[Macworld]

Post your comments for Coming soon: Adobe Flash on Android, WinMo and WebOS here

[natmusak]

"a richer Internet browsing experience"

Flash ads sucking resources, battery life, and, well, just sucking in general? That is rich. So rich.

[bonesb]

As long as the mobile version is an optional plug-in or add-on, it's all good with me.
I won't opt for Flash on my mobiles, but its availability will finally, sweetly, and authoritatively shut up those that want Flash on their mobiles.

[venividivici]

I am sure what Apple is going to do is really deliver a robust Safari that will implement HTML 5 fully, thus taking advantage of what iPhone already does: Quicktime.
As AJAX, HTML 5 and CSS 3 take over more sites, we'll see that a Flash will end-up as a commodity, Just like Shockwave Plugin for Director ended up.
Who remember when Netscape had 3VRML plugins, and now?
SVG, AJAX, CSS, HTML 5 are the future. Just visit the WAVE project that Google (http://wave.google.com/) has been working on, No Flash.

[macmanga]

The iPhone NOT having Flash is a feature, not a flaw, imo.

[Grannysmith]

I welcome Flash 10 on any mobile device. It's lame not being able to watch YouTube videos or visiting websites that have been built in Flash.

[bet011]

The first thing I do when Flash is FINALLY added is turn it off in settings. And never turn it back on.

[rab777hp]

....which is why I have an Android device, and not an iPhone

[Steve_S]

For most people, just being able to play Flash based videos from Quicktime would be enough to satisfy most. My daughter likes to play on Webkinz which is a Flash based site, but aside from that, a few less annoying animated adds isn't a terrible thing. As for Flash as a development platform? I surely hope not.

[kresh]

Flash is such an issue that Apple hardly sold any iPhone 3GS's this past launch, or very many iPhone 3G's the launch before that. Silly Apple.

[Troyallen]

Flash is necessary to view certain websites. It's not only for ads

[venividivici]

Troyallen said:

Flash is necessary to view certain websites. It's not only for ads

Do you mean that is as necessary as Internet Explorer is necessary, or silverlight?

There are great sites that have been created with the aid of Flash, and the Flash architecture. But to say that is necessary, is far from the truth. Developers should use the technology available and give options, that's why you have not only HTML, but SGML, and WML.

I remember the time where most banks and financial institutions would tell you. In order to view their content you have to use Windows OS and IE. But little but little they realize the importance of an Information Architect and that sites should be prepared for the common denominator.

I am not again Flash by any means, I started developing with it, before Macromedia acquired Future Splash, and I like it very much, but it is not necessary. It should be built with the following thought, "For a richer experience, you should have Flash Installed" not with a "In order to view our content you have to have Flash!"

[flowney]

This is all gravitating toward the big showdown at the OK Corral. Well established proprietary solutions on one side vs open standards (HTML 5, CSS, SVG etc.) on the other. While I'd prefer to root for the open source side, the fact that Apple, Google, Mozilla et. al. really haven't developed the tools and documentation that content developers need, I have to wonder whether they are really all that serious.

[SpinThis!]

As a web developer, I've come full circle to loving Flash content, to loathing it (because it isn't "standard", whatever that really means) to accepting it and using it for many things. Is it necessary to make a whole site in Flash? Usually not but if you're looking to do anything multimedia-related on your website (like any kind of audio, video, accepting file uploads properly, etc.), it's just easier and more compatible to write a little widget to do those things using Flash then dance around QuickTime/Windows Media issues, etc.

HTML5 still doesn't even address some of these things and who knows when/if IE will actually adopt those standards properly. That brings up another point: one of the beautiful things about flash is the high adoption rate. Most Internet surfers already have the latest version of Flash and the ones who don't are usually only one version behind so it's generally pretty easy to target older versions. And consistency of using the fonts you want and know that the site is going to look exactly the same on whatever platform you use is just great.