5 ms·

This seems like it might work to set back the anti-flash pro-html5 movement.

daeken 17y ago
If it does, it's because developers let it. If HTML5 is superior to Flash from a development standpoint, developers will still have the option of going that route with this. I believe that Google's announcement on this really only benefits end users: either way a developer goes, they're going to get a better result.
- cookiecaper 17y ago
  HTML5 is not superior to Flash from a development standpoint. Flash comes with a nice, integrated IDE that allows quick production of visuals and scripting. I think it'd be hard to make an argument that HTML5 development is equally assisted for most use cases. The real question is whether developers hate Adobe/Flash/proprietary standards enough to keep promoting HTML5. I think they do for now, but unless someone comes out with a Flash-esque development environment soon, the fervor will eventually die out and people will settle for the path of least resistance, which is Flash.
  - rimantas 17y ago
    Flash comes with a nice, integrated IDE that allows quick production of visuals and scripting. I think it'd be hard to make an argument that HTML5 development is equally assisted for most use cases. It's not hard at all. I can write my HTML with any editor I like. I can see the source of any page I like. No need to buy Adobe tools or hunt for .fla.
    - cookiecaper 17y ago
      Right, writing normal HTML is easy. In this context, I'm referring to animations and other graphical niceties that Flash has historically been deployed to provide and which HTML5 addresses with its canvas elements. I mean that such things are easier to make with Flash's IDE, which comes with many drawing tools, the timeline, layers, etc., vs. HTML5 canvas which, as far as I know, has no serious development environment offering any of these things. Even if it isn't so hard for a programmer to figure out how to duplicate things in HTML5 canvas, a large reason Flash has been able to spread so widely is because it appeals to designers and other visual producers, and is usable by them without much difficulty. To displace Flash, canvas will need to acquire a development environment that does the same.
    - tomlin 17y ago
      Ugh. I hate this fallacy of composition. I think you know what he means, but it is easy to be the teacher's pet with a shiny apple of misinformation. Making complex animations (not a sliding nav, for example) is not easy in HTML5+JS. Sorry, it isn't. We can have this argument forever, have yet to see someone produce the evidence of their accusations. Flash IDE, with all of it's flaws, trumps any "HTML editor" for animation or UX complexity. Sorry, that's just the way it is. No "Visual jQuery" exists.
      - rimantas 17y ago
        Making complex animations are not easy in Flash either. Unless Flash can draw thing for you, can it? As for basic tweening, you do not need HTML and JS for that. Now you can have CSS transforms, transitions and animation. Those are extremely easy to use and while they are not enough for really complex stuff they can and will replace most of the basic effect flash has been overused for.
        tomlin 17y ago
        It's extremely clear that you have not developed in Flash. Flash isn't an extension of the CSI interface, so no, it doesn't do anything "for you". Please, don't wax your "knowledge" as fact. You know exactly what I mean. I do agree that Flash is used when it is not necessary. However, on the flip of the same token there are those who would have you believe that you should use JS when Flash is a clearly better choice.
        pvg 17y ago
        "teacher's pet with shiny apple of misinformation", "wax your knowledge", "flip side of the same token"... I think you have exceeded your daily quota of metaphormixing.
    - not_an_alien 17y ago
