Professor Daddyo's Blog

Insider Info (creative minds in the workforce)

professordaddyo — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 19:10:28 +0000

I Really wanted this entry to be my “Why I divorced Apple” story, but this will suffice until I get around to that one. I also could have titled this “Customer Service Call” but read on and you’ll understand the title.

I recently changed phones. Not carriers just phones. When Google decided to make a phone, and teamed up with HTC™ to make the Nexus One, I jumped in feet first. For close to two years I absolutely loved my Nexus, until one day my 21 year old walks in with his Sidekick 4G. Primarily unimpressed, I played around with his phone, comparing functions side by side with the Nexus, and after a wireless tether I was sold.

The Sidekick 4G is a solid unit. My son and I agree that if this unit ran an OS greater than it’s Froyo stock OS, it would would be a steep Android offering. After having various problems: screen freezes, force quits, etc., I called T-Mobile customer service and go some Insider Info:

Operator #1
Having experienced a hard reboot on this unit previously, I informed Operator #1 that I was aware my APN settings had to be redone. However, I communicated, I wanted to ask a few questions. Did she have any idea when the Sidekick 4G would get at least a Gingerbread update? Because, I cited, with an up to date OS, this phone would really be a contender. She began by saying “Android just makes me hungry, all this Gingerbread and Ice Cream Sandwich, just makes me hungry!” HUH?

She proceeded to say that she could see in her records that Samsung and T-Mobile came to some sort of an agreement to TALK about updates on 11/2. She also explained that the issues (problems) I had with my unit were “known issues.” I asked if these “known issues” were listed anywhere in Cyberspace? Her answer was no. I asked if I could be emailed a statement stating the “known issues”, my close friends are developers, and who knows? Maybe they could possibly find a work-around. Her answer was no. I say “well is there a supervisor I may be able to talk to that might give me a go-ahead on an email stating the “known issues”? Her answer was no, this is Insider Info.

She’d now have to switch me over to another department to to restore the APN settings on my phone. Her final advice was that if I basically Stayed Stock (NOT gonna work for a hacker with a rooted phone, hint-hint), and use my task manager, Blah…Blah…Blah…that’s the best i could do. Wow. She offered me a “free trial” of voicemail to text, (which I made sure I can cancel on day 29 of my 30 day trial) which Google Voice already gives me free of charge.

Operator #2
So I presume, because this department would be handling the actual tech work, they’d be at least a smidgen more informed about an OS update. So, of course I inquired. Operator #2 let me know I WOULD be receiving an update (although she didn’t know when), but by no means a new OS. She pouted “we (t-mobile) only provide you phone service, the update business is Google’s responsibility.” From where she stood, Google refuses to issue an entirely new OS before fixing an old faulty one. I guess I should be……..happy? She “understood my my plight” and “knew how frustrating it was”, all of which I pondered was tied to her “I see you are quite a phone connoisseur, which unit are we talking about?” comment as she sifted through my records to show my evolution from Blackberry-to-Nexus One-to-now a second Sidekick 4G.

I accepted the pun, and was actually impressed by an immediate call-back after the call dropped during our conversation. T-Mobile DOES have good customer service, just some Insider Info that they can’t repeat other than speaking to a paying customer on a secured line. (Here is where I insert using Google Voice to record calls is a godsend).

Throughout this journey, I’ve learned that companies need creative minds to make sense of it all. Operator #1’s Samsung-to-T-Mobile vs operator #2’s T-Mobile-to-Google, says a great deal about what needs to happen. Only through usage can any of these three deliver a superior product. Touchwiz™ technology withstanding, the hardware for the Sidekick 4G holds up, and, could be a superior device with a decent system update. That would increase sales of this unit, no-brainer. But the absence of a creative partner is evident, giving the Sidekick 4G a slim chance of being a major Android competitor. The Nexus Prime is on its way, EVO’s are getting the Ice Cream Sandwich OS, and the Motorola Atrix still rocks.

But NEWSFLASH to the three companies in this triangle……..you need to hire one of us.

Back To Basics

professordaddyo — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:02:01 +0000

Last night, us NBA fans experienced what we all watch for. But it wasn’t the fancy stuff that counted. Teams that don’t make foul shots and basic lay-ups rarely win games. This week, I had to send the Nexus One™ back to HTC for repair. I’m fored to the “basics” of my Blackberry. Last night, amid the various web conferencing available, I used a basic telephone conference call to deliver a message to a conglomerate of music producers. And last night, Dirk Nowitzki and the Dallas Mavericks won a crucial game with the basics.

My buddy (SetFree) and I created the And1 mixtapes. We spent a lot of time with the players. There was always talk in the locker room about being NBA material, and those guys can absolutely do amazing basketball tricks, but the NBA requires the basics first.

So I challenge you today, what basics are you leaving out in you quest to becoming fancy? Your inquiry and examination may surprise you.

