Another nail in Flash's coffin

[BaldiMac]

As a side note, anything that leads to the demise of over-animated, image-bloated Flash restaurant sites is a win in my book. I would support Kim Jong-il himself for president if he ran primarily on a platform of elimination of Flash from restaurant websites.

Seriously. Hours, locations, contact information, menu, a few pictures, and short description. What else do you go to a restaurant website for? Maybe reservations if it's popular enough. Ordering for takeout/delivery places. None of this requires or is enhanced by Flash.

 

[s15119]

flash supporters? just make sure you don't put me in that group. i am pro-choice. that's all. flash sucks. i don't even like it. but, it exists. making it more difficult for me to view it won't make it go away for the forseeable future. criticizing other companies for giving customers choice (as the op did) seems wrongheaded to me.

No one has deprived you of any choice. It might be an interesting discussion, if you would argue honestly. But your hyperbole about tyranny and force just makes it incredibly silly. You do have choice. You may view the web with any device you like. You may use flash. People even do so on iPads. No force has been used and you've lost no freedom. To argue otherwise is simply silly and has no basis in reality.

 

[radiogoober]

This whole Flash thing will be a complete non-discussion in about 1 year, 2 tops. No Flash isn't going away, but the reality is that HTML5 adoption is skyrocketing, the number of iOS devices out there are growing by millions each month, and Flash still sucks on the mobile devices that do run it anyways. I suspect most people talking game about switching tablets just for Flash haven't actually used Flash on a tablet yet.

As a side note, anything that leads to the demise of over-animated, image-bloated Flash restaurant sites is a win in my book. I would support Kim Jong-il himself for president if he ran primarily on a platform of elimination of Flash from restaurant websites.

Agree 100% with your prediction.

The absolute worst is when a website loads a flash animation just for their buttons. Oh my god. Flash is so horrible.

 

[BaldiMac]

i feel like many people keep polishing that turd in the hopes that they can turn restrictive policies into "freedom," lack of support for content on the internet into a "shining" experience, and customer-friendly efforts by other companies into foolishness.

If only you applied the same critical evaluation of other companies that you apply to Apple's lack of Flash support, you might be able to understand where we are coming from. You are the one arguing for the adoption of a closed, proprietary format over open standards. And yet you think you are on the side of "freedom" and open access to content. Flash isn't content. It is a format to deliver content. Why is it so unreasonable to believe content should be delivered using open standards?

 

[294307]

Pandora has rebuilt it's front-end in super fast HTML5, dropping support for antiquated Flash.

http://www.pandora.com/newpandora

Another nail in Flash's coffin. The more that this happens, the better.

I still stand by my statement: any competing mobile OS that brags about supporting Flash is in fact advertising a negative feature. Flash is a step backwards and supporting Flash is merely a diversion so people can overlook your poorly designed OS. Concentrate on the user experience and quit trying to tack on "features" that are really just distractors.

Hmm...I could definitely see more sites switching to HTML5 because of it being new and just as capable of making slick websites as using Flash.

Most sites change certain elements of the site to HTML5 for iOS devices and android smartphones that do not have Flash, whereas the main site for computers are using Flash. Is this the same case here with Pandora or is it going to be HTML5 for computer users too?

 

[chown33]

i feel like many people keep polishing that turd in the hopes that they can turn restrictive policies into "freedom," lack of support for content on the internet into a "shining" experience, and customer-friendly efforts by other companies into foolishness.

i guess the consensus here is that it is a great moment for us as consumers when flash gets dropped, and that companies who offer flash in their products are bad (as the op stated). we'll just have to agree to disagree about this.

As a consumer, you have never had the freedom to define product features à la carte. Your sole freedom as a consumer is the choice you have among competing products.

Some products offer options. Your sole freedom is the choice you have among those options. You don't get to define options à la carte, either.

If a product is discontinued, your freedom to choose that product disappears, unless you're willing to buy it used.

