Someone noticed the worm in the Apple

I can't say I am surprised at this investigation by the FTC. I wonder if Steve Jobs is? I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that someone at Adobe may be grinning on the inside about this.

I finally understand Steve Job's argument against Flash

Yes. That's right, I finally understand Steve Job's argument... and it is more asinine than I thought. You may have seen that he posted an open letter on the Apple website clearly spelling out his argument. While there are some things I can't disagree with such as stability and security on Macs (since I don't work on a Mac that much), there are a few statements that really clear it up for me.

What I mean by that is the fact that Steve Jobs is so removed from the lowly task of developing software that he cannot comprehend what it would take to create an equivalent application in HTML5, CSS and Javascript. To quote Steve Jobs:

If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?

There really are no words to describe how much this trivializes what Flash developers do.

You might as well say:

Why take a plane from New York to LA when you can ride a bike?"

The two technologies have widely varying capabilities and weaknesses. Why not use HTML5, CSS and JavaScript? Because they aren't good enough yet. They just aren't. I know Steve wants them to be and maybe someday they will but right now you just can't do the same thing. Even if some websites, applications, and games could be done it HTML5, it isn't necessarily cost effective for me to change everything to support one platform.

And do we really need to hear how Apple defines Open again:

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

Now I don't know about you but this statement is just as true as Jobs's

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

And when you think about it, the Flash Player is free, Adobe's Flex SDK is open source and the Flex Compiler is free, the Flash Player format spec is freely available. It doesn't cost anything additional for a developer to start creating apps for the Flash Platform. Just a browser, the free items above and some initiative and off you go. Plus, I can't remember the last time Adobe stepped in an disallowed any Flash application from being sold (or given away for free)

In contrast, you need to buy a Mac from Apple to build iDevice apps, you need to pay for the privledge of becoming an iDevice developer (which doesn't guarantee they will let you actually distribute anything you create). You then have to submit your creation to Apple's approval process (whose guidelines vary widely depending on some unknown criteria). At any time Apple can choose to prevent your creation from being distributed even if it approved it previously.

Now seriously, does Apple really think they are more "Open" than Adobe?

Apparently Jobs also doesn't understand the meaning of the word full. So here is the definition for anyone else who doesn't know:

• containing as much or as many as is possible or normal
• entire: constituting the full quantity or extent; complete;
• complete in extent or degree and in every particular

More...

When a person goes to a website and the whole thing or any significant part of it cannot be seen, then they are by definition not seeing the "full" website. It doesn't matter that YouTube videos can be seen if the ones I want can't be seen. If many of the sites I visit use Flash, and many do, then I am not seeing the "full" web. If I play a lot of games online that are Flash, then I am again not seeing the "full" web.

I do agree that Flash was created in the PC era. However, Objective-C was too. And who cares? Flash is pushing beyond PCs too. Targeting TVs, mobile devices, and anything else with a screen is just as likely with the Flash Platform.

Having Flash on mutliple types of devices does not mean that Adobe (or their developer base) wants to take a single application and run it on every device. What we do want is to be able to leverage some code, logic and assets in order to quickly build contextual apps without driving costs up by recoding everything in a different technology.

So yes... I understand what he is saying. To paraphrase: "I am so important that it doesn't matter that I am so out of touch with reality... people will follow me! And by the way... I want to control everything"

Lets not forget that the iPhone can have buggy apps when built natively too

There seems to be a trend with the people backing Apple in their decision to prevent Flash from being compiled to the iPhone. Many developers have been saying that that capability will cause a whole wave of poorly designed/developed applications from get submitted which would be a huge burden on the App Store review process.

Am I the only person who has my iPhone lockup or crash when using native apps?

I doubt it. Bad developers are bad developers regardless of what language they use. The fact that a bunch of new app submissions is going to bog down the review process speaks more about the review process than the apps. What if for a whole new generation of Objective-C developers comes out of the woodwork? Wouldn't that slow down the review process too? Wouldn't you get just as many poorly written applications? The fact of the matter is that the whole concept of a review process is ridiculous. If Apple wants to maintain quality, then have the review process be optional. Then let the consumer choose whether they want to download apps that don't have the Apple approval.

There are probably a hundred different compromises that could be made that would benefit both developers and consumers while at the same time protected the Apple brand experience. The real problem is Apple's lack of willingness to compromise.

Apple pours salt on Adobe's wound...

In a further attempt to crush Adobe, Steve Jobs has announced that starting Monday (coincidentally the same day as the Adobe CS5 launch event) you will no longer be able to dial the number 5 from your iPhone. Steve Jobs states that the number 5 is buggy and has lead to 92% of all iPhone crashes.