Social Media Rehab Episode 2

professordaddyo — Thu, 12 May 2011 14:45:19 +0000

Eric & I discuss Sony & the Hackers, Mind Music, Google Goodies, and more!!!

My Take on Microsoft buying Skype

professordaddyo — Tue, 10 May 2011 13:05:48 +0000

The net-worth of Networking

professordaddyo — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 02:16:43 +0000

“Networking” has been, and remains, a buzz for folks wanting to make it in business. Trust me, a full week will not pass without an invitation to some party, some gathering, some “networking” event. We’re often told these gatherings are the places to meet our next investor, major connection, or client. But what is the true worth of networked parties and activities? Do we really gain as much as the proposed hype? Just as we set rules for dating, our networking outings seem to warrant a set of rules also. There is absolutely no reason to see the same people over and over again, and gain nothing. In the end, countless emails and unreturned phone calls are not the goal. We network to gain connection, further our progress, and maybe even sell something. So what truly makes networking worthy? • The Knowledge Factor Many people treat networking events as places to find investors or customers. Instead, look for sources of knowledge. When engaging in a conversation, check to see if you are learning something, you can talk about TV shows, the economy, and the weather somewhere else. You’re looking to grow your business, and good information is a great place to start. • The “no address, no business” rule. I’m not saying that business cards without an address attached don’t do business, but having an address means someone is paying rent or mortgage, hence, a real business. As a rule of thumb, I usually avoid businesses with no address. Don’t get me wrong, I do make exceptions, but those are far and few between. • Network Up I often say “if you’re the biggest fish in the pond, swim to a bigger place”. Going to places that have folks or your level or below is a big red flag. You want to move up, so start by networking up. Remember, the choice to say no is always available. You don’t have to say yes just because folks invite you. Build your business, and have something to present when you go out. Too often, we network to make something happen, and we should be making something happen before we network. And remember, the next person you meet at a networking event, may have read this blog. Happy networking.

Increasing The Odds (or How to hedge your bets)

professordaddyo — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 04:16:41 +0000

In the evolving world of Social Media, information overload is a much discussed topic. Often, (more than I would like) my friends ask me, “D, how do you keep up with it all?” New networks appear daily, and everyone wants you to sign up. Scripts like Facebook connect help, but does not take away from adding yet another task for your brain, and even the people close to you suffer your absence with you being in the same room.

So how much is too much? Turns out that in cyberspace, no amount is too much.

*Reputation takes the longest to build
Only celebrities can break this rule. The rest of us “bumblebees” as Wilbert McKinley might say, need to post as much as we can. If we truly know cyberspace as the world wide web, we’d know time zones do apply. Some folks are sleep, while some are at work, while some are partying, all at the same time. A true strategy would warrant knowing who’s seeing what, at the right times. That’s round-the-clock work, and that takes time.

*Original content trumps all
Re-purposing content (see The mis-understanding of re-purposed content), is cool, but your true voice comes from your mouth. If you had a lawn mower company, it would do you well to talk and post and blog and video and foursquare and getlue and scoutmob about it as often as you can. Having a voice means being heard. You need to have a concert everyday.

*Lights, Camera, Action
Social Media and reality television (even though it’s scripted) are brothers from another mother. The cameras are on 24/7, and repping your brand or product is a full time job. We live in a world where you only need a Twitter name on a card and its all good. Mobile devices are part of our lives, we never turn them off, and we answer tweets at 4 in the morning. At four-o-one we land the deal. We sleep when we sleep. But most of the time, we’re awake.

I don’t see any of my colleagues slowing down. Increasing your odds is engaging with folks online as much as you can. Write as much as you can, tweet as much as you can, Facebook as much as you can. Find your voice, don’t be annoying, and give it what you got. Often.

Monday Night Football

professordaddyo — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 03:30:50 +0000

I still hear the music in my head. Growing up, and being a huge (American) Football fan, Monday Night Football was the main attraction, the lights-camera-action, of a Football lovers week. Teams wanted to play there, fans wanted to watch there, and advertisers knew the space could provide top dollar. It was a good time for the NFL, and although some pundits blame the 1982 strike for the start of some decline in interest, the fact remains that Monday Night Football is not what it used to be.

So what does this all mean? For marketers, it means staying on top of your game. For artists, it really means to watch your back. Think of Gladys Knight. Her song &voice trancended genre, race, and creed. But the truth is she’s not on the radio today, even if she does make a mean chicken and waffles. If and artist so regal, or (in the case of Monday Night Footbal) a day so royal can be an after-thought today, so can you, tomorrow.