You're the consumer. You're not a product developer. If you were, then your freedom extends to whatever you can make, license, and sell. If you fail to license a patent or other protected intellectual property, you have the freedom to be sued. If you fail to sell what you've made, you have the freedom of incurring bankruptcy. Whether you think that's right or wrong, it's part of being a product developer.

 

[whooleytoo]

As a side note, anything that leads to the demise of over-animated, image-bloated Flash restaurant sites is a win in my book. I would support Kim Jong-il himself for president if he ran primarily on a platform of elimination of Flash from restaurant websites.

Unfortunately, after one or two years, you'll find out he has replaced all the over-animated, image-bloated Flash restaurant sites with over-animated, image-bloated HTML5/CSS/Javascript that's even harder to turn off.

"HTML good, Flash bad." (wonder if anyone'll get the reference.. )

 

[BaldiMac]

Unfortunately, after one or two years, you'll find out he has replaced all the over-animated, image-bloated Flash restaurant sites with over-animated, image-bloated HTML5/CSS/Javascript that's even harder to turn off.

"HTML good, Flash bad." (wonder if anyone'll get the reference.. )

Why would it be harder to turn off? The great thing about open standards is that anybody can build controls. We will have more control over HTML5 content than Flash. Same idea as AdBlock... filter certain types of content by the originating server.

 

[whooleytoo]

Why would it be harder to turn off? The great thing about open standards is that anybody can build controls. We will have more control over HTML5 content than Flash. Same idea as AdBlock... filter certain types of content by the originating server.

Harder to turn off, in the sense that currently people install Flash-blockers to prevent Flash from loading so they can continue to enjoy the HTML content.

However if the animated adverts are implemented in HTML/CSS/Javascript, it'll be harder to create an HTML ad-blocker distinguish between the site code and advert code.

 

[BaldiMac]

Harder to turn off, in the sense that currently people install Flash-blockers to prevent Flash from loading so they can continue to enjoy the HTML content.

However if the animated adverts are implemented in HTML/CSS/Javascript, it'll be harder to create an HTML ad-blocker distinguish between the site code and advert code.

Again, it wouldn't be harder. You would just be blocking a different content type. And you would have more fine-grained control.

The primary way ad content is distinguished from site content is the originating server for the content. For example, Google Adwords are HTML ads and easily blocked.

 

[Carouser]

This argument is headed towards "Flash is good because it's easier to block Flash ads than HTML ads."

 

[radiogoober]

This argument is headed towards "Flash is good because it's easier to block Flash ads than HTML ads."

YUP lol. Let's just leave it at "we can effectively block most types of ads." And Flash sucks for everything and it should be wiped off the face of the planet. Flash is like giving your computer HIV.

 

[whooleytoo]

Again, it wouldn't be harder. You would just be blocking a different content type. And you would have more fine-grained control.

The primary way ad content is distinguished from site content is the originating server for the content. For example, Google Adwords are HTML ads and easily blocked.

What content type would you block? It would just be Javascript & images.

Filter by the source is better alright, but presumably you can work around that too by using dynamically changing hosting or perhaps by using hosts which also serve useful content and thus the user wouldn't want to block.

As long as there's money to be made in attention-getting website advertising, they'll find a way to continue serving it. Getting rid of Flash won't achieve much.

This argument is headed towards "Flash is good because it's easier to block Flash ads than HTML ads."

Now, now; let's not be silly. I never said that. Nor did mattraehl say "With Flash gone, we'll NEVER see a single web advert again".

The argument that IS being discussed is whether the demise of Flash will also lead to the demise of animated web adverts, not exactly the same thing. Subtly different.

 

[darngooddesign]

The argument that IS being discussed is whether the demise of Flash will also lead to the demise of animated web adverts, not exactly the same thing. Subtly different.

Why on earth would that happen? There will always be annoying animated web ads regardless of the format.

 

[PBG4 Dude]

"HTML good, Flash bad." (wonder if anyone'll get the reference.. )

Fire bad!!!!

Although, Camp Chaos did use Flash video when this came out.

