Why I think Adobe is dumping Mobile, and Apple is getting a Pyrrhic Victory
I have been finding it very interesting to see how many people have been saying that Adobe is waving the white flag, and submitting to Apple. I see this as far from the case.
To me, Adobe is actually setting up 2 eventual possibilities here.
1. The Pyrrhic Victory
As much as Apple has hyped it, as much as early adopters have sacrificed livestock and emphatically prayed at their altars, HTML5 just does not yet hold a candle to AVM2. Incidently, that's what we're really talking here, the selection of virtual machine, NOT the overlying language and technology. I shall get to this later.
So what's the bottom line? Strategy 1 is that Adobe's calling the HTML5 bluff.
Who here has coded a full RIA with HTML5? I know some of my collegues have tried, and they are coming against fierce obstacles, some of which will be a difficult and costly struggle at best. After developers get burned on mobile, cancelling the flash mobile player will quite possibly turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory for HTML5.
Why?
1.1 It's slower
Yes, there are many benchmarks out there that clearly show that HTML5 *is* slower than well written Flash code. Simple fact, and very explainable as it's new technology. One source is http://themaninblue.com/writing/perspective/2010/03/22/
1.2 Cross compatibility
Sorry boys and girls. Remember the long days and nights to make your 1 piece of code work for 4 different browser verticals over a span of 5 different versions, giving 20 possible permutations? Well, it's back, and with mobile, say hello to their little friends.
With proper architecture and separation of code, Flash gives a single codebase for a project over a spread of different devices. Sure, you need to rewire and reconfigure your interfaces, but that's kind of expected. a 25" monitor is completely different to a playing card sized smart phone screen.
HTML5 is still having trouble with the most basic of projects across multiple browsers. Again, the W3C standard is not strictly implemented by browsers, there are defects as the engines are different, and independantly developed, and there is not a single engine that your code will run on.
Say what you want about Flash, but they got this bit right. One codebase, many browsers/devices.
Here's some more sources:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/web/library/wa-crossbrowsertechniques/?ca=drs-
(Note Listing 12: Creating a gradient in Safari and Chromse, and Listing 13: Creating a gradient in Internet Explorer)
1.3 The corporate version dilation dillemma
How many corporates still run IE 8? How about IE7? How about IE6?
Simply put, good luck trying to fight corporate policy. You will have more success asking the IT director to run around the office with no pants on, than clear a new browser before it's been tested on all multi million $$$ custom built browser apps that were designed and built for IE6/7/8.
Try to get timesheets with peoplesoft, or the web versions of RTC 2/3, or Lotus Notes 6 to run on modern browsers, and before you say "just upgrade", you need to realise that it can cost multiple hundreds of millions to upgrade these software suites. Seriously. Do you think a CTO in this fiscal climate will put forward a proposal to spend this sort of money, because they want a shiny new unproven programming language? Should they do it, do you think the CFO is going to back them up, and finally that the CEO will be able to sell it to shareholders?
Even if there are no problems with existing software, who'd be prepared to risk their career and sign on the dotted line before thorough testing?
The bottom line is that a ubiquitous minimum standard of IE9 or equivalent generation browsers in corporates will be quite a while off.
There are stacks of other business cases why HTML5 is not suitable right now for even semi-sophisticated RIA's. The only place that I can see a business case for HTML5 is for web pages, and for Banner Ads.
1.4 The Internet - on Steroids
With all of the new developments such as MoleHill giving 3D accelleration to the browser, with FMS giving swarm based multimedia etc for a simple license fee, there are many business cases that HTML5 will not likely be able to complete for at least 5-10 years. I wonder what Flash will be able to do then?
1.5 Conclusion
If this eventuates, those that have pushed HTML5 will look rather silly, and lose their credibility. At this time, Adobe can then reappraise the need for a mobile flash player, and possibly implement something new. This will eventually raise Adobe's share price.
2. Viva la HTML5
Here is a simple fact. Adobe sells tools to make developers lives easier. This is their business.
