3 ms·

Pavlov wasn't arguing against the development of Canvas. He was merely pointing out that, while impressive, Canvas has a -long- way to go before it's a viable

by teej 17y ago

Pavlov wasn't arguing against the development of Canvas. He was merely pointing out that, while impressive, Canvas has a -long- way to go before it's a viable platform for full-scale multimedia work on the web. Being viable is a combination of performance, authoring tools, and reach. Of course, there are lots of reasons to hate Flash, but you need to recognize what Flash does well to be able to beat it. Today, Flash beats Canvas at everything that matters on the web. Tomorrow, Canvas will have to exceed Flash at those things to be the winner. And even then, Adobe isn't going down without a fight.

ZeroGravitas 17y ago
It seems "disruptive innovation" has gone lately from being an overused buzzword to being an entirely forgotten concept. Short version: it is not always necessary to be better at everything to be a threat to an established product. For an example see the case of mainframes vs. mini-computers which was brought up (and sneered at) above. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology
- daleharvey 17y ago
  I probably should have mentioned it myself but disruptive innovation / innovators dilemma / christienssen was exactly what I was alluding to, cheers.
- pavlov 17y ago
  Certainly not a forgotten concept. Flash itself was a highly disruptive technology: originally a vector painting engine created for mid-'90s pen computing, it sneaked under the radar for years under the guise of a harmless animation plugin. Who could have foreseen in 1998 that Flash would replace not only Shockwave and Java, but also QuickTime and Windows Media on the web? Sun, Apple and Microsoft had their lunch eaten without even noticing -- and they actively aided their fall by bundling the plugin in their products. ("It's only 100k, and advertisers like to use it for animated banners. How could it possibly threaten our business?") IMHO, that is disruptive. In contrast, HTML 5 seems rather like a sustaining innovation that supports the existing business model of certain web giants.

by teej 17y ago

ZeroGravitas 17y ago

It seems "disruptive innovation" has gone lately from being an overused buzzword to being an entirely forgotten concept. Short version: it is not always necessary to be better at everything to be a threat to an established product. For an example see the case of mainframes vs. mini-computers which was brought up (and sneered at) above. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology

daleharvey 17y ago
I probably should have mentioned it myself but disruptive innovation / innovators dilemma / christienssen was exactly what I was alluding to, cheers.
pavlov 17y ago
Certainly not a forgotten concept. Flash itself was a highly disruptive technology: originally a vector painting engine created for mid-'90s pen computing, it sneaked under the radar for years under the guise of a harmless animation plugin. Who could have foreseen in 1998 that Flash would replace not only Shockwave and Java, but also QuickTime and Windows Media on the web? Sun, Apple and Microsoft had their lunch eaten without even noticing -- and they actively aided their fall by bundling the plugin in their products. ("It's only 100k, and advertisers like to use it for animated banners. How could it possibly threaten our business?") IMHO, that is disruptive. In contrast, HTML 5 seems rather like a sustaining innovation that supports the existing business model of certain web giants.