New Droid 2 Ad

Remember how a certain fruit company used "There's an app for that" as a marketing slogan for the longest time? Well, Motorola has used a similar slogan in its latest ad in the Wall Street Journal to remind people that the Droid 2 can run full Adobe Flash 10.1. Personally, I would have gone with a certain gloved wrestler to show off Flash (with consumate v's), but to each their own. [@benforta via CrunchGear]

There are 39 comments

tkfox007 says:

I think Apple is gonna need some aloe for that burn

JohnnyACE562 says:

Where's my Hyde shades?


jordanetodd says:


estebancam says:

Hahaha. "a certain fruit company" hahaha

ChrisX#AC says:

As michael kelso would say.. "BUURRRRNNNNN!!!!"

kingzahir89 says:

I smell sizzling Apple

sting7k says:

Righteous burn.

ZDriver says:

Now that's some funny shit!

rfmike says:

Amen Brother ^^^^^^^^...

Kujako says:

Works gud on mine, just got the update today. I will preface my statement by saying that I could care less about flash videos and games. My interest is in data visualization and applications. I ran a limited set of tests using Google Visualization and Flex apps, runs well enough for me.

hotkoko says:

what about my Droid 1

jerbear says:

Should be fine. I had Flash running on my Evo on 2.1 and it worked officially with 2.2. Are you running Froyo yet? Should work OK but maybe a little slow on some Flash sites just because the processor is a bit slower (550mhz versus 1ghz).

RacecarBMW says:

theres always overclocking

Saiyajin says:

That is funny. Ever since I loaded Froyo on, I've really enjoyed the flash addition to the browser experience. Feels much more like it's supposed to. Truth is now there are MANY phones for that. Written from my flash loading DI. :-)

Smokexz says:

This is flash? It worked on my Samsung Vibrant, so I am confused...

jpena53 says:

Yeah I saw this on the way to lunch in US Today, awesome! Bring the heat apple.

Seanlee83 says:

People hate apple because it's closed & properity & it's not open, and that's ok to not like because of that. But flash is closed and all of that & it's not open whatsoever but people gush over it. People always shoot for open but they love flash. Is it because its another thing to hate apple for. Please explain.

bjordan says:

I think it's less about open and close from a Flash standpoint and more about choice as a user. Apple doesn't give you the choice and Android does.

If a feature is optional I don't see how anyone can argue (not saying you are) that it's a bad thing. Flash with the on-demand setting is perfect. I can ignore it most of the time but it's there when I need it.

Beenyweenies says:

There are different levels of technology to look at here - at the OS level, many people (myself included) believe that OS vendors should give users the choice as to which technologies they can utilize with said OS, within reason. If that technology does not represent a serious risk to users and/or is not illegal in some manner, the OS vendor should have no say in whether or not people use that software or technology. Imagine, for example, if Apple tried to say you could not use ANY Adobe products on your mac, citing some performance consideration. That IS EXACTLY what they are doing, and singling out the most ubiquitous web technology in the history of the internet.
Apple and Google should allow users to choose which web technologies they want to use on their smartphones, because the only real argument against doing so would be impact on battery life. That is a choice that each user should be free to make - more features versus reduced battery life.

You can have a separate discussion (at the "web technology" level) about the merits of Flash versus alternative options such as HTML5, or about open source versus proprietary, but that's a completely separate issue that shouldn't be decided by Apple or any other company. The free market should decide if Flash is a worthwhile technology to have on smartphones. Again, you have to consider the ubiquity of Flash:

- 7 of the top 10 sites on the internet use Flash
- 30-40% of all North American websites use Flash. In China etc. that number jumps to 60%+
- Flash has a 99% install base, more than any other web technology
- more web surfers have Flash installed than have Javascript enabled

For any OS vendor to cut out such a widely used technology, especially when Apple has a widely publicized grudge against Adobe, is completely anti-consumer and no argument, open source included, will justify that move.

As for Flash being a "closed system" that's not entirely true. Flash is, essentially, ECMA script (aka Javascript) which is completely open source. The SWF format is proprietary, but so are many other very popular technologies like browsers and media players. Besides, the argument in favor of Flash has less to do with "open source" and everything to do with consumer choice. Apple throws out the term "open source" to inflame and leverage the open source community in their war against Adobe. If they truly cared one bit about open source, they wouldn't be building the largest closed system in consumer history, would they?

