Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Do iPad users still want FLASH?
- Thread starter ehoez
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
last real stats I saw about this topic included all iOS users (all 3 iDevices) and more than a million requests for the Flash player came in from iDevices in a SINGLE MONTH! Now, assuming those "in the know" quickly learn their iDevices can't have Flash, I would assume that lots of those requests are newer people who are NOT "in the know" and are wanting their new iDevice to do something THEY want it to do... only to be disappointed that it can't.
Asking this question here is asking a pretty biased crowd. Whatever Apple says seems to heavily dominate what this crowd wants to believe, and there are plenty here who jump in to justify anything Apple chooses to do.
Would I like the individual user OPTION for a Flash player on my iDevice? Absolutely. If I want to "burn my battery faster", "crash Safari 10 times a day", and so on, shouldn't that be MY choice? Why should anyone argue on behalf of Apple choosing for it's customers... especially something so prevalent.
HTML5 is far from being a full Flash replacement. If one could wave a magic wand and immediately convert all Flash video everywhere to HTML5 video, us iDevice users would be able to play those videos, as would a small crowd using certain browsers. But the vast majority would be locked out (because their browsers and hardware can't play HTML5 video). Flash runs on just about everything today EXCEPT iDevices because Apple chose to lock it out rather than letting iDevice buyers decide for themselves.
Besides, Flash is much more than just video (and HTML5 is even farther from replacing the rest of Flash beyond just video).
Some apps burn iDevice batteries very fast too. Some apps crash iDevices. Etc. But those apps can be downloaded by those that want them or not downloaded by those that don't. It's too bad that at least the OPTION doesn't exist for users to make a similar decision about Flash. Those that don't want it don't download it. And those that do will get what they want out of their own iDevice too.
Asking this question here is asking a pretty biased crowd. Whatever Apple says seems to heavily dominate what this crowd wants to believe, and there are plenty here who jump in to justify anything Apple chooses to do.
Would I like the individual user OPTION for a Flash player on my iDevice? Absolutely. If I want to "burn my battery faster", "crash Safari 10 times a day", and so on, shouldn't that be MY choice? Why should anyone argue on behalf of Apple choosing for it's customers... especially something so prevalent.
HTML5 is far from being a full Flash replacement. If one could wave a magic wand and immediately convert all Flash video everywhere to HTML5 video, us iDevice users would be able to play those videos, as would a small crowd using certain browsers. But the vast majority would be locked out (because their browsers and hardware can't play HTML5 video). Flash runs on just about everything today EXCEPT iDevices because Apple chose to lock it out rather than letting iDevice buyers decide for themselves.
Besides, Flash is much more than just video (and HTML5 is even farther from replacing the rest of Flash beyond just video).
Some apps burn iDevice batteries very fast too. Some apps crash iDevices. Etc. But those apps can be downloaded by those that want them or not downloaded by those that don't. It's too bad that at least the OPTION doesn't exist for users to make a similar decision about Flash. Those that don't want it don't download it. And those that do will get what they want out of their own iDevice too.
When we didn't have it in the first place it was fine but i feel it would be good to have but not worth the trouble. The main problem is flash adds they make everything so difficult even though it uses up a lot of recourses it would be manageable to watch videos if the adds, and the rest of the page didn't hog everything. Even macs don't ship with flash anymore, its done with now that adobe gave in. They are developing in the next version of flash a converter to html 5, basically like sky fire but not as annoying. I hope that is released asap because it would be nice.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
HTML 5 won't solve the ads issue. If anything, once HTML5 is truly dominant it will be that much harder to block the ads. Right now, those that want to block ads can use Flash blockers or not install the player. Once HTML5 rules, the player will be fundamentally "installed" and blocker software will be guessing at what is an ad vs. what is page content.
So? Saying "Flash is a good thing to have because it's easier to block Flash than HTML" isn't a great argument from any perspective.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Not my argument at all. For those that hate Flash because of ads, HTML5 is going to be a cruel non-solution. I'd prefer the OPTION of a Flash player for my own iDevices (not wanting that CHOICE forced on anyone else though). But I consume Flash beyond just video and wish that my iDevice was all I would need to take along when traveling but can't (because that option is locked out).
One of the main arguments against Flash is the "I hate the Flash ads" argument. But HTML5 will have the ads built right into the page itself, not running in a dedicated player somewhat isolated from the page. If you don't like Flash because of ads, you'll not like HTML5 when it is fully running the show.
That's not true. You'll have more control over HTML5 ads than Flash ads. We will block them the same way we always do - by content types and originating server.
Do you have a hard time blocking image ads? They're delivered via HTML.
