Topic

Adobe Ceases Mobile Flash Development

[Note: This post was originally titled "Adobe Ceases Flash Development", but was edited by staff for clarity.]

Now that I have your attention, Adobe has killed the MOBILE version of Flash. Per ZD Net
We will no longer adapt Flash Player for mobile devices to new browser, OS version or device configurations. Some of our source code licensees may opt to continue working on and releasing their own implementations. We will continue to support the current Android and PlayBook configurations with critical bug fixes and security updates.

Tiny Speck is trapped now. It is no longer possible to create a version of Glitch which will run on smart-phones.The future of Glitch is one choice : native iOS app. 

Creating a native app for Android is a resource-sucking exercise in futility. Not only is the platform fragmented beyond belief, but there is no guarantee the platform will even exist five years from now. Truly, this week articles started appearing showing how Apple stands to reap billions from Google / Android in patent licenses. I can assure you the talks for 'swipe to unlock' alone are going to run in the billions to secure a license. What a bittersweet irony that Apple will make more profit off Android than even Google. 

From a fiscal and business perspective there is only one thing Tiny Speck can do : ride Flash until all support is dropped and then jump to the iOS platform. As I had said in a previous post - don't think I don't remember those condemning me as wrong - if Tiny Speck didn't see this coming six months to a year ago they are in deep trouble. 

Since history keeps showing how right Steve Jobs was about Flash, I will keep repeating the obvious : Bet against Steve Jobs at your peril. 

Tiny Speck, welcome to the iOS community. I look forward to playing Glitch on the iPhone and iPad one day soon. 

Posted 13 months ago by TekNoh Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

Previous 1 2
  • would you bet your house on the demise of Android?
    Posted 13 months ago by Liz Erd Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Steve Jobs is no longer with us. I like my iOS devices as much as the next guy, but please don't enshrine him as some infallible deity.
    Posted 13 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Wait, so you're suggesting TS to drop PC support and move the game to smart phones?

    :|
    Posted 13 months ago by Elly Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Kind of an insane post, considering that no matter what, 99% of people are going to be playing it on their desktop computers. I don't even WANT to play Glitch on my phone. 
    Posted 13 months ago by victoriah Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Agreed, TK-855.I was thinking the same, victoriah. I don't want to play glitch on my mobile. . .
    Posted 13 months ago by Liz Erd Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I do want to play Glitch on my iPad. Bring it on. 
    Posted 13 months ago by Pekoponian Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Adobe Ceases Flash Development" 

    A little melodramatic, don't you think? They've ceased development of Flash Player for mobile. Trying to get Flash Player running acceptably on mobile platforms has clearly been a hiding to nowhere for a long time, so this announcement is only surprising in that many people didn't think that Adobe still had that degree of common sense left any more. Nobody has said anything about the desktop player, and I don't expect to see that go away anytime soon. 

    Building a full iOS game client would be a massive undertaking and I'm not convinced that would make commercial sense right now. I'd be very surprised to see one in the forseeable future.
    Posted 13 months ago by dopiaza Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Misleading title followed by incorrect assertation that Flash is the only development option for graphics-intensive smartphone applications and suspect conclusion that favors moving to a single closed development platform.

    ...yeah, you got my attention all right :(
    Posted 13 months ago by Millstone Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I really fail to understand why so many people demand to have phones do more and more, and that application makers bow to their fevered demands. Staring at your phone, cupped in your hands, your face illuminated by the LCD glow, as you try to move little characters around has to be boring or at least frustrating if the game is truly worth playing for a long duration.
    Posted 13 months ago by Evadrepus Terramere Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I don't want to play it on my phone anyway.
    I only used my phone to choose the next skill and to see what's on the forums as long as that stays the same I don't really care.
    If I can't do that anymore I'd slightly care.
    Posted 13 months ago by Nutty Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Some of our source code licensees may opt to continue working on and releasing their own implementations."

    Many Android manufacturers had already modified & adapted their own versions of flash before Adobe created Flash Mobile.
    HTC had better flash on my EVO months before Adobe's "official version".

