4 ms·

That is simply not true. Flash 5 == JS+HTML5. I know you don't want to hear that, but you might have to actually face the fact that HTML5 is not the Flash kill

by tomlin 17y ago

That is simply not true. Flash 5 == JS+HTML5. I know you don't want to hear that, but you might have to actually face the fact that HTML5 is not the Flash killer you want it to be. Not yet, anyhow.

jrockway 17y ago
You can play full-screen, streaming, 1080p video without Flash, you can render vector graphics without Flash, you can use OpenGL without Flash, you can play sound without Flash, and you can write code that is dynamically compiled to native machine code... without Flash. So apart from missing libraries (which Adobe would port), I fail to see what Flash is needed for. Modern browsers have the ability to do everything Flash does; and if they don't, the ability can be added. (Adobe could even add the features themselves; every relevant browser is Free Software!)
- tomlin 17y ago
  Really? So if an ad agency told you you needed to port mycanvas.landsend.com or similar venture to HTML5+JS using the "future browser" you speak of, you couldn't see any problems with that? My favorite line: "and if they don't, the ability can be added". Yeah, we've seen web standards move at incredible speeds. YouTube, Hulu and the ilk would be glad to hear they wouldn't have a hope in hell in your world for years. Here's a fantastic quote: "Does anyone else remember seeing really sexy "DHTML" demos that featured full-screen animation and more? I do. You know when that was? 1998" Let me know your plans to pull all of these techs together. I'd like to see that.
  - jrockway 17y ago
    Having worked for ad agencies, I would never do that again. But anyway, Flash doesn't work on the iPad at all. So if you want your site to show up there, you have HTML 5 and JavaScript at your disposal; a Flash site is not even an option. Adobe isn't going to convince Apple to change their mind, but they can release a tool allowing Flash developers to migrate to HTML + JavaScript. With this in place, they don't need to maintain the Flash plugin anymore, except perhaps for IE users. YouTube, Hulu and the ilk would be glad to hear they wouldn't have a hope in hell in your world for years. So hostile. I'm not the one releasing devices that don't support Flash but do support HTML and JavaScript. YouTube is already doing what I describe. They tell IE users to stop using it, and they develop their own web browser. Flash will not be YouTube's default player for much longer.
    - tomlin 17y ago
      > So hostile. I'm not the one releasing devices that don't support Flash but do support HTML and JavaScript. If Apple wants to give Adobe the finger, they have every right to and I can't/won't argue it because it is their business logic. Are they billionaires? Yes? I support HTML5 and it's apparent "crushing" effect on Flash, but call it like it is. Your entire original comment is so far into the future that Marty McFly and the Doc would possibly need to go to 78mp/h in the Delorean just to see it in the horizon. HTML5 is great, but it's not going to change the world and dethrone Flash anytime soon. Saying that or anything of that nature is dishonest and completely without evidence.
      - jrockway 17y ago
        HTML5 is great, but it's not going to change the world and dethrone Flash anytime soon. Saying that or anything of that nature is dishonest and completely without evidence. Isn't that what everyone said about Firefox and Safari? I think Apple has enough fanbois in the design industry to say, "Apple's not supporting Flash very well anymore; maybe I will try a plain HTML design for this site." There may be a lot of money in flashy Flash sites, but I can't recall ever visiting one intentionally. Most of the Web's needs are met by plain HTML these days, and the few sites that have a good technical reason for using Flash (YouTube) are very close to being able to move away. Going back to my original point, an IDE that let people construct the usual flashy Flash with HTML5 and JavaScript would be a good product for Adobe to have. It future-proofs them. Every user with a web browser has a web browser, but only 98.whatever percent have Flash. Why artificially limit yourself to 98% of the Internet?
        tomlin 17y ago
        > Why artificially limit yourself to 98% of the Internet? You shouldn't. But you're telling yourself that 100% of the users on the 'net will be using an HTML5+JS power browser. See how that doesn't make sense?
- statictype 17y ago
  Flash also does tcp\ip. Flash also does Internet Explorer. That last point may not be relevant to you but it is certainly relevant to many people. >and if they don't, the ability can be added. (Adobe could even add the features themselves; every relevant browser is Free Software!) um, yeah, thats exactly what they've done - in the form of a plugin called Flash.

