TheRealTimeWeb.com - iOS

My Answers To Gruber's Questions

Wed, 12 Jan 2011 16:35:00 +0100

Argh, Tim Anderson tricked me into reading a post on daringfireball... As expected, what I saw wound me up. In the post John Gruber has some 'questions', and since I highly doubt that Google feels that they owe him a personal explanation I'll take a stab at the answers here (Gruber's blog does not allow comments).

Q 1. In addition to supporting H.264, Chrome currently bundles an embedded version of Adobe's closed source and proprietary Flash Player plugin. If H.264 support is being removed to 'enable open innovation', will Flash Player support be dropped as well? If not, why?

A: No, it won't. Flash does not hinder open innovation, quite the opposite. H.264 on the other hand does, and someone, somewhere has to pay if you and me want to consume H.264 content. In the case of Flash, Adobe pays some of the fees for us, but the future licensing terms are quite uncertain
The Flash community is one of the most highly creative collection of people I have ever had the joy of being a part of. I could go on and list 100 examples here, but just take a look at the most recent thing that comes to mind:
Use Kinect to Control Adobe Flash Using Node.js

That's open innovation in my book. Blitz didn't have to ask anyone for permission to build this application - compare that to iOS. They did not have to pay Adobe to either author or play Flash content - compare that to Apple's developer program. Large parts of Adobe's Flash Platform are open source, but the Player is closed - and rightly so in my opinion. Flash does not hinder innovation, it encourages it. Can the same be said for H.264?

Q 2.Android currently supports H.264. Will this support be removed from Android? If not, why not?

A: Who cares really? Are you calling Google a hypocrite if they don't? If so, where is your criticism of Apple for championing closed source codecs such as H.264 and calling their platform open? Maybe Google is hiding behind 'open' too?
And since the fallback technology for video playback in the browser is Flash anyway you can simply use that - Android has great support for Flash.

Q 3. YouTube uses H.264 to encode video. Presumably, YouTube will be re-encoding its entire library using WebM. When this happens, will YouTube's support for H.264 be dropped, to 'enable open innovation'? If not, why not?

A. It won't matter either way. I have a feeling that YouTube will ensure that their videos can be played back. Did things break when YouTube transitioned to H.264? Actually, transitioning is the wrong term here. Contrary to popular belief there was never such a thing as a 'Flash video codec'. Flash has supported H.264 for years, alongside other codecs. Adding WebM to the mix is a formality now.

4.Do you expect companies like Netflix, Amazon, Vimeo, Major League Baseball, and anyone else who currently streams H.264 to dual-encode all of their video using WebM? If not, how will Chrome users watch this content other than by resorting to Flash Player's support for H.264 playback?

A: Maybe like so: Chrome user navigates to video page. Site detects Chrome. Chrome plays video using Flash which is bundled into Chrome, using an H.264 or WebM version of the content, whichever is available. User is happy.
What am I missing here? Is there something inherently wrong with playing a video in Flash?

Q 5. Who is happy about this?

Google I guess for taking a swipe at Apple. And I know who isn't happy: you aren't, quite clearly. One's own medicine can taste bitter.

Using 'Air Display' iPad App To Aid Flash iOS Development

Fri, 05 Nov 2010 11:55:00 +0100

A few days ago my mini-display to DVI adapter that connects my external display to my iMac stopped working. Whilst waiting for a replacement I wondered if my iPad could act as a secondary display in the meantime. If you are like me then you will feel as if one of your arms has been cut off when you have to work on a single display - it feels totally inadequate despite a size of 27" :-)

A few minutes after posting a question about such a setup on Twitter I had received several recommendations for an app called Air Display (not to be confused with Adobe AIR, it has nothing to do with that at all). I bought the app and tried it - it turns out that it works very well indeed and is also great to test some basic touch screen interactions, especially if you develop Flash applications for mobile. I also recorded the following short video to quickly demo the setup. If you have any questions please post them below in the comments.