Seanlee83 says:

Yea but the average consumer don't really care about open or closed wether it android or Ios. Alit don't even know what the hell that means. Not all people that buy iPhone are fandboys & not all people that buy android are fanboys. They just want a phone to work good, but I'm sorry it is closed because it's run buy one company & when problems occur it's no telling how long they will cone out with a fix. U saw how long it took them to bring out flash.

darktanone says:

The argument that Flash is required to experience the full Web will become irrelevant. MPEG/LA recently made H.264 movie codec royalty free for Internet use forever. Chances are it will become the video codec in HTML5. More sites are making there content, especially video, available in HTML 5 and afterall, isnt movie playback one of the main reasons for wanting Flash on your mobile device? The other is playing games, and apps, especially on the iPhone, has that covered. Not much more use for it on mobile devices is there? As HTML 5 gains acceptance, Flash will be less influential on the Web.  

Flash on Android is spotty and unreliable at best and Adobe should be ashamed for releasing such buggy software, especially for one of its premiere technologies. Do they or Google give a damn about a good user experience? No, because their developers is the customer and not you and me. There is such low expectations in the Android space that they think this release of Flash is great. I just don't get it! You guys are supposed to be so much more aware of tech - the enlightened ones. It just blows my mind that you're so accepting of anything, no matter how poorly implemented, as good because it offers you a choice. When did you become so brainwashed? So blind to the obvious? Until you get yourselves out of this fog, you shouldn't criticize Apple or iPhone users. The ad is only funny until you stop and think!

darreno1 says:

Um, when Flash becomes irrelevant (maybe in 5-10 years) then we'll talk. As for right now, I want it and will gladly take it. As for it being buggy and unreliable, maybe that's your experience but mine on the Droid X has been very positive. Just today I was showing it off to someone and they were wowed by the quality of the audio and video. And there are many websites that were not viewable before that are now viewable and fully functional.

So IMO, your 'spotty' and 'unreliable at best" comment is way, way off base.

Also, if and when html 5 becomes the dominant standard, Android will be right there too, ready to view html content. So we get the best of both worlds and are not limited to what one individual with an inflated ego thinks we should have.

darktanone says:

That's one of the advantages of HTML 5, the video codec is bulit into the browser and there's no need to install a pluggin like Flash or Silverlight on your device. As long as the browser is compatible, the video plays on any device. Maybe you should go to ABC or HULU to see see how Flash performs.

Steve Jobs announced that over 120 million iOS devices have been sold. That means a considerable portion of smartphone users have discovered they can live without Flash. That is telling! If Flash was so important to the Web experience, how is it that so many can do without it? Is this all marketing? Have you been unknowingly conditioned to believe it's relevant?

Check yourself before you answer. Surely Flash has its place on the Web, but whether it takes a year or five years, It's on its way out.

Beenyweenies says:

"the video codec is bulit into the browser and there's no need to install a pluggin like Flash or Silverlight on your device."

First of all, video codecs don't play back in browsers. Medi players decode the codec and display the result. This means that Firefox, Google Chrome, IE etc. will all need to have their own media players as part of their browsers.

Now, think this from a different perspective. Under your scenario above, video players and codecs will very likely stagnate. There is just one codec from here to eternity (h.264), and it's up to the browser manufacturers and the decidedly non-innovating HTML standards body to innovate in the media player space. On the codec side, the standards body will maybe adopt a new one every 10 years. Internet Explorer will develop their own video playback engine (based on WMP no doubt), Apple will develop their own (based on Quicktime, no doubt) etc. because is up to the browsers to provide the playback. Maybe microsoft, in an effort to differentiate, decides to support features X and Z of HTML5 video, while Safari only supports feature Y. How will content providers ensure that their video, closed captioning, inline ads etc. play back the same on all these browsers when they don't even support the same features? Welcome to the current reality of "standards based" internet, and why so many devs moved to Flash to begin with.

