Web Browsing Performance on Android 2.2 Hampered by Flash Compatibility

[Krevnik]

Yep - HTML5 = Magic. Won't need no CPU or memory. It will just appear instantly. And every one will just continue to watch HTML5 videos - nothing more than they do with Flash. And even if they do more HTML5 will make it happen totally smoothly - I await the day when HTML5 will make it possible to finally solve world hunger. HTML5 isn't your random tech.

The big problem is that Flash is a single implementation from a single company. It doesn't need to compete with itself to improve as long as some baseline manages to keep stuff like Silverlight from taking share away from Flash. It isn't open.

HTML5 at least says "Here's the spec, implement it how you see fit." You can have Google, Apple, Mozilla, Microsoft and so on all compete against each other to have the best browser that supports HTML5. This means fights for less memory, CPU, and so on, as they try to streamline the experience more.

It won't solve all the content problems that Flash solves, but it does address some of the big ones (video and animated/active content, not so much custom animations and games though).

 

[goldstmarc2]

Froyo wins hands down. Not only is the browser faster but disabling/enabling Flash is simple. All they have to do is leave it disabled by default, power users can get it as they need it.

Pay attention Apple. You're about to get schooled.

 

[skyehill]

Froyo wins hands down. Not only is the browser faster but disabling/enabling Flash is simple. All they have to do is leave it disabled by default, power users can get it as they need it.

Pay attention Apple. You're about to get schooled.

Amen. If Flash causes a majority of sites I go to to run poorly, I'll turn it off, but on the occasion that I want to go to a site, let's say IGN.com to watch a video review, I'll turn it on and enjoy the video, and then turn the plugin off again. It's a choice I'm going to love having. There's nothing more aggravating than using my wife's MAGICAL IPAD and being greeted with the PLEASE LOAD LATEST VERSION OF FLASH message all over the place when all I want to do is watch video reviews, trailers etc etc.

I know the fanboys hate choice, but as a real consumer, I want it.

 

[arbourable]

The big problem is that Flash is a single implementation from a single company. It doesn't need to compete with itself to improve as long as some baseline manages to keep stuff like Silverlight from taking share away from Flash. It isn't open.

HTML5 at least says "Here's the spec, implement it how you see fit." You can have Google, Apple, Mozilla, Microsoft and so on all compete against each other to have the best browser that supports HTML5. This means fights for less memory, CPU, and so on, as they try to streamline the experience more.

It won't solve all the content problems that Flash solves, but it does address some of the big ones (video and animated/active content, not so much custom animations and games though).

+1

Don't you think that HTML5 spec will continue to develop and so be more useful for animation/games?

 

[parapup]

The big problem is that Flash is a single implementation from a single company. It doesn't need to compete with itself to improve as long as some baseline manages to keep stuff like Silverlight from taking share away from Flash. It isn't open.

HTML5 at least says "Here's the spec, implement it how you see fit." You can have Google, Apple, Mozilla, Microsoft and so on all compete against each other to have the best browser that supports HTML5. This means fights for less memory, CPU, and so on, as they try to streamline the experience more.

It won't solve all the content problems that Flash solves, but it does address some of the big ones (video and animated/active content, not so much custom animations and games though).

True that if and when HTML5, WebGL and other Open technology becomes capable of totally replacing Flash it would be preferable to use it over other proprietary alternative. But until that happens Flash is filling in for what Open web cannot do.

And I believe Flash spec is open - anyone can implement alternatives.

Telling people to use X instead of Y in the name of Openness never works - let alone if you have ulterior motives like Jobs has.

So Jobs can invest money to create open alternative to Flash that really makes it possible to do everything Flash does only better - then he wouldn't need to tell people what to use - Flash will die on it's own.

Until then it's all propaganda. But I have my doubts Jobs will let go of his App Store revenue by giving people an Open Flash replacement.

 

[calsci]

WOW flash slowed down the browser till it was turned off. What a surprise (sarcasm)

 

[Justinf79]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but there's an iPhone app called "Cloud Browse" that will let you view flash content from web sites. It's kind of like a VNC, and renders Firefox on the screen. Hulu doesn't work though, since they block the proxy server you connect to.

 

[skyehill]

+1

Don't you think that HTML5 spec will continue to develop and so be more useful for animation/games?

It sure will, but its definitely not there yet. Not even close to being there yet. Flash is. That's why offering the choice is the right answer. Jobs is all talk without the plethora of HTML5 sites to back that talk up. It makes him a clown.

