I need an iPad flash player that will work like an adobe flash player!!,,,,,Please

No Flash for iPads, iPhones, or iPods

Here's why there's is no Flash available for iDevices or other mobile devices. Adobe was unable to provide a product that was suitable to the needs of battery powered mobile devices used for Internet browsing. Existing Flash technology used too much memory, ate battery life, and was buggy. Simply put Flash did not work well on mobile devices.

Apple's Steve Jobs led the escape from Flash dependency when Apple introduced the iPhone, and later introduced the iPad. There was a hue and cry over the omission. Time proved Jobs was right on target.

So this is why there is no Flash for your iPhone or iPad or iPod nor for most SmartPhones. Flash has been abandoned by many sites in favor of supported technologies such as HTML5 or by providing their own custom app.

Here is Steve Jobs official comment on his momentous decision to omit Flash from iDevices: Steve Jobs on Flash.

Here is Adobe's later announcement to cease development of Flash for mobile devices: Adobe on Mobile Flash.

Now, you are not necessarily out on a limb. There are some apps that can display some Flash, but don't count on there ability to display anything using Flash.

Apps that can display some Flash from the Web:

• Puffin
• SkyFire
• Photon Flash
• Browse2Go
• iSwifter

Also, note that many sites that use Flash provide their own app for accessing their material. So check with your favorite sites and find out if "there's an app for that."

Good luck!

Please note the items listed under Legend in the right sidebar of this page. 🙂

Love the heavy use of "did" "was" "existing", yet no mention of "does" "is" or "current".

Yes we all understand why Steve Jobs did not want a Desktop Application runnig on his mobile device, I think what most people are confused about is why is the mobile version blocked.

Kappy wrote:

Adobe "was" unable to provide a product that "was" suitable to the needs of battery powered mobile devices used for Internet browsing. "Existing" Flash technology used too much memory, ate battery life, and "was" buggy. Simply put Flash "did" not work well on mobile devices.

It's been 3 years since these claims were made about the desktop technology being used on mobile, and the mobile versions did not even exist till 6 months later.

Current version today, show Steve Jobs was wrong on ALL points, because he made assumptions about a mobile Flash player which did not exist for another 6 months based on what he saw using the desktop version on mobile.

But w/e, it's your loss. I picked up an Android, now I get ALL content, from html5-flash-apps

duderRama wrote:

Love the heavy use of "did" "was" "existing", yet no mention of "does" "is" or "current".

Yes we all understand why Steve Jobs "did" not want a Desktop Application runnig on his mobile device, I think what most people are confused about is why is the mobile version still blocked.

Kappy wrote:

Adobe "was" unable to provide a product that "was" suitable to the needs of battery powered mobile devices used for Internet browsing. "Existing" Flash technology used too much memory, ate battery life, and "was" buggy. Simply put Flash "did" not work well on mobile devices.

It's been 3 years since these claims were made about a technology that didn't even exist till 6 months later.

Do you have any clue what you're talking about? Clearly, no. You can harp on the use of helping verbs, but it does not change the fact that Adobe has given up development in any way for mobile flash. It's been a dying breed for some time now, and even they won't work on it for mobile use. So, I'm not sure what your point is, but Kappy offered a very comprehensive answer to the OP, which is based on fact.

I don't dispute Kappy, just throwing out more info on the matter, as Kappy sounded a bit one sided.

And Adobe stopped mobile FLash not because of performance reasons or anything battery related.

They stopped because in order for a plugin to be usefull it needs to be as well distributed as any other web standard.

Adobe Flash is possible on the pc because all pc's support it, and 97% of all internet connected devices have it installed.

Since Apple blocks Flash on IOS, and Apple has nearly 65% of the mobile market Adobe had no choice but to stop developing it. It costs Adobe alot of money to outfit every cpu/gpu possibility that comes out every 3 weeks on some new phone or tablet, and to only be able to reach at most 35% of users it's a lost cause and a money sink.

Apple with it's limited configurations and few devices would be the best canidate for Flash, but without Apples support they can't justify the cost of equiping all these other configurations every 3 weeks. If Apple was on board mobile Flash would not have been cancelled.

Apple has decided it wants media consumption to occur outside the browser and within proprietary apps, so Adobe has refocused the Flash player as a mobile App deployment method, instead of a mobile browser deployment method.

But don't kid yourself, all that has happened is the mobile Flash player has been moved into Apps and out of the browser to allow Apple to continue to have complete control over all media distribution and consumption.

Mobile Flash is very alive and well inside 100,000xs of Apps.

Again, you clearly don't know much of what you are espousing here. Click this link which was updated today and tell me where you can validate your claim that apple owns 65% of the mobile market. I'm sure they wish they did, but they clearly don't.

http://www.bgr.com/2012/04/04/android-and-ios-account-for-over-80-of-the-u-s-sma rtphone-market/

And just so it doesn't appear one sided, here is another link stating Android is the top OS in the mobile world.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/14/shocker-android-grew-us-market-share-after-q2 -ios-was-static/

Rather than jumping on everyone, why not respond to and attempt to assist the original poster?

Likely they don't care on iota about the whys and whynots of Flash availability.

rbrylawski wrote:

Again, you clearly don't know much of what you are espousing here. Click this link which was updated today and tell me where you can validate your claim that apple owns 65% of the mobile market. I'm sure they wish they did, but they clearly don't.

http://www.bgr.com/2012/04/04/android-and-ios-account-for-over-80-of-the-u-s-sma rtphone-market/

http://www.statowl.com/flash.php

OS Platform Statistics

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

Mobile Devices Statistics

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_mobile.asp

---------------------------------------------------

1.3% is mobile.

67% of that is IOS

Around 0.75% of all internet traffic belongs to IOS.

(I'll trust the world wide web consortium for my numbers over some "news" articles)

How does this help the OP?

Since you hate the iPad so much (which is your right, and I don't care what technology you use)... why are you spending so much of your free time in a support forum for use of the iPad?

rbrylawski wrote:

duderRama wrote:

Love the heavy use of "did" "was" "existing", yet no mention of "does" "is" or "current".

Yes we all understand why Steve Jobs "did" not want a Desktop Application runnig on his mobile device, I think what most people are confused about is why is the mobile version still blocked.

Kappy wrote:

Adobe "was" unable to provide a product that "was" suitable to the needs of battery powered mobile devices used for Internet browsing. "Existing" Flash technology used too much memory, ate battery life, and "was" buggy. Simply put Flash "did" not work well on mobile devices.

It's been 3 years since these claims were made about a technology that didn't even exist till 6 months later.

Do you have any clue what you're talking about? Clearly, no. You can harp on the use of helping verbs, but it does not change the fact that Adobe has given up development in any way for mobile flash. It's been a dying breed for some time now, and even they won't work on it for mobile use. So, I'm not sure what your point is, but Kappy offered a very comprehensive answer to the OP, which is based on fact.

He/she/it's a troll that prowls around the forum searching for threads to post nonsense.

So what can I do now.

Parkview22 wrote:

So what can I do now.

Do now about what? If you're looking for information on Flash alternatives, see Kappy's post, the first answer to the original post.