POLITICAL
There is a current trend towards fiscal responsibility in the US driven by large current and projected deficits as well as an economic recession. Many politicians and financial analysts have outlined a path going forward that includes protecting financial institutions, reducing taxes on the middle class, enacting various government incentives to spur job creation and investment, increasing investment in various economic sectors (most notably infrastructure and alternative energy) as well as using technological advancements to streamline systems and reduce operating costs. These political trends and the accompanying media coverage have already begun to create an overall environment where businesses and consumers are focused on a more efficient use of resources.

ECONOMIC
The global financial crisis, spurred by a collapse in US real estate and financial credit markets, has created financial insecurity, job loses and less discretionary income for many consumers and businesses. In response, consumers and businesses cut expenditures and moved to solidify their balance sheets. Many of these businesses are now well positioned for growth if an economic uptick becomes reality. The prospect of export to growing economic powers like China, India & Brazil along with austerity measures in troubled economies has begun a promising economic upward trend, but these forces have been tempered by turmoil in the Middle East leading to rising energy costs as well as natural disasters that have constrained supply chains. In response, a cautious but hopeful consumer has emerged with a trend towards high value (low cost, high return) offerings.

SOCIAL
The forces of globalization and interdependency have created strong social trends towards environmental responsibility, social responsibility, global standards and global (internet enabled) communities. Consumers and businesses are beginning to feel more like global citizens and in response a new ‘social conscience’ is emerging where the full social, environmental and global impact of a product is becoming important. While current economic trends are providing pressure for consumers to be motivated by price, it appears that an undercurrent of social responsibility is leading consumers and businesses to be less ‘commodity minded’ and more socially conscious as the current economic difficulties subside.

TECHNOLOGICAL
A move towards mobile computing and sustainable energy is transforming how businesses and consumers operate. Technological advancements in mobile infrastructure, touch interfaces, cloud computing and location aware systems has enabled a new mobile computing platform to emerge. In response to this new platform, a new sector of “situation aware services” has arisen that are tailored to individuals based on preference, circumstances and location. In addition, consumers and businesses are shifting towards curated offerings in an effort to manage the influx of information created from 24/7 global connectivity. A strong desire for energy independence and reduction of environmental impact has fostered a new environment of innovation in the areas of green energy and energy efficiency. Growth and innovation in these areas has the ability to act as a widespread transformative force for many decades. In response to the global financial crisis, it appears we may be standing at a new technological precipice as politicians, businesses and consumers increasingly turn to the latest technological advances to address the economic, competitive and social issues they are facing.

First let me say, that Steve makes some good points, but if you are objective you quickly realize his memo is more about shaping public opinion than being truthful. An in-depth look at Steve’s points shows that while many are based on truths they are not entirely accurate, (which IMO are often the most dangerous kinds of truths).

First, there’s “Open”.

Yes Flash is closed and proprietary, but Apple isn’t telling the whole truth when they say they want to embrace open technologies as an alternative. Yes HTML5, CSS and javascript are all open technologies but Steve knows full well these technologies are not fully defined, fully agreed upon or fully adopted yet. His championing of H.264 for video is evidence that he is not really trying to champion open technologies, since H.264 is not an open technology. In fact, with Adobe’s Open Screen Project (removal of licensing fees and opening of data protocols for Flash) H.264 and Flash could almost be considered equally open technologies. In fact, I’m sure he still wants people to download and install the Quicktime plug-in… doesn’t he?

Second, there’s the “full web”.

The iPhone, iPod and iPad cannot view the full web, period. Steve has done his best here to make it sound otherwise, but there really is no intelligent argument that can be made here. In the case of video on the web, Steve suggests we leave the internet and launch a separate app to view YouTube content and recommends H.264 as an alternative (even though it is not open source) as a solution to all our internet video problems. I wonder which internet video player is best positioned to handle H.264 video content? I also wonder what market forces drove such high adoption of Flash as the video standard on the internet? Remember… Windows Media Player, Quicktime and Real Player have all been around for many many years and H.264 has been around for several years as well, showing that when given a choice developers and users have chosen Flash for video delivery. In the case of games, again Steve asks us to leave the internet (open source) and the games we love and instead play them as apps (closed and proprietary) on Apple’s iDevices. Next comes the most important aspect of the “full web” argument, which Steve purposely avoids. Flash is used for a lot more than just video and games, and to see this you only need to realize that over 33% of all websites utilize Flash. Steve provided an impressive list of websites that no longer need Flash for video, but the list of sites that utilize Flash for more than video is much larger and more impressive. Here are just a small handful… (Nike, Adidas, NASA, Chevrolet, Ford, Volkswagen, Audi, Disney, Hulu, Major League Baseball, National Hockey League, ATP – Association of Tennis Professionals, Prada, Gucci, Quiksilver, SONY, CNN, Barbie, McDonalds, Burger King, Starbucks, Funny Or Die, NBC, ABC, Comedy Central, Iron Man 2, & Avatar).

Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.

Here I think Steve makes some good points, but also provides some misleading information. In regards to security, Steve points to a report from Symantec in 2009. Anyone paying attention knows that Symantec backed off that original claim – Symantec backs off claim, says current Flash Player safe from attack. For a smile, it is also interesting to note that Symantec publishes their regular ‘Threat Report’ in Flash – Internet Security Threat Report XIV | Symantec. When it comes to performance, I do think Steve has a somewhat legitimate gripe. Flash performance has been lacking and IMO Adobe did not shift their attention to performance early enough. This is now hurting them on mobile platforms where performance is key. Even so, it appears they have heard the call and have redoubled their efforts to play catch up. Flash Player 10.1 provides enormous performance gains and many of their initiatives now seem focused on performance.

In regards to Flash crashing the Mac, this certainly is true, but not for the reasons Steve is telling everyone. As the web continues to mature, websites are becoming more and more powerful. In fact, many people believe web based applications will replace desktop applications. Flash allows developers to create applications that are very powerful (similar to desktop apps), and for that reason Flash content is able to crash your browser just like a desktop application can crash your computer. No matter what technology you use, when that technology enables developers to do more powerful and more complex things you will run the risk of causing crashes, whether it is Flash, AJAX, JAVA or any other technology. The answer to this problem, is not to eliminate powerful tools from the web, but instead to leverage a solution Apple & Microsoft have already used on the desktop. Sand box each application so it is no longer able to crash the operating system. Google has already done this with Chrome, sand boxing each browser tab so a web page can not crash the whole browser. You can be sure that the next major revision of every browser will include the same functionality.

Fourth, there’s battery life.

Again, Steve makes an excellent point, but purposely gives misleading information. Steve is correct to point out that hardware video decoding is far more efficient and that most platforms are configured for H.264 hardware decoding. Where he is misleading is when he says, “Flash has recently added support for H.264”. Adobe added this support back in 2007, and it certainly has been around long enough for the new mobile iDevices from Apple.

Fifth, there’s Touch.

Again, an excellent point mixed with purposely misleading information. He says, “Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not touch screens with fingers”. This is true of ALL internet technologies, including HTML5, CSS and javascript. No matter what technology a developer uses they will have to be careful when relying on “rollovers” if they want their content to be compatible with touch devices.

Sixth, the most important reason.

Steve is right, if everyone used the same tools and abided by the same rules, applications would be more stable, more intuitive, faster and probably more efficient to create. I agree, Apple’s ability to control every aspect of a product has lead to some really revolutionary and amazing products. But when those tight controls are pushed beyond Apple’s borders to the greater development community, problems are inevitable. Apple is able to push these tight controls on developers now because of the large amount of money that can be made developing for Apple’s iDevices, but these tight controls also mean lack of choice, lack of freedom and lack of innovation. Apple would never apply these same rules to Mac OS X application development, because developers would simply stop developing for the Mac and move to Windows.

Conslusions.

I love Apple, and I have supported them since their early days, but if you’re not drinking the Cupertino Kool Aid, it’s easy to see Steve is not being 100% honest about his objections to Flash. I think it is more likely the case that Apple sees Flash as a strategic enemy to many of their objectives. Apple wants to see iTunes/Quicktime become the standard for video on the internet. Apple doesn’t want Flash as a competing development platform, where you can develop an app once and deliver it to every mobile phone… if you could do that then every phone would have 100,000 apps and a big reason to buy the iPhone would go away.

The future of the internet is being decided now, and Apple is doing their best to take control of it. Mobile devices and internet connected devices are on the rise, and Apple is very intelligently taking control. Apple is touting open standards, but pushing for closed platforms with truly unprecedented controls over developers. Be careful! Liberty is usually lost in just such ways… with people cheering for it!

