Noe jeg ikke visste, men som gir ytterligere en forklaring på hvorfor Apple vil at Adobe skal fikse Flash. I tillegg til å være den plugin som forårsaker flest OS-problemer, så er den heller ikke 64-bit kompatibel, slik den leveres nå av Adobe.
Siden Apple nå leverer 64-bit kompatibel surfing o.a. i Snow Leopard, må man ha Flash som en separat prosess - og dermed forstår jeg hvorfor prosessoren koker som den gjør i Snow når man kjører Flash.
"Jeg vil ha VHS!!!"
http://daringfireball.net/2010/01/apple_adobe_flash
But theres another reason why Apple created this new external process architecture for web content plugins in Snow Leopard: it was the only way they could ship Safari and the WebKit framework as 64-bit binaries. Flash Player is only available as a 32-bit binary. (This is true for other third-party web content plugins, like Silverlight, but Flash is the only one that ships as part of the system.) 64-bit apps cannot run 32-bit plugins. Apple doesnt have the source code to Flash, so only Adobe can make Flash Player 64-bit compatible. They havent yet. So if Apple wanted Safari to be 64-bit in Snow Leopard (and they did), they needed to run 32-bit plugins like Flash in a separate process.
SNIP
Det som følger visste jeg, men artikkelen i linken er meget god, og verdt å lese, den er også kritisk til Apple:
Why? At the core, because Flash is the only de facto web standard based on a proprietary technology. There are numerous proprietary web content plugins including Apples QuickTime but Flash is the only one thats so ubiquitous that its a de facto standard. Flash is the way video is delivered over the web, and Adobe completely controls Flash. No other aspect of the web works like this. HTML, CSS, and JavaScript are all open standards, with numerous implementations, including several that are open source.
The simplest argument in favor of Flash support on the iPhone (and The Tablet, and everywhere) is that Flash is, by dint of its popularity and ubiquity, part of the web. But the best argument against Flash support is that it is harmful to the web as a whole to have something as important as video be in the hands of a single company, and the only way thats going to change is if an open alternative becomes a compelling target for web publishers.
Its a chicken-and-egg problem. Publishers use Flash for web video because Flash is installed on such a high percentage of clients; clients support Flash because so many publishers use Flash for web video. Apple, with the iPhone, is solving the chicken and egg problem. For the first time ever, there is a large and growing audience of demographically desirable users who dont have Flash installed. If you want to show video to iPhone users, you need to use H.264.
Apple isnt trying to replace Flash with its own proprietary thing. Theyre replacing it with H.264 and HTML5. This is good for everyone but Adobe.