×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Flash CS5 Will Export iPhone Apps

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the in-by-the-side-door dept.

Cellphones 154

HanClinto was among a number of readers to send word that Adobe has worked around the inability to run Flash on iPhones and iPod Touch devices. Adobe has been trying to work with Apple for more than a year to get its Flash Player software running on Apple's products, but has said it needs more cooperation from Apple to get it done. Now Adobe has come up with a work-around. At its Adobe Max developer conference in Los Angeles Monday, Adobe announced that the CS5 release of Flash Professional, due in beta later this year, will allow developers to write applications and compile the code to run on Apple devices. Getting these into the app store might be tricky, though.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yaaay. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29654619)

Yay, now Flash won't just make my Quad Core 3.6GHz with a 4850 Crossfire setup stutter when I try to fullscreen it. It can do it to my iWhatever now too!

Some apps are already there... (4, Informative)

chocobanana (974767) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654625)

Look in http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashcs5/appsfor_iphone/ [adobe.com] They already show apps accepted into the store that were made by devs with prerelease versions of Flash CS5... I think this is cool as it will enable people skilled in Flash to stick to their tool of choice. I would love to see a comparison between developing the iPhone SDK and Flash.

Re:Some apps are already there... (4, Informative)

AwaxSlashdot (600672) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654857)

I would love to see a comparison between developing the iPhone SDK and Flash.

From Daring FireBall [daringfireball.net] :

From the FAQ:

Can I run content created with Flash in the iPhone simulator on Mac? No. Flash content created for the iPhone will not run within the iPhone simulator on Mac.

Thatâ(TM)s because the Simulator runs x86 binaries, but Adobeâ(TM)s compiler only produces ARM code.

Can I use native iPhone OS Controls in my Flash based iPhone content? No.

Not surprising. Iâ(TM)m guessing this will mostly be used to make games anyway.

No debugging. No native controls.

Re:Some apps are already there... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655255)

No debugging. No native controls.

In one word: 'FLASH' .

Re:Some apps are already there... (2, Informative)

samkass (174571) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656779)

No native controls makes sense, but "no debugging" doesn't follow from the "can't run in the simulator" statement. With Apple's toolchain, you can still debug while the software is running on the actual device (not the simulator). It's possible that Adobe has done something similar with this. I don't know. It would be interesting to find out one way or the other.

Re:Some apps are already there... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29656831)

No debugging on the iPhone compiled code, but I am betting you can debug the Flash application itself, as "iPhone" should simply be a target, and not the only "compilation" mode available. After all, it still will write normal Flash applications.

Awesome! (-1, Flamebait)

GradiusCVK (1017360) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655055)

I think this is cool as it will enable people skilled in Flash to stick to their tool of choice

As a person who doesn't own an iPhone, I think this is so completely wonderful that I'm near tears. I can't wait until the skilled Flash developers who made this [winkkk.com] possible start pumping out iPhone apps. It accomplishes two important goals:
1: Destroy the iPhone (you people are so smug! I'm happy with my BlackBerry, thanks)
2: Reduce the amount of time people spend developing Flash for the internet

Am I being unrealistic in hoping that it somehow puts Adobe out of business as well? I mean, maybe some kinda legal battle with Apple or something? Come on, it could happen!

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655275)

as flash goes from strength to strength it seems that the haters are getting more and more absurd in their hopes and dreams.

i know lots of open source advocates who have embraced flex, which is quite open and incredible powerful. they're doing fine.

if i were to sink to your level and use the same faux glee that you try to put across in your post then i would say that people like you are welcome to sideline yourselves; more work for the likes of me.

to be perfectly honest, i suspect that a large proportion of you haters are too thick or too old to get their head around the tools for flash. technology has never kind to those that fail to adapt.

anyhow, good luck with your applets and your html 5 dude!

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29656885)

I always saw the lack of Flash as a bonus. When it went beyond animation and turned menu's into Menutisements that take 30 seconds before you can even click on a link, I lost all interest in Flash and what it can do for me, other than to annoy.

Re:Awesome! (1)

Me! Me! 42 (1153289) | more than 5 years ago | (#29657223)

Too true, GradiusCVK!
(even if somewhat overly "skilled" in sarcasm.)
Mod him up.

Yet another language (1)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654633)

Flash seems like it would need all sort of runtime support to do all the cool things that Flash is supposed to be able to do. If there is no runtime, and the language is just compiled down to native code, and it simply relies on existing iPhone libraries, then is Flash/ActionScript really all that useful and attractive as an implementation language?

This is where Android really shines. You can program in any language, as long as it's Java.

Re:Yet another language (1)

BikeHelmet (1437881) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654693)

This is where Android really shines. You can program in any language, as long as it's Java.

Android has full C/C++ support, but then you're locked to whatever phone you made it for.

Most devs would rather take a tiny hit in performance to not have to recompile constantly. If you go the C/C++ route, you have the chance that you'll miss out on an Android phone using a different SoC.

With Java, you have languages like Ruby and Python too. ;)

Re:Yet another language (2, Informative)

tomtomtom777 (1148633) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654763)

Android has full C/C++ support

They supply the standard C library, but they expose no other API whatsoever. In practice, this means you cannot do any input/output in C and it's use is limited to processor intensive logic.

Re:Yet another language (1)

freeshoes (826204) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654781)

Ruby? Python? If I want the app to take the term of my natural life to load then I will use these, what we need is Haskell.

Re:Yet another language (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655145)

You can always use http://jaskell.codehaus.org/ or http://sourceforge.net/projects/jhaskell/

Re:Yet another language (2)

dFaust (546790) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654705)

then is Flash/ActionScript really all that useful and attractive as an implementation language?

It's attractive to people that only know Flash/Actionscript and don't have the time/desire/skill to learn Objective-C.

I fear just what kind of pre-existing crapware this will enable on the iPhone.

Re:Yet another language (1)

naz404 (1282810) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654813)

>I fear just what kind of pre-existing crapware this will enable on the iPhone.

Addicting Flash games of course! :D

I look forward to seeing some of the better Flash games ported to the iPhone.

Re:Yet another language (1)

salarelv (1314017) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654915)

Buy a Hero and You have Flash 9 support.

Re:Yet another language (1)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654937)

I work for a company that makes mainly Flash-based software. The thing about Flash is that with the same source code (totally unchanged between versions) we can output a web application and a stand-alone executable (for example, to go on a CD). Something which our clients love is the multi-format, multi medium nature of Flash. Yes, most of this can be done with Java, but not in the same amount of time and not with the same artist-integration Flash has.

On the topic of iPhone integration, if Flash CS5 lets almost anyone make iPhone apps will this slow the approval of apps as every Tom Dick and Harry will be submitting their Newgrounds fodder? Not only this, but does this mean we can create and compile iPhone apps on the PC? As far as I'm aware it can only be done on Mac OSX with their Objective-C libs at the moment (one of the reasons we've not already started iPhone development is the lack of Macs in our office... or iPhones)

Re:Yet another language (1)

gaspyy (514539) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655195)

Flash CS5 on both Mac and PC are supported. I am in the same position as you, especially since many people who play my chess game [flashchess3.com] would love to see it on their iPhones.

As for quality, only AS3 is supported. Most simple/crappy flash games are written in AS1/AS2 because of the easier learning curve, but really, considering apps like iFart on IAmRich, I doubt anyone will contend that the quality of the approved flash games could be too low.

Re:Yet another language (2, Insightful)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655297)

Thank god only AS3 is supported.
Although, most of what our company outputs is AS2, mainly because our primary clients have paranoid and backwards IT techs who refuse to update their flash players, or low-budget IT Depts who are still using Pentium IIIs.
Anything that'll give us some leverage to put AS3 into practice is well worth it
"Sure, you can have it on the iPhone, but only if you update your flash player on your PCs"

Re:Yet another language (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656173)

if Flash CS5 lets almost anyone make iPhone apps will this slow the approval of apps as every Tom Dick and Harry will be submitting their Newgrounds fodder?

You mean, slower than it already is, with everyone submitting their flashlight and other extra-generic apps?

Re:Yet another language (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655331)

Right, because the programming language is synonymous with the quality of the program. "You wrote a program in a language I don't know or understand. It MUST be crap". It's like Fox News for technology here. Besides, you are worried about "crapware"? Yes, let's continue the trend of creating farting apps and bouncing boob games and hope that "crapware" doesn't come out. It's all quality now!

Re:Yet another language (1)

Hannes2000 (1113397) | more than 5 years ago | (#29657251)

I fear just what kind of pre-existing crapware this will enable on the iPhone.

none. this isn't a mobile safari flash plugin, it's just another way to compile your standard iPhone-App. Apple won't be accepting "pre-existing crapware" any more than they do already.

Play nice! (1, Offtopic)

sumthinboutjesus (984845) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654637)

It is extremely frustrating to have a very capable mobile browser and not be able to watch online video content, such as Hulu, ESPN etc. Flash games would potentially be a side benefit of the technology, but I care less about games than I do viewing online video content. I really wish either the content providers would ditch Flash as their delivery method or Apple would get on board with Flash 10.1 so I don't have some web content effectively gimped. Either would be fine with me, although I imagine ditching Flash as the delivery method would be better as I don't particularly care for annoying Flash ads and Adobe's current Flash version for Mac doesn't lead me to believe their iPhone implementation would be stable or have smooth playback. I really do wonder how good Flash can be on all the other mobile platforms it is being ported to...