Bill Mackin

SOME HIDDEN TRUTH
While Steve Jobs might want you to think it’s all about buggy performance and Adobe’s lazy product development, the hidden truth is that Apple sees the Flash platform as a barrier to their advancement in numerous categories. The most obvious is internet video, where Flash is currently dominant and Apple would obviously like to see Quicktime take over. Only slightly less obvious would be the mobile space, which Apple obviously sees as the next major computing platform and have consistently shown their distaste for competing development platforms. Consider also, Apple’s recent move into mobile advertising a place where Flash is poised to be a very important technology. Less obvious is Flash’s ability for internet application development, especially when used by audio/video consumption companies, (i.e. Netflix, Hulu, etc.) that compete with the Apple TV, or when used by Adobe to create new web applications like Adobe’s online word processing application Buzzword (a clear competitor to Apple’s online version of Pages). Add to all of this, Apple’s strategic belief that they should not be reliant on any other companies proprietary technologies/platforms and things quickly become clear. Flash is the enemy.

If you’re still not convinced Apple has ulterior motives, take notice that as Adobe prepared Flash Player 10.1 (a release focused on performance much like Apple’s Snow Leopard) Apple refused Adobe’s request to use Mac OS X’s hardware acceleration APIs. The direct result of which is that CPU usage required to play video in Flash Player for Safari on Mac OS X dropped from 37.41% (Flash Player 10.0) to a still abysmal 32.07% (Flash Player 10.1), while for Safari on Windows it dropped from 23.22% (Flash Player 10.0) to only 7.43% (Flash Player 10.1) and for Firefox on Windows it dropped from 22% to 6%!

SOME MAJOR PITFALLS
While the Flash platform certainly has some weaknesses, it also has some huge benefits that will make it nearly impossible to kill. When developing a website that integrates numerous media types, Flash’s integrated development platform is far ahead of anything available for HTML5. When creating Rich Internet Applications, Flex, Flash Builder & Flash Catalyst are far more powerful and efficient for development than any Open Web alternatives. While HTML5 will provide some new tools previously only available through Flash, those tools will not be nearly as comprehensive or polished as those available in Flash. Current adoption of the latest version of Flash resides somewhere near 98%, and HTML5 and the corresponding Open Web standards are still not fully developed or agreed upon much less adopted. While the latest browsers may incorporate these new Open Web standards there will be no way to update older browsers, leaving a large swath of web citizens unable to realize HTML5 developed content. There are numerous other pitfalls in Apple’s attempt to kill Flash, but just with this handful of items I think it is safe to say, Flash will be around and relevant for at least the next 5-10 years and probably much longer if Adobe is able to continue innovating on the Flash platform.

ADOBE’S NEEDED RESPONSE
Adobe works with Apple on numerous fronts, but they can’t be afraid to aggressively respond. Anyone that has been reading the tech blogs lately, knows Apple is not only damaging the Adobe/Flash brand but they are starting a very dangerous momentum towards the death or marginalization of Flash. Adobe must understand that in addition to their strategic business interests being at stake, the Flash developer community is relying on Adobe to secure the future of the Flash platform and dispel any negative publicity that we will eventual have to deal with.

Adobe has done a good job of optimizing Flash Player 10.1 where possible, but a strong marketing push is needed to repair the brand image of Flash. Adobe should respond strongly by touting the new release of Flash Player 10.1 as 4 times faster* than Flash Player 10.0, (* where OEMs have made hardware acceleration available). Adobe should talk regularly about why 1/3 of all web pages use Flash, and why 85% of award winning websites use Flash. Without a doubt Adobe should point out (by name) the most popular internet destinations that require Flash. If consumers begin to see Flash as “the platform” for great internet content, the lack of Flash support on the iPhone and iPad will suddenly be very relevant and Apple will have to relent. After all how can Apple claim, “The Ultimate Browsing Experience” if their mobile devices are unable to display large portions of the internet.

A FEW EXAMPLES (OF MAJOR WEBSITES THAT USE FLASH)

• Hulu, Funny Or Die, (well most video sites – too many to list here)
• Disney, Barbie, (well most kids sites – too many to list here)
• Addicting Games, Farmville, (well most games sites – too many to list here)
• Chevrolet, Ford, VW, (well most car companies – too many to list here)
• Avatar, Iron Man 2, Up, (well most movie sites – too many to list here)
• McDonalds, Burger King, AppleBees, Starbucks, (well most food companies – too many to list here)
• NBC, ABC, Comedy Central, (well most tv companies – too many to list here)
• Nike, Adidas, (well most sports companies – too many to list here)
• You get the idea…