And even more technically it was Future Splash Animator before Macromedia bought it from a few dudes trying to make their own software.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
some points to think about between Flash and HTML 5
- Thread starter smetvid
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And even more technically it was Future Splash Animator before Macromedia bought it from a few dudes trying to make their own software.
That's not really the point, though. The point was that if advertisement is the reason people hate Flash so much, HTML5 is not going to solve the problem. This is because the problem is not what software is used, it's the application.
But so is Quicktime, and given the context it seems a bit odd to complain about Adobe's proprietary software from an open and free point of view when Apple is doing the exact same thing. If only Apple would release control of the system and invite Adobe full use of the API, Flash on a Mac-system wouldn't be a problem.
And speaking of Quicktime, if H.264 is the best option and the use of closed proprietary software is the devil incarnate, why do Apple still insist on using Quicktime on http://www.apple.com/trailers/.
It is what it is.
So*I*find*out*that*the*reasons*the*iPhone,*iPod,*and*soon-to-be-released*iPad*don't*support*Flash*are*three-fold*(and*complicated*as*hell).
One,*Apple*claims*that*the*Flash*Player*causes*Safari*to*crash*in*OSX*and*refuses*to*support*it*on*its*newer*platforms,*even*going*so*far*as*to*write*separate*code*isolating*the*plug-in*so*that*if*it*does*malfunction*in*OSX*it*won't*take the*entire*browser down with it.
Two,*Adobe*claims*that*it's*Apple's*fault*because*they're*not*opening*up*their*APIs*to*third-party*developers,*which*would*give*Adobe*more*control*over*Apple's*video*architecture,*or*some*such*craziness. Apple's refusal has something to do with security and keeping third-party control at bay. Plus they can upgrade their architecture when they want to instead of waiting for another company to catch up.
Third,*Apple*along*with*Google*wants*the*Internet*to*support*a*more*open*source*protocol*like*HTML*5*and*H.264, the former of which*isn't*even*fully*developed*yet.*Although*YouTube*is*experimenting*with*it.*This*means*no*unnecessary*upgrading*of*Adobe's*Flash*Player*because*video*would*be*built*into*the*browser*instead.*This*also*means*less*control*over*ads*and*video*for*Adobe.
I'm*all*for*more*open-source*protocols*on*the*Internet.*We*need*some*kind*of*standards*that*don't*give*advantage*to*one*group*over*another.*At*the*same*time*Flash*is*all*over*the*web*and*can't*feasibly*be converted to a system that isn't even fully developed yet.
Of course there's also the issue of Flash usage and mobile device battery life, not to mention the hit the iTunes Store 'TV shows' would take if everyone just tuned into Hulu on their iPhones. In addition to the fact that the AT&T 3G network would implode from within causing a black hole that would stretch us all as thin as a strand of spaghetti before crushing us into an infantasmal point of nothingness. Ok that last part was a bit exaggerated, but you get my point.
What do you think of these developments? Who should support what? Does anyone besides me and the companies involved even care? Hello?
So*I*find*out*that*the*reasons*the*iPhone,*iPod,*and*soon-to-be-released*iPad*don't*support*Flash*are*three-fold*(and*complicated*as*hell).
One,*Apple*claims*that*the*Flash*Player*causes*Safari*to*crash*in*OSX*and*refuses*to*support*it*on*its*newer*platforms,*even*going*so*far*as*to*write*separate*code*isolating*the*plug-in*so*that*if*it*does*malfunction*in*OSX*it*won't*take the*entire*browser down with it.
Two,*Adobe*claims*that*it's*Apple's*fault*because*they're*not*opening*up*their*APIs*to*third-party*developers,*which*would*give*Adobe*more*control*over*Apple's*video*architecture,*or*some*such*craziness. Apple's refusal has something to do with security and keeping third-party control at bay. Plus they can upgrade their architecture when they want to instead of waiting for another company to catch up.
Third,*Apple*along*with*Google*wants*the*Internet*to*support*a*more*open*source*protocol*like*HTML*5*and*H.264, the former of which*isn't*even*fully*developed*yet.*Although*YouTube*is*experimenting*with*it.*This*means*no*unnecessary*upgrading*of*Adobe's*Flash*Player*because*video*would*be*built*into*the*browser*instead.*This*also*means*less*control*over*ads*and*video*for*Adobe.
