Apples "Ipad" for photographers?

[mwfanelli2]

There is an argument on another web site as to whether the lack of Flash is good or bad. Personally, I hate Flash as the vast majority of Flash applications seems to be advertisements of the most annoying sort. Plus, it is a massive resource pig.

The other side of the discussion likes Flash because they are either Flash developers (!) or because some of their favorite sites use Flash. They are willing to put up with the high demands because they have enough memory and CPU to handle it.

You can't please everyone!

[Photo-John]

I have been told that Flash is a resource hog. That may be. But it doesn't really matter. It's used all over the Web - both for advertising and for content. Any device or operating system that doesn't support it is just not doing its job - that job being accessing Web content. Apple needs to get off their high horse and get with the program.

[GB1]

I have been told that Flash is a resource hog. That may be. But it doesn't really matter. It's used all over the Web - both for advertising and for content. Any device or operating system that doesn't support it is just not doing its job - that job being accessing Web content. Apple needs to get off their high horse and get with the program.

The whole Flash / No Flash debate is interesting but I wonder how much control Apple has over what Adobe does and doesn't do? Assuming they don't want to block it, how can they make Adobe develop a Flash player for that OS? The Palm Pre has the same problem.

I use Flash on my personal home page because it's much easier to add new images. I don't have to create any new HTML, just upload the image to a directory and add a line of code to an XML file (two XML files, actually). There's surely other ways to do the same thing (Perl comes to mind), but it works and I payed only $20 for the app. There's also a variant where you don't even have to modify any XML .. just drop it in.