Adobe CEO On Apple, Google and Microsoft

 

By Posted 17 Nov 2010, 00:52

You do not have to be a genius to work out that Adobe and Apple do not see eye-to-eye, most of which has to do with Steve Jobs and his refusal to allow the iOS devices to use Flash content. Shantanu Narayen, the CEO for Adobe said that he did not want to talk about this matter.

However, before he went onto other matters he did say Apple and Adobe are just “on different sides,” but what could he mean? Well, PCMag points out the obvious when they say that Adobes mission is “creating content for multiple platforms,” something we know that Apple are not doing.

Also See: The Fappening leads to Apple celeb account news

Narayen who appeared at the Web 2.0 conference today also added that he was not pushing for a merger with Microsoft. He did not mind pointing out about Adobe’s commitment to Google Android, RIM and HP webOS, but that still did not stop people wanting to know more about his thoughts on what Steve had to say about Flash.

Knowing that the Apple CEO said that Flash was slow and buggy was a shock to a number of us, especially when you look at this BlackBerry PlayBook and iPad browser comparison video. I wonder if Steve Jobs has seen how fast it loads web pages with Flash content on them, even faster than the iPad can render what there is left on the page.

If you could ask the Adobe CEO any question, what would it be?

  • grocha

    It may be so that apple does not want cross-platform apps on its plaform(what vendor really does if they had the option). But as for flash, it is slow and buggy! Will all this hoopla about how great android and other platforms are cause they run flash, most comments I see about still basically says well it works somewhat! And that it is sluggish. From the demo videos of the Playbook, it ran OK on the example that they selected to show. Still looks choppy. And this is on a dual core processor with alot more memory than an iPad or iPhone 3g/36s. That is twice the processing power(if you just consider #number of processors), and 4 times memory of an iPad, 2 times that of an iphone4!

    Also note that even for android, Adobe had to work for well over a year after the whole flash/iPhone nonsense started to make them work on some android phones, and those phones too all had much more horsepower than any of the prior IOS devices.

    By the way, have been using iPhone for a couple of years now, and can say I miss flash. Just my oppinion

  • marius

    in Flash you can recreate almost any application that you can buy from the app-store. this is why Steve Jobs does not want flash on the iPhone. you could use applications from any website and do almost the same as the native applications. You would not buy games from the app-store, you would go to a website with games specially made in flash for the iPhone :)

  • Elvis

    Flash is all about presenting annoying ads over the content you really want to read. pop ups, chasing moving windows to close the content are fn annoying. What's the firs thing you do when viewing a heavy flash based site? Chance the quality to low to reduce CPU and BW usage. Flash is a CPU and BW hog, and with the service providers moving to capped or tiered plans, flash will chew up a lot of BW. Over the comparatively slower mobile connection, i wold rather not have flash to save my BW for content I want to see and save CPU and battery life so that I am not constantly searching for an electrical outlet. Flash is slow and crashes a lot, not to mention the security issues that could leave your devices and information vulnerable to attacks. I commend SJ for holding his ground in order to push for new open HTML5 based standards and content. Adobes' mistake was acquiring Macromedia in the first place. If Adobe cannot adopt to the future standards, then they deserve to lose market share and sales of development tools.

  • Norman Speight

    I'm certainly NOT an Apple enthusiast but —-
    I've tried every way I can to get rid of my current version of Flash Player and it outright refuses to go. Please don't suggest ways, I've used them all including ones you've probably never heard of. I notice that Adobe will give you what they think you out to do at $39.00 a pop. and if it doesn't work? Well you go back again for another $39.00 experience.
    Anything that is so flawed just is written properly, Anything that gives an easy way in to hackers is obviously not very security conscious and to charge for your poor software problem being solved is the last straw. What I can't understand is why the BBC and the newspapers adopt this piece of rubbish for viewing videos when there is so much other easy viewing software about beats me. Something about money in there somewhere I think. Whatever it is, it most certainly isn't about quality.
    So Jobs is dead right on this one