Having Fun With Flash and iPad

Thu, 28 Oct 2010 11:43:00 +0100

I know I should be doing 'proper' work but right now I am having way too much fun playing with the Flash CS5 iOS packager. Two days ago I started porting my Just Letters game (yes, that old chestnut) to iPad and I was pleasantly surprised how easy it was, even after deciding to rewrite the game in plain AS3 (plus a few graphical assets which I packaged into a .swc file). In total it must have taken me only 4 - 6 hours before the game was running on the iPad, and this included the logic for the NetConnection and ShareObject syncs.

But the point of this post isn't about the game, it's about how much fun Flash suddenly is again. The combination of AS3, RTMP and a tablet form factor is ~~magical~~ just great, and I've already got a few ideas for some further, more useful applications.

Say what you like about Flash, but Adobe is onto something here with AIR and Flash Player for devices, and that even includes TVs now. I cannot help but get excited about that.
The purists amongst you may point to performance issues and advocate native apps above all else. Sure, packaged Flash apps do not perform as well as native applications, but they sure become attractive when it comes to price. Also usually often perform well enough, and are likely to get better as time goes on. AIR for Android is showing what's possible, and I am sure the iOS packager will catch up.
As yourself this: How many companies really have the budget to build an iPhone app, an Android app, port those to tablet factor, and then possibly throw in a BlackBerry app for good measure? And how many developers can afford the time to learn all the native languages involved? Sure, you can get so far pretty quickly, after all AS3 has taught us many useful programming concepts, but to reach the level of expertise that you may already have in AS3 will take serious time - ever heard of the 10,000 hour rule?

I'm not advocating against native apps though, far from it, it's more a feeling of empowerment that anyone with some decent AS3 skills can now roll out a mobile app. This can and will translate into some new revenue opportunities, no doubt about it.

I'm also happy that the workflow as I see it does not limit you to an installable app. After all, why build a native app if a web app will do the job? Want to publish a SWF at the same time and serve that to browsers? Go ahead. For Just Letters the SWF that is produced during the compilation to iOS's .ipa is ready to deploy to the web as is, no further actions needed. For other form factors you may need to re-jig the view of your application, but we all know that that is (often) easily done, especially for simple apps such as this game. But then, most mobile apps must be simple by default, concentrate on one specific task and try to accomplish that task well. Whether they succeed or not is down to the developer, but let me push the boat out here and say that the underlying development platform plays only a small role in any failure or success.
An application is judged by its users, and looking back at the only iPhone application I have released to date I can say that I could have done a lot worse, and have done a lot better than thousands of native applications in the store. And you know what: Just like the tools I use I'm bound to get better too as I work hard on putting in those 10,000 hours - not necessarily learning new programming languages but gaining new experience on new platforms in using the tools I know best.

Rock on Flash. More to come.

Multicast Chat Across Devices and Platforms

Mon, 04 Oct 2010 13:46:00 +0100

In preparation for my session at Streaming Media Europe in a couple of weeks I had a play with the IP multicast feature in Flash today. Tom Krcha posted an excellent example on his blog a few months ago which demos this feature very well.
It's worth pointing out that this code works in a LAN setup, not over the public internet. This also means that Cirrus (aka Stratus) is not required for the P2P introduction - Flash Player can handle this itself on a multicast enabled LAN. Therefore you can try this using the devices on your local network, but not with your friends elsewhere on the net.

I wanted to try Tom's example on my iPad and Nexus One. The phone was easy since it can run Flash Player 10.1 and Tom's example app worked fine there. But what about the iPad?
Since I have got an Apple iOS developer account I am able to use the iPhone packaging feature in Flash CS5 to build iPhone and iPad applications. All I needed to do was to port Tom's Flex example to Flash as using the Flex framework on a device is not the best thing to do - at least not until themobile-optimised Hero SDK ships.

This blog post is therefore just a record to say: it worked and it worked well. Porting took only half an hour, and I then spent another half hour fine tuning a few bits and pieces, nothing major. The photo shows the app running on my Windows 7 netbook, the Nexus One and the iPad. I also had it running on my iMac and in the Flash IDE.