Re:Play nice! (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654821)

You do realize the news that Flash CS5 will be able to export iPhone Apps has absolutely nothing to do with Safari Mobile supporting Flash or websites ditching Flash for something else to show their videos, right?

Re:Play nice! (1)

sumthinboutjesus (984845) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654863)

Yes, I do know that, and I thought it was clear from my comment that I wanted either the option for Flash on the iPhone or for current online video providers to move away from Flash so I could use their content...neither of which is a solution with the current announcement of Flash 10.1. Effectively, that's the whole point of my comment: this announcement has nothing to do with my desire for Safari to either support Flash or for websites to ditch it, and that sucks.

Re:Play nice! (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654873)

Effectively, that's the whole point of my comment: this announcement has nothing to do with my desire for Safari to either support Flash or for websites to ditch it, and that sucks.

I'm glad we both agree your reply has nothing to do with this article.

Re:Play nice! (1)

sumthinboutjesus (984845) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655075)

Why don't you stop being a dick and RTFA, as in the article it clearly talks about how Flash Player is still not properly supported etc. My comment was clearly relevant to the article and the continuing issues surrounding Flash on the iPhone, and it's obvious you either didn't read the article (and just stuck with reading the summary as most do) or you have serious issues with reading comprehension and understanding critical commentary of the article's content.

Re:Play nice! (1)

freeshoes (826204) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654883)

Silverlight anyone..... thought not.

Re:Play nice! (1)

Bazar (778572) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655085)

Watching videos on your cellphone?
We get charged by the kilobytes for online cellphone useage here in New Zealand, watching a 30 minutes youtube movie would probably cost at least 50USD
If your annoyed that you can't download movies to your cellphone, i can't help but think your doing something wrong.
Flash pages on the otherhand i can understand, especially since there are so many websites that don't function correctly without flash

Re:Play nice! (1)

sumthinboutjesus (984845) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655153)

Although I didn't explicitly state earlier, I'm actually using an iPod touch 3rd gen, which is essentially an iPhone without the cell radio. Therefore, all my data usage comes from WiFi. Hence, no worries about the outrageous data fees that cell companies charge; it would be hard to justify those prices given that 99% of the time I'm within range of WiFi. And yes, mobile Safari would be essentially a desktop browser (which would be very useful) if it could support a few critical plugins such as Flash that seem to be increasingly popular for viewing web content.

Re:Play nice! (1)

Anonymusing (1450747) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656035)

We get charged by the kilobytes for online cellphone useage here in New Zealand, watching a 30 minutes youtube movie would probably cost at least 50USD

iPhone users in the U.S. are typically REQUIRED to pay for a $30/month unlimited data plan, on the assumption that you will either use a lot of data, or AT&T still wants to make a buck off you.

Why would this be tricky? (2, Interesting)

dFaust (546790) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654667)

There are already at least four apps on the store today that were built like this. This isn't Flash on the iPhone in any way - the apps are compiled into native iPhone applications. Does Apple have a rule somewhere that says all iPhone apps must be compiled with XCode?

Re:Why would this be tricky? (5, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654699)

They do have a rule saying apps must be written using the iPhone SDK provided by Apple.

Re:Why would this be tricky? (2, Informative)

joh (27088) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654809)

Yeah, but there's no rule that says that the code has to be hand-written. If it uses all the right APIs chances are that Apple will never even notice how the app was generated in the first place.

Re:Why would this be tricky? (2, Interesting)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 5 years ago | (#29657125)

Yeah, but there's no rule that says that the code has to be hand-written. If it uses all the right APIs chances are that Apple will never even notice how the app was generated in the first place.

No, there is no specific rule, but there are a lot of complaints from developers using Phonegap [phonegap.com] . This framework allows HTML/JavaScript based development on iPhone, Android and BlackBerry. Apps developed using this framework have been rejected from the App Store in unusually high percentages.

There are a lot of unwritten rules to the App Store as well. One of them is: don't use frameworks.

Re:Why would this be tricky? (1)

biscuitlover (1306893) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654833)

It's interesting if that is indeed the case, because there are a lot of apps out there that have been written using Unity3D [unity3d.com] ...

Re:Why would this be tricky? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29654939)

It's interesting if that is indeed the case, because there are a lot of apps out there that have been written using Unity3D [unity3d.com] ...

...ever looked at Unity's requirements for the iPhone edition?

You must be an approved Apple Developer for the iPhone and install the iPhone SDK (requires Intel-based Mac running OSX 10.5.4 or later)

Re:Why would this be tricky? (1)

gaspyy (514539) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655159)

The same note is present in Adobe's case - see here [adobe.com] (scroll to bottom): "Delivery through the App Store requires participation in the iPhone Developer Program and approval of the application by Apple."

