On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 12:53 AM, jude <flexcapaci...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apple made > many requests (complaints) for them to upgrade and provide a good > experience for their users which they ignored. Now, years later is it the > reason Apple's decisions on Flash? > Jude, while I don't agree with the decisions that Adobe is making with it's support of Linux I have to stop you and tell you that you are wrong and that you've been listening to Apple's FUD. The real story behind the "poor sweet Apple company that kindly asked for a intel supporting CS upgrade" is that the day before Adobe released the new version of CS - a date that they had been very open with for a long time with partners such as Apple, Apple announced the new version of their hardware. Obviously the decision to switch core architecture had been made long ago but the decision was never shared with Adobe beyond many of Adobe's requests to ensure that their software was prepared to work on Apple's hardware. Apple is notorious for not releasing information to partners until it goes out to the world, then all the partners have to play catchup. So rather than giving Adobe a heads up so that they could plan for the change well in advance, they sprung the trap the day before the release. This sort of announcement is meant to screw with a company because Apple is well aware of Adobe's release cycle and how long it would take to upgrade Adobe's applications to work with the new hardware. Now Apple has roughly a year to (very publicly) complain that Adobe isn't fast enough or accommodating and should "just upgrade their software". We as developers know this isn't an overnight job, especially for something as full as Creative Suite. No Jude, I'm sorry to say that you listened to the Apple narrative without all the facts. In this case Apple was able to have their cake and eat it to. As you know, as scheduled, in the next release cycle (and even earlier for some applications) Adobe worked to make their applications compatible for the new hardware. However the straw man that Apple set up was already done and Apple was able to make Adobe look bad. Apple only "repeatedly asked for Adobe to upgrade" after the damage was done rather than gave Adobe the heads up to plan and release on time. -- Jonathan Campos