    For most Android users, this announcement means nothing.

    For Tiny Speck, this announcement means nothing. I'll continue to play on my Mac Pro.

    Apparently the only people who care are iOS users. Personally, I'll choose open markets over closed systems any day.
    Posted 13 months ago by Kungaloosh Subscriber! | Permalink
  • So Flash implementations on Android will diverge as multiple manufacturers each maintain their own code base, adding to the already rampant fragmentation in the Android market. Sure sounds like a recipe for success to me...
    Posted 13 months ago by dopiaza Subscriber! | Permalink
  • A cellphone display is too small to play this sort of game.  And the iPad is too closed a platform to bother with.  No, this is not relevant.  Just another anti-Flash rant, to be frank.

    I really like the current Glitch app on my iPod touch.  I wish it did several more things, i.e. I wish it had build-in Forum capabilities.  Otherwise, it's fine the way it is.

    I can't believe people are still going to pound the anti-Flash drum for Steve.  Let the guy rest in peace, allow the distortion field to fade away.
    Posted 13 months ago by Parrow Gnolle Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Staff had a response to this the last time someone went melodramatic about the demise of Flash.
    Posted 13 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • one of the worst OPs in recent memory, and that's saying a lot.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Flash is not, has not been, the only available platform for applications like Glitch. There remains Silverlight, which is a mature technology, and HTML5, even though the latter is still in relative infancy. And both of them have strong support in the Mac, PC, and Linux communities. Tiny Speck has been developing API's to encourage community development. They are not stuck on in-house development. Open Souce? Not with iOS.
    Posted 13 months ago by Fokian Fool Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Open Souce? Not with iOS."

    There's lots of open source available for iOS. The official Glitch iOS SDK, for example.
    Posted 13 months ago by dopiaza Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Just don't try to do any development using that Open Source, unless it's just for you and three or four of your friends.  And pony up that annual $100 to Apple.

    Yeah!
    Posted 13 months ago by Parrow Gnolle Subscriber! | Permalink
  • This seems pretty irrelevant to me.

    Like others, I've no interest in playing glitch on my phone.

    Yes, it would be lovely if I could play it on the iPad but let's be realistic here - the current incarnation of the iPad has nowhere near enough Memory for it to be viable. Glitch just about creaks along on my Mac Book Pro upgraded to 4Gb ram with only the browser running. The latest iPad has only 512Mb. Even if that's special super-duper memory it's not going to be equivalent to a 4Gb laptop.

    So, while tablet hardware evolves to match the power of a laptop / desktop there is time for HTML5 (or some other solution) to mature.

    I dont think lack of mobile flash support is an indicator of the need for a native app in the long run.
    Posted 13 months ago by geekybird Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Just don't try to do any development using that Open Source, unless it's just for you and three or four of your friends.  And pony up that annual $100 to Apple."

    Huh?

    I've made way more money from my iOS development than I have from my Android development. As ways of making a living go, iOS wins hands down.
    Posted 13 months ago by dopiaza Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Can you imagine what the effects of the sudden surge in player population that would come with an iOS version would do to the playability of this game?  Take the current complaints about lag, lack of player housing, and auctions and magnify them by the appropriate magnitude.

    I'm sure Tiny Speck knows enough to not bite off more than they can chew right now.
    Posted 13 months ago by Warrender Subscriber! | Permalink
  • This is a PC game. Tiny Speck have already said they are not developing for mobile.
    Posted 13 months ago by Lucille Ball Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Pointless discussion. If the glitch devs were developing a full app for Android, they would either code it in Java or use the NDK to write it in C or C++ for the performance gain. Flash is the least likely way that you'll ever play Glitch on your smartphone.
    Posted 13 months ago by Millstone Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I sorta disagree, in that I do think Glitch will eventually want the whole game packaged in a native iPad app.

    iPhone, no. iPad, yes.

    but not today or any even any time soon, and not some sort of low performance flash export.

    mostly because, you know, they'd make a ton of money charging a buck an app.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "This is a PC game. Tiny Speck have already said they are not developing for mobile."

    that is flatly untrue. read the most recent blog post for example.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • No. I want an iPhone app.

