cleanup
Nov 28, 11:31 AM
Me too. I didn't realize it has been 5 years since I bought my last pair of blue jeans. I only have 2 pairs of blue jeans, and 1 pair of dark greys. I don't wear jeans all the time like some people do, so I never think of replacing at least one of those. One pair definitely doesn't fit anymore, while I love the other pair (but they fit rather "meh").
I'm the total opposite. I buy a new pair of jeans every few months. Only own 2 pairs of slacks. I'm not at the point in my life where I should be dressing up every day. :)
Anyways, I'd love one of these, but it's not happening. :p
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51UXNVaEPoL.jpg
I'm the total opposite. I buy a new pair of jeans every few months. Only own 2 pairs of slacks. I'm not at the point in my life where I should be dressing up every day. :)
Anyways, I'd love one of these, but it's not happening. :p
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51UXNVaEPoL.jpg
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 05:10 PM
And by "copied Palm" of course you mean "patented themselves back before Feb. 2010."
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/02/03/apple-granted-patent-for-touch-sensitive-bezel/
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/02/apples-ipad-may-gain-an-intelligent-bezel-in-the-future.html
He's referring to inductive charging, not intelligent bezel, if I am correct.
FTA:
While the art we�ve seen shows some form of inductive or touch charging, our sources can�t confirm whether or not Apple�s working on its own version of cable-free juicing. There�s also a �swipe area� shown in the drawing which appears to be on the bottom and / or top of the device � that could very well be an NFC point, but that�s pure speculation on our part.
Wondering why they don't if the hardware is there and the network supports it already.
Because the hardware is in the CDMA phone on Verizon. The AT&T iphone 4 doesn't have the same chip. If the iphone 5 does, it's still up to apple and at&t to enable it.
Do you still think it's ugly?
I think all iphone mockups are ugly. Only the official iphone renders and pictures on apple's website seem to do it justice. I hated the iphone 4 from giz's pictures even.
http://www.tuaw.com/2010/02/03/apple-granted-patent-for-touch-sensitive-bezel/
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/02/apples-ipad-may-gain-an-intelligent-bezel-in-the-future.html
He's referring to inductive charging, not intelligent bezel, if I am correct.
FTA:
While the art we�ve seen shows some form of inductive or touch charging, our sources can�t confirm whether or not Apple�s working on its own version of cable-free juicing. There�s also a �swipe area� shown in the drawing which appears to be on the bottom and / or top of the device � that could very well be an NFC point, but that�s pure speculation on our part.
Wondering why they don't if the hardware is there and the network supports it already.
Because the hardware is in the CDMA phone on Verizon. The AT&T iphone 4 doesn't have the same chip. If the iphone 5 does, it's still up to apple and at&t to enable it.
Do you still think it's ugly?
I think all iphone mockups are ugly. Only the official iphone renders and pictures on apple's website seem to do it justice. I hated the iphone 4 from giz's pictures even.
DaBlackMamba
Mar 17, 10:20 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Anyone know about fi or scp?
Anyone know about fi or scp?
pchan0
Apr 28, 05:07 PM
http://attach.mobile01.com/attach/201104/mobile01-18c7a370b1a60cb9b63c24e9dcfe7005.jpg
Same.
Same.
more...
JoeG4
Dec 1, 04:53 PM
I know I'm going to get labeled as a mac zealot and linux apologist for asking this, but isn't it weird how the project spent ALMOST ALL OF ITS TIME looking for ways to crucify OS X/Linux, but they avoided MS like the plague, as if they were afraid to make them look bad?
"I didn't have much time left for working on Microsoft Windows but I've received the most helpful feedback from the MSRC"
Riiiight. :p
"I didn't have much time left for working on Microsoft Windows but I've received the most helpful feedback from the MSRC"
Riiiight. :p
SmileyBlast!
Apr 28, 12:30 PM
This is the important part:
Apple's iPhone 4 ranked as the top-selling mobile phone in the U.S. during the quarter, and perhaps most surprisingly, the iPhone 3GS took second place in the rankings. Despite essentially being a nearly two-year-old device . . .
That speaks volumes.
I noticed that 2 which must mean that Samsung and LG still ship a lot of Feature Phones as well in addition to their Android phones.
Still, we can surely expect this trend to continue where Smart Phones rise and Feature phones sunset.
Apple's iPhone 4 ranked as the top-selling mobile phone in the U.S. during the quarter, and perhaps most surprisingly, the iPhone 3GS took second place in the rankings. Despite essentially being a nearly two-year-old device . . .
That speaks volumes.
