Adobe rewrites Wired Magazine iPad app without Flash, gets it approved by Apple
Wired Magazine's official iPad app was an early casualty of Apple's war on Flash. Working with Wired publisher Conde Nast, Adobe built the app in Flash, but then they had to rewrite using Apple-approved Objective C. Adobe completed the new app and just got it approved for sale in the App Store. The app is a proof of concept for building a magazine app with the same tools Wired uses to make the magazine itself. It costs 5 bucks in the App Store, about the same price as a print magazine.In that respect, Wired and Adobe succeeded: the magazine looks great, and (although it takes up half a gig) it can be viewed entirely offline. That includes video clips and other rich media. This is good news for owners of the non-3G iPad, who can take the magazine with them even where there's no Wi-Fi. Unfortunately, Apple's no-Flash policy means Adobe failed to make an app that will run on every platform. Whether that's a knock against Flash or against Apple is a matter of perspective.
[via All Things D]
Comments
6
Subscribe to commentsSevenmackJun 2nd 2010 9:43AM
Well, since Conde Nast and Adobe could do a Flash version of Wired -- and do it fairly quickly -- it's the fault of Conde Nast. They chose to do one version instead of two, limiting their own reach. Apple may dictate what companies do for its platform. But given that Apple is only 5 percent of desktop space (and only 12 percent of smartphones), it doesn't dictate everything. And shouldn't.
kevjohnMay 27th 2010 10:01AM
Apple may only be 5% of the desktop market, but they are 100% of the iPad market.
SevenmackMay 27th 2010 10:07AM
And iPad isn't even five percent of the computer market. Big deal. Again, the market for readers is much larger than the individual tools being used.
In the broad scheme of things, Apple is a influential, but small player in a much-larger world of desktop and mobile communications. A content provider has to make sure it reaches those who use iPads, iPhones, iPods and Macs for their communications. But it must also reach the 80 percent of those folks who aren't using either of these tools.
Perspective must always be maintained in these discussions.
kevjohnMay 27th 2010 11:03AM
I think you've lost perspective. Nobody reads e-books (or e-mags) on a desktop. Nobody.* That's what the Kindle, Nook, iPad, et al. are for. And sales of the iPad are greatly outpacing the others. Not to mention the domination of the iPhone and iPods in their respective markets. Generally speaking, if you can only make a mobile app for Apple's products or one for everyone else, you'd be wise to go with Apple currently. Don't underestimate the power of the Apple side.
* - "Nobody" is an exaggeration of course, but not by much.
C.W.May 30th 2010 7:14PM
"I", "I", "I".. it's always "I",
What ever happened to "We" as in everyone.
I guess you totally missed the release of the WeTab then ;) It has many more features then an iPad will ever dream about having, but most of all, it also costs less and does more ;)
Feel free to read more: http://wetab.mobi/
IANAJun 3rd 2010 10:36AM
"Unfortunately, Apple's no-Flash policy means Adobe failed to make an app that will run on every platform. Whether that's a knock against Flash or against Apple is a matter of perspective."
Umm...no.
Unfortunately, Apple's no-Flash policy means Apple failed to make a platform that can accommodate every pre-existing technology that has a large footprint in online and offline computing. No perspective necessary.