I'm*all*for*more*open-source*protocols*on*the*Internet.*We*need*some*kind*of*standards*that*don't*give*advantage*to*one*group*over*another.*At*the*same*time*Flash*is*all*over*the*web*and*can't*feasibly*be converted to a system that isn't even fully developed yet.
Of course there's also the issue of Flash usage and mobile device battery life, not to mention the hit the iTunes Store 'TV shows' would take if everyone just tuned into Hulu on their iPhones. In addition to the fact that the AT&T 3G network would implode from within causing a black hole that would stretch us all as thin as a strand of spaghetti before crushing us into an infantasmal point of nothingness. Ok that last part was a bit exaggerated, but you get my point.
What do you think of these developments? Who should support what? Does anyone besides me and the companies involved even care? Hello?
Did you miss my gigantic post about how Adobe doesn't support several browsers, mobile platforms, operating systems, or disabled users? It's the post with all the links to petitions.
There are a lot of users who Macromedia and Adobe have kicked to the curb and ignored, and up until a few years ago Mac users felt the brunt of this, and today it's still affecting disabled internet users and Linux users, who often can't even browse Flash sites due to the plugin being so pathetically supported. If we were talking about HTML 5 it wouldn't matter, as the Linux community and mobile phone manufacturers could easily implement support and tweak the performance themselves. But because Flash is closed to the public, they can't; they end up at the mercy of whether Adobe decides to improve the Flash support, or whether they don't. So far it's been the latter.
You probably can't understand this as a Windows user, where you receive the best Flash support, but the moment it happens to you while trying to use another platform and when you realize you can't do anything about it, you immediately understand why HTML 5 needs to replace Flash completely.
So for you to claim any Flash website is "open to everyone" is an extreme misunderstanding on your part.
And I guess you missed all my posts where I talk about the performance on my Imac. I use a few Windows systems at work for testing but my computer is a Mac.
So you are saying that it is ok for the world to use a technology that may be inferior as long as everybody can use it? If that were the case we wouldn't even have computers today to be having this discussion. Technological advances happen and sometimes people get left in the dark. That is part of progress. Apple doesn't run Windows which means some people cannot use certain programs but I don't see you criticizing that. What about Quicktime's bad support for Linux? Quicktime was never an open format but at the time it was necessary to move the technology forward. I totally get what you are saying but not everything works that way in the world sometimes. Like I said before it would have been great if we didn't need Flash but we did. Nobody else stepped forward to support the stuff Flash does. If open standards would have supported all of this stuff from the beginning then you and I wouldn't be having this conversation right now. The fact is that Adobe filled a gap. It wasn't perfect but when it comes to computers nothing is. Just like how Gimp and Blender still have bugs and problems even though it is open to a huge community of users. None of us know for sure that if Flash were open that the problems you mention could even be fixed. It is all guess work. Personally I would rather ride the technology wave and try to push the web to new levels of possibility without having to wait to do so every ten years.
Hey I use Firefox so I cannot watch H264 video with HTML 5 so that sort of leaves me out in the cold as well doesn't it? Me having to use Safari to view the video opposed to Firefox is no different then Flash not working with certain browsers. All of my corporate clients who use IE 6, 7 and 8 have no way of watching it either. How open is the format to them? You see it is supposedly ok to tell people to move to a new web browser or OS but yet it isn't ok for Adobe to only support browsers that are used by 99% of the world.
I also don't understand why you think it is ok for a commercial company to make it's own intellectual properties open source just because some people want it that way.
What's with all this "inferior" talk?
Run these demos in your browser and tell me what you need that isn't in HTML 5 — http://blarnee.com/wp/13-incredibly-fresh-new-canvas-demos/
Is it animation tools similar to the Adobe Flash suite? That's a pretty poor argument — it can be done in many other ways, which will work fine until Adobe creates a HTML 5 suite for users who need a GUI.
I don't want you to feel I'm dismissing what Flash has done to push video, animation, and interactive content on the internet. But the way they've done it has been less than perfect, and now that the proper standards have evolved to cover these areas, there is no reason for Flash to stay around with its disadvantages of platform un-interoperability and lack of disability access, which are very much solved in HTML 5.