I noticed that 2 which must mean that Samsung and LG still ship a lot of Feature Phones as well in addition to their Android phones.
Still, we can surely expect this trend to continue where Smart Phones rise and Feature phones sunset.
more...
jazz1
Apr 28, 04:07 PM
Honey, does this white iPhone make my backside look fat ;)
-aggie-
Apr 27, 10:02 PM
For now, I'll switch. Nies
Looks like I need to switch to nies.
Deadline is 10:30 am EST.
Looks like I need to switch to nies.
Deadline is 10:30 am EST.
more...
NismoRoadster
Mar 17, 11:02 AM
iPad available at Los Cerritos. I called and guy told me if I'm not in line already I won't be getting one.
Do you know if the 64gb ATT Came in?
Do you know if the 64gb ATT Came in?
KnightWRX
Apr 12, 06:57 AM
TB was envisioned by Apple and then handed off to Intel for development and implementation.
Citation needed.
Citation needed.
more...
Crosbie
Apr 14, 01:44 PM
The link in this thread still causes me problems:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=12349432
Though now Safari crashes a short time after showing the white box problem.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=12349432
Though now Safari crashes a short time after showing the white box problem.
Roller
Mar 31, 09:08 PM
It's really disconcerting that so many of the UI changes that Apple has made over the past few OS X iterations have seemed rather arbitrary. Cosmetic improvements are fine (though I think that this look for iCal would be a major step backward), but they should be concentrating on functionality, speed, reliability, and security. If I'm going to give up Rosetta for OS 10.7, I'd like to get a lot more than eye candy.
more...
mc68k
Oct 30, 01:33 AM
cool thats probably it then, the -16.
the processor trick is with the dev tools. there's a prefpane where u can turn off individual cores, and turn off hyperthreading. too bad there's not a dev tool for overclocking ;)
the processor trick is with the dev tools. there's a prefpane where u can turn off individual cores, and turn off hyperthreading. too bad there's not a dev tool for overclocking ;)
kingtj
Oct 23, 10:55 AM
From a practical standpoint, I know exactly what you're saying. But it doesn't help fix the problem. In the past, MS has implemented restrictive policies that angered enough users that they were forced to back down on them.
EG. A while back, MS took a stance that it was illegal to use an imaged installation of Windows on your PC if you didn't own a "volume license" or separate retail box license for it. If your PC came bundled with a copy of Windows on it and you blew that away in favor of your pre-made disk imaged version, they tried to say you weren't properly licensed anymore if you didn't own that second license.
This caused so many corporations to suddenly be "illegal" on thousands of PCs that it created a firestorm of protest. After that, you never really heard about the issue again. MS even started addressing the "Ghost" imaging software specifically in their tech. notes.
People who just shrug and say "Who cares? I'll just break the EULA and do things my way." just encourage MS to keep on restricting things. If you aren't the "squeaky wheel", you don't get any "oil".
I could care less what the microsoft's EULA agreement says. If I'm able to install it I could care less if it is illegal. As long as it is only on one computer then I'm doing it. And they wonder why people pirate their software...
EG. A while back, MS took a stance that it was illegal to use an imaged installation of Windows on your PC if you didn't own a "volume license" or separate retail box license for it. If your PC came bundled with a copy of Windows on it and you blew that away in favor of your pre-made disk imaged version, they tried to say you weren't properly licensed anymore if you didn't own that second license.
This caused so many corporations to suddenly be "illegal" on thousands of PCs that it created a firestorm of protest. After that, you never really heard about the issue again. MS even started addressing the "Ghost" imaging software specifically in their tech. notes.
People who just shrug and say "Who cares? I'll just break the EULA and do things my way." just encourage MS to keep on restricting things. If you aren't the "squeaky wheel", you don't get any "oil".
I could care less what the microsoft's EULA agreement says. If I'm able to install it I could care less if it is illegal. As long as it is only on one computer then I'm doing it. And they wonder why people pirate their software...
more...
Kyffin
Nov 15, 06:42 PM
Gotta say I disagree with you on that, I've always thought good quality clobber is worth the money.
Just for why is that I'm facing a new wardrobe after eleven+ years service from the last (I tend to do things periodically) when I had a half dozen suits made up and some good shoes. As for the suits they hang better than anything off the peg to this day and I'll get a couple more years out of them yet (the cut and full canvassing mean that you save money on the price per wear basis as well as being continuously better turned out). Its really win, win, win (especially if you like to support skilled local crafts &c.)