 

[BaldiMac]

What content type would you block? It would just be Javascript & images.

If it's just javascript and images, then I could block all images from an ad server. Why isn't that clear? Most browsers have this capability built in now. If it was an animation, I could block the canvas element or svg graphics. If it was a video, I could block video. It's not all that complicated.

Filter by the source is better alright, but presumably you can work around that too by using dynamically changing hosting or perhaps by using hosts which also serve useful content and thus the user wouldn't want to block.

As long as there's money to be made in attention-getting website advertising, they'll find a way to continue serving it. Getting rid of Flash won't achieve much.

And you have the same issues with Flash content. Nothing would be worse. It would be the same or better.

 

[macUser2007]

When people turn it on, they will piss and moan that the device is crap and can't handle flash. Why would Apple compromise the functionality of their iDevices for the sake of a few.

25 Million people who have bought the iPad alone are probably "Meh" with it not having flash.

Amazing how delusional some of the faithful are!

Apple does not allow Flash only because it competes with iAd (and to a lesser extent, with their store content), which was their "secret" plan to become the Google of mobile advertising.

But Google threw a wrench in Apple's plans, by acquiring Android, making it open source, and working with Flash to implement their player and provide hardware acceleration.

A year ago, when Steve was screaming that Flash is dead (just like he screamed before that book-reading is dead, or that Java is dead, or that nobody needs copy/cut/paste), there were a lot of companies planning on creating mobile versions of their sites, to accomodate the iPads and the iPhones.

But now, with the Android steamroller gaining ground and fully supporting Flash, very few are considering mobile versions.

If the Android numbers continue to rapidly grow, in another year, iPad/iPhone users and their lack of support for Flash will be largely irrelevant to the web.

iAd has been a monumental flop, so I expect that in a year or two Apple will let it die, and iOS will support Flash, if it wants to compete.

BTW, Flash is a lot more than video and games. It provides a widely adopted platform to do things which HTML5 cannot do, or it cannot do cost-efficiently.

So I expect that HTML5 and Flash will happily coexist on the web, making it better and more exciting for all users (O.K., all except iOS users).

Also, stop the FUD about Flash running badly on mobiles. Flash runs perfectly nicely on my Nexus S, which is roughly equivalent to the iPhone 4 in terms of power (I am not even talking about the newer dual-core chips available on newer Androids, soon to become quads). I basically don't even notice when it's loading Flash content, or HTML content. It just works.

 

[BaldiMac]

Amazing how delusional some of the faithful are!

Apple does not allow Flash only because it competes with iAd (and to a lesser extent, with their store content), which was their "secret" plan to become the Google of mobile advertising.

But Google threw a wrench in Apple's plans, by acquiring Android, making it open source, and working with Flash to implement their player and provide hardware acceleration.

A year ago, when Steve was screaming that Flash is dead (just like he screamed before that book-reading is dead, or that Java is dead, or that nobody needs copy/cut/paste), there were a lot of companies planning on creating mobile versions of their sites, to accomodate the iPads and the iPhones.

But now, with the Android steamroller gaining ground and fully supporting Flash, very few are considering mobile versions.

If the Android numbers continue to rapidly grow, in another year, iPad/iPhone users and their lack of support for Flash will be largely irrelevant to the web.

iAd has been a monumental flop, so I expect that in a year or two Apple will let it die, and iOS will support Flash, if it wants to compete.

BTW, Flash is a lot more than video and games. It provides a widely adopted platform to do things which HTML5 cannot do, or it cannot do cost-efficiently.

So I expect that HTML5 and Flash will happily coexist on the web, making it better and more exciting for all users (O.K., all except iOS users).

Also, stop the FUD about Flash running badly on mobiles. Flash runs perfectly nicely on my Nexus S, which is roughly equivalent to the iPhone 4 in terms of power (I am not even talking about the newer dual-core chips available on newer Androids, soon to become quads). I basically don't even notice when it's loading Flash content, or HTML content. It just works.

