3 ms·

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 developm

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.

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.