Thursday, April 29, 2010

Steve Jobs hates flash

There will be no flash on the iPad. Ever. This is a common complaint with current iPad and iPhone users. Adobe flash is universal language that many websites currently use. Safari may be one of the greatest mobile web browsers, but the lack of Flash prevents many websites from operating correctly. Steve Jobs does not agree.

Here is his open letter on his viewpoint.

"First, there’s “Open”.

Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.

Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.

Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.

Second, there’s the “full web”.

Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video.

Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.

Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.

Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.

In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?

Fourth, there’s battery life.

To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.

Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.

When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.

Fifth, there’s Touch.

Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary multi-touch interface doesn’t use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?

Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.

Sixth, the most important reason.

Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices."

I think Steve Jobs is being hard headed for not letting developers try to adapt flash onto the iPad. Adapting it over to a touch screen interface can't be that hard, plus it would be 3rd party developers working on it. There isn't much for Apple to lose except alienating a large population of users that would love Flash. Do you agree with Steve Jobs?


Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Manifesto

The Owners Manifesto


The Maker's Bill of Rights

  • Meaningful and specific parts lists shall be included.

  • Cases shall be easy to open.

  • Batteries should be replaceable.

  • Special tools are allowed only for darn good reasons.

  • Profiting by selling expensive special tools is wrong and not making special tools available is even worse.

  • Torx is OK; tamperproof is rarely OK.

  • Components, not entire sub-assemblies, shall be replaceable.

  • Consumables, like fuses and filters, shall be easy to access.

  • Circuit boards shall be commented.

  • Power from USB is good; power from proprietary power adapters is bad.

  • Standard connecters shall have pinouts defined.

  • If it snaps shut, it shall snap open.

  • Screws better than glues.

  • Docs and drivers shall have permalinks and shall reside for all perpetuity at archive.org.

  • Ease of repair shall be a design ideal, not an afterthought.

  • Metric or standard, not both.

  • Schematics shall be included.


    Hmm.. this should be the case of all our owned electronic devices.. but sadly it is not. The iPad fails every single one of these points, yet people still buy the device. Why? As consumers we need make a stand on what we buy and vote with our money. New devices should be more user friendly to the general public. The one thing the irks me about apple products , like the iPad, are they charge through USB, but you have to have a apple usb adaptor. Why can't it follow the standard like most other devices?

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Interactive E-Book

Wow, I've got to admit this is pretty cool. This interactive e-book can visually enhance and animate stories to bring them to real-life. Since the iPad has an accelerometer, touch capablities; The possiblities are endless. This is so much cooler then the old pop-up books of the past.

Check out the Alice demo video below, the guy turns/shakes/tilts to interact.

This could revolutionize E-books and makes me want to buy an iPad right now!

Friday, April 16, 2010

Efficiency

The iPad lacks efficiency for a heavy PC user like me. I use the PC for more reasons then entertainment, which is all the iPad can seem to do. The ability to quickly type in a web address is something I've grown accustomed to. It's easily done on any keyboard. The iPad's virtual touch keyboard makes this quite difficult. Maybe I need practice, but even on my iPhone which I've had for 2 years, I can't always get a complicated URL in one attempt. Next, the lack of multi-tasking hurts a lot more than i thought. By simply clicking a url from my email app it forces the iPad to close it, and open Safari to load the page. This takes a couple of seconds, but it is quite annoying. Now if i want to respond back to the email, i have to close Safari and relaunch Email. I am not the only user frustrated with this.


Thursday, April 15, 2010

iPad Purpose?


What is the purpose of Apple's new product, the iPad? When it was first announced, I had to have it.. but i stopped and ask'd myself why. I had no answer. It is a mixture of a netbook,iPhone, and a e-reader. It doesn't excel at anything the latter does. Netbooks are capable of multitasking and come with stronger computing components. The iPhone is smaller, lets you make phone calls and has the same apps. A e-reader is more portable, comfortable in ones hand.. so where does that leave the iPad? Is it just a shiny new toy to show off? Writer Rob Pegoraro seems to be confused for its purpose too. To him it just a flashy toy. I have to agree.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

300,000 Ipads sold at launch

Apple has announced that the iPad has sold over 300,000 units on the first day.

That is a lot better then i thought it would do.. I mean its just a giant iTouch isn't it? What purpose does this device serve? I myself have an iPhone and a netbook. Should I even think about purchasing an iPad? I will be reviewing articles about this new phenomenon and seeing if it's worth the hype.

Did you buy an iPad?

Tuesday, April 13, 2010


Ipad. It has finally arrived April 2010. Apple's tablet has been rumored for a couple of years now.. let's see if it will live up to its hype. Lets take a look at the specs taken from the Apple website;

Display

  • 9.7-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit glossy widescreen Multi-Touch display with IPS technology
  • 1024-by-768-pixel resolution at 132 pixels per inch (ppi)
  • Fingerprint-resistant oleophobic coating
  • Support for display of multiple languages and characters simultaneously
  • Battery and power4

    • Built-in 25-watt-hour rechargeable lithium-polymer battery
    • Up to 10 hours of surfing the web on Wi-Fi, watching video, or listening to music
    • Up to 9 hours of surfing the web using 3G data network
    • Charging via power adapter or USB to computer system
    • Capacity3

      • 16GB, 32GB, or 64GB flash drive

      Processor

      • 1GHz Apple A4 custom-designed, high-performance, low-power system-on-a-chip

      Sensors

      • Accelerometer
      • Ambient light sensor

      Audio playback

      • Frequency response: 20Hz to 20,000Hz
      • Audio formats supported: HE-AAC (V1), AAC (16 to 320 Kbps), Protected AAC (from iTunes Store), MP3 (16 to 320 Kbps), MP3 VBR, Audible (formats 2, 3, and 4), Apple Lossless, AIFF, and WAV
      • User-configurable maximum volume limit

Monday, April 12, 2010

First Post


This blog will be used for my final project for COSC460 regarding the... IPAD! I will be looking at various articles deciding if the iPad is for me, and how this "innovative" product will effect the modern day life.