NBC and Time Warner Continue to Back Flash Over HTML5

[JackAxe]

No, it doesn't. It slows down the entire device, sucks battery power, scrolls very choppily...




If it's an iPhone app, it's not using Flash OR HTML5. Flash and HTML5 are ways to deliver video through a web browser, and are separate from the format of the video itself. In your case, the video is being delivered through an app, not Flash, nor HTML5.

DUuuuuude!

Actually that's not true overall about Flash. And slowing down the entire device! NO, not even remotely!

Flash is freaking FAST on my unlocked Nexus One -- I'm sharing because I just got it!. -- Even with sites like CNN, or others that like to load multiple Flash banners at once! It scrolls smoothly when I've allowed them to load!** It takes a heavy Flash piece to really effect the scrolling and even then, it's not to the point I loose control and it's only confined to that moment, that page -- and no, this is hardly a bad thing when overall there's no big issues I've encountered.

**There's an option under plug-ins called "On Demand." With this enabled, Flash does not load until it's clicked -- sound familiar? So click only the little gray box with a green arrow in it, when you want to view Flash! What a concept! And everything I've tried so far has ran fantastic!

Now the actual browser -- which I think is Chrome under Froyo 2.2 ABSOLUTELY DESTROYS mobile Safari on all fronts -- no mater which device is running Apple's slug-browser. It's lightning fast and actually feels about the same as Chrome on my Unibody 17". It display a REAL web page for all the sites I visited, not the mobile crap I've been served up with my Touch more and more over the years. And this is on a 800x480 screen, vs my iPod's 480x320 screen. There's never no LAME checker board pattern -- even with Flash set to load by default, the pages load and displays super fast! Sites like Slashdot behave like they do on my desktop, not the click-more crap like under way slower mobile-safari.

And FLash by default does not suck the battery, nor is it a CPU hog to throw that in. It's all on the developer and you should know this, as the same applies to games. And once again, most of the content I encountered did not effect the scrolling of the page at all. The multiple FLash pieces would wobble a bit, but no bothers, since I have the option. Flash runs absolutely great on my Nexus One and that's awesome, especially when considering that Flash 10.1 is still beta and Froyo 2.2 is not a final build.

 

[WilliamLondon]

You FAIL. Android outsold iphone OS in the first quarter this year. They are selling over 100,000 android devices a day, and its increasing every day.

And Android prostitutes itself on how many different handsets? That's as daft as comparing Windows OS sales to Mac machines. One is hardware, one is software. The comparison is silly.

 

[Peace]

You misunderstand the purpose of the Comcast App. It won't allow you to view content. it's a search/tv guide/remote control app.

I understood what it does very well. I think you misunderstood the implications behind Comcast starting to embrace the iPad.

 

[milani]

I always wonder how many of the people who comment on this issue are actually web developers and understand the differences between what HTML5, CSS, Javacript, and Flash can do.

You cannot do everything with HTML5, even though Apple wants to make it sound that way. There are things that Flash can do that HTML5 and Javacript simply can't, and NBC has made that clear with their statement they made about Hulu.

You all are quick to take Apple's side, but I bet most of you don't even know the difference between HTML5 and Flash. (It's not even HTML that would be doing most of the work anyway; It's Javascript.)

I'm a web designer and I'll happily call your bluff on that one.

And FYI HTML5 will offer native video support:

<video src="movie.webm" controls>

No jQuery or other javascript libraries required. See Wikipedia.

Anyway... while I think this is a really short sighted decision for NBC and Time Warner, and I'm going to enjoy the day that the companies are forced to reverse their decision because Adobe is unable to provide a viable Flash experience for mobile clients.

Generally speaking though, I can't believe people are causing so much fuss about an antiquated plugin. Why would anyone not want the browser to natively support video? Explain why you'd prefer it to be delivered to you by a plugin that's prone to crashing (or even if it were a stable plugin)? I just don't get it...

