple loving IDC survey of a couple of months back only put Apple as having 25% of the smartphone market. Less that 10% of iPod owners use the Web browser once a month...

Support for Flash player on tiny screens on which the vast majority do very little and very different browsing is largely irrelevant - dictating the software which developers can or cannot use to build apps is a different matter. I'd rather Adobe used their money porting CS to Linux - if they really care about developer freedom they will, but a legal case will at least inform Joe consumers.

The idea that Adobe will lose its position as a result of HTML5 is laughable - most iAds will be written in CS5 and once HTML5 browser support is mainstream in a year or maybe two, ie when MS decide its time and force the IE upgrades through, we'll mostly be bashing it out with CS6.

Whatever happens with HTML5 there's a mass of great Flash online which isn't going anywhere - hop down to the Apple's site and look at the list of 'iPad Ready' websites - sums up the actual user experience to expect nicely - two tiers, like the early days of Apple Web browsing, kid yourself you're on the better tier if you like.

[Ian Davies]

Reading better helps comprehension

"even the Apple loving IDC survey of a couple of months back only put Apple as having 25% of the smartphone market"

The comment didn't mention marketshare, it was talking about share of traffic i.e. how much iPhone/iPod owners make use of internet access. On that metric, iPhone users are bigger than everyone else combined.

[Anonymous Coward]

Presumably the much quoted AdMob stats...

...which measure ad impressions including those within applications, not actual traffic. Data by carrier and web logs tell a different story altogether. Certainly the case that iPhone is shaping up to be the best platform for fans of advertising though.

[_mark]

That's a Load of Fanboy BS

all you anti flash people are probably the most boring folks ever.. so willing to take the web back to the dark ages. pathetic. the funny thing is, no one complained about flash before iJobs announced it not being on his silly little restricted products.. I know what’s coming next so here:

HTML5 better than Flash is a myth folks.. http://vimeo.com/10553088

If you watch towads the end of the video on the Android HTML5 animation framerate is like 3 – 12 Frames Per Second. Pathetic. While Flash 10.1 is 28-30 FPS and looks pretty normal. I benchmarked HTML5/JS VS. FLASH/AS animations myself using an animated cloth simulations and came up with very similar results about 2 months ago.. HTML5 and Javascript is worse than Flash and Actionscript in chewing up CPU AND MEMORY!! It’s what I suspected. HTML5/JS beats flash only when the animated particles / spites or physics crunching is VERY LITE.. when it is intense (lots of stuff going on at once) Flash is FAR SUPERIOR!!! It’s a fact.

[wtfF0nzie]

Lethal weapon

Murtaugh: "Get that trash off my lawn!"

[F1reman]

Wouldn't any real developer...

...write in the native code rather than use a GUI or higher level language to do it for them?

[Annihilator]

Native code

Native to what? The processor? Cos I'm pretty sure the majority of people gave up on assembler a while ago and relies on compilers now...

[Jon Double Nice]

And using vi

but only if they're a really real developer

[sabroni]

Real developer?

pompous much? Real developers use whichever tool satisfies all the requirements and gets the job done quickest. When you say "native code" are you advocating everyone writing in assembler?

[Mr Brush]

LOL

Where's my popcorn?

[Anonymous Coward]

Way to go Apple!

I think it's great Apple is forcing vendors to use standard open source / cross platform languages. The Java crap for example is memory and CPU intensive. Mobile devices should be lean and fast so C, C++ type stuff is a great way to go.

[Anonymous Coward]

No way!

I once used a C++ app that leaked memory, so it's clearly not a viable language for Job's Utopia of never-crashing software. As for C?! How many crap programs have been written in that old warhorse? Clearly not suitable.

In fact, only developers who have solved the halting problem will be allowed to program for iThings in the future.

[Chemist]

Re : No way!

Funny, the Linux kernel is almost entirely C - I've not had one crash since about 1997.

Maybe it's the quality of the programming ?

[Bod]

Quality

"Maybe it's the quality of the programming ?"

That is exactly what it is. There are virtually no guards against sloppy programming in C and they can and frequently do crash and leak memory a hell of a lot. A kernel written in C has to be absolutely perfect quality.

C++ is the same, but if you don't use the inherited underlying C way of allocating memory, limit the direct use of pointers, and use libraries like STL instead of trying to re-invent the wheel (badly) then sloppy developers can at least avoid some of the mistakes. Java and C# take it to another level so developers don't have to be so concerned about how the compiler and target platform works at the memory and pointer level and just crack on with developing apps. Yes it protects sloppy developers, but also for those who aren't sloppy it allows for increased productivity whilst not sacrificing quality (and a note to those who scoff at such languages, no you can't just ignore object and resource disposal. It's still an issue, and in fact those who come from a C/C++ background understand it more and can make more reliable and efficient Java/C# apps).

They all have their place though. I'd fully trust a kernel written in C, if it's developed by the likes of Torvalds and peer reviewed by the best. I wouldn't trust an end-user application written in C by a fresh graduate out of Bangalore who did a business degree and is trying to get into IT, but I'd be happier at least if those apps are being churned out in a high level language that translates into safe code. The app itself might be rubbish but at least it's not going to kill the device.

[Anonymous Coward]

waaa

this catfight gets more comical by the day.

hopefully adobe will be told to piss off and it'll be another nail in the coffin of proprietary plugins on the web.

[Bod]

Proprietary

"it'll be another nail in the coffin of proprietary plugins on the web."

So we can say goodbye to QuickTime then too. ;)

[Player_16]

QuickTime runs mostly programs...

...rarely ads on the net.

[Chas]

WTF??

And how is any different to game developers working on Xbox, Wii or PS3 titles? They have to use the prescribed tools or they don't get to play.

Flash is a craptastic pile of ordure, particularly on the Mac where it regularly maxes out the CPUs and more often than not crashes the browser. Sight-disadvantaged? You're out of luck with Flash. In any case Adobe still haven't delivered a mobile version of Flash that works as the desktop version does.

It was mainly Adobe's intransigence that forced Apple to develop Carbon. Even then, Adobe made Mac users play second fiddle to Windows for years and charged a fortune for buggy products. And you can't even buy PS or Dreamweaver without having to buy practically the whole kaboodle - how's that for ignoring the needs of the user.

They cannot claim monopoly abuse since Apple have no monopoly in mobiles. Some may deride Jobs for being a power-mad martinet but it's that tight rein on the system that has made the iPhone et al such a phenomenon. If what Apple has done serves to make a better platform, then I'm all for it, although Apple could mitigate the furore by allowing certain libraries for physics engines and the like that are available from other sources to be used.

Payback's a bitch, ain't it Adobe?

=:~)

[Anonymous Coward]

Flash on the Mac

"Mac where it regularly maxes out the CPUs and more often than not crashes the browser"

Just about an hour ago I had to shut down flash - it was running at 118% of CPU (using both of the cores) and the lap top was getting very hot.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Games devs

Don't have to put up with "ye, you can use this... Na. I was only kidding! Oh you spent $$$? Haha. Should have read the T&Cs"

[dave 46]

Anti competitive again

Apple wants application lock in, they do not want people using frameworks that allow them to easily re-compile for other platforms (such as android, windows mobile or whatever Nokia is doing this week).

If it's hard to move to new platforms developers will be less likely to do it, the apps remains only on iPhone and the paying customers don't get tempted away.

Anyone who thinks this is defending slow apps that don't take full advantage of your iPhone's hardware is just being numb.

[Ian Davies]

Yeah...

"Apple wants application lock in"

whereas Adobe just wants us all to have our own unicorn and be nice to each other, right?

"Anyone who thinks this is defending slow apps that don't take full advantage of your iPhone's hardware is just being numb."

Anyone who thinks that cross-compilers like Adobe's Flash packager for iPhone are going to do anything - ANYTHING - other than commoditize the hardware and native feature sets of different phones into a shallow, lowest common denominator pool of supported features, is being galactically disingenuous.

[Giles Jones]

Don't talk wet

Application lock in? Since when has writing native code using the proper APIs been "lock in".

Christ, that makes any OS that provides an API a platform to lock in people. I don't see Microsoft pushing the "posix" API.

I don't see Microsoft helping the world run Win32 API applications on Linux, OSX and Unix. In fact, they tried to subvert and kill off the best attempt at "write once, run anywhere", i.e. Java.

Of course Apple doesn't want people porting substandard trash from Android to Windows to iPhone. Android's development platform is vastly different to the iPhone and different to Windows Mobile.

WinMo is C++, Android is Java based and iPhone is Objective C.

All have completely different APIs. Anyone writing an application to run on all would have to use a very high level language. This would create very suboptimal code, bloat, slow, buggy, just shit! and what's more the developer would still ask for a couple of quid for the privilege.

[Rattus Rattus]

re: Apple doesn't want people porting substandard trash

Of course they don't, the app store is drowning in enough of that already!

[magnetik]

well ...

If you're gonna download a lame fart app you at least want it to run at a decent speed, right?

[Paul E]

Where do you draw the line then?

"...write in the native code rather than use a GUI or higher level language to do it for them?"

Yes lets all start writing assembler shall we???

[Michael]

sounds good to me

jmp 0x00

[JeffShortland]

And not even any fanbois.....

This is little more than one company bitching that some other company wont let it play in it's tree house. It's not monopolistic, it's not vindictive, It's just preference.

Apple sure as hell isn't stopping you from buying another phone, one that uses flash.. but really, what are you missing by not using it? some shopping ads and Hulu. Whoop de do.

I'm not here to side with Apple because I like the iPhone, just because Adobe is crying over the club house.

[StooMonster]

Unity 3D iPhone ... don't die!

Hoping that Unity will live through this, even though it allows programmers to code in C#

Apple have gone mad, here's a Google Docs spreadsheet of some of the best-selling software on App Store and which middle-ware was used to create it https://spreadsheets.google.com/lv?key=0ApLAS6djiVwydGhJMmh1YjYwb0QzUDl6dEVzV1hwVnc&f=0 Even Tap Tap Revenue that Steve Jobs demoed running in multi-tasking uses the Lua programming language.

Also, it looks like measurement and analytic services other than Apple's will be blocked too. New York Times ran an article that discusses Flurry (a mobile analytics company, their products can tell developers how long sections of their game take to complete or pages take to read etc.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/technology/companies/13apple.html?scp=1&sq=%22apple+is+tightening%22&st=nyt

[Steen Hive]

Unity 3d

I hear yah. Unity - a great little, innovative company with an outstanding product - they've just unveiled iPad support too, and that jackbooted thug Jobs is pulling the rug from under their feet as we speak.

This is why monopolies and monopolistic control of any market hurt, all you apologists. And for the last fucking time - the market isn't phones, the market is software for the iPhone.

[Sean Timarco Baggaley]

Unity requires XCode for iPhone builds.

So it's *probably* safe.

Even so, anyone who puts all their business eggs in one platform basket is doing it wrong.

Also, for the last fucking time, the market isn't software for the iPhone. The iPhone is popular, but that's only because Apple's competitors have been so incredibly shit. Don't blame Apple for taking advantage of the faults of their competitors.

[Steen Hive]

Unity requires.

The mono runtime too. Oops.

Of course the market is iPhone software, you know like there is a market for windows software, mac software, android software? That's what these people are jumping through hoops to try and compete in, and quite often having their hard work and great products nullified by dictat.

"You are free to develop and/or buy (insert other platform of choice here)" has bugger-all to do with this. Apple exerts 100% monopoly control on this market, no matter how significant or not you think that market is.

[Anonymous Coward]

re: Unity requires.

