3 ms·

So to get rid of the Flash plugin you are proposing a new plugin which is not a HTML standard. Who is supposed to write such a plugin and how would it differ fr

by buster 17y ago

So to get rid of the Flash plugin you are proposing a new plugin which is not a HTML standard. Who is supposed to write such a plugin and how would it differ from Flash, then? Chrome Frame comes to my mind, this covers IE6,7,8 but not Firefox. May be a good candidate, but Chrome Frame has been around for a while now, and i haven't heard of web sites using it. Chrome Frame could lead the way to "one standard implementation of HTML5" which could at least eliminate some of the major pain (performance and cross browser differences). It's a nice thought, but somehow i have my doubts about Chrome Frame becoming that popular. Too much politics in the browser war. Also, many enterprises don't allow users to install that, which in turn makes it a no go for most web sites.

derefr 17y ago
I'm suggesting, I think, that Adobe drop the current "target" of their flash plug-in as a client-side embedded viewing frame for a special filetype that's actually an executable running in a proprietary VM, and just make it into said plug-in, basically a support framework for browsers. Expose everything that's currently exposed to Actionscript to Javascript instead, in other words. It's not something that Adobe would ever want to do—but it might be something they eventually will be forced into, after they realize no one is really using Flash all that much any more.
- benologist 17y ago
  That bridge already exists ... Flash and JavaScript can communicate with each other and in the form you're describing - http://www.happyworm.com/jquery/jplayer/latest/demo-01.htm http://www.happyworm.com/jquery/jplayer/latest/demo-01.htm will use OGG if it can or MP3+Flash behind HTML/JS/CSS.
statictype 17y ago
I'm skeptical about Chrome Frame's adoption. It sounds like just a way to trick IE users into using Chrome. If they wanted the benefits of Chrome, why not just run Chrome in the first place?

by buster 17y ago

derefr 17y ago

I'm suggesting, I think, that Adobe drop the current "target" of their flash plug-in as a client-side embedded viewing frame for a special filetype that's actually an executable running in a proprietary VM, and just make it into said plug-in, basically a support framework for browsers. Expose everything that's currently exposed to Actionscript to Javascript instead, in other words. It's not something that Adobe would ever want to do—but it might be something they eventually will be forced into, after they realize no one is really using Flash all that much any more.

benologist 17y ago
That bridge already exists ... Flash and JavaScript can communicate with each other and in the form you're describing - http://www.happyworm.com/jquery/jplayer/latest/demo-01.htm http://www.happyworm.com/jquery/jplayer/latest/demo-01.htm will use OGG if it can or MP3+Flash behind HTML/JS/CSS.

statictype 17y ago

I'm skeptical about Chrome Frame's adoption. It sounds like just a way to trick IE users into using Chrome. If they wanted the benefits of Chrome, why not just run Chrome in the first place?