> In this case, the open standards are ahead of Flash. They're only ahead if you consider one idea with poor implementation and compatibility in around 3% of t

> In this case, the open standards are ahead of Flash. They're only ahead if you consider one idea with poor implementation and compatibility in around 3% of the browsers to be "ahead". And by that same logic, Unity3D is already way ahead of both of them, and it doesn't mean anything either. Flash already has OpenGL/DX enabled on Flash 11 (currently in an open beta), which should be released later this year. Given the quick turnaround we have for Flash Player penetration (6 months for 80% penetration; 12 months for 95% penetration) I can bet Flash's 3d will be at 90% penetration on all desktop platforms and browsers before even WebGL reaches 20% market penetration. There's no helpful headstart here. Like it or not, a Flash Player upgrade gets installed much faster than a browser upgrade. Look at the number of people who are still using old IE versions. There are no "leaps and bounds" in the HTML world. Even if standards came out as quickly as a single company putting out their own platform, actual implementation and adoption takes a much, much longer time. This is the real world, and that some people ignore it is baffling. There are many reasons NOT to use Flash, but trying to sell HTML5 as a more capable standard is missing the point entirely. And considering Apple's stance on not allowing WebGL on iOS either, plus Microsoft refusal to implement it, can't see any real advantage in using WebGL coming in the future. Quite the opposite.