Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: no Flash on android 4.1

Expand Messages
  • jrgen_schrader
    I rather wish we would find ways to help him save his goods from the sinking ship.
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I rather wish we would find ways to help him save his goods from the sinking ship.


      --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Jeffrey Martin <panoramas@...> wrote:
      >
      > http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2012/06/flash-player-and-android-update.html
      >
      > I guess Trausti will find a way to say that this is not even true ;)
      >
    • Trausti Hraunfjord
      Jeffrey the joker :) I don t blame you for thinking in this way (based on my past postings), but I already got my wakeup call a wile back. Not that I like it,
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 1, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Jeffrey the joker :)

        I don't blame you for thinking in this way (based on my past postings), but I already got my wakeup call a wile back.  Not that I like it, but it is what it is.  

        I have already decided that we will put no more work into Flash... beyond what is reasonable to maintain what there is... also depending on what happens with Win8 tablets and phones.  The work that has been done on the Flash 11 player we had out over a year ago for testing, has been "permanently" shelved (see above), and the programmer will concentrate on the other players he has made (WebGL, Webkit and others).  It's been a few months where those plans have been brewing on this end, and it was not a major surprise to learn of this abandonment plan by Adobe.... although it was not a welcome thing to read :)

        Currently 65% of all Android phones are on version 2.3, and that is the first version where Flash was available (published in 2010).  Latest version of Android is 4.0 and is also supported by Flash... while 4.1 will be cut off from Flash support.

        My guess is that due to Adobe's close cooperation with Microsoft, which will no doubt be pushing their own Win8 for tablets and phones, this end of Android suppoort has been decided.  Adobe is seemingly (from where I see it) betting on the MS horse, rather than the very fractional Android market where it is said to be more than 4000 different devices on a global plan.

        Maybe they have a different reason, but this is my guess. 

        Trausti

        On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Jeffrey Martin <panoramas@...> wrote:
         

        http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2012/06/flash-player-and-android-update.html


        I guess Trausti will find a way to say that this is not even true ;)


      • Kathy Wheeler
        ... One of the articles I read made two interesting observations: 1. that Flash has never really been an important part of Adobe s business; and 2. that the
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 1, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          On 07/02/2012, at 7:14 AM, Trausti Hraunfjord wrote:
          > Maybe they [ Adobe ] have a different reason, but this is my guess.

          One of the articles I read made two interesting observations: 1. that Flash has never really been an important part of Adobe's business; and 2. that the in-browser no-plug-in approach was the way to go.

          It seems to me that this eerily echos the demise of QTVR as a delivery option: not that important to the software manufacturer, and a user resistance to downloaded plug-ins in general.

          The more things change the more they stay the same ...

          KathyW.
        • Ken Warner
          ...can you say Java?
          Message 4 of 6 , Jul 1, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            ...can you say Java?

            Kathy Wheeler wrote:
            > On 07/02/2012, at 7:14 AM, Trausti Hraunfjord wrote:
            >> Maybe they [ Adobe ] have a different reason, but this is my guess.
            >
            > One of the articles I read made two interesting observations: 1. that Flash has never really been an important part of Adobe's business; and 2. that the in-browser no-plug-in approach was the way to go.
            >
            > It seems to me that this eerily echos the demise of QTVR as a delivery option: not that important to the software manufacturer, and a user resistance to downloaded plug-ins in general.
            >
            > The more things change the more they stay the same ...
            >
            > KathyW.
            >
          • Ben Knill
            Adobe made their stance perfectly clear a while ago with regards to mobile - using Flash to produce apps via Air, and focusing on desktop browsers.
            Message 5 of 6 , Jul 1, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Adobe made their stance perfectly clear a while ago with regards to mobile - using Flash to produce apps via Air, and focusing on desktop browsers. 


              They dropped the support for mobile browser-based Flash ages ago,  and this is just the next phase in that process. 

              But apps in Flash are getting built more and more, and open a lot more opportunities in terms of performance, capability and the benefits of a single code base. 



              On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Kathy Wheeler <kathyw@...> wrote:
               


              On 07/02/2012, at 7:14 AM, Trausti Hraunfjord wrote:
              > Maybe they [ Adobe ] have a different reason, but this is my guess.

              One of the articles I read made two interesting observations: 1. that Flash has never really been an important part of Adobe's business; and 2. that the in-browser no-plug-in approach was the way to go.

              It seems to me that this eerily echos the demise of QTVR as a delivery option: not that important to the software manufacturer, and a user resistance to downloaded plug-ins in general.

              The more things change the more they stay the same ...

              KathyW.


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.