Adobe "Welcome to the Browser Market"

I sat in last week on the Aussie National User Group (@WebDU) meeting and I asked (well attempted to but screwed the question up)

"How Adobe will handle the PR messaging around Apollo being regarded as a browser, given that their official wording on it is the opposite"

I'm not sure if Mike Chambers didn't understand the question or ignored it, but his response was a well scripted PR version "It's not a browser, we see it as being a... " ( I get where they want it to be, but the developers aren't using it in that way - sorry but its fair call?).

I bring your attention to articles like this (there are more if you search for them)

https://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/adobe_apollo_collision_course_browsers.php

Now, here is the thing that appeals to the developers the most. It's been X number of years since we went through the browser wars and they sucked, they now have an opportunity to build their own browser but with multimedia capabilities via languages like FLEX.

Yes, Microsoft are going to showcase our own version (more to come..) of this concept and you'll see some interesting Runtime "wars" so to speak arise.

The difference overall is which of us will force constraints on the developers and which won't. In the end, it needs to be agile and we need to be relevant to the developers and designers out there that want to break the mould, and make concepts like "Apollo talk to a .NET DLL" buried deep within the operating system.

If you can't make that happen, then make it happen!

It's time to listen to the Developers themselves and less about what the intent is, as you only have to look at the way in which Web 2.0 is being used people want "variety" and with lots of agility (failure will result in consequences)

It's back to the browser argument, I'd wager we are about to see VM wars per say not browser wars and my money is on Microsoft for now and the only reason being is they not only do they pay me (that plays a significant role hehe) but I can see they are focusing on the developers workflow first (Plus: I get to put my grubby hands into the mixing pot on direction every now and then! ).

I couldn't care less at this stage what the output is, it's the input that has me curious.

Comments

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  Uhm, please, Mr. Eager Little Microsoft Rep, don't go trying to translate "turning standard web technologies into regular desktop apps" as "it's just another browser". It's not becoming of a firm with the size, power, and responsibility of Microsoft to employ such tactics. jd/adobe

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  Do you have an answer for your own question if it were asked about Microsofts product? Surely if people (whoever they may be) can look at Apollo as a browser, the same can happen for you? The linked article suggests that "Adobe is on a collision course with IE, Firefox...", I can understand if you disagree with this because you see the difference between these product and browsers but I think it'd be fair to say that coming from a browser mindset it's not a way off assumption to make. In that light, will Microsoft's version be compared with IE for extra leverage (eg. IE is a browser, this is different in these ways, so it's not a browser)?

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  I'm not so much asking you to compare, but interested in how you as an evangelist will go about presenting WPF/e as more than just a browser, to avoid the PR problem you see Apollo having. But like you suggest, I'll come back and ask that in 6 months time when you know more. Hopefully so will I and wont be the complete newb i am with this stuff right now :P

• Anonymous
  March 28, 2007
  The comment has been removed