      While I also disagree with the previous comment somewhat, "No need to buy Adobe tools or hunt the .fla" is not an advantage of any other development platform; that's because the real tools used for Flash development (Flex SDK, the compiler, and asdocs/etc) are free. Indeed, the IDE is seldom used nowadays by many shops; it's not that there are "alternatives", but that there are better ways: I know I've been doing Flash for 10 years and my IDE of choice now is none other than Eclipse. For all it's worth, you can create full Flash content with notepad, the official command-line compiler, and if you want graphics, some SVG editor or GIMP or whatever.
      - mgcross 17y ago
        I can't imagine being able to complete an animated banner ad implemented in HTML5/JS (or Flex for that matter) in anywhere close to the time it would take within the Flash IDE. Using the Flash IDE, I can also apply JPEG compression to 24-bit PNGs (with alpha channels). I really wish there was a similar alternative for HTML. And as poor/buggy as the font support is in Flash, it's still far better than using a flattened image. The timeline, filter effects and third party tweening solutions also bring a lot to the table.
  - GHFigs 17y ago
    HTML5 is not superior to Flash from a development standpoint. daeken was saying if it is superior, then developers still have that option. They aren't choosing one or the other, as (say) Apple has with not supporting Flash at all on the iPhone/iPad platform. It's good news for everybody except the small contingent that specifically wants Flash to die out. It doesn't hurt people who choose HTML5 for other reasons (such as reaching iPhone users).
  - godDLL 17y ago
    You should try their IDE on a medium sized project (a Facebook.com/Odnoklassniki.ru game will do). It's no picnic. Flash IDE has the bullet points, but TextMate/Vim/whatever can actually edit code. That is, there exist specialized workflows to solve problems Flash IDE is trying to solve, and they work better. Adobe documentation is integrated into the IDE, but HTML5 documentation is far and wide abundant (and in my experience actually accurate and intelligible most of the time). It's easy to whip up a quick project with Flash. But most of the life of software projects is spent in debugging and support. Good luck with that. At the same time, browser tech will enjoy Firebug/Inspector/SpeedTracer, and specialized asset creation workflows, in many cases leading to a more professional looking (and working) result. And yes, Adobe would do themselves good by getting on with browser tech tools, while they still have the chance.
    - tomlin 17y ago
      Flash debugs great and MonsterDebugger is swift and elegant. This one-sided story is getting old.
      - godDLL 17y ago
        I thought it was Adobe's toolchain we were discussing. Using a third-party compiler, debugger and asset management tools helps a ton, but does not validate the technology. Widespread use does. Shame there is no remedy for Adobe's documentation.
        not_an_alien 17y ago
        It does not validate, but it does negate the whole "I'm forced to use Adobe stuff" point people like to spill around. That has been moot for a while and people continue to press on it.
        tomlin 17y ago
        The technology is valid. It needs a better community and a standard associated with it. Flash is a great technology. HTML5+JS is a great technology. Adobe/Macromedia can be, at times, hack-y. Doesn't mean that they didn't manage to have a great idea or 2. This whole single-minded circle jerk re: HTML5+JS is causing a diffuse in logic and making people "gang" stupid.
jsz0 17y ago
I'm not sure it changes anything. Everyone has Flash installed at this point. Chrome is a relatively small chunk of overall Internet usage either way. The big potential game changer is Adobe delivering a really good version of Mobile Flash that defies their detractor's expectations.