FYI... The Daily Show clips from Comedy Central's website will play in Safari on the iPad now. Another Flash Domino falls...
Honestly, you guys who go on about how you don't need Flash are so annoying. Yes, few web sites use it. However, I attempt to visit multiple sites per week only to find out I can't view some or all of their content. If you truly *never* encounter a Flash site, then you must not use your iPad for much surfing because statistical probability is you will regularly need Flash. I think you're just fanboys.
Yes, Flash would be very nice so can I can visit all sites as designed.
Yes, Flash would be very nice so can I can visit all sites as designed.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
So you can block HTML5 ads right now? With what software?
Yes, ad blockers- when available- will be able to try to guess what might be ads vs. what might be HTML5 media content. But it won't be as easy to guess. Right now, the ad haters can kill all of the Flash ads by NOT installing the player and/or using ad blockers that block Flash media from playing. That's a very easy solution that works 100% of the time. When HTML5 rules, it's going to be much more of a guessing game for the ad blocker software and the "player" is going to be fundamental (and thus mandatory) for all browsers that can display HTML5.
And the argument against Flash because "I hate the ads" still isn't resolved by this feedback. If we hate Flash because we hate Flash Ads, HTML5 is NOT going to arrive ad-free.
"I don't like Flash / don't notice it / am fine with its absence" = fanboy who won't stop posting and misrepresents their Internet use
"I would like the option of Flash" = honest and reasonable opinion which can never be said enough
Got it.
Safari. Firefox. Internet Explorer. Opera. That's the advantage or open standards. You can build control into the browser.
And, for the record, I did say that you will have more control.
Why not? They will do it the same way they do it now. Content type and originating server.
I agree with you. It's a silly argument. The only advantage is that we won't have to rely on one company to improve the efficiency of playing certain content, ads or otherwise. Don't like how Firefox handles canvas animations? Switch.
I can't say I've never visited a flash site, but I can say I really don't miss it. I have flash on demand on my iPad, it's called Puffin 
However I have only used Puffin a few times, none of the sites I visit on a regular basis require flash, and if they do, well, there's an app for that.
However I have only used Puffin a few times, none of the sites I visit on a regular basis require flash, and if they do, well, there's an app for that.Lol so because there are many of us people who don't need/notice/whatever flash, we're fanboys? Are you sure we don't annoy you just cos we deflate your point? We could just as easily say you're a flash fanboy if we want to drop to your immature level..
Many sites now are switching away from flash based content. What does that tell you? Or are you in denial?
I do pretty much all my browsing on an iPhone or iPad since they came out. Only once did I need flash, well I didn't even need it, my brother sent me a link to a video that was in flash, all I did was go to the mobile version of the same site and I got a HTML 5 version instead.
It means I think many of you downplay how often you go to a site and can't use it. I'm tired of having to put down my iPad for my MBP just to view something. And I simply don't believe you've only had ONE instance of needing Flash. I don't think you guys are lying, I just think you aren't really counting.
Flash or HTML5, whatever I don't care. I just want to view every site. You guys don't obviously don't.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Here's some sample ads in HTML5: http://dev.sencha.com/deploy/css3-ads/ How do you block them with Safari, Firefox, IE, Opera?
Within the context of my postings in this thread, how they do it now is by blocking ALL Flash content. If the player is not installed, no flash ads. If the player is installed but Flash ad blockers are also running, a user has the option to play Flash content if they want.
Yes, some ad blockers also recognize the other types (such as animated .gif and static banners), but that's outside the context of my responses and this thread is about "do iPad user still want Flash?"
Yes of course! I don't see anything wrong with more compatibility, even if it is being abandoned little by little. I like my options and I know a lot of people agree. I also know a lot of people disagree, and have no problems as is. I still don't think they would argue against having it though...
No. Any iPod user who wants flash has moved on to bigger and better 'Pads, such as the Tab 10.1.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I can't say I've never visited a flash site, but I can say I really don't miss it. I have flash on demand on my iPad, it's called Puffin
puffin (and similar) are OK but they heavily rely on only the variations of Flash that streams (like video). I think Flash as a video player is great because it runs on just about everything out there (except iDevices because of Apple deciding to choose for users, not because it can't run on iDevices), unlike HTML5 video which runs on only a small minority of hardware & only certain browsers. I know, I know, it'll get there. But between now and that time that HTML5 video is as universal as Flash video in terms of running on everything is probably still a LONG TIME (many years). It would be nice to have the individual OPTIONS for those interested between now and that time.
Flash is more than just video though. It can do all kinds of animation in very efficient file sizes- even at dial up speeds. It can do all kinds of audio syncing effects that HTML5 isn't even close to being able to cover (ever notice how just about all HTML5 demos lack sound? wonder why? Now you know). And there are tons of tools to help coding novices render multimedia in Flash and make it available on the web where just about everyone can access & view it.