It's worth noting that there are already a few apps made with Flash on Adobe store.
Also not mentioned in the summary is that this is actually native code being generated:
"We created a new compiler front end that allowed LLVM to understand ActionScript 3 and used its existing ARM back end to output native ARM assembly code. We call this Ahead of Time (AOT) compilationâ"in contrast to the way Adobe Flash Player and Adobe AIR function on the desktop using Just in Time (JIT) compilation. Since we are able to compile ActionScript to ARM ahead of time, the application gets all the performance benefits that the JIT would offer and the license compliance of not requiring a runtime in the final application."

Monotouch (3, Informative)

AwaxSlashdot (600672) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654877)

http://monotouch.net/ [monotouch.net]
Compile C# code written against .Net libs and get it running on the iPhone. Monotouch provides a C# to ARM compiler and the ARM implementation of the .Net libs you might need.

Ok. (1)

mcgritch (472005) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654669)

But when are they going to announce support for Authorware?

Hard vs. easy (1, Insightful)

JonTurner (178845) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654741)

>>Getting these into the app store might be tricky, though.
But getting this into the courts will be a snap.

Certain recent high-profile apps store refusals (most notably, google voice) have drawn FCC attention. Apple cannot keep a walled garden forever.

Re:Hard vs. easy (2)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654945)

Whilst they are not a monopoly supplier of mobile phones they can do what they like.

Re:Hard vs. easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655113)

No, they can't.

Re:Hard vs. easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655527)

As pointed out by a previous poster, there are already apps using this on the store http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashcs5/appsfor_iphone/ [adobe.com]

Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654907)

Serious question - I have no idea what their beef is. Is it yet more paranoid control of the apps , even apps running in a VM , that can run on their system or is some sort of security issue , or is it just sour grapes?

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (3, Interesting)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654933)

The main reason Apple and Adobe fight over Flash is because Adobe doesn't want to do a complete rewrite of Flash for the iPhone and instead just wants to modify its Mac-version to run in Safari Mobile.

Apple however isn't content with this, because it's their opinion that Flash for Mac/iPhone takes up too much resources, which will harm the "browsing experience" and drain the battery.

Basically, Apple demands something better than Adobe is willing to develop.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

tpgp (48001) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655063)

Basically, Apple demands something better than Adobe is willing to develop.

Do you have a non-speculative source for this?

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

dhovis (303725) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655133)

Basically, Apple demands something better than Adobe is willing to develop.

Do you have a non-speculative source for this?

Have you ever used Flash on the Mac?

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

elvum (9344) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655265)

It seems to work fine for me.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655279)

Then you haven't looked at your CPU usage while running Flash on a Mac.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655315)

In all fairness, he probably has a fast enough CPU that it isn't an issue.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655385)

Yeah, but the iPhone hasn't.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (2, Interesting)

cppmonkey (615733) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655693)

Just because Flash is single threaded and thus can only choke one core of a dual core machine at a time doesn't mean it can't bring a 2.8 Ghz machine to it's knees. Just try watching one hulu movie in Safari in one window and load some particularly crappy flash game in firefox. Your machine is now unusable.

Adobe treats mac users as second class citizens thus treating many of their power users like dirt. If you think like Steve Jobs, this is an insult to Apple since they went and did want industry members like Adobe have long demanded of them and built a better OS than Windows (much better) and built really solid hardware, the iPod Touch/iPhone anyways, and then been plagued with monopolists like Adobe/Microsoft shutting them out. If history is a lesson, (think iWork) Apple will soon deliver a native version of Inkscape and dump resources into Pixelmator, and start bundling them with Final Cut studio and new iMacs (well a trial version in Pixelmator's case). Apple somewhat reasonably demands more, Adobe and Microsoft refuse to/can't deliver so Apple just raises the bar... this is capitalism at its best; even if the Google Voice fiasco is capitalism at its worst.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

moogied (1175879) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656347)

This is true with windows too? Flash is a bloated pile of shit program. Is this really shocking? Wake up and smell the piss poor programming along with god awful management decisions. (Rewrite? Screw that! Lets tack more shit on!)

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (2, Insightful)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 5 years ago | (#29657299)

Yes, I know. Until just last week I ran Ubuntu on a 2.8ghz machine, and believe me, I know how painful it is to hear your CPU fan spin up to max as you're watching a TV show that if you had pirated would take almost no system resources to run.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655273)

That's not an argument. Flash is too ineficient, bloated and plain sucks in any platform.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655393)

Until that is fixed, Steve Jobs doesn't want it on his precious platform.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

dhovis (303725) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655645)

That's not an argument. Flash is too ineficient, bloated and plain sucks in any platform.

The Windows version of Flash craps out unicorns compared to the Mac version.

