A fellow Twitter, Marius Jørgensrud, stated that Flash will die out as a format if the iPhone get support for Silverlight (all translation errors are on me).

My first reaction where that as long as the i-units (iPhone, iPod) are bringing in a lot of cash Apple would never deviate from the formula of creating i-units that just works. It is well known fact that Apple currently does not want to allow 3rd party applications to execute arbitrary code on their units. This is in fact the main reason why Flash and Java is not yet available on the units. Seen from a support (and business) point of view this makes perfectly sense: Do not allow anything that can degrade the end users positive experience with the units. I believe that this is also the reason why Apple does not allow 3rd party applications to multitask.

With this in mind I am very skeptical about Silverlight support in the i-units.

If Apple is not ready to even run Java applications on the i-units, then something like Silverlight or Flash will never stand a chance. The closest you currently come to executing 3rd party, arbitrary code, on the i-units is JavaScript in Safari.

3rd party browsers and other animals

There are speculations on why Apple will not let 3rd party web browsers on the i-units. The most common reason seems to be that Apple refuse 3rd party browsers since they offer Safari. This is a serious misunderstanding. The real reason is the same as with Flash, Silverlight and java. Let's face it: How interesting is a web browser that can not even run JavaScript?

I also seriously doubt that Apple in the future will support Silverlight only. The reason is not that Apple has a better relationship with Microsoft than with Adobe. Both companies have had long standing and good relationship with Apple.

When Apple decide to support applications that will execute 3rd party code it is because they are loosing market share (and money) to competitors. On Twitter Marius also stated that he really hope that the Android platform would take off and become a serious contender to the i-units.

I completely agree with his stance. It is not because I want Flash or Silverlight - or even Java to run on my i-unit. My main reason is egoistic: I want a device that can multitask any application.

Multitasking is the Real Mccoy

Multitasking on hand held units is much more important than being able to run Flash or Silverlight applications. As long as a hand held unit is not able to multitask it will not become a serious business tool.

I will be the first to acknowledge the success of the iPhone as a business phone. But let's face it - when it comes to serious business use the iPhone is not as good as the Nokia E-series, the BlackBerry, or even the Windows Mobile.

No one is questioning how user friendly the iPhone is - no one is questioning how sexy the iPhone is. It does of course fit a particular kind of business users. These users want it simple and easy. These are the kind of users who seldom, if ever, venture out of the established box. But once they do they either learn to live the the limits of the iPhone or they switch to another platform.

Just for the record: I will be the first to admit that I might be wrong. Even business users may want style over matter.

So what about Android then?

It may not look too sexy in it's current incarnation - but it does multitask.

Even if a certain service provider made Google remove a tethering application and made some commentators state that Google is no different that Apple when it comes to the Android platform. Even Google need to take into account carriers if they want their platform to be widely deployed. Money still talks.

One should really ask why a carrier want a tethering application pulled. My answer is simple: If a carrier does not want tethering kind of applications on their end users devices their network may not be up to par - and you as a paying customer should really consider going with your money elsewhere.

I do not believe that pulling a tethering application, or any other applications for that matter, will be the norm for Google. It is in the interest of Google - and their customers (i.e. carriers and service providers) to allow any application to run on their device.

Rumours have it that Google has hired one of the architects behind the iPhone GUI. If this is the case there should be no reason that the Android software will not be as sexy as the iPhone software. It is then up to the Android hardware manufacturers to create stunning looking hardware.

The iPhone have had a tremendous success. Incumbent device makers have more or less tried to create, in my opinion, very bad copies of the i-unit experience. Just check out any of the Windows Mobile front-ends to see what I am talking about here.

In my opinion, the only platform that can take on the i-unit experience is Android. There are no reason why the Andorid platform should not be a great success - with the right look and feel and the right hardware it could really give Apple some serious competition.

When this happen we might see Flash and Silverlight on the i-units.

My forecast however, is that we will first see 3rd party multitasking applications. I doubt that every i-app out there will be allowed to multitask - but Apple will be forced to open up multitasking to 3rd party apps. As a i-developer you may have to pay Apple a higher percentage on your AppStore income because of stricter due-diligence involved.

When this happen I could be pursued to buy a iPhone.