Pictured above: an example of Flash being used to create a more exploratory style of navigation in a site that reflects the product's hand crafted origins - www.600.co.nz
Apple are masters of introducing new toys that the world lusts after before anyone's even really sure why. The most recent highlights have to be the iPhone and the iPad. Early adopters of both are instantly in the seriously cool camp. Web browsing was never so hot as on these devices. But how is that browsing experience really? For any sites that have Flash - you will in fact be viewing the (often poorer cousin) HTML version. While your device may be cool - your content may not.
Given that 30 - 40% of all webpages contain some kind of Flash files, and approx 98% of all web browsers accommodate Flash (according to Flash Magazine.com), then WHY does Apple choose to ban this clearly popular plug in?
Apple have all kinds of reasons to trash Flash (mostly it's developed by a rival; albeit a software manufacturer). Steve Jobs elaborates here on his thoughts (not in an open format inviting comment or discussion) which are quite biased (since when was Apple "open"?).
Even in the mobile world, other phone manufacturers have figured how to accommodate this plug in with Flash Lite being included in the firmware. By the end of 2010 the number of mobile devices that cope with Flash Lite will be 2.5 billion. (Though the latest version of Flash will be ubiquitous across platforms, so even Flash Lite will eventually be obsolete.) If 2.5 billion other devices can handle it - why not the iPhone?
What's more Adobe have extended their products to allow developers to make a non-Flash version relatively easily - but that's still not good enough for Apple - oh no you cannot load an application into iTunes that originated in Flash (even though it runs without it).
Further, much of the business of the web, in the form of advertising, relies on Flash to hook in it's audience, sell it's products and gain advertising revenue.
So, content providers (people with websites, banner ads, or mobile applications) must totally re-make their content if they are to be seen by the super cool adopters of Apple products.
It makes me wonder - what's the cost of that to the entire world, if it were to all be made accessible by Apple? Isn't that then the true price of more than a little arrogance on the part of Apple?