It's pretty obvious if you were a Mac user (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655201)

Flash sucks a whole lot on OS X.

Apple's not going to let Adobe develop on the iPhone until Flash doesn't suck on OS X.

I'm on powerbook g4 1.67 GHz and playing hulu videos pegs 100% of CPU. It still stutters quiet a bit. I don't think iPhone Flash will be much better.

Re:It's pretty obvious if you were a Mac user (0, Troll)

shar303 (944843) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655309)

oh come on - everything sucks on osx. its like wading through a highly-viscous saccharin gloop.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

anti-pop-frustration (814358) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655199)

Apple however isn't content with this, because it's their opinion that Flash for Mac/iPhone takes up too much resources, which will harm the "browsing experience" and drain the battery.

True. Flash on mobile browsers might be too much (hardware wise) for the current generation of smartphones. But we're getting there fast.

Also, a proper flash plug-in would mean arbitrary code (which in Apple speak is code word for communism), and we can't have that sort of thing, no sir. Users must be protected from it at all cost.

Apple: Making trusted computing cool since 2008.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (2, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655069)

Paranoia is an irrational fear.
Apple strongly controlling apps is a business decision.

There's a difference.

It's one of many business decisions that makes up the iPhone ecosystem. Something which has been phenomenally successful. Consumers like the end result, and vote with their dollars.

Whilst Apple employees do make mistakes with edge cases of their rules, the rules themselves are not irrational. And Flash isn't an edge case.

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655335)

Politics. Flash would allow to write applications that are not screened by Apple, same reason for Java. Imagine the possibility, someone could

Re:Whats the issue Apple have with Flash? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655493)

Not really though, because even if a JVM or Flash Player existed on the iPhone, you wouldn't be able to install stuff on the iPhone without getting it from the App Store.

The only way you could provide applications would be throug the web, but web apps [apple.com] are currently also not being screened by Apple.

Clarification (3, Informative)

orta (786013) | more than 5 years ago | (#29654957)

Before a million 'oh noes runtime' posts. It doesn't use the flash runtime, it uses Apple's LLVM to convert the usual AS3 JIT runtime to being a compiled app. This is why it won't have any problems with the app store. The OP is wrong, and it's documented. As proved by the fact they have apps on the store. I just hope this gets Open Sourced so that we don't have to use the Flash IDE to do it.

Re:Clarification (1)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 5 years ago | (#29657189)

There are a lot of Phonegap [phonegap.com] -based apps in the App Store, too. But there have been a lot of rejections as well. Apple doesn't like you using third-party frameworks. This will be no exception -- a couple of apps in the App Store is not evidence that it's OK to use 3rd-party frameworks.

Same as Mono? (1)

WarwickRyan (780794) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655089)

So they've written a static compiler, just like mono did?

ahref=http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/01/open-source-mono-framework-brings-c-to-iphone-and-wii.arsrel=url2html-27181 [slashdot.org] http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/01/open-source-mono-framework-brings-c-to-iphone-and-wii.ars />

Re:Same as Mono? (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656203)

Yes, that's exactly what they did. Another commenter posted from another source that they modified LLVM to understand Actionscript and output AOT-compiled ARM code.

Do you still have to... (2, Insightful)

Assmasher (456699) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655123)

...sign that horrid SDK license?

Do you still have to buy a hideously overpriced Apple machine to use as a dev box?

Flash (REAL, unchained and fettered, Flash) and Java do not exist on the iPhone for one simple reason: GREED.

If a complete Flash Player and Java are on the iPhone, everyone can develop for the iPhone without an SDK, everyone can publish/sell applications without the crApp Store.

I have no problem with a company making money off its products, but the lengths to which Apple disciples will go to justify the hideousness of its corporate behavior is only matched by their ability to ignore Apple's ridiculous prices.

Re:Do you still have to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655361)

yeah anony cause I don't need the flame...

This sentiment is really getting old. Don't like the hardware prices, don't buy. Recently I purchased a Macbook Pro for me, Gateway uber machine for my wife, and a Toshiba mid-line machine for my daughter. Know what...the Mac was worth what I paid.

Having worked on Microsoft stuff, I'm wondering why I have to buy a hideously expensive OS, Visual Studio, and maybe a couple of Win mobile phones (you know, to test all the form factors and processors). My iPhone programming experience is an order of magnitude better than my WinCE and Win Mobile development experience. Compare the real price to get in the door and I think the Apple story is much better.

Also, I'd expected to hate learning Objective-C (am a Java guy) but wasn't so bad. Had to remember how to release memory :)

Re:Do you still have to... (2, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656275)

Having worked on Microsoft stuff, I'm wondering why I have to buy a hideously expensive OS, Visual Studio

Nice try, but Visual Studio is available for free (see the Express editions). Plus you don't need to use those, there are other compilers/IDEs available. And you can run on hardware from any manufacturer. And you don't need permission from MS to release your application on their platform.