by tomlin 17y ago

That is simply not true. Flash 5 == JS+HTML5. I know you don't want to hear that, but you might have to actually face the fact that HTML5 is not the Flash killer you want it to be. Not yet, anyhow.

jrockway 17y ago

You can play full-screen, streaming, 1080p video without Flash, you can render vector graphics without Flash, you can use OpenGL without Flash, you can play sound without Flash, and you can write code that is dynamically compiled to native machine code... without Flash. So apart from missing libraries (which Adobe would port), I fail to see what Flash is needed for. Modern browsers have the ability to do everything Flash does; and if they don't, the ability can be added. (Adobe could even add the features themselves; every relevant browser is Free Software!)

tomlin 17y ago
Really? So if an ad agency told you you needed to port mycanvas.landsend.com or similar venture to HTML5+JS using the "future browser" you speak of, you couldn't see any problems with that? My favorite line: "and if they don't, the ability can be added". Yeah, we've seen web standards move at incredible speeds. YouTube, Hulu and the ilk would be glad to hear they wouldn't have a hope in hell in your world for years. Here's a fantastic quote: "Does anyone else remember seeing really sexy "DHTML" demos that featured full-screen animation and more? I do. You know when that was? 1998" Let me know your plans to pull all of these techs together. I'd like to see that.
- jrockway 17y ago
  Having worked for ad agencies, I would never do that again. But anyway, Flash doesn't work on the iPad at all. So if you want your site to show up there, you have HTML 5 and JavaScript at your disposal; a Flash site is not even an option. Adobe isn't going to convince Apple to change their mind, but they can release a tool allowing Flash developers to migrate to HTML + JavaScript. With this in place, they don't need to maintain the Flash plugin anymore, except perhaps for IE users. YouTube, Hulu and the ilk would be glad to hear they wouldn't have a hope in hell in your world for years. So hostile. I'm not the one releasing devices that don't support Flash but do support HTML and JavaScript. YouTube is already doing what I describe. They tell IE users to stop using it, and they develop their own web browser. Flash will not be YouTube's default player for much longer.
  - tomlin 17y ago
    > So hostile. I'm not the one releasing devices that don't support Flash but do support HTML and JavaScript. If Apple wants to give Adobe the finger, they have every right to and I can't/won't argue it because it is their business logic. Are they billionaires? Yes? I support HTML5 and it's apparent "crushing" effect on Flash, but call it like it is. Your entire original comment is so far into the future that Marty McFly and the Doc would possibly need to go to 78mp/h in the Delorean just to see it in the horizon. HTML5 is great, but it's not going to change the world and dethrone Flash anytime soon. Saying that or anything of that nature is dishonest and completely without evidence.
    - jrockway 17y ago
      HTML5 is great, but it's not going to change the world and dethrone Flash anytime soon. Saying that or anything of that nature is dishonest and completely without evidence. Isn't that what everyone said about Firefox and Safari? I think Apple has enough fanbois in the design industry to say, "Apple's not supporting Flash very well anymore; maybe I will try a plain HTML design for this site." There may be a lot of money in flashy Flash sites, but I can't recall ever visiting one intentionally. Most of the Web's needs are met by plain HTML these days, and the few sites that have a good technical reason for using Flash (YouTube) are very close to being able to move away. Going back to my original point, an IDE that let people construct the usual flashy Flash with HTML5 and JavaScript would be a good product for Adobe to have. It future-proofs them. Every user with a web browser has a web browser, but only 98.whatever percent have Flash. Why artificially limit yourself to 98% of the Internet?
      - tomlin 17y ago
        > Why artificially limit yourself to 98% of the Internet? You shouldn't. But you're telling yourself that 100% of the users on the 'net will be using an HTML5+JS power browser. See how that doesn't make sense?
statictype 17y ago
Flash also does tcp\ip. Flash also does Internet Explorer. That last point may not be relevant to you but it is certainly relevant to many people. >and if they don't, the ability can be added. (Adobe could even add the features themselves; every relevant browser is Free Software!) um, yeah, thats exactly what they've done - in the form of a plugin called Flash.