No, you're not left out in the cold at all, because you have the OPTION to switch to another browser; you can use any of several browsers out there, and you could even create your own. You don't seem to appreciate the difference — A user does not have the option to download a different Flash plugin. And if Adobe hasn't made a plugin for that user, then they cannot view Flash websites at all.
I'm not saying that at all, and now you're just throwing a red herring into the discussion to try and paint me as anti-business. Well I've got news for you, I actually own two companies which deal with intellectual property, and I very much understand how important IP is to a company. In this case, however, it's a misplaced argument. The internet is not a proprietary product — it's open and should stay that way so it can be accessed by anybody using any platform, whether it's a PC, a Mac, an iPad, or a child in Africa using a little OLPC.
When I say inferior I am talking about workflow and productivity. We also don't really know yet what the true benchmark comparison is going to be like against HTML 5 Canvas and Flash. Many HTML 5 canvas based demos I have seen have pushed my 3.06 Ghz dual core Imac above 50% cpu useage. I can imagine those demos would be murder on a Ipad. Designers need design tools now. Perhaps HTML 5 will be better then Flash and part of me hopes that it will but that time is not here yet. When professional level design and animation tools are available with keyframes and motion paths then I will consider it equal or better. Not everybody who creates web content is a developer and talented animators never ever use code. If all of a sudden the world dropped Flash the internet as a whole would take one giant step backwards in terms of visual artistry. When somebody (which I'm sure will be Adobe) makes a animation design tool for HTML then yes Flash will be dead.
You mention platform un-interoperability but HTML 5 doesn't have that yet. Flash actually has more of a reach right now. Maybe HTML 5 will be there in a few years but it isn't there yet. What are PC users supposed to do in the mean time? Download Firefox? It is hard to get the IT department in certain companies to install a new version of Flash which is just a plugin as opposed to installing an entirly new web browser. PC users make up over 90% of the market right now and a large chunk of those in the corporate world still don't even use IE 7 let alone 8. It could take years for HTML 5 to be available to everybody. Flash doesn't reach 1% of the market right now which is sad but HTML 5 misses out on over 80% of the market.
Nobody is saying the internet is a proprietary product. In fact people don't have to use Flash. Flash is an option if you want it. Linux users cannot use Silverlight either but nobody seems to bash that as much. There will always be technologies developed by companies that are way ahead of what HTML can do and they may not be available for everybody.
Look I embrace HTML 5 just as much as you do but we need to be realistic here. Things cannot and will not change over night. It is ridiculous to expect Flash to just go away over night. There is a large integrated part of the web economy tied in with Flash currently. The transition needs to be gradual or else it will affect a lot of jobs. Do you really want to see hundreds of talented web designers without jobs? By using a blind boycott of Flash we are not helping the situation but just making it worse. Why can't we let the people choose what they want to use? If HTML 5 is going to be better then Flash then let people discover this for themselves. Eventually when designers no longer see the need or the market to use Flash they will stop using it. It is as simple as that. Apple forcing people to stop using things takes away the right to choose which I consider more of a freedom then a standard being forced on everybody because a group thinks it is best. Let me and the rest of the world make that decision for ourselves. That is all we are asking here. None of us are running around saying "kill this" or "Flash must die" and "end all plugins now" All any of us are saying is that the internet is a big place where we can all live in unison so give us a choice as to how we want to experience the web. You are saying I shouldn't have the right to use Flash and I am saying I should have the right to use HTML 5, Flash, Silverlight or Shockwave if I want to. To me that is what makes the internet an open world.
OP is spot on the money. HTML5 isn't going to be adopted overnight. Right now only two browsers which make up about 10-11% of the market support h264 in a video tag.
On desktop computers, correct. But we need to admit that mobile devices are rapidly becoming a larger market, and could quickly become the primary method of internet access. And when we're talking about mobile platforms, around 90% of them have support for HTML 5 + H.264 video.
Flash is unstable Buggy Garbage. Check out http://flashcrash.dempsky.org/
They detail a bug that has been well known in flash yet nothing has been done about it. Good riddance to flash IMO!
