Google DoubleClick HTML5
- Started
- Last post
- 17 Responses
- monNom0
I swear, every time I hear about "HTML5" I question whether it's me that doesn't get it, or the person talking about it.
- Kaleb2420
You already can make HTML ads in most of these systems, whether it's DoubleClick, PointRoll, or EyeWonder — announcing HTML5 isn't a big surprise. Yay, more Flash vs. HTML5 hype...
- Kaleb2420
Expect to see a whole bunch of ads you can't disable easily, now on all of your devices! What will the backup image be for HTML5 on IE lte 8?
- CyBrainX0
I've done a ton of Flash banners - regular and vendor stuff. There's always a quick turnaround. That Flash export functionality seems promising, aside from all the unsupported features but anything else is just not going to cut it.
You need a timeline. You need vector graphics with shape tweens, masks, etc. All the things you would take for granted using a simple animation tool that would probably be a total bitchhole in html5. You just couldn't get any work done in time.
- Why bother putting effort into shit no one is ever going to look at. If you are doing shit work like banners just get them out the door.animatedgif
- the door, clients dont give a shit about them either thank fuckanimatedgif
- abettertomorrow0
I told you Google would eventually stab Flash in the back...
- spot130
Everyone who thinks HTML 5 and Flash are comparable is a retard.
- explainprophetone
- I'm sorry to say, but I've heard way too much of this shit.spot13
- HTML + CSS + JS + H264 + + + + can kinda do some shit that actionscript can do, that's as far as it goesspot13
- the point is, for banner ads, yesterday it was jpg/flash and today someone else crashed the partyprophetone
- Replace kinda do some shit with "do most of what people need."abettertomorrow
- but it's really JavaScript not HTML5 that "does what people need".spot13
- You're absolutely right, but that's what I was referring to.abettertomorrow
- and we all know that Javascript suckspauliusuza
- JavaScript's awesome, what the fuck?spot13
- abettertomorrow0
They aren't 1 on 1 comparable...but this is moving into one of the areas Flash dominates (banner ads)
- luckyorphan0
^^ Agreed.
But it seems that the argument isn't whether they're comparable. The debate is more about whether or not you need all of the capabilities that Flash provides to give users an interesting web experience. Sure, there are those possible campaigns and modules that only flash can do, but does that justify using it?
We're building several mega-sites right now, and Flash is nowhere on our scope. But we're still giving tons of robust interactivity.
So, the reasons for using Flash just diminished today...again.
- True, but are using HTML5 or are you using JavaScript to replace the "Flash" functionality?spot13
- DrBombay0
Besides serving video without Flash, what else has changed?
- Boz0
all of these tools are much more a pain to use and build rich media ads with..
This is not really a stab or betrayal of Adobe at all.. it gives an alternative to building mobile ads aka competition to iAd Producer from Apple or Adobe's new tool Edge (codenamed Wallaby).
Flash will still be a lot more prefered for those to want to make highly interactive ads with some videos that need switchable bitrates and all that stuff.. but that doesn't mean there isn't a spot in this area for HTML5 based IDEs for creating banners..
Sure, you can do some of the stuff you can with Flash.. you don't necessarily need Flash for simple ads.. but try to connect all that shit with server side analytics and tons of other back end applications (not necessarily used for tracking) and you will quickly understand the issues you might have with HTML5 created ads..
One example that is jarringly obvious is that by just integrating EMBED object you can run a full blown application directly in Facebook's feed.. you can't do that with HTML5/JS.. Same applies to banners..
This will serve one segment of the market.. and unfortunately since Apple is a bunch of cunts (with $teve Jobs at the helm) always trying to fuck things up, this wouldn't have been an issue at all.. The reason these tools are mostly being built is because of Apple really. Who makes banners and needs to address all mobile devices including iOS will have to do with smaller subset of features that HTML5 will give them over full rich interactivity with no boundaries they can do with Flash.
I have used both Wallaby from Adobe and iAd Producer.. it's ok for simplest things with some JS coding capabilities..but it all boils down to templates..and with banners you really want to differentiate that brand and innovate how users will see them.. that's what made Flash so popular.
- prophetone0
boz, good stuff, do you have any online resources you've found in your travels to get flash nerds acquainted with html5 ad units? aside from wallaby, etc...
- Horp0
I remember when banner ads were considered the absolute toilet-bend of creative opportunity and not even worthy of discussion on any level.
Now they are the stock in trade for most of you poo-nippers it seems.
Rise above it. Give no kind of fuck what these filthy fucking banner ads are produced in. Its like fussing over the best paper stock for postal junkmail.
- Boz0
Not much has been done so far.. This Google tool is one.. but I would suggest you look at iAd Producer just to get a hang of how they are doing these things.. I won't lie.. iAd Producer is very nice application and if we were to get more HTML5 banner producing software I would like it to be more like that as well.
I don't do a lot of banners so I wasn't interested in pursuing this with awesome fury but i've been just checking things out as they show up..
I did decide on being a part of testing for Wallaby because this tool is more of a Flash to HTML5 converter than anything else.. It's not really a full blown IDE like iAd Producer or this Google thing.. What this does is allows you to do Flash animations and all that interactive stuff in Flash IDE and then just export it to HTML5 compliant format. To me though.. this is a lot better, because you don't have to re-learn stuff to work with it..
- interesting, thanks. i want to hope that wallaby can do the trick, but building from scratch is a safer bet imoprophetone
- i'm going to check it out tho, thxprophetone
- Boz0
@Horp..
I agree with you.. but ads have started playing a much larger role in advertising.. with Flash and divs people have created some really interesting and highly creative solutions to create visuals and interactivity that go beyond traditional 300x250 or 728x90 ad..
This is why the value of banners and the number of people working on them has increased.. they are just much more interactive and advanced..
With HTML5 though.. I'm thinking this will go back to the age of banners being super simple and be exactly what you described.
- lolabettertomorrow
- ..."banners being super simple..." in other words, worse.CyBrainX
- prophetone0
- Why do they start applauding when he talks about all the unsupported feature warnings pop up.CyBrainX
- And why was Shatner at Max?
http://goo.gl/gL9qJCyBrainX - fucking atrocious.animatedgif
- dbloc0
here we go again.
- fyoucher10
It'll likely just be a fallback for Flash ads, a step up from a backup GIF image if the user doesn't have Flash installed (i.e. Flash is off or you're on an iOS device). Like Boz said, a simplified version of the Flash ad.
HTML5 doesn't compare as far as animation goes. Ad agencies aren't going to dumb down their creative for a 'new' technology in which something like a current technology like Flash can do. Using straight video can do animation but then we're talking bandwidth which costs money, so I don't see that taking off unless bandwidth is unlimited (mobile market)
I do like the idea of the Flash to HTML5 converter, an easy way to create the simplified 'alternate' HTML5 based ad.
Ultimately it's the company that's paying for the banner ad that's going to decide if it should be Flash or HTML5 based. Personally, unless Flash disappears tomorrow I don't see HTML5 ads taking off, it just an extra expense where a static backing GIF image would suffice.