And just when I started getting back into it.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/...-mobile-flash/
Printable View
And just when I started getting back into it.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2011/...-mobile-flash/
Best to get the information from the horses mouth and not somewhere else
http://blogs.adobe.com/conversations...ash-focus.htmlQuote:
Our future work with Flash on mobile devices will be focused on enabling Flash developers to package native apps with Adobe AIR for all the major app stores. We will no longer continue to develop Flash Player in the browser to work with new mobile device configurations (chipset, browser, OS version, etc.) following the upcoming release of Flash Player 11.1 for Android and BlackBerry PlayBook. We will of course continue to provide critical bug fixes and security updates for existing device configurations. We will also allow our source code licensees to continue working on and release their own implementations.
Emphasis following the upcoming release of Flash Player 11.1 for Android and BlackBerry PlayBook
In other words they are still developing player 11 for bb and android.
And still will be using as in air.
So in other words they are still creating
;) Phew
At least my post drummed up a touch of life in the land of yellow. lol
Trust me it stirred up quite a bit of controversy at other forums I inhabit.
Flash is not that bad, and it's certainly ain't dying. It's just refocusing itself.
Time to move on...
Goodbye Flash.... it was good while it lasted
Our company uses flash for MANY of our clients across a broad range of applications and there's NOTHING that can currently cover the same range of development and delivery options.
So, flash isn't going anywhere. Just because we'll no longer be able to create iPad/iPhone apps in flash is no hit to us. We've only done one of those and it had enough performance issues that we decided to dig into XCODE for the next one.
Flash is here to stay, at least for now. HTML5 is showing promise, but it's just not ready to handle the complexity and interactivity that you can get from flash.
The misinformation surrounding this is toxic. I blame Adobe.
The mobile flash player is the only thing ceasing to be supported. period. The only thing that sucks about that is the wind it added to the sails of already biased idiots.
Flash for desktops - still supported
Air for desktops - still supported
Air for Android - still supported
Air for IOS - still supported!
Adobe's only profit from flash was the IDE. Almost zero flash player content was being targeted to mobile which makes their mobile player a zero ROI. Hopefully the time, effort and money they plan on throwing at HTML5 tooling will result in some killer apps. God knows the industry needs it.
Coincidentally I have a cool HTML5 project starting development and after spiking a few CSS3/3-D tests I can confidently say that, "I F*CKING HATE IT! I HATE IT!" Javascript is "exprethifff" but even its best evangelist, Douglas Crockford will tell you it sucks! CSS3 is more of what CSS has ALWAYS been... Stacking greased marbles while wearing boxing gloves! The human mind was not meant to think sideways. Sorry for the rant, I just really hate my industry today.
In somewhat related news adobe is going through restructuring.
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/08/a...digital-media/
Most people will browse the internet in mobile devices. While flash will still work in desktop browsers, I think it'll become less and less relevant in websites in the next couple of years. So, in practical terms, not having a mobile flash player will affect its existence in desktop web browsers.Quote:
Originally Posted by jAQUAN
However, Adobe's strategy has been to market flash/flex as a platform to develop applications. And I think it will continue being a strong tool in that field. Besides, considering Flash is a great tool for game development, and animation (I'm guessing 90% of tv animation is done with flash), Flash won't go away.
I know almost everyone on here is going to agree with me – but even if just one IDIOT HTML5 supporter reads this – it’s worth it.
First of all – HTML5 is fine for the reasons it was intended – video players without plugins, etc.
BUT… Will people STOP saying HTML5 is a “Flash Killer” or even a replacement, or even in the same league as Flash.
If it wasn’t for Apple’s marketing – this whole “war” wouldn’t have even started – html5 would have just been the update it was intended to be.
Apple would not allow Flash on their iphones for ONE reason – it wasn’t because it’s slow, or uses a lot of battery power, or any reason to improve usability –
Apple would not allow flash on their devices because they wanted to SELL APPS – TO MAKE MONEY.