They detail a bug that has been well known in flash yet nothing has been done about it. Good riddance to flash IMO!
Smetvid- Please, for the love of God, stop using the argument, "Flash is a choice", "Flash should be an option", "Flash should be a right for everybody", "Flash makes the internet open." —— Not only is that an oxymoron, but your support of Flash is a huge hypocrisy as you're simultaneously neglecting many internet users who Adobe doesn't support.
Who can fix the 100% support problem? Well, it's either Adobe — who haven't done anything in years — or it's HTML 5, which can bring that 100% support to internet users.
You don't seem to understand how serious The Flash Problem is for a lot of people. Each day that Flash is continued to be used across the web is one more day they struggle to use the internet. You have no idea what it's like to open your browser and pray that you'll get through the day without encountering a site that uses Flash. You have no idea what this is like, but I do. The day I had to sign a petition, begging for the Flash plugin to be fixed on my platform, is the day I ceased to be a Flash developer and vowed to use only internet standards. I realized how completely BS it all was that someone should rely on a single company to be able to use the internet to any decent standard.
You argue that HTML 5 isn't widely adopted, well it's true, but that's because people don't need HTML 5 browsers right now. How do you think Flash got such wide adoption? — It was a prompt, saying they need to install such and such plugin. If YouTube suddenly ditched their Flash mode and prompted users to download a HTML 5 browser, I think you'd be impressed with what can happen overnight.
Both Apple and Google are very quickly and efficiently pushing HTML 5 browsers in front of users. There is no reason to make this a long and painful transition. If Flash designers lose their jobs, so be it. That is not a valid reason to hold back. But realistically, it should not be too hard for them to transition to HTML 5 designers as the right tools are introduced.
Who can fix the 100% support problem? Well, it's either Adobe — who haven't done anything in years — or it's HTML 5, which can bring that 100% support to internet users.
You don't seem to understand how serious The Flash Problem is for a lot of people. Each day that Flash is continued to be used across the web is one more day they struggle to use the internet. You have no idea what it's like to open your browser and pray that you'll get through the day without encountering a site that uses Flash. You have no idea what this is like, but I do. The day I had to sign a petition, begging for the Flash plugin to be fixed on my platform, is the day I ceased to be a Flash developer and vowed to use only internet standards. I realized how completely BS it all was that someone should rely on a single company to be able to use the internet to any decent standard.
You argue that HTML 5 isn't widely adopted, well it's true, but that's because people don't need HTML 5 browsers right now. How do you think Flash got such wide adoption? — It was a prompt, saying they need to install such and such plugin. If YouTube suddenly ditched their Flash mode and prompted users to download a HTML 5 browser, I think you'd be impressed with what can happen overnight.
Both Apple and Google are very quickly and efficiently pushing HTML 5 browsers in front of users. There is no reason to make this a long and painful transition. If Flash designers lose their jobs, so be it. That is not a valid reason to hold back. But realistically, it should not be too hard for them to transition to HTML 5 designers as the right tools are introduced.
From the perspective of my girlfriends mother, they had a relatively new desktop. It wasn't a power house, but it suited their needs just fine. That was until they started wanting to watch things on youtube.
They called me asking why their computer would stutter on every video, etc etc, so finally I put them in the HTML5 Youtube Beta, and voila, they can now watch any video that is HTML5 without a problem.
I think this is a common problem, to us not so much, we're the nerdy type with fast computers, and up to date software.
To a vast majority of PC users, they just can't figure out why they can't watch the funny video of the boy that was bitten by his brother charlie.
Let's support the death of Flash.
They called me asking why their computer would stutter on every video, etc etc, so finally I put them in the HTML5 Youtube Beta, and voila, they can now watch any video that is HTML5 without a problem.
I think this is a common problem, to us not so much, we're the nerdy type with fast computers, and up to date software.
To a vast majority of PC users, they just can't figure out why they can't watch the funny video of the boy that was bitten by his brother charlie.
Let's support the death of Flash.
You do realize that flash isn't cancer or some incurable disease right? Your latest post lacks a bit of.. how do I say - PERSPECTIVE.
