There is absolutely no reason why you can't use HTML5 and JavaScript to give video subtitles. There is even a JavaScript library that supports SRT files.
HTML5 with a fallback to flash would be ideal for the BBC.
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.
Flash s*cks! Get rid of it!
- Thread starter echo.park
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There is absolutely no reason why you can't use HTML5 and JavaScript to give video subtitles. There is even a JavaScript library that supports SRT files.
HTML5 with a fallback to flash would be ideal for the BBC.
Actually is companies that ask for it. GM, BurgerKing, pharma companies. They tell us they want the sites done in flash or they take their money elsewhere, and no one is going to turn down a few million dollars because a client wants flash. Its not about being to "lazy" its about the clients no liking it when you tell them flash isn't needed, they still see flash as "cool and hip" as if it was 1998 still.
When major corporations catch up with 2011, then the internet will too. Some clients still have us doing dev work for Flash 8.
Why use HTML 5 and Javascript when something can be done easily with no sweat in Flash? HTML 5 offers nothing over Flash, Flash is superior to HTLM 5 with user interactive content.
HTML 5 = something that is being shoved threw people's throat while offering nothing over what's currently available at the market.
edit: My old $500 laptop easily got 4 hours of battery life while watching youtube in Linux. ( Flash is crap in Linux too, at least a few years back when I was using my old laptop ) So it's an OS X / MBA issue if you get only 2.5 hours watching youtube video's with Flash?
I don't need some stupid test on some random web page. All I experienced is told in my very first post. Of course does HTML5 drain my battery also, but you know, dramatically less. Same with heat and fan noise.
Watching HTML5 720p video for like 25 mins raises the CPU temp from 52° to maybe 60° C, without changing the fan speed.
Same thing with Flash 720p causes my CPU to reach 85° to nearly 90° C! Fan speed at limit.
Last edited:
A few hours of battery life, no need to worry about plug-ins and lower operating temps are nothing?
Whole games have been built in HTML5 and CSS3, how does flash give a better experience than that?
I can't believe this thread!
Some of the posts here are hilarious - desperately trying to come up with legitimate reasons as to why flash is so bad (hint: the reason is because Steve told you so). What? People who develop in flash are LAZY now? Really?
A crappy bit of flash programming is not going to drain your battery twice as fast as a crappy bit of HTML5... I call SHENANIGANS!
One of my mates works for a company who have developed almost exclusively in Flash for around 10 years. And they have done some VERY popular websites. Thanks to Steve, they are completely dual/re-tooling and spending a TONNE of time and effort in the process to try and be competitive. The result - the same end product produced in a slightly longer timeframe. Oh and probably higher costs to the customer.
Can someone explain to me what Apple's ACTUAL beef is with Adobe/Flash please? And spare me the "it drains power" crap.
Some of the posts here are hilarious - desperately trying to come up with legitimate reasons as to why flash is so bad (hint: the reason is because Steve told you so). What? People who develop in flash are LAZY now? Really?
A crappy bit of flash programming is not going to drain your battery twice as fast as a crappy bit of HTML5... I call SHENANIGANS!
One of my mates works for a company who have developed almost exclusively in Flash for around 10 years. And they have done some VERY popular websites. Thanks to Steve, they are completely dual/re-tooling and spending a TONNE of time and effort in the process to try and be competitive. The result - the same end product produced in a slightly longer timeframe. Oh and probably higher costs to the customer.
Can someone explain to me what Apple's ACTUAL beef is with Adobe/Flash please? And spare me the "it drains power" crap.
Nothing I experienced has to do with "what Steve told us". LOL
(Actually I don't give a ***** about Steve, I love Apple cause of the products, not cause of some Guru-ism.)
IT IS A FACT that when I use Flash my battery drains extremely fast, my CPU gets hot as ***** and the fan speeds up to its limits.
Doing the EXACT SAME THING using HTML5 gives me nothing of this!
So what now?
Flash s*cks!
OK, cool.
To be honest - I haven't had the same experience. Have you been upgrading through OS versions perhaps? OS-X is great, but it is not perfect and crap does build up especially over version upgrades.
After a clean rebuild (I usually did OS upgrades) my 4 year old (2.4 GHz) MBP feels much snappier. That said, even before I never noticed my fan coming on etc.. within for Flash sites. I use Chrome browser/Lion OS btw.
OK, cool.
To be honest - I haven't had the same experience. Have you been upgrading through OS versions perhaps? OS-X is great, but it is not perfect and crap does build up especially over version upgrades.