Personally I like wearing the same clothes for years- my shoes probably have seen thousands of miles and get more comfortable with every step (I like having a cobbler too- even if he's only seen two pairs from a rotation of three over a decade:eek:). Similarly shirts just get better until they turn into mufti (I rotate shirts and treat them well so easily get 3+ years until the collars/cuffs fray past the 'would you be happy to meet the Queen in that?' point- fortunately thats when I luv 'em the most!)
I suppose its diffrent strokes/ diffrent folkes, but I really don't get the whole sweatshop/ single use/ el cheapo clothes, nor the crassness of expensive branded clothes with a only slightly longer life. Not a value judgement, but really don't see any worth in doing it this way. /2p
Just for why is that I'm facing a new wardrobe after eleven+ years service from the last (I tend to do things periodically) when I had a half dozen suits made up and some good shoes. As for the suits they hang better than anything off the peg to this day and I'll get a couple more years out of them yet (the cut and full canvassing mean that you save money on the price per wear basis as well as being continuously better turned out). Its really win, win, win (especially if you like to support skilled local crafts &c.)
Personally I like wearing the same clothes for years- my shoes probably have seen thousands of miles and get more comfortable with every step (I like having a cobbler too- even if he's only seen two pairs from a rotation of three over a decade:eek:). Similarly shirts just get better until they turn into mufti (I rotate shirts and treat them well so easily get 3+ years until the collars/cuffs fray past the 'would you be happy to meet the Queen in that?' point- fortunately thats when I luv 'em the most!)
I suppose its diffrent strokes/ diffrent folkes, but I really don't get the whole sweatshop/ single use/ el cheapo clothes, nor the crassness of expensive branded clothes with a only slightly longer life. Not a value judgement, but really don't see any worth in doing it this way. /2p
maclaptop
May 3, 11:53 PM
Change is good.
With the iPhones overwhelming success, if this is true, it's nothing but good news.
This will also teach impulse control to many.
With the iPhones overwhelming success, if this is true, it's nothing but good news.
This will also teach impulse control to many.
more...
yojitani
Mar 3, 09:30 PM
Is Charlie Sheen a comedian? Is he talented? No. But he does appear to have an emotional health issue that could destroy him.
iEvolution
Apr 29, 07:49 PM
But this is how the true Apple believer thinks. If Apple doesn't make it, you don't need it. If anyone else makes it, it's junk. All that matters is that Apple makes huge sums of money so we can brag about it here. We want to pay a high price so Apple can continue to produce products that we want to buy and we don't want any competition. All we care about it what Steve says.
That's your choice man and I respect it, we all have our own ways.
That's your choice man and I respect it, we all have our own ways.
Consultant
Apr 12, 09:05 AM
iPhone adds iPod integration! Oh wait isn't the fall event usually for iPod touch and iPod? :confused:
dukebound85
May 2, 02:19 AM
What about those who lost their lives in 9/11? They probably deserved to live, but can you give them life back?
Really?:confused:
Like I said - the world needed him alive, and I wish they had just captured him instead. Nothing constructive comes out of cheering over somebody else's death.
Um, are you not the same person who applauded the Columbine shootings and wished you had the balls to do something similar back in the day?:rolleyes:
I remember that thread very well before it was moderated...so forgive me if I do not share the same opinion as you
Really?:confused:
Like I said - the world needed him alive, and I wish they had just captured him instead. Nothing constructive comes out of cheering over somebody else's death.
Um, are you not the same person who applauded the Columbine shootings and wished you had the balls to do something similar back in the day?:rolleyes:
I remember that thread very well before it was moderated...so forgive me if I do not share the same opinion as you
Foggy
Nov 7, 01:28 PM
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town. Boo hoo I'm not paying for an app that IMHO is half baked to begin with. :rolleyes: At least I'm not outright going in search of a seral number and pirating the thing. Again its a tide me over until VM gets their butt in gear and releases this thing.
Ahh ok - so if I dont like something then I dont have to pay for it? $80 for an app that, by your own admission, you are using all day every day doesnt sound a lot whether you like the app or not.
Ahh ok - so if I dont like something then I dont have to pay for it? $80 for an app that, by your own admission, you are using all day every day doesnt sound a lot whether you like the app or not.
Deefuzz
Nov 16, 09:46 AM
What are you guys doing to your clothing?
I have shirts in my wardrobe that are 4+ years old! How are you washing/wearing your clothes that they wear out in 2 years?
I have shirts in my wardrobe that are 4+ years old! How are you washing/wearing your clothes that they wear out in 2 years?
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
BrianMojo
Jul 26, 03:54 PM
I can look at diagrams all day long
I'm impressed by your endurance! ;)
I'm impressed by your endurance! ;)
0 comments:
Post a Comment