Yes clearly he is the baby, unlike the people who can't deal with the fact that a private company doesn't do what they want and go cry about it constantly like they're entitled to it.
ahahahaha brilliant
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 Soon to Hit the iPad?
- Thread starter LouieSamman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes clearly he is the baby, unlike the people who can't deal with the fact that a private company doesn't do what they want and go cry about it constantly like they're entitled to it.
ahahahaha brilliant
It will over time. Tool don't appear overnight. I'm fine w/ Apple being the driver to push the web this direction.
If you don't like it, don't buy iOS and go whine in another forum.
Several pages back I asked for situations where 'more advanced animations/interactivity' were necessary to accomplish supply-side goals on the web and didn't get much of an answer (read: none).
A thread tangent brought up Club Penguin as something many children cannot get on iOS. My response is not 'therefore Flash is indispensable' it's what I've said many times before:
(1) For specialized tasks, Apps can be written (and for something like Club Penguin with 12 million accounts and spin-off Nintendo games I think Disney can handle it)
(2) The fact that iOS doesn't run Flash websites doesn't magically mean iOS should therefore run Flash. It's a constraint, people can take it or leave it.
Some people have made reasonable disagreements, but this has been said and augmented and developed ad nauseam with any kind of discussion ending up with Fanboy rabble rabble rabble
Flash is really an old way of doing things. It's top heavy and very troublesome for anyone that doesn't have the plugin. You can achieve the same effects normally using AJAX and JS based methods. AJAX and JS appear on the iPhone and iPad just fine as well as close to all the browsers. I develop strictly using universal guidelines when I'm scripting websites. The best policy is a closed loop system base that can be accessed on the greatest number of devices. Android OS doesn't even support Flash in full which is why it's webkit Flash for Android webkit is kinda busted.
HTML5 is a pretty good solution for universal access with most of the animations and multimedia support that Flash used without going with a closed system that requires a custom plugin built for the device. So why so much adversity to Flash? There are multiple reasons:
1. Processor activity using Flash is much higher than loading AJAX or JS. Animations can be done without the use of Flash which would make processing the animations much faster without heavy use of the processor
2. Download time of Flash based content is very long compared to standardized code. I hate loading time since it's idle time and when using mobile devices in a post-pc environment, it just doesn't make sense to wait anymore. It's all about instant-on instant access now.
3. Flash doesn't support any of the web standards. Back button doesn't work, forward button doesn't work, linking doesn't work correctly, search and breadcrumbs don't work. Sure, you get a pretty website with cool animations but at the disadvantage of navigation. It's also not standardized to web marketing which makes it impossible to search content.
4. Flash is hard to update. Adding a new page to the website requires adding a completely new set of information in each page so navigation is smooth across the entire Flash designed website. Those of you that know flash, know that it's difficult to add another page onto your Flash based websites. It's one of the reasons why I don't use Flash anymore.
HTML5 is a pretty good solution for universal access with most of the animations and multimedia support that Flash used without going with a closed system that requires a custom plugin built for the device. So why so much adversity to Flash? There are multiple reasons:
1. Processor activity using Flash is much higher than loading AJAX or JS. Animations can be done without the use of Flash which would make processing the animations much faster without heavy use of the processor
2. Download time of Flash based content is very long compared to standardized code. I hate loading time since it's idle time and when using mobile devices in a post-pc environment, it just doesn't make sense to wait anymore. It's all about instant-on instant access now.
3. Flash doesn't support any of the web standards. Back button doesn't work, forward button doesn't work, linking doesn't work correctly, search and breadcrumbs don't work. Sure, you get a pretty website with cool animations but at the disadvantage of navigation. It's also not standardized to web marketing which makes it impossible to search content.
4. Flash is hard to update. Adding a new page to the website requires adding a completely new set of information in each page so navigation is smooth across the entire Flash designed website. Those of you that know flash, know that it's difficult to add another page onto your Flash based websites. It's one of the reasons why I don't use Flash anymore.
While I'm about as anti-Flash as you can get, your argument above has some SERIOUS flaws.
1 - Replicating Flash-type animation is much more CPU-intensive in HTML5 (for now)
2 - Downloading animations / videos / etc. in HTML5 or Flash is going to be the same. The assets are the heavy load, not the .SWF envelope.
3 - These issues (deep linking, bookmarking, SEO-friendliness) have all been resolved for Flash for several years. There's a lot of awful Flash coders out there that don't use them, but there's also a lot of awful HTML coders.
