Another nail in Flash's coffin

[Geckotek]

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.

Says who? That's obviously wrong since Facebook is rewriting their site in HTML5 specifically targeting mobile devices.

Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Its been around since the 90's and the websites who support flash are legion.

Facebook, YouTube, and Pandora tell me otherwise.

 

[macUser2007]

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?....

LOL. For the record, I've been here for a while now (as opposed to you ). I have bought more Apple products than I can count and I have had every iPhone with the exception of 4 -- I switched to Android mainly because of its Flash capability, and because I got sick and tired of jailbreaking after every minor OS update.

Is Android perfect? No. Each platform has its strengths and weaknesses.

But Android runs Flash, and it runs it perfectly well. And it will only get better. So, overal, it's a more complete experience and it's growing like crazy.

Frankly, outside of the few fanboys here and there, nobody really cares what the technology behind it all is.

Users basically want to have a good experience, and access the same sites they do on their desktop. Which includes Flash sites. That's a fact.

So, yeah, titles like "Another nail in Flash's coffin" are largely delusional. And the lame excuses how "we don't need no Flash because it will die any day now" are just as delusional.

Flash is here to stay, for the foreseeable future. And if iOS wants to stay relevant, it will have to allow it.

 

[Carouser]

Frankly, outside of the few fanboys here and there, nobody really cares what the technology behind it all is.

Users basically want to have a good experience, and access the same sites they do on their desktop. Which includes Flash sites. That's a fact.

I agree, people don't care about the tech, and they want a good experience with the same sites on their device as on their desktop. This is why outside of the few fanboys here and there, nobody says "I wish iOS had Flash". They actually say "I wish this site worked on my iPad". That's why there's a huge incentive for sites which have been using Flash to present their content in an alternative way.

 

[radiogoober]

i agree, people don't care about the tech, and they want a good experience with the same sites on their device as on their desktop. This is why outside of the few fanboys here and there, nobody says "i wish ios had flash". They actually say "i wish this site worked on my ipad". That's why there's a huge incentive for sites which have been using flash to present their content in an alternative way.

yup.

 

[macUser2007]

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.

Huh?

So, Adobe offers HTML5 tools and Apple doesn't, yet you blame Adobe for failing to offer such tools earlier, and for not providing full support for what is still a changing platform?!

This makes a lot of sense.

Oh, and as I pointed earlier, Safari also offers the poorest support for HTML5 of any browser, with Google providing the best HTML5 support. I expect you to chime in and blame Google for not providing even better support, and for not providing it sooner....

 

[Geckotek]

Users basically want to have a good experience, and access the same sites they do on their desktop. Which includes Flash sites. That's a fact.

I'm far from an Apple fanboy. I even wrote a blog article burrying the first iPhone due to all of it's missing features. When the 3G came out I finally gave Apple a chance. And one of the things that keeps me on iOS is I now have a large investment in the platform including docking stations and connection in my car.

That being said, what you say is a fact is....in fact...not a fact. It's not a fact becuase as a consumer I want a good experience....more than I care about having access to all the sites I can access on my desktop. And the fact is, more and more sites are offering flash-free alternatives for mobile devices. I can't recall the last website I went to that I couldn't use due to needing flash.

If you want a fact, it is a fact that Facebook is converting their site to entirely Flash 5. Facebook....the busiest site in the world. YouTube is slowly but surely offering their videos in HTML5.....the second busiest site in the world. Looking down the list of the top 10 websites, most of them work fine on my iPad (I don't visit all of them so I can't be sure if all do).

 

[macUser2007]

...They actually say "I wish this site worked on my iPad". That's why there's a huge incentive for sites which have been using Flash to present their content in an alternative way.

Why, because Apple has chosen to block one of the most widely adopted technologies on the web?

Nope, in a year or two, when Android tablets and phones far outnumber iOS devices, nobody will care that 5% of the users have a crippled devices which cannot access content. Particularly if they can't see the ads...

 

[Geckotek]

Why, because Apple has chosen to block one of the most widely adopted technologies on the web?

