<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Not to mention Unity. Well, ok, I mentioned Unity.<br>
If they don't resolve that, Apple should take down every billboard and<br>
recall every ad that features Unity content. Which is all of 'em.<br>
<br>
Dave A<br>
<br>
Len Bullard wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:7138AA17746B447180EDBB48DE663E54@LenBullardPro"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">For such a lousy inefficient yadda yadda, Flash has more authors for it than
almost anything one counters with such as SVG or X3D. Apple is stepping on
a lot of toes there.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org">x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org">mailto:x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org</a>] On
Behalf Of Braden McDaniel
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 8:44 PM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org">x3d-public@web3d.org</a>
Subject: Re: [X3D-Public] Everybody's Business - How Apple Has Rethought a
Gospel of the Web - NYTimes.com
On Thu, 2010-04-22 at 10:35 -0500, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:cbullard@hiwaay.net">cbullard@hiwaay.net</a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The market argument that controlling more of the backend creates a
logistically sounder system for the consumer is hard to refute by
numbers. Logistics curve, number of managed changes and consumables
says that for the most bug-free consistent experience, the Apple
method is sound.
It may not be true. Closed systems are typically non-resilient
diverse environments. How this will work out feature for feature in
fielding useful systems to the web is obvious: more closed gardens
with noise at the interfaces. On the other hand, telling Adobe to go
screw themselves given the number of professional Flash authors (a
non-trivial skill set) is hubris and they will pay dearly for that.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Will they? The iPhone has been without Flash support for some time now.
How dearly would you say they've paid so far?
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">No Joe, HTML5 is not enough. HTML5 plainly has become Apple and
Google's to play with and Microsoft's to cope with.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
That's very much an issue of what parties have taken leadership roles by
devoting resources to the problem. Microsoft *could* have been a leader
in this effort, had they opted to do so.
Really, countering Flash is something Microsoft has bungled badly. They
could have embraced SVG some years ago and helped evolve it to the point
that it would be a reasonable Flash alternative. There's a contingent
of Web developers eager for these sorts of technologies.
Instead, Microsoft delivered Flash Redux and called it Silverlight:
technology practically guaranteed to be embraced by anyone already in
the Microsoft camp, and yawned at by everyone else.
So now I hear that Microsoft is finally embracing SVG. Maybe they
finally Get It. We'll see.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> Trying to smooth
over Apple's strategy to dominate all of the backend processes and
applications that enable third-party applications to be vended to
Apple hardware consumers is a straight forward monopolistic and
predatory move on the developer ecosystems at every level from code
head to contentDiva. This isn't simple an X3D problem.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
It certainly is. The biggest problem in countering this offensive:
Apple is exactly right in asserting that Flash is a resource hog and a
frequent culprit in browser crashes. Flash is viewed by many (with
informed opinions) as bad software whose few virtues could be replaced
with more efficient solutions. If Apple doesn't back down, it's because
the only stick we have to beat them with is a dry, rotten twig.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>