Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I remember it very differently - P.T. Barnum wanted everyone on HTML 5 because you couldn't turn the ads off - which was kinda important for iAd (Remember that PoS?)

Well then your memory has lapsed because Apple's non-support of Flash in iDevices well predates iAds. Also regardless of Job's motives he was the only tech leader speaking out and doing something about getting rid of Flash. But let's not use either of our memories here since we can go back to Steve Jobs:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Michaelgtrusa
You can verify you don't have flash here (I had to. Nope. Gone.)

I had to install it a little bit back to use my damn credit card's "get a one time use" number so it could animate the stupid card numbers shuffling. How lame! And then, the number was rejected or declined anyway!

Please, everyone, stop using flash so we can move on with our lives!
 
And that is truely sad. Better technology has been available for quite some time now.

The solution is to "vote with your wallet". That is to say, if the site uses flash then don't visit it. If enough people follow suite the problem takes care of itself. When I'm not at work my iPhone and iPad are my primary computing devices so if a site requires Flash I won't be using it.
 
The solution is to "vote with your wallet". That is to say, if the site uses flash then don't visit it. If enough people follow suite the problem takes care of itself. When I'm not at work my iPhone and iPad are my primary computing devices so if a site requires Flash I won't be using it.

That's a great sentiment, but anime fans who want to support the industry really have no choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demo Kit
The solution is to "vote with your wallet". That is to say, if the site uses flash then don't visit it. If enough people follow suite the problem takes care of itself. When I'm not at work my iPhone and iPad are my primary computing devices so if a site requires Flash I won't be using it.
Doesn't quite work when the things that you need to use for your bank or something related to your work or something else along those lines use Flash in some way.
 
The solution is to "vote with your wallet". That is to say, if the site uses flash then don't visit it. If enough people follow suite the problem takes care of itself. When I'm not at work my iPhone and iPad are my primary computing devices so if a site requires Flash I won't be using it.
That's also an invalid argument if you are required to use a particular site for business reasons or if in your life you have chosen a specific company for reasons that are more important than whether or not their site uses Flash technology.

Not everyone on the planet has the luxury of kicking Flash all the way to the curb. I have Chrome on my Mac for those rare instances where a site I need to use requires Flash for full functionality.

However, the more instances of critical Flash vulnerabilities and the more people complain to website operators, each is a tiny step closer to Flash's ultimate and eagerly anticipated demise. Flash's demise would be a step in the right direction in improving the safety of the Internet for all users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: steve333
No doubt Google saves everything, but if you turn off all of its phone-home features, is there any evidence Chrome still phones-home?

Yes. There are many aspects to Chrome that rely on Google’s servers. If you want to get rid of those, then you have to use a crippledmodified version of Chromium that strips out these components. Off-the-shelf Chrome and Chromium are not enough. Even with programs such as Little Snitch, it is practically impossible to block google.com, because it is so ubiquitously included in so many websites.

As I said above, the only reason why you would install Chrome just for Flash is because of the silent, automatic background updater baked into Chrome. The Adobe updater will remind you of updates. Other than that there is no difference. Safari and Chrome will run Flash in a sandbox and they are both configured not to run it unless you have given permission. The plug-in itself always comes directly from Adobe, there is no special/modified Google version for Chrome.
 
I don't know about you, but I haven't found advanced HTML5 and JavaScript features on websites any more efficient than Flash. It's all hacky garbage that gobbles my CPU cycles and RAM.

Cancer JS does this to a lot of sites, I've seen it. I haven't really noticed anything wrong with only html5 video (except crappy playback controls that don't scrub properly).
 
  • Like
Reactions: sudo1996
Unfortunately there are still businesses who insist on using it - my current employer insists on having all their media assets for their training courses delivered through a website which uses Flash. It is amazing how much Microsoft has jumped into embracing web standards and I hope that Apple get their act together and start supporting HEVC, VP9, VP8, Opus and AV1 along with other standards such as WebRTC and more because right now Safari is looking a lot like Internet Explorer based on how far behind when it comes to embracing new web standards.
I don't get it. What's wrong with H.264, which Apple has supported for several years? Why did they decide to push so many new video codecs? I thought this stuff was already done.
 
I don't get it. What's wrong with H.264, which Apple has supported for several years? Why did they decide to push so many new video codecs? I thought this stuff was already done.

