And people say Flash is dying...

[bpaluzzi]

Amusing that answer. Self centered and completely egoistical.. and quite flawed. Which makes it amusing.

1. It uses flash, not silverlight. Installed base of Flash is "substantial".
2. Whine all you want about IE (I assume you mean IE6^^), visiting a site which is scripted for IE6 still works under Mozilla, Safari or Safari, if not completely well aligned.

If you think that the only difference between IE6 and a modern browser is "alignment", or if you think that the IE issues are fixed in IE7 or IE8, then you've not done any serious web development.


If your site doesn't work _at all_ on a browser without Flash, it's because your web developer is awful at his job. Period. There is no excuse for creating a site that doesn't display SOMETHING meaningful in all browsers. If it's a RIA that really needs flash to function (a game, an application with unique user interface, an application that requires camera, etc.), there should still be text explaining that to the user.

If it's anything else (navigation/page elements, video, etc.), if the person developing the site knows what they're doing, there are work arounds.

If your developer doesn't have the ability, or if you don't have the budget for such progressive enhancement, then that's not Apple's fault.

 

[Funkymonk]

Yeah it sucks. I'd love to get an ipad but one of the main reasons I would get one is for lounging around and surfing the web. It's too bad most off my favorite sites use flash so I won't be getting an ipad anytime soon

Damn you apple!

 

[MrWillie]

Yeah it sucks. I'd love to get an ipad but one of the main reasons I would get one is for lounging around and surfing the web. It's too bad most off my favorite sites use flash so I won't be getting an ipad anytime soon

Damn you web masters of my favorite sites!

Fixed that for you.

 

[Jcoz]

Yeah it sucks. I'd love to get an ipad but one of the main reasons I would get one is for lounging around and surfing the web. It's too bad most off my favorite sites use flash so I won't be getting an ipad anytime soon

Damn you apple!

Which sites, out of curiosity?

 

[BaldiMac]

Amusing that answer. Self centered and completely egoistical.. and quite flawed. Which makes it amusing.

1. It uses flash, not silverlight. Installed base of Flash is "substantial".
2. Whine all you want about IE (I assume you mean IE6^^), visiting a site which is scripted for IE6 still works under Mozilla, Safari or Safari, if not completely well aligned.

And you think a roadblock is more seamless "as Job visions it"? Sorry, you are the first person I feel who is drinking the Kool-Aid.

Job is in it for the dollars, he isn;t a saint who works for the betterment of our experience. He makes that money by producing great (seamless) products. But he has been wrong a few times... and in this case it feels like a business conflict repackaged as "vision".

I don't know what you are talking about. You are making all of this up at random. I haven't used Flash since before there was an iPhone. It has nothing to do with Steve Jobs or Kool-Aid. I never claimed anything about Jobs vision. I never said your Sesame Street site is in Silverlight.

Please don't invent my arguments and lump me in with all the anti-Flash rhetoric that you've ever heard. I don't use Flash. I'm fine if you want to use it. It's great for a lot of different purposes including many applications that you can't currently do with alternative technologies. The only reason I support Apple's decision is because it has encouraged web developers to support open standards instead of or in addition to Flash when possible and practical. Since I don't use Flash, that means more content for me.

I will never understand how supporting open standards over Flash has become the "self-centered and egotistical" position to so many people in this argument. Promoting competition to Flash is somehow bad. Why would a monopoly by Adobe be good?

 

[fertilized-egg]

Please don't invent my arguments and lump me in with all the anti-Flash rhetoric that you've ever heard. I don't use Flash. I'm fine if you want to use it. It's great for a lot of different purposes including many applications that you can't currently do with alternative technologies.

My favorite sequence from this thread:

Person A: Flash is important. Look at the amount of Flash-exclusive content. An example is my hometown newspaper's Flash-only site.

Me: (visits the Flash site mentioned by Person A on my Android mobile phone) I've just tried that Flash site. Its performance is horrendous.

Person B: You cannot arbitrarily pick a heavy site and try to win the argument in a back-handed way like that!

Me: What??

 

[michael.lauden]

If you think that the only difference between IE6 and a modern browser is "alignment", or if you think that the IE issues are fixed in IE7 or IE8, then you've not done any serious web development.


If your site doesn't work _at all_ on a browser without Flash, it's because your web developer is awful at his job. Period. There is no excuse for creating a site that doesn't display SOMETHING meaningful in all browsers. If it's a RIA that really needs flash to function (a game, an application with unique user interface, an application that requires camera, etc.), there should still be text explaining that to the user.

If it's anything else (navigation/page elements, video, etc.), if the person developing the site knows what they're doing, there are work arounds.

If your developer doesn't have the ability, or if you don't have the budget for such progressive enhancement, then that's not Apple's fault.

I agree completely. and was going to type an almost identical response. By the by - for anyone remotely thinking that IE is a modern browser, let me point you in this direction

http://people.mozilla.com/~prouget/ie9/

 

[darngooddesign]

Person B: You cannot arbitrarily pick a heavy site and try to win the argument in a back-handed way like that!