Being prepared is always something we hear, and seldom practice. Plenty of entrepreneur and startup can attest: “when the money rolls in, minds get cloudy”. Being prepared for budget increase is key to success. Knowing what to buy next, and who to spend it on, can make or break a company. Just because one year is fruitful, it doesn’t mean all years will be. So saving, instead of spending your profit, is usually the best way to go. Of course you’ll upgrade staff, equipment, or even offices. But don’t start planning the company trip to Aria in Vegas just yet. Let the business grow first.

Something else to think is star power, or the lack thereof. Without John Madden and Frank Gifford, the faces we knew were no longer there. Gifford retired and Madden went on to invade our living rooms, and Monday Night? Fade to black, well until recently when Mike Vic scored over 50 points. And that’s my final point. Even in a dead spot, your talent can bring it alive. I remember my cousin Joel missing watching the game with me, he missed history.

And that’s just it. Shine in the dark, and be ready when the liight goes out. Are you ready for some football?

The mis-understanding of re-purposed content

professordaddyo — Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:02:59 +0000

Twiiter. Facebook. Linkedin. For some, even Google Buzz. Social networks have become a mainstay for many of us. Just a few years ago, we depended on news channels for most of what we consumed. Now, we actually get into broadcasting the news ourselves. From the Facebook “like” button, to the “retweet”, we just LOVE to blast out information we get from the four corners of the Internet. But besides doing it to fickle our interests, what is our reasoning behind re-purposing content? The likelihood of getting a story first or even 100,00th is slim. For instance, if your Facebook or Twitter feeds resemble that of the folks you post to, re-purposed content can almost be considered nil. Re-purposing “old” content can give the appearance of you or your company being out of the loop. It is true, however, that re-purposed content can show expertise, and on that note these points:

*comments count
The true way to make your expertise known is to add your two cents. Most re-purposed content comes from a main post or article anyway. If you agree, say why. If you don’t agree, say why. We all love new information, give us some of your own.

*don’t re-tweet like a machine gun
Twitter users, you know where I’m going with this. Machine Gun re-tweeting may work for a sports event, but end it there. When you re-tweet in spurts and not spots, you show how little original content you really have in your arsenal.

*give credit, give credit, give credit
Put the shoe on the other foot. If you write something, would you want someone else to get credit? Nuff said.

Original content trumps all other. Never forget that. So be aware of how you use re-purposed content. That said, get to writing!

Innovation : Innovation

professordaddyo — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 20:09:49 +0000

What is innovation? The dictionary describes innovation with words like cutting edge, mutation, and shift. We (Technorati) associate innovation with names like Apple, Windows, and Android. But what can truly be called innovation? This video is from a gospel group. Gospel Music, as we have known it, has never been this innovative. Checklist:

Cutting Edge

The group W.H.A.T. is cutting edge if nothing else. Given the common “gospel ground” of Marvin Sapp and The News Boys, the group speaks to to specific tribe as Seth Godin would put it. The dig into to the streets for Jesus Christ, and that’s to be respected, regardless of you religious persuasion.

Mutation

Interestingly enough, mutation just may fit innovation’s description the best. The brutal truth remains of nothing new being under the Sun. So we all copy, borrow and ‘leverage’ as my team and I say. That said, mutating business practice and art form is genius. It hold the secret to the careers of Steven Jobs and Micheal Jackson. None of our heroes in business or art reinvented the wheel. They took what existed and made it better, or in some cases translated it for their tribe. It’s not even blasphemous to say that about Scripture translation. This is an extra ‘red flag’ for those of us that equate innovation with being ahead of the curve. Lies, garbage, and trash. Invention my friend, DOES NOT equal innovation.

Shift

It is proper to associate innovation with a shift. The examples of computing versus no computing, or smartphone versus no smartphone serve us well here. All innovation represents that ‘paradigm shift’ thingy Steven Covey coined. When you’re moving folks ahead in thought leadership, showing them how to do things smarter and differently, you’re innovative.

The video above represents all of these points well. But so do I and Shelly Palmer delivering tech news through our video shows, or Carol’s Daughter selling cosmetics. The best thing about now is innovation is available to you too, if you agree to not cheat the man hours. #gydo

Congratulations, Apple. Your business practice now duplicates Microsoft, sans 1995.

professordaddyo — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 18:21:55 +0000

Disclaimer: I love my iPhone, and in general I think Apple has some very brilliant ideas coming through the pipe. However, this press release Steve Jobs vomited all over the internet about Flash raised the hackles and quite frankly pissed me off. I’m no Adobe fanatic, but the cavalier manner Jobs blew off anything not Mac related showed how little Apple truly understands the web, gaming, or even their customer base. For the uncommented article click here: Article Link: http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

The red text thrown in are my bitchings and coffee fueled anger.

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.

First off, let’s put Adobe in it’s place and let the reader know that they are small fish playing in big waters. Nevermind the fact that without Photoshop and the rest of the creative suite Apple would be confined to a MUCH smaller market share. The design world runs on Adobe products. I wonder if Apple’s going to start pumping out Apple-made design products and this is a way to distance the current Apple users from Adobe.

