Flash does have built-in DRM / content protection that is not matched by any HTML5 spec. Yes, you can grab downloaded video from the cache for sites like Youtube that do not use this DRM, but for websites like Hulu, the video is never saved to the hard drive, so it is not easily circumented without usage of a screen recorder like Tunebite or Totalrecorder. Given that DRM is proprietary by nature, technologies like Flash and Silverlight will probably serve these needs for awhile.
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.
Google Chrome Set to Gain Integrated Flash Player Plug-In
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Flash does have built-in DRM / content protection that is not matched by any HTML5 spec. Yes, you can grab downloaded video from the cache for sites like Youtube that do not use this DRM, but for websites like Hulu, the video is never saved to the hard drive, so it is not easily circumented without usage of a screen recorder like Tunebite or Totalrecorder. Given that DRM is proprietary by nature, technologies like Flash and Silverlight will probably serve these needs for awhile.
That can be fixed. Insert Windows 7 DVD, boot from it. Select "Reformat hard drive", then install Windows 7.
So many here make the mistake of believing that Flash is a video player. It's so much more, and that's why Flash will continue to be a major force even if every site moves to HTML5 video.
Excellent post, thanks.
I think that there is a fourth, although one could argue that it's a special case of your number 3.
I see applications that build their GUIs in Flash. These are usually server management applications - but the client interface is a Flash webpage. This lets them support multiple clients with a single codebase - Windows, Apple, or any other system with a Flash browser. (For Win/Apple only support, I see Silverlight as well.)
Uhm, actually, Apple simply lied, hoping that it wouldn't get caught.
They got caught in England, and were forced to pull their ads.
But they still lie in the US. The Apple site still claims "iPad is the best way to experience the web."
But of course, without Flash it's only half the web..., and half the truth.
DUUUUDE! you are calling safari a resource hog and prefer firefox? firefox is the most sluggish, fat and inefficient browser on the mac platform ever! way to bloated with stuff that nobody needs. safari runs quick, is snappy and starts up immediately.
Step in the wrong direction for security. Flash is a big target for exploits. If someone downloads itunes they could be installing an old exploitable version of flash if flash was updated recently but itunes was not. If an old version were sitting around and installed by someone they would also get an old exploitable version.
How hard is it to click on install the first time you see a flash site?
How hard is it to click on install the first time you see a flash site?
Why do you make the assumption that I was talking about OS X? Chrome has far more Windows users than OS X users, and that's where most attacks happen. I made no reference specifically to any particular OS.
Know the difference of an ARM A8 and an Intel Core 2 Quad?
yeah, one is used to make things that fit in your hand. and one is used for boxes the size of a 6 pack.
Hmmm now I wonder why Apple don't put a Core 2 Quad in their iPhones
The vast majority of Windows users support you on that.
Nice that you used a smiley on that unsupportable statement.
It may be unsubstantiated, however, as you have surmised, the numbers speak for themselves.Nice that you used a smiley on that unsupportable statement.
Okay I feel dumb, I just looked in the Options
Wrench >>Options >> Under the Hood >> Content Settings >> Plug-ins
and it looks like you can already allow/block a site accessing plugins and I'd guess Flash would fall under that category. But it would be nice to be able to be more specific rather than all plugins. because maybe I want all plugins except Flash to work on most sites.
(I could say the same thing about Silverlight, and other technologies.)
Your wish is granted (sort of)... Adobe has already announced support for Canvas and HTML5 in CS5 apps including Illustrator and Dreamweaver (the other technologies you list are already supported today in Dreamweaver).
Take a look at this example of CS5 building a dynamic canvas-based chart:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TwGpgFlrAE
In this discussion, Flash VIDEO is the only relevant feature we are talking about. (or should be …perhaps with the exception of Ads) …the rest of what flash does will NOT be replaced by HTML5 until other creation tools are available. That will be further down the road, hence my specific reference to VIDEO, and naming video websites like Youtube, Vimeo, etc.
Now I'm wondering what percentage of users have installed Flash solely for the purpose of watching youtube videos. You know they aren't installing it for ads, and I'd be willing to bet the majority of users aren't active web gamers. Once video no longer requires Flash, their % will start dropping.
Awesome! I'll be back, I'm off to download Chrome.
@DMann,
37.6% of a 5% market share is WAY smaller than 8.92% of a 93% market share.
@DMann,
37.6% of a 5% market share is WAY smaller than 8.92% of a 93% market share.
Awesome! I'll be back, I'm off to download Chrome.
@DMann,
37.6% of a 5% market share is WAY smaller than 8.92% of a 93% market share.
We're not talking about size (quantity) here, were talking percentages in relation to migration.
Seriously, why would it bother you of all people.....?!?
I think it is strange that Google of all companies would support such a closed proprietary piece of software. I always thought they were ones to push open source?
Seriously?
Ok, so for a bunch of (presumably) intelligent people, I feel like the vast majority are missing the major issue here, which is that no technology (aside from explicit mal-ware) should be explicitly "barred" from the internet.
I'll also add that, while I am an avid mac user, and haven't owned a windows PC in quite some time, I am currently boycotting the iPhone and iPad BECAUSE they don't allow the same types of freedoms that Android phones are very quickly beginning to support.
I'm a developer by trade, and I use all sorts of different technologies including java, php, html, css, javascript, AND flash...all depending on the individual client's needs and desires.
Take a look at an EPK site for a movie, for instance this one that I worked on a few years ago:
http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/perfectstranger/site/flash.html
skip the intro and enter the actual experience, and you'll be able to move around an interactive apartment in 3d, as well as interact more closely with different areas within...this IN ADDITION to a photo gallery, video preview, synopsis, etc...
Now tell me how you can implement this type of functionality or ANY pie-in-the-sky functionality (because movie studios want what they want) using html, even html5. Now what if you only have 3-4 weeks to do it?
Despite all it's problems, Flash is inherently flexible, and can create rich interactive user experiences that are rivaled by very few online content delivery platforms, and it's extremely unfortunate that Apple has started such a firestorm about whether and why it is an unnecessary technology.
Standard sites can be built perfectly fine using standard technologies, but Flash is instrumental in pushing the boundaries of what the web can offer, a fact I think which is important to remember.
I'm saying kudos to Google for their efforts to support ALL that the web has to offer, not limiting their own user-base based on what THEY think is "acceptable" technology.
As for Apple, I can't be the only person they've alienated with their tactics in this matter. A large amount of their user-base is made up of professional developers and people in online entertainment...and a large number of these use Flash as a medium. Go ahead Steve, shoot yourself in the foot by alienating a percentage of your customers...even if it's a small percentage, it's still YOUR bottom line.
Ok, so for a bunch of (presumably) intelligent people, I feel like the vast majority are missing the major issue here, which is that no technology (aside from explicit mal-ware) should be explicitly "barred" from the internet.
I'll also add that, while I am an avid mac user, and haven't owned a windows PC in quite some time, I am currently boycotting the iPhone and iPad BECAUSE they don't allow the same types of freedoms that Android phones are very quickly beginning to support.
I'm a developer by trade, and I use all sorts of different technologies including java, php, html, css, javascript, AND flash...all depending on the individual client's needs and desires.
Take a look at an EPK site for a movie, for instance this one that I worked on a few years ago:
http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/perfectstranger/site/flash.html
skip the intro and enter the actual experience, and you'll be able to move around an interactive apartment in 3d, as well as interact more closely with different areas within...this IN ADDITION to a photo gallery, video preview, synopsis, etc...
Now tell me how you can implement this type of functionality or ANY pie-in-the-sky functionality (because movie studios want what they want) using html, even html5. Now what if you only have 3-4 weeks to do it?
Despite all it's problems, Flash is inherently flexible, and can create rich interactive user experiences that are rivaled by very few online content delivery platforms, and it's extremely unfortunate that Apple has started such a firestorm about whether and why it is an unnecessary technology.
Standard sites can be built perfectly fine using standard technologies, but Flash is instrumental in pushing the boundaries of what the web can offer, a fact I think which is important to remember.
I'm saying kudos to Google for their efforts to support ALL that the web has to offer, not limiting their own user-base based on what THEY think is "acceptable" technology.
As for Apple, I can't be the only person they've alienated with their tactics in this matter. A large amount of their user-base is made up of professional developers and people in online entertainment...and a large number of these use Flash as a medium. Go ahead Steve, shoot yourself in the foot by alienating a percentage of your customers...even if it's a small percentage, it's still YOUR bottom line.
Flash is extensively used on virtually every non-commodity site. This includes most entertainment, sports, arts, fashion and games site. Even Steve Jobs' Pixar uses Flash extensively, and all of its movie specific sites are done almost entirely in Flash.
I understand that many pimply geeks never venture outside of a few forum sites, but the rest of the world does.
I think a good majority of people don't mind Flash. What they mind is the way it has been implemented on the Mac platform. Whether it is Apple or Adobe's fault, doesn't matter. It hasn't been implemented or streamlined for the Mac community. In my opinion with the exception of a few sites, Flash seems to be the choice for advertising does it not? There are plenty of sites that use it for other items aside from just advertising.
I would rather see google support one of the open source programs that competes with flash.
The problem with other solutions are their flexibility or more like lack of it. Even more so Flash is provided with great tools for creating rich interactive content which are not available for any other solution.
Trust me, you're not. I don't see the merit of sticking or offering only a one solution or in this case no solution at all. Its beyond me why Apple can't have open policy on allowing third parties to provide different solutions for pads, phones and pods. After all, the end user can disable or not install the products in the first place if they don't like them. Regarding Flash, it offers great tools that are not available for any other comparable solution. For those tangled up with video argument, I'm not talking about it. I'm talking about on time delivery highly interactive rich media.
ROFL! I'd laugh more at that statement, but I see thats already happened a good number of times in this thread already.
I think all of you flash-haters get so worked up, because this is such a simple concept and its about the maximum that you can technically comprehend.
If you are more interested in joining the loud and uninformed... go for it.
Interesting theory, now days it isn't about the all out attack, its back to simple battles and cutting supply lines.
Strange... I use Safari as my primary browser and have for almost 7 years now since switching to Mac's... Never even downloaded Chrome.
If it were so buggy, unstable and crashed all of the time, you'd think I know. I just love the foaming at the mouth "Browser Wars"... give me a break people... one day you'll grow up and realize that all of this, is actually what is driving the technology forward.
I could really care less of people are running IE, Chrome, Firefox, Lynx or do it all with curl... why do you?
"My browser is better than your browser!" -- If you are in the peanut gallery 'choosing sides', that's pathetic.
Wow... this last statement is exactly what my last 10 rants have been about... knowing absolutely NOTHING, being completely wrong, yet still posting worthless dribble.
No, Flash is not bundled with new Mac's and no it is not automatically updated with Safari updates. My goodness. I am trying so hard to refrain from personal attacks, so ya'll don't cry like little children and get me tossed off... again.
Regardless of Google's intent here, it can only work out for the better. If Flash integration is horrible, people can just disable it, much like you can now. If Flash integration is improved, then Flash performance and stability improves.
Of course, if all you want is for Flash to die, then re-read all of my other rants...