Ever heard of WebGL? If you don't, google it! You know, that open specification from 9 months ago for GPU access implemented already in Chrome, Firefox, Safari and Opera?
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 Discontinues Development of Flash Player on Mobile Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ever heard of WebGL? If you don't, google it! You know, that open specification from 9 months ago for GPU access implemented already in Chrome, Firefox, Safari and Opera?
So then proves Flash is not dead. There are lot of Flash actionscript developers who will prefer to use Flash rather than another technology.
Last edited:
No need for that, they will just push flash content in your app store now. You next Angry Birds will be built in Flex most likely.
Good job! You beat me on that. Glad to see that, I'm not against moving forward you know!
Last edited:
Microsoft decides to pass on WebGL over security concerns
Remember when Microsoft decided to pass on SVG ? on PNG ? on MNG ?
While they don't have the clout they used to in the web standards arena, they are still a big player and this attitude towards WebGL (which I agree definately needs to be out there) could end up hurting or even killing the format.
We should have had SVG on the web a decade ago. PNGs should have replaced the patent laced GIF format ages before the LZW Unisys had expired (it still should, PNG/MNG are much superior formats).
Edit : Oh and :
Getting a WebGL Implementation
... On mobile Flash?
Or not. Who knows. Certainly the rest of browsers are betting on it. Add to that the fact that for the first time in years IE has dropped below 50% on web browsing statistics, and we find that a significant percentage of browsers out there already support WebGL.
Further, adding the EOL'ing of mobile Flash, that support is going to get some spotlight.
... On mobile Flash?
Or not. Who knows. Certainly the rest of browsers are betting on it. Add to that the fact that for the first time in years IE has dropped below 50% on web browsing statistics, and we find that a significant percentage of browsers out there already support WebGL.
Further, adding the EOL'ing of mobile Flash, that support is going to get some spotlight.
The difference is IE represents still close to 50% of web traffic. Mobile devices are barely registering right now, hovering around 1-2%.
WebGL is threatened of being redundant. Did Apple finally get around to shipping it in Lion ? Or do you still require nightly builds and Terminal-fu to enable it ?
The difference is IE represents still close to 50% of web traffic. Mobile devices are barely registering right now, hovering around 1-2%.
More like 5.5% according to Ars Technica and NetMarketShare. (uh, with a peak of 6.37% a couple of months ago!)
Maybe it is growing so fast that you didn't even realize?
Redundant... to what?
Does it even matter if Apple shipped it? I currently only use Firefox and Chrome, and both support it.
(and given that Windows is still in the majority of desktops, I'd say Firefox and Chrome are much more significant extending WebGL than what Apple ships in Lion... don't you think?)
You know, don't get too attach to WebGL, just in case
Why? Support is growing, so I don't think it will be EOL'd any time soon! ;D
(in fact, being an open specification, it can't be EOL'd...
)Get practicing the angle, as it unquestionably won't.
They might provide HTML5 based content to closed platforms that can't run stream rippers, but open computing platforms? No. They'll just move off the web entirely, to proprietry apps for each platform.
Of course, that means minority platforms will not be considered worth the development time, so we can look forward to OSX not getting many of those and it being a lower priority years behind.
Oh joy. What a great victory for openness online that is.
Phazer
This is exactly why I expect Flash to stick around for a while.
It allows companies like Hulu, YouTube or the BBC to target a wide range of platforms without having to do any of the work themselves.
Flash Player certainly isn't available on every platform, but it's on a lot more than a website-specific plugin or App can be.
If you take the BBC for example, they use Flash to provide streaming programmes on all platforms that support it. On iOS, they use HTML5 Video, but they aren't able to show certain content (particularly US shows) because it's too easy to rip.
As you say, some other content providers get around this on iOS by having an App to access the service.
Last edited:
After all, that's how things are now; those flash players were just another kind of propietary apps.
Flash in the desktop is unaffected, theoretically at least. And if a player was made in Flash, surely it can be converted into an AIR app. So, what's the problem?
I think you are mixing subjects here.
I think there are two problems with WebGL right now:
1) It's not in every browser and every browser implements it to different extents. As already noted, Microsoft isn't planning on putting it in at all. Without Internet Explorer, standards don't get anywhere.
2) Browsers tend to set high requirements for using it - in terms of GPU, driver versions etc. If your computer doesn't support it, then the site wont work at all because no browser currently has a software fallback option - Flash does.
The software fallback option is being explored by some of the browser developers.
Try out the new Google Maps WebGL option:
http://maps.google.com/mapsgl (there should be a link in the bottom right).
Even if your browser, GPU and Operating System support WebGL, it still might not work because Google thinks you'll get bad performance or there are known issues with your configuration. You just don't get issues like that with Flash.
Developers aren't really able to see WebGL as a viable option until there is a good software fallback option and it's available in more browsers.
Last edited:
But some still do and some did for a long time...
...At first, we were doing HTML with non-WYSIWYG text editors, then came the FONT tag, then WYSIWYG editors, then CSS, then Flash with CSS and WYSIWYG editors, then we dropped Flash, then came 2004, then...
So that means mobile Flash will be a fragmented mess with various implementations for WebOS, BlackBerries, and all flavors of Android? LOL!
Not just iOS, but also Windows phones. The death knell was when it was announced that the (vaporware) Microsoft Tablets running Win8 on ARM wouldn't run Flash. Adobe could fight Apple with their last dying breath. But Microsoft jumping off the bus was when the reality hit home.
For the record, I'm pretty sure it was Adobe who laid of 750 people and killed mobile Flash. If you're looking for a scapegoat, it's this guy: Shantanu Narayen
As if mobile browsing (or browsing in general) wasn't already fragmented, what a difference...
You have no clue, do you?
Flash itself (not the player) is standardized. As long as an implementation of the standard adheres to the standard, it can be made for whatever OS you want.
That's not what "fragmentation" is refering to at all.
You have no clue, do you?
Flash itself (not the player) is standardized. As long as an implementation of the standard adheres to the standard, it can be made for whatever OS you want.
That's not what "fragmentation" is refering to at all.
Flash is not a standard. I think you are referring to the idea that most of the specification is published.
You have no clue, do you?
Flash itself (not the player) is standardized. As long as an implementation of the standard adheres to the standard, it can be made for whatever OS you want.
That's not what "fragmentation" is refering to at all.
Yeah, that's why we have a grand total of... 1 implementation.
If you don't have a testing and certification program, you are reduced to being even bug-compatible with the original Flash (or those cases where the implementation doesn't follow correctly the spec). You can go see the problems faced by the guys trying to fix the nasty security problems in Flash.
And anyway, if there was a real standard, Adobe wouldn't have source code licensees.
Nice to see who talks about clues.
(and yes, that will/would be fragmentation. The RIM guys have announced they'll keep developing their Flash. Will tha be Flash 11.1? 11.1 "RIM release"?Would that be released on sync with Adobe releases? Only bugfixes?minor versions, major? It's not only fragmentation, it's a nightmare. )
Last edited:
Adobe product manager fingers Apple for death of Flash Player for mobile
I find this funny..
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/11/adobe-product-manager-fingers-apple-for-death-of-flash-player-fo/
I find this funny..
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/11/adobe-product-manager-fingers-apple-for-death-of-flash-player-fo/
This is ONLY for mobile devices right ? not across the board? aka laptop/desktops
If so, what may start out killing on the mobile platform, may in fact escalape up to being global.
Just image a world without Flash.
FYI: didn't Adobe say Blackberry & Android will be getting security & bug fixes, for now, but they will soon cease?