<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Steve Jobs lying about Flash not working on iPhone?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/</link>
	<description>Exploring the 2010 Web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:12:19 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: max191</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/comment-page-2/#comment-120170</link>
		<dc:creator>max191</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 05:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4113#comment-120170</guid>
		<description>Thanks for writing this blog and sharing it with the world. I would like to know how to go for reading your rss blog. Please let me know if possible.&lt;br&gt;regards&lt;br&gt;&lt;a rel=&quot;dofollow&quot; href=&quot;http://www.charcoalgrillsite.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;charcoal grill&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for writing this blog and sharing it with the world. I would like to know how to go for reading your rss blog. Please let me know if possible.<br />regards<br /><a rel="dofollow" href="http://www.charcoalgrillsite.com" rel="nofollow">charcoal grill</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ingen Flash på iPhone &#171; Adobehjälte</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/comment-page-2/#comment-96324</link>
		<dc:creator>Ingen Flash på iPhone &#171; Adobehjälte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:18:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4113#comment-96324</guid>
		<description>[...] det går även rykten om att det är andra saker än prestanda som ligger bakom. Vissa påstår att det är en konflikt mellan Adobe och Apple när det kommer till PDF-formatet . Andra tar upp Adobes krav på licenspengar som en annan trolig orsak till varför Apple [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] det går även rykten om att det är andra saker än prestanda som ligger bakom. Vissa påstår att det är en konflikt mellan Adobe och Apple när det kommer till PDF-formatet . Andra tar upp Adobes krav på licenspengar som en annan trolig orsak till varför Apple [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Human VOIP &#187; Blog Archive &#187; RIA on the mobile phones and small devices</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/comment-page-2/#comment-96236</link>
		<dc:creator>Human VOIP &#187; Blog Archive &#187; RIA on the mobile phones and small devices</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:29:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4113#comment-96236</guid>
		<description>[...] Steve Jobs bashed on the Flash Player performance on the iPhone, Adobe replied and there were others. After the release of the iPhone SDK, Adobe&#8217;s CEO announced they will develop a Flash Player [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Steve Jobs bashed on the Flash Player performance on the iPhone, Adobe replied and there were others. After the release of the iPhone SDK, Adobe&#8217;s CEO announced they will develop a Flash Player [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Realtosh</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/comment-page-2/#comment-96268</link>
		<dc:creator>Realtosh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4113#comment-96268</guid>
		<description>Why should Apple pay Adobe to license Flashlight or Flash; and/or pay Microsdoft to license Silverlight. Instead of paying royalty fees to support proprietary technologies; why shouldn&#039;t Apple just continue to support H.264 codec which is part of the MPEG-4 standard.

Wouldn&#039;t supporting open standards be better for the web, for mobile computing and for Apple and its&#039; customers, then giving money to either Adobe or Microsoft that has the ironic side-effect of helping to establish a proprietary technology as a defacto standard. If Apple were to try to establish a proprietary technology, it would be their own. But from Apple&#039;s recent history, they&#039;ve made every attempt to build their solutions on standard technologies. Why would anyone think they would act differently when it came to Flash. They convinced the largest repository of videos on the web, youtube, to move from Flash to H.264. What would make anyone think that they would ever get around to supporting Flash, other than to keep it as a negotiating tactic with Adobe. Why give up that chip earlier than absolutely necessary.

Apple did in fact choose to support the ActiveSync protocol on the iPhone which is part of the Microsoft Exchange email technologies. Apple added this technology only out of necessity; to be compatible with Exchange servers already deployed at thousands of corporations. But in that fight Blackberry is already running away with the lion&#039;s share of mobile email, because their system works most of the time; several long high-impact well-publicized outages not withstanding. Apple doesn&#039;t want to be associated with the Blackberry outages that take out all Blackberry devices, even iPhones if Apple were so inclined to support RIM technology. On the other hand if a companies Exchange servers go down, all email is down including desktops. The IT folks and Microsoft will take all the heat.

Plus, I can see Apple building out an email server solution, more robust than the open source solutions that are already included for free with OS X Server.

But as far as Flash or Silverlight is concerned, I wouldn&#039;t be holding my breath if I were either Adobe or Microsoft. Apple is already supporting an open standard (H.264) and getting everyone who would listen to move away from licensed proprietary technologies (Flash and Silverlight) and the obligatory royalties. I can only see that as a good thing. Now all these websites  who want to show up on the iPhone will have to provide their content in H.264.