Say what you want about Flash on devices, there's something very cool about getting your code to run so easily in so many places. And remember this app now not only spans devices but also platforms and even runtimes since the iPad app is practically AIR based.

You can download my Flash app including sources here, but note that you need an iOS developer account to compile and install it on an iDevice.

My Email To An iPad User

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 22:15:00 +0100

As some of you know, I offer a hosted collaboration tool called Scribblar which I built using some of my favourite technologies, namely Flex and FMS. Today I sent out a newsletter announcing a new feature and I received the following email from one of my users:
"Greetings. I was hoping to use Scribblar to serve as a communication tool between two ipads. However, scribblar uses flash and ipads only use java. Is there a way around this?"

I replied as follows:
--------------------
Hi,
Unfortunately Apple's iDevices do not support Flash or Java or indeed any third party browser plug-ins. This is a purposely implemented limitation on Apple's part and I suggest you contact them, express your disappointment and request support for Flash and other well established browser plug-ins. We here at Scribblar - which is essentially a one man team - build web applications using Flash as a primary platform and have not got the resources to develop a completely separate version solely to accommodate a sub-section of Apple hardware. As you probably know, a 'normal' Apple Mac desktop machine or laptop runs Flash just fine, in fact Scribblar was built on a Mac and I'm writing this email on a Mac. My assumption is that Apple has limited support for third party runtimes on its iDevices based simply on business reasons as it gives users less choice about the apps and games they can use and consume, and encourages more purchases via the app Store instead. But that's just my personal guess.

Later this year there are a wide variety of tablet devices to be released which run on more open operating systems which fully support Flash as well as other established web technologies in addition to those supported by Apple.

Sorry not to be able to help any further on this occasion.
--------------------

I'm not going to beat a dead horse any further here but isn't this a really sad state of affairs? I cannot help but feel that Apple is forcing the web back a few steps and it's not just the Scribblar user that's being left slightly disappointed here, it's also the Apple user. The undiluted web experience? Not quite. Instead this is a game in which everyone loses.
I'm just glad that you have choices *before* you buy an iDevice, but the email above also demonstrates that not all users are aware about what exactly these devices can and cannot do - this user thought his iPad could run Java, and likely also thought it would run Flash until he tried a few sites. It's left to me, the Flash developer, to educate him. In the future I should CC Apple support on such communications...

Downgrading Apple iPhone OS 4.0 to 3.1.3

Fri, 25 Jun 2010 11:01:00 +0100

I've had major performance issues on my iPhone 3G (which is over 2 years old) after upgrading to the new iOS 4.0. Apps took much longer to launch, password entry forms did not respond quickly enough and the whole experience was just much much worse than using the 3.1.3 firmware version. Unfortunately I quickly found out that Apple does not like you to downgrade the OS and firmware for reasons that are only known to them, regardless of the fact that the new OS clearly does not perform well on a 3G model.
I tried the 'normal' downgrade process using iTunes 9.2, a 3.1.3 firmware file which I downloaded from this site and entering the phone into DFU mode as described in various guides. However at the end of the restore process I always got Error 1015 which basically translates to 'Nice try my boy'.

Fortunately after unsuccessfully trying a few different approaches I came across this guide which uses the iRecovery tool after Error 1015 has manifested itself and this worked a treat. I managed to downgrade to 3.1.3 without issues following the steps described. So if you too are stuck at Error 1015 then give that guide a try - but you do so at your own risk of course.

Hope this helps someone.

My Letter To Apple: Objection To Section 3.3.1, Request For Exclusion

Tue, 04 May 2010 12:29:00 +0100

I've just sent the following to the EU Dev Support at Apple.

==============================

Dear Apple,
As a developer who has successfully used Adobe Flash CS5 to build, submit and publish iPhone applications via the App Store I am unable to agree to the new Updated Program License Agreement you wish to impose on me.

Section 3.3.1 of the agreement states:
"Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited)."

Since my application has originally been written in ActionScript it is now in violation of these terms. This brings up two questions:

1) Could you clarify whether or not applications submitted under a previous version of the Program License Agreement are affected by this change? If so, am I supposed to remove my application from the App Store?

