I think that by restricting Developers to a specific set of languages, Apple can somewhat ensure that developers target their platform specifically rather than have developers submit apps that are built for the lowest common denominator of mobile devices. I guess they don’t want to foster an environment that mirrors what’s on the web today. Most websites leave out a ton of features just because IE6 cannot support those features. I do believe that developers produce their best work when they target a specific platform and take advantage of the unique features that platform has to offer.

It is also good business for Apple to maintain a base of developers that are “married” to their platform. Imagine an environment where most iPhone developers migrate to Flash CS5. In such an environment, if Apple releases enhancements to their frameworks, developers would have to wait for Adobe to integrate those changes into Flash before the developers could take advantage of Apple’s improvements.

What if Google buys Adobe and decides CS6 will only come out on google chrome and Flash will only support Android? Apple and all developers that target iPhone OS get left in the dust!

Let’s face it, we always have a choice of mobile phones but when it comes to graphics applications, Adobe is a very strong monopoly. I’d be cautious siding with them on an issue such as this. It may not end well. How much is the web premium suite again? Do you think we would have to pay that much if Adobe and Macromedia never merged?

Adobe is a behemoth. IPhone devs may not be able to use Flash but I’ll bet my last dollar that 99.9999999876% of all graphic content you’ll see on Apple, Sony, Microsoft, Palm & Android devices as well as the web will be created using Adobe’s tools. Isn’t that enough?

I don’t necessarily have an issue with Adobe’s goal of making flash an indispensable tool but I do think that a lot of comments in the blogosphere wrongly suggest that Adobe may have altruistic motives. Adobe’s goal isn’t to give developers choice; it is to maintain and extend the dominance Flash currently enjoys. Apple’s goal isn’t to limit developers choice but rather to ensure that their platform doesn’t become just another deployment target for Flash.

Consider the following: 
If a developer uses Flash, who becomes responsible for performance tuning? The developer or Flash? 
My guess is Flash.

If Flash achieves 65% penetration into the iPhone development market? Who becomes responsible for how efficient Flash generated byte code runs on iPhone?
My guess is Apple because end users will not attribute sucky performance to Adobe but to Apple. 

Both companies are right so there really is no need for Adobe evangelists to pretend this is a fight about open vs closed.

I bet the blogs on here will have a totally different tone if MS/Google/Apple release free tools that allow developers to deploy their apps as Flash files. We will not hear all the clamoring for choice on the developers behalf.

Read the comments section for yourself. http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplatform/2010/01/apples_ipad_–_a_broken_link.html

What most people care about is fast application switching. Most people can only handle iTunes plus another app simultaneously and the iPad delivers on that front.

Guess what else doesn’t multitask?

1. Nikon D9000KZX w/ 1.0 – 9000 VR zoom lens.
2. Playstation 3.
3. Steinway Piano.
4. In car navigation system.
5. Xbox 360 elite.
6. Desk Lamps.
7. Nintento Wii/DS.
8. Movie Theatre. (Don’t count eating popcorn. We both know you aren’t kissing anyone nerdlinger).
9. TVs(If you count the lame widgets, I’ll count the iPad’s clock)
10. Even the Batmobile wasn’t a tank and a bike at the same time. The bat dude had to switch modes!!!

The iPad isn’t here to help you do things the same old way. You need to use your imagination a tad bit to appreciate it. I think its greatest attribute is the fact that it makes computing a lot more casual. One also has to understand that at the moment, it is a blank canvas but by the time it hits the shelves, there will be utterly brilliant software available for it.

Imagine reading to your 4 year old as s/he sits on your lap? Oh look thats a liger, lets click it to hear what sound it makes. Now dear, circle the the odd elephant out of these 3. Ok now lets play a game of tic tac toe and then watch yo gabba gabba. You cannot do any of that on a netbook.

I reckon anytime you need to read, surf, play a game, review a document or watch a movie without being tethered to a desk or one of those victorian pillow + miniature desk combos, the iPad will trounce a netbook. So think train, plane, airport, bathroom, armchair, bed, coffee shop, exercise bike.

Also imagine the following:

A waiter coming up to you in a restaurant and showing you the specials on an iPad. Just wouldn’t be the same on a dell mini. A presenter reading prepared speeches from an iPad rather than a netbook.

A car sales person checking availability, showing options and working out finance rates right away from the desk. How about a real estate agent giving a tour of a house? She can dump all the paper in her car and walk in with just an iPad. Oh you want to me to verify the property taxes? Ok, I’ll make a note of that. Let me show you this new listing that has the kind of kitchen you are looking for right on Witherspoon.

The lack of multi-tasking isn’t a hindrance in any of these use cases. I’m getting one of these the day they are made available. I’ll hand it down to my kids when the 3rd generation comes out and get that as well.