Wow. I can't believe the Flash bashing continues with such great passion.
There are hundreds of thousands of apps in the app store. Some burn iDevice batteries faster than others. Some crash iDevices during use. Etc. Each person has a choice whether they download a resource-hogging app or one that is barely a blip in resource usage on iDevices. As such, each of us chooses apps for ourselves that can slow down- even crash- our own iDevice, burn our own batteries faster or slower and so on. It's soooo nice to have such choices rather than Apple deciding for us.
A Flash "app" would be just another of those hundreds of thousands of apps. Those interested in having that functionality, burning their batteries faster, perhaps "crashing Safari every time I use it" and so on could choose to download and use it. Those who don't want it wouldn't have it forced upon their iDevice- just like any other app. Every month, iDevice owners request the Flash plugin millions of times. They are wanting access to something in Flash and then must experience the disappoint that their shiny iDevice can't play that content. Why disappoint them? Why not give each of them the option to download the plugin if they desire to do so...perhaps with an iOS "are you sure" warning that encourages them to review Steve's "Thoughts on Flash"? At least they could then make an informed decision for themselves. Millions of requests for the Flash plugin each month clearly flies in the face of "millions of iDevice buyers prove they don't want Flash" (those buyers want to buy iDevices from Apple AND some of them want Flash to run on those iDevices too).
While HTML5 + javascript + h.26X may be "the future," it is not the present. By the time all the popular sites that still offer inaccessible features in Flash have converted everything to HTML5 + javascript + h.26X, I bet every single iDevice currently in use will have long-since been retired.
Too many people here think Flash is just video (and even then, it's still the ONLY video standard that will run on a broad array of platforms and all browsers (unlike HTML5 + javascript + h.264, which will run on only a subset of browsers)). But Flash is so much more than just video. Flash offers well established features (and standards) that make many impressive animations possible without the streaming video overhead. These are not just animations for ads, but also animations for important purposes such as education. Flash files can be very small by driving eye-grabbing animation & video without having to render that motion in bandwidth-hogging streaming video (like h.264 and all other streaming video formats).
While there are the usual abundant cheerleaders here that ignore applications of Flash beyond streaming video, it only takes very minor effort to come across Flash-based web content that is not useless or solely entertainment along the lines of youtube, etc. For example, in the education area, there are tons of tools that make it very easy for teachers to render multimedia lessons in Flash. They have no such tool replacements to render for HTML5 + javascript + h.264 (and even if they did, unless their students were all using a subset of browsers, etc, they couldn't actually view that multimedia anyway).
My company recently went through a website overhaul and explored the issue of adapting some Flash content to HTML5 + javascript + h.264. The issues were simple:
- Yes, you have to go that way if you want that Flash-driven content to be viewable on Apple iDevices. There are no choices because Apple says so.
- No, all that new replacement development into HTML5 won't work with most of the browsers that hit our site every day (and that reality is unlikely to change for many years to come).
- Some of what we have in Flash (particularly various kinds of informative and educational presentations that involve vector animations, etc) are impossible or nearly impossible to cost-efficiently replicate in HTML5 + javascript + h.264 while keeping the media files sizes around the same small sizes. Besides, you have to ALSO keep an alternative option (Flash) as most of the browsers won't be able to work with the HTML5 version anyway (effectively mandating TWO courses of media development instead of just one)
- Etc. (there were many smaller issues)
Ultimately, compromises were made which typically resulted in files sizes that used to be- say- 100K in Flash being jacked up to 400K for an iDevice-friendly alternative. Little niceties like having audio synced to media actions were much more complicated (because HTML5 doesn't really offer much in syncing audio with visuals). Multi-media presentations we could show in relatively large windows even at dial-up connection speeds without much in the way of (video)buffering delays or streaming video stalls had to be scaled down to very small windows if we wanted even the dial-up crowd to be able to watch a streaming H.264 equivalent. And so on.
In the end, was the changes worth it? We'll our site is now mostly Flash-dependency free (unless visitors want to watch and interact with a number of complex multimedia (not just video) presentations for which we had no availability of tools to even somewhat replicate them in HTML5 + javascript + h.264). Now iDevice users can visit our site and do and see most things without issue (though a number of files are now larger, so it does take more bandwidth to download them... and some of these offer less functionality than before in an effort to keep the file sizes from getting even larger still). We’re happy that more people (iDevice owners) can visit the site now and see almost everything. We're not so happy at the compromises that had to be made to accomplish that; the alternative was to spend a LOT of money on hand-coded replacements for various forms of media (not just video conversions).
We look forward to a day when tools like Articulate Presenter is able to do what it does yet render it's output for HTML5 + javascript + h.264 in addition to Flash (we'll still need the latter to run on most browsers for years to come).
Until then, there are NO tool options equivalent to tools like those. The content side can't deliver their media (of those types) in HTML5 even if they wanted to do so and there isn't enough cross-browser compatibility to make it viewable (as a singular development output option) even if they could.
Bottom line: Apple has deemed Flash as bad. As such, many cheerleaders here can only see it that way too. Some of those cheerleaders may download apps to their iDevices that burn battery pretty quickly, sometimes crash their iDevice, and so on (the various "Flash is bad" justifications). But at least they have the OPTION to burn their own batteries, etc faster or slower based on what they choose to install on their own devices.
A Flash-enabling "app" could be the very same kind of thing. Those that want it should be able to get it. Those that don't shouldn't have it forced upon them. In this way, EVERYONE would get what they want. Apple should not choose for us. We should choose for ourselves. If Apple is genuinely concerned about a rise in customer service issues related to a Flash plugin, they could simply build a periodic warning popup into the iOS system that advises users that using the Flash plugin is likely to burn up battery power quicker, sometimes crash Safari, etc. Then, it would almost all be on Adobe to deliver an iOS plugin that significantly addresses Apple's gripes.
An entire generation (and probably the next generation or three) of iDevices would at least have the OPTION of accessing all of the world wide web instead of being forced to miss a chunk of the Internet because Apple chooses for its users, instead of letting us users choose for ourselves.
Cheerleaders cheering against choices for fellow consumers is pied piper syndrome: you lose NOTHING if the OPTION was available. But your fellow consumer that wants or needs access to something in Flash would be able to get even more utility out of
their own iDevice. And anyone who has some dependency on being able to access Flash content could then join the iDevice-owning pool so that Apple sells even more iDevices. Win:win:win.
Once HTML5+javascript+h.264 fully replaces Flash everywhere, that plugin would just not get used anymore, much like all kinds of deprecated early HTML elements increasingly fading out with the passage of time. What's nice about the latter is that deprecation didn't arbitrarily kill the functionality because someone decided it was outdated. Instead, those early sites written in outdated HTML are still fully viewable & visible in our 2011 browsers. Those in charge of such matters chose to let the passage of time eventually wash out the "bad" old and replace it with the "better" new. Apple arbitrarily decided to forbid access to a standard multimedia solution that works on all browsers and on all platforms and that has lots of easy-to-use tools to make interesting, compact content for it. In 2015-2030, perhaps Flash will be near-dead. Wouldn't it be nice to have the OPTION as individuals to at least be able to see/hear/use that stuff only available in Flash until that day comes?
