Twiiter

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter
    Search
    Powered by Squarespace

    Entries in Flash (1)

    Thursday
    08Oct2009

    Flash on the iPhone

    Update: One of the developers of Trading Stuff posted a comment below, and has a great blog post about his experience getting it running on the iPhone.

    There has been a lot of discussion about running Flash apps on the iPhone over
    the last few days. It was precipitated by Adobe's announcement that Flash
    Professional CS5
    would have support for publishing apps as iPhone native
    executables. They went into a little more detail, saying that they were going to
    use an Ahead of Time (AOT) compiler backend based on LLVM, and that
    there are already several apps on the store using it. This generated a large
    number of responses from various people, some knee-jerk, some well
    reasoned out. Of course, the fact that there are samples we can dissect means
    that it is possible to make some informed analysis about them.

     

    Personal views

     

    Before we get into the technical details of this, let me go into my background a
    bit, lest I be accused of being biased or having an agenda. I have around 10
    years of Objective C development experience, and almost no experience writing
    anything substantial with Flash or ActionScript. I am also primarily a Macintosh
    user, where the Flash experience (even in the browser) is often less than ideal.
    I am told it is a better experience on Windows. I do use the Hulu Desktop app, which is written in Flash, and think it is pretty nice (though
    they should make cut and paste work in their text fields, grrr). Of course,
    something like Hulu is an immersive app that has no need to integrate with the
    native OS experience, but neither do most games.

    There are a lot of neat little web games and what not that are written in Flash,
    that I would like to run. If that was the tool the author felt it best to
    express their ideas and it worked for them then great. In particular, for
    software that I don't feel needs interface with OS and which can use a
    completely custom UI (in other words, games) I think there is no difference to
    the user. So long as the environment generates good code that can run at full
    frame rate without killing the battery I am in favor of getting Flash apps to
    run on the iPhone.

     

    Warm up

     

    Okay, so first off lets look at what we know. Adobe is using the LLVM arm
    backend to generate code. Right off the bat that gets me bit worried. Don't get
    me wrong, I love LLVM. Hell, I was one of the people who wrote
    the LLVM ppc backend. Having said that, I wouldn't use the LLVM arm backend at
    this time. The reason I wouldn't is because every time I have asked the
    people who are actively working on it they tell me it is not ready for prime
    time. That is the reason why LLVM-gcc and clang are not supported compiler
    targets for iPhone, despite them being supported (and encouraged) for development
    on Snow Leopard. Apple has a lot of compiler engineers and has basically stated
    that LLVM is their future compiler direction, so if those guys are telling us to
    hold back, then how is it good enough for AOT Flash?

    Now, Adobe could potentially have another arm backend they developed, or maybe
    they branched off a particular build and have fixed whatever bugs would impact
    them while ignoring stuff they didn't need. It is entirely possible that they
    could have reasonable code coming out of this thing, and I don't have access to
    the toolchain itself to inspect it, but it definitely gets me nervous. This may
    also be one of the reasons why they are not ready to widely release the tools
    yet.

     

    Lets get to it

     

    Okay, so I downloaded one of the games that was available, Trading
    Stuff
    , decompressed its IPA and had a look inside. At first
    glance it looked like a pretty normal iPhone app. Then I noticed there were no
    resources besides a basic MainWindow.nib. No images, no sounds, no
    localizations. The next thing I noticed was that the binary was ~13 megabytes,
    or approximately ~95% the size of the entire app. That is enormous for a binary.
    For reference, compare that to a normal iPhone game, like The Oregon
    Trail
    , which is ~106 megabyte game has ~1 megabyte executable, or
    about 1% the size of the app.

    What is going on is that the Flash build environment is not using any of the
    standard Mac OS X/iPhone OS bundling or localization mechanisms. Instead they
    are transforming all their assets into embeddable objects and shoving them
    directly into their application's TEXT section. At first glance that might not
    seem so bad, but it has a bunch of consequences. It defeats almost any sort of
    caching or prefetch logic the OS has for specific data types (like images), and
    instead places all of the pressure directly on the VM and paging subsystems.

    To be clear this is no way violation of the SDK agreement, and embedding objects
    into an app in this way is occasionally appropriate, but the degree to which it
    is happening with these cross compiled apps is different, and likely will have a
    number of significant (negative) performance implications.