Of course, the published iPhone application I developed complied fully with the previous version of your Program License Agreement, and which I was happy to adhere to. As you are aware, Apple had no problems approving my iPhone app, including taking a 30% cut from any earnings to date.

2) It seems clear that due to the recent changes in terms I am no longer able to develop iPhone applications using my favourite tool, Adobe Flash CS5. Since I paid a full year's subscription and you have now changed the terms under which I am allowed to engage with the program, I kindly ask you to exclude my company from having to adhere to the section 3.3.1. In the likely case of you being unable to comply with my request I kindly ask for a pro-rata refund as I have no plans of 'originally writing' any of my apps in any of the 'approved' programming languages mentioned in section 3.3.1.

I am awaiting your timely reply within the next 10 working days.

Regards,

Stefan Richter

==============================

I'll post any correspondence I receive back here. Of course the request for excluding my company from Section 3.3.1 is a bit of a joke and will not happen, but I wonder what their refund policy is like? Thanks to Jodie who has also emailed Apple on this matter - and who is still waiting for a reply.

Steve Jobs Lies About Speaks Up On Flash

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 21:44:00 +0100

I got to be honest, I was gearing up for a massive rant on the latest PR effort by Apple in which Steve Jobs is trying to defend the company's ridiculous anti-Flash stance. But as it turns out I'm far too slow and some of my friends and colleagues have already said what needs to be said and I therefore would like to simply point you to a few of my favourite posts on the subject.First off though, let me state that Apple certainly makes some valid points. Unfortunately for them however, most of the arguments against Flash are either half-truths or flat-out lies, with the outcome that any remotely valid points can't be taken seriously. And if I look over the points made in the posts I link below I must say there isn't really a single argument left standing.

So first up is Adam Banks with his thoughts on Steve's thoughts. Adam addresses many of the most serious flaws of Steve Jobs' argumentation and picks them apart one by one.

Jesse Warden adds yet more firepower, and also addresses the totally ridiculous H.264 argument.

Dan Rayburn adds a great amount of sense to the discussion by calling Apple's bluff of trying to masquerade the lack of Flash on the iEverything as a technology issue. It clearly is not, and it is not about HTML5 versus Flash either. It's the App Store versus Flash. Apple simply is too greedy to let anyone else in on the goldrush - oh sure, developers are allowed to build apps (and hand over a large cut of their revenues) but only if they play by Apple's ever changing rules. Not for me, thanks.

Even Adobe's CEO has already been quoted on this latest development, and his thoughts are here.

Also check out this 'first draft' of Steve's rant.

Let's face it, Apple feels immensely threatened by Flash. It's evident just by the fact that Steve Jobs felt the need to write that blog post - when did you last see Apple's CEO defend a company decision in this way? Why the need to explain themselves? And this comes from a company that doesn't even allow their employees to blog or speak publicly on record! And you want to talk about 'Open'? Gimme a flippin' break.

What I find most interesting on this whole spat is the fact that I feel forced to write posts like this one. It's not something I want to write about, but I don't like lies and FUD left to stand unchallenged. The same can not be said for the other side though: how many Flash developers (or Adobe board members for that matter) do you see writing posts that would provoke a response from Apple, or their fanboy crowd? I don't see any. And that's exactly why I love the Flash community that much and feel so passionate about it, feeling the need to defend our ground: we do not go out and hrow mud at other people's products or technologies, in fact quite the opposite is the case. Every single Flash Developer I know is multi-skilled, and many have written iPhone apps, in Objective-C would you believe (that's subject to change, see Mike Chambers and others, yours truly including, but then I was indeed lazy and coded in AS3, sorry Steve).
I honestly do not understand where the need to bash Flash comes from. If Flash really eats your CPU or drains your battery then why not simply uninstall it? I donlt see people doing that. Could it be that deep down you know that video decoding requires CPU cycles, and that this won't change no matter what codec and playback technology you deploy? Or maybe it's because we all know that Flash is an essentially fibre of today's web, and your iPhone's battery is dead after barely 6 hours of normal usage and lasts for just about a single day (nighttime not included) if you don't touch it, and that's without Flash...

