Adobe is basically saying that Flash will be available on competitor's phones and the market will decide; which is exactly the right response. I wish most tech bloggers would take this view and just shut up with the endless "analysis" of Flash and Apple. Flamewars don't decide anything, the market does.

Meta-comment: I don't agree with everything in this post, but it made me think. It's a refreshing change from the echo-chamber posts that simply parrot whatever was last posted and either agree in breathless terms or disagree vociferously.

Suggestion to bloggers: When you read something that makes you excited or angry, resist the impulse to respond on the same terms. Ask yourself what important factor is being ignored in the current debate.

That's a ridiculous comparison. Apple is far more closed and controlling than Microsoft ever was.

Bad as this provision is in itself, even worse is the broader idea that such items should be "slipped in" to omnibus statutes that are so indecipherable that no reasonable legislator or member of the public can know all that is in it before it becomes law. It is indecent that such items should pass and get signed into law without meaningful debate as to their implications and without any form of public scrutiny whatever. In the meantime, we the taxpayers are stuck with the consequences.

Wow. This is... infuriating. I've purchased ~$100 (~75 albums) worth of streaming albums on Lala and I'm not happy to see them converted into ten albums worth of iTunes credits.

I have to say: so far I've been really unimpressed with the recent efforts to paint Apple as the new "Big Brother". But to purchase a company which is pioneering new methods of music distribution, and almost immediately shut them down and force their purchases to fit your distribution model is anti-innovation, monopolistic, and completely contrary to the kind of "different thinking" that has gotten Apple to where it is today. Utterly depressing.

Yeah this was a clearly worded and classy response, definitely better than I expected.

> Jobs is trying to undermine the competition because he fears that he made the wrong choice.

You think so?

Smart-phones have been around a long time. The iPhone was announced over three years ago, yet here we are in the middle of 2010 and mobile Flash is still nowhere to be found on any mobile device. How is that not Adobe's fault? Is Adobe just not very interested in mobile Flash, or are there very serious technical challenges that Adobe has been unable to overcome?

Instead of waiting around for Adobe to get their act together, Apple delivered HTML video and interactive web content for their mobile devices, they delivered it years ago, and they did it using open standards and open source development that their competitors are not only taking advantage of, but are utterly embracing.

It is the tale of one company that's able to get things done, and another company that isn't. And it shows how foolish it is for companies like Apple, Google, Palm, and RIM to depend on a company like Adobe to deliver the "full web".

There was no choice to be made. Mobile Flash didn't exist in 2007, it still doesn't exist today, and any dependence on Adobe is foolish.