 

[wovel]

It sure will, but its definitely not there yet. Not even close to being there yet. Flash is. That's why offering the choice is the right answer. Jobs is all talk without the plethora of HTML5 sites to back that talk up. It makes him a clown.

Too bad as of today flash is still not a choice. By the time they make it work, Adobe will jack up the spec again and then only the people on the 2 or 3 platforms adobe decides they want to work on that day will be able to use it.

 

[Yelmurc]

Amen. If Flash causes a majority of sites I go to to run poorly, I'll turn it off, but on the occasion that I want to go to a site, let's say IGN.com to watch a video review, I'll turn it on and enjoy the video, and then turn the plugin off again. It's a choice I'm going to love having. There's nothing more aggravating than using my wife's MAGICAL IPAD and being greeted with the PLEASE LOAD LATEST VERSION OF FLASH message all over the place when all I want to do is watch video reviews, trailers etc etc.

I know the fanboys hate choice, but as a real consumer, I want it.

The issue here is that the average user doesn't even know what flash is.

If google pre installs it on its OS then the average user will think the browser sucks because half the sites they go to are sluggish.

If the user has to install it. either they won't bother or they will install it and not realize it is flash that is causing the poor performance.

Don't get me wrong I love the idea that we are free to do what ever we want. But for the general public allowing flash could actually hurt android more than it would help it.

 

[arbourable]

And I believe Flash spec is open - anyone can implement alternatives.

Yes, as long as you stick to Adobe's spec and you don't need to play back DRM'ed content.

Telling people to use X instead of Y in the name of Openness never works - let alone if you have ulterior motives like Jobs has.

Yes, how dare he want the users of Apple products to have a better user experience, what an evil guy.

So Jobs can invest money to create open alternative to Flash that really makes it possible to do everything Flash does only better - then he wouldn't need to tell people what to use - Flash will die on it's own.

"Jobs" IS investing money and so are Adobe/Google and many others. There is no doubt that HTML5 is the future. The only reason Google are supporting flash is to try to get an edge. We'll see if it works.

Until then it's all propaganda. But I have my doubts Jobs will let go of his App Store revenue by giving people an Open Flash replacement.

Apple are fully committed to HTML5. BTW, Apple only offered web apps when the iPhone came out, and were vilified for not offering native app development. I guess they can't please all the people all the time!

 

[The Mad Hatter]

To be honest it would be a piss-poor effort if Android 2.2 on a Nexus One wasn't faster than an iPhone 3GS, considering it has a 66% faster CPU and more than twice the RAM of a 3GS.

One from the no-****-sherlock dept really.

This just reminds me of the old adage "...if it still doesn't work, use a bigger hammer"

I'm just wondering why all these "fandroids" aren't kissing Steve Jobs' back-side? If he hadn't taken a stance against Flash (and in effect, wake up the "sloth" known as Adobe), could you imagine how REALLY bad mobile Flash would be at this moment?

Just my 2¢

 

[marksman]

Froyo wins hands down. Not only is the browser faster but disabling/enabling Flash is simple. All they have to do is leave it disabled by default, power users can get it as they need it.

Pay attention Apple. You're about to get schooled.

You know that doesn't solve the problem with flash sucking and making it so lazy and incompetent web developers stop using flash though.

That is the bigger problem. That is why flash must be done away with entirely. Making it a choice is no choice at all. Lazy web developers will force it on people.

 

[Marvin1379]

Pretty sure that number is accurate actually. And it may have come from Jobs himself. Don't forget that every iPod Touch has the iPhone OS too.

As of the April 2010 Keynote that S.Jobs gave, 85 million iPhone/iPod touches. Add in the approx 1million iPads to date, so 86 million (not too far off from the 100M quoted, but sales will reach that in the next 12 months).

 

[arbourable]

The issue here is that the average user doesn't even know what flash is.

If google pre installs it on its OS then the average user will think the browser sucks because half the sites they go to are sluggish.

If the user has to install it. either they won't bother or they will install it and not realize it is flash that is causing the poor performance.

Don't get me wrong I love the idea that we are free to do what ever we want. But for the general public allowing flash could actually hurt android more than it would help it.

What's the point of Flash once HTML5 is ubiquitous. Once Adobe supports the full HTML5 spec in CS, then surely Flash is dead, right?

Supporting flash seems to me to make less and less sense!

 

[parapup]

Yes, how dare he want the users of Apple products to have a better user experience, what an evil guy.

Better experience? Android gives their users the best experience. Don't want Flash - you wouldn't notice anything. Want Flash for the common Flash sites that HTML5 fails to deliver - a click or two and you are happy. Oops, changed your mind - another click to only load it on demand, per page basis.

*That* is better experience. Telling people what tastes, needs and business to have and how to get it done is an insulting experience - telling them you can't do it because one Corporation thinks some other Corporation is sloth and evil is more than insulting, it's idiotic in fact.

 

[wovel]

Yes, as long as you stick to Adobe's spec and you don't need to play back DRM'ed content.

And as long as you pay Adobe a licensing fee. Distribution of flash for devices or creation of your own flash player requires a license fee. The Adobe license agreement and gnash faq both provide some insight into this.

In the case of Android, it appears Adobe is distributing the app themselves in the store, so none of the manufacturers will have to pay the license fee.

 

[rhett7660]

This just reminds me of the old adage "...if it still doesn't work, use a bigger hammer"

I'm just wondering why all these "fandroids" aren't kissing Steve Jobs' back-side? If he hadn't taken a stance against Flash (and in effect, wake up the "sloth" known as Adobe), could you imagine how REALLY bad mobile Flash would be at this moment?

Just my 2¢

Well that means they would have to admit that Steve was right and we can't have that now can we.........

 

[krzyglue]

This is all that matters.

Ever read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World?

 

[wovel]

Better experience? Android gives their users the best experience. Don't want Flash - you wouldn't notice anything. Want Flash for the common Flash sites that HTML5 fails to deliver - a click or two and you are happy. Oops, changed your mind - another click to only load it on demand, per page basis.

*That* is better experience. Telling people what tastes, needs and business to have and how to get it done is an insulting experience - telling them you can't do it because one Corporation thinks some other Corporation is sloth and evil is more than insulting, it's idiotic in fact.

Because they are perpetuating flash which has always been bad for everyone...What about all those people who purchased (and continue to purchase) Android phones that came out before 2010, what about their precious choice to run flash.

 

[arbourable]

Better experience? Android gives their users the best experience. Don't want Flash - you wouldn't notice anything. Want Flash for the common Flash sites that HTML5 fails to deliver - a click or two and you are happy. Oops, changed your mind - another click to only load it on demand, per page basis.

*That* is better experience. Telling people what tastes, needs and business to have and how to get it done is an insulting experience - telling them you can't do it because one Corporation thinks some other Corporation is sloth and evil is more than insulting, it's idiotic in fact.

Great, then get an Andriod phone. There's no dilemma for you is there? By all accounts, the latest Android phones are much better in every way. So what's your problem?

 

[RobertCraigWils]

Beta

By the way - I've seen this only mentioned a few times in the 14 pages of threads, so far, but uh - that iPhone is running a beta version of the next OS... which is fine - but wouldn't you expect a fully released OS (Android) to be faster than a beta version?

 

[chris200x9]

They are using WebKit Nightly and iPad is using a far older branch. Compare equal branches and then talk.

oh boo hoo hoo better software better hardware boo hoo hoo you guys are rediculous, so let's say a mac runs faster than a windows machine. It's not a valid comparison you cannot say the mac is better because they are not running the same software? I mean in the end results matter, not excuses.

 

[wovel]

oh boo hoo hoo better software better hardware boo hoo hoo you guys are rediculous, so let's so a mac runs faster than a windows machine. It's not a valid comparison you cannot say the mac is better because they are not running the same software? I mean in the end results matter, not excuses.

The point was in relation to HTML5 rendering since the later build of WebKit has better support for it. Webkit is the OSS browser project with Apple as it's primary contributor that is used in Chrome and Android..I expect the released version of iPhone OS 4 will show similar HTML5 performance. They are running the same software, just different versions of it. You are welcome to test the difference in rendering performance on your own machine. (Windows or OSX)

To be clear you think it is accurate to compare a 2010 phone running a brand new os to a 2009 phone running a beta OS? You don't think it is possible the results would be different with similar hardware and the release version of iPhone OS 4?

 

[kenman884]

Glad that finally somebody hit the point. Would like to have a comparison with the iPad - which has 1 GHz as well, and for sure the next iPhone will have more than 600 MHz.

But the iPad makes the Nexus One look like it's standing still, despite having a similar processor and half the ram...