But apart from all of that, yes, I'm afraid you do need to pay for Windows.

Don't like the hardware prices, don't buy.

Sure, we don't. But all the while there are daily Iphone stories (two today, in fact), it's fair game for people to comment on them. If people don't know about these issues, how will they know not to buy?

My iPhone programming experience is an order of magnitude better than my WinCE and Win Mobile development experience.

Order of magnitude, eh? How do you quantify "experience"?

Compare the real price to get in the door and I think the Apple story is much better.

What's the "real" price, and how does it differ to price?

Re:Do you still have to... (3, Informative)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655433)

If a complete Flash Player and Java are on the iPhone, everyone can develop for the iPhone without an SDK, everyone can publish/sell applications without the crApp Store.

Your argument makes no sense at all. First of all, there are already lots of ways to build iPhone apps without using a Mac, like Unity 3D [unity3d.com] or MonoTouch [monotouch.net] . So you don't need a Mac, even without a JVM or Flash player.

Secondly, you wouldn't be able to publish and sell apps if a JVM or Flash Player would exist on an iPhone, because without jailbreaking the device, the only way to install apps remains through the App Store. Supporting Java or Flash has nothing to do with the way apps are distributed.

Rant all you want, but at least make sense while doing so.

Re:Do you still have to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655561)

Your argument makes no sense at all. First of all, there are already lots of ways to build iPhone apps without using a Mac, like Unity 3D [unity3d.com] or MonoTouch [monotouch.net] . So you don't need a Mac, even without a JVM or Flash player.

Do you even know what you are talking about? MonoTouch lets your write in .NET languages, but still requires a Mac.Unity 3D is a gaming platform, I'm sure everyone wants to just write games....

So refute rants all you want, but at least make sense while doing so.

Re:Do you still have to... (1)

gaspyy (514539) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655563)

Secondly, you wouldn't be able to publish and sell apps if a JVM or Flash Player would exist on an iPhone, because without jailbreaking the device, the only way to install apps remains through the App Store

Why? Maybe I want to sell through Apple's App store but also through my site directly and avoid their fees.

Whether or not I use the SDK is kinda irrelevant as long I pay to join the developer program and get an iPhone to test (the simulator is not enough for serious testing, especially for the actual user experience, sensors, etc).

Re:Do you still have to... (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655583)

Why? Maybe I want to sell through Apple's App store but also through my site directly and avoid their fees.

You can't install apps from a website on an iPhone.

Re:Do you still have to... (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656223)

Unless your phone is jailbroken, but that's not the route Adobe is going for, here, obviously.

Re:Do you still have to... (4, Informative)

rxmd (205533) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655699)

Your argument makes no sense at all. First of all, there are already lots of ways to build iPhone apps without using a Mac, like Unity 3D [unity3d.com] or MonoTouch [monotouch.net] . So you don't need a Mac, even without a JVM or Flash player.

Regarding Unity3D, see the Unity for iPhone Requirements page: [unity3d.com]

In order to license and use Unity iPhone Publishing, developers must meet the following requirements:

  • You must own Unity 2.x (Indie or Pro)
  • You must be an approved Apple Developer for the iPhone and install the iPhone SDK (requires Intel-based Mac running OSX 10.5.4 or later)

And regarding MonoTouch, see the MonoTouch FAQ [monotouch.net] :

What is MonoTouch?
MonoTouch is a software development kit
for Mac OS X that lets you use .NET programming languages to create native applications for Apple iPhone and Apple iPod Touch devices. [...]

Do I need a Mac to use MonoTouch?
MonoTouch requires a Mac and Apple's iPhone SDK to test on the emulator and deploy on the device.

So no, those aren't ways to build OS X apps without a Mac. For someone who asks his parent poster to rant all he wants, but at least to make sense while doing so, you might check your facts a little better.

Re:Do you still have to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29656487)

Flash (REAL, unchained and fettered, Flash) and Java do not exist on the iPhone for one simple reason: GREED.

What an idiot.

How can you discount the very real performance problems of Flash on platorms other than Windows. You can't even run Flash on a Mac without the processor pegging to 100% and the fans coming on. That's not true of other video codecs on the same platform.

What a hideous post.

Re:Do you still have to... (2, Interesting)

Snocone (158524) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656545)

Flash (REAL, unchained and fettered, Flash) and Java do not exist on the iPhone for one simple reason: GREED.

If a complete Flash Player and Java are on the iPhone, everyone can develop for the iPhone without an SDK, everyone can publish/sell applications without the crApp Store.

Unfortunately, we can demonstrate your thesis incorrect by example.

People are indeed developing for the iPhone without an SDK and publishing/selling applications without the crApp Store right now, using HTML5. I reviewed an example here [alexcurylo.com] , ponying up the big $4.95 over the web to do the complete non-crApp Store buying experience, and was quite impressed indeed with how native it appeared.

As a matter of fact, apparently you're a bit young to remember this, my son, but for the first year after the iPhone was released there was no SDK and developers were told that writing HTML apps, as the above cited people are making a business out of now, would be the only way to develop for the iPhone. And although the release of the SDK rather overpowered it, last year a whole metric fluffton of various hooks and APIs were added specifically to make HTML apps like the above examples more powerful, more native looking, and all around better. ... so, looks like your reasoning doesn't hold up. Apple not only approves but is actively promoting the development of non-SDK native-appearing HTML5 apps. Yet, somehow, Flash and Java remain off the phone. Now why, oh why, could that be? Begins with an "S" and ends with a "k", that would be my guess!

Re:Do you still have to... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29656937)

Interesting article, but that intro where you just dismissed cydia offhand took a bit away from it. It would have been one thing if you had numbers, but you essentially just said "It's like this because it's the conclusion I want as the intro to a review". I mean 100% of the people I know with iphones have it jailbroken. They all also have paid for apps from the normal app store.

Re:Do you still have to... (1)

Snocone (158524) | more than 5 years ago | (#29657203)

that intro where you just dismissed cydia offhand took a bit away from it. It would have been one thing if you had numbers,

If you'd like numbers, check out the weekly Admob reports for instance. They will show that less than 8% of user sessions are on jailbroken phones.

I consider that quite sufficient reason to dismiss Cydia offhand. Now, if you have a counterexample -- just one! -- of a publisher that has actually made significant money from a Cydia offering, then I will rethink my offhand dismissal.

Palm Pre (1)

markdavis (642305) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655167)

Palm seems to have no problem with it. The Palm Pre is going to be the first phone to support Flash:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpI6gA9cuME [youtube.com]
http://www.precentral.net/adobe-flash-player-101-demod-pre [precentral.net]

Re:Palm Pre (1)

Spliffster (755587) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655293)

<quote><p>Palm seems to have no problem with it. The Palm Pre is going to be the first phone to support Flash:</p></quote>
The way you write this, it sounds like something positive.

Seriously, I don't like the stronghold of Apple over the iPhone platform but if this prevents the poor iPhone users to ever have to witness the Flash "Experience", I think this is a good thing.

Oh, an if you want video, there is a video player on the iPhone which can display streaming video. Flash is the worst option for watching video so just offer a Video stream on your site instead of a fucking flash applet, dammit!

-S

Re:Palm Pre (0, Troll)

shar303 (944843) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655379)

your having problems with logic here but its quite simple, let me help you a bit.

for most people flash is a very good thing, for idiot zealots like you it isn't. flash continues to spread and grow in power.

the increasingly shrill voices of those like you

if you're stupid enough to buy a phone that drops 1/5 of all calls in nyc then they deserve what they get - a walled garden that nobody with half a brain would want to be in.

you just wait for html 5 with svg wundershow extensions /sarcasm.

Re:Palm Pre (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655785)

"for most people flash is a very good thing"

No, for most people flash is the "least bad"* of the available solutions, but it doesn't mean it's good. Many people have problems due to lack of proper hardware acceleration and multi-platform support (as we can see in this very case).

Re:Palm Pre (1)

shar303 (944843) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656329)

it is arguable that the whole point of flash is its ubiquity and the ease with which it can be installed. compare/contrast with java fx and silverlight, which are both a lot more troublesome than flash in both respects.

hardware acceleration is great, (who would argue against it), but if it compromises these aspects of the flash plugin then that might be seen as a bad move.

with flash 10, pixel bender can be used to offload a certain amount of work to a gpu but its not ideal. something that adobe are working on no doubt.

Re:Palm Pre (2, Insightful)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656321)

I love how things not being supported is twisted to be a good thing - we've seen it before: 3G, MMS, video, copy/paste. That last one in particular, it's amazing the lengths people went to to justify how the UI was improved by not being able to do something as simple as copy/paste, by talking about "new paradigms" (but not ever explaining what those were).

The joke is that when the Iphone finally does add those new features, suddenly the argument that it was better off without them vanishes, and the news is accompanied with much hype and fanfare, as if it was the first phone to ever have such a feature.

I wish I thought of these tactics 10-15 years ago for the Amiga, when development for it was disappearing after Commodore's demise. "Why yes, it doesn't matter that AmigaOS doesn't have Java, in fact, that's a reason why it's better than Windows, because Java is horrible!"

Re:Palm Pre (2, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656485)

it's amazing the lengths people went to to justify how the UI was improved by not being able to do something as simple as copy/paste, by talking about "new paradigms"

It would be amazing if it was true. But it's not.