If it does, it's because developers let it. If HTML5 is superior to Flash from a development standpoint, developers will still have the option of going that route with this. I believe that Google's announcement on this really only benefits end users: either way a developer goes, they're going to get a better result.

cookiecaper 17y ago
HTML5 is not superior to Flash from a development standpoint. Flash comes with a nice, integrated IDE that allows quick production of visuals and scripting. I think it'd be hard to make an argument that HTML5 development is equally assisted for most use cases. The real question is whether developers hate Adobe/Flash/proprietary standards enough to keep promoting HTML5. I think they do for now, but unless someone comes out with a Flash-esque development environment soon, the fervor will eventually die out and people will settle for the path of least resistance, which is Flash.
- rimantas 17y ago
  Flash comes with a nice, integrated IDE that allows quick production of visuals and scripting. I think it'd be hard to make an argument that HTML5 development is equally assisted for most use cases. It's not hard at all. I can write my HTML with any editor I like. I can see the source of any page I like. No need to buy Adobe tools or hunt for .fla.
  - cookiecaper 17y ago
    Right, writing normal HTML is easy. In this context, I'm referring to animations and other graphical niceties that Flash has historically been deployed to provide and which HTML5 addresses with its canvas elements. I mean that such things are easier to make with Flash's IDE, which comes with many drawing tools, the timeline, layers, etc., vs. HTML5 canvas which, as far as I know, has no serious development environment offering any of these things. Even if it isn't so hard for a programmer to figure out how to duplicate things in HTML5 canvas, a large reason Flash has been able to spread so widely is because it appeals to designers and other visual producers, and is usable by them without much difficulty. To displace Flash, canvas will need to acquire a development environment that does the same.
  - tomlin 17y ago
    Ugh. I hate this fallacy of composition. I think you know what he means, but it is easy to be the teacher's pet with a shiny apple of misinformation. Making complex animations (not a sliding nav, for example) is not easy in HTML5+JS. Sorry, it isn't. We can have this argument forever, have yet to see someone produce the evidence of their accusations. Flash IDE, with all of it's flaws, trumps any "HTML editor" for animation or UX complexity. Sorry, that's just the way it is. No "Visual jQuery" exists.
    - rimantas 17y ago
      Making complex animations are not easy in Flash either. Unless Flash can draw thing for you, can it? As for basic tweening, you do not need HTML and JS for that. Now you can have CSS transforms, transitions and animation. Those are extremely easy to use and while they are not enough for really complex stuff they can and will replace most of the basic effect flash has been overused for.
      - tomlin 17y ago
        It's extremely clear that you have not developed in Flash. Flash isn't an extension of the CSI interface, so no, it doesn't do anything "for you". Please, don't wax your "knowledge" as fact. You know exactly what I mean. I do agree that Flash is used when it is not necessary. However, on the flip of the same token there are those who would have you believe that you should use JS when Flash is a clearly better choice.
        pvg 17y ago
        "teacher's pet with shiny apple of misinformation", "wax your knowledge", "flip side of the same token"... I think you have exceeded your daily quota of metaphormixing.
  - not_an_alien 17y ago
    While I also disagree with the previous comment somewhat, "No need to buy Adobe tools or hunt the .fla" is not an advantage of any other development platform; that's because the real tools used for Flash development (Flex SDK, the compiler, and asdocs/etc) are free. Indeed, the IDE is seldom used nowadays by many shops; it's not that there are "alternatives", but that there are better ways: I know I've been doing Flash for 10 years and my IDE of choice now is none other than Eclipse. For all it's worth, you can create full Flash content with notepad, the official command-line compiler, and if you want graphics, some SVG editor or GIMP or whatever.
    - mgcross 17y ago
      I can't imagine being able to complete an animated banner ad implemented in HTML5/JS (or Flex for that matter) in anywhere close to the time it would take within the Flash IDE. Using the Flash IDE, I can also apply JPEG compression to 24-bit PNGs (with alpha channels). I really wish there was a similar alternative for HTML. And as poor/buggy as the font support is in Flash, it's still far better than using a flattened image. The timeline, filter effects and third party tweening solutions also bring a lot to the table.
- GHFigs 17y ago
  HTML5 is not superior to Flash from a development standpoint. daeken was saying if it is superior, then developers still have that option. They aren't choosing one or the other, as (say) Apple has with not supporting Flash at all on the iPhone/iPad platform. It's good news for everybody except the small contingent that specifically wants Flash to die out. It doesn't hurt people who choose HTML5 for other reasons (such as reaching iPhone users).
- godDLL 17y ago
  You should try their IDE on a medium sized project (a Facebook.com/Odnoklassniki.ru game will do). It's no picnic. Flash IDE has the bullet points, but TextMate/Vim/whatever can actually edit code. That is, there exist specialized workflows to solve problems Flash IDE is trying to solve, and they work better. Adobe documentation is integrated into the IDE, but HTML5 documentation is far and wide abundant (and in my experience actually accurate and intelligible most of the time). It's easy to whip up a quick project with Flash. But most of the life of software projects is spent in debugging and support. Good luck with that. At the same time, browser tech will enjoy Firebug/Inspector/SpeedTracer, and specialized asset creation workflows, in many cases leading to a more professional looking (and working) result. And yes, Adobe would do themselves good by getting on with browser tech tools, while they still have the chance.
  - tomlin 17y ago
    Flash debugs great and MonsterDebugger is swift and elegant. This one-sided story is getting old.
    - godDLL 17y ago
      I thought it was Adobe's toolchain we were discussing. Using a third-party compiler, debugger and asset management tools helps a ton, but does not validate the technology. Widespread use does. Shame there is no remedy for Adobe's documentation.
      - not_an_alien 17y ago
        It does not validate, but it does negate the whole "I'm forced to use Adobe stuff" point people like to spill around. That has been moot for a while and people continue to press on it.
      - tomlin 17y ago
        The technology is valid. It needs a better community and a standard associated with it. Flash is a great technology. HTML5+JS is a great technology. Adobe/Macromedia can be, at times, hack-y. Doesn't mean that they didn't manage to have a great idea or 2. This whole single-minded circle jerk re: HTML5+JS is causing a diffuse in logic and making people "gang" stupid.

jsz0 17y ago

I'm not sure it changes anything. Everyone has Flash installed at this point. Chrome is a relatively small chunk of overall Internet usage either way. The big potential game changer is Adobe delivering a really good version of Mobile Flash that defies their detractor's expectations.