3 ms·

While quiet obvious to some, I think it's worth mentioning that Adobe was never against HTML5, or implicitly worried about Flash because of it. Adobe always tr

by tomlin 16y ago

While quiet obvious to some, I think it's worth mentioning that Adobe was never against HTML5, or implicitly worried about Flash because of it. Adobe always tried to make a case for Flash based on a few points that some refuse to grasp. HTML5 just can't do- or not easily at least -some of the things Flash can (e.g. webcam interaction, RTMP, multi-threaded animation). This isn't to say that Flash is amazing, just that developers must have some kind of platform to deliver engaging, rich experiences for many reasons. Not all of them are banner ads and movie sites. While Flash may have had many years as a cheesy intro page engine, more recent development with Flash is often an impromptu petrie dish for future advances in standards and web-based UI. The real issue is, could implementation of a standards-based Flash variant work? And if so, how? Certainly Adobe has pondered whether Flash would survive such standardization since we barely see CSS3 and HTML5 specs materialized as necessary.

cryptoz 16y ago
> HTML5 just can't do- or not easily at least -some of the things Flash can (e.g. webcam interaction, RTMP, multi-threaded animation). Webcam integration: Sure, I'll buy that. RTMP: Of course HTML5 isn't built with a technology that was developed for Flash. You know what Flash doesn't have? A <video> tag! Can equal functionality be built with Flash? Of course, very easily. But don't go calling Flash-specific protocols things that are against HTML5; that's silly. multi-threaded animation: HTML5 has WebWorkers and multithreaded JavaScript. Not sure why you think this can't be applied to animation. HTML5 is stronger than you think.
- tomlin 16y ago
  > RTMP: Of course HTML5 isn't built with a technology that was developed for Flash. Likewise, a similar protocol could have been created for HTML5 video. It would be hard to argue that the web doesn't need some sort of persistence for video. Waiting for an entire video to load before you can seek to an appropriate position makes HTML5 video outright archaic in this light. > But don't go calling Flash-specific protocols things that are against HTML5; that's silly. It's silly to ascertain Flash as an enemy of HTML5, period. I never did. I simply implied that Flash has a leg-up in some important departments. > multi-threaded animation: HTML5 has WebWorkers and multithreaded JavaScript. Not sure why you think this can't be applied to animation. Let's assume for a minute that I didn't preface with "...not easily at least" and claimed that it couldn't be done at all. No matter the reach or depth of your imagination, you will not be able to conjure up a single timeline-critical HTML5+JS-based site that performs on the same level as a Flash-developed one. By that, I mean Flash is much more capable of handling vector-based and raster-based graphics at high speeds while maintaining composure. Secondly, WebWorkers and timeline animation -despite your insistence- is not easy to implement, as I earlier stated. If your statement was entirely true and HTML5+JS was readily capable of such feats, I'd imagine we'd see much less Flash games and much more JS-based ones today. > HTML5 is stronger than you think. I never attested that it wasn't strong. Regardless of Flash, I hope that HTML5 continues to evolve and is eventually capable of what Flash is. At this time, it is not capable and selling these false statements does nothing to help HTML5's cause. Read more here: http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html
  - cryptoz 16y ago
    > I'd imagine we'd see much less Flash games and much more JS-based ones. HTML5 games work (by default) on ~50% of computers because there is no Microsoft implementation. The reason we haven't seem many games in HTML5 is because of Microsoft's lack of HTML5 support. When everyone is using Windows 7 and IE9 (with hardware acceleration, too!) HTML5 will outperform Flash and will be available on every platform.

by tomlin 16y ago

cryptoz 16y ago

> HTML5 just can't do- or not easily at least -some of the things Flash can (e.g. webcam interaction, RTMP, multi-threaded animation). Webcam integration: Sure, I'll buy that. RTMP: Of course HTML5 isn't built with a technology that was developed for Flash. You know what Flash doesn't have? A <video> tag! Can equal functionality be built with Flash? Of course, very easily. But don't go calling Flash-specific protocols things that are against HTML5; that's silly. multi-threaded animation: HTML5 has WebWorkers and multithreaded JavaScript. Not sure why you think this can't be applied to animation. HTML5 is stronger than you think.

tomlin 16y ago
> RTMP: Of course HTML5 isn't built with a technology that was developed for Flash. Likewise, a similar protocol could have been created for HTML5 video. It would be hard to argue that the web doesn't need some sort of persistence for video. Waiting for an entire video to load before you can seek to an appropriate position makes HTML5 video outright archaic in this light. > But don't go calling Flash-specific protocols things that are against HTML5; that's silly. It's silly to ascertain Flash as an enemy of HTML5, period. I never did. I simply implied that Flash has a leg-up in some important departments. > multi-threaded animation: HTML5 has WebWorkers and multithreaded JavaScript. Not sure why you think this can't be applied to animation. Let's assume for a minute that I didn't preface with "...not easily at least" and claimed that it couldn't be done at all. No matter the reach or depth of your imagination, you will not be able to conjure up a single timeline-critical HTML5+JS-based site that performs on the same level as a Flash-developed one. By that, I mean Flash is much more capable of handling vector-based and raster-based graphics at high speeds while maintaining composure. Secondly, WebWorkers and timeline animation -despite your insistence- is not easy to implement, as I earlier stated. If your statement was entirely true and HTML5+JS was readily capable of such feats, I'd imagine we'd see much less Flash games and much more JS-based ones today. > HTML5 is stronger than you think. I never attested that it wasn't strong. Regardless of Flash, I hope that HTML5 continues to evolve and is eventually capable of what Flash is. At this time, it is not capable and selling these false statements does nothing to help HTML5's cause. Read more here: http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html
- cryptoz 16y ago
  > I'd imagine we'd see much less Flash games and much more JS-based ones. HTML5 games work (by default) on ~50% of computers because there is no Microsoft implementation. The reason we haven't seem many games in HTML5 is because of Microsoft's lack of HTML5 support. When everyone is using Windows 7 and IE9 (with hardware acceleration, too!) HTML5 will outperform Flash and will be available on every platform.