3 ms·

How is moving from Flash to HTML 5 going to resolve any of your complaints with a rich media experience? I loved this experience http://9elements.com/io/projec

by cjbos 17y ago

How is moving from Flash to HTML 5 going to resolve any of your complaints with a rich media experience? I loved this experience http://9elements.com/io/projects/html5/canvas/ http://9elements.com/io/projects/html5/canvas/ but it's still a closed box and uses up 100% of my cpu (Win XP/Chrome). If we move from flash we are just going to replace those rich experiences with another technology, which has the same issues. You can't turn it off any easier than you can turn off a full page flash example. Will your complaints be directed at HTML 5 for serving up the same web in 2 or 3 years time that we have today? I'd suggest directed your energies into getting more large corporations delivering the kind of content you want (The iPad page is a great example), as well as serving up a rich experience e.g. (http://www.apple.com/ipad/ipad-video/#large http://www.apple.com/ipad/ipad-video/#large)

tumult 17y ago
I was working on something that used HTML5 mouse interaction. There was a bug in WebKit with detecting its position on the page. I patched it, submitted the patch, and it was accepted. Bug gone. That's the difference. Canvas is not a closed box. I can look at an implementation (and there is more than one) and see what's going on. It can be improved by anyone. Just as importantly, an idle canvas doesn't consume 5% of my cpu. Canvas, to my knowledge, does not frequently crash my browser. I'm with you on the rich thing definitely. I think more companies are starting to catch on that what they've wanted all along is just some video showing off their thing, not a 'site' which is actually just chunks of video/swirly animations with text that you have to fidget with your mouse on to see all of. Hopefully we'll continue to see the situation improve.
- cjbos 17y ago
  Right, and that difference is to do with the experience of implementing the solution not consuming the solution. I agree the decision to choose an open source solution over a closed source solution that you can patch yourself if you come across a roadblock is very powerful. But to the end user consuming the rich media experience there is very little differences between the two implementations at this moment in time, both are buggy, overload the CPU and have issues with accessibility. To them the only perceivable difference is likely that one also works in IE. I'm hoping there will be a big shift back to content just being content without the need for big shiny bells and whistles as well. That said, if after a user has read my piece, viewed my video, but still wants something else I'd like to give them the option of something "different" if there is a demand for it. E.g. http://www.thecoronabeach.com/ http://www.thecoronabeach.com/ it bugs me though when the brand doesn't offer the more friendly traditional experience as the primary presence on the web... e.g. www.corona.com its just awful. BTW, the only time I really get a browser crash due to flash is when I'm working with my own code in a early state if ever, its very rare. I see alot of errors on about 25% of sites as I run the debug version of the player, but they don't cause my browser to crash. They are just as annoying as those old javascript error alert boxes that older browsers use though. And I run flash alot!
  - tumult 17y ago
    Flash is pretty OK in Windows, generally. I wouldn't have such a big beef with it if Adobe could get its Linux and especially Mac OS X versions at least as fast/non-crashy.

by cjbos 17y ago

tumult 17y ago

I was working on something that used HTML5 mouse interaction. There was a bug in WebKit with detecting its position on the page. I patched it, submitted the patch, and it was accepted. Bug gone. That's the difference. Canvas is not a closed box. I can look at an implementation (and there is more than one) and see what's going on. It can be improved by anyone. Just as importantly, an idle canvas doesn't consume 5% of my cpu. Canvas, to my knowledge, does not frequently crash my browser. I'm with you on the rich thing definitely. I think more companies are starting to catch on that what they've wanted all along is just some video showing off their thing, not a 'site' which is actually just chunks of video/swirly animations with text that you have to fidget with your mouse on to see all of. Hopefully we'll continue to see the situation improve.

cjbos 17y ago
Right, and that difference is to do with the experience of implementing the solution not consuming the solution. I agree the decision to choose an open source solution over a closed source solution that you can patch yourself if you come across a roadblock is very powerful. But to the end user consuming the rich media experience there is very little differences between the two implementations at this moment in time, both are buggy, overload the CPU and have issues with accessibility. To them the only perceivable difference is likely that one also works in IE. I'm hoping there will be a big shift back to content just being content without the need for big shiny bells and whistles as well. That said, if after a user has read my piece, viewed my video, but still wants something else I'd like to give them the option of something "different" if there is a demand for it. E.g. http://www.thecoronabeach.com/ http://www.thecoronabeach.com/ it bugs me though when the brand doesn't offer the more friendly traditional experience as the primary presence on the web... e.g. www.corona.com its just awful. BTW, the only time I really get a browser crash due to flash is when I'm working with my own code in a early state if ever, its very rare. I see alot of errors on about 25% of sites as I run the debug version of the player, but they don't cause my browser to crash. They are just as annoying as those old javascript error alert boxes that older browsers use though. And I run flash alot!
- tumult 17y ago
  Flash is pretty OK in Windows, generally. I wouldn't have such a big beef with it if Adobe could get its Linux and especially Mac OS X versions at least as fast/non-crashy.