<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Platform Shifts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/2010/03/platform-shifts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/2010/03/platform-shifts/</link>
	<description>Just an average guy trying to drink above average beer.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:20:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ryanstewart</title>
		<link>http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/2010/03/platform-shifts/comment-page-1/#comment-185615</link>
		<dc:creator>ryanstewart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 01:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/?p=2335#comment-185615</guid>
		<description>@mesh, as I said, it has it&#039;s limitations, but the iPhone has been pretty damn good at taking ajaxy, Web 2.0 sites, and basically making them work better than any other mobile browser. 

Now for a number of reasons people started building specific versions for the iPhone, but I&#039;d argue that the original versions were&#039;t bad, just not ideal. We&#039;ll see the same thing (hopefully) with Flash.

@JulesLT, I&#039;ll have to ask around. I hadn&#039;t heard that. It wouldn&#039;t completely surprise me, but I thought it was part of being in the OSP.

=Ryan
ryan@adobe.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@mesh, as I said, it has it&#8217;s limitations, but the iPhone has been pretty damn good at taking ajaxy, Web 2.0 sites, and basically making them work better than any other mobile browser. </p>
<p>Now for a number of reasons people started building specific versions for the iPhone, but I&#8217;d argue that the original versions were&#8217;t bad, just not ideal. We&#8217;ll see the same thing (hopefully) with Flash.</p>
<p>@JulesLT, I&#8217;ll have to ask around. I hadn&#8217;t heard that. It wouldn&#8217;t completely surprise me, but I thought it was part of being in the OSP.</p>
<p>=Ryan<br />
<a href="mailto:ryan@adobe.com">ryan@adobe.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JulesLt</title>
		<link>http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/2010/03/platform-shifts/comment-page-1/#comment-185612</link>
		<dc:creator>JulesLt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/?p=2335#comment-185612</guid>
		<description>I read somewhere that carriers were getting in the way of Adobe&#039;s OTA updates (much as some do not bother to distribute Android and WebKit browser updates, even when devices are capable).

I can see their logic (they want us to upgrade, and browser/Flash capability will be a reason) but it&#039;s going to make the mobile Web as bad as having to deal with the oldest popular version of IE/Netscape!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read somewhere that carriers were getting in the way of Adobe&#8217;s OTA updates (much as some do not bother to distribute Android and WebKit browser updates, even when devices are capable).</p>
<p>I can see their logic (they want us to upgrade, and browser/Flash capability will be a reason) but it&#8217;s going to make the mobile Web as bad as having to deal with the oldest popular version of IE/Netscape!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike chambers</title>
		<link>http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/2010/03/platform-shifts/comment-page-1/#comment-185604</link>
		<dc:creator>mike chambers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:02:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/?p=2335#comment-185604</guid>
		<description>--
I think this is one area where the iPhone has been successful is by “shrinking” the web and making it touch-based without requiring any changes by the sites themselves
--

I dont think that is necessarily true. While some content (but not all) works fine on the iPhone, much of it is definitely not optimal.

I think the proliferation of websites delivering web pages optimized for the iphone speaks to this.

Its the same with Flash (as you suggest). A lot of content will run fine, but may not be optimal. In those cases, content provides may update it and release a version optimized for the mobile interface and interactions.

mike chambers

mesh@adobe.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8211;<br />
I think this is one area where the iPhone has been successful is by “shrinking” the web and making it touch-based without requiring any changes by the sites themselves<br />
&#8211;</p>
<p>I dont think that is necessarily true. While some content (but not all) works fine on the iPhone, much of it is definitely not optimal.</p>
<p>I think the proliferation of websites delivering web pages optimized for the iphone speaks to this.</p>
<p>Its the same with Flash (as you suggest). A lot of content will run fine, but may not be optimal. In those cases, content provides may update it and release a version optimized for the mobile interface and interactions.</p>
<p>mike chambers</p>
<p><a href="mailto:mesh@adobe.com">mesh@adobe.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 1/7 queries in 0.067 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 235/236 objects using disk: basic

Served from: blog.digitalbackcountry.com @ 2012-02-08 13:06:57 -->