If visiting a website that has flash is that much of an infliction for you - you really should take a deep breath and take a walk outside and remind yourself that there are far more important things than a site that does or does not have flash or html5.
It might help you "get through the day" - and without prayer even.
Hey, it's an exaggeration, but it's difficult to get my point across without it. Most people haven't experienced what it's like to be unable to use a popular website. If I took away your Youtube, and said you need to wait for Adobe to fix your access before you could watch another video which could be a year from now, or maybe never, you don't even know if Adobe are planning on ever fixing it for you, you would quickly understand.
I understand your point. I would argue that using exaggerations only weakens your argument as it makes you come across as immature, extreme and ranting/raving. I think you can express yourself in a much more intelligent way then speaking in hyperbole.
And I don't say that to condescend at all - because I know you're capable of illustrating your point better than that last post. And the comment holds true for way too many people on this and other message boards.
One of the main reasons that Flash runs so poorly on both Mac OS X and Linux is because Adobe requires the plug in to bypass API's in order to achieve hardware acceleration, something that both Mac OS X and Linux don't permit by design.
Consequently, on both of these platforms Flash uses the CPU for all its processing needs which is why the computer heats up and the fans kick in. This isn't a problem with Windows because Microsoft has taken a different approach to its OS design that allows Flash to bypass the operating system API's and access hardware directly.
This is really noticeable when comparing to HTML 5 codecs. On a Mac, the H264 video codec accesses relies on API's to achieve hardware acceleration and puts much less strain on the CPU then Flash as a result of this.
Additionally, Flash actually constrains software development because OS and browser developers need to wait for Adobe to optimize the plug in for their software. This has led to browser developers having plug ins run as separate processes. Had Apple, for example, chosen to wait for Adobe to optimize its plugin for 64bits we would still be using the 32 bit version of Safari. That's not good for developers, and its certainly not good for end users.
If users REALLY love Flash as opposed to the content it delivers they should complain to Adobe to make Flash open source. Otherwise users are essentially arguing against their own self interests to Adobe's glee and the webs detriment. This is a case where Apple's self interests in disallowing Flash from its mobile products are really well aligned with the interests of internet users, if for different reasons.
All internet users should DEMAND that Adobe make Flash open source and that all sites provide content using open source standards in order to ensure the best possible experience regardless of the device or software.
Consequently, on both of these platforms Flash uses the CPU for all its processing needs which is why the computer heats up and the fans kick in. This isn't a problem with Windows because Microsoft has taken a different approach to its OS design that allows Flash to bypass the operating system API's and access hardware directly.
This is really noticeable when comparing to HTML 5 codecs. On a Mac, the H264 video codec accesses relies on API's to achieve hardware acceleration and puts much less strain on the CPU then Flash as a result of this.
Additionally, Flash actually constrains software development because OS and browser developers need to wait for Adobe to optimize the plug in for their software. This has led to browser developers having plug ins run as separate processes. Had Apple, for example, chosen to wait for Adobe to optimize its plugin for 64bits we would still be using the 32 bit version of Safari. That's not good for developers, and its certainly not good for end users.
If users REALLY love Flash as opposed to the content it delivers they should complain to Adobe to make Flash open source. Otherwise users are essentially arguing against their own self interests to Adobe's glee and the webs detriment. This is a case where Apple's self interests in disallowing Flash from its mobile products are really well aligned with the interests of internet users, if for different reasons.
All internet users should DEMAND that Adobe make Flash open source and that all sites provide content using open source standards in order to ensure the best possible experience regardless of the device or software.
Why do you have to be insulting to me? Do you really think that is the solution? I see your point but I don't agree with it. Why do you feel the sky is falling just because I do not agree with you. You have a single stance and objective to hate Flash no matter what anybody says. Look once again I agree with you on many of your topics. Well at least I did before you started insulting me everywhere I went. I admitted that Flash wasn't perfect and that hopefully someday HTML 5 will replace it. What more do you want from me? You will not be happy until I sign the same petition you have signed. Why can't you let other people have their opinion? You act as if it is some mortal sin not to agree with your point. You keep trying to assume I am somebody I am not. First you accused me of being a Windows user and then you accused me of being an employ of Adobe which I am not and would never do in a million years.