It's all about choice, and Apple does not want you to have any if you use their devices. But then you do have a choice after all: the choice not to buy Apple's products. Thankfully.

Update:
Here are some more great articles on the subject from Ryan at Untold Entertainment speaks of misdirection by Apple, Lee Fernandes busts yet more of Steve's myths, Andrew of the One Degree Group hopes this exercise will backfire on Apple, Rob Pegoraro of the Washington Post also sees right through Apple's smokescreen and OSNews smells hypocrisy thick enough to cut it with a knife. Wow, strong words.

Apple Is Acting Like A Dick Spoiled Kid

Fri, 09 Apr 2010 11:07:00 +0100

Excuse my French, but that's the most fitting way of describing Apple's latest move of deciding to 'ban' any cross-compiled applications from its App Store. If enforced this could mean an effective block of Adobe Flash CS5's flagship feature which is the ability to export native iPhone apps written in ActionScript.

I'm annoyed by this for many reasons. The primary one is that this directly sends a message to me personally as a developer who has already launched a Flash based iPhone app onto the App Store. That message reads: "We do not value your work. Whilst technically there's nothing wrong with your application and you have complied with all the rules we have given you already we've decided to move the goal posts now and deemed that your work adds no value to our platform."

Well guess what Apple, your platform does not add any value to me either. Not that I had any plans to develop more iPhone apps anyway anytime soon, but the fact that the effort I put in already is effectively discredited does cheese me off. Who does Apple think they are? Do they really believe that this is going to drive adoption of their own tools? I predict the opposite will be the case.

I don't think even Apple is that stupid. Instead this latest development is nothing more than a cheap shot at Adobe, but with a lot of collateral damage. They seem to forget that most developers are skilled in several languages, and many Flash devs also code in Objective-C. Will they reconsider their investment in Apple now? I certainly will.
Having already sold my Apple TV and replaced it with an Acer Revo, replaced my MacBook Pro with a netbook I'll most certainly not be renewing my Apple Developer agreement, nor agree to their updated terms. MobileMe can also go f**k itself. And my decision about upgrading to the next iPhone has just been made for me too: the HTC Desire is what I desire.

Granted, when it comes to desktop hardware I'll have to consider my options as I do like OSX and my iMac. But the bottom line is that I'll vote with my wallet and feel mighty good about it.

PS: I have updated the description of my game on the App Store - will let you know if/when they publish it. But I feel they may not :-)

My First iPhone Game - Built with Flash!

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:11:00 +0100

The time has finally come to lift the lid on this. As you've probably all heard by now, Adobe today announced a brand new feature for the upcoming Flash Professional CS5: Export as iPhone app. Insane! Essentially what this feature will allow you to do is a cross-compilation from SWF to Objective-C - the resulting app is a totally legit iPhone/iPod Touch app which can be submitted to the Apple app Store. In my case that process has already happened, and the app has been approved!

I will post more details about the development process when things have calmed down a little, but for now I'm super exited to announce the immediate availability of my first application for iPhone and iPod Touch: my good old Just Letters game.
I figured this Flash game of mine which stems back from around 2005 would make an ideal candidate for a touch screen device, and I think I haven't been completely wrong with that assumption. Not only is Just Letters one of the first games built in Flash to ever hit the App Store but I have a feeling it is the very first game that use Flash Media Server to provide the real-time features.

In celebration of the launch I am distributing 10 free voucher codes for the US App Store (sorry, the vouchers do not work on App Stores outside the US). The game normally retails for $0.99. Just leave a comment below and I will pick a random 10 later today (leave your email too!).

Please help me spread the word about this game by blogging about it, tweeting or getting your grandma to buy a copy. Don't forget to review and rate it on the App Store too. please point people to the following age when you link to the game: http://www.muchosmedia.com/justletters (muchosmedia is my company, the 'official' developer behind the game).
Last but not least, if you need the game's icon or some screenshots then you can grab a small zip (1MB) from here. It also contains the game description in text format.

Thanks for your support!