Me: What??

Me: You can not pick a resource heavy Flash site to say that Flash universally sucks because the majority of Flash sites are not super resource heavy.

Or to put it an automotive frame.

You can not look at the Hummer's single digit MPG and draw the conclusion that that all cars suck.

PS> I do admit it seemed like I was referring to the site the other poster specifically used as an example. I wasn't and it led to a good wtf moment.

 

[Seydlitz]

I will never understand how supporting open standards over Flash has become the "self-centered and egotistical" position to so many people in this argument. Promoting competition to Flash is somehow bad. Why would a monopoly by Adobe be good?

Apple decides to block out sites of perfectly legitimate nature. They limit your browsing and you and others are fine with it, indeed laud it.

And HTML5? as of January 2011 HTML5 is still at Working Draft stage in the W3C. I'm all for open standards, but the way Steve used it in his essay is very disingenious.


And about the silverlight it seems you have a short memory. You lumped flash with Silverlight, where you seem to gloss over that on an Android phone (HTC Desire) flash sites work with Opera Mobile.

So strangely there seems be other mobile devices that can handle flash.


But in the end the bottom line is clear. Apple can force small free websites to redesign at a substantial cost or loose out the iOs customers. They haven't got a beef with Apple, nor do the consumers, but HEY, Apple is doing it for an open web.

On that note, Apple can start selling a certain bridge, seems a lot of people are ready to buy.

 

[Seydlitz]

I agree completely. and was going to type an almost identical response. By the by - for anyone remotely thinking that IE is a modern browser, let me point you in this direction

http://people.mozilla.com/~prouget/ie9/

I'm 100% sure MS is much less than open/honest.... but you do realize thats a Mozzilla developers blog.

On IE optimized sites. Of course live on the web would be better if those sites were conform HTML4... but the normal webuser just doesn't care. I never found a site where Firefox or Chrome didn't (somehow) work. I'm sure they exists, but it's rather rare.

Yet cut out Flash and you are blocked out many sites.


There is a difference in promoting open standards and just blocking content for your own business arguments.

 

[BaldiMac]

Apple decides to block out sites of perfectly legitimate nature.

No, the don't block any sites. They just don't have the ability to display Flash content. Just like Android devices don't have the ability to display Silverlight content.

They limit your browsing and you and others are fine with it, indeed laud it.

Please stop making stuff up that you think I believe. Apple doesn't limit my browsing at all. I choose to not use Flash.

And HTML5? as of January 2011 HTML5 is still at Working Draft stage in the W3C

Super. Most of it has been implemented in the latest browsers. What's your point?

And about the silverlight it seems you have a short memory. You lumped flash with Silverlight, where you seem to gloss over that on an Android phone (HTC Desire) flash sites work with Opera Mobile.

So strangely there seems be other mobile devices that can handle flash.

What are you talking about? I used Silverlight as an example of a similar technology. I am completely aware that Flash is available on Android.

But in the end the bottom line is clear. Apple can force small free websites to redesign at a substantial cost or loose out the iOs customers. They haven't got a beef with Apple, nor do the consumers, but HEY, Apple is doing it for an open web.

Yep.

On that note, Apple can start selling a certain bridge, seems a lot of people are ready to buy.

 

[Carouser]

But in the end the bottom line is clear. Apple can force small free websites to redesign at a substantial cost or loose out the iOs customers. They haven't got a beef with Apple, nor do the consumers, but HEY, Apple is doing it for an open web.

Small free websites shouldn't be coding in Flash. Not because I don't like Flash (I don't), but because 'small' and 'free' suggest that the web page owner should be using blog software or basic HTML and passing on media management to other agents like YouTube and Flickr. Such a redesign is not a 'substantial cost' and gets them out of a format which fewer devices can view. It's better to go with broader formats than more restrictive ones, the onus is on the website designer to balance access and content priorities, not on Apple to do whatever people whine about.

I imagine Sesame Street Netherlands is quite capable of redesigning their website if they choose to make it accessible across multiple formats; the reason why the site is free is because Sesame Street as a whole (though a non-profit) generates plenty of revenue through licensing etc.

 

[angrylawyer]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I never understood HOW they would make flash work on any touch screen device.

I mean take a site like 2advanced.com, there menu requires you to hover over a link..move your cursor down to your selection so a menu pops up on the right. And this menu is one which slides through it's list automatically as you move your cursor up and down inside the menu's box.

So from the start, how do I 'hover' with my finger? When I touch the screen how does the touch screen know that I want to 'hover' and I'm not scrolling through the page, clicking something, or about to perform a gesture?

..not to mention any of the other steps involved in the 2advanced menu process. It seems like for flash to work with a touch screen, either developers have to build flash sites totally differently or flash/mobile OS's have to change dramatically.