Sorry, but you are very, *very* wrong. It doesn't *actually* work like that. It's a problem if Apple don't allow others to develop software for *other* platforms, but they do. Saying that you can only use ANSI C based languages (excluding C#) and HTML/CSS/JavaScript isn't making people jump through hoops! If you want to compete in the iPhone app market, then these are the requirements, it *is* as simple as that. Much like the IOC require that all athletes not take performance enhancing drugs! "It's not fair! I don't know those languages!" isn't a valid argument against the policy! Working hard isn't a reason to relent on this either! Hey, that's not Apples fault if these 'hard-working' (go and read ReWork) people have backed the wrong horse! That's business. As it stands, there are other platforms, and as Sean Timarco Baggaley eloquently pointed out "...Apple's competitors have been so incredibly shit." So this is an opportunity for those spurned developers to take action and reverse this--that'd be a much more effective "fuck you, Apple" that all this moralising and idealising! If you don't like, do something about it! Adobe suing just goes to prove Jobs right, they *are* lazy...

Your claims of monopoly abuse are wrong for the very simple reason that there are competitors; the market *isn't* iPhone software. If that were true, it could be argued that Apple have a case against Corel, Autodesk and to lesser extent Microsoft, to name three obvious companies, for *not*, or stopping, writing software for the Mac platform--which is just silly.

[Steen Hive]

Deliberate conflation

No,no and NO!

"Your claims of monopoly abuse are wrong for the very simple reason that there are competitors; the market *isn't* iPhone software. If that were true, it could be argued that Apple have a case against Corel, Autodesk and to lesser extent Microsoft, to name three obvious companies, for *not*, or stopping, writing software for the Mac platform--which is just silly."

These companies ( Adobe, Unity, Opera etc etc ) don't make phones, don't make phone platforms, but you are mistakenly or disingenuously trying to conflate *their* market with Apple's market.

You also seem to have difficulty conceptualising the market in desktop software - in fact you have it arse-backwards - if Adobe refuse to code for MacOS because they think Jobs is a prick, it is *not* monopoly abuse, but if Jobs decides to block Creative Suite because he has a bad haemorrhoid day, it certainly IS. Jobs is engaging in anti-competitive behaviour in that case, Adobe is not.

[Player_16]

Re: Deliberate conflation.

OK. Apple does have 100% on the App market -the Apple App market. You cannot go out and buy apps from someplace else -unless jail-broken. Apple Apps runs on ONE platform so it cannot be a m-o-n-o-p-o-l-y on the interweb. If the App store disappeared tomorrow, the interweb will keep going without a blink. Adobe makes plug-ins for the interweb market -12 y.o. plug-in's. Adobe controls THAT market with their plug-in's. Adobe could be considered a monopoly but only if you're ball-&-chained to running that plug-in in which case, you are not. If Adobe's plug-in's malfunctioned tomorrow, the interweb will keep going without a blink (minus the ads, games, some web programs and YouTube and video pr0n). Adobe freely admits it gives the responsibility of Flash upkeep to the platform (Linux, Apple, MS, Android, etc). If it does not run correctly, it's the platforms fault - that's stupid.

"...if Adobe refuse to code for MacOS because they think Jobs is a prick, it is *not* monopoly abuse..."

Adobe has to code (plug-in) for Apple for Adobe is freely displaying their products on the web (Flash) to be freely accessed by all. It is up to (your example) Apple to grant or deny the tools needed for access: Apple denied. If Adobe actually refused the plug-in outright over the MacOS for those personal reasons, THAT would be monopoly(?) abuse because Adobe's plug-in would work on those other platforms but Apple's and Adobe would be breaking the laws of fair-trade.

"…but if Jobs decides to block Creative Suite because he has a bad haemorrhoid day, it certainly IS."

No! Creative Suite is a program not a interweb-only program. He does not have to permit that program on his platform but he would be interfering in the livelihood of others that use the program on a regular bases on HIS product. So he better have a real good reason for doing so otherwise it would be anti-competitive behaviour NOT monopoly abuse due to the interweb does not depend on Apple products.

[Kevin McMurtrie]

Popcorn

Apple could simply have power drain specifications to reject inefficient apps. Bad code comes in all forms so the coding language restrictions do a poor job of hiding Steve's raging ego. There are also certain tasks where JIT-compiled JavaScript, Java, Perl, etc. can run very efficiently.

Developers using Flash rarely have intentions of efficiency. It's too often a short-cut language for rapid offshore development. Adobe can run a big angry lawsuit only to find all of their apps being rejected again on technical grounds. It's all going to be amusing.

[Phil Rigby]

Adobe need to understand...

It's APPLE's platform. They can do what they want as far as rules go on who can run what. It's their device, their OS. Period. If they want to stop any flash stuff, they can. If Adobe want to boycott it or other idiots like that "go screw yourself" guy, well there's plenty of other people who'll develop for it. Just look at the amount of apps available.

If people like EA Games can put Need For Speed on there without violating SDK T&Cs, I don't see why people are bitching about closed platform. And the poster who mentioned about Xbox/PS3 etc coding is exactly right - you try building an Xbox game without Microsoft's approval and toolkit and you see what happens to it.

Adobe just need to fook off.

[Captain Save-a-ho]

What's good for the goose...

Not that I believe this will happen, but it's possible that Adobe will play tit-for-tat and decide that they can't support all Apple products in general, pulling support of Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.

I hope and pray that's the next step in the escalating hostilities between both sides. Who needs reality TV when you have reality itself?!?

[Steen Hive]

Gander

"pulling support of Photoshop, Illustrator, etc."

One can but dream! Much as I love using and working on MacOS, I would pay good money to see the look on the supercilious little cock's face if they pulled that one out of the hat!

[Player_16]

Pulled.

'...little cock's ... pulled that one out ... hat!'

I'm struggling with my imagination. Did you realise what you wrote?

[Eddy Ito]

Re: What's good for the goose

Oh please, oh please let me have a front row seat for a dueling handbags at dawn bitch slap between Apple and Adobe.

[Dave 142]

money

And do themselves out of the enormous amounts of money they make selling these products? Adobe may not like what Apple are doing, but they like money a whole lot more.

[Bod]

Their platform

So Apple can do whatever they want with their device, their platform and say exactly what can and cannot run on it.

Yet Microsoft cannot do the same with theirs for fear of being hauled through the courts on anti-trust competition cases.

[Inachu]

This is how I wish things would be played out.

I wish adobe would go ahead and play but apples rules.

Make flash per the specs apple sets forth and let us at least see flash in some way or another.

Then while we have this crippled flash then Adobe takes apple to court then wins then Adobe releases a better version that will work with all websites.

Let the choice to use flash be on the shoulder of the consumer and not the corporation.

[David Kelly 2]

Re: This is how I wish things would be played out.

> Let the choice to use flash be on the shoulder of the consumer and not the corporation.

Already is. If the consumer wants FLASH then don't buy iPhone, iPod, or iPad. Steve Jobs should be congratulated for standing his ground.

I rarely see FLASH used productively. Even at The Register its primary use is for animated advertisements. Click2Flash has greatly improved my web browsing experience.

[Anonymous Coward]

I really am fascinated to see what grounds there are

for anyone to build a case for suing Apple. "Taking away the lawn we wanted to park our tanks on without asking"?

The only group who are going to win from this farrago are the lawyers.

[John Savard]

Only One Basis

If Adobe does sue, as rumored, I think there would be only one basis on which they could do so: antitrust law.

[Ivan Headache]

You mean

Apple doesn't trust adobe to run flash properly?

I can't see that there's anything they can sue about.

[A Non e-mouse]

Yes & No

I can see Apple's point in not including/allowing flash, but I think the SDK license change is a step too far.

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell them to stick it

If the developers' T&Cs are so horrible, why doesn't *everyone* stick two fingers up and simply not write any apps. Sales will plummet and the T&Cs will quickly change.

Can no one else see how developers enslave themselves and empower platform owners when they moan so vocally yet still jump through hoops to release their apps. the iPhone is only popular because it's perceived there's an app for everything. No apps, no iPhone.

[R Cox]

What mobile phone has full Flash?

IMHO, this lawsuit indicates the lack of relevance of Flash i the mobile marketplace. It seems to be clear that Adobe believes that there is a good chance that Flash is going to lose it's place as one of a few de facto web standards, and the only way to save it is to force Apple to support it on the iPhone. After all, we have yet to see Flash on the Blackberry even though it has been rumored for a couple years and allegedly in real development for a year. Likewise MS Kin, the phone that would save the MS phone platform, does not come with flash. Android 2.1 has flash, as well as Palm. But neither are these are yet taking the market by storm. So I guess instead of getting a real mobile strategy, they will sue Apple into doing it for them.

[Julian Cox]

Let's forget this is about Apple iPhone for a second...

... and lets say this was a company that developed for arguments sake an Operating System that ran on, lets call it, Personal Desktop devices.

Let's now assume they said "the only way you can buy software through our website where we take a cut of everything".

Let's now say they mandated "only applications developed through our .TEN APIs will be allowed to be submitted to our site. Sorry Sun/Java... sorry all those innovative people who've invested time and effort into alternative technologies... f##k innovation it's our OS - we'll do what we like!"

Now let's say that company was called Microsoft... what would you Jobsian brown-nosers be saying then?

Hey - guess what they don't need to ... they have the market sewn up through innovation in a generally (?!) competitive market on that platform... and yet PCs outsell Macs how many to one?

I'm not an evangelist for any particular company or technology - I am an evangelist for Open, innovative IT! Proprietary sucks... and then it dies. That's what history shows us.

[Ian Davies]

<snigger>

"they have the market sewn up through innovation"

ggghghggnnnnnn.... *cough*.... BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAA AAAAAAA HAAAA HAA AHAAAAAA HAHAHAHA HAAAAAHAHAAAHAA HAAA HAAAH AHAA HAAA AHAAHA HAAA HAA hAHAAAAAHA AH AHA AHA HAAAAAAAAH AHAAAAAHA HAAAAAA HAA HAAHAAAH AhAAAHA HAAAHA AAAA BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAA AAAAAAA HAAAA HAA AHAAAAAA HAHAHAHA HAAAAAHAHAAAHAA HAAA HAAAH AHAA HAAA AHAAHA HAAA HAA hAHAAAAAHA AH AHA AHA HAAAAAAAAH AHAAAAAHA HAAAAAA HAA HAAHAAAH AhAAAHA HAAAHA AAAA BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAA AAAAAAA HAAAA HAA AHAAAAAA HAHAHAHA HAAAAAHAHAAAHAA HAAA HAAAH AHAA HAAA AHAAHA HAAA HAA hAHAAAAAHA AH AHA AHA HAAAAAAAAH AHAAAAAHA HAAAAAA HAA HAAHAAAH AhAAAHA HAAAHA AAAA aaaaa.... .... . ..

[wipes tear from eye]

oooh boy, that was a good one. Thanks.

[Anonymous Coward]

The old "if it were Microsoft..." and "Apple 'fanbois' have double standards.." gambits!

Apologies in advance for the length of this...

The short version; this argument lacks cogency, is full of holes and tired cliches that have been disproven time and again, but just for the hell of it, here's why:

That argument is just absolute hogwash! Where does this ridiculous sense of entitlement come from? As some that prefers to work on a Mac, I'd say that *if* Microsoft were doing the same for Windows I'd say "All power to them!". Why? Because it's *their* platform. Simple. So long as it's documented, where is the problem? The other reason is that I am a mature adult that doesn't take these post or the actions of the companies being discussed as a personal affront!

This *isn't* about an OS that runs on the desktop, it's about a mobile device. Please differentiate between the too. The thing with comments like "the only way you can buy software through our website where we take a cut of everything" is that its just wrong. It's wrong on two counts. The first is one of quality control--not in the quality of the apps, rather the quality of the experience. The second is one of security. Not to mention that if you release the app for free, Apple don't charge (30% of 0 is of course 0), and the charge allows for support for the app developers and the cost of maintaining the store. This is simple commerce. It's how shops have been functioning for centuries

Let's take this next assumption at face value and actually apply to an, as of yet unreleased, actual product. If one wants to develop apps for Windows Phone 7, one has to use a .Net technology. This does open up other *languages*, but it's exactly as you describe, I haven't heard anyone complain about this. As to whether Microsoft will allow flash on *their* (and it is *theirs*) platform--it's an unknown. I'm not sure, but I believe that Microsoft have indicated that it's something that thay are considering. Strategically, and the decision will be strategic, it might be a good thing from a marketing POV, however taking Microsoft's long-standing security issues and Flashes negation of ASLR and DEP in Windows, it'll be on Microsoft's, terms, and rightly so.

On to "Sorry Sun/Java... sorry all those innovative people who've invested time and effort into alternative technologies..." Cry me a fucking river, won't you! That is commerce. You go to a bookie. You back a 'sure thing'. It comes in last. Do you go to the bookie "That's not fair! I worked hard for that money! I want it back and I want the winnings that I should have had too!"? No. Same apples here. What about all the people that invested in learning about Be Inc. only for Apple to buy NexT? Sure in this instance Apples loss is Androids gain? I have an Android handset and an iPhone, the overall quality of apps on the iPhone is *vastly* superior to Android, maybe these spurned developers can turn that around?

"Hey - guess what they don't need to ... they have the market sewn up through innovation in a generally (?!) competitive market on that platform... and yet PCs outsell Macs how many to one?" And what are Apple's profit margins like vs. Dell, HP et al.? I don't see either Dell *or* HP bothering the top 5 global business anytime soon (Apple currently rank 7th while Dell or HP don't even figure in the top 50)! Yes, market share *is* a useful metric, but it's not necessarily an indication of how good a product is, is it, or actually how successful it is

"I am an evangelist for Open, innovative IT! Proprietary sucks... and then it dies. That's what history shows us." Horse crap! Using your last illustration, history has shown us that a closed proprietary OS has the market! You've succinctly pointed this out already! So you are a Stallmanian ideologue then? That's fine; doesn't make your point any less wrong. Why use Microsoft as example though?

What Apple have done with the touch interface *is* innovative, like it or not! At least to the extent that all it's competitors have launched devices that mimic theirs. Let me clear one thing up that seems plague arguments like these; innovation != invention and innovation != first.

[Alan_]

O rly?

"I would also admit other natively compiled languages (Unity?) to that fold too for the same reason"

Then you'll be delighted to find out that Unity is powered by Mono, which is an implementation of the .NET runtime. All your unity code is 100% cross platform pre JIT'ed C# (or whatever .NET language you wrote your app in). Mmmm... isn't middleware delicious.

[Anonymous Coward]

All Adobe need to do...

... is make it's Windows CS6 suite identical to the Mac experience, right down to 1 button mouse support. Then discontinue support for it's Mac version when it's released.

Creative Suite is the only reason we allow Macs at the PLC I work at, everyone else gets PC's. And its only ever the Macs that have "issues" with things like, Exchange, Windows Server shares, funny filenames. Get rid of the Macs and I can half my IT department :)

[Ivan Headache]

err... which 1 button are you talking about?

the one on the left, the one on the right, the one in the middle or the one on the sides?

As an IT professional(?) you should know by now that Macs do not have 1 button mice.

How many years is it?

[Ian Davies]

yeah...

"And its only ever the Macs that have "issues" with things like, Exchange, Windows Server shares"

hmm... all those Microsoft technologies that are only half documented because, you know, Microsoft are *really* against the whole concept of lock-in... they're very clear on that.

Irony much?

[Anonymous Coward]

In my experience...

most companies have busy IT departments because the average PC is a POS and has to be resuscitated every five minutes. Further, having run an IT department with a mix of Macs and PCs, the Macs rarely if ever needed the attentions of a paramedic. They even played nice with the PCs.

Macs, as any IT "expert" such as yourself (cough!) knows, haven't had single-button mice for many years. Oh, and lightening up the load on a fragile mouse and moving it to the keyboard, where most of the work gets done, makes a lot of sense unless all you're doing is playing WoW.

I would suggest that, in future, if you have little or no real knowledge of a piece of kit, you probably didn't wanna go on a public forum like El Reg and whine about it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Some suggestions to Microsoft

1) Any application that does not follow the Windows Development Guidelines should be terminated immediately by the OS. They could slow down Windows a lot.

2) Do not let any client connect to Exchange natively but Outlook. But Outlook any client is bad written and should not access the server but via IMAP/SMTP

3) Do not let any office application but Office open Office documents, they could easily trash them because they don't support all the features.

4) Allow only VC++ and .NET approved languages to be used as Windows development tools. Get rid of Java, PHP, Python, Ruby, etc. etc, they all will make Windows looks slow.

5) Do not allow any non-Windows client to connect to Windows servers - unless they are MS approved to ensure protocols implementation are high-quality and properly done.

6) Forbid installation of any browser - EU was wrong to rule other browser could be installed, they could destabilize the system and deliver not a fully correct user experience.

7) Wait for the Apple fanboys cry "Microsoft can't do this!"

[Ivan Headache]

I think you are missing the plot here

The issue is about developing for a new platform - not for a platform that has been around for donkey's years.

What better way to ensure stability and economy of code than to keep close tabs on what is being used to create that code.

[Anonymous Coward]

And

Lots of people get upset as Windows becomes much more stable, but totaly unusable for most things as you can't install most stuff you want to use, like, oh, I don't know, a Mac.

[Chemist]

Re : Some suggestions to Microsoft

I think by these rules you may have stopped Microsoft using most of it's own apps

[Anonymous Coward]

Missing the point

Apple control the iPhone. If you want to release an app, Apple have to approve it. Apple are therefore responsbile for the stability of the environment - there is no one else to blame. If they want code to be optimised then they can say so, if this reduces the availabilty of applications and people choose Android, Microsoft or Nokia OS phones then they will pay the price for this control.

With Windows, it's a platform that's uncontrolled. Great for experimentation and innovation. Terrible for stability - unless you are a large "corporate" and lock down the environment in which case it's as bad as the iPhone (have to get apps approved, built according to standards, tested to make sure there are no DLL or other conflicts etc.).

Control and stbility versus freedom and flexibility - your choice. I prefer stability and will pay the price for the subsequent control (even if means there are less apps on the App Store because of it).

A pint - we have choices, unlike the desktop OS there is no monopoly* in the smartphone OS market.

*In the UK a firm is said to have Monopoly power if it has more than 25% of Market share, though the US Sherman Act meaning is a situation in which there is a single supplier or seller of a good or service for which there are no close substitutes.

[Efros]

The Bitchslap is on

Now all we have to figure out is who is the bitch?

[James O'Brien]

Well then

This should be an interesting outcome in the end:

As much as I hate crApple and their lockin on hardwear and softwear, Adobe does have a LARGE customer base with flash (namely 98% of the net it seems, I cant go anywhere anymore without seeing the lovely little symbol from flashblock being displayed)

This may get me flamed but for those who do re-read what i said again. This isnt for or against either company. Personally i do think this will be a test not only for the EULA/vendor lockin for the SDK or the OS, but also for the restrictions placed by Adobe on their own softwear. Should be a good time.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hooray, I hope that they both lose..

They both make products that I use and value, but honestly, they are behaving like a bunch of flapping walrus cocks over this. Toys out of pram can get rather tiring..

[fred #257]

Aaaargh!

Flapping walrus cocks?

You, sir, owe me a new keyboard.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah...

It's been a long time since weve had a good animal/genital insult around here.

[Anonymous Coward]

The real questions are...

"What they are saying is that they won’t allow applications onto their marketplace solely because of what language was originally used to create them,"

C, C++ and Java are allowed.

What languages do Adobe plan to write their applications in?

...because if they plan to let just anyone take a file and turn it into a native executable then that's a security nightmare just waiting to happen!

Let's be honest, Flash is looking pretty old-hat these days. I found an HTML 5.0 browser (still under dev obviously) that can play Quake 2. FFS Quake 2!! Can Flash do that? No.

What it seems to be used for is as a wrapper around video or for annoying adverts. We don't need to wrap video in Flash in this day and age and I for one could do without annoying buzzing, moving or musical adverts, tyvm!

[Big-nosed Pengie]

I don't get it

Why gives a flying fuck what language it's written in.

I have no love for either Apple or Adobe, but surely it's up the user to decide what they want to run or not run their equipment?

[Anonymous Coward]

No

If there is a problem and they want Apple to be responsbile then no, it's up to Apple. The iPhone is a controlled environment. Less choice.

If it's up to the user, like on most Windows machines, then you're right - good luck with those DLL conflicts, Registry settings etc. etc. Of course, the benefit is you have freedom and choice.

[tempemeaty]

Grease abobe's ears...the doors narrow to for their head

Now Adobe wants to dictate to another company how that company is to make it's products? Dear Adobe...arrogant much? Hahahaha...

[David McMahon]

Ban CS5 on macs!

I think Adobe got a case, Apple are at least anti-competitive

I do wish Adobe would not release Photoshop for mac's the fan boi's would have to get a PC then! Ha...

They would probably still stick a sodding Apple sticker on their thinkpads though!

[Anonymous Coward]

No head for business...

You don't get how business works, do you? Let's follow your suggestion through shall we? Do you suppose that if Adobe "ban" their software on the Mac platform that the ~70% of all their CS sales (yes, it is *that* biased towards Mac) will all migrate to Windows, *just* to continue using Adobe tools? I don't generally do "ad hominem", but are you 12? What *will* happen is that in 2-3 years, Adobe will be bought out or go bankrupt. They are small fry in financial terms, with an annual turn over of ~$2.9 billion, and a net income of just $386.5 million. A business like Apple or Microsoft could swallow up Adobe whole, and have change to buy their share holders a slap-up meal at Petrus, with a bottle of 1947 Chateau Pétrus Pomerol on each table! Maybe that'd be the best course of action for Apple--an hostile takeover.

>"I think Adobe got a case, Apple are at least anti-competitive" When you think 'anti-competative' consider *if* there is any comparable competition that suffers economically as a result. In this instance, the answer is an emphatic no. If anything, from the amount of ranting here the opposite is true; this will spur on developers to develop apps for Apple's competition, which franky Android, Blackberry and Nokia(ha!) need! Apple are at worst being protectionist--nothing illegal about that.

There is a general misconception that Apple are blocking Adobe's entry into the iPhone market. They are not. They are blocking individuals from using Adobe's software to develop apps for Apple's platform. Apple are also blocking Adobe's proprietary runtime from their OS--again, nothing illegal about that.

The words 'anti-competative' and 'monopoly' are used way too much around here, and it seems as though the main protagonist do not actually know what they are talking about.

[vic 4]

Re: No head for business...

> There is a general misconception that Apple are blocking Adobe's entry into the iPhone market. They are not. They are blocking individuals from using Adobe's software to develop apps for Apple's platform.

I think the main point is being lost here and focus is being place on Adobe because it affects them. However Apple, in their traditionally "lets be vauge to cover case where we want to change our minds, pretend thats what we had in mind from the start or just cover inconsistent application" way, appear to be implying that developers can't use generation tools, platform dependent abstractions.

I rarely develop an application with 100% hand written code, if I do then you can bet it is a trivial application. I, and many people/shops out there would write a DSL (domain specific language), from which an interpreter executes those at runtime or generate java/c/obj-c as applicable. Apple have already had place T&Cs to prevent you from having an interpreter, which while it is pretty poor from my point of view I'll concede the point. However this new change to the T&Cs seem to suggest I can no longer use my generator stragegy, i.e. this seems to prevent me from writing some of my logic in a language I created (or something like flash) and then translating that into objective-c or c++. Obviously iun teh case of flash apps, these would require a flash runtime, but Adobe would have to write this in c/c++/obj-c and the deveopers app would have to link against that.