Because H264 has been the defacto standard where as AV1 and Opus are going to eventually become part of the W3C standard due to them being open and royalty free. Regarding VP8 and VP9 - I guess one could discard vp8 and vp9 since Google's long term aim is to replace VP9 for 4K on YouTube with AV1 once it is ready so at the very least if Apple are going to launch a 4K compliant AppleTV and want customers to be able to access 4K content from YouTube then they'll need to start supporting VP9 for Video and Opus for the audio. At the other end you have HEVC which is the format for 4K which makes it more efficient providers such as Netflix so eventually they'll have to support it too - something that Microsoft did over a year ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sudo1996
Because H264 has been the defacto standard where as AV1 and Opus are going to eventually become part of the W3C standard due to them being open and royalty free. Regarding VP8 and VP9 - I guess one could discard vp8 and vp9 since Google's long term aim is to replace VP9 for 4K on YouTube with AV1 once it is ready so at the very least if Apple are going to launch a 4K compliant AppleTV and want customers to be able to access 4K content from YouTube then they'll need to start supporting VP9 for Video and Opus for the audio. At the other end you have HEVC which is the format for 4K which makes it more efficient providers such as Netflix so eventually they'll have to support it too - something that Microsoft did over a year ago.
Oh wow, I always assumed H.264 was an open standard since it's so widely used. Looked it up, and yep, commercial users must pay royalties.
 
The only think I'll add is this: if you ever come across a web page that demands Flash to play a video, open Safari's Develop menu, select User Agent submenu and tell it to pretend it's an iPad. Reload the page and a lot of the time, the menu will play. Even the sites that require Flash often don't really require it, if you ask properly. (Develop menu only appears as a preference setting, for those who don't know. Preferences > "Advanced" tab, and look at the bottom. There's a checkbox for it).
 
Ok, finished reading all comments thus far.

Conclusion: most members in forum hates flash.

One thing to note is: there are still tons of people having no idea about the vulnerability of flash or even OS. They just install flash when they are asked to do so.

Also, I have heard that Chinese sites don't actively support new standards. HTML5 is not really a thing over there. Completely phasing out Flash could easily take decades from now. If your world is flash free, congratulations. Otherwise, keep your plugin updated.
 
It seems like every other week there is a "critical security update" for flash player. I don't think Adobe is even trying to put out something good...

At least it shows they are addressing the problems as they become known. Apple has been known to sit on known exploits and bugs for MONTHS at a time with no fix. Which do you prefer, a company that fixes the exploits as soon they're discovered or one that ignores them until it's convenient to pull a programmer from the iPhone to address it since even with over 100 BILLION in cash, Apple can't seem to hire enough programmers to meet their needs (or they just don't' give a flying frack about the Mac anymore, which seems FAR MORE LIKELY based on their utter lack of updates to the Mac Pro, Mac Mini, etc. and the wholesale purposed destruction of everything from Xserve to Airport to Aperture.

Those companies who still refuse to abandon Flash should be boycotted, maybe then they get the message.

People on here act like there are no exploits anywhere else except Flash. HTML5 has had its own 'exploits' (like forcing ads on you that adblock can't stop and forcing videos to auto-play which then the programmers of browsers have to write more code to stop until they get more creative. ANY language that can do anything other than just print your name is going to be used by someone to get what they want and if you don't like it, it could be called malicious. Flash gets picked on and yet owning an Android phone is 10x more likely to steal your ID or data than using Flash (let alone Flash on OS X where most exploits from Flash like starting trojans won't work anyway since most trojans can't run on OS X to begin with).

The point is that if you get rid of Flash, it will be replaced with something else that is then exploited instead. Thieves don't just stop thieving because you change your door locks once in awhile. They will find another way into your home. You might as well tell people to stop using Windows and Android if they don't want to risk malware as tell them to ditch Flash as it represents only 8% of the attacks on that platform. But no, the Apple flavored Kool-Aid Brigade finds it fashionable to demonize Flash because well, Steve Jobs didn't like it! :rolleyes:
 
At least it shows they are addressing the problems as they become known. Apple has been known to sit on known exploits and bugs for MONTHS at a time with no fix. Which do you prefer, a company that fixes the exploits as soon they're discovered or one that ignores them until it's convenient to pull a programmer from the iPhone to address it since even with over 100 BILLION in cash, Apple can't seem to hire enough programmers to meet their needs (or they just don't' give a flying frack about the Mac anymore, which seems FAR MORE LIKELY based on their utter lack of updates to the Mac Pro, Mac Mini, etc. and the wholesale purposed destruction of everything from Xserve to Airport to Aperture.



