Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google Chrome Set to Gain Integrated Flash Player Plug-In

*LTD* said:
Apparently it does. Steve opens his mouth and HTML5 comes rolling out of it. Roughly one to two months later and major players are preparing for HTML5 transitions.
Click to expand...

We know you're one of the uber fans of Steve and Apple.

But guess what. The word isn't transition TO. Unless these same sites are dropping flash altogether. Which they are not. They are providing their videos in various formats. Which is wise to cover the greatest audience.

It's ignorant to think that websites are going to stop using flash in 2010 altogether just because Apple deems it so. While the iPad and other mobile computing devices can't view flash and that's a big audience - there's a much BIGGER audience at present that uses technology NOT Apple.

I know it's painful for you, LTD, to think that people could possibly use other computers by other manufacturers. But I assure you - it's happening all around you!
 
*LTD* said:
Apparently it does. Steve opens his mouth and HTML5 comes rolling out of it. Roughly one to two months later and major players are preparing for HTML5 transitions.
Click to expand...

Or it could be that HTML5 has been in development hell for the couple of years and W3C has finally gave a hard date of release which coincidentally ties in with the release of major devices that will utilize the new technology.
 
hitekalex said:
Why, because Steve Jobs declared that Flash is inherently bad? Listen here.. the world doesn't revolve around Apple, Steve Jobs tantrums, or his little iPhoneOS ecosystem. Chrome is a multi-platform browser and vast majority of Internet users use Flash.
Click to expand...

Flash is a total resource hog... and on a mobile platform, it is going to suck down battery pretty substantially vs. not having it. I've been working on an HTPC platform for my house and looking at Win7 on a Revo vs. a Mac Mini. My worst case scenario to test is Flash. It takes the CPU utilization through the roof vs. anything else that is running, streaming, or whatever. It is true that Flash is multi-platform, and its an equal pig on all the platforms. If there is a more efficient way to accomplish the same user experience, then I applaud Steve Jobs for taking the unpopular position and trying to push everyone to it.
 
Overheard from the conversation were two lines by Jobs. Enthusiastically, "They're going to see it all eventually so who cares how they get it." Which seemed to be about web content, said the tipster.

And the puzzle pieces fall into place...

Jobs is pushing against the need for Flash while Schmidt is enabling it. Lame.
 
Except that the internet is like a formula one race car and flash is like putting stale vintage 1976 leaded gasoline in it.
 
i guess I won't use chrome then.

why the heck would people install click to flash and then have google integrate flash? doesn't google think anymore?:rolleyes:
 
I hope Google will have a preference to turn the plugin on/off.

For 95% of my browsing I don't want flash, not because Steve says it's dead, but because it consumes resources and in most cases just slows down my browsing experience. for the other 5% of my browsing needs I wouldn't mind just enabling flash. Better yet, maybe Google will allow you to make a allow/block list of sites where flash will work or not.

For example: Disable Flash on digg.com, most news sites, etc.
Allow Flash plugin on Hulu, NBC.com, ABC.com, etc...
 
People, you need to get over this Google vs. Apple thing. Stop trying to make everything that Google does into a some kind of Apple thing as well. You're just making a big deal out of nothing.

Google integrating Flash via API is not just for the Chrome, but for the ability to use Flash in Chromium, their OS for netbooks as well as for Android OS. It also means faster Flash updates for their browser. We already have Flash via Chrome. Nothing changed in any big way here. It isn't even a big news. So what does it have to do with Apple? Nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

Get over yourselves, seriously.
 
convergent said:
Flash is a total resource hog... and on a mobile platform, it is going to suck down battery pretty substantially vs. not having it.
Click to expand...
Which means that it really ought to be a consumer-by-consumer choice, to enable or disable it as they would other features. However, even if HTML5-based features aren't fully equivalent to everything that Flash can do, it's going to be hard to stop the momentum once it's a viable standards-based alternative. We may not be there yet, but the more consumers that have non-Flash-enabled devices, the more pressure there will be on websites to offer the alternative, which makes iPhones more and more practical. We'll see.
 