Apple appear to be implying that you can't use libraries that abstract away the underlying OS, allowing the developer to code against another library, that library then calls the relevant runtime library. Software developers have been using this approach pretty much for the whole history of programming.

The point is why should apple dictate what I language write my application in, as long as it does not call teh so called "private" API and does not interpret code at runtime (guess that rules out algebraic calculators?) what concern is it of theirs, it's an implemenation issue. What next, I have to use xcode to type the actual code instead of emacs, hell I even write some of the code under linux.

The only reason I can think of is that would make it harder to support multiple platforms, as we won't be able to write apps in something neutral and then compile that into something runnable on iphone, andrond, mac/win/linux desktop, web app. Maybe developers would have to prioritize platforms and the iPhone is (currently) the leader

> Apple are also blocking Adobe's proprietary runtime from their OS--again, nothing illegal about that.

What is different to that and using any other library from a third party. As long as that runtime is not calling an <illegal> api method or interpreting any code, I'd expect it to simply translate the intent into the relevant iphone method, that coupled with a tool from above to turn your flash to objective-c or an compiled object file/library so that there is nothing interpreted.

[Euchrid]

re: Ban CS5 on macs

"I do wish Adobe would not release Photoshop for mac's the fan boi's would have to get a PC then! Ha"

Alternatively, they could just run Photoshop in a Windows environment on their Macs - in fact, a lot of users would be better off doing that in any case as the Windows version offers better performance (and is 64-bit) than the Mac version. Quite a while ago, a PC magazine did a group test of laptops running PS and found for the best performance came from a MacBook Pro running Windows.

[Rolf Howarth]

@tempemeaty

They're not doing that all. They're not trying to dictate that you must use Adobe tools, they're saying that Apple shouldn't dictate that you can't. Big difference.

Give the developers the choice to use what tools they want. It's like a web site hosting company saying you can only put JPEGs on your web pages if they were created in Paintshop Pro.

[vic 4]

@tempemeaty

It's probably more akin to devloping your web site using xml, say schema/data representing a product catalog, and then transforming that that into static html pages.

[Anonymous Coward]

my two cents

If most interactive content apps that came out of Adobe weren't the launch points for more exploits and the cause of an infinite number of system hangs or outright crashes, then I'd say Jobs was being the usual dick we've all come to know. And while it will be a cold day in hell before I ever purchase an apple product, I support Jobs on this one.

Adobe: Clean up your crap or go away!

[Dodgy Dave]

Developers = X-Factor contestants

I'm amazed that Apple keep knocking back iPhone developers, yet the apps keep coming. I can only imagine that the App Store is full and they have no more resource to spend approving apps - instead they're just beating developers with a shitty stick to see if they'll go away.

I'm 100% (well, 99%) behind Jobs' war on Flash, but it's a risky game: if Android apps are mostly crummy and iPhone ones remain slick, he retains his saintly reputation. If Android apps start to do useful or cool things that an iPhone can't, he will look like an arrogant fool.

Cheers

DD

[Svein Skogen]

A cute solution would be

If Adobe cut the price for the Windows version of CS5 in half, and increased the Apple version by a third. That would make a few beancounters calculate, and come back with the result "apple users are too expensive to employ" and give those who now are on the creative suite the option of tossing out their fruit-cases or getting tossed out ALONG with the fruit-cases. ;)

Making apple-customers lose their income would solve a lot of the problems. ;)

//Svein

[Anonymous Coward]

re: A cute solution would be

“If Adobe cut the price for the Windows version of CS5 in half, and increased the Apple version by a third. That would make a few beancounters calculate, and come back with the result "apple users are too expensive to employ" and give those who now are on the creative suite the option of tossing out their fruit-cases or getting tossed out ALONG with the fruit-cases. ;)

Making apple-customers lose their income would solve a lot of the problems. ;)”

What on Earth are you talking about?

In that case, all the companies would need to do is to run CS in Windows on existing Mac hardware (for the last few years, all Macs can run Windows) in return for a whopping discount.

Of course, users may have the oh-so difficult task having to remember different keyboard shortcuts…

[James Butler]

@AC 12:56

"In that case, all the companies would need to do is to run CS in Windows on existing Mac hardware (for the last few years, all Macs can run Windows) in return for a whopping discount."

Discount? You still have to purchase a Windows license, take the time to install it into BootCamp and then buy the Windows version of the software and install that, too. In terms of both time and money, it's more expensive to run dual boot when two proprietary operating systems are involved. Maybe you are referring to the 50% price difference in the software (as proposed by the OP), but even a 50% "discount" on CS won't make up for the rest of the expense.

[Anonymous Coward]

Waste of money.

All Adobe has to do actually to to publish a press release that has:-

...the 'Adobe Creative Suite', 'cancelled' and 'Mac OS X' phrases in the first sentence.

...the 'exclusive' and 'Microsoft Windows' phrases in the second sentence.

Flash support will be in iPhone 4.0 in a flash if that happened.

[Anonymous Coward]

re: Waste of money

Hardly.

As someone pointed out on here on yet another story about the Apple/Adobe spat (the Adobe Man saying Apple can screw itself), Adobe basically said 'up yours, Apple... screw OS X, Windows is the way to go' years ago - the AC listed how little Adobe developed for the Mac platform in the last ten years (as was mentioned it ported PS to OS X in 2005!). If Adobe is soooo important to the overall Mac market, why did Adobe's obvious reluctance to bring out OS X native apps have so little effect?

As has been pointed out, the majority of CS users use Macs... looking over the fact that all Macs in the last few years can run Windows (so it's not as if users would not be able to use CS on their machines), how many do you think would really blame Adobe?

Adding a little conspiracy theory of my own, maybe Apple wouldn't mind Adobe pulling out of the Mac market...

[rcdicky]

Is anyone else getting a bit bored of this now?