    - Tilt to Move
    - Tap to Interact
    - Double Tap to Jump
    Posted 13 months ago by Bashere Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "Since history keeps showing how right Steve Jobs was about Flash, I will keep repeating the obvious : Bet against Steve Jobs at your peril."

    LOL! Nice hoodwink you put on yourself there, it looks cute on you.
    Posted 13 months ago by ✦ SHI∇IΔΠ ✦ Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Ever notice that people who post wildly misleading forum titles always follow it up with some sort of off-the-wall rant about how "someone" MUST do "something"?

    Fascinating!
    Posted 13 months ago by Kraftmann Subscriber! | Permalink
  • iOS is not Open Source. Of course neither is Windows :) But the Android and Linux operating systems are. Yes there is a iOS SDK for Glitch. I've even had a staff member ask me to give it a shot when I can. It's open source. But the target platform is not as open as Windows, Mac, Linux, or Android. 
    Posted 13 months ago by Fokian Fool Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Striatic Stoot has mentioned in several interviews, such as the Massively interview, that the mobile apps will be mini-games that will supplement the desktop experience. So while the glitch is making apps, glitch Isn't becoming an app itself...
    Posted 13 months ago by Kungaloosh Subscriber! | Permalink
  • After reading this discussion, I can't imagine an iPhone app. The screen is too small. You won't be able to see anything in the game while you're looking at your inventory, or the chat/activity windows. iPad sounds a bit more probable, but still, playing with solely touchscreen is going to be more painful than enjoyable. 
    Also, even if you wanted anything from the developers, it should be a polite request. We don't even have to pay to play this game. 
    Posted 13 months ago by Kieley Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @kungaloosh

    TS is developing for mobile, that's all that matters.

    i also think "supplement the desktop experience" is an unfortunate way to think about it.

    in the medium to long term, i don't think Glitch will end up being a "PC game" either. also an unfortunate way to think about it..

    what i do think is that Glitch will involve a variety of different modes to play the game. if they do it up right and take mobile seriously, the mobile play mode should be compelling enough to stand alone. players should rarely, if ever, need to step into the PC flash game to do things. the experience should remain compelling without that.

    "supplement" is not the right word or mindset to take into the development of Glitch Mobile. "play in parallel" is going to be more successful.

    i'd like to take my wife as an example. she played for a bit, and then i thought she lost interest in giltch. she hadn't "played" in a long time, but i recently found out that she had been updating and managing her skills on a regular basis for weeks through her phone. the game forces her to log in to get emblems in order to continue learning things, which i think is ridiculous .. the game isn't encouraging her to play by doing this, it is actually discouraging her.

    so she's interested in Glitch. when you think about it, she's even "playing the game". it is just that interacting with the game through PC/Flash is all wrong for her. wrong for her schedule, wrong for the devices she feels most comfortable using, wrong for a host of reasons.

    this is why "supplement" is a failed way to think about mobile, at least medium to long term. it basically cuts out a whole segment of players who could be playing the game in a compelling, comprehensive play mode outside of PC/Flash.

    it is critical to divorce the concept of the game from the concept of the user interface.  i wan't to play Glitch on my phone. the real Glitch game with other real Glitch players. trick is, that play style might have nothing to do with running around in a side scrolling flash game.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @striatic - spot on (IMHO)
    Posted 13 months ago by dopiaza Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @dopiaza

    only problem is, i'm not sure Tiny Speck is for sure on that path.

    they understand that path, certainly better than i do, but i'm not sure they're on it any more.

    if you look at Glitch's development history, they *were* on that path but some decisions lead me to believe they are straying.

    for example, back when gardening was a popup HTML interface that could be accessed so long as your avatar was beside the garden. could have been a mini-game playable anywhere / any time, but the interaction between it and the flash interface annoyed people. a legitimate beef, but the solution was to overhaul gardening into something exclusive to the flash client.

    then there are the auctions. or, more specifically, the mailbox system. the glitch mail system is horrible and i don't understand why they designed it the way they did. they've dropped the most horrible aspect of it, the dispatcher boxes, but here is a system that seems *perfect* for API hooks and asynchronous play and not only do you have to open flash to access it .. you need to walk to a specific street! why? i just don't get it.

    it's like they've made this decision that bringing people into the flash interface as if having the majority of gameplay + chat in there wasn't enough. it could be possible to buy, craft, and re-sell at auction over my phone, but the mail system makes that impossible, even if it were possible to interact with your inventory outside the game interface, which it probably should be.

    anyway, i hope they get back on the path and think about these game elements in an API friendly way now that they have some more API developers around doing awesome stuff. easy to lose focus on that kind of thing in closed beta. yes yes i know long, closed betas are often necessary - this was true for Glitch - but they also suck and can create very warped priorities and blind spots at the worst possible time.

    still, everything we are hearing points in the right direction, just needs to come into alignment with the non-flash game elements and the API : ]
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • but enough of that 'inside baseball' garbage, when we talk about "play in parallel" and "the real Glitch game" we need to think about what those terms mean and how to get there from here given the overwhelming focus on the Flash interface.

    if i were to distill what "the real Glitch Game" is down to three core elements, they would be:

    1] Develop your Glitch
    2] Interact with other Glitch Players
    3] Interact, impact the development of the world

    Not all players are going to engage in all three core elements, but i think they need to be available for Glitch to be Glitch. None of these are innately tied to the flash interface.

    1 and 2 are already possible in some respects, and although both are stunted the path is pretty clear for both - especially 2. 3 is trickier but has the most potential.

    My wife plays "Develop your Glitch" but hits roadblocks in the emblems and achievement based unlocking, and also in that the benefits of skill development [other than BL] are tied entirely to the flash interface. i actually think the Roadblock are ok, since they all relate to skills that are used 'in game' .. but there is no reason why all the skills have to be 'do activity X in game' based. maybe it due to a limited imagination or just habit, but there is no reason why there can't be skills that allow players to do passive, asynchronous things instead of purely flash client based activities. Gardening and Remote Herdkeeping are closest to this, but you still need to log into flash to do those. I have about 10 different ideas for different types of skills like that, but let's stick to general principles. Beyond that, offline crafting with API hooks would activate most of the other skills for use outside of Flash. although i think that would be worth the effort, it isn't the full, satisfying play mode we are looking for .. see 2

    "Interact with other Glitch Players" is possible. You've got status updates and those updates are on the Glitch HQ iOS app, the web interface and the game client. You can't mail people, which is 100% no good, and you can't chat or IM, which is maybe 5% no good because updates + mail would serve the same function outside the client and are better suited to communicating across devices and play modes. communication is only one type of interaction though and it isn't enough. auctions are workable and perhaps even better served by the API than the web interface, but the and mailing/receiving  of items should be improved and untied from the flash client. We'll see how the offline component of groups develops after the islands come out, but notification of replies in group either by email or RSS or an 'updates' section of the home page or main groups page is almost certainly necessary.

    it is "Interact, impact the development of the world" where the real gap arises. the obvious solution would be to allow something like remote donation to street projects, but i don't think that's the ticket. like offline crafting, it merely replicates something that is done better in the flash client. it is also reclusive and somewhat anti-social. in the recent interview, Stoot talks about "automation", and i think that's where the fun is. imagine commanding a little robot to go out and perform tasks and report back to you with cute little status messages sent to your phone or PC. it might ask you for direction from time to time, and report how other players have interacted with it.. ie. "Bleep. I have been hugged 23 times today, Master, and I feel goooooooood. Blorp." it might recite poetry you've written as it wanders around and report people's responses to you. that kind of stuff. doesn't have to be purely 'functional'.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • the social component is critical, as you don't want "offline" play to suck energy out of the world or make it feel empty. it should actually add to that. there are many creative ways to do this but i really like the command the robot method. the trick is to make it feel like the robots, being the principle point of contact between different play modes, aren't playing in something of a parallel world - despite the play modes being parallel.