4 - Again, this argument has been negated for several years now by using any number of the decent flash-integrated CMS on the market. Or by building one bespoke.
Yeah, I can't stand restaurant web sites that use animations. What on earth are they thinking of? I want to check the address, see the menu, basic stuff. As soon as I see animation I leave the site.
Animation on the Web is a blight.
Animation on the Web is a blight.
You are correct, eye candy is not necessary, and websites could be a series of boring RSS feeds. But where is the fun in that?
When approached as a series of static elements it is just as hard to add new pages to a flash site as a static html site. However, if the content is dynamically loaded by code rather than on the timeline, its quite easy to add content to a flash site. All it takes is a smart programmer.
I agree that in a perfect world no plugins should be required. But seeing as no one bitches about having to download their favorite alternate browser, downloading one plugin which installs on all browsers seems trivial. I supposed you stopped testing against Firefox and Opera since these are things you need to download as well.
Thanks for the response, but this is a false dichotomy, and you still haven't given me examples.
I think it shows the seriousness or lack thereof of Flash: it's something people would like, and that's fine, but is necessary only in trivial or very niche circumstances - which, in the absence of examples, remain hypothetical.
Hmmmm it looks like my info is pretty old. I haven't seen the Flash CMS systems out there.
1. I've done several Flash-like animations in HTML5 already and they are pretty lightweight compared to Flash of yesteryear. AJAX + JS based animations are fast and efficient. The main thing is that if you don't need certain animation sequences, you don't load them in your code.
2. Video payloads are normally heavy anyways but I was referring to loading time for animations and launching of swf content on most websites that are still out there. It's just too heavy for my taste and loading HTML5/PHP is almost instantaneous.
3. I guess on the whole, I've seen so many Flash websites with no SEO and also don't have searchable content which has really turned me off of flash. If Adobe fixed these issues, why is it that so many flash websites don't use the tools? HTML scripters out there are equally heinous but I've seen many more good websites using PHP/PERL/XHTML/HTML5 than standard HTML. On the whole it seems with XHTML CMS out there, it's more pervasive to have the tools built-in.
4. After briefly seeing some of these Flash CMS, I think I'll take a try and build something basic using one to see how it goes. Any preferences for Flash based CMS?
1. I've done several Flash-like animations in HTML5 already and they are pretty lightweight compared to Flash of yesteryear. AJAX + JS based animations are fast and efficient. The main thing is that if you don't need certain animation sequences, you don't load them in your code.
2. Video payloads are normally heavy anyways but I was referring to loading time for animations and launching of swf content on most websites that are still out there. It's just too heavy for my taste and loading HTML5/PHP is almost instantaneous.
3. I guess on the whole, I've seen so many Flash websites with no SEO and also don't have searchable content which has really turned me off of flash. If Adobe fixed these issues, why is it that so many flash websites don't use the tools? HTML scripters out there are equally heinous but I've seen many more good websites using PHP/PERL/XHTML/HTML5 than standard HTML. On the whole it seems with XHTML CMS out there, it's more pervasive to have the tools built-in.
4. After briefly seeing some of these Flash CMS, I think I'll take a try and build something basic using one to see how it goes. Any preferences for Flash based CMS?
The biggest single objection I have to Flash is that it takes away a core principle of Internet use: User control.
How many times do you end up on a site, only to have the screen go crazy with pop-up menus and animations? Actions triggered by the Flash "MouseOver" event. Or even just the act of going to a particular page, or clicking on a link. And as a result you spend time closing the windows and popups, and carefully maneuvering your cursor to the link or button you actually want, without accidentally infringing on the MouseOver regions.
Which is not to say that ALL Flash sites do this. Or even that site operators don't have other tools at their disposal to do equally egregious and annoying things. But Flash definitely seems to be the worst offender.
The second objection is Flash's well-known security vulnerabilities.
No platform (including iOS or Mac OS) is immune to malware and hacking. But it does seem to me that Apple has done a remarkably good job of keeping serious security and malware issues OFF the entire iOS platform.
And this is (IMHO) the argument that "Flash-on-demand" is far from a sensible solution. Its like saying "I'll only put on my seatbelt if I'm speeding": Hardly a recipe for automotive safety. Just as you don't know when you're going to be in a car accident - you don't know if a site has been infected with malware.
How many times do you end up on a site, only to have the screen go crazy with pop-up menus and animations? Actions triggered by the Flash "MouseOver" event. Or even just the act of going to a particular page, or clicking on a link. And as a result you spend time closing the windows and popups, and carefully maneuvering your cursor to the link or button you actually want, without accidentally infringing on the MouseOver regions.