People on here act like there are no exploits anywhere else except Flash. HTML5 has had its own 'exploits' (like forcing ads on you that adblock can't stop and forcing videos to auto-play which then the programmers of browsers have to write more code to stop until they get more creative. ANY language that can do anything other than just print your name is going to be used by someone to get what they want and if you don't like it, it could be called malicious. Flash gets picked on and yet owning an Android phone is 10x more likely to steal your ID or data than using Flash (let alone Flash on OS X where most exploits from Flash like starting trojans won't work anyway since most trojans can't run on OS X to begin with).

The point is that if you get rid of Flash, it will be replaced with something else that is then exploited instead. Thieves don't just stop thieving because you change your door locks once in awhile. They will find another way into your home. You might as well tell people to stop using Windows and Android if they don't want to risk malware as tell them to ditch Flash as it represents only 8% of the attacks on that platform. But no, the Apple flavored Kool-Aid Brigade finds it fashionable to demonize Flash because well, Steve Jobs didn't like it! :rolleyes:

Its taxing on the performance of the browser, the performance of the computer, it has overstayed its welcome. Its not just about security. Its also not a standard, like HTML or JPEG. Its Proprietary and it can be NOT supported on the software/computer you use.
 
Its taxing on the performance of the browser, the performance of the computer, it has overstayed its welcome. Its not just about security. Its also not a standard, like HTML or JPEG. Its Proprietary and it can be NOT supported on the software/computer you use.

I don't like Flash much, but these are weak arguments. What's a standard? Some group of know-it-alls proclaims they're the "standard" ??? Flash came out in the 1990s. HTML5 wasn't even dreamed of back then. By sheer population numbers, I'd say Flash was pretty much the "standard" for well over a decade. Saying you don't like one company having complete control over Net content is a lot like saying it's OK for Apple to decide what's allowed on your Mac computer (see thread on Sierra security certificates causing programs to fail). IMO, it should always be the choice of the consumer. If Flash dies because people stop using it, so be it. It should not die because some group decides they don't like it because they aren't getting a piece of the pie. I can easily block Flash. I'm having a hard time blocking HTML5 garbage (e.g. ad block detection). I'm not HTML5 fan either as such. I want control of what goes on with my computer, not companies wasting my paid for capped bandwidth with their full page annoying pop-ups etc. If companies had been reasonable about such things to begin with (e.g. reasonable sized pictures only) we wouldn't have to keep escalating the programs to fight the crap they keep making (with Flash or HTML5).

I remember sites back in the late 1990s that could run fast on a 56k modem and be perfectly readable in a Lynx text browser. Are sites so much better looking today or are they just filled with bandwidth robbing garbage like video and animated ads by the dozen and hover-over pop-up messages, etc. etc. ??? Is ANY of that stuff good for the user is it all for the companies wanting to force content down your throat? In most respects, I'd take the 1990s web design over today any day of the week. I've got 50Mbps here with a quad-i7 and there are still sites that take way too long to load.
 
I took the flash player off my system (I still have adobe animate/flash as part of CC). Anything I need to view as flash content is ably handed by google chrome.
 
Really? What if someone's bank is using Flash and there's no alternative to it as far as using their bank online?

Switch banks, and tell them why.
People who mistake principles and taste for utopianism...
 
Switch banks, and tell them why.
People who mistake principles and taste for utopianism...
Sure change your banks and move your money and lose out on various perks you might have with your bank and all kinds of other reasons you like your bank just because of Flash. That totally makes a whole lot of sense.
 
I am really glad that I uninstalled Flash years ago.

Steve Jobs was correct:

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

Even so I uninstalled flash, reading the provided link made me smile

Quote:

First, there’s “Open”.

Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary.

---

Well as Apple is a company that supports "open" - looking at FaceTime (even so Steve promised to make it open it never happened), Lightning port, Metal (instead of OpenGL / Vulcan) etc etc
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.