Think of all the 10000’s of flash games, apps, etc already avilable for FREE on newgrounds,miniclip, etc – why would anyone pay $3 for a game – when they could play in for free?
They HAD to come up with a reason why they shouldn’t include flash.
So why did they support HTML5? Because it’s a terrible substitute with no possibility of competing with Flash.
With no real development suite – making anything in html5 is painstaking. I could recreate almost any of the html5 “killer” demo’s that are available on the web – but know what? My flash versions would be better. It would be vector, so look perfectly sharp, it could be downloaded as a single file and played offline. It could have drop-shadows, glows, and, and most importantly – I could make it fast – not because of ActionScript itself – but because of the Flash dev software. Why take weeks drawing circles in code, when you can use movieclips to make great animations.
Even if there was a software package that made it simple to make html5 games – a sort of “Flash for html5” – (Adobe edge?) HTML5 is still limited. Sending a single file swf, contain all the sound, code, graphics, etc to newground is simple – sending a bunch of html,javascript,pngs will just be a pain.
Need more reasons? Over 90% of users have Flash player installed – so the whole argument that you need to download a plugin for it to work is ridiculous. People have the plugin-and if they don’t – it’s a small simple download – that is linked to by the content.
It’s more effort to download the latest chome or firefox browser that supports html5. Most users are still IE – which doesn’t have full 5 support yet.
I’ve read people saying – flash slows down my browser – and even made my browser crash. I guarantee – there are more javascript errors out there. I’ve had more browser crashes because of poor JavaScript code then flash.
If flash does cause your browser to crash – it’s because Flash is so simple to use – beginners make games/apps/ads – not fully knowing what they are doing, and their code gets stuck in a loop. This isn’t a fault of flash – it’s a fault caused by the coder. Guess what? As more people take up HTML5 – you will get the same poor coding, and just as many crashes.
And if flash crashes your safari browser on your mac – it won’t crash if you use firefox on your mac. The safari browser is to blame there. (If It crashes in ff on the mac – this isn’t the post to discuss mac vs pc)
It’s sad so many people are behind HTML5 as a replacement for flash –without fully knowing why they are supporting it. They’ve been told by Apple flash is bad – and they’ve just accepted it.
The developers of html5 themselves have said people are trying to use it in a way it was not intended.
Sorry for the long post.
Maybe I can find some HTML5 site somewhere to work for.
there's always fortran http://www.fortran.com/
Flash can be unplugged, html5 not, which means adds cannot be unplugged. HTML5 can therefore replace Flash.
I want to see HTML5 development using similar frameworks like SWIZ or MATE and design patterns as it is possible in Flash builder to build powerful and stable applications. Flash builder and AIR will be the focus especially because of the crossplatform advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by argonauta
All I need to in order to be happy again is a new language and a killer IDE built around it that compiles to html/css/js. Writing any of those languages is akin to writing machine code.
I asked my client if they had an idea for this animated transition in this html5 project. They sent me the animation for the marvel logo used in their movies. F*cking shoot me. Shoot me now!
there are many, many reasons why HTML5 is not (yet) a replacement for Flash.
The immediate problem is the raft of bandwagon jumping nay sayers and apple fanboys shouting it down. It's bound to have a negative effect on prospective jobs for Flashers as employers get sucked in to the hype and are sold on an immature platform
We can always send clients links like this to help them make up their mind.
http://now.periscopic.com/2011/05/ou...-your-project/
I get what you're saying. However, I think this is partially off.Quote:
Originally Posted by m_andrews808
I would wager that most experienced Flash devs also know HTML-based technologies (and could get jobs doing so). On the other hand, I know that there are many HTML devs that don't know the first thing about Flash.
While I think it's true that HTML-centric devs oppose Flash in large part because they don't know how to use it, I think that most Flash devs oppose working with HTML because they have programmed in both.
^ Nailed it. I just made this realization yesterday. I suddenly dawned on me that the vitriol spewed by html devs likely stems from the fact that they've lost a contract or two due to a lack of ability to write as3.