This couldn't be true right? Of course not... but it is only slightly more ridiculous than his decision to prevent the use of the Flash iPhone packager. There are a lot of developers out hear that didn't want to have to take sides in the Adobe/Apple war... but we are taking a lot of shrapnel from Apple's F-You grenades.

I for one will be focusing on AIR development for every other phone and if I have to learn Silverlight to support Windows Phone 7, then I will.

This certainly doesn't make me want to go spend $3000 on a Mac, then pay for the privilege of becoming an "iPhone" developer, then spend a ridiculous amount of time learning a language that's only other use is for supporting a single minority (talking Mac vs. Windows here) platform, then spend tons of time building the next great mobile application which will need to ported to Flash anyway to support all the other phones, only to have it take forever to be reviewed by the App Store nazis and finally get rejected because Steve Jobs doesn't like the color Red (or some other undisclosed reason).

Ok... I'm done ranting for today. Now I will go back to checking out the HP Slate

Did Steve Jobs Just Kill the iPad

In case you are living under a rock you may not be aware that Apple and Adobe have there... differences. This article on Slate asks whether Steve Jobs' decision to keep Flash off the IPad will "kill Flash".

There have been many "Flash Killers" over the years which have faded into obscurity, so you could easily ask whether this decision will be worse for Apple than Adobe. If you think about all the great things that the iPad would be great for (video, mobile video conferencing, games, presentations) you will see that most if not all of them are currently solved with adequate success using Flash today. So, as an iPad user you will probably eventually be able to get all those things on the iPad, but my expectations (and those of many gadget users) are that any new device should add value on top of what I have today... the iPad doesn't (at least not in the way I want it to).

So the argument needs to focus on which technology meets the needs and expectations of the target audience. I just don't see how Apple's latest device will do that. It just isn't as revolutionary as the iPod or iPhone.

Handy IPhone app for... Flex/ActionScript developers?

Mike Chambers released a cool little reference guide for Actionscript for the IPhone. Now, to me, there seems to be something wrong with using an IPhone app to create RIAs that won't run on the IPhone. Plus, if I am in Flexbuilder working on a Flex app, the Actionscript reference is only a key (ok... two keys Shift + F2) away.

But, since I have a new found love for my IPhone, I will probably install this to check it out anyway.

For more info, visit Mike Chambers' blog or you can find it on the App Store.

Apple IPhone vs. Blackberry Storm

For some reason, the holidays always make me want to buy some new gadget. Maybe it is the overwhelming amount of advertising by anyone with a product to sell. This year, I set my sights on a new phone. 

Now, I don't actually need a new phone but for some reason I have decided to shop around anyway. So, the two that caught my attention are the Blackberry Storm and the Apple IPhone. I am sure I am not the only one to compare these two, but I figured I would share my observations.

They both offer lots of the same features so I am not going to compare each aspect of them. What I would like to compare is my initial Experience with them. 

First impressions are hard to overcome

I popped into the Apple store at the local mall and immediately was greeted with a bunch of associates that were all younger than me that were very friendly and appeared to know all the ins and outs of the product. I picked up one of the many that were on display and could play around with it. I immediately was able to navigate around and play some of the demo songs that were on it, get online and browse to my own website and the Klok website without a problem. I did notice instantly that the Flash content on my sites did not work. Though, this was expected.

The same night I went over to the Verizon store (I have a Verizon phone now by the way). I waited in line at the counter so that I could take a look at the Storm. When I finally got to look at it, I picked it up and tried to click some buttons. After a few attempted "clicks" it was clear that it wasn't working. So, the woman behind to counter took a look at it. Tried to push a few buttons and resorted to pulling the battery out. When she put it back in the phone "rebooted". I waited about an hour (actually about 3 minutes but it felt like an hour) and then left because it wasn't coming back up. About 20 minutes later I came back and it was working again. I was able to play with it but it was hard to get past the fact that just a half an hour ago I had a terrible experience with it. I navigated around but had a hard time browsing the web with it. I couldn't really type too well on it either. 

My Conclusion

Even though I was eventually able to play around with the Storm, looking back I feel like it was harder to figure out, harder to use and generally not as "fluid" as the IPhone. Feel free to disagree with me as I am sure other people's experiences were different. That, however, is exactly my point. It doesn't really matter if one product is "better" than another, what matters is whether it provides "a better experience for me".

So I have decided to purchase and IPhone and switch to AT&T (which I never thought I would do just for a phone)