Specialist for Rich Internet Applications and UI-Design

What most people miss-understand is: It’s not the Flash Player which is supposed to be “open” or not. It’s the Flash/SWF specification, which is open. The Player is not and no-one said that it is.

Think of it like this:

• HTML is based on an open specification made by the W3C. Browsers interpret HTML in order to provide web content.
• Flash is based on an open specification made by Adobe. Flash Players can interpret SWF in order to provide web content.

The fact that Adobe’s Flash Player is the most spread doesn’t make Flash a “bad” technology.
Some years ago, the Internet Explorer was the most dominant web browser on the web. It was buggy (and still is) and proprietary and all but did anybody blame HTML on that? I’m sure no-one did.
If people say now that the Flash Player should be open: Is every browser manufacturer in the world now supposed to open their browser source as well? – I don’t think so.
It’s the same with Flash. The format is open, the Player is not.
It’s not Adobe’s fault that there are no other competitors which offer versions of Flash Player that can compete with the original one by Adobe.

Flash is not contra-productive to an open web
Don’t get me wrong. I personally don’t like proprietary systems but I can understand companies that don’t want to open their software.
For an open web, this isn’t important though. What needs to be open is the format, not the player/browser which renders/interprets the content.

Just to make things clear

• I am not an Adobe-fanboy.
• I hate the Flash Player, but I love Adobe’s tools to create content of any type.
• I am not an Apple-hater. I own a Macbook myself and I love it.

I want as much control over my devices as possible. Thus, I own an Android phone.
No company in the world should be allowed to tell me what I should install on my phone and what not.
I can’t install Flash on an iPhone? – Won’t buy it. That simple.

• 
• 
• 
• More

There has a lot of discussion going around in the past days about the big Adobe vs. Apple issues. All because of Flash.

Steve doesn’t like Flash. He says, it’s buggy, slow and unstable, which I, as a Flash developer, must agree to partially.

But this is only one side of the medal. While the Flash player itself isn’t that great, the development tools provided by Adobe, like Catalyst, Flash Builder or Flash Professional, are really awesome. For me, as a traditional software engineer coming from Java programming, all these tools are absolutely professional, easy to use and really enhance the development workflow.

Thus, there can be only one consequence:

The Flash Player must be eliminated from the web and Adobe should continue building their great developer tools, but target HTML5.

On the Adobe MAX 2009, it was demonstrated, that it is possible to export Flash applications into HTML5. I know that this is just an early prototype, but if Adobe wants to survive, I think this is probably the best way to go, since all sides would benefit from this:

• The web gets rid of the Flash Player
• Steve is happy
• Flash Developers can continue using Adobe products to create web applications
• Adobe will survive

This strategy totally makes sense. Adobe doesn’t make money by selling the Flash Player. They sell development tools which target the Flash Player. If these tools would instead target HTML5, no-one would get hurt.

I know, this is technically not very easy. There are Flash-features which do not exist in HTML5 (yet), like web-cam support for example. But time will fix this. As far as I know, web-cam support was already suggested as a new feature for the next HTML versions.

Auf golem.de gibt es ein interessantes Interview mit Matthias Döpfner, Konzernchef des Axel-Springer Verlags, in dem das iPad als Retter der Print-Industrie gepriesen wird:

“Jeder Verleger auf der Welt sollte sich einmal am Tag niedersetzen, beten und Steve Jobs dafür danken, dass er damit die Verlagsindustrie rettet”

Gleichzeitig übt Döpfner Kritik am iPad, da dieses kein Flash unterstütze. Die Hoffnung ruht aber auf der Konkurrenz, die Adobe’s Technologie nicht ablehnt, wie zum Beispiel HP mit seinem Tablet, genannt Slate.

Döpfner äußerte aber auch Kritik am iPad und Apple. So sei er enttäuscht, dass Flash auf dem Gerät nicht läuft. Die Contentbranche solle sich zudem mit Apple zusammensetzen und die Umsatzverteilung neu verhandeln. 30 Prozent Umsatzanteil für Apple sei zu viel. Doch die Konkurrenz bei den Tablets werde sich hier positiv auswirken. Es gebe Tablets von Microsoft und Amazon und es werde ein Tablet von Google geben.

Quelle: golem.de

Ich persönlich stimme zu 100% mit dieser Meinung überein. Keine Frage, das iPad ist ein nettes Gerät und füllt ausgezeichnet die Lücke zwischen Smartphone und Notebook. Ich kann mit gut vorstellen, wie in ein paar Jahren Menschen mit Tablet statt Zeitung im Café sitzen und ihre täglichen News konsumieren. An Flash als Platform für solch reichhaltige Medien führt allerdings zur Zeit kein Weg vorbei. Wie so etwas aussehen kann zeigt ein Video auf theFlashBlog.com (Unbedingt ansehen!!).

Langfristig wünsche ich mir allerdings ein Web ohne Flash Player. Es ist ja unlängst bekannt, dass sich Flash-Anwendungen in native iPhone-Applikationen kompilieren lassen. Wäre dann nicht theoretisch eine (teilweise) Transformation nach HTML5 möglich? Schön wär’s.

The HP Slate looks as cool as the iPad, has more features like Flash-support or a built-in camera and offers a full operating system (Windows 7).

The iPad lacks support for Flash (No Flash videos, No Flash games like Farm Ville), has no camera (hello, video telephony?) and the worst of all: No full OS.
It’s basically nothing more than a big iPod Touch with all its limits.

I don’t know when exactly in 2010 the Slate will come out, but as long as it’s affordable, I’d probably buy it.

Sorry Apple, as much as I like your (real) computers, the mobile devices you build are a joke.

Sometimes I have troubles finding good web radios, but today I stumbled over a great one from France called BolzRadio.

It was quite hard to find this one on iTunes since it was placed in the “ambient” section. I personally wouldn’t really put it there.
They play quite a lot of relaxed alternative music including some very felicitous covers of well known pop-songs.

The french ad breaks are annoying but acceptable.

I’m listening to it for more than 5 hours now and it’s still great! I’m lovin’ it