Surely it's up to Apple what it wants to run on it's own hardware?

I quite liked the idea of Adobe pulling all of it's products from Mac though, now that WOULD light a few fires wouldn't it? :D

As for the poor developers being locked in. Poor them eh? Haven't a lot of people who've written apps/games etc made quite a bit of money from releasing apps on the iPhone?

From what I can see, it's a fairly easy way of getting a product out there. Even though sometimes they have to jump through a few Apple approval hoops, it's still quite straightforward.

[vic 4]

RE: Is anyone else getting a bit bored of this now?

Then stop reading!

> Surely it's up to Apple what it wants to run on it's own hardware?

Surely it's up the person who bought it. These changes to T&Cs are going to affect existing apps that may now be withdrawn or have updates/support withdrawn, will Apple give me a refund on my phone. For that matter wIll Apple refund the cash I had to fork out just for the privilege to put software I wrote onto my own phone and to give them stuff to sell and take a cut.

> As for the poor developers being locked in. Poor them eh? Haven't a lot of people who've written apps/games etc made quite a bit of money from releasing apps on the iPhone?

Sure there are few who made quite a bit, but not that many. It will be the customer who ends up paying, more developemnt time means more cash that has to come in to cover costs, tax, living expenses, then pensions, vacations health insurance etc. How many apps at say 1.99 would you have to seel per month to get your monthly salary and perks before tax, baring in mind that 30% goes to apple.

> From what I can see, it's a fairly easy way of getting a product out there. Even though sometimes they have to jump through a few Apple approval hoops, it's still quite straightforward.

Yes is staright forward, but apple's changes in strategy are making it harder then it should be and there is a large risk that all your work can be need replacing just becuase apple chaneg the goal posts half way through.

I now only write iphone software for other people, my own work is focused on the future, and that future is open and unrestrictive.

[Anonymous Coward]

Help please!

Will someone please provide me with a time machine? If I have one of those I can go back in time and prevent the utter shit that is Flash from ever existing and make the world a better and happier place.

[Eddie Edwards]

Wow

It only just occurred to me that the Jobsian cult with their hatred of translation layers has pretty much banned any cross-platform application at all, even if they only use a thin C++ class over the top of the published APIs. So, no writing Android + iPhone apps in the same codebase.

This is clearly insane.

[TeeCee]

Strange attitudes here.

We've had plenty of previous stories around here where a small developer has been fucked by the Apple due to a capricious rule change. Most of these have resulted in howls of outrage from all bar the drooling fanbois.

Now they've done it to Adobe. Adobe are a big company who can afford to sue the fuck out of them for their wasted time and effort in producing flash encapsulation for an iPhone runtime.

I don't think that the fact that Adobe are a bunch of twunts with a shitty product* has any bearing on the rights and wrongs of the situation, so I reckon that most of you are being terribly two-faced. If Adobe were to win this it'd benefit all the small developers too, as Apple would be pretty much forced to provide consistant rules around what they can and can't do and stick to them in future. With a precedent set, just about anyone could afford to sue based on it.

As for the Ts and Cs, if a court were to find that any clauses were unreasonable (and anything like "we reserve the right to move the goalposts without warning whenever we feel like it" would sound like such) they'll just strike 'em down.

*AFAICS nobody, not even Adobe, is suggesting that anyone be forced to install or use it. They just want you to have the choice.

[Ivan Headache]

I am now missing the plot here.

What are Adobe going to sue about?

Ir's all very well saying the Adobe has lots of dosh and can afford to sue - but what for? No-one in this 'discussion' has come up with anything that warrants a court case.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm with Adobe

Speaking as an avowed iPad fanboy and a developer (and an AAPL shareholder, and a hater of Flash!) I'm firmly with Adobe on this one and think that Apple have gone one step too far.

What Apple are basically saying is you can't sell an app for the iPhone/iPad if you also sell the same app for other platforms (using whatever preprocessors or procedures you choose to use internally to develop your apps with).

I don't know whether it's illegal or not but what Apple are doing is blatantly anti-competitive and it sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

"...what Apple are doing is blatantly anti-competitive..."

No. Protectionist? Yes! Unnecessary? Maybe, but Adobe's heel-dragging on Apple's other platform has probably fostered this approach. It's not anti-competative at all.

[_mark]

Jobs has Lost his Mind..

EA, Gameloft, Tapulous, and ngmoco are some of the TOP TEN Game Developers in the App Store that use embedded Lua interpreters ..so goodbye to all the TOP RANKED games according to their Terms of Service! LOL

Apple REALLY shot themselves in the foot on that one! Especially since Jobs demoed Tapulous in the keynote which is one of the apps that should be banned. If they don’t ban ALL THE TOP GAMES for using Lua, and Flash Coded games are banned, Adobe has a solid case for a lawsuit. WOW.

[Anonymous Coward]

Adobe needs to learn some humility

for instance, I deleted the Acrobat Reader shortcut from my desktop for a reason. Stop putting it back every fucking time you have to patch your piece of shit bloatware without even giving me the condescending option of a box to untick to stop you doing it. Grr.

And... breathe

[asdf]

in other news

Google will soon open source their new video codec so we can finally start to see Flash die the death that is a decade overdue. Don't get me wrong don't like how Apple does business but at least some of their products are ok and even a bit revolutionary. Adobes products on the other hand are made in India, bloated malware is not fit for any purpose short of getting any platform under the sun owned by script kiddies in record time.

[khbkhb]

Anyone recall Thompson's ACM Turning speech?

The topic was security and trust, specifically how he hacked the C compiler to subvert programs compiled with it.

I predict Apple will use it as the basis of the argument that in order to have a fully trusted platform, they need to manage/own/certify the development tools.

[Anonymous Coward]

Violins playing tragic tune..

Adobe was all cozy with Apple's decision to ban Java on the iPhone. Now they're hacked that Apple (through the same valid, but twisted logic) has gored their particular ox. Sorry, but this particular unemployed former Sun engineer is unconcerned with their problem.