no more Adobe Flash player for mobile browsers

Soooo? Besides already not being able to download flash for my iPhone due to Apple restrictions this will affect me, how?
 
Dixie said:
Soooo? Besides already not being able to download flash for my iPhone due to Apple restrictions this will affect me, how?
Click to expand...

Battery life drains quickly in using mobile Flash browser. Jobs sucks Flash!!
 
Dixie said:
Soooo? Besides already not being able to download flash for my iPhone due to Apple restrictions this will affect me, how?
Click to expand...

The many other people admit that flash player on Android loading much slower than the normal perform appear to be.
 
Royale said:
So.... Steve Job is RIGHT!
Click to expand...

... just as expected. It's somewhat ironic now after all the fuss Adobe made regarding the comments made by Steve Jobs. They were so determined to prove that they were here to stay and that it was the choice of the mobile browsers.
 
Flash is pretty crap on most mobile devices, IMO. No real loss here.
 
PowerON said:
The many other people admit that flash player on Android loading much slower than the normal perform appear to be.
Click to expand...

Too early to say. Wait for dual core 2.0ghz android and it will be good like desktop. :D

android has flash support, none for apple! :nana:
 
PowerON said:
The many other people admit that flash player on Android loading much slower than the normal perform appear to be.
Click to expand...

Yeah I am disappointed with flash's performance on my first droid. However, with my new dual core phone (1ghz) it plays moderate sized flash much better.

Battery consumption isnt too bad, but I would be happy if it was more optimized for battery usage.
 
The main reason I was always skeptical of flash on mobile was because of the hardware on phones. That is the only limitation of it.

It's like trying to fit a desktop into a phone, there will be limitations that can't be fixed.

Samsung had announced they plan to have a 2.0ghz cpu out within some time, it will be mainstream by 2012. They also announced quad core mobile chips, I think Qualcomm will probably oversee that production. I see it that the bottleneck was trying to run flash on a slow cpu, like an old netbook.

There were too many architecture restrictions that slow it down. Once the hardware has improved, eventually flash can be supported easily, if not by third party.

As for the battery saves, well, can you save battery watching youtube all day on a netbook? I doubt it.

I'm still waiting for the day they will let us run our phones 100% completely by the AC, without battery support. This will fix the problem about battery drain with flash. Both android and apple are guilty of it, there is no way to run a phone completely off the charger only.
 
Flash has been around for ages and yet it's still not a stable platform. That should be enough to tell you something. I doubt it will ever be stable on any mobile phones for years to come. It's just the way Flash is. It's not that stable on a lot of computer platforms either.
 
Banjo said:
Flash has been around for ages and yet it's still not a stable platform. That should be enough to tell you something. I doubt it will ever be stable on any mobile phones for years to come. It's just the way Flash is. It's not that stable on a lot of computer platforms either.
Click to expand...

What do you mean about the instability on computer platforms? I don't run OSX Leopard/Lion often, but fedora, debian and NT 6 are my daily drivers. I've never encountered a problem with flash on either of them yet, outside of horrible coding. Newgrounds is full of that.
 
naisho said:
What do you mean about the instability on computer platforms? I don't run OSX Leopard/Lion often, but fedora, debian and NT 6 are my daily drivers. I've never encountered a problem with flash on either of them yet, outside of horrible coding. Newgrounds is full of that.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was thinking about same thing,

only problem I encountered is, that flash requires ridiculous computer power for its size and purpose.
 
Eighty said:
only problem I encountered is, that flash requires ridiculous computer power for its size and purpose.
Click to expand...

That is the problem. They require too much power for so little.
 
naisho said:
Too early to say. Wait for dual core 2.0ghz android and it will be good like desktop. :D

android has flash support, none for apple! :nana:
Click to expand...

No, it's mean for not enough on market. Powerful mobile phone mean, too few available to running. Give up! Long live HTML5 for now...
 
naisho said:
The main reason I was always skeptical of flash on mobile was because of the hardware on phones. That is the only limitation of it.

It's like trying to fit a desktop into a phone, there will be limitations that can't be fixed.

Samsung had announced they plan to have a 2.0ghz cpu out within some time, it will be mainstream by 2012. They also announced quad core mobile chips, I think Qualcomm will probably oversee that production. I see it that the bottleneck was trying to run flash on a slow cpu, like an old netbook.

There were too many architecture restrictions that slow it down. Once the hardware has improved, eventually flash can be supported easily, if not by third party.

As for the battery saves, well, can you save battery watching youtube all day on a netbook? I doubt it.

I'm still waiting for the day they will let us run our phones 100% completely by the AC, without battery support. This will fix the problem about battery drain with flash. Both android and apple are guilty of it, there is no way to run a phone completely off the charger only.
Click to expand...

Someone noted a 10% battery drain after the playing the video which calculates down to 4.3 hours of video. Playing the Flash based game for 12 minutes resulted in a 4% drain which boils down to 5 hours of continuous gaming in the browser using Flash Player.
 
Back
Top