Adobe Flash Media Server 4.5 Brings Flash Video Streaming to iOS Devices

[goosnarrggh]

It can do what Flash can do on an iPad. Sounds good to me.

HTML5 by itself cannot yet do everything that Flash has been able to do. It's getting closer, but a lot of the extra functionality, such as the WebSockets API, is still undergoing extensive revision on the W3C's drafting table, and support among most web browsers is still very fractured with some browsers (Firefox, Chrome) supporting the bleeding edge and turning off all support for older versions, and other browsers (IE, Safari) supporting only the older versions which are incompatible with the newer revisions and known to contain security oversights.

If HTML5 on the iPad is capable of replacing 100% of everything that Flash would otherwise have been able to do, then the iPad must have some proprietary extensions to HTML5 which make HTML5 good enough to be a Flash replacement. And if that is the case (if HTML5 has different capabilities on the iPad than on other platforms) then we've just thrust ourselves back into another case of a fractured web landscape, just as bad as Flash has proven to be.

This would be a fundamental roadblock to true universal web accessibility, which defeats the whole point of HTML5 standardization in the first place. For HTML5 to be a worthy Flash replacement, it must be capable of delivering the same experience on every platform.

 

[John.B]

It makes me laugh so much when I see people rubbish flash as they say it's only for advertising and will be glad when it's dead.

Well at least you now either can't see it, or can switch it off.

So, what do you think is going to possibly happen in a little if/when Flash is not around? No more advertising?

Nope, sorry, you going to get swamped in HTML5 adverts instead

Adblock Plus. With the Element Hiding Helper.

Why not send WebM/HTML5 video to every browser that can support it, with Flash being the fallback ?

Because WebM is a Google proprietary technology. Nobody but the Google fanbois (there's that word again!) and the FOSS microcosm cares about WebM.

 

[KnightWRX]

Because WebM is a Google proprietary technology. Nobody but the FOSS microcosm cares about WebM.

WebM is not proprietary at all. You need to look up the definition of the word. Also, H.264 is a MPEG-LA proprietary technology. And frankly, seeing how Chrome and Firefox only support WebM and are pretty much closing unto a majority share of the market, I don't see how you can say only the FOSS microcosm cares.

BTW, reported the insult, deleted it from the quote.

 

[John.B]

WebM is not proprietary at all. You need to look up the definition of the word. Also, H.264 is a MPEG-LA proprietary technology. And frankly, seeing how Chrome and Firefox only support WebM and are pretty much closing unto a majority share of the market, I don't see how you can say only the FOSS microcosm cares.

The best part is that MPEG-LA holds patents that WebM violates. But it's not the first time Google has gone all "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" over someone else's IP. I'm sure it won't be the last.

BTW, reported the insult, deleted it from the quote.

It wasn't an insult, it wasn't aimed at a person, it describes a group of self-selecting people. The fact is that the only people who care about WebM are the Google fanbois. It's not important to anyone else.

 

[KnightWRX]

The best part is that MPEG-LA holds patents that WebM violates. But it's not the first time Google has gone all "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" over someone else's IP. I'm sure it won't be the last.

Still at the state of "MPEG-LA" FUD : http://www.h-online.com/open/news/i...ties-have-essential-WebM-patents-1288232.html

As of yet, no one has actually come forth with patent violations.

And the MPEG-LA holds no patent per se. They only act as a clearing house to pay actual patent holders. They claim to have 12 companies now holding patents that VP8 violates, yet we have had no names or patents mentionned yet.

It wasn't an insult, it wasn't aimed at a person, it describes a group of self-selecting people. The fact is that the only people who care about WebM are the Google fanbois. It's not important to anyone else.

It's important to me and I'm not a google fanboi as you put thus disproving your statement.

Unless you mean to call me a Google fanboi, which would then be a breach of rules.

 

[JAT]

HTML5 by itself cannot yet do everything that Flash has been able to do. It's getting closer, but a lot of the extra functionality, such as the WebSockets API, is still undergoing extensive revision on the W3C's drafting table, and support among most web browsers is still very fractured with some browsers (Firefox, Chrome) supporting the bleeding edge and turning off all support for older versions, and other browsers (IE, Safari) supporting only the older versions which are incompatible with the newer revisions and known to contain security oversights.

If HTML5 on the iPad is capable of replacing 100% of everything that Flash would otherwise have been able to do, then the iPad must have some proprietary extensions to HTML5 which make HTML5 good enough to be a Flash replacement. And if that is the case (if HTML5 has different capabilities on the iPad than on other platforms) then we've just thrust ourselves back into another case of a fractured web landscape, just as bad as Flash has proven to be.

This would be a fundamental roadblock to true universal web accessibility, which defeats the whole point of HTML5 standardization in the first place. For HTML5 to be a worthy Flash replacement, it must be capable of delivering the same experience on every platform.

Well, your last comment is not the point. The point is that Flash on an iPad (assuming you've JBed and use Flash on an iPad) does not deliver the same experience as it does on a computer. And I'm NOT talking about battery life. Pretty harsh to say html5 on a tablet should match up to Flash on a computer when Flash doesn't.

Sounds like you are speaking more from a creation/programming side of this. Anything html5 can't match on the user side?

 

[foiden]

On the user side, the main thing would be in games (compatible with touch) and/or interactive applications with sound. Seems the one thing missing from HTML5, is the ability to store and trigger sound from the browser. You currently need flash to do so.

 

[elppa]

Why not send WebM/HTML5 video to every browser that can support it, with Flash being the fallback ?

Erm. Because H.264 is more efficient (less bits/better quality)?

H.264 is a win-win over WebM. The only reason you would use WebM is politics.

 

[John.B]

Still at the state of "MPEG-LA" FUD : http://www.h-online.com/open/news/i...ties-have-essential-WebM-patents-1288232.html

As of yet, no one has actually come forth with patent violations.

And the MPEG-LA holds no patent per se. They only act as a clearing house to pay actual patent holders. They claim to have 12 companies now holding patents that VP8 violates, yet we have had no names or patents mentionned yet.

MPEG-LA manages a patent pool for the entire suite of H.264 patents for a mere pittance. They are managing that pool to maximize royalties re: WebM; tipping their hand too early might work against that. Remember that the limits they've voluntarily set for H.264 royalties (to garner wide adoption) don't apply to WebM.

Note: I'm only saying that's how the patent game is played, not that I agree with it.

It's important to me and I'm not a google fanboi as you put thus disproving your statement.

Unless you mean to call me a Google fanboi, which would then be a breach of rules.

Did you read what I wrote? Or what you wanted to hear?

FWIW, there isn't a hardware accelerated video chipset in the the world that handles WebM natively; it's not only less efficient in general, it requires additional software overhead. Yet all of the chipsets handle H.264 natively (and efficiently).

Like elppa said, the only reason to pick WebM over H.264 would be political: if you absolutely, positively refused to pay anyone for their intellectual property. Who does that leave? The FOSS diaspora, Google, and the Google fanbois. Everyone else knows there is no payback in fighting Larry Page's private fights for him.

 

[FloatingBones]

Well, have a hard time believing it, the patches are nothing extraordinary. They simply turn down the verbosity level on the logging going on behind the scenes, which is set to something like debug in some instances on the shipping WebOS 3.0.2 and the iptables DROP rules all being logged.

Turning it down to Error fixes much of the sluggishness and a few Homebrew patches on Preware actually do that for you (or you can do it yourself with novaterm and some command line hacking using the SDK/PDK).

I have read your messages and thought about them. Your story sounds credible.

What I'm having trouble with is that the major tech blogs haven't broken this story. From how I understand what you've said, by keeping the debug code in place, HP essentially managed to destroy the customer response to this product. That should be one of the biggest stories of the last several years in all of tech. It is unbelievable that a mature product-oriented tech company would have such a gargantuan problem with their rollout of a product. Metaphorically speaking, they steered the ship straight into the iceberg.

Am I understanding what you are saying correctly? Can you point to any reporting in the tech websites or newspapers that have competently covered this story?

 

[coolspot18]

No if only Flash IDE will output native HTML 5 code.

 

[milani]

I bet the Android boys still have plenty of other advantages to their native Flash support, like you know, actually being able to play around on newgrounds or something.

What is that?

 

[John.B]

What is that?

The original Flash portal website and haven for Apple haters everywhere. It's often held out as an example of all that iOS users are being deprived of, usually by people who don't understand that there are a more quality iOS-based games than one person could ever play.

It is a great way to test the fans on your MacBook, though.

 

[KnightWRX]

Like elppa said, the only reason to pick WebM over H.264 would be political: if you absolutely, positively refused to pay anyone for their intellectual property. Who does that leave? The FOSS diaspora

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means :

di·as·po·raNoun/dīˈaspərə/
1. Jews living outside Israel.
2. The dispersion of any people from their original homeland.

Are you calling FOSS supporters/users/developers Jews ? That again would be an insult and a breach of rules... because I'm pretty sure FOSS people weren't "dispersed" from their "homeland".

I am part of the Free Software/Open Source movement community indeed. That is my reason for using WebM. The open Web should not be locked down to people who have money to pay to access the content, it should be open to anyone. Google (I am no fan of any corporation, they all work for one motive : profit). Is WebM political ? Sure, but then again, the open source community has had to play the political game against Microsoft and other big players before to promote interoperability.

WebM is interoperability. H.264 is closing the content to only those approved players that have the funds to do so.

It's pretty ironic that some people who bash one proprietary standard for being under the control of Adobe and then not do so for another, h.264, for being under the control of a patent pool.

What is that?

http://newgrounds.com

A Flash portal site with fan made content (animations, games). Some are pretty funny and creative, there's a few animation series that are composed of shorts that are pretty good.

The original Flash portal website and haven for Apple haters everywhere.

What does liking newgrounds' content and "hating" Apple have to do with each other exactly ?

Am I understanding what you are saying correctly? Can you point to any reporting in the tech websites or newspapers that have competently covered this story?

There is no reporting aside from maybe a post on precentral. All of this you learn by browsing around webOS forums and talking with individuals in the webOS community.

 

[iTunes-Luv]

I strongly believe that Flash Media Server is not only for streaming media, maybe for now but also providing backend for buidling awesome multi-user games or collaborative applications in the future to devices that do not support Flash

Flash Media Server 4.5 will only help Adobe make new customers. Existing customers are not going to move away - infact their lives just got a little easier.

And for the people that complains Flash will eat your battery or crash your device, the more choice the better. Consumers will determine which technology good or bad, promising or dying. should not do that job