If you could have any kind of camera (even non-existant ones) what would you choose?

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:29:43 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

There was no innuendo in the statement " Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash. He probably went as far as he could
without risking litigation." The first sentence is a well recognised
fact. The second is my opinion and is probably correct.

it isn't, since there's nowhere further to go.

I've already given you examples.

none that were relevant.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see".
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:41:37 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/10/15 PDT 9:19 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

There was no innuendo in the statement " Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash. He probably went as far as he could
without risking litigation." The first sentence is a well recognised
fact. The second is my opinion and is probably correct.

The first sentence is unsupported.

Have you been hiding under a rock?

See https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

"I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products
so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not
allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads."

I've kept Flash installed on my computers, no biggie at all.

How come you didn't convince Steve Jobs to change his mind?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:29:43 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

After a certain amount of toing
and froing by other people I came in with the line quoted above "And
Steve Jobs made that clear in uncertain terms": which he did.

he said that because flash is garbage, and it is.

And he did say that, and it killed the development of flash in th
relevant Apple direction. That's a clear example of a
developer/supplier stopping other developer/suppliers from entering a
particular market area.

nope.

apple said that if adobe could make it not suck, they'd support it.

adobe didn't. they tried and gave up

Too busy making pigs fly.

whatever the reasons, adobe didn't fix mobile flash and they still
haven't fixed flash on the desktop.

as it stood at the time, flash was a buggy mess on the mac (still is)
and the #1 source of crashes. it is also a security nightmare and a
battery hog.

why would anyone want that on a new platform, especially on a device
that has a *much* smaller battery than a laptop does?

No good reason at all.

nonsense. it's a very good reason.

Your understanding of English is definitely perverted. I in effect
said "there is no good reason" would want (a buggy mess) on a new
platform ... .

You are so geared up to argue that you seem to think I was saying the
opposite.

who wants a phone that has a couple hours of battery life and crashes
all the time?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 8/11/15 PDT 5:09 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:41:37 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/10/15 PDT 9:19 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

There was no innuendo in the statement " Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash. He probably went as far as he could
without risking litigation." The first sentence is a well recognised
fact. The second is my opinion and is probably correct.

The first sentence is unsupported.

Have you been hiding under a rock?

See https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

"I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products
so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not
allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads."

I've kept Flash installed on my computers, no biggie at all.

How come you didn't convince Steve Jobs to change his mind?

Mr. Stevens-

Try to read for comprehension, and hold your childish insults. I'm
talking re Mac computers, not iOS. I've previously said why he
prohibited Flash on iOS devices, which the entire industry has since
followed.

On 8/11/15 PDT 5:13 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

You are so geared up to argue that you seem to think I was saying the
opposite.


PKB

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:34:38 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/11/15 PDT 5:09 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:41:37 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/10/15 PDT 9:19 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

There was no innuendo in the statement " Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash. He probably went as far as he could
without risking litigation." The first sentence is a well recognised
fact. The second is my opinion and is probably correct.

The first sentence is unsupported.

Have you been hiding under a rock?

See https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

"I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products
so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not
allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads."

I've kept Flash installed on my computers, no biggie at all.

How come you didn't convince Steve Jobs to change his mind?

Mr. Stevens-

Try to read for comprehension, and hold your childish insults. I'm
talking re Mac computers, not iOS. I've previously said why he
prohibited Flash on iOS devices, which the entire industry has since
followed.

I read for comprehension. You wrote "The first sentence is
unsupported". The first sentence was "Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash." In other words you said there was no
support for Steve jobs wanting to prohibit users from installing
flash.

There is well publicised support for that statement. I was frankly
surprised that you were not aware of it. Hence my comment.

You may be talking Mac computers, not iOS.
I wasn't. I was talking about Steve Jobs.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 8/11/15 PDT 6:43 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:34:38 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/11/15 PDT 5:09 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:41:37 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/10/15 PDT 9:19 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

There was no innuendo in the statement " Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash. He probably went as far as he could
without risking litigation." The first sentence is a well recognised
fact. The second is my opinion and is probably correct.

The first sentence is unsupported.

Have you been hiding under a rock?

See https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

"I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products
so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not
allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads."

I've kept Flash installed on my computers, no biggie at all.