After a clean rebuild (I usually did OS upgrades) my 4 year old (2.4 GHz) MBP feels much snappier. That said, even before I never noticed my fan coming on etc.. within for Flash sites. I use Chrome browser/Lion OS btw.
I GOT YOU ALL BEAT>.I RUN CHROME OS via PARALLELS...
flash is NOT installed on osx..hehe
jk..i dont do that
but honestly, i used to use chrome browser...but in OSX lion, safari is a much smoother and faster browser. Also takes up less resources. ...Chrome is good for a windows user
flash is NOT installed on osx..hehe
jk..i dont do that
but honestly, i used to use chrome browser...but in OSX lion, safari is a much smoother and faster browser. Also takes up less resources. ...Chrome is good for a windows user
The real test is to compare power consumption in OS X vs Windows Boot Camp. I wouldn't be shocked to find out if Flash ran at a lower efficiency in OSX vs Windows, perhaps due to the limitations imposed by the OS. It may even be architecture related, where the instructions available to Adobe/Flash are limited.
I won't have my Air for another 2-4 weeks (hopefully), so I can't run the tests myself :'(
I won't have my Air for another 2-4 weeks (hopefully), so I can't run the tests myself :'(
That is completely against the spirit of the HTML5 standard though, so doing that is not a good idea.
There are many things that cannot be done with the HTML5 <video> tag that Flash can do very easily and consistently - full screen is one of them.
The real problem here is that Apple has not implemented support in Mac OS X for a large range of GPUs to do hardware accelerated video decoding. This results in a lot of users being unable to benefit from that feature.
If Apple released an update to fix this, users would see benefits in terms of heat output, CPU usage, power consumption and smooth playback.
Last edited:
a while back, on probably a 2ghz macbook pro:
playing a 1080p video in quicktime player took ~4% cpu.
playing the same video embedded in flash took ~35% cpu.
:shrug:
playing a 1080p video in quicktime player took ~4% cpu.
playing the same video embedded in flash took ~35% cpu.
:shrug:
Those two tasks aren't comparable.
It is much harder to play video within a browser window than it is just to play video in its own window.
Same on my core i5 MBP, it for some reason just doesn't wanna work without using more resources than necessary
I don't buy this argument (as a developer). video playback is taking data, decoding it, and writing out the video data to a point in memory. That's the long and short of it. The key difference between its own window and in a browser window is that the browser window gives me a different location to draw it... or the browser may just be doing it for me.
Now, it's more work to include overlays and that sort of thing on top of video (something both Flash and QT does). Flash pays more to do that because of the nature of Flash. It's more akin to a Java VM than it is native code like Quicktime. Even though the video decoding can be run native (and must), the rest of the overlays and everything else added on top isn't. That's where the extra CPU load comes from, in the end if we assume the two decoders are equal. They may or may not actually be equal in practice, due to Apple's hardware-assisted decoders versus Flash not always being able to use them to full effect in OS X.
On one hand, I quickly read this thread as, "Fish Sticks! Get rid of it!" and came here to campaign for fish sticks and their proper place in American cuisine.
On the other, Adobe Flash can't just be gotten "rid" of like that. It's been engrained into the internet for years. If it's going to go the way of the Dodo, it'll happen naturally.
On the other, Adobe Flash can't just be gotten "rid" of like that. It's been engrained into the internet for years. If it's going to go the way of the Dodo, it'll happen naturally.
As a developer, you must be very familiar with interfaces. A video in a browser requires additional processing because the video data interfaces with the browser, and the browser interfaces with the video player. How much data processing is required between the interfaces - I have no idea, but it certainly isn't the same as being your own program with your own resources.
dragging a quicktime video into the browser window and playing it yielded the same results. it's the same quicktime layer.
the quicktime video was pulled from the flash layer so it was the same file as well.
This article explains why:
http://blogs.adobe.com/penguinswf/2010/01/solving_different_problems.html
As the article notes, playing an "HTML5" video through your browser will result in worse performance than if you just played it in QuickTime or VLC or any other media player.
That's the problem with Flash and macs, and apple fanboys don't realize that.
FLASH IS NOT CRAP, the flash support for Mac OSX is crap!
In windows, if you compare flash to html5, there's really no much difference in efficiency, battery, heat etc.
But in Mac OSX it's different. I don't know whose fault it is, maybe it's apple's, maybe it's Adobe's. The point is that flash doesn't have a good support in osx like it has in windows. And that's why steve dropped it.