    here is a good idea for how to avoid that problem and possibly turn it into a benefit ..http://www.tweenbots.com/ .. extrapolate from this and perhaps if someone's "glitchbot" gets into trouble and a player helps it out, the bot's owner could give a 'tip' either in currants or energy or mood to the good samaritan. or pay a player inside the game to conduct repairs or add upgrades.

    there are other ways to create intersection between "offline" and "online" play, but i'm already way off tangent. the point is, game doesn't need to be flash based or PC based or iOS based or side scrolling based or keyboard based or avatar based or whateverelse based if it follows those three core elements.

    and also, the tangent is still less ridiculous than the OP itself, so i feel no shame : ]
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @dopiaza

    I've made way more money from my iOS development than I have from my Android development. As ways of making a living go, iOS wins hands down.

    But what does that have to do with what I was commenting about, which was that nothing about the fact that the Tiny Speck iOS API is Open Source could ever result in anything anybody codes using it being Open Source?  The whole iOS universe is closed source by design.  Even more vigorously so than anything from Microsoft.  Perhaps that doesn't matter to you, in which case my comment wasn't directed to you.

    Flash isn't Open Source either, so it's really not a central issue in this thread.  But Flash isn't going away.  If anything, it is being more focused towards online Game use and less toward general purpose Web use.  Now that the head zealot at Apple is gone perhaps things will improve there as far as Flash support.  They could certainly do more than actively block improvements in the Flash platform working on their product line without too much effort. 

    However, Apple has decided that it's in their business interest to keep near total control of content on their newer platforms.  Good for them, I guess.  I hope that doesn't work out in the long run for them, cuz I like the idea that culture is free and not beholden to a boardroom full of executives somewhere.

    It feels sort of weird championing Flash over Apple.  Kind of twisted, and it shows how very, very far Apple has tumbled downward.
    Posted 13 months ago by Parrow Gnolle Subscriber! | Permalink
  • "But what does that have to do with what I was commenting about, which was that nothing about the fact that the Tiny Speck iOS API is Open Source could ever result in anything anybody codes using it being Open Source?"

    the last bit there is contentious.

    depends on the license, really. there are licenses that prevent open source code from being used in commercial or in closed source applications, and in the case of the VLC iOS app for example, forced the developers to pull the app from the store, but that is not true of all open source licenses.

    also, my limited understanding is that just because the app is in the store does not mean that that the source code itself cannot be open, free, public, whatever.

    open source and copyleft are not the same thing, see "Apache License".
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • For something to be Open Sourced, it has to be something that can be passed around, compiled at will by different people, and grow.  Changes need to roll back into the main source tree so that the code base converges.  At least that's the spirit in which Open Source is generally directed.  Anything for the iOS platform by design remains ossified and frozen.  The fact that source code for something is available and twenty different people can fork it for their own private use is irrelevant.  The producers of built binaries need to kneel down and kiss the Apple ring before they can be distributed.
    Posted 13 months ago by Parrow Gnolle Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Liz Erd : Would I bet my house Android is going to die? In. A. Heartbeat. It is looking like in the next three to five years at least two Android handset manufacturers are going out of business for want of profit. The rest are - oh, so slowly - starting to realize the only company consistently making money off Android is Google. They are also turning their gaze to the slumbering mega-giant just now starting to awake : 

    Tech support & warranty costs. 

    Guess what? Google isn't helping pay for those. Now stir into the mix what Forbes and Bloomberg and others are realizing : Apple is going to make more off patent licenses from Android than Google could possibly make from Android. As I mentioned, 'swipe to unlock' will be *at least* a billion dollar conversation all by itself. 