2.1 The Adobe Flash player is NOT PROFITABLE. The Flash player IS A NECESSARY EXPENSE.
Adobe does not sell the Flash player. They give it away. What they sell is tools to build things for the Flash player, such as LiveCycle et al for very large sums of money. CS5 etc also makes them a pretty penny.
What will happen is that there will be a Flex/Flash compiler to publish to HTML5. Adobe will have a whole suite of tools again geared for however the developers wish to work, and they can charge large amounts of money for it, and developers will gladly pay it, because ADOBE TOOLS SAVE YOU TIME, and therefore MAKE YOU MONEY.
If the supporters and contributors to HTML5 finally do get it right, Adobe will certainly drop the Flash player in an instant. This would be ideal for everyone. Imagine Flex compiling to HTML5, running on all browsers, etc. To developers, it will be business as usual.
From a financial perspective, Adobe will be saving all the development and maintenance cost of their flash player, increasing their shareholder value.
2.2 Stakeholder cred
From a PR perspective, Adobe will be lauded for it's flexibility, and GIVING DEVELOPERS WHAT THEY WANT. At the end of the day, not even developers really care what mechanism is being used to get their pixels on the screen. All people care about is the end result. Since Adobe will be perceived to not let their ego's and pot commitment get in the way of sound business decisions, again, this will raise the share price.
2.3 An Apple a day...
Finally, Adobe will be able to work on the iProducts. Unfortunately, the walled garden will now be in serious danger, as there will be plenty of free to air content available through the browser etc, so there will be less and less need to buy software through the app store.
3. Conclusion
At the end of the day, Adobe's strategy has to be admired. It is a classic Chess Fork move. Either scenario provides Adobe with significant strategic advantage, and at the end of the day, HTML5 may well be the tool of choice within the next 2 years. Pigs also may fly, and the Eurozone might just sort itself out and stabilise the global economy.
For myself, I am betting with Adobe and it's technology at this point in time. With smart leadership like this, it's hard to imagine a scenario where having a solid knowledge of Action Script, MXML and the rest of the Flex framework leaves me and my collegues without work.
To me, Adobe is actually setting up 2 eventual possibilities here.
1. The Pyrrhic Victory
As much as Apple has hyped it, as much as early adopters have sacrificed livestock and emphatically prayed at their altars, HTML5 just does not yet hold a candle to AVM2. Incidently, that's what we're really talking here, the selection of virtual machine, NOT the overlying language and technology. I shall get to this later.
So what's the bottom line? Strategy 1 is that Adobe's calling the HTML5 bluff.
Who here has coded a full RIA with HTML5? I know some of my collegues have tried, and they are coming against fierce obstacles, some of which will be a difficult and costly struggle at best. After developers get burned on mobile, cancelling the flash mobile player will quite possibly turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory for HTML5.
Why?
1.1 It's slower
Yes, there are many benchmarks out there that clearly show that HTML5 *is* slower than well written Flash code. Simple fact, and very explainable as it's new technology. One source is http://themaninblue.com/writing/perspective/2010/03/22/
1.2 Cross compatibility
Sorry boys and girls. Remember the long days and nights to make your 1 piece of code work for 4 different browser verticals over a span of 5 different versions, giving 20 possible permutations? Well, it's back, and with mobile, say hello to their little friends.
With proper architecture and separation of code, Flash gives a single codebase for a project over a spread of different devices. Sure, you need to rewire and reconfigure your interfaces, but that's kind of expected. a 25" monitor is completely different to a playing card sized smart phone screen.
HTML5 is still having trouble with the most basic of projects across multiple browsers. Again, the W3C standard is not strictly implemented by browsers, there are defects as the engines are different, and independantly developed, and there is not a single engine that your code will run on.
Say what you want about Flash, but they got this bit right. One codebase, many browsers/devices.
Here's some more sources:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/web/library/wa-crossbrowsertechniques/?ca=drs-
(Note Listing 12: Creating a gradient in Safari and Chromse, and Listing 13: Creating a gradient in Internet Explorer)
1.3 The corporate version dilation dillemma
How many corporates still run IE 8? How about IE7? How about IE6?