Wow. Talk about FUD. Way to rewrite history to fit your argument.

 

[mKTank]

Amazing how delusional some of the faithful are!

Apple does not allow Flash only because it competes with iAd (and to a lesser extent, with their store content), which was their "secret" plan to become the Google of mobile advertising.

But Google threw a wrench in Apple's plans, by acquiring Android, making it open source, and working with Flash to implement their player and provide hardware acceleration.

A year ago, when Steve was screaming that Flash is dead (just like he screamed before that book-reading is dead, or that Java is dead, or that nobody needs copy/cut/paste), there were a lot of companies planning on creating mobile versions of their sites, to accomodate the iPads and the iPhones.

But now, with the Android steamroller gaining ground and fully supporting Flash, very few are considering mobile versions.

If the Android numbers continue to rapidly grow, in another year, iPad/iPhone users and their lack of support for Flash will be largely irrelevant to the web.

iAd has been a monumental flop, so I expect that in a year or two Apple will let it die, and iOS will support Flash, if it wants to compete.

BTW, Flash is a lot more than video and games. It provides a widely adopted platform to do things which HTML5 cannot do, or it cannot do cost-efficiently.

So I expect that HTML5 and Flash will happily coexist on the web, making it better and more exciting for all users (O.K., all except iOS users).

Also, stop the FUD about Flash running badly on mobiles. Flash runs perfectly nicely on my Nexus S, which is roughly equivalent to the iPhone 4 in terms of power (I am not even talking about the newer dual-core chips available on newer Androids, soon to become quads). I basically don't even notice when it's loading Flash content, or HTML content. It just works.

+1.
Flash runs great on my Nexus S too.

 

[mattraehl]

A year ago, when Steve was screaming that Flash is dead (just like he screamed before that book-reading is dead, or that Java is dead, or that nobody needs copy/cut/paste), there were a lot of companies planning on creating mobile versions of their sites, to accomodate the iPads and the iPhones.

But now, with the Android steamroller gaining ground and fully supporting Flash, very few are considering mobile versions.

Source?

 

[vvswarup]

Amazing how delusional some of the faithful are!

Apple does not allow Flash only because it competes with iAd (and to a lesser extent, with their store content), which was their "secret" plan to become the Google of mobile advertising.

But Google threw a wrench in Apple's plans, by acquiring Android, making it open source, and working with Flash to implement their player and provide hardware acceleration.

A year ago, when Steve was screaming that Flash is dead (just like he screamed before that book-reading is dead, or that Java is dead, or that nobody needs copy/cut/paste), there were a lot of companies planning on creating mobile versions of their sites, to accomodate the iPads and the iPhones.

But now, with the Android steamroller gaining ground and fully supporting Flash, very few are considering mobile versions.

If the Android numbers continue to rapidly grow, in another year, iPad/iPhone users and their lack of support for Flash will be largely irrelevant to the web.

iAd has been a monumental flop, so I expect that in a year or two Apple will let it die, and iOS will support Flash, if it wants to compete.

BTW, Flash is a lot more than video and games. It provides a widely adopted platform to do things which HTML5 cannot do, or it cannot do cost-efficiently.

So I expect that HTML5 and Flash will happily coexist on the web, making it better and more exciting for all users (O.K., all except iOS users).

Also, stop the FUD about Flash running badly on mobiles. Flash runs perfectly nicely on my Nexus S, which is roughly equivalent to the iPhone 4 in terms of power (I am not even talking about the newer dual-core chips available on newer Androids, soon to become quads). I basically don't even notice when it's loading Flash content, or HTML content. It just works.

Your post is filled with inaccuracies. First of all, Android existed before iAd. Google bought Android before the very first iPhone. The first Android phone came out in late 2008. The Droid came out in late 2009 and it was the flagship Android phone for a while. Apple came out with iAd in 2010. So explain to me how Google "threw a wrench in Apple's plans" for iAd by buying out Android if iAd didn't even exist at the time of the purchase.