Nope, in a year or two, when Android tablets and phones far outnumber iOS devices, nobody will care that 5% of the users have a crippled devices which cannot access content. Particularly if they can't see the ads...

Just because it is widely adopted doesn't mean we should continue using it. I've never liked the fact that I had to install a 3rd part add-in to consume media. There is now a new alternative that doesn't require some stupid add-in. Let's move forward and leave 1990's tech behind.

And sorry, I don't see Android tablets overshadowing iPads anytime soon. Not a single device has made a significant number of sales compared to the iPad. And with very large websites like Facebook and YouTube dumping flash, I think your statement is completely flawed.

 

[Carouser]

Why, because Apple has chosen to block one of the most widely adopted technologies on the web?

Nope, in a year or two, when Android tablets and phones far outnumber iOS devices, nobody will care that 5% of the users have a crippled devices which cannot access content. Particularly if they can't see the ads...

If I was producing web content, and I could choose one option, which was accessible by anybody with a browser on virtually any device, or I could choose another option, which would arbitrarily exclude some users (from a hugely desirable target market), and both options were equivalent in terms of cost, why would I bother with the second option? In a year or two it will still be smarter to produce content that 100% of people can access.

 

[BaldiMac]

it's all about the ads, and that's why there is no Flash on the iPhone.

How, exactly, would Flash have competed with iAd (if Apple had allowed it)?

iAds are in apps, Flash ads would presumably be in the browser. Along with all the other ads in the browser. Do you really think Flash ads are that superior to all the other ads for mobile advertising???

 

[mattraehl]

How, exactly, would Flash have competed with iAd (if Apple had allowed it)?

iAds are in apps, Flash ads would presumably be in the browser. Along with all the other ads in the browser. Do you really think Flash ads are that superior to all the other ads for mobile advertising???

Stop using logic, it confuses them. Anyways everyone knows that the ads in Mobile Safari are iAds sold by Apple to go where the broken Flash ads went. Or something.

 

[macUser2007]

If I was producing web content, and I could choose one option, which was accessible by anybody with a browser on virtually any device, or I could choose another option, which would arbitrarily exclude some users (from a hugely desirable target market), and both options were equivalent in terms of cost, why would I bother with the second option? In a year or two it will still be smarter to produce content that 100% of people can access.

Yeah, well.... If you currently chose HTML5, your content will NOT be viewable on about half of the world's computers. If you chose Flash, it will be viewable on virtually all computers.

In addition, HTML5 currently has capabilities which are comparable to Flash circa 2001. There is a lot of stuff which is simply not currently possible to be done effectively, or done at all, with HTML5.

How, exactly, would Flash have competed with iAd (if Apple had allowed it)?

iAds are in apps, Flash ads would presumably be in the browser. Along with all the other ads in the browser. Do you really think Flash ads are that superior to all the other ads for mobile advertising???

Apple has always aimed to make apps the primary way users interact with content on iOS devices.

For instance, Apple has been forcing publishers to move to app delivery of their content (remember the outcry when Safari Reader came out).

If virtually all interaction in iOS is done though apps, then virtually all advertising will be viewed within apps. Apple gets to charge its hefty premiums at every step along the way.

Flash throws a wrench in this scheme, by allowing content providers to bypass Apple.

So, no Flash for iOS.

BTW, yes, Flash is better for ads. HTML5 ads are way too primitive, compared to what Flash can do, and they are not universally viewable, as Flash ads are. Have you ever wondered why advertisers have not jumped en masse on the HTML5 bandwagon?

 

[fertilized-egg]

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

My Galaxy S phone and RIM Playbook, both equipped with faster CPUs than EVO, hiccups badly when Flash is loaded with jerky scrolling and in Playbook's case with much worse case of checkerboard invasion. When I run Flash and try to zoom in and out, often times the click gets registered too late. It's most noticeable when you compare the Youtube experience in Flash on those devices against the HTML5 Youtube on an iOS device. It's just day and night.

 

[andrewlgm]

There is one site called watchmoviesforfreedotnet which will not load on my ipad. It is by far my favorite site on the web. It is a given that I did not know about it before buying the Ipad last year. As I cited sometime ago, my university uses an iteration of blackboard and student management account which is entirely flash based. Whenever I have my ipad with me at school I am forced to travel to the library since I can't do anything from the ipad.

More often than not I'm carrying my macbook all day with me and leaving the Ipad behind, 4 days out of the week when I'm at school. And when I'm finally in bed and wish to watch one of those free bad quality movies that I'll only watch once (so I don't see the point in spending $5) I use the macbook.

I wasn't deceived by apple when buying the ipad. But flash is still present. And in these circumstances, my ipad is useless. So, I've used my brother's galaxy tab and it works with both of these flash websites perfectly. No lag in loading, no hiccups, no freezing.

I guessing this tablet-flash discussion is all up to a person's needs and wants. And the ipad no longer cuts it in my personal experience. I'll be waiting for the new batch of tablets this coming september and I'll be selling the ipad.

 

[mattraehl]

Flash throws a wrench in this scheme, by allowing content providers to bypass Apple.

So, no Flash for iOS.

Can you be specific about what things content providers currently cannot do in Mobile Safari, that they would be able to do if it had Flash? Besides more obnoxious ads and Facebook games?

 

[mattraehl]

And when I'm finally in bed and wish to watch one of those free bad quality movies that I'll only watch once (so I don't see the point in spending $5) I use the macbook.

Seriously? You don't see the point?

 

[vvswarup]

Why, because Apple has chosen to block one of the most widely adopted technologies on the web?

Nope, in a year or two, when Android tablets and phones far outnumber iOS devices, nobody will care that 5% of the users have a crippled devices which cannot access content. Particularly if they can't see the ads...

Bet against Apple all you want. From what you seem to be implying, Flash is supposed to be the killer feature that finally makes people jump ship. Every iPad competitor to date has had Flash and not one of them is a significant threat to the iPad.

It used to be that Apple products were the premium products. On average, Apple products cost more than other brands. That's not the case this time with tablets. The iPad is at the bottom of the spectrum for price. And Apple still earns a healthy 30% margin. Also, Apple has tremendous leverage with component suppliers. Apple has singlehandedly created component shortages. In February, there were reports that Apple had booked up 60% of the world's touchscreen capacity, creating a shortage and driving up prices for competitors. Rumor has it that Apple caused delays in the release of RIM's PlayBook and Samsung's Galaxy tablets.

Now I know I'm going to be called a fanboy for condoning what a lot of people are going to call blatantly anticompetitive behavior. It's nothing more than shrewdness and business savvy. That alone should be reason enough to think twice before betting against Apple.

 

[Geckotek]

People keep touting Android tablets as giving "the full internet experience". I say BS, the iPad will suffice until I can have a Windows 8 tablet that provides a "full computing experience" instead of these limited options I now have for productivity apps such as Excel. I consider that much more of a hinderance than the lack of Flash.

 

[vladi]

I'm sure it's an exercise in futility discussing flash with you, given your opinions. There is absolutely nothing that says "ultimate user experience and presentations" in Flash. Flash is a turd. It's ugly. A website has never been *more functional* due to having a flash interface, a flash menu, or anything. It's always made less functional, uglier, and clunkier.

There is no point of having flash menus. That's half assed job.

Go ahead and check thefwa.com to get a better picture of what is flash best suited for.


Also if you happen to live in a boring world of presentations or work with people who can't understand a thing unless its presented in a slideshow I strongly recommend learning Flash over Keynote/PowerPoint to spice things up.

 

[palpatine]

People keep touting Android tablets as giving "the full internet experience". I say BS, the iPad will suffice until I can have a Windows 8 tablet that provides a "full computing experience" instead of these limited options I now have for productivity apps such as Excel. I consider that much more of a hinderance than the lack of Flash.

yep.

flashless apple is an annoyance, and i've stuck with apple so far because they clearly provide the best half-baked experience of them all. i've been experimenting with getting stuff done only on the ipad this week following some helpful advice by forum members. it has gone really well, and i am pleased. but, i am at the limits of its usefulness, and i had to turn to the macbook pro today. that's cool, and i am getting more than i expected out of the ipad.

but, a device that was fully baked and enabled me to complete projects from start to finish? that's a tablet i could love.