In your fantasy HTML5 scenario, DivX never would have been created, nor would VLC, MKV and a whole host of other things that have really pushed online media forward, and coincidentally were products of the open source lovers. There would be no place for them, because all browsers would use h.264 and their own built-in playback engines. End of story.
The uniformity you are pushing for is a double edged sword and I doubt you've ever considered it from that angle. Flash offers uniformity, but NOT at the exclusion of other options. In fact, when new codecs like h.264 and webM come along, Adobe incorporates them into Flash. Other media players are free to proliferate, so people still have choice.

In short, I'm not really sure you even know what you are asking for in HTML5. The only people really clamoring for it are Apple device owners who are locked out of using Flash. Maybe you should demand Apple give you access to the full internet rather than asking the entire internet to change based on Apple's personal vendetta against Adobe.

darktanone says:

The video support in the browser simply acts as format that all of them will support. They can of course support other formats at their descretion. This is not intended as a limitation, but to provide a standard that all will support. This is not my fantasy, but the intention of the W3C and WHATWG. They determine standards that affect the Web. Flash is controlled by one company and that's Adobe. Do your homework. This is not an Apple thing either, they've just decided to support OPEN Web standards in HTML5, CSS3 and Javascript and reject the Adobe controlled Flash. That simple!

Did you have much success at the Hulu or ABC site? Both of those sites can be played on the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad through apps. That's why iPhone users don't need Flash, and are experiencing the full Web. The apps come in where Flash left off. So don't buy into the notion that iOS devices are limited because there's no Flash support. Stop buying into the Android hype. This ad is part of that hype. The sad part is the poor soul who believes the ad and buys the Droid X, only to discover that Flash on Android is spotty and unreliable at best.

"Did you have much success at the Hulu or ABC site? Both of those sites can be played on the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad through apps"

so basically none of the devices can access these sites out the box right? so why are you acting as if the iphone can do it w/o the app? maybe if you came on here saying it could do it w/o an app maybe you would make sense but you make no sense because if that app was never made everything you said would have been pointless.

**COMPLETLY OFF TOPIC** why are you so happy to have a phone that you need apps to make it cool yea apps are great on all phones but you can't edit songs to make it a ringtone w/o an app which my dinc can nd my gf's ip4 can't. you dont have customizable home screens thats what the ppl really want which again the ip4 cant out-the-box. nd why the F*** are ppl happy about folders my blackberry storm had folders thats nothing new all that means is your forced to put less important stuff in folders because they dont let you change what they want to be on their phone nice! ppl spend $200 on it and you cant change anything cant add memory which 16 gb is not that much anymore cant change the battery even if to buy a spare. thats like buying a brand new car and all you can do is paint it no rims, no added speakers or lights sure its a nice phone in general but the fact is that all 120 million phones/devices look exactly the same with the same memory same battery same setup same app location BORING!! look at the commercials "the best iphone ever" but they never mention anything to make it sound better than a droid in general. i can wait a few months til we have almost all the same apps you have which then what will you have to cling on? if it was so nice ppl wouldn't jail break it to have options like these guys have been trying to tell you in the first place options are niceto have! having to download an app for options not as nice. i LOVE the iphone and ipad i just wish they would let you add to it app wise it blows my phone out the water but you cant change how things look like adding a pic to your home and i dont mean a wallpaper little things is what i like and thats what Droid DOES! dont make such a nice phone then limit it to be an a-holes apple boo!

Beenyweenies says:

"MPEG/LA recently made H.264 movie codec royalty free for Internet use forever. "

Wrong. Dead wrong. Every authority on the subject has confirmed that their carefully worded PR blitz changes NOTHING. It just reaffirms that end users (you and me) will pay no royalty. Browsers, encoders and media players all will still have to pay them royalties. As a member of MPEG/LA, Apple shares in those proceeds FYI.

You also seem to be suffering from the same codec/container confusion that every other Flash detractor does. Flash uses h.264 video just the same as HTML5 would. The difference is that it will be years before the browsers support HTML5, and enough people have those new versions installed in enough numbers to warrant even using HTML5. Also bear in mind that to this day, all browsers handle basic things like CSS in their own little way, this will be no different. Developers are sick to death of coding around the differences between browsers, which is why Flash is so successful to begin with - Absolute uniformity across all OS and browser versions.