Dude wake up and realize that we agree on many of the same points here. We just have different ways of making the transition. I support HTML 5 with open arms but I understand that it is logical to allow the transition to happen gradually. Why is that such a problem for you? I realize you hate Flash with a passion and I am cool with that. Why can't you be cool with me liking Flash?
May I ask what platform you use that allows you to not use Flash at all? I am want to understand this problem better but your negative tone doesn't exactly help the situation. I am willing to discuss this with you further but only if you can start talking to me in a civil manner.
smetvid, I'm sorry if anything I've said has insulted you. I haven't attacked you on any personal level. At worst, I criticized your arguments on "openness" as hypocritical, which I still believe they are. At best, I'm trying to introduce a discussion about the internet users left out of the 'Flash loop', which I believe is a serious problem we need to get past as soon as possible.
The platform I'm personally referring to is OS X six years ago. The plugin existed, but performance was so poor you couldn't navigate to a Flash site without it threatening to crash the browser. I am/was an active member of FlashKit, which is where I signed the petition. Although the problem on OS X may have since been alleviated somewhat to a more acceptable standard, there are still plenty of mobile platforms and certain distributions of Linux that Adobe doesn't support, and Flash also contravenes the American Disability Act (and similar European acts) by having such poor support for disabled users.
Unfortunately I don't think it is possible for us to make this transition "gradually" Being that nothing will ever move unless someone decides to finally take an action to make progress. The worst example of this is Internet Explorer, and the horribly unstandardized and broken world wide web they created. It was only when Mozilla took dramatic measures with pushing Firefox to make Microsoft jump to adopting proper standards into IE. I question if they ever would have had it not been for Firefox.
Apple and Google are taking similar dramatic actions in pushing HTML 5 forward. But I struggle to understand your point of view; you claim to be a big proponent of HTML 5, yet you've created this thread which is completely counter-supportive to the wide adoption of HTML 5.
The platform I'm personally referring to is OS X six years ago. The plugin existed, but performance was so poor you couldn't navigate to a Flash site without it threatening to crash the browser. I am/was an active member of FlashKit, which is where I signed the petition. Although the problem on OS X may have since been alleviated somewhat to a more acceptable standard, there are still plenty of mobile platforms and certain distributions of Linux that Adobe doesn't support, and Flash also contravenes the American Disability Act (and similar European acts) by having such poor support for disabled users.
Unfortunately I don't think it is possible for us to make this transition "gradually" Being that nothing will ever move unless someone decides to finally take an action to make progress. The worst example of this is Internet Explorer, and the horribly unstandardized and broken world wide web they created. It was only when Mozilla took dramatic measures with pushing Firefox to make Microsoft jump to adopting proper standards into IE. I question if they ever would have had it not been for Firefox.
Apple and Google are taking similar dramatic actions in pushing HTML 5 forward. But I struggle to understand your point of view; you claim to be a big proponent of HTML 5, yet you've created this thread which is completely counter-supportive to the wide adoption of HTML 5.
WRONG. wrong. wrong.
the real reason behind the lack of flash, is because getting a multitouch app done in flash is easy.
and you know what? that would destroy the monopoly over apps/app store and change the apple rulez of business.
every one would start to make flash apps in the web for iphone/ipad, and thachx-tcham! 8) no app store
I really doubt that.
If I had to compare the quality of flash games vs appstore games, it'd be no contest. Flash can not provide the depth and stability that actual apps can. It's that simple.
But this is an inherent problem with your proposal in my opinion. Flash has hit critical mass. Even with IE mucking up and Firefox coming on the scene - IE never really lost their dominance. IE slowly worked (and is still working) on "compliance." People didn't stop using one piece of software and go to another like you're suggesting people do with Flash. Do you know how long it would be before people stopped using IE even if they hadn't changed a bit? A LONG time. Too many users, too many machines.
Flash is similar - it's at critical mass. For there really to be a revolution, websites and designers would have to abandon it and change all their sites rendering the need for flash on browsers useless at which point the browsers and/or adobe would abandon flash.
But that will and can never be an overnight thing. It would be like trying to get all the website on the net organized to display a message at exactly 9am their time. You might get a bunch interested - but not enough to even register a blip across the entire web.
