Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
To be fair, there are still some web developers who still use, and will continue to use, flash for main web content. They are what I like to call "new old school," in that they are past the point in their career of really learning anything new. So they will retire after designing one of the last flash websites, and I will get to come in behind them and rewrite the thing in HTML5 (for a good fee).
Not sure this is a very realistic scenario. Web design, as a career, isn't exactly old enough that there is a large demographic of people who are on their way out to retirement and, as such, have simply stopped evolving their understanding. What we do have are web designers who didn't quite get the memo that they have a career which is constantly evolving, and that if they wish to remain competitive they need to keep learning. They're on the way out because they won't compete.

Flash is still very important for certain websites. Very nice for, say, a car website—or a movie website. Due to the lack of a proper development environment and backward support it is prohibitavely expensive in many cases to do something like, say, a game in 'HTML5' (which is so the wrong name for this, but people use it anyway). It can be useful for some select scenarios in video, but that's on the way out. Alternative open standards are on their way to replace many of these things, though.

A designer/developer who is using Flash in other cases is just a crappy designer/developer. That's really all there is to it.
 
"Now with slightly less security holes!" :rolleyes:

Or rather, "fewer security holes!" No forum post is complete without a grammar stickler. :p

In all seriousness, though, I do hope that their 64-bit effort will unearth some security oversights, although it has the potential to cause a few more...
 
You know people, flash isn't dead, I know some of you wish it was, but its not.

However, it finally has a decent piece of competition, and like Adobe is going to let HTML5 just win the fight.

I think Flash may turn into a decent piece of software in 2-3 years. If the HTML5 support kicks up.
 
I believe that Safari is being extended further in WebKit to better use this technique. At least with the nightlies I've noticed crashes that affected only one open window.

While the prevention of crashes is one important element we also can't dismiss the potential for better performance on multi core systems. In the end the use of separate processes should lead to a better overall user experience.

Yes that is the case. Just realize that the use of separate processes is new to Safari and under development in Webkit. A few months ago there was a news release describing where Apple was going with web kit development. Frankly I've forgotten the details, but Webkit development is fairly open so you can look for yourself.

I'm not sure what is stopping 64 bit FireFox. Lately it seems as if FireFox has lost focus.

Generally on a Mac you want all of your apps to be 64 bit to save on memory. Loading 32 bit apps while running an otherwise 64 bit system causes the loading of 32 bit versions of many libraries into memory. Of course having a backup browser is very important so I keep Firefox installed, but seldom use it.

Oh one last thing I use Click to Flash, a fantastic solution to crap Flash advertising.

the latest version of the firefox 4 beta supports windows 2000. it's ridiculous to support such an old OS. this is the reason why firefox is so slow
 
AFT. This is why HTML5 is a much better solution. Why should the world have to wait on Adobe for all things multimedia on the WWW? And they haven't got the Reader plugin 64 bit for Mac OS X yet either.
 
AFT. This is why HTML5 is a much better solution. Why should the world have to wait on Adobe for all things multimedia on the WWW? And they haven't got the Reader plugin 64 bit for Mac OS X yet either.



the apple PR goons are back
 
Yeah !
Now, Safari will crash much faster than before thanks to 64-bits ! :D
Oh no, wait, I'm on a core duo; 'can't install it. I guess, I'll keep crashing Safari slowly like before. :D:D

I'm not using flash since ClicToFlash arrived, but if it does help, that's a good thing. But, will it make any difference ? I mean, 99.99% of all Flash will be made with version previous to 64-bits one, so it shouldn't benefit it, right ? I don't think that's going to change fast...
 
Since converting to Mac, I've enjoyed a lot of the benefits of the platform but even after this I gotta say watching flash video and similar content on my Mac still REALLY sucks. It turns an otherwise solid quiet machine into a blowy, fan-monstering block of overheated aluminum that is unpleasant to be around.
 
Installed it & watched "The Mysterious Ticking Noise" on Youtube. Got mid to upper 30s in Activity Monitor for CPU usage.

"I found the source of the ticking! It's a pipe bomb programmed in Flash!"
 
