4 ms·

would it solve the problems? absolutely. would browser vendors pick it up for a standard? almost definitely not. though, nothing is stopping anyone from creati

would it solve the problems? absolutely. would browser vendors pick it up for a standard? almost definitely not. though, nothing is stopping anyone from creating new flash games, videos, etc. the software is out there, and NG already does flash game jams.

justsomehnguy 3y ago
Well, the modern CSS + animations + SVG solves like 90% of things Flash could do, with HTML5 and canvas it solves the remaining 9%. but the biggest problem is the authoring tools and I if there were anything worthwile enough the web would had exploded already.
- rhn_mk1 3y ago
  I'm not sure if it's included in your 90%, but an advantage of Flash is that it was not JS or HTML. Meaning that you could block it easily, when it offended your senses (animated ads, autoplaying videos), without affecting the functionality of most web sites. CSS + animations + JS + HTML5 cannot be blocked without destroying the web site as well.
  - Bakingpotato 3y ago
    yeah I remember that people demonized flash so much for that and turned a blind eye once html and javascript was given that power. jokes on them now, I guess not to mention flash content could run on a potato, while javascript is soon to see your processor as fried as a potato chip instead
  - justsomehnguy 3y ago
    > CSS + animations + JS + HTML5 cannot be blocked without destroying the web site as well. That's a lame excuse. There were enough 'not malicious' sites, there are enough sites now what treat you like a 3rd rate netizen even if you are on a 4k desktop in a landscape orientation. If anything, Web is destro^W profiling itself for a narrow subset of mobile users for quite some years already, so I can't accept your 'blovk Flash' stance as anything having a substinence.
    - rhn_mk1 3y ago
      I'd like to reply, but I'm not sure how to read this comment. There were always user-unfriendly sites. It used to be possible to easily block the nasty content (Flash), now it's rather hard. It used to be possible to extract the interesting content (Flash) and save it without the junk website. Now it's not. Separation was an advantage. I agree that the Web is narrowing itself down. One of the symptoms is not having interactive content clearly delineated from the rest. You seem to come from the same premises but arrive at the opposite conclusion, and I don't understand your reasoning.
  - xp84 3y ago
    Oh yeah! We used a plug-in called FlashBlock which would load by default and basically do nothing but show a button to load, and if you clicked the button it would load actual Flash for that single embed. Blocked so many ads but let you play games.
- bamfly 3y ago
  Flash is to web dev as Excel is to desktop applications: it "sucks" but is also arguably the single best tool the entire field has produced. The technologies that might replace Flash are "better" but also so much worse that they aren't even close to actually replacing it, years on—and, yeah, that's mostly about the authoring tools, which were not just excellent, but also de facto free for hobbyists (thanks, piracy) when Flash was in its prime.
  - Bakingpotato 3y ago
    not only that, the shovelware scene proved that it was piss easy to use, and powerful (especially in the later years) see as many html5 gaming webpages lately? yeah, no. the 'death' of flash killed the browser game and rapid prototyping that flash offered, and there is nothing on that level in this age. the problems that html5, css and javascript could in theory 'solve' are a moot point when the switch to those technologies killed any enthusiasm for it.
    - mschuster91 3y ago
      And so many of the Flash web games could be saved because they were completely self-contained units. Today? Just forget about saving some web based game someone makes because it's probably streaming its assets from some dynamically computed URLs
      - Bakingpotato 3y ago
        that's true. I think a few flash games did a split swf thing for DRM purposes, and yeah. look where that got them... lost media ahoy for html5

justsomehnguy 3y ago

Well, the modern CSS + animations + SVG solves like 90% of things Flash could do, with HTML5 and canvas it solves the remaining 9%. but the biggest problem is the authoring tools and I if there were anything worthwile enough the web would had exploded already.

rhn_mk1 3y ago
I'm not sure if it's included in your 90%, but an advantage of Flash is that it was not JS or HTML. Meaning that you could block it easily, when it offended your senses (animated ads, autoplaying videos), without affecting the functionality of most web sites. CSS + animations + JS + HTML5 cannot be blocked without destroying the web site as well.
- Bakingpotato 3y ago
  yeah I remember that people demonized flash so much for that and turned a blind eye once html and javascript was given that power. jokes on them now, I guess not to mention flash content could run on a potato, while javascript is soon to see your processor as fried as a potato chip instead
- justsomehnguy 3y ago
  > CSS + animations + JS + HTML5 cannot be blocked without destroying the web site as well. That's a lame excuse. There were enough 'not malicious' sites, there are enough sites now what treat you like a 3rd rate netizen even if you are on a 4k desktop in a landscape orientation. If anything, Web is destro^W profiling itself for a narrow subset of mobile users for quite some years already, so I can't accept your 'blovk Flash' stance as anything having a substinence.
  - rhn_mk1 3y ago
    I'd like to reply, but I'm not sure how to read this comment. There were always user-unfriendly sites. It used to be possible to easily block the nasty content (Flash), now it's rather hard. It used to be possible to extract the interesting content (Flash) and save it without the junk website. Now it's not. Separation was an advantage. I agree that the Web is narrowing itself down. One of the symptoms is not having interactive content clearly delineated from the rest. You seem to come from the same premises but arrive at the opposite conclusion, and I don't understand your reasoning.
- xp84 3y ago
  Oh yeah! We used a plug-in called FlashBlock which would load by default and basically do nothing but show a button to load, and if you clicked the button it would load actual Flash for that single embed. Blocked so many ads but let you play games.
bamfly 3y ago
Flash is to web dev as Excel is to desktop applications: it "sucks" but is also arguably the single best tool the entire field has produced. The technologies that might replace Flash are "better" but also so much worse that they aren't even close to actually replacing it, years on—and, yeah, that's mostly about the authoring tools, which were not just excellent, but also de facto free for hobbyists (thanks, piracy) when Flash was in its prime.
- Bakingpotato 3y ago
  not only that, the shovelware scene proved that it was piss easy to use, and powerful (especially in the later years) see as many html5 gaming webpages lately? yeah, no. the 'death' of flash killed the browser game and rapid prototyping that flash offered, and there is nothing on that level in this age. the problems that html5, css and javascript could in theory 'solve' are a moot point when the switch to those technologies killed any enthusiasm for it.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    And so many of the Flash web games could be saved because they were completely self-contained units. Today? Just forget about saving some web based game someone makes because it's probably streaming its assets from some dynamically computed URLs
    - Bakingpotato 3y ago
      that's true. I think a few flash games did a split swf thing for DRM purposes, and yeah. look where that got them... lost media ahoy for html5