Also, you're completely mistaken if you think Flash and HTML5 will coexist. Adobe will not let HTML5 get to that point. You point out deficiencies in HTML5. Did you know that Adobe sits on W3C, the standards committee in charge of HTML5? Adobe has been stalling the committee's work on HTML5 so that HTML5 can't become viable enough to threaten their cash cow.

 

[Meanee]

For the record, Flash works great on my Evo 3D. Browser won't even hiccup when Flash is loaded. It was SLIGHTLY slower on my old Evo, which ran a single core chip

 

[macUser2007]

Your post is filled with inaccuracies....

Uhm, do you really think that long-term strategies and acquisitions get hatched and implemented in a year? Apple knows where the money is.

Nothing to do with performance - it's all about the ads, and that's why there is no Flash on the iPhone.

Unless you want to argue that Apple makes crappy hardware, and can't keep up with the Android world....

As to HTML5, you are absolutely wrong: Not only Flash and HTML5 will coexist, but Adobe has provided the community with HTML5 tools, including Flash conversion tools, while Apple has done nothing about it, despite all the hot air from Jobs.

Plus, currently Chrome and Android (and Firefox and Opera) offer significantly better HTML5 support than OS X and even iOS. http://html5test.com/results.html

 

[vvswarup]

Uhm, do you really think that long-term strategies and acquisitions get hatched and implemented in a year? Apple knows where the money is.

Nothing to do with performance - it's all about the ads, and that's why there is no Flash on the iPhone.

Unless you want to argue that Apple makes crappy hardware, and can't keep up with the Android world....

As to HTML5, you are absolutely wrong: Not only Flash and HTML5 will coexist, but Adobe has provided the community with HTML5 tools, including Flash conversion tools, while Apple has done nothing about it, despite all the hot air from Jobs.

Plus, currently Chrome and Android (and Firefox and Opera) offer significantly better HTML5 support than OS X and even iOS. http://html5test.com/results.html

Adobe has offered up HTML5 tools only now when they should have been offered a long time ago. And this HTML5 authoring tool is not a full-fledged version.

It is true that Adobe has been stalling the committee on HTML5. Search for it.

 

[radiogoober]

Amazing how delusional some of the faithful are!

Apple does not allow Flash only because it competes with iAd (and to a lesser extent, with their store content), which was their "secret" plan to become the Google of mobile advertising.

But Google threw a wrench in Apple's plans, by acquiring Android, making it open source, and working with Flash to implement their player and provide hardware acceleration.

A year ago, when Steve was screaming that Flash is dead (just like he screamed before that book-reading is dead, or that Java is dead, or that nobody needs copy/cut/paste), there were a lot of companies planning on creating mobile versions of their sites, to accomodate the iPads and the iPhones.

But now, with the Android steamroller gaining ground and fully supporting Flash, very few are considering mobile versions.

If the Android numbers continue to rapidly grow, in another year, iPad/iPhone users and their lack of support for Flash will be largely irrelevant to the web.

iAd has been a monumental flop, so I expect that in a year or two Apple will let it die, and iOS will support Flash, if it wants to compete.

BTW, Flash is a lot more than video and games. It provides a widely adopted platform to do things which HTML5 cannot do, or it cannot do cost-efficiently.

So I expect that HTML5 and Flash will happily coexist on the web, making it better and more exciting for all users (O.K., all except iOS users).

Also, stop the FUD about Flash running badly on mobiles. Flash runs perfectly nicely on my Nexus S, which is roughly equivalent to the iPhone 4 in terms of power (I am not even talking about the newer dual-core chips available on newer Androids, soon to become quads). I basically don't even notice when it's loading Flash content, or HTML content. It just works.

I truly appreciate that you come in here and call us delusional, and then spew an incredibly ridiculous and completely false set of premises. I mean nothing in your post is remotely correct. Do you really believe what you write?

Edit: There are some really hardcore Android/Flash fanboys here. I love how they go through threads and vote up/down on posts. Wow.