2 ms·

Why shouldn't they? They don't sell Flash player, they sell Adobe Flash described as "Create web designs and online experiences complete with interactive conten

Why shouldn't they? They don't sell Flash player, they sell Adobe Flash described as "Create web designs and online experiences complete with interactive content, exceptional typography, high-quality video, and smooth animation for truly engaging web experiences," not "Create .swf files". So, while faster HTML5 adoption would give them less time to adapt (therefore, they say that HTML5 is "not ready" -- honestly, true: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/commands.html#devices http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/c...), they need to adapt and show that they're adapting -- because otherwise the creatives that are currently using Flash could start considering options (currently few, but that too can change). Something like "well, by the time iPad is too popular for flash-based websites to be viable, we will allow you to make HTML5, so stop worrying about that".

Raphael_Amiard 16y ago
The more i think about it, the more clever the idea of flash using HTML5 as a backend sounds from adobe's perspective. In the (very) long term, it would remove a big maintenance responsability from them, and put part of this weight on the browser's engine shoulders. They wouldn't have to bear with the vocal linux and mac crowds saying their player sucks, for once, and their stuff would play on other platforms too. I think Adobe realizes this. The problem is that Javascript performance/graphic performance isn't there yet.