    Now, moving on from the obvious, its time to actually start poking at the
    generated code. If we just take a cursory look at the linkage, we can see some
    bad stuff going on here. Why are they calling dlopen, dlclose, and dlsym? The
    only reason to use those is load in frameworks and resolve symbols after launch,
    something that is strictly verboten. In the best case that might be some dead
    code they use from debugging that should have been stripped that should have
    out. In the worst case, they depend on them to get access to symbols they are
    not supposed to use. I want to be clear about this: There is no legitimate
    reason why any app that follows the terms of the SDK agreement should use these
    functions
    , and I find it shocking that Apple lets apps that link against them
    on the store at all. I should also note this is not exhaustive, those are just the most obvious things, but in my cursory inspection I saw a dozen or so objective C selectors that I believe are private.

    Actually that brings up another point. Despite the app developer doing nothing
    wrong, one of their toolchain or middleware vendors is doing something that could
    be an issue. When I write apps for the store I might choose to play fast and
    loose with something if there is a compelling reason, but if I am providing a
    library for someone else I never do. Using private APIs is putting your
    customer's apps at risk. Not only do I find that unacceptable,
    but I think any vendor who does that is generally irresponsible and makes it me
    hesitate to use any of their other products because I feel it shows a certain
    casualness about how you treat their customers. If there is a legitimate reason
    you need to do something that risks your customer's products, then as a company
    you need to disclose it so your customers can make an informed decision.

    I should note this is not an intrinsic issue with Flash, I know for a fact
    certain major vendors ship iPhone libraries that call APIs that can get your app
    rejected from the store without informing developers. For instance, various analytics companies
    really shouldn't be poking at private APIs to try to find cached location
    framework data. It isn't just a privacy breach, it places your clients apps at risk.

     

    So what. How does it run?

     

    On my iPhone 3G it runs really choppy, on my 3GS it runs acceptably, but it
    still isn't smooth. Given the OpenGL performance people have seen on the 3GS
    that is still pretty bad. I have not done any invasive tests by instrumenting
    the binary, that is just what I can get via basic usage. The sad thing is that
    there is no reason it has to have performance like this. This is not an inherent
    issue with the ActionScript used in this app (though that may have issues), it
    is that what is coming out of the toolchain is a huge, monstrous binary that stresses
    the runtime and has performance characteristics completely different than
    anything the iPhone is currently setup for.

    Also, remember, the slower the frame rate the more work the phone is doing per frame, and the
    more battery the app is using. When you see an app that can do 120 FPS in its
    demo loop, that means that when it is running at 30 FPS it is using ~25% of the
    CPU/GPU assets. When you see one that can only get 20 FPS that means it cannot
    hit 30 FPS to clamp at despite maxing some or the costly (in terms of battery)
    system assets.

     

    Punchline

     

    Technically speaking, these do appear to basically be within letter of the SDK
    agreement, modulo the fact that Adobe appears to making private API calls. They
    should be able to do what they need to without making those calls, so ultimately
    that should be a non-issue.

    Now, the notion that what this thing emits is indistinguishable from
    something Xcode emits is laughable. They are very different, and not in a good
    way. While the apps may get acceptable frame rates on an iPhone 3GS, they don't
    on earlier hardware, and they almost certainly use substantially more
    battery power than native games.

    I want to be excited about this thing, both because it is a seriously cool
    piece of tech, and because there are Flash games I would like to run on my
    phone, but looking at what this thing is spitting out I think the apps it will
    generate will perpetuate the stereotypes about Flash (especially on cell
    phones), and give Objective C programmers a (somewhat misplaced) sense of
    vindication about their views on Flash.

    This is all still in beta, it could end up a lot better than it currently is. It
    could be something that can make some great games available on the iPhone.
    Unfortunately looking it right now I am very skeptical, and I think that is the
    right position to have given Flash's performance elsewhere. Yes, this is
    entirely new technology, but it comes from the same company with the same
    priorities. Given the product they have delivered to me on my desktop for the
    last 5 years they don't get benefit the doubt, they have to pull themselves out
    of the doghouse as far as I am concerned. Come on Adobe, prove me wrong!