What people did say was that all the various suggestions that people here and on blogs were making for how to do the UI were shit. And that Apple would probably do cut'n'paste in a future version when they came up with a good UI for it. Which is exactly what happened.

Re:Palm Pre (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655855)

Interesting...I must have gotten my Nokia E71 from the future...
It has been out for over a year with flash support, and it is not the first phone to have it...

Re:Palm Pre (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656343)

Well this is Appledot, we can't expect stories about phones from the major companies in the industry like Nokia.

But yes - if not having Flash is a good thing (as some here claim), why isn't there a story for the Motorola V980 not supporting Flash? And if it is a good thing, why aren't there stories for all the phones that do?

Re:Palm Pre (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656245)

So does that make all Windows Mobile phones somehow the second phone to support Flash, or.. what?

Adobe, don't you know Apple? (2, Interesting)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#29655851)

Number 1 rule to make sure something ships on Apple iPhone platform or even OS X is: Keep your mouth shut up about it. Especially if you do "workaround" kind of stuff. Look what they did to Google, Sun (ZFS).

This announcement will not serve anything rather than thousands of trolls and fanboys not knowing a single thing about "Flash lite" kind of things working perfectly on Symbian/Win MO talk how bad Flash is and how it will eat their battery.

They didn't understand the basic but secret reason about why a multimedia/app platform like Flash wasn't shipped with iPhone at first place. We, users have very good guesses.

If I sound paranoid, I ask you what happened to ZFS after Sun CEO blogged about it before SJobs was able to announce it with his genius PR. There are no traces of ZFS on Snow Leopard nor its server. It is amazing that $1 shareware app authors knows how to deal with Apple but multi billion Adobe which somehow owes its existence to Apple does such lame PR announcements.

Have fun with your "export to iPhone" menu option next year. Something tells me something will go wrong with the cunning plan.

Re:Adobe, don't you know Apple? (1)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#29657015)

Number 1 rule to make sure something ships on Apple iPhone platform or even OS X is: Keep your mouth shut up about it. Especially if you do "workaround" kind of stuff.

Kinda hard to sell a product that you can't tell anybody about, isn't it?

Apple Wants Control Of Its Apps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29655895)

They want total control over what does run, and what doesn't run on their iPhone. Their rejection of Flash points toward that fact. Why? Because many of the apps, including ones with pr0n and other Apple no-no's could easily be written in Flash and run through the browser, thus rendering Apple's draconian control useless...

I'd prefer it if Flash went away entirely (1)

crunchly (266150) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656063)

Aside from the occasional clever game, I could certainly do without Flash in general, let alone on the iPhone. And even if Flash were available, I suspect that most Flash apps would have to be rewritten to work well on the size screen and the touch interface of the iPhone. If you are going to write an app for a specific platform then, use the appropriate tools for the job. Certainly, Apple tries its best to keep all aspects of its machines under its own control, but anything to reduce the annoyance of Flash is a good thing IMO.

Great. NOW you tell me. (1)

tenzig_112 (213387) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656341)

After spending a month diving into the iPhone SDK and re-learning C NOW you tell me that I can make iPhone apps with Flash?

Will iPhone apps built in Flash still feature Flash's terrible bitmap scaling and rotation? Will it still allow for sloppy (and dangerous) typing and memory operations? Probably not, I suppose. Still, I can't see myself developing in Flash (or .net for that matter) just because it's more familiar. Tools for jobs. If I want to make a game for the web, I'll use Flash. If I want to make an iPhone app, I'll use X-Code thanks very much.

Wrong wrong wrong wrong WRONG! (5, Informative)

sootman (158191) | more than 5 years ago | (#29656603)

HanClinto was among a number of readers to send word that Adobe has worked around the inability to run Flash on iPhones and iPod Touch devices. Adobe has been trying to work with Apple for more than a year to get its Flash Player software running on Apple's products, but has said it needs more cooperation from Apple to get it done. Now Adobe has come up with a work-around.

This does NOT let Flash content, as we know it, run on iPhone! For once in your miserable lives, editors, (and maybe submitters, too), READ THE DAMN ARTICLE! [adobe.com] Last line of the first paragraph, IN BOLD: These aren't Flash SWF files, they're native iPhone apps.

Getting these into the app store might be tricky, though.

And I HATE this whiny editorializing BULLSHIT! Again from TFA, THIRD FUCKING PARAGRAPH, first sentence: As of today, participants in the Adobe pre-release program have submitted 8 applications and all of them have been accepted into the App Store.
 
Slashdot eds, this is the worst submission I've seen in a while. kdawson, do you know how to read, or click on a link?
 
For anyone who actually cares to know details, there's more info here. [adobe.com]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?