 

[rcandre2]

Wait a second.....OK.. you mean to tell me that Apple doesn't control the world? Wow!

 

[bmturney]

Doesn't surprise me...

NBC already proved how stupid they were when they pulled their content from iTunes only to come slinking back a year later.. I give it a year... they will slowly, quietly make the switch...

Some have made a big deal about other portable devices supporting flash... let's compare the battery life of those devices with the 11+ hours of video play I get out of my Flash Free iPad... I guess if you really want flash, and don't mind being plugged in all the time... me... I like my freedom...

I give it 5 years... monster TVs taking up a wall in the living room... and monthly subscriptions to satellite and cable companies will slowly fade... people will be consuming their content on the fly on their portable media devices... catching up on their shows while laying in bed... while on the commuter train heading to/from work... while sitting waiting on their kid to get out of soccer practice... or while sitting out by the pool...

Anyone not prepared to provide their content via these portable media devices will pay the price...

 

[WilliamLondon]

The sheep do not have to think just repeat his thoughts on flash all day.

+1000!

Oh, I love this - it's called IRONY!

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

So many misguided posts.

Everyone here is looking at this the wrong way.

Basically all NBC is saying is they aren't jumping aboard right away. What is so wrong with that? Apple is pushing HTML5, some are following, some are rightfully just waiting and seeing what happens. Its a smart business decision. What if HTML5 fails? What if 6 months from now all these purchased iPads end up useless? If so you just invested in something that didn't work out.

Its a smart business idea to put it on a roadmap and watch and see how it develops. Set the capital budget aside for the upgrade get ready and when it becomes mainstream slowly adopt. Thats called being smart.

 

[ksgant]

Meh...there are tons of other things to watch out there. No biggie. Bye NBC.

 

[marksman]

$10,000???

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAA!!!! You have no clue what you are talking about.

You don't even understand what has to be done, or in the case of NBC nothing.

You keep making these ridiculous comments yet you have not said one relevant thing that makes me believe you understand the technical side of this at all.

 

[scuromago]

Hum..

I guess there is a reason NBC is at the bottom of the network barrel.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

No - it's up to Adobe to prove it. They have asserted that it was possible years ago. Why don't they show a version of it running on the iPhone. They are registered developers. If it was easy to do (and it would be them developing it by the way). Then develop it Heck - they can do it on a jailbroken phone for all I care. Just have them prove that it works. They have yet to do it.

It is not up to Apple to support a third party product. What part of Flash is owned by Apple?

Why bother to try with this or any App if Apple makes it clear that it won't be approved anyway? The Flash player is a free plugin, so there's no money in doing it anyway for jail broken iDevices. If I was wanting to code a free app for iDevices but Apple told me that it would NOT be allowed to be installed, I wouldn't bother to try.

The easy out is for Apple to bend here: make it a user installable OPTION- just like we all have the option to install and uninstall the Flash player on our computers. Apple has thoroughly beat up "the piece of junk" that Flash is in public, so Apple can easily distance itself from the consequences of batteries being burned too fast, Safari crashing "10 times a day", and so on. Apple could even force a requirement for a user warning on that OPTION that advises the user that Flash will burn their batteries faster than normal, may crash their browser, etc: proceed anyway or cancel?

Then, it would all be on Adobe to deliver a version of Flash that works well. They would be challenged to save face or admit defeat. And Apple would not look like big brother in this issue anymore; instead, they would be giving the subset of iDevice users that would like the Flash option the ability to download that particular "app" created by Adobe.

Make it just as easy to uninstall if it turns out to be as bad as Apple has implied, and there is very little user downside to the switch on this decision. Actually, Apple would look very good for caring enough about all iDevice users to let them have something that some of them want.

No loss to those who abhor Flash- they simply don't install that "app" on their iDevice, keeping the overall experience exactly as Apple favors.

The only possible loser in this is Apple's iTunes store business objectives, in that Flash would give iDevice owners access to an enormous amount of content beyond just video, much of which could be favored over buying something similar as a dedicated app in the iTunes store.

 

[polobruce]

Six months max before they sing a different tune. Short sighted fools.

I agree with you. It's only going to hurt the networks who are already hurting for the loss of eyeballs due to the mass video content available on the web. Isn't it the content distribution that makes them money. The more people that watch their content the more that will see the embedded ads.

I'm sorry but I agree with jobs. Flash is always freezing my browser and that's ie safari or firefox. I can understand how apple would want to control the user experience to prevent such things on devices like the iPad and iPhone that are marketed as trouble free power it on and it works. Plus when something like flash starts effecting the functionality of the device the customers will be calling apple.

Does htc, Microsoft, palm support their product in the same manner (I don't know just asking).

 

[Mattie Num Nums]

You don't even understand what has to be done, or in the case of NBC nothing.

You keep making these ridiculous comments yet you have not said one relevant thing that makes me believe you understand the technical side of this at all.

Ironic...

 

[marksman]

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-200905-201004

IE6 still has 12% marketshare, ALL versions of Safari combined have still yet to catchup to that number. The marketshare of Safari users on an iPad are less than 1% and won't likely breakout of that for quite some time to come. Microsoft has been trying to kill of IE6 for ages (take a look at Microsoft Australia's webpage for evidence of that) because it knows how IE6 is holding back Internet design and capabilities. IE6 can't run HTML5.

Still this brings up the question that must be asked: Which viable business would willingly rewrite their entire video content delivery system for the underdog with insignificant presence in the browser market? The answer should be NONE if they want to keep their shareholders happy - who know that 95% of existing users can use Flash, which is significantly higher than the number of users that can run HTML5.

A million iPads is insignificant in the great scheme of things, and we have no idea what trends the iPad will accomplish when other Pad designs start to flood the market. Steve knows this, but the FUD machine would tell you otherwise.

In the next 12 months there will be over 100 million idevices out there. Where do you people get this 1 million figure. The future of all of this stuff is mobile. Not being on board is stupid. What is more stupid is NBC already has video that works on the iPhone so why would they even make such a stupid announcement as this?

The way people are incorrectly intermixing technologies and words is driving me up the wall.

 

[pharmx]

I always wonder how many of the people who comment on this issue are actually web developers and understand the differences between what HTML5, CSS, Javacript, and Flash can do.

You cannot do everything with HTML5, even though Apple wants to make it sound that way. There are things that Flash can do that HTML5 and Javacript simply can't, and NBC has made that clear with their statement they made about Hulu.

You all are quick to take Apple's side, but I bet most of you don't even know the difference between HTML5 and Flash. (It's not even HTML that would be doing most of the work anyway; It's Javascript.)

The irony in your post is that any web developer promoting standards-compliant sites wouldn't go near Flash. Adobe tried to get ActionScript standardized to replace Javascript. Fortunately they failed.

As a web developer, you should remember the browser wars and how much that crippled the internet, especially when it left us with stuff like IE6 in its wake. Having to to code twice (one way for Microsoft, and another way for every other company) has been a nightmare, and if Adobe gets their way, it will happen all over again. As long as ActionScript is a proprietary language, there will always be a need to do twice the work.

As much as it sucks short term to transition from Flash, it is the best option with respect to the future of the internet. If ActionScript was not proprietary, this wouldn't even be an issue.

 

[zeromeus]

Apple is stupid and...

Seriously! I own a few Apple gadgets, too. I saw from the beginning how Apple is trying to bully another company. Sure, if they don't want to support a certain platform, good for them. I don't care. However, the should stay with their own whatever crap they decide to go with and leave other people alone. Don't try to bully them. HTML5 is not exactly stable right now. Why can't they just accept the fact that they screwed up and should accept other standards that work better???

 

[Cinemagic]

You'd think NBC, who is last in the big three ratings would do whatever they could to improve their market share and ratings. Are they blind to the numbers of iPads sold?

I hope that NBC advertisers are getting a good deal. Their product sure isn't getting seen by as many people as ABC or CBS.

Of course, NBC rarely does what they say. Just ask Conan O'Brien

As for Time-Warner, well, they've always been stingy and stubborn. Remember the Fox vs Time-Warner Super Bowl fiasco?

I'm glad I'm not a shareholder.

 

[YoGramMamma]

Microsoft is not a co-owner of NBC. Comcast bought NBC. It hasn't gone through yet but still.
NBC is part owner of MSNBC and that's it.

NBC Universal is currently owned by General Electric.

i see someone here watches 30Rock too

and i believe you meant Kabletown, not Comcast... no?

 

[pharmx]

Of course, from their point of view, they might say: "while true, every major browser already supports Flash TODAY... not some time in the future.


Flash is an old standard that already works across multiple platforms. I'm pretty confident it would work on iDevices too if Apple wouldn't forbid it.

No argument about Flash having room for lots of optimization and evolutionary improvements, but these companies- like many others- are choosing a standard that works now... for the vast majority of computers in the world, not switching to a draft standard that does NOT work now for the vast majority of computers in the world.

Their business is selling content and advertising. They make more money by reaching more people. They make less money by reaching less people. Why are we surprised that they would choose to reach as many people and platforms as they can? It's not like they are saying they'll never develop an app or switch to h.264 when the opportunities look right (for their own business).

Great post

This sums up the situation perfectly.

 

[cocky jeremy]

The world does not evolve around Apple or its iGadgets. It's time that Cupertino wakes up to reality.

Could you be more wrong? Do you think it's a coincidence that Apple is all about HTML5 and all of the sudden all of these websites are switching from Flash to HTML5? Apple pretty much controls stuff, inside and outside of Apple itself. Here's a quick question. Do you think, if Apple had Flash on the iPhone and iPad, all of these websites would be switching to HTML5 now? That's what i thought..

 

[Enigma55]

Wow. Some company basically told apple to F* off. I guess they have both now been added to Steve's hit list. This is definitely not over.

 

[Porchland]

From the article...

In addition, one media executive pointed out that Apple's ability to dictate terms to the media giants will be weakened further by Google TV, a software product that enables viewers to watch online video on their big-screen TVs.

Mmm-hmm. You think Google will be streaming that stuff in Flash?

 

[devinci99]

You're wrong. It has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with the audience.

You have to think these companies are targeting the masses and right now the iPad is doing well and HTML5 will at some point become the gold standard. Right now though, it is not. It makes sense to target what is the standard now and to watch to see what the technology does as it matures and than pull the trigger.

I dont see where I am 100% wrong.

These bean counters group iphone OS market in the same group as the web audience. There are about 2 ways to reach the mobile audience, and that is either through a browser, or through an application.

This isn't just about industry standard for the WWW. Its about wanting to invest to reach the audience you want to reach or not. Flash doesnt run well on mobile, and unless you going to get a devteam to create an native app, there's no good way to get your content to them.

html5 may not be the only option, but it is an option to send rich content to the mobile world now.

The problem is some of these companies dont see justification to put their content on the iphone/mobile world yet.

Maybe the combine millions of iphone, ipad, ipod touch + andriod + mobile 6.x audience/market isn't enough yet for these companies to justify investing in a technology for it.

 

[whatever]

Both phones were paid for. BOGO is half price for each phone. The second one is not free, especially since they both require a two year contract, and both users must want the same kind of phone.

It's just a sales technique:

The same way that Apple "gives" away iPod touches with Macs during some sales. The same way that Walmart just dropped the iPhone to $97 with contract. The same way that iPhones are given "free" on contract in Japan and other countries to get new buyers.

Either way, we're talking about a phone that is under 6 months old, which is being highly discounted and already EOL.

The only way that report would make sense is if it compared phones by mfg or particular phones. But by lumping all Android based phones together doesn't make sense, since no one company makes money from them.

Did you know that Lucas Films makes more money than Google does on every Droid phone sold.