The fatal flaw with your entire argument is that you are viewing the issue from a consumer perspective, but it is the developers and content providers who will decide the winners in this debate. For example, HTML5 doesn't support the video playback features that content providers rely on, like true streaming, copy protection, inline advertising, metrics, reliable cross-browser presentation etc. You can "wish" for HTML5 all you want, but unless the content providers and devs fully embrace it, you're out of luck.

"Flash on Android is spotty and unreliable at best"

You clearly do not own an Android device, and likely haven't even played with one running Froyo and Flash. The experience using the final release of Flash/Froyo is surprisingly smooth and desktop-like. Like most fanboys, you are simply repeating things Steve Jobs said, and crap you read on pro-Apple forums. Funny that you then talk about people "being in a fog."

darktanone says:

Most of what you just wrote is inconsequential. I'm well aware that the HTML 5 specification hasn't been ratified. However, the approved parts are being implemented in browsers now. The video part has been a sticking point and the move by MPEG/LA may make h.264 the standard. That's just the reality. Deal with it! Flash won't be replaced tomorrow and may stick around for awhile, but it's role in the Web will be reduced. That's also fact!
You're clearly buying into Google's marketing and I'm sorry you're so far gone and brainwashed. You still haven't responded to how your Droid X did at the Flash enabled Hulu and ABC sites.

Yah closed. Tell that to the bagillion games on

That can be played on Windows, OS X, Android, Linux. And I'll bet you a years salary that it would have been on iOS by now if it wasn't for Unkie Steve saying NO. Now lets look at developing for the iPhone.....What can it be used on? iPhone.

Closed is a relative term.

The only reason, and I do mean ONLY reason flash isn't on the iPhone is because of the App store. The minute you can start playing games that are on the web, people would be less interested in buying them. Apple is all about the money. And to be fair all companies are. But Apple....takes a perverse pleasure in screwing over their customers. See needing to pay for the driver that would allow support for 802.11N on the MBP 4 years ago. See charging for the first update of the OS on the first gen touch.....but it was free on the iPhone...and on and on and on.

darktanone says:

Can those games be played offline? HTML 5 will allow offline game play. Flash is a desktop technology and no good for mobile devices.

Beenyweenies says:

Why are you even bothering to compare a mature product installed by 99% of internet users to the hypothetical feature set of a standard that won't be official for many years?

There is no comparison to be made - one product exists and enjoys more widespread use than any other web technology in our history, the other isn't even real yet.

darktanone says:

Think about Google's upcoming Chrome app site, do you think it will use Flash or HTML5?

hotkoko says:

when will my DROID 1 get flash? supposed to get the update 2 wks ago

The thing is....I'm willing to bet 80% of the cattle that we call consumers doesn't even know what Flash is and doesn't care. As long as it has the one with more GEEBEEE's they are happy. MOOOOOO cattle.

AASonyKK says:

Wow, very nice!!!! Good motorola!

nowadroidfan says:

I like that Motorola is using Apples ads against them but, how many people not into technology know what flash is? A lot of people i know who have an android device of some kind probably don't know what flash is. This ad will still be effective, I don't think it will be as effective as apple though.

btw I use a Droid X and love it. Cant wait for FroYo.

Beenyweenies says:

These ads are probably aimed at people like you and me, not average consumers. Tech geeks are the thought leaders for their peer groups, and word of mouth, seeing people using the device etc. is what compels the average consumer to adopt a new product, far more so than ads. As these thought leaders embrace a new technology, it gains press and word of mouth, and the mouth breathers move accordingly.

Apple's entire ascendency is owed to this reality.

sookster54 says:

I love the ads I see when they're taking shots at Apple, there was one saying "no jacket needed" in referral to the bumper bandaid on iP4's antenna problem.

Steve deserves it because at every single press conference, he has to bring up Android and Blackberries when addressing problems or questions, that's pure arrogance right there.

It's more like he's trying to make a living and cover up his mistakes e.g. Not giving iOS users the freedom to choose exactly what they want on the device they bought