 

[radiogoober]

There is no point of having flash menus. That's half assed job.

Go ahead and check thefwa.com to get a better picture of what is flash best suited for..

Thank you for posting that link. In fact, that link (www.thefwa.com) is the perfect example of why not to use Flash. That was possibly the ugliest website I've ever seen, it was the most pointless, and the slowest. There was absolutely no need to use Flash for the vast majority of that website. It could be laid out easier, and infinitely better looking, using HTML/CSS. I mean honestly: they used Flash headers/footers/content/menus. OH MY GOD HORRIBLE. I'm adding that website to my /etc/hosts so that I can never see it again.

I literally vomited looking at that website. That is the EXACT reason that Flash is a dead technology and should be dropped. Despicable.

 

[RossMc]

YouTube full website works fine on the iPad now all the videos are HTML5 I think. Everyone I have tried so far has played It must have changed recently because they were still flash the other day.

 

[Carouser]

Yeah, well.... If you currently chose HTML5, your content will NOT be viewable on about half of the world's computers. If you chose Flash, it will be viewable on virtually all computers.

It's a good thing those aren't the only two options, then.

In addition, HTML5 currently has capabilities which are comparable to Flash circa 2001. There is a lot of stuff which is simply not currently possible to be done effectively, or done at all, with HTML5.

Those capabilities and that stuff amounts to the 2011 version of splash pages. Nobody schooled in accessibility and usability would ever consider using that stuff.

EDIT: Or like having audio play when you go to a website. The solution isn't finding the best means to play stupid MIDI music for the audience, the solution is to not even do it in the first place.

 

[Meanee]

Thank you for posting that link. In fact, that link (www.thefwa.com) is the perfect example of why not to use Flash. That was possibly the ugliest website I've ever seen, it was the most pointless, and the slowest. There was absolutely no need to use Flash for the vast majority of that website. It could be laid out easier, and infinitely better looking, using HTML/CSS. I mean honestly: they used Flash headers/footers/content/menus. OH MY GOD HORRIBLE. I'm adding that website to my /etc/hosts so that I can never see it again.

I literally vomited looking at that website. That is the EXACT reason that Flash is a dead technology and should be dropped. Despicable.

For me, it looked great. Plus a great info about the project, well presented too. You may have a stomach bug. Go look at a cute kitten, see if it makes you vomit too.

I believe this thread proved that you are simply a blind follower, eating out of Steve's hand. Your unexplained hatred for Flash only has one reason, which is "Steve told me it's bad and since I have no functional brain of my own, I will follow anything that I am told"

EDIT: Or like having audio play when you go to a website. The solution isn't finding the best means to play stupid MIDI music for the audience, the solution is to not even do it in the first place.

You can play audio with simply embedding a file, or through Java applet. Everyone, grab your torches and pitchforks! We are waging war against Java and browsers in general too!

 

[Carouser]

For me, it looked great. Plus a great info about the project, well presented too. You may have a stomach bug. Go look at a cute kitten, see if it makes you vomit too.

I believe this thread proved that you are simply a blind follower, eating out of Steve's hand. Your unexplained hatred for Flash only has one reason, which is "Steve told me it's bad and since I have no functional brain of my own, I will follow anything that I am told"

I believe you haven't read this thread. If you don't like radiogoober's posts and think they are low-content, perhaps you could participate with the more substantive points made by other posters.

I'm also pretty sure that site's goals could be achieved just as well without Flash.

You can play audio with simply embedding a file, or through Java applet. Everyone, grab your torches and pitchforks! We are waging war against Java and browsers in general too!

This kind of hyperbole doesn't help the discussion. The point is that there are definitely some things only Flash can do. However, those things are very rarely, if ever, necessary. It amounts to saying 'Flash does what Flash does well, very well'.