Death of Flash
- Started
- Last post
- 205 Responses
- rounce0
mr. twokids, I wouldn't say they're 'right' but they're not 'wrong' either. The SWF format specification IS open source, and they already have x264 licenced so _in_theory_ they could write their own flash player and take advantage of OpenGL at the same time and give their uses a better experience for flash content. Though they could have done this for years now and they haven't likely as it'd be a hefty undertaking - but not THAT much of a problem for a company the size of Apple. With renewed interest in Safari as a product to be taken seriously, and their enthusiasm for the richer content possibilities of HTML5 and not having to go to the trouble and cost of licencing Flash from Adobe.
It's of my opinion that Apple don't see the point of supporting Flash on the iPad & iPhone, simply because they don't have very much to gain from any eventuality compared to Adobe. Consider their two main options:
* Apple licence a version of Flash Player direct from Adobe for their devices: Apple effectively hand Adobe greater product penetration, gives them a greater market presence, and slips em an exorbitant amount of cash.
* Apple write their own FP implementation: Apple gets product control, but only to a degree, they're still playing catch-up every time Adobe makes a change to the spec. They'll also end up spending a lot on the project which, don't forget, will most likely have teething troubles so it'd still be pretty far off.All for what? To stop their users moaning about Flash support and start moaning about something less superficial? Forget it.
Helping to push HTML5 is a far better option for Apple as it's something they already support. If the HTML5 dream doesn't die after all the current buzz has died down, then less people will mind not having Flash content so much, as most of the things they want to do (Watch videos, listen to music, etc) will be possible.
That's not to say that Flash will be pushed to the sidelines. It will still have it's place on the web, as well as for devices such as set top boxes, just maybe not so much for internet video delivery. It also means Adobe will have to freshen up Flash and get creative, which can't be a bad thing either.
As users and developers, we'll decide. The web is a place of constant user driven technological darwinism. On these issues we can only look to the future without prejudice, safe in the knowledge that whoever has made the wrong move has fucked themselves royally.
As for my day to day, personally I don't care, if people want fancy HTML5 shit zipping around the screen, fuck it, I'll charge them the same as I would to do it all in AS3. Just with a slightly different breakdown on the invoice.
- I can do both y'see ;)rounce
- so far we're only talking about apple, what other manufacturer will not support flash?? none I guess,GeorgesII
- We've also been discussing the impact that HTML5 could have on Flash. First half Apple, 2nd part impact of HTML5.rounce
- I tried to be concise, I could rattle about Flash Vs. The AppStore as well if you want?rounce
- rounce0
This thread has a signal/noise ratio of almost nought.
I gave up before the end of the first page and, I'm only sticking around for the image posts.
- GeorgesII0
Apple user 10% of PC on the planet,
iphone shares is growing but its just a phone dammit,
but do you really think the rest of the world will stop using flash because steve Jobs said it and it can't run on the Iphone and Ipad,
ffs get your shit together Apple users
- CyBrain0
The claim that Flash can't run well on an iPhone, let alone an iPad with more power is a weak claim and even an admission of inferiority if you consider that Palm, Nokia and Android all run Flash without complaints from their users.
- tOki0
With the improvements that are being made to the flash platform by adobe and the general community (remember this is where paper vision came from) there is absolutely no reason its going die anytime soon.
Its freaking powerful at a visual and web application level - but requires good programming like any real language. With the introduction of flex, it has become powerful at the desktop level as well. The problem is there are too many amateurs out there using it to make garbage...the same goes for other creative software as we all know a "client whose nephew has photoshop and could do it for 15 bucks".
It's more expensive to develop yes, but vastly more superior. Give me a call when you can develop this in HTML:
http://www.verbatim.jp/senshuken…
Procedurally generated creatures that fight in dynamically lit 3D, with AI and all. A feat, it even runs well on Firefox on my freaking mac. The guy who coded this doesnt use pv3d either, it's his own personal kick ass one not available to the public.
The truth is too, as long as consortium controls HTML - things will move slowly and painfully. Let's face it, the big players are never really going to be friends. At least with adobe if they want something possible in flash they can simply do it :)
- there is a papervision.js demo that might handle this just with canvas, and browser makers are working on WebGL.Pupsipu
- that verbatim thing is awesome
Not_Just_Another
- feel0
hey, idk if you guys have posted it yet, but youtube and vimeo have a HTML5 beta thing goin on:
(click on the Switch to HTML5 player)It works fine, a little buggy, but it's working!
I'm not sure how its gonna be for flash animators to publish/animate stuff on html5 thou.
- here is how http://paulirish.com…
not made by Adobe. Makes Adobe look like morons.Pupsipu - look like morons. Runs on the iPhone.Pupsipu
- I looked into those Paul Irish demos. They don't support any actionscript.CyBrain
- here is how http://paulirish.com…
- PonyBoy0
so what's the real deal here?
Is the software (flash player) too inefficient a plugin for mobile devices that have minimal memory / processor speed?... I can understand if that's the issue - I still see sites that run like shit on my Intel processor mac...
... what has to be done to the player / application to make it a balanced/efficient platform for mobile devices?
One last Q (off point too)... most of the apps for mobile devices - are they all written in something resembling OOP?
- it's both Adobe's shitty player and the devices hardware capabilitiesernexbcn
- they are going to release Flash 10.1 mobile soon and it's supposedly betterernexbcn
- Mobile apps are Objective-C in the iPhones case, then .net/C++/Java on othersBIGGESTDOGINTHEWORLD
- SteveJobs0
@zeldman "Flash won’t die tomorrow, but plug-in technology is on its way out."
just wow. somebody call adobe and sun; the prophet has spoken.
--------------------------------... (semicolon)look, i think the flaw here is in this one-sided kind of thinking. it's too either/or. both technologies have their strengths and there's no reason they can't work along side one another.
- BusterBoy0
@peterh Just proves a point how fucken arrogant they have become. A lot of Mac people are getting mighty pissed off with them.
#ephix re-engineering...the cost of having to convert the millions of sites from flash to something else...possibly html5 but who the fuck knows where/when these supposedly new technologies will appear
- imho - Apple don't "owe" the (original) core users (designers) much. They're a company, making profits. They're Microsoft and they're General Motors.Peter
- ...and they are General Motors. Just because you bought all the Apple stuff doesn't mean you're entitled to something more than a personal opinion.Peter
- ...a personal opinion.
Sucks, but, hopefully something to consider before buying the next must-have -anything-.Peter - ah i seeephix
- BIGGESTDOGINTHEWORLD0
_
and seriously fuck Adobe for wasting time on dumb shit like 3D in Photoshop when that fucking program only has 16 levels of anti-aliasing and linear colour space gradients. Fucking amateur hour
- eieio0
http://www.google.com/finance?ca…
the google finace thing is flash, does this mean google will change all this type of stuff to html5 eventually or what? ca't use it on an ipad so i'd sooner buy a chrome based tablet considering all the shit google has with flash support
- * AND has flash supporteieio
- JS charts http://raphaeljs.com…Pupsipu
- kingsteven0
- < interval >kingsteven
- that jp one is mad as you like !
Excellent work, them..mikotondria3
- stewdio0
@armsbottomer. Was really good to read your response. I agree. How's Lisp treating you? I've been dabbling for a bit, but nothing serious yet. Did you know the original Netscape LiveScript interpreter was written in Lisp?
I haven't used Clojure but would like to try. What's your setup like? How can I get up and running quickly on OS X? I've played with Paul Graham's Arc and found it exciting. That and some mucking around in MzScheme. I'm also slowly (like... this will take *years* for me) building a Javascript-based Lisp interpreter. Not so much for usefulness, but so that it forces me to better understand both Javascript and Lisp (or at least Common Lisp / Scheme; I want lexical closures of course).
Those who hate Javascript are perhaps confused by the "Java" part of the name. Forget Java. Think Lisp, Scheme, and maybe even Prologue. Javascript is actually an amazing language. One just needs to unlearn a lot of the latter-day OO baggage. If you're not convinced maybe one way to ease into it is to use JSON instead of XML. Functions as data. Very nice.
- oh yes JSON, what an argument.
btw javascript is not a language , it's a script, please build me a socket or capture a real computer stream with javascript.spraycan - socket or capture a real computer stream with javascript.spraycan
- there's something called web sockets being proposed for standard, latest chrome supports it, works with JSernexbcn
- oh yes JSON, what an argument.
- must_dash0
saying that there is a lot of data for a flash app to download isn't always a problem... most of my .swfs are under 100k
- i got loaders for my loaders beyatchkingsteven
- lolrayborn3000
- SteveJobs0
armsbottomer, no offense, but that's not a very good argument, especially since you're still learning java. microsoft and adobe have both moved their technologies and respective languages in this direction for a good reason. i'm not going to go into a full-on argument on the many reasons why an object-oriented language is far better than something like javascript for games and applications. i'll leave that for you to research, but suffice to say, almost all big companies understand the value, and have invested a substantial amount of time building massive libraries and frameworks around these technologies. it's not going to go away, or simple be replaced by something simpler that a novice developer can pick up in an afternoon.
- armsbottomer0
@spraycan
i used to think javascript sucked too, but then i learned how to use it correctly and saw its beauty.also, java is too much for anyone. sorting a hashmap in a language shouldn't involve as much production as it does in java.
maybe i'm just hate java because i've been experimenting with dynamic languages that have java wrappers. for example, in clojure ( a lisp wrapper for java, difficult to get at first but i'm trying to learn it now):
java:
public class Person {
private String firstName;
private String lastName;
public Person( String firstName, String lastname){
this.firstName = firstName;
this.lastName = lastName;
}public String getFN(){
return firstName;
}public String getLN(){
return lastName;
}public void setFN(String firstName){
this.firstName = firstName;
}public void setLN(String lasttName){
this.lastName = lastName;
}}
lisp:
(defstruct person :first-name :last-name)
personally, i'd rather write a one line than a shit load. javascript has many similarities to lisp, and its ease of use is one of them. so i reiterate, fuck java/as3.
- just because it's a dynamic language, doesn't mean it's not a REAL programming language.armsbottomer
- it is not , it can't control streams, it doesnt implements sockets, it is just a script for popping stuff out of a brownser..spraycan
- brownser, many people try to push the boundaries of it but theres no point in making oranges out of applesspraycan
- they are called "script kiddies", lolspraycan
- designbot0
Flash isn't going anywhere. It's too deeply rooted all over the web (For example, 75% of all web video is Flash) and even if Adobe made no future enhancements to it at all, it would take a long time for it to disappear.
Flash = win
Adobe needs to refocus it's attention of Flash to designers though, not developers.
- acescence0
aviary is doing some cool flash app stuff, check out their new browser-based audio editor...
- "browser-based"
DIE DIE DIEi_monk - this really excites me as an old director audio nerd, flash music production community/tools like hob-nox may yet change the world.kingsteven
- path of flash.kingsteven
- "browser-based"
- armsbottomer0
i think flash lends itself better to certain forms of online game/interactive development. sure there's 03D which looks great, but as much as i love js, i'd rather work with the flash ide on large scale projects. as3 sucks (there's too much ceremony to writing it, like java) compared to js (which is just a beautiful, lovely language) but having a library/timeline/etc can often be helpful.
as far as flex and flash projects that use databases, i'm hoping that dies out soon so we can see more people espousing tools like couchDB, which ties in perfectly with javascript.