How come you didn't convince Steve Jobs to change his mind?

Mr. Stevens-

Try to read for comprehension, and hold your childish insults. I'm
talking re Mac computers, not iOS. I've previously said why he
prohibited Flash on iOS devices, which the entire industry has since
followed.

I read for comprehension. You wrote "The first sentence is
unsupported". The first sentence was "Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash." In other words you said there was no
support for Steve jobs wanting to prohibit users from installing
flash.

There is well publicised support for that statement. I was frankly
surprised that you were not aware of it. Hence my comment.

You may be talking Mac computers, not iOS.
I wasn't. I was talking about Steve Jobs.

You should learn to make better distinctions. St. Steve blocked Flash
for iOS, not Mac OS.

Sheesh.

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 20:03:09 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/11/15 PDT 6:43 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:34:38 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/11/15 PDT 5:09 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:41:37 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

On 8/10/15 PDT 9:19 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:

There was no innuendo in the statement " Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash. He probably went as far as he could
without risking litigation." The first sentence is a well recognised
fact. The second is my opinion and is probably correct.

The first sentence is unsupported.

Have you been hiding under a rock?

See https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

"I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products
so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not
allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads."

I've kept Flash installed on my computers, no biggie at all.

How come you didn't convince Steve Jobs to change his mind?

Mr. Stevens-

Try to read for comprehension, and hold your childish insults. I'm
talking re Mac computers, not iOS. I've previously said why he
prohibited Flash on iOS devices, which the entire industry has since
followed.

I read for comprehension. You wrote "The first sentence is
unsupported". The first sentence was "Steve jobs wanted to prohibit
users from installing Flash." In other words you said there was no
support for Steve jobs wanting to prohibit users from installing
flash.

There is well publicised support for that statement. I was frankly
surprised that you were not aware of it. Hence my comment.

You may be talking Mac computers, not iOS.
I wasn't. I was talking about Steve Jobs.

You should learn to make better distinctions. St. Steve blocked Flash
for iOS, not Mac OS.

Sheesh.

Sheesh yourself. Not even Steve jobs could uno the past. Flash was
installed where Flash had already been admitted. But at that point in
time he wanted no more of Flash and said so in no uncertain terms.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 04:58:20 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
wrote:

On Wednesday, 12 August 2015 04:39:36 UTC+1, Eric Stevens wrote:


You should learn to make better distinctions. St. Steve blocked Flash
for iOS, not Mac OS.

Sheesh.

Sheesh yourself. Not even Steve jobs could uno the past. Flash was
installed where Flash had already been admitted. But at that point in
time he wanted no more of Flash and said so in no uncertain terms.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens


My recollection was that steve jobs didn;t want a buggy version of the mobile flash plugin on Aple devices because they were bugy and used a lot of resources compared to the newer HTML 5.

I wasn't arguing that Steve Jobs was wrong in any way (although there
are some here who automatically go into anti-bash mode). It is merely
a statement of fact that he wanted to stop Flash (and no doubt for
perfectly good reasons). It is also a statement of fact that had he
done more than he did he ran the risk of getting in trouble with
anti-trust laws or similar.

https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript - all open standards. Apple's mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

John McWilliams:
You should learn to make better distinctions. St. Steve
blocked Flash for iOS, not Mac OS.

Sheesh.

Eric Stevens:
Sheesh yourself. Not even Steve jobs could uno the past. Flash
was installed where Flash had already been admitted. But at that
point in time he wanted no more of Flash and said so in no
uncertain terms. --

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Whisky-dave:
My recollection was that steve jobs didn;t want a buggy version of
the mobile flash plugin on Aple devices because they were bugy and
used a lot of resources compared to the newer HTML 5.

I wasn't arguing that Steve Jobs was wrong in any way (although
there are some here who automatically go into anti-bash mode). It is
merely a statement of fact that he wanted to stop Flash (and no
doubt for perfectly good reasons).

No he didn't. Or rather - support it, Eric. You claim it is a fact, facts are
supported by evidence, so present your evidence upon which you base your supposed
"fact".

It is also a statement of fact that had he done more than he did he
ran the risk of getting in trouble with anti-trust laws or similar.

Also no substantiation for this supposed "fact".


--
Sandman