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.

It IS a business decision. Flash breaks the iTunes store. So does Jailbreaking an iPhone (because you can use 3rd party apps). Flash also allows you to do much more with the phone than Apple wants (because if you can do more they can’t SELL it to you as an upgrade)

First, there’s “Open”. (Apple 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.

Hi pot, meet kettle. Did someone not tell him about Flex? Open standards? Developers are using Flash much like others use Java. Java btw, was made by Sun. Why are they not killing Java apps?

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.

“Hi, we’re not supporting anything we aren’t a member to.”

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.

Let’s talk about web browsers for a second. How come I can’t get firefox on my phone, or opera, or IE, or Chrome, or ANY other browser but Safari? It’s interesting when they talk about open standards it’s only when it revolves around something they’ve made. “We make things open, but only if Apple makes it and supplies it.” Wait…they supply it? And no one else? That’s kind of proprietary isn’t it? Sure anyone can create something using WebKit, but they built it. Much like flash, huh? Isn’t this the SAME argument Steve was complaining about 2 paragraphs back? And what about all the other open standards available on the web, such as Open Social, Google Code, the open source Mozilla Project, Songbird, AJAX, etc etc? What, no love for these Steve?

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.

YouTube has 40% of the web’s video? Doubtful. Where are these magical statistics from? And where are all these wonderful sites with H.264 that my phone can run? Last I remember if it isn’t on YouTube, I can’t watch it on my iPhone. And if it IS a YouTube video, Safari takes me to YouTube’s app and closes Safari. Wonderful, now I have to reopen and reload the website again. Ever heard of the IA term “pogo sticking?”

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.

I have nothing to say on this one. This is Steve Jobs showing his middle finger to Adobe. This also is the typical fuck you stance Apple has with game developers, and why it’s been so hard to get decent games on the Mac. If it isn’t brought to you by Apple, it’s not on their system.

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.

He’s probably referring to Memory Leaks that occur when you run a flash game. This is more a poorly written code issue than an Adobe issue. You don’t bitch to Apple that a program written in Cocoa doesn’t work, you bitch at the developer that made it. Funny…my Windows box runs Flash just fine.

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?

Seeing as how they’ve released their mobile SDK to all mobile devices, we’ll see what happens.

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.

I’m not too into video specifics so I can’t comment on battery drain with different decoders. What I do know is I haven’t been able to use my iPhone for 10 hours, regardless of what I’m doing. Saying that it’s a decoder issue is throwing out all the other problems iPhone batteries have. Even with a greatly delayed battery life fix I still have to charge my phone everyday, or twice a day if I use it a lot.

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.

So long as it’s through the YouTube app.

Fifth, there’s Touch.

Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers (although it’s available). 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?

The same argument could be made for any interactive code, whether CSS dropdown menus, Javascript boxes or the snakeoil of HTML5. Mouse based interactivity will always be a problem when you’re dealing with touch, regardless of the codebase.

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.

Web design HAS to change with the display technology. Case in point: before the iPhone you could view webpages on your mobile, and developers/designers created separate stylesheets specifically to accommodate these users. Honestly if you don’t have a mobile design for your website these days you’re missing out on a huge amount of web traffic anyhow.

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.

Of course they do. Same reason Apple wants developers to use their app kits. That’s business.

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 really says a lot. Copy this to a record and play it backwards and you’ll get what Steve Jobs is actually saying. It’s about control. Apple is completely against 3rd party developers and software because they can’t control it. That lack of control scares Apple, and it shows through in the totalitarian practices used in the iTunes store (for example, why I can’t get Firefox on the iPhone). I could site tons of links but a Google search will find them all for you.

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.

You’re basically saying your customers are stupid and you know better than they do which applications they’ll want. Why not give them the choice to install crappy applications? Are you that afraid one of these 3rd party apps might be great and take away your market share?

Flash is a cross platform development tool (and yet it’s somehow not open). 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.

That’s because you killed Carbon which CS4 was written in, and didn’t bother to tell Adobe. So they had to rewrite everything in Cocoa and didn’t have time to pump out another version until CS5. That’s also why there was a 64-bit version of Photoshop CS4 for Windows but only a 32-bit version for OSX.

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.

Read: “We make money, and only people who follow our rules make money.”

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.

Steve: “PCs are for people who are ancient and don’t understand the web. Mice are antiquated, and if you have a PC with a mouse and like Flash then you might as well live with the Amish up in Pennsylvania.”

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.

Any games not run by Apple aren’t games. Maybe if we ignore them they’ll go away. Like homeless people. And Mexicans.

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.

“Your product sucks, Adobe.”

Steve Jobs
April, 2010

Congratulations, Apple. Your business practice now duplicates Microsoft, sans 1995.