iLounge

1

Doesn’t support ActionScript.
This is designed to replace annoying, resource-hungry Flash Ads with annoying, resouce-hungry HTML5 Ads.

Posted by Dan Woods on March 8, 2011 at 12:35 PM (PDT)

2

The bigger question to me: is this the start of Adobe’s surrender to HTML5? It seems like building a tool that bypasses Flash limits developers’ desire to develop in Flash in the first place. Why pay for a tool to bypass your hard work when you can build it in HTML in the first place?

That being said, I’m speaking from someone who does almost no programming and has no familiarity with either language. Just seems like an odd business move for Adobe.

Posted by Dave on March 8, 2011 at 12:51 PM (PDT)

3

@Dave:
I was thinking almost exactly the same thing. I do absolutely no programming, and I do not know the differences between Flash and C++. I also found it odd that Adobe introduced a product that will cater to getting content onto Apple devices. Especially considering the harsh words from both sides in the initial debate. I tend to see this as a “tell” that maybe Adobe needs to be on iOS a little more than Apple needs to accommodate Flash. Companies that are fielding Flash sites are missing an ever-growing community of mobile browsers/shoppers. I am sure with enough prodding Adobe saw that as a serious concern.

Again, I may be way of base here. But it certainly seems like I am at least warm…

Posted by Mitch on March 8, 2011 at 4:05 PM (PDT)

4

I commend Adobe for bringing the mountain to Mohammed. Given how many years ago the iPhone was first launched and how much Flash is still ALL OVER the internet, Apple’s stubbornness has done the consumer no favours, limiting Safari’s usefulness.

As for Flash vs HTML5 and the usefulness of a conversion tool, as resource hungry as it may be, Flash is a fantastic working tool for animation and effects that can be split between artists and programmers without a person needing to be both. I haven’t yet seen similar HTML5 tools. Do they exist? Regardless, a conversion tool would allow those who work on Flash to cater to those missing out due to Apple’s misguided stubbornness.

Posted by BeefJerky on March 9, 2011 at 2:46 AM (PDT)

5

@BeefJerky:

Your points are certainly valid, but… You seem to be looking at this simply from the developer viewpoint.

“as resource hungry as it may be, Flash is a fantastic working tool for animation and effects that can be split between artists and programmers”

Now, as a simple web browsing user, I have often experienced this resource hunger and “buggyness” on my computers. And being an iPhone user since day one, I am generally pretty oblivious to the fact that I do not have Flash on my phone. Safari’s usefulness may be somewhat limited by not having Flash, but I can easily see the other side of that coin. The inclusion of Flash and it’s system requirements could (and has on many of the Android/Win Mobile phones I have used) bring the device to it’s knees. Had Adobe been more proactive in making a truly mobile-enhanced Flash, they would have been on iDevices from the jump. They dragged their feet and told Apple that what they had was good enough. In my experience (again, as a simple user) it was not. And as a user, I do not care what wonderful bells and whistles are available for the developers. I just want products that do not put unnecessary drain on my system. They can keep their nauseating splash pages and intrusive animations.

Now Apple iOS is a HUGE piece of the mobile computing pie. And only now is Adobe seeing that they NEED to be visible on that platform.

Posted by Mitch on March 9, 2011 at 5:51 AM (PDT)