On a related note, the most confusing argument is that flash crashes a lot and somehow crashes more often these days. I don't spend much time researching flash experiences across the web but I do see a lot and I just don't experience this crashiness. I follow some great devs on twitter who post links to their edge case experiments and they're pretty damn stable.
My office is researching a holy grail approach to javascript atm. From a developer stand point its kind of an enjoyable search for a solution. It's what we do. But from a effort vs. payoff perspective, this is f*cking insane! I will say that javascript is a bit like free style kung-fu. The only structure comes from technique. This is appealing until you realize its like having mad rubix cube or pen twirling skills. No body f*cking cares.
It's only a matter of time before the HTML5 canvas replaces the Flash stage. There are already programs out there on the market which are basically replica's of the first versions of Flash. They'll only get better over time...
For example, http://tumultco.com/hype/
I want to see solid programming using design patterns and frameworks with HTML5 and Javascript as it is possible with Flash and Flex. Until then Flash and Flex won't disappear and it's enough time for Flash/Flex developers to dive into HTML5 and application development.Quote:
Originally Posted by s3an
That's the problem with these IDE's so far. Adobe Edge has the makings to be a seriously good app but in the end, there's no runtime to compile for. They're are all just code generators and real programmers hate that. Debugging is a nightmare and god forbid you want to add a feature.
Straight OOP will never be a smart thing to do in javascript. It simply doesn't work that way. I'm reading "The Good Parts" by Douglas Crockford right now and it has some very good coping mechanisms like closures and modules but lets face it, they're really just f*cking hacks.
That's probably true, but it going to be a long f*cking time until it does. The flash stage accounts for only a portion of what makes it a killer platform. There's sound channels, sockets, DRM playback, text... ok text in flash is a joke, code privacy, and a ton of other awesomeness built up over the last 10 years. In the mean time clients are going to expect to pay the same price for content that's much harder to build.Quote:
Originally Posted by s3an
Until I see an IDE that's worth a damn... HTML5 isn't an answer for much anything. And I refuse to go back to the days of coding everything in Coda or Notepad. I already do that for PHP. Not gonna do that for HTML5 Canvas too. Timeline + IDE = happy mofo.
It ain't happened yet.
Aptana3 is not a bad code editor in that it's code completion supports css3 and html5. Still no design mode a la Edge. It will happen but unless it comes with custom js sugar I'm never going to feel like I'm doing the right thing.
I ought to make a sticky out of this thread. Seems the only discussion which always returns members.
I haven't touched flash in years (well maybe other than deploying a few videos).
More to the point - I can't remember the last time I used a proper flash based website - or even a website with heavy use of smaller flash files (again, other than video sites).
I don't think HTML5 is the flash killer, the way the web has evolved has just required less use of flash - most people use the web to buy stuff, look at stuff and talk about stuff - none of that requires flash.
However - the experience can be enhanced with modern browser features - css3, hml5, latest javascript support/libraries etc..
I've just a built a new site and we've quite heavily used new css3/html features and I can really see the benefit - we've also taken into account users with older browsers of course - they can still use the site.
There wasn't a single instance where we thought we need flash..
Flash still has its place of course but the days of animated flash menus are over.. thank god.
Frankly, I would sell an iPad to browse something like this -
http://www.rexonaformen.com.mx
HTML5 promises to be a good tool ...just not for the stuff that flash does very well.
html5 will fall prey to the same failures of html1,2,3 only moreso.
Not that I like the WC3 but atleast it was/is a governing body that issues standards and practices to html. Even with that there were and are still inconsistencies in how it is implemented cross browser. The WC3 has stated that html5 is still a proposition. No clear rules have been carved in stone. It's only a draft
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/
Considering that browser vendors applied their own standards to previous incarnations and they are less bound to observe future standards it will mean more not less compatiblity issues. Not only with browsers but with operating systems in general. As html5 is becoming a part of the programming language lexicