4 ms·

I've only missed the point if Gruber's points are agnostic. I know they aren't. > video - kinda. The RTMP equivalent implementation isn't quiet as easy as RTMP

by tomlin 16y ago

I've only missed the point if Gruber's points are agnostic. I know they aren't. > video - kinda. The RTMP equivalent implementation isn't quiet as easy as RTMP. > animation - this is the kind of bs I'm talking about. Having done complex timeline animation in Flash and JS (with WebWorkers) I can say with all honesty that it is not just fine with HTML5+JS. JS-based timeline animation is clunky at best and incredibly time consuming.

look_lookatme 16y ago
Why the downvotes here?
ugh 16y ago
HTML5 and Javascript don’t have to be as good as Flash. They only have to capture the most common use cases.
- tomlin 16y ago
  You're right, they don't. I'm still looking for where it is proven that a well-coded Flash site is inferior to a well-coded HTML5+JS site in terms of battery life. No one can seem to give a tangible, legible reason why Flash has the unreasonably holy authority to drain battery power.
  - raganwald 16y ago
    Ahh, the No True Scotsman fallacy again! Hamish: No Flash site is inferior to its HTML5 equivalent in terms of battery life. Angus: Youtube's Flash implementation uses more battery than their HTML5 equivalent on my machine. Hamish: No well-coded Flash site is inferior to its HTML5 equivalent in terms of battery life. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/No_true_Scots...
    - tomlin 16y ago
      > Angus: Youtube's Flash implementation uses more battery than their HTML5 equivalent on my machine. Apologies for this, it seems to have evidence in it: http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html It's hard for me to compare HTML5 to Flash if the Flash version has a truckload of abilities being used that cannot be utilized in HTML5. What's so hard to understand about this? Does the MacBook fan only come on for Flash? It seems unlikely. Seems like it might engage for CPU-intensive processes that contain audio, video, Internet access (WiFi or 3G isn't cheap on the battery) and a mixture of other features. I'm not trying to get any one to agree to Flash being better. I just don't see an equal argument. Ever.
equark 16y ago
Animation is largely a tooling issue. It will be solved at some point, probably by Adobe.
rimantas 16y ago
But simple CSS3 transforms/animations are hardware accelerated and cover a lot of use cases.

by tomlin 16y ago

look_lookatme 16y ago

Why the downvotes here?

ugh 16y ago

HTML5 and Javascript don’t have to be as good as Flash. They only have to capture the most common use cases.

tomlin 16y ago
You're right, they don't. I'm still looking for where it is proven that a well-coded Flash site is inferior to a well-coded HTML5+JS site in terms of battery life. No one can seem to give a tangible, legible reason why Flash has the unreasonably holy authority to drain battery power.
- raganwald 16y ago
  Ahh, the No True Scotsman fallacy again! Hamish: No Flash site is inferior to its HTML5 equivalent in terms of battery life. Angus: Youtube's Flash implementation uses more battery than their HTML5 equivalent on my machine. Hamish: No well-coded Flash site is inferior to its HTML5 equivalent in terms of battery life. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/No_true_Scots...
  - tomlin 16y ago
    > Angus: Youtube's Flash implementation uses more battery than their HTML5 equivalent on my machine. Apologies for this, it seems to have evidence in it: http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html http://apiblog.youtube.com/2010/06/flash-and-html5-tag.html It's hard for me to compare HTML5 to Flash if the Flash version has a truckload of abilities being used that cannot be utilized in HTML5. What's so hard to understand about this? Does the MacBook fan only come on for Flash? It seems unlikely. Seems like it might engage for CPU-intensive processes that contain audio, video, Internet access (WiFi or 3G isn't cheap on the battery) and a mixture of other features. I'm not trying to get any one to agree to Flash being better. I just don't see an equal argument. Ever.

equark 16y ago

Animation is largely a tooling issue. It will be solved at some point, probably by Adobe.

rimantas 16y ago

But simple CSS3 transforms/animations are hardware accelerated and cover a lot of use cases.