Simply put, good luck trying to fight corporate policy. You will have more success asking the IT director to run around the office with no pants on, than clear a new browser before it's been tested on all multi million $$$ custom built browser apps that were designed and built for IE6/7/8.
Try to get timesheets with peoplesoft, or the web versions of RTC 2/3, or Lotus Notes 6 to run on modern browsers, and before you say "just upgrade", you need to realise that it can cost multiple hundreds of millions to upgrade these software suites. Seriously. Do you think a CTO in this fiscal climate will put forward a proposal to spend this sort of money, because they want a shiny new unproven programming language? Should they do it, do you think the CFO is going to back them up, and finally that the CEO will be able to sell it to shareholders?
Even if there are no problems with existing software, who'd be prepared to risk their career and sign on the dotted line before thorough testing?
The bottom line is that a ubiquitous minimum standard of IE9 or equivalent generation browsers in corporates will be quite a while off.
There are stacks of other business cases why HTML5 is not suitable right now for even semi-sophisticated RIA's. The only place that I can see a business case for HTML5 is for web pages, and for Banner Ads.
1.4 The Internet - on Steroids
With all of the new developments such as MoleHill giving 3D accelleration to the browser, with FMS giving swarm based multimedia etc for a simple license fee, there are many business cases that HTML5 will not likely be able to complete for at least 5-10 years. I wonder what Flash will be able to do then?
1.5 Conclusion
If this eventuates, those that have pushed HTML5 will look rather silly, and lose their credibility. At this time, Adobe can then reappraise the need for a mobile flash player, and possibly implement something new. This will eventually raise Adobe's share price.
2. Viva la HTML5
Here is a simple fact. Adobe sells tools to make developers lives easier. This is their business.
2.1 The Adobe Flash player is NOT PROFITABLE. The Flash player IS A NECESSARY EXPENSE.
Adobe does not sell the Flash player. They give it away. What they sell is tools to build things for the Flash player, such as LiveCycle et al for very large sums of money. CS5 etc also makes them a pretty penny.
What will happen is that there will be a Flex/Flash compiler to publish to HTML5. Adobe will have a whole suite of tools again geared for however the developers wish to work, and they can charge large amounts of money for it, and developers will gladly pay it, because ADOBE TOOLS SAVE YOU TIME, and therefore MAKE YOU MONEY.
If the supporters and contributors to HTML5 finally do get it right, Adobe will certainly drop the Flash player in an instant. This would be ideal for everyone. Imagine Flex compiling to HTML5, running on all browsers, etc. To developers, it will be business as usual.
From a financial perspective, Adobe will be saving all the development and maintenance cost of their flash player, increasing their shareholder value.
2.2 Stakeholder cred
From a PR perspective, Adobe will be lauded for it's flexibility, and GIVING DEVELOPERS WHAT THEY WANT. At the end of the day, not even developers really care what mechanism is being used to get their pixels on the screen. All people care about is the end result. Since Adobe will be perceived to not let their ego's and pot commitment get in the way of sound business decisions, again, this will raise the share price.
2.3 An Apple a day...
Finally, Adobe will be able to work on the iProducts. Unfortunately, the walled garden will now be in serious danger, as there will be plenty of free to air content available through the browser etc, so there will be less and less need to buy software through the app store.
3. Conclusion
At the end of the day, Adobe's strategy has to be admired. It is a classic Chess Fork move. Either scenario provides Adobe with significant strategic advantage, and at the end of the day, HTML5 may well be the tool of choice within the next 2 years. Pigs also may fly, and the Eurozone might just sort itself out and stabilise the global economy.
For myself, I am betting with Adobe and it's technology at this point in time. With smart leadership like this, it's hard to imagine a scenario where having a solid knowledge of Action Script, MXML and the rest of the Flex framework leaves me and my collegues without work.
posted by Bayani Portier at
2:47 PM
0 Comments
