Apple And Adobe Put Themselves At Risk In Flash Fight
But if you're a developer, a solution provider or a customer, it's a different ballgame altogether.
What makes it vexing for technologists is that both sides in the great debate over Adobe's Flash technology are mostly correct.
Adobe's Lee Brimelow, who started the latest round of fighting between the two companies by telling Apple to "go screw yourself," articulated two weeks ago why he disagreed with Apple's decision to lock Adobe's Flash out of its iPhone 4.0 platform.
"What they are saying is that they won't allow applications onto their marketplace solely because of what language was originally used to create them," he wrote. "This is a frightening move that has no rational defense other than wanting tyrannical control over developers and more importantly, wanting to use developers as pawns in their crusade against Adobe."
In another forum, Adobe's most recent quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company warned: ". . . (T)o the extent new releases of operating systems or other third-party products, platforms or devices, such as the Apple iPhone or iPad, make it more difficult for our products to perform, and our customers are persuaded to use alternative technologies, our business could be harmed."
Don't feel sorry for Jobs, as he's not beneath throwing his own rhetorical bombs - like when he once referred to Java as a "ball and chain."
It's hard to disagree with the argument that Apple wants control over what developers do on its platform, but with Apple and Adobe so financially tied together on Mac OS X through Adobe's Creative Suite franchise it's laughable to say that Apple is out to get Adobe. In fact, Apple executives regularly explained a few years ago that sluggish Mac sales could at least partly be explained by the absence of Creative Suite for its Intel-based Mac systems, which were then new. Adobe helps Apple succeed as a company and everybody knows this.
Apple even acknowledges its own actions with respect to third party software companies could become an issue. In its own quarterly SEC report, Apple writes:
"The Company's development of its own software applications and services may also negatively affect the decisions of third-party developers, such as Microsoft, Adobe and Google, to develop, maintain, and upgrade similar or competitive software and services for the Company's products."
Jobs, though, is now drawing attention to the Flash fracas with what amounts to a response to Brimelow.
"Flash was created during the PC era -- for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards -- all areas where Flash falls short."
It's not an absurd argument to make that Flash is a resource hog that does its best work on the PC platform, not handheld devices. But Jobs writes about "the PC era" like someone would write about the horse-and-buggy era. The insinuation that the PC era is over is balderdash. Apple's own financial numbers -- with incredibly healthy sales figures for Mac desktops and notebooks -- make that much clear. The PC industry is still a growth industry, period, and Flash is incredibly important to the PC as a platform.
Adobe and Apple need developers, solution providers and customers with them to grow their businesses. But developers, solution providers and customers are sick of tech companies' inability to work with each other. If Adobe wants Apple to support Flash on the iPhone OS, it should address Jobs' concerns -- including making its proprietary technology open technology if that's what's required. For its part, Apple shouldn't be surprised if it pushes legions of technologists, channel partners and customers away from it as a company because of its inability to reach a workable solution with another party.
Each company has some of the world's smartest people. On this particular disagreement, it might be helpful if they each acted like it.