Stop whining! It&#039;s cheaper to encode in H.264 anyway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why should Apple pay Adobe to license Flashlight or Flash; and/or pay Microsdoft to license Silverlight. Instead of paying royalty fees to support proprietary technologies; why shouldn&#8217;t Apple just continue to support H.264 codec which is part of the MPEG-4 standard.</p>
<p>Wouldn&#8217;t supporting open standards be better for the web, for mobile computing and for Apple and its&#8217; customers, then giving money to either Adobe or Microsoft that has the ironic side-effect of helping to establish a proprietary technology as a defacto standard. If Apple were to try to establish a proprietary technology, it would be their own. But from Apple&#8217;s recent history, they&#8217;ve made every attempt to build their solutions on standard technologies. Why would anyone think they would act differently when it came to Flash. They convinced the largest repository of videos on the web, youtube, to move from Flash to H.264. What would make anyone think that they would ever get around to supporting Flash, other than to keep it as a negotiating tactic with Adobe. Why give up that chip earlier than absolutely necessary.</p>
<p>Apple did in fact choose to support the ActiveSync protocol on the iPhone which is part of the Microsoft Exchange email technologies. Apple added this technology only out of necessity; to be compatible with Exchange servers already deployed at thousands of corporations. But in that fight Blackberry is already running away with the lion&#8217;s share of mobile email, because their system works most of the time; several long high-impact well-publicized outages not withstanding. Apple doesn&#8217;t want to be associated with the Blackberry outages that take out all Blackberry devices, even iPhones if Apple were so inclined to support RIM technology. On the other hand if a companies Exchange servers go down, all email is down including desktops. The IT folks and Microsoft will take all the heat.</p>
<p>Plus, I can see Apple building out an email server solution, more robust than the open source solutions that are already included for free with OS X Server.</p>
<p>But as far as Flash or Silverlight is concerned, I wouldn&#8217;t be holding my breath if I were either Adobe or Microsoft. Apple is already supporting an open standard (H.264) and getting everyone who would listen to move away from licensed proprietary technologies (Flash and Silverlight) and the obligatory royalties. I can only see that as a good thing. Now all these websites  who want to show up on the iPhone will have to provide their content in H.264.</p>
<p>Stop whining! It&#8217;s cheaper to encode in H.264 anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Some Geek</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/comment-page-2/#comment-96266</link>
		<dc:creator>Some Geek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:57:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4113#comment-96266</guid>
		<description>Some more thoughts: All my typos aside [this is some really good booze, inbibe and type], Stevo is just following the telco paradigm for mobile devices. ATT has their own &#039;store&#039; for ringtones etc as does T-Mobile and others. WHY is this a big surprise.

The hacker / jailbreaker community not only has an installer.app paradigm for apps, they also have a Debian like package manager RUNNING NOW. Google Cydia as well as &#039;jailbreak&#039; or &#039;installer.app&#039;.

What it boils down to is, Steve wants Flash quarantined to an &#039;App&#039;, preferably signed, and NOT in MobileSafari&#039;s web space.. a space devoted to web pages, VERY lean Javascript / AJAX [see Google and Facebook&#039;s iphone pages, etc], and RSS.

Outside that space of Mail and Web, the kids and flying baloney afficionados get the appSpace like &#039;game apps&#039;.. hence the show of Spore as a segregated app. Now whether Adobe will play by these rules [they can with AIR] .. well, that&#039;s the question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some more thoughts: All my typos aside [this is some really good booze, inbibe and type], Stevo is just following the telco paradigm for mobile devices. ATT has their own &#8217;store&#8217; for ringtones etc as does T-Mobile and others. WHY is this a big surprise.</p>
<p>The hacker / jailbreaker community not only has an installer.app paradigm for apps, they also have a Debian like package manager RUNNING NOW. Google Cydia as well as &#8216;jailbreak&#8217; or &#8216;installer.app&#8217;.</p>
<p>What it boils down to is, Steve wants Flash quarantined to an &#8216;App&#8217;, preferably signed, and NOT in MobileSafari&#8217;s web space.. a space devoted to web pages, VERY lean Javascript / AJAX [see Google and Facebook's iphone pages, etc], and RSS.</p>
<p>Outside that space of Mail and Web, the kids and flying baloney afficionados get the appSpace like &#8216;game apps&#8217;.. hence the show of Spore as a segregated app. Now whether Adobe will play by these rules [they can with AIR] .. well, that&#8217;s the question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Some Geek</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/03/06/is-steve-jobs-lying-about-flash-not-working-on-iphone/comment-page-2/#comment-96267</link>
		<dc:creator>Some Geek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:42:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4113#comment-96267</guid>
		<description>Apple has always played hardball with Adobe over a number of things, basically to keep the core user experience [and support headaches] away from the vendors, this is why:

- Preview App supports basic PDF functionality.
- Ditto Quicktime and basic Flash.
- Ditto TextEdit and *.doc / *.rtf.