    So, combine atom-thin margins with royalty demands from Apple AND ballooning tech support costs... well, only a fool or an MBA would be unable to see the writing on the wall. Android is going away. That much is inarguable. The only thing *to* argue is when. 
    Posted 13 months ago by TekNoh Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Parrow, that's just hyperbole.

    i thought you were going to get into an explanation of how Apple specifically prevents what you set up in the first portion of the statement, and then you just threw a fistful of adjectives at the screen.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • and TekNoh, at least you're explaining your thinking but come on. please.

    two handset makers going out of business for want of profit does not signal the collapse of a platform, it is just how - you know - capitalism works. i am sure Apple will make more money as a result, but so will other companies making Android handsets.

    even in the worst worst case scenario, Android is not going away in 5 years. worst worst case scenario, license fees get jacked up and Motorola is the sole manufacturer of Android devices coz Google owns them and can suck up any *potential* licensing fees through the margins on the device.

    personally, i own an iPhone. i think Android has many problems in its future. i've been to a couple Android developer meet ups where Google and Adobe talked about and demoed different technologies that looked like garbage, and the tales of woe surrounding fragmentation and security were frightening.

    but you are just wrong about it going away. it isn't, at least not in the next 5 years. there are just too many people who will buy it and too many ways for google to make money through it and too many legacy devices to ignore.

    in terms of Glitch, it is going to be on Android in some significant capacity, even if it is merely mobile browser based.

    and even if you are totally right about everything, then Android explodes and Apple picks up a ton of the pieces .. and so will Microsoft, of all people. or HTC or whoever else will develop their own OS, coz they certainly won't be able to switch from Android to iOS.

    yeah, we get it, MBAs a dumb or something. doesn't make you right.

    calm down.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
  • MSFT is killing silverlight too.  I think this is a win for HTML5 not apps and closed ecosystems.  Long live HTML5!
    Posted 13 months ago by Knewnan Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Somewhat off topic somewhat not:
    Could you see Glitch adapted for Wii? Imagine the amount of exercise you'd get on a foot pad having to make your glitch walk and reaching out to hug trees, dig, or even squeeze chickens ! .... still haven't figured out a movement for the pig nibbling :/
    Posted 13 months ago by BlackWolf Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Adobe......Edge...... ..........................................    ............. .
    Posted 13 months ago by Rook Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Or Wallaby in that case, whatever...
    Posted 13 months ago by Rook Subscriber! | Permalink
  • When has Tiny Speck ever stated an intention to create a mobile version of the game? In fact, I could swear I'd read a specific statement from them that they did NOT intend to ever do this.
    Posted 13 months ago by HeyHeyHolly Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'll be sure to pay attention to this after I've cleared all the other items off my Irrelevant Stuff I Don't Give a Crap About list.
    Posted 13 months ago by Billy McBinky Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @striatic : Your entire premise is based on the absurd assumption that businesses do not need profit to survive. It is my belief between licensing costs paid to Apple and the losses sure to accumulate from buying Motorola, even mighty Google is going to be significantly damaged by Android. 

    It is a common consensus in the analyst community that manufacturing hardware is a "crappy, low-margin commodity business", but that is the business Google just jumped in. That is also the reason companies like HTC and RIM are on the ropes. Even the once mighty Nokia found out how expensive 'free' is when they started chasing the Android mirage while attempting to sell cheaper than everyone else. Adding to Google's woes, also, was the announcement that Adobe is abandoning Flash development for TVs. That is a square drop-kick to the nuts of Google and now Google will have to throw significant resources trying to create a replacement for that burgeoning revenue stream. There is just no way the next 3 - 5 years goes well for Google. 

    Your entire premise is propped up by unicorn tears and leprechaun farts because margins will not and cannot increase merely because there are two fewer players. Apple is setting the bar on pricing, so even if it were just Google and Apple in the market, Apple would eat Google alive because of Apple's superior profit margins. Even if Apple decided to go easy on Google - not going to happen, but let's just run with it - then by increasing pricing slightly Apple accelerates their accumulation of cash and has even more resources to crush Android like a bug. It is simply impossible for anyone in the cell phone industry to accumulate cash faster than Apple, yet that is precisely what must happen for Android to survive, let alone 'win'. 

    Like I said, only a fool would try to say this is not the case. Android is a fast-track to losing money, and the oh-so-smart MBAs are just starting to realize this. Anssi Vanjoki, formerly of Nokia, realized it LAST YEAR when he said mobile manufacturers who go the Android route are doing no better than Finnish boys who 'pee in their pants' for warmth in the winter. There may be others in the cell phone industry who, like Anssi, 'get' it, but they are being silenced for now. It's like Nero without the fiddle. 

    Nobody - least of all the people around here - has brought to bear any evidence which directly or indirectly contradicts the fact Android represents a fast-track to declining profits. We are seeing it all over the industry with every 10-Q filed by everyone except Apple. 

    Tiny Speck needs to turn a profit as well. I just can't see how they are going to be able to do this with anything else other than iOS. Every other avenue represents either a dead end, or a negative return on investment. I still maintain, and I have not seen anything which counters the evidence of this, betting against Steve Jobs is not a wise move. Adobe itself is proving exactly how true this is, licked wounds and all. Yet, this is precisely what Tiny Speck did with Glitch : Placed a massive bet Steve Jobs was wrong about Flash. I will keep saying it because every passing day reinforces the truth : If Tiny Speck wasn't mobilizing to ditch Flash six months to a year ago then they are in deep trouble. 

    Adobe is pretty seriously pulling in the oars on Flash. In the past week Adobe has killed all future mobile development and now TV development. The writing has been writ large that web development is over as soon as they have properly positioned Air and the Adobe HTML 5 efforts. That's if Adobe has the luxury of deciding its own fate. That could be accelerated at any time by any major browser developer deciding to drop Flash like a bad habit. One more time : only a fool would argue "if". If has already been decided by Adobe and the market.

    The only sane, rational arguments to be presented involve "when". I keep tossing out cogent, compelling reasoning as to why this must be so. So far, the most intelligent counter-argument has been 'nuh uh!'. Fine. So be it. Think what you will of me personally because, frankly, I don't care. Call me every derogatory name in the book. The one thing you cannot call me is wrong. Every day that goes by, every announcement from Adobe, and every 10-Q filed showing losses is just cementing precisely how right I am. 
    Posted 13 months ago by TekNoh Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Teknoh.

    I skipped your entire comment because your first sentence was incorrect.

    I included at least one reason why Google could avoid any *potential* licensing fee issues, by selling through its own vendor to absorb the fees. There are other options like having OEMs absorb some of the costs themselves. this is not rocket surgery. companies like HTC are making significant profits from Android and will continue to do so.

    as for Tiny Speck, I'm sure TS is able to and in fact will increasingly support iOS. I'm 100% sure their plans have never involved mobile flash, and I'm 100% sure this announcement has little to no bearing on any plans they do have.

    Flash will be around on the PC platform for some time, for precisely the same reasons that Mobile Flash was doomed on handsets. HTML 5 -too general a term, really, isn't there yet, in terms of heavyweight graphical performance, as is present in Glitch. it will be eventually will be but Flash is a mature technology that is actually the very best option for doing certain things in the browser from a graphical and networking perspective.

    you really like Steve Jobs, eh?

    Glitch, and many many other web based games, if rendered using Canvas and JavaScript, would play like 'shit', to invoke a Jobsism.

    the reason Jobs didn't like Flash was because it had garbage performance on the Mac, and was totally inappropriate and impossible to effectively port to mobile devices.

    rendered in HTML5, Glitch would have garbage performance and would have even worse performance on mobile devices if they tried to somehow port it in that manner.

    HTML5, as a suite of technologies, is amazing and truly the future of the web, and maybe a bunch of other things too... but Glitch, along with many other web based games, would also play like absolute shitty garbage if implemented in HTML5. the only reason to do that in 2012 would be ideological.

    as for iOS, glitch will be playable on iOS in fashion that is appropriate to iOS, instead of a garbage port of the browser based game.
    Posted 13 months ago by striatic Subscriber! | Permalink
Previous 1 2