Which is not to say that ALL Flash sites do this. Or even that site operators don't have other tools at their disposal to do equally egregious and annoying things. But Flash definitely seems to be the worst offender.
The second objection is Flash's well-known security vulnerabilities.
No platform (including iOS or Mac OS) is immune to malware and hacking. But it does seem to me that Apple has done a remarkably good job of keeping serious security and malware issues OFF the entire iOS platform.
And this is (IMHO) the argument that "Flash-on-demand" is far from a sensible solution. Its like saying "I'll only put on my seatbelt if I'm speeding": Hardly a recipe for automotive safety. Just as you don't know when you're going to be in a car accident - you don't know if a site has been infected with malware.
OK Fine. This is just one site, but you can't easily accomplish all the small animations and tweens easily without Flash. This site could obviously have been done without all those things, but it would have been as nice.
www.litigationpresentation.com
Do you believe this won't happen if Flash died to be totally replaced by HTML5 ?
No annoying adds, no popups in HTML5 ?
One man's nice is another man's... uhh... Wow.
Let's just say that if killing Flash meant that we'd never have to see a site like that again, then count me as a big vote for "KILL IT"
Ok, one site. I figure it is trivial/niche and which did not have to use Flash anyway. You say it 'wouldn't be as nice'; I disagree, but that's just our opinions. This is hardly enough to demonstrate how indispensable Flash is. When I ask for 'examples' I mean objectives or things web designers are trying to accomplish that they can't do any other way. It's clear websites which use Flash won't be the same if they don't use Flash.
Flash as a tool is good for making Flash animations, but those in themselves aren't useful for very much anymore, if they ever were. It's confusing the means (Flash) with the ends (making something useful/entertaining) and thinking the means are good in themselves (they aren't).
EDIT: Just so you don't think I'm moving the goalposts, I do mean 'show me websites which accomplish something which couldn't have been done without Flash other than the trivial fact that they have a Flash animation' and it's pretty clear Litigation Presentation can list their accomplishments and have cute imagery without doing so.
Wow! I don't know! If HTML5 has the exact same problems as Flash and no redeeming benefits (like it stops working in iOS for some reason) then this is an argument against HTML5 too, not an argument in favour of Flash.
I only need one redeeming benefit, it works natively in my browser with no additional plug-ins.
I think its subjective at this point. If you place more value in a lack of plugins then you do having extra polish added to a site then no Flash doesn't add anything beyond the fact that you have access to more of the internet than you do without. I consider there to be more value in having Flash then not, others feel the opposite. Neither will see eye-to-eye because what one sees as negatives, others see as benefits. And god forbid that everyone should agree to disagree on an internet forum. 
PS. I see annoying ads on my iPad without Flash.
PS. I see annoying ads on my iPad without Flash.
I think its subjective at this point. If you place more value in a lack of plugins then you do having extra polish added to a site then no Flash doesn't add anything beyond the fact that you have access to more of the internet than you do without. I consider there to be more value in having Flash then not, others feel the opposite. Neither will see eye-to-eye because what one sees as negatives, others see as benefits. And god forbid that everyone should agree to disagree on an internet forum.
Yes, absolutely, but to nit-pick, what you call 'extra polish' I call 'digital cruft'
The point is we can have the discussion - there's more to it than 'raaaawr if you don't demand Flash and chalk its absence up to Mean Ol' Mr. Jobs you're a fanboy in denial'.
Yes, absolutely, but to nit-pick, what you call 'extra polish' I call 'digital cruft'
The point is we can have the discussion - there's more to it than 'raaaawr if you don't demand Flash and chalk its absence up to Mean Ol' Mr. Jobs you're a fanboy in denial'.
Well to be fair, Flash's absence is due to Mean Ol' Mr. Jobs. This thread is 7 pages now and you can only add so many meaningful comments. Now its just a series of "what you see value in I see as crap" arguments from both sides.
I take it you mean 'for the defensible reasons he's laid out even if people don't agree' not 'because he's a big crybaby who owes me something', and I think there's still posts in the thread which have value.
That's the thing, our opinion of how mean SJ is depends on how badly you want Flash and how valid you think his objections to it are.
Last edited:
All of that content can be migrated. If not today, soon enough.
The problem is that you are stuck in this thinking that flash is some required part of the internet and that it's the ONLY solution. It's not.