4 ms·

It's still unclear whether having Flash is better than not having Flash.

30 points by technologizer 16y ago

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
michaelpinto 16y ago
Flash — it rhymes with "crash"
barista 16y ago
I think flash is just a stopgap until something faster and native comes from android. Both MSFT and AAPL are not supporting it on their mobile platform. Android only supports it because they don't have any other options.
- Niten 16y ago
  Huh? As far as "native" goes, the Android browser is just as fast as, or faster than, the iPhone's. And Adobe has already confirmed Flash for Windows Phone 7.
- beej71 16y ago
  Would you elaborate on Android not having any other options?
- jmillikin 16y ago
  Android already supports Theora, WebM, and H.264 -- what do you feel its native support is lacking? Manufacturers put Flash on tablets/phones as mindless "differentiation", an extra checkbox to wave in front of consumers. There's no technical reason for Android to support Flash, and (as this article demonstrates) numerous good reasons not to.
  - danenania 16y ago
    Forgetting that there is a ton of popular flash content on the web? Outside the developer community, people don't care about how the content they're interested in is delivered, they just want access. It isn't hard to criticize the implementation of flash on mobiles, but there are obviously strong arguments for including it on a platform. It's clearly a LOT more than an 'extra checkbox'.
    - twocentswanted 16y ago
      Right. Thanks to flash compatibility on my phone, I can watch/listen to a lot of content that cannot be rendered on an iDevice. That's a meaningful differentiator.
- code_duck 16y ago
  Not sure what you mean - what does WM7 or iOS have that Android doesn't? Native apps are just as capable on any platform.
thailandstartup 16y ago
Click to Flash is the ideal middle ground for mobile devices. Only play the Flash when the user explicitly requests. 90% of the time, the user won't notice the Flash missing, the other 10% it is available on request. That solves the battery issues and the annoying advertisement issues.
- pohl 16y ago
  Well, it might help the battery issue, but it couldn't solve it unless the video playback was just as efficiently hardware-accelerated as the native implementation. You're also introducing a user experience cost of N additional taps for an afternoon watching N flash videos. The ideal sweet spot is for proprietary plugins to vacate all browsers post haste.
  - dbrannan 16y ago
    Take a good look at the number of plugins you are already running. If you are using Chrome type in about:plugins in the URL. I think you might be surprised. I see many people have this hate towards Flash because it is a plug-in, but what about QuickTime, Silverlight, and Java? Plug-ins exist to extend the functionality of our browsers and let's face it, HTML does not do everything.
    - ootachi 16y ago
      In most cases, those plugins are there because some other app put them there, not because they're actually used. The most notable exception is probably Silverlight for Netflix.
- yardie 16y ago
  I don't think Click to Flash is the optimal solution. On the PC side it still loads Flash objects, they just aren't displayed. It also skews feedback. If developers think that flash is being represented in mobile devices when its not that only causes them to divert resources from creating mobile HTML versions of sites.
Enlightenment 16y ago
I only wish that I had an on/off button for Flash on all browsers like I do with the useful "QuickJava" addon to Firefox.
icarus_drowning 16y ago
For me, this seems pretty simple: if it is shown that Adobe can create a version of Flash that alleviates problems with poor battery life and terrible performance, obviously it will be "better to have Flash". So long as those problems persist, Flash seems like a lot more of a liability than an asset.
- code_duck 16y ago
  I'd add 'security' in there, too. The situation is already looking worthy of concern on Android and other open mobile OSs. Do we need one more attack vector? Particularly a platform with a history like Flash?
  - tptacek 16y ago
    CSS3 is also worthy of concern. It's true that the security concern is different, and it's true that the security concerns are in general cumulative, but it's not like you can decisively say "things that add to the attack surface are bad".
    - trotsky 16y ago
      I think it's pretty safe to say that Adobe code bases have more or less earned themselves a special line item in the security concerns list at this point.
      - tptacek 16y ago
        You could --- and I'm not just saying this to be argumentative --- say the same thing about parts of Webkit. I want to be clear that I agree that Flash adds more than a banana-equivalent dose of insecurity. I just worry about the notion that the rest of the system is much better.
        trotsky 16y ago
        You make a good point that I wouldn't want to try to disagree with.
marcusbooster 16y ago
I really thought I'd miss Flash for certain sites, but it turns out that if it can't be done with html5 then there's usually "an app for that".
mrinterweb 16y ago
I think that the big news with Flash 10.2 is that it does have hardware acceleration for video. http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2011/02/flash-player-10-2-launch.html http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2011/02/flash-player-10-2... The article suggests that 10.2 is not hardware accelerated.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- lloeki 16y ago
  10.2 hardware acceleration is actually disabled for mobile.
- metageek 16y ago
  It's not enabled in the beta, that's all.
  - mrinterweb 16y ago
    I see. I just checked the release notes http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/895/cpsid_89556.html http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/895/cpsid_89556.html "Please note that this feature has been turned off for this Beta release, but will be available in the final Flash Player 10.2 release." "Please note that GPU rendering was turned off for this Beta release." It will be interesting to see how well it performs when they enable the hardware acceleration in the final 10.2 release.
- ZeroGravitas 16y ago
  10.1 had hardware acceleration of decoding. 10.2 has "Stage Video" which lets it take advantage of even more hardware for displaying the video as long as the developer of the Flash code displaying the video doesn't need to do anything fancy with it like put it on the face of a rotating cube. They seem to refer to this as hardware accelerated rendering. This latter thing seems to be only coming to Honeycomb and up, and isn't fully baked so 10.2 for Froyo is final, while 10.2 for Honeycomb is still a beta.
mcritz 16y ago
I think there are five major points of failure for Flash on tablets. 1. Flash integration into system battery management. 2. Software support for hardware acceleration, both for video, 3D, and 2D. 3. Flash objects' use of network hardware. 4. Flash memory caching / swaps. 5. Android allocation of processor usage for Flash VM. Implementing a Flash VM that doesn't crush your battery requires addressing all these points. This will be especially hard to support the plurality of hardware and OS varieties.
tlear 16y ago
This is what will determine RIM's fate in a few weeks, if playbook flash is just as bad then they are pretty much done for.
- wtallis 16y ago
  You say that as though the PlayBook actually has a chance of catching on in a big way. Even if it did, it wouldn't hinge solely on Flash support. RIM has never done a great job targeting the consumer market, and their enterprise customer base is still pretty loyal. Even if the PlayBook fails to change that, RIM will not go bankrupt before they have time to try again.
jsz0 16y ago
I can't stand the middle-ground of things 'sorta working' I would rather have it be either fully functional or non-existant.
mkramlich 16y ago
Reading that article I could almost hear Steve Jobs over my shoulder saying, "I told you so."

30 points by technologizer 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

michaelpinto 16y ago

Flash — it rhymes with "crash"

barista 16y ago

I think flash is just a stopgap until something faster and native comes from android. Both MSFT and AAPL are not supporting it on their mobile platform. Android only supports it because they don't have any other options.

Niten 16y ago
Huh? As far as "native" goes, the Android browser is just as fast as, or faster than, the iPhone's. And Adobe has already confirmed Flash for Windows Phone 7.
beej71 16y ago
Would you elaborate on Android not having any other options?
jmillikin 16y ago
Android already supports Theora, WebM, and H.264 -- what do you feel its native support is lacking? Manufacturers put Flash on tablets/phones as mindless "differentiation", an extra checkbox to wave in front of consumers. There's no technical reason for Android to support Flash, and (as this article demonstrates) numerous good reasons not to.
- danenania 16y ago
  Forgetting that there is a ton of popular flash content on the web? Outside the developer community, people don't care about how the content they're interested in is delivered, they just want access. It isn't hard to criticize the implementation of flash on mobiles, but there are obviously strong arguments for including it on a platform. It's clearly a LOT more than an 'extra checkbox'.
  - twocentswanted 16y ago
    Right. Thanks to flash compatibility on my phone, I can watch/listen to a lot of content that cannot be rendered on an iDevice. That's a meaningful differentiator.
code_duck 16y ago
Not sure what you mean - what does WM7 or iOS have that Android doesn't? Native apps are just as capable on any platform.

thailandstartup 16y ago

Click to Flash is the ideal middle ground for mobile devices. Only play the Flash when the user explicitly requests. 90% of the time, the user won't notice the Flash missing, the other 10% it is available on request. That solves the battery issues and the annoying advertisement issues.

pohl 16y ago
Well, it might help the battery issue, but it couldn't solve it unless the video playback was just as efficiently hardware-accelerated as the native implementation. You're also introducing a user experience cost of N additional taps for an afternoon watching N flash videos. The ideal sweet spot is for proprietary plugins to vacate all browsers post haste.
- dbrannan 16y ago
  Take a good look at the number of plugins you are already running. If you are using Chrome type in about:plugins in the URL. I think you might be surprised. I see many people have this hate towards Flash because it is a plug-in, but what about QuickTime, Silverlight, and Java? Plug-ins exist to extend the functionality of our browsers and let's face it, HTML does not do everything.
  - ootachi 16y ago
    In most cases, those plugins are there because some other app put them there, not because they're actually used. The most notable exception is probably Silverlight for Netflix.
yardie 16y ago
I don't think Click to Flash is the optimal solution. On the PC side it still loads Flash objects, they just aren't displayed. It also skews feedback. If developers think that flash is being represented in mobile devices when its not that only causes them to divert resources from creating mobile HTML versions of sites.

Enlightenment 16y ago

I only wish that I had an on/off button for Flash on all browsers like I do with the useful "QuickJava" addon to Firefox.

icarus_drowning 16y ago

For me, this seems pretty simple: if it is shown that Adobe can create a version of Flash that alleviates problems with poor battery life and terrible performance, obviously it will be "better to have Flash". So long as those problems persist, Flash seems like a lot more of a liability than an asset.

code_duck 16y ago
I'd add 'security' in there, too. The situation is already looking worthy of concern on Android and other open mobile OSs. Do we need one more attack vector? Particularly a platform with a history like Flash?
- tptacek 16y ago
  CSS3 is also worthy of concern. It's true that the security concern is different, and it's true that the security concerns are in general cumulative, but it's not like you can decisively say "things that add to the attack surface are bad".
  - trotsky 16y ago
    I think it's pretty safe to say that Adobe code bases have more or less earned themselves a special line item in the security concerns list at this point.
    - tptacek 16y ago
      You could --- and I'm not just saying this to be argumentative --- say the same thing about parts of Webkit. I want to be clear that I agree that Flash adds more than a banana-equivalent dose of insecurity. I just worry about the notion that the rest of the system is much better.
      - trotsky 16y ago
        You make a good point that I wouldn't want to try to disagree with.

marcusbooster 16y ago

I really thought I'd miss Flash for certain sites, but it turns out that if it can't be done with html5 then there's usually "an app for that".

mrinterweb 16y ago

I think that the big news with Flash 10.2 is that it does have hardware acceleration for video. http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2011/02/flash-player-10-2-launch.html http://blogs.adobe.com/flashplayer/2011/02/flash-player-10-2... The article suggests that 10.2 is not hardware accelerated.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
lloeki 16y ago
10.2 hardware acceleration is actually disabled for mobile.
metageek 16y ago
It's not enabled in the beta, that's all.
- mrinterweb 16y ago
  I see. I just checked the release notes http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/895/cpsid_89556.html http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/895/cpsid_89556.html "Please note that this feature has been turned off for this Beta release, but will be available in the final Flash Player 10.2 release." "Please note that GPU rendering was turned off for this Beta release." It will be interesting to see how well it performs when they enable the hardware acceleration in the final 10.2 release.
ZeroGravitas 16y ago
10.1 had hardware acceleration of decoding. 10.2 has "Stage Video" which lets it take advantage of even more hardware for displaying the video as long as the developer of the Flash code displaying the video doesn't need to do anything fancy with it like put it on the face of a rotating cube. They seem to refer to this as hardware accelerated rendering. This latter thing seems to be only coming to Honeycomb and up, and isn't fully baked so 10.2 for Froyo is final, while 10.2 for Honeycomb is still a beta.

mcritz 16y ago

I think there are five major points of failure for Flash on tablets. 1. Flash integration into system battery management. 2. Software support for hardware acceleration, both for video, 3D, and 2D. 3. Flash objects' use of network hardware. 4. Flash memory caching / swaps. 5. Android allocation of processor usage for Flash VM. Implementing a Flash VM that doesn't crush your battery requires addressing all these points. This will be especially hard to support the plurality of hardware and OS varieties.

tlear 16y ago

This is what will determine RIM's fate in a few weeks, if playbook flash is just as bad then they are pretty much done for.

wtallis 16y ago
You say that as though the PlayBook actually has a chance of catching on in a big way. Even if it did, it wouldn't hinge solely on Flash support. RIM has never done a great job targeting the consumer market, and their enterprise customer base is still pretty loyal. Even if the PlayBook fails to change that, RIM will not go bankrupt before they have time to try again.

jsz0 16y ago

I can't stand the middle-ground of things 'sorta working' I would rather have it be either fully functional or non-existant.

mkramlich 16y ago

Reading that article I could almost hear Steve Jobs over my shoulder saying, "I told you so."