MikhailT said:
People, you need to get over this Google vs. Apple thing. Stop trying to make everything that Google does into a some kind of Apple thing as well. You're just making a big deal out of nothing.

Google integrating Flash via API is not just for the Chrome, but for the ability to use Flash in Chromium, their OS for netbooks as well as for Android OS. It also means faster Flash updates for their browser. We already have Flash via Chrome. Nothing changed in any big way here. It isn't even a big news. So what does it have to do with Apple? Nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

Get over yourselves, seriously.
Click to expand...

I dislike Google almost as much as I dislike Flash. What is there to get over.

And by the way, Chrome by definition is a thin decorative plating used to make shiny and disguise what otherwise might be an unattractive hunk of junk.
 
About the frekn time someone realised and did the obvious...

Thank you Google!

May others follow now pretty please :)
 
bnerd said:
Its not HTML5 transitions... its HTML5 ADDitions.

The major players are sticking with Flash on the web... moving to HTML5 for devices that are stuck with only HTML.
Click to expand...
Transition = addition (in the beginning)

During the "transition" from OS 9 to OS X you were able to run both type of apps simultaneously thanks to classic.

We're almost done with the "transition" from PPC to Intel. People still run PPC code on Intel machines via Rosetta today, but don't expect that to continue too much longer.

Once the tech has caught up and all the major players can natively play HTML5 video …Flash video support will be dropped by Youtube, Vimeo, etc. It will take several years, but it will happen.
 
Beric said:
I guess it's a good thing, since you have to have flash to use the internet these days.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

55173-lolwut.jpg

o_rly.jpg
 
The *only* reason Google is doing this is to make their browser better than the alternatives. While their approach is inherently going to improve the user experience, that's not their motivation. Contrarily, Apple's motives are driven by user experience, hence their lack of interest in Flash.

At the end of the day, though, this will be a big step forward for Flash that will probably end up benefiting all browsers. Why can't Flash run in its own sandbox, for example?
 
I find it interesting that when Steve Jobs says he can't make his OS's work with Flash, it's Adobe's fault, and almost everyone assumes that Flash is on the way out. Just because it doesn't work on the minority of computers, doesn't mean that it's on the way out. Get a real PC if you can't view your websites. I like my iPhone, but I don't like it that Stevie sold me something that only works on a portion of websites. But that's my fault, not his. I bought the iPhone hoping that Flash would come, but that's where my hope turned to stupidity. LOL. I believe it's mostly because Apple can't get a portion of the pie, or own Flash and get all the pie. Who knows. Everything at Apple is secret and us genius' on here verse thoughts as facts.

Now, if Google and Adobe have figured a way to integrate it into working in the iPhone version, this would be a great blow to Apple's ego.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/5.0.342.7 Safari/533.2)

I loves me some Chrome! My favourite cross platform browser and the inclusion of flash doesn't bother me one bit.
 
hitekalex said:
Why, because Steve Jobs declared that Flash is inherently bad? Listen here.. the world doesn't revolve around Apple, Steve Jobs tantrums, or his little iPhoneOS ecosystem. Chrome is a multi-platform browser and vast majority of Internet users use Flash.
Click to expand...

Most users use Flash and don't know it. Most users really don't care as long as it works, and in the case of Flash on the Mac it really doesn't work very well. Most users only use it when they play online games, like though Facebook or other social networking site. Most interactivity is easily done through HTML5 and Javascript, and it is much more light weight than Flash. As such, these sites will eventually move away from Flash because more and more people are accessing it on their mobile device. And regardless of one's opinion of the iPhone, it is a large chunk of the market. So for the first time, probably ever, Apple as the ability to demand change and people have to listen (eventually).

Flash is not inherently bad, its current implementation on the Mac platform is bad. But ultimately, it is old technology that will be completely replaced by HTML5/Javascript eventually. Until that time, I think this is probably a good move for Google.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back