Not just flash, remove java.
And python, php, etc. and don't allow for Ruby. All those are buggy and slow... and non standard.

Apple should only be the latest version of Objective C!

Eheem.... (x)html with php or aspx (.net) IS the most common programming languages for the web. So php is non-standard and yet the most common on the web? What's so buggy with PHP, python, Ruby On Rails etc..? :)
 
Crash right away

Watching YouTube videos.... the 10.2 player crashed on the second video I tried to watch. I fully expect bugs in beta software, but I didn't expect it to crash so soon into the trial run... hope this isn't going to be frequent, or bye-bye 10.2.
 
Eheem.... (x)html with php or aspx (.net) IS the most common programming languages for the web. So php is non-standard and yet the most common on the web? What's so buggy with PHP, python, Ruby On Rails etc..? :)

Just ignore the poster you responded to. He doesn't know what he's talking about.
 
I know this has been an issue for Linux people who run all 64-bit systems, but what's the deal with 64-bit plugins on the Mac? Does Safari run in 64-bit and spawn another process for plug-ins, regardless of 'bittyness', or does it mean something else? Are there any OS X ninjas out there care to enlighten us?

Pre-post edit: it occurred to me before I hit Submit that I could test this myself using Activity Monitor. Safari on my late 2007 MBP with 10.6 runs as a 64 bit process. If I go YouTube, Flash is spawned as a new, separate 32-bit process.

Does the 32-bit Flash work if you make the kernel run in 64-bit, or was this a blocker in the move to full 64-bit? I always wondered why Apple made the hybrid kernel the default. I also notice that Firefox is 32-bit. I'm surprised that isn't 64-bit -- interestingly, when I load Flash in Firefox it doesn't spawn an external process for Flash, it hosts it in the Firefox process. Maybe the 64-bit Flash will pave the way for 64-bit Firefox?

As I understand it, this is just a special-case for Flash. Apple had to do something, because at one point the Flash plug-in was responsible for over half of all Safari crashes. They specifically spawn it in a separate process so that when it inevitably crashes, it doesn't drag the whole browser down with it.

As for Firefox, I'm guessing that since the Windows version of the Flash plug-in is much more stable it hasn't become quite the same priority to keep it from killing the browser.
 
64 bit Flash ads. Hooray!

Ads integrated into the OS of my iPod/iPhone! Hooray!


TeamMojo said:
AFT. This is why HTML5 is a much better solution. Why should the world have to wait on Adobe for all things multimedia on the WWW?

The world still has to wait on browser developers, and some of them have their own agenda for video on the web and how they can make money off of it. But let's ignore that.
 
Ads integrated into the OS of my iPod/iPhone! Hooray!




The world still has to wait on browser developers, and some of them have their own agenda for video on the web and how they can make money off of it. But let's ignore that.

or the fact that html 5 isn't even a solution yet. Its not even close to being mature.
 
The world still has to wait on browser developers, and some of them have their own agenda for video on the web and how they can make money off of it. But let's ignore that.
Video is complicated. Audio is fairly complicated too. But neither is so complicated that it can't be done in HTML5 on big websites (or even small websites with a little bit of extra effort). HTML5 provides a flexible solution to navigate this mess, but as you say, we've got some time to wait before older browsers are sufficiently phased out. Currently the forward-thinking approach involves newer standards for video with Flash fallbacks for older devices. It is workable.

In any case, all the browser makers seem to be onboard with HTML5 (and associated standards and capabilities—all those things people are usually referring to when they say 'HTML5'). Even Microsoft seems to be working a little harder each release to catch up with Internet Explorer.
 
I don't know why people are so negative about Flash, I haven't had any problems with it so far... I have seen more buggy HTML sites and crash Java applets than Flash applets. So down with HTML! HTML sucks.
 
Adobe is an authoring company not a technology one! They should stick with that and make better authoring tools. Leave the technological aspects to Apple, MS, Oracle etc.


:confused:
Well currently their so called motion design authoring software is update is killing us here :p After Effects CS5 is buggy as the fruit flies at my house :(
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.