2010年4月30日

“Thoughts on flash” from Steve Jobs

最近水果店的首腦Steve Jobs寫了一篇Thoughts on flash來替iPhone和iPad不支援flash解畫。
讀過了之後覺得

1. Apple和Adboe的關係出了問題
2. SJ 最中係“We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash.“。 Flash的確係最容易令Safari死原因


Copy from http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

Thoughts on Flash

Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there are few joint interests.

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. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.

First, there’s “Open”.

Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.

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.

Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.

Second, there’s the “full web”.

Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video.

Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.

Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.

Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.

In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?

Fourth, there’s battery life.

To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.

Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.

When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.

Fifth, there’s Touch.

Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary multi-touch interface doesn’t use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?

Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.

Sixth, the most important reason.

Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.

We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.

This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.

Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.

Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.

Conclusions.

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.

The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.

New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.

Steve Jobs
April, 2010

2010年4月29日

請不要再買淡水的“阿婆鐵蛋‘

Copy from Mobile01 淡水:阿婆鐵蛋考

昨天去淡水,買了當地享盛名的阿婆鐵蛋來吃,感覺就是鬆軟可口,可是鐵蛋不就應該是硬邦邦的嗎,跟我吃的怎麼不一樣?

後來,我去翻查了一下資料,了解渡船頭阿婆鐵蛋的掌故,在這裡跟大家分享。

有關淡水阿婆鐵蛋最早的報導,是出自民國72年民生報記者林明峪先生之手,標題為「阿婆鐵蛋,硬是要得」,報導引起許多人的注意,有的媒體遠從日本來採訪,甚至淡江大學的教授都也對 它情有獨鍾而寫成了書,從此阿婆鐵蛋開始廣為人知,這篇報導如今收錄在聯經出版社民國73年出版的「大快朵頤」(已絕版)21-25頁。

當時鐵蛋發明人黃張哖女士(阿哖婆)在渡船頭畔經營一爿被討海人(海腳)諢稱為「海腳大飯店」的小麵攤,因為滷蛋賣不出去,加上滷好的蛋海風一直吹,越滷越小,越滷越黑,但客人卻喜歡上這種更有嚼勁、更加美味的黑滷蛋,於是阿婆的鐵蛋便在這樣不經意中產生了,因為他黑黑的且嚼勁十足,便被稱之為「鐵蛋」。

阿婆鐵蛋出名後,大量生產鐵蛋供商家批貨販賣,其中有一家跟阿哖婆批貨去賣的。現在老街上極富盛名的「阿婆鐵蛋」也是十多年前跟阿哖婆批貨的其中一家,由於地點位於人來人往的交叉口,較引人注意、生意也比較好,賣久了便賣出了名聲,搶先申請了註冊商標,把人人熟知的阿婆鐵蛋變成了獨家商標,自己也開始製作鐵蛋來賣。

而阿哖婆的女兒黃玲紅女士,雖然八歲開始就幫著母親顧店做鐵蛋,一手做出的鐵蛋有「阿母的味道」,卻認為當初是因為自己不懂註冊商標的方式,而先讓別人申請去了,只有另外申請了「海邊鐵蛋」的註冊商標。

黃女士無奈的說,儘管當地的鎮公所都知道這段歷史,每次總努力邀請黃女士自己製作的「海邊鐵蛋」參加各地園遊集會做推廣,往往客人卻總說這不是阿婆鐵蛋不願購買,而錯過了一嚐真正阿婆鐵蛋的滋味。儘管如此,黃女士為了紀念當初發明鐵蛋的創始人阿哖婆,所以後來又另在註冊商標上加上了阿婆兩個字,於是商標便成了「海邊阿(哖)婆鐵蛋」,由於「阿婆鐵蛋」早已打響名聲,鐵蛋市場沒有「海邊阿哖鐵蛋」的立足之地,阿哖婆鐵蛋就此式微。


淡水本地人的發言
本來是賣不出去的滷蛋,在「廢物利用」下,無意中創造出淡水一項知名特產,因大受歡迎還鬧雙胞案,我覺得黃張哖女士應該才是正宗的創始人,不過誰創始不重要,因為鐵蛋須長時間滷煮、搧風,但近來店家為節省瓦斯及製作時間等成本,鐵蛋煮得鬆軟無味,已失去了原本的精神,連這麼簡單的小吃都cost down這麼厲害,淡水哪裡還能再吃到正宗硬邦邦的鐵蛋呢?

2010年4月28日

~開張大吉~

這是我在2010年4月28日的一個失眠晚上(早上?), 心血來朝而設立的部落格......
這處沒有什麼主題, 只是把我所有想到的東西都共冶一爐放在這處
希望大家有空多點來看

P.S.
雖則說共冶一爐,但最主要會分以下幾類
1. 程式開發分享 (都是一些日常IT工作經驗)
2. DIY分享 (生活小手作)
3. 旅遊資訊 (香港人放假時都是不愛留港的......)
4. 省錢情報
5. 生活 (那就是其他, 哈哈)

P.S. 希望可以有恆心的維持這部落格