HTML5 hardly has any tools- and the few that are out there are relatively limited in capabilities. And even if those capabilities are enough for someone, posting the HTML5 code without a Flash equivalent screens out the majority of the audience (unless that audience is mostly Apple people, Chrome users, and a few others).
We just went through an effort to make the transition at my company because we wanted all our web media to run on iDevices too. The simple reality is that a business can NOT choose to fully embrace just HTML5 if that business wants to reach the whole world. The choice now- and for the foreseeable future- is TWO versions of media: one for a small segment currently capable of HTML5 (and even that has some fragmentation issues) and another for the vast majority of the world (which is the Flash version).
Companies wanting to cover all bases now get to develop 2 times in 2 different coding environments often with different programming talent at around 2X the cost. THAT is the reality of HTML5 vs. Flash now and for a long time into the future. A company that chooses to solely embrace HTML5 now and in the medium-term is choosing to NOT make their media content visible to the bulk of the world. If their customers are not just Apple people (and Chrome and a few others), they have NO CHOICE but to at least include a Flash version too.
Actually I like that apple doesn't allow flash, they're drawing a line against poor standard tech. Adobe had a chance to sort mobile flash out where it runs well, doesn't drain the hell out of the battery. Did they take up that opportunity? No. That's their own fault. Apple have standards. I'd rather not have flash and have a good running device than flash enabled, crashing, sluggish, draining battery, more security holes than Swiss Cheese. That's not even a choice.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Not me. And I know I'm not the only one (see post #27- that's more than one million in a single month). I like all the rest of what an iDevice offers. But I do think it would be far more useful to me if I could choose to download a Flash player "app" and "burn my own batteries" or "crash Safari 10 times a day" if I want to do that on my own iDevice.
Switching to Android or the HP (even at $99 on closeout) can get you a real Flash player running on a tablet but then you have to sacrifice so many other niceties you get on iDevices.
People here often post Apple's crushing sales results as proof of the world voting against Flash. I doubt that they are voting against Flash (again see post #27); they are instead voting for all the other great features & benefits that come from embracing iDevices vs. other options. If all the Apple store apps were also available as Android apps and if an Android Device could interface as seamlessly with iLife and OS X programs as iDevices, I'd be very quick to switch.
Personally, I think the iDevices we have would just be more valuable to those that would like to have a Flash player if Apple would allow that OPTION for them. It wouldn't hurt any of the "die Flash die" people as they could choose NOT to install that option just like one user isn't forced to install any other apps another has on their iDevice.
----------
Believe what you wish. I don't argue that Flash is perfectly efficient as is, nor do I argue pro Adobe and con Apple. There are apps in the app store that burn batteries faster than other apps but we users are allowed to download those Apps. There are apps in the app store that crashes iOS but we are allowed to download those apps if we desire too. Some apps make iDevices more sluggish. Some come with security risks (even iOS itself has security holes that need to be plugged, but Apple isn't banning iOS).
I suspect the main reason to ban Flash is as many have surmised: business. If Flash-based apps can run on iDevices (too), developers can code it ONCE in Flash and it will run EVERYWHERE. Flash Apps don't have to be sold through the iTunes store; one can argue they are all web apps (so millions of Flash apps won't be able to flow 30% to Apple when they are added to iDevices). Etc. Do I think some of what Steve wrote against Flash is what he actually believes? Yes, and I believe it too. But is that the real reason to ban Flash... or is that good PR reasoning? After all, if you post "thoughts on Flash" and offer that it's bad for Apple's profit motives, that's unlikely to be as well received even to those completely under Apple's spell.
I don't love Flash. Actually, I'd love a better alternative. But between now and when that better alternative is fully in place and universal (runs on as many things as Flash does now), I'd rather we users have the personal option for Flash rather than Apple deciding for us.
And before someone posts: "go buy some other iDevice-like thing that runs Flash if you feel that way", please see my last post. It's a "cake and eat it too" issue for me. I'd like all the niceties we enjoy in our iDevices as well as the option for my iDevice (that I paid for) to also cover this other, PERSONAL need as well. If I could have that option, I could leave the laptop home much more often when traveling for business. Instead, I have to bring it too or in lieu of this "magical" "the whole internet in your pocket" iDevice if I have any perception I may need to be able to run Flash media during those travels.
We have several hundred thousand apps to make these iDevices do just about anything... except this one thing... which is able to be done on just about every other kind of computing device in the world. I'd sure like a complete solution app for that.
Last edited: