Does HTML5 really beat Flash?
- Started
- Last post
- 69 Responses
- CyBrain0
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've read HTML5 is not a fully developed standard yet. So, real comparisons probably don't do them justice yet. This article seems to be comparing video performance and CPU usage, but HTML5 and Flash have a lot more
functionality than that. Seems like the jury is still out, but when HTML5 is here, how will it perform on different browsers? How hard will it be to develop for? It's not like there will be a timeline with and easy (mostly) software interface to use. Maybe Dreamweaver becomes a different animal altogether.Make no mistakes, the reason Jobs is against Flash isn't because of performance. It's money. He won't give up Apple's cut from app developers. All his posturing is pure bullshit.
- lukus_W0
Apple doesn't want flash, because it reduces their ability to regulate the applications available for the device. Imo, the 'performance' issue is just an excuse.
- +1jpea
- how so? don't agree. are people really going to log in to a browser just to use flash aps?inteliboy
- flash probably would use a lot of battery power. Definitely uses a lot of CPU on mac.jeremydouglas
- < so does quicktime,spot13
- reason being is that someone could make a whole app store in flash, thus putting the one coveted thing out of apple's handsjpea
- handsjpea
- Stugoo0
going the same way as ie6 tbh.
- uan0
as long as clients have flash, you use flash, if there is no flash, use html-javascript or whatever is enabled at the clientside...webfolks always adapted and will adapt to whatever technology is out there to deliver content.
flash (or swf) is so succesfull because they were the first to bring animation to the web, now the webstandards are catching up, so in recent future there will be no need nomore for the flashplugin; I wonder how it will slowly disappear from default browser installations.
I think adobe will have to expand flash's output to plain html-javascript in the coming years, if they want to keep flash in the webdesigner/developer toolbox.
- ukit0
Maybe Flash will just become a way to create "Flashy" HTML:)
- made me laughKnuckleberry
- Yep, but when? If they have iphone app publishing in CS5. It doesn't seem like much of a stretch.kingsteven
- ernexbcn0
HTML5 is a great improvement but it will take years for full browser support, I'm all for HTML5 but you can't deny there are certains sites that at the moment just can't be done with HTML5, an example would be webcam enabled sites and heavy media (advertising).
From a web developer point of view there are a lot of good things coming like web sockets, the end of cookies (or if not the end a real local storage that works like SQL), canvas, etc. But it will take time for browser support and good authoring tools to take advantage for example of the Canvas element and CSS3 animations, there are people working already on frameworks and stuff. It's safe to assume that Adobe is going to step in eventually and create some sort of IDE for using these new elements or some kind of Flash bridge between that.
- boobs0
Flash has support on all browsers now. Which browsers now support HTML 5.0 fully?
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for HTML 5.0. When it's ready for real commercial use, I'll remake my client's sites in HTML 5.0.
Until then, Flash it is.
- If no one pushes it hard, it'll take 20 years.ETM
- thats what she said.iCanHasQBN
- harmsie0
Html 5 and particularly canvas has long way to before it will have the same scripting power that flash has, we also have along way to go before Html 5 is implemented properly in anything other than safari, its ages away.
- ukit0
"Editor's Note: Some people have pointed out that Ozer has done seminars and written books featuring Adobe products, so therefore he makes money from the success of Adobe Flash. We don't think that has any effect on the test outcomes, but we thought it was worth updating the post to note it."
Maybe I'm too cynical, but this "test" sounds more like viral marketing/ opinion shaping by Adobe. I'm sure the outcomes he reached are accurate, but it kind of misses the point in a number of ways, i.e.:
-HTML5 can replace far more than just video, i.e. http://mugtug.com/sketchpad/
-There are many more potential advantages to using HTML5 than just performance enhancements. Better searchability, accessibility, seamless integration with the rest of the code. As a simple example, you could style your custom video player easily instead of relying on an embedded player or a plugin. Functionality could be greatly enhanced as well.
-Flash has been developed for over a decade, HTML5 is still in its infancy and barely supported. A direct comparison doesn't really make sense, in fact in some ways it's kind of amazing HTML5 already matches or exceeds Flash's performance in many browsers.
-Am I missing something, or is there any reason browser developers couldn't build hardware acceleration into their implementation of HTML5 video codecs in future versions?
- lobstarr0
HTML5 will be the new "web2.0/SEO" word that account people or clients bring up in meetings to show that they are current.
i can't wait for it.
- airey0
even-money the next version of dreamweaver will let you not really deploy html5.
- airey0
we're effectively comparing (if you'll excuse a car manufacturing analogy) a current model affordable sedan with a tesla concept-car.
sure it shows that things like video can be launched with less resources but by the time html5 can work across all browsers including fucking IE we'll be 3-5 years down the pipeline.
with a flash player that's streamlined (you think they're not discussing this at adobe) and a computer that comes with a 2gig graphics card and a terrabyte of ram, making the resources argument a feeble academic one at best.
- Mimio0
There's no free lunch. I don't really see how the browsers is going to be a more efficient media player. I doubt they'll be server negotiation for true streaming either.
- have you even read or looked at the html5 video stuff?airey
- Well I just read that NYT article and it said it wasn't more memory efficient.Mimio
- http://html5demos.co…
Yah, really impressive.Mimio
- airey0
hey mimio, you might want to actually look into this shit man. i mean, it sounds like you have no actual idea about the video player peeps are talking about. it's actually very impressive and tiny in file size (script and png image library). nice use of terrible cliché though. i always love me some cliché!
- ephix0
ever used a flash audio player and noticed it always reloads the mp3 each time you play it? html5 doesn't do that. just worked that out.
- airey0
true. so it's a god-send for anyone suffering OCD.
- but it also means that the file is in your browsers cache memory which may not be great.airey
- for something like a static audio or video file, i have no problem with that.ephix
- which defeats the whole 'resource' argument peeps seem to have.airey
- how? it saves resources by not having to re-download the exact same thingephix
- it takes memory to keep it in cache. this is part of the so-called problem. i think it's fine as you say.airey