Time.... and a "competing" product which provides the same benefits as flash without the headaches and/or a change in programming from Adobe....
Working in the web design industry I can tell you that no client wants to make their site in Flash any longer.
At least, no client that is serious about their customer relationships and speed of their site.
It's all about the 3 seconds you have after someone clicks a link. They want to have their information pop up above the fold of the browser, and they want it instantly. Flash makes that hard, even with most of America having transitioned to broadband.
I can see Flash going to the wayside in video circumstances, and I really think it should, but as far as advertising and web pages go, it will always "be there" I just think to a lesser effect over the next few years.
At least, no client that is serious about their customer relationships and speed of their site.
It's all about the 3 seconds you have after someone clicks a link. They want to have their information pop up above the fold of the browser, and they want it instantly. Flash makes that hard, even with most of America having transitioned to broadband.
I can see Flash going to the wayside in video circumstances, and I really think it should, but as far as advertising and web pages go, it will always "be there" I just think to a lesser effect over the next few years.
But wouldn't that argument be true of HTML 5 and the canvas tag as well? You are talking about any form of rich media that will be slow and not just Flash. Cramming 3MB of data down a pipe is going to take awhile no matter what way you deliver it. There are also ways of using Flash so it doesn't take a long time to load.
I agree with you to a certain point but I see jobs posted every day for Flash designers so somebody must still be requesting the use of it somewhere. Our company gets requests all the time from corporate clients for Flash content. You and I are both correct because the internet is huge and has niche markets. Your client base is going to be different then my client base.
I am really sorry Flash has been a problem for you. I am unfamiliar with the performance of Flash on older Mac systems. At that point in my life I was still using Director to create museum kiosks and desktop applications.
As to the "open" factor that is something that is always going to be a matter of opinion for both of us and is quickly turning political in nature. In fact this whole argument is more or less political at this point. We all have good and bad points about usability, market adoption and performance. After that it all boils down to politics and opinions.
I follow everything you say and I would love to change things right now. I used to hate Flash with a passion because I was a Director user which has sort of been killed by Flash. I was dragged kicking and screaming into Flash against my will. I would love nothing more then to leave Flash but I just cannot yet. I have clients that still want to pay money for Flash content. Maybe they are misguided and I may agree with you but the fact is they still want it. I am already in the process of suggesting a move to HTML 5 but 98% of our clients are corporate PC users who will not use Firefox if their lives depended on it. Until IE adopts HTML 5 or the PC world switches to Firefox and Firefox decides to support HTML 5 H264 video I am sort of stuck. I also know HTML 5 isn't 100% ready yet and it doesn't have the design tools that a huge group of web designers use to build content for their clients. I understand a visual design tool isn't needed by everybody but there are a lot of hard working talented artists that do use those tools. Personally I do not want to see a lot of my brothers and sisters loose their jobs because of a sudden switch. I do think the switch may happen eventually but that time is not yet. We need to give the designers time to gravitate to HTML 5. Our company for example depends on dynamic live video streaming for our clients. That is something I am pretty sure will not be possible with HTML 5 right now. If Flash were to die tomorrow we would have no options left to offer this service to our clients.
Personally I feel the happy medium to our debate and the problems on the internet are for designers to use both HTML 5 and Flash. This way the entire world wins. For those that hate Flash you can fall back to the HTML 5 version of the site. For those who do need some of the features of Flash that option is there. I realize this option doesn't sound good to you but your solution doesn't sound good to me or my clients right now. When HTML 5 can support everything I use in Flash I will be more then happy to drop Flash and use it.
Most of my reason for starting this thread wasn't targeted at you who actually has a valid point about the sliver of the market that Adobe forgot about. It was aimed at the people who think HTML 5 is going to magically fix many of the problems of Flash such as annoying ads and slow loading sites and so forth. That doesn't mean I don't think people shouldn't use HTML 5 but to not be shocked when a lot of the things people are annoyed about may still be there. Most people are annoyed at rich media content not Flash itself.
The interesting thing about this is that Flash CS5 is going to be able to create native Iphone and Ipad apps. So Flash will be used to create hundreds of thousands of free apps over night.