These apps run wicked quick on either PPC or Intel desktops.

Now we have a handset based on the [for a desktop, clunky, but for a handset okay] PPC ARM architecture.

If any of you have a jailbroken iphone or touch you know that the apps for RTF, PDF, and **basic** Flash video *cough* Youtube.app *cough* are acceptable.

But no way is Jobs going to allow Fuh-lash, a plugin that has had a checked past on the Mac OSX platform and that has even Intel users gnashing their teeth from time to time on his **new platform** with his **new userbase** of 2.5mil and rising iPhone users. Not with the current sucky telco infrastructure [in the US].

Sun is a whole other kettle of fish. They will develop a RUNTIME that allows APPs that Apple will SIGN.

Adobe wants a backdoor into  *Mobile*Safari and Apple&#039;s web experience. For the mobile end user, they want to be &#039;the internet&#039;.. And Stevo is saying uh, NO, I&#039;m going after enterprise, and for the flying baloney you have the SDK. This should be painfully obvious.

MobileSafari in firmware 1.x has set expectations. There is no copy/paste [which annoys me], no downloading, and no Youtube or other plugin handoff [*unless* you use javascript/URL transmogrification for Youtube].

But we can already see how Apple is embracing the Youtube/Google AJAX way of doing things, heck, check Apple&#039;s MobileSafari guidelines [&quot;Don&#039;t use or bring up Flash&quot;], and their addition of a Javascript error console inside Safari [Preferences &gt; Safari &gt; dot dot dot.

Actions speak louder than words. What, in their docs as well as Stevo&#039;s little diatribes are they doing? To what end? Draw your own conclusions.

Oh, another piece of yellow journalism from me:

Scooby stabs iPhone in the back:

Go to ipodtech&#039;s &#039;iphone.app&#039; page:


Service Unavailable

The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try again later.
Reference #6.4cdcf180.1205151626.2bf7f7f5</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apple has always played hardball with Adobe over a number of things, basically to keep the core user experience [and support headaches] away from the vendors, this is why:</p>
<p>- Preview App supports basic PDF functionality.<br />
- Ditto Quicktime and basic Flash.<br />
- Ditto TextEdit and *.doc / *.rtf.</p>
<p>These apps run wicked quick on either PPC or Intel desktops.</p>
<p>Now we have a handset based on the [for a desktop, clunky, but for a handset okay] PPC ARM architecture.</p>
<p>If any of you have a jailbroken iphone or touch you know that the apps for RTF, PDF, and **basic** Flash video *cough* Youtube.app *cough* are acceptable.</p>
<p>But no way is Jobs going to allow Fuh-lash, a plugin that has had a checked past on the Mac OSX platform and that has even Intel users gnashing their teeth from time to time on his **new platform** with his **new userbase** of 2.5mil and rising iPhone users. Not with the current sucky telco infrastructure [in the US].</p>
<p>Sun is a whole other kettle of fish. They will develop a RUNTIME that allows APPs that Apple will SIGN.</p>
<p>Adobe wants a backdoor into  *Mobile*Safari and Apple&#8217;s web experience. For the mobile end user, they want to be &#8216;the internet&#8217;.. And Stevo is saying uh, NO, I&#8217;m going after enterprise, and for the flying baloney you have the SDK. This should be painfully obvious.</p>
<p>MobileSafari in firmware 1.x has set expectations. There is no copy/paste [which annoys me], no downloading, and no Youtube or other plugin handoff [*unless* you use javascript/URL transmogrification for Youtube].</p>
<p>But we can already see how Apple is embracing the Youtube/Google AJAX way of doing things, heck, check Apple&#8217;s MobileSafari guidelines ["Don't use or bring up Flash"], and their addition of a Javascript error console inside Safari [Preferences &gt; Safari &gt; dot dot dot.</p>
<p>Actions speak louder than words. What, in their docs as well as Stevo&#8217;s little diatribes are they doing? To what end? Draw your own conclusions.</p>
<p>Oh, another piece of yellow journalism from me:</p>
<p>Scooby stabs iPhone in the back:</p>
<p>Go to ipodtech&#8217;s &#8216;iphone.app&#8217; page:</p>
<p>Service Unavailable</p>
<p>The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try again later.<br />
Reference #6.4cdcf180.1205151626.2bf7f7f5</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
