∞ Adobe founders hit back at Jobs and Apple in Flash debate

Written by

Two weeks after Apple CEO Steve Jobs posted an open letter on the pitfalls of using Flash in the company’s mobile devices, Adobe founders Chuck Geschke and John Warnock responded with their own thoughts.

In a letter titled “Our thoughts on open markets,” Geschke and Warnock said they believe open markets are in the best interest of developers, content owners, and consumers.

“If the web fragments into closed systems, if companies put content and applications behind walls, some indeed may thrive — but their success will come at the expense of the very creativity and innovation that has made the Internet a revolutionary force,” the pair said in the letter.

However, Jobs pointed to Flash’s proprietary nature, compared to Apple’s support of open standards including HTML5, CSS and JavaScript; issues surrounding reliability, security and performance of Flash; its effect on mobile device battery life and a user interface designed for mice, not touch screens.

“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,” said Jobs.

But Adobe feels that Apple’s position shows they are trying to control more than just the iPhone, iPod and iPad platform.

“We believe that Apple, by taking the opposite approach, has taken a step that could undermine this next chapter of the web — the chapter in which mobile devices outnumber computers, any individual can be a publisher, and content is accessed anywhere and at any time.

“In the end, we believe the question is really this: Who controls the World Wide Web? And we believe the answer is: nobody — and everybody, but certainly not a single company,” said Geschke and Warnock.


  • Eric

    Okay Adobe, open source Flash. Then your argument will have some weight.

    Or make it so well on the Android that Apple has no choice but to adopt it. And while you're at it, make Flash export native iPhone apps that will never, ever interfere with updates of any kind that Apple might do. Then, and only then, will your argument hold any weight. But the argument that Apple is the guilty party when it comes to open web standards has got to go. You're the one with the proprietary technology, designed to drive everyone to your tools and nobody else's. Hey, that kind of makes you guys hypocrites to be crying about Apple no?

    Disclosure, I develop in Flash and will be for some time to come because of choices we made two years ago. So I have no axe to grind from not using or needing Flash. But believe me, we have seen the future in the iPad and are already taking appropriate measures in terms of the future.

  • Robert

    So the restaurant sites (for example) hidden within Flash content are not behind a "wall"?

    Totally clueless!

  • http://www.thomas-fitzgerald.net Thomas Fitzgerald

    It seems to me as if Adobe is using it’s public spat with Apple to deflect public attention away from HTML 5. It’s trying to make supporting flash a freedom issue to gain support for public support. But when you look at it the bulk of their argument seems more levelled at HTML 5 than anything to do with Apple, but they know they can’t use the freedom and open argument against a true open staderd so they’re using Apple as the scapegoat.

  • http://intensedebate.com/profiles/deltatee deltatee

    I love the quote out of the letter "If the web fragments into closed systems, if companies put content and applications behind walls, some indeed may thrive — but their success will come at the expense of the very creativity and innovation that has made the Internet a revolutionary force” because it could be said by EITHER side. Trying to use an argument for your technology that could be turned around (without rewording) and used against your technology, speaks volumes to me. Is this the best you could come up with?

  • http://intensedebate.com/profiles/deanlewis Dean Lewis

    When you don't have an argument, appeal to emotional abstracts like "freedom" and the like. It's worked for politicians for years. Guess it might work for Adobe, too.

  • SteveS

    "If the web fragments into closed systems…"

    By definition, Flash is a closed system. What exactly are they arguing here?

    "No company — no matter how big or how creative — should dictate what you can create, how you create it, or what you can experience on the web."

    I'm not sure Warnock and Geschke understand the difference between web content and the medium for which the content is delivered. Not supporting Flash is not limiting the content you can view or what you can create. It's merely limiting the medium by which it can be delivered.

    "We believe that Apple, by taking the opposite approach, has taken a step that could undermine this next chapter of the web — the chapter in which mobile devices outnumber computers, any individual can be a publisher, and content is accessed anywhere and at any time."

    Yes, and mobile devices will very soon outnumber desktop systems. Obviously, Adobe is scared. However, one has to wonder why Adobe hasn't been able to produced a reasonable Flash player on ANY mobile device up to this point.

    Sorry Adobe, I realize you have a vested interest to keep Flash relevant, but the argument presented in your response to Job's thoughts on Flash is weak. Worse, they didn't even attempt to answer Job's specific concerns of Flash. That says volumes in and of itself.

  • Daniel Swanson

    “In the end, we believe the question is really this: Who controls the World Wide Web? And we believe the answer is: nobody — and everybody, but certainly not a single company,” said Geschke and Warnock.

    What they're tacitly saying (thinking) is that they think Apple COULD indeed control the web. This pushes their "thinking" over the rational edge and perhaps reveals their own intentions. This is also a statement of sheer envy.

    I would have given Warnock/Geschke more credit in the intelligence market. At this point they've got nothing in defense of Flash as it exists now. Just because its seems like Apple's is the loudest voice saying, "The emperor ain't got no clothes on!" doesn't mean a string of other won't realize such and side with Apple in eschewing Flash.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Adobephile Adobephile

    I've worn my screen name proudly for nearly two decades, and I'm a professional Creative Suite user, about to happily upgrade to CS5, but on the subject of Flash, I take exception.

    Steve's position is clear and rational. Until Adobe can produce a version of Flash that works well on the iPhone, it will not be allowed. And even more importantly, Adobe will not be able to use its Flash converter to produce apps for the App Store. That stipulation is even more important for the continuing integrity of Apple's iPhone OS ecosystem. They must maintain control, clear and simple.

    But in stating and affirming such terms, Steve is not at the same time asserting Apple's intention to dominate the Web. Such an irrational deduction tends to reveal the deducers own sordid intentions.

    Steve Jobs is to be commended yet again for taking such a bold position which, though its immediate purpose is to protect the iPhone OS ecosystem. This backlash from the highest places at Adobe does more to reveal Adobe's own profound misgivings over Flash's future than to refute at all any of Steve's stated position.

  • http://rob-of-cleargraphics.blogspot.com/ cgrscott

    Interesting comments from the Adobe founders.

  • http://www.theuniversalsteve.com SSteve

    One year at Thanksgiving when I was a teenager, my grandmothers got in a shouting match and the one who was sober called the other a bitch. That's what this feels like.