Why would ads produced using open standards be "a lot more difficult to disable"? Open standards should lead to more control.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adobe Debuts 'Wallaby' Prerelease Flash-to-HTML5 Converter
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why would ads produced using open standards be "a lot more difficult to disable"? Open standards should lead to more control.
From most of the comments here, it seems most people think Flash is just what is used to display those animated ads. They don't realize that Flash is an entire suite of technologies, and the part that Adobe actually makes money on is the creation environment.
But I would expect nothing less here. Most of the commenters are quite ill-informed and quick to jump to conclusions. Sort of like Fox News viewers.
You have interpreted the situation correctly and everything will be fine. Sites will finally be able to display ads to those that wish to mooch free content without the possibility of ever making any ad revenue for the site provider.
People really believe that Flash is required for ads ? Seriously guys, iAd doesn't use Flash, it uses straight HTML5. This wasn't required at all for rich ad content.
No, they won't. We'll get the new CanvasBlock extension for our browsers. Then we can selectively activate or not any Canvas tag on a page. Same as with Flash content that's simply put there through the Embed tag and that we use FlashBlock for.
Alternatively, things like AdBlock that just don't load external links from a site list (if I'm on Macrumors, then images/javascripts/css should come from the macurmors domain) will work just as well for the CSS/Javascript required for the ad Canvas.
And that is exactly what they're doing. What article did you read? This is a new tech, which will be no doubt implemented into flash CS5 (the app, duh) and fireworks.
As of now it will simply open your .fla file and save it as an html file and related images and scripts needed.
And I've tested it. It works like crap and isn't even close to ready for a demo. What on earth did they demo in October??? It basically has about 5% of the features of flash. Or possibly, HTML 5 only supports about 5% of the features of flash. Probably the latter.
ROFLMAO, if MR readers are as FN viewers, then MR itself is - Glen Beck?
But you're right, hardly any sense on these boards when it comes to Flash.
You're talking to Bieber fan base here, please show some understanding yourself
What's a Bieber?
This is exactly what I posted in the earlier post. This whole HTML5 thing seems less capable than Flash in 1998. And the speed of its development is laughable.
Rudy, you don't even want to go there. If you don't know what a bieber is, consider yourself blessed by the almighty God of New Sound.
Flash is not an entire suite of tech. Its an application that makes one type of interactive file... Shockwave Flash. (.swf). Not much "suite" there.)
Flash (the app) is an authoring tool designed to make interactive content. At the moment, it only makes .swf content. But there's no reason it couldn't be updated to save html 5 or even blu-ray and DVD. The latter two are pretty restrictive, but Adobe's DVD/Blu-Ray app can save your DVD as flash. And Adobe Fireworks can save as flash, gif animations, CSS, etc.
And yet most of those "web developers" do not use any tools or create web sites that do things like what flash can do.
Start doing the fancier stuff and it chances a fair amount.
Umm you do know ads do not follow a set standard. The standard blockers look for common places for adds or things linking to another site for information. It is just scanning the html code for common ad location. I know in theory it is easy to get around ad blockers and fool them into displaying the ad. Little more work on the back in on how the ads are stored and loaded but still not very hard to do.
There are multiple reason why this is not done. One is is pisses people off. Also it is found people running the blockers tend not to click on ads any how so why bother screwing up you display rate vs people clicking on it. Advertiser are fine with it for the same reasons.
I do not see any real big changes happening for the same reason as ads are allowed to be block now. Not worth the trouble and more it pisses people off to get around them.
I doubt it'll be that easy in reality.. ad companies don't want easy to block ads... they'll find a work around.
I've seen a few (abnious) sites that check for blockers - and refuse to load content... mind you, those sites aren't worth visiting. Sorry, I can't remember what sites they were now - it was back a while.
How do you work around the Canvas tag ?
They haven't been able to up to now, they won't be able to in the future.
I'm glad that Steve Jobs pointed out what we were all thinking about Adobe Flash. Hopefully with a little kick in the pants Adobe will finally update it or let it die.
I don't understand your reply
I did say "First let me say that I don't mind ads on the web, AS LONG AS THEY DON'T MOVE WHILE I'M TRYING TO READ THE NON-AD CONTENT."
I fully understand that content is provided to me for free in exchange for me viewing ads. I find (some) ads useful in making purchasing decisions.
I don't enjoy some types of ads and so take measures to avoid them. On the web, I usually want to read the content and find it difficult to do so if there are moving ads on the site. I've added Flashblock and adblock to get rid of those specific ads.
On the TV, most ads have an effective volume much higher than the content. If I'm enjoying the subtle dialog and witty repartee of "House" or "Two and a Half Men", I'm annoyed by the sudden blaring of the commercials, and so (reflexively by now) mute them.
You have interpreted the situation correctly and everything will be fine. Sites will finally be able to display ads to those that wish to mooch free content without the possibility of ever making any ad revenue for the site provider.
I did say "First let me say that I don't mind ads on the web, AS LONG AS THEY DON'T MOVE WHILE I'M TRYING TO READ THE NON-AD CONTENT."
I fully understand that content is provided to me for free in exchange for me viewing ads. I find (some) ads useful in making purchasing decisions.
I don't enjoy some types of ads and so take measures to avoid them. On the web, I usually want to read the content and find it difficult to do so if there are moving ads on the site. I've added Flashblock and adblock to get rid of those specific ads.
On the TV, most ads have an effective volume much higher than the content. If I'm enjoying the subtle dialog and witty repartee of "House" or "Two and a Half Men", I'm annoyed by the sudden blaring of the commercials, and so (reflexively by now) mute them.
No, it's a tool that keeps people using Adobe products to produce content. Be it Flash or HTML5.
Still good for Adobe
And again, this is not some kind of Flash created problem and Flash won't suddenly enable this. HMTL5 has been capable of animated Ads all along. The reason you don't see any outside iAds right now is browser support for Canvas in the wild is atrocious.
real life test
Enough with the bickering. Here's what this not even close to ready for prime time tool will give you...
Flash Site
http://www.stagingdirections.com
(ONE 550k flash file)
Wallby conversion...
http://www.stagingdirections.com/html5
(188 files amounting to 10 MB!)
I realize wallaby isn't even an alpha, but 20 times the file size? 188 files? That's what HTML 5 wants to bring to the table?
Anyway, that file is a good example of what clean simple flash can do. And it is basically a site that should be able to be done with existing CSS, javascript, and html. But this thing couldn't convert it.
Enough with the bickering. Here's what this not even close to ready for prime time tool will give you...
Flash Site
http://www.stagingdirections.com
(ONE 550k flash file)
Wallby conversion...
http://www.stagingdirections.com/html5
(188 files amounting to 10 MB!)
I realize wallaby isn't even an alpha, but 20 times the file size? 188 files? That's what HTML 5 wants to bring to the table?
Anyway, that file is a good example of what clean simple flash can do. And it is basically a site that should be able to be done with existing CSS, javascript, and html. But this thing couldn't convert it.
Haha, this is a potential brown nose moment for Apple.
Here is what can happen:
1.) Adobe comes out with a decent Flash to JS/HTML converter - it's semi optimized but works well enough. Crazy battery consumption on mobile devices when running on JS/HTML ads.
2.) Adobe continuously improve its Flash runtime (and it has been since it merged with Macromedia, ver 9 saw As3, ver 10 with hardware acceleration) so it's always faster when doing the same operations compare to JS/HTML.
3.) Ignorant users realize that it's not Flash that's killing their battery life, it's the ads. Flash then gains street creds for having faster and optimized run time.
This is assuming, of course, there are no other good authoring tools that may come along.
Here is what can happen:
1.) Adobe comes out with a decent Flash to JS/HTML converter - it's semi optimized but works well enough. Crazy battery consumption on mobile devices when running on JS/HTML ads.
2.) Adobe continuously improve its Flash runtime (and it has been since it merged with Macromedia, ver 9 saw As3, ver 10 with hardware acceleration) so it's always faster when doing the same operations compare to JS/HTML.
3.) Ignorant users realize that it's not Flash that's killing their battery life, it's the ads. Flash then gains street creds for having faster and optimized run time.
This is assuming, of course, there are no other good authoring tools that may come along.
That may be true, however a quality Flash player has not always been available to every platform. Adobe appears to be working extraordinarily hard to address this issue right now as the mobile web is exploding. But they have a poor record for maintaining quality long term support for less dominant platforms.
Conforming to HTML5 standards were possible reduces the impact on these platforms and for user who do not have/want Flash installed.
If advanced features were limited to were they are truly needed (Games/DRM/Video Conferencing/etc.) far more content would be available to every user.
Examples include the ipad and a small volume competitor to the ipad called the xoom.
But this is not a HTML5 Designer Tool - this is a flash->HTML5 ... makes we wonder who good the generated HTML5 will be (given the 'efficient' programming of Adobe and also following the 'garbage in, garbage out' rule).
But hey, I wait and see - maybe they did a good job in generating fantastic efficient HTML5 and see it as a way to make the transition easier.
Uh, please explain how Flash (the player) and Flash (the file format) and Flash (the authorizing tool) doesn't constitute a suite.
The same way a copy of Dreamweaver, a resulting html file, and a web browser aren't a suite of tech.
The same way a copy of Final Cut, a quicktime movie, and the quicktime player aren't a suite of tech.
Or if they are, then I guess MS word and a .doc are just one item away from a suite of tech.
HTML 5 would be more of a suite of tech. Javascript, CSS, png, jpeg, etc. All those different tech come together to produce the web page. One tool, one tech, and one viewer doesn't describe a suite of tech to me. It's the exact tech you would expect. Gotta create it. Gotta have a file, and gotta play it.