Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Flash Ported To iOS and iPhone 4 231

An anonymous reader noted that there is a simple HOWTO explaining how to install flash on an iPhone4. Mad props for using Strong Bad as the demo. Of course, step one is to use the JailBreakMe. Once installed, Flash inside Safari loads in a stopped state so it won't even hurt performance unless you decide to actually execute the program.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Flash Ported To iOS and iPhone 4

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Now we wait.... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09, 2010 @09:20AM (#33187686)

    Why would they? Most folks don't jailbreak their phone, and most could probably care less about flash. The vast majority of sites you visit either have mobile versions, or if not, the flash isn't critical to navigation. I've hit maybe 2 sites in the past year that required flash. I simply brought my business elsewhere in such cases.

    It's a non-issue. Otherwise flash would be on every smart phone on the market. It's only now making it into mainstream Android platforms, and even then, it's still a dog.

  • by AmazinglySmooth ( 1668735 ) on Monday August 09, 2010 @09:29AM (#33187772)
    I'm convinced that Apple has put out iOS4 with at least one bug that users find mildly annoying (like failing to send emails with photos). That way once an exploit is discovered in the new OS release they have reasons for users to upgrade.
  • Curious... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by valeo.de ( 1853046 ) on Monday August 09, 2010 @09:52AM (#33187972) Homepage

    I wonder how many people actually want Flash on their phones. I mean, Adobe have had more than a few years to optimise their player for the biggest sector of their market: the desktop, and they've failed completely. Even on my fairly beefy (Windows 7) desktop with gigs of ram and an abundance of free CPU cycles (read: 99% idle, only Chrome with flash running), the latest flash player chews up CPU like no man's business. (And yes, I've tried the betas and pre-releases, and they're just as bad...)

    Perhaps I'm wrong in thinking that only a minority of people would want flash on their phones, or perhaps Adobe has stepped it up a gear and actually optimised flash player enough so that it won't drain down a handset's battery in a very short space of time. But considering that they often refuse to even comment on bug reports regarding performance (or a complete lack thereof), I'd be surprised if they have.

  • Re:Oh well (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Shihar ( 153932 ) on Monday August 09, 2010 @09:54AM (#33187992)

    I have been a pretty big hater of flash in the past. Its ability to bring a modern computer to its knees with a fucking little flash game is pretty god damn annoying. That said, Apple bitch slapping the shit out of Flash has knocked a little sense into their heads. They have recently discovered mortality and found that they kind of fear it. Flash has started to clean up its act and stopped assuming that the user has more cores than fingers and enough memory to run a dozen instances Windows Vista at once. In fact, EVERYONE has started to do this from website designers to chip makers. I think the smart phone mobile revolution has been great for design in general. For too long everyone used Moore's law as crutch. Why use good design when you can throw 8 gig, handful of cores, and enough power to run a small movie theater at the problem?

    What makes the mobile revolution really interesting is that it is really just reclaiming a lot of old tech. Everyone from chip designers to programmers know exactly where to go next because we have already been there with the PC. The challenge now is to take that old tech and optimizing to do more with less. The programing piece is interesting, but I think the real advances will be in hardware design. What smartphones are doing to hardware (chips, memory, sensors, etc) is breathtaking. They have covered ground that it took PCs a decade to cover in a couple of years. By the time my HTC Evo is ready for replacement in less than two years, I don't doubt for a second that my next phone is going to be rocking specs to put my last computer to shame.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 09, 2010 @10:33AM (#33188568)

    The iOS flash "port" is really just a wrapper around the Android Flash Player to make it work on iOS. This is only possible since the devices use the same sort of CPU. So without Android Flash, there would be no iOS flash :)

  • Re:Jailbreakme (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Tharsman ( 1364603 ) on Monday August 09, 2010 @10:39AM (#33188668)

    If you live in an area with good AT&T coverage you wont notice a problem. Go out into the boonies.

    I see your anecdotal evidence and match with my own. Out here in the midwest ive seen it happen on every iphone4 ive had the opportunity of trying it on. Including the display model at the AT&T store.

    My issue, though, is I have not found an area that does not jump from good to so-bad-i-just-need-to-stare-at-it-for-the-iphone-to-fail. There does not seem to be any in-betweens around where I live. Either ATT just plainly sucks, or they work great.

  • Re:Jailbreakme (Score:3, Interesting)

    by kimvette ( 919543 ) on Monday August 09, 2010 @12:46PM (#33190834) Homepage Journal

    Yes, updates are voluntary and you have to select to force an update.

    Updates are technically voluntary, but if you sync to Windows rather than OS X it is ALL TOO EASY to accidentally upgrade the phone's OS due to focus stealing [wikipedia.org] if you're touch typing.

    So, voluntary it may be, but sometimes some involuntarily update due to focus stealing. Microsoft may consider that type of call a feature, but I consider it a bug. At least X window managers allow me to allow or disallow focus stealing, and on OS X it hasn't been a problem for me either.

  • Re:Oh noes! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Monday August 09, 2010 @01:18PM (#33191436) Homepage

    Well you can read their reasoning here [apple.com]. Pay special attention to reason #6.

    I'm not saying you can't disagree with their reasoning, but obviously they have their reasons.

  • by willy_me ( 212994 ) on Monday August 09, 2010 @03:16PM (#33193498)

    But the real question for me is this: why take such joy in giving up that choice? Why thank Apple for disallowing a feature that wouldn't hurt you at all, though it might only rarely help?

    If iOS users could access Flash then those website owners would have the option to ignore mobile users. "The current Flash website works" would be their response to requests for an optimized one. As it stands, without Flash support, website owners are given the choice to ignore all iOS users, create a dedicated app, or create a website version optimized for mobile devices.

    Apple would prefer that website owners took the latter of the three choices. Forget Flash - just create a version that works well with mobile devices. Small screen, no mouse - it really requires a different design. When designing future websites be sure to "think mobile" during the design process. This is beneficial to users of all mobile web devices.

    So by taking away "choice" in regards to Flash, Apple is pushing the industry to accommodate small mobile devices. This is good for everyone. I am glad Apple made this decision. But if I personally owned an iOS device I would want the option to use Flash. Guess I would have to jailbreak or purchase an Android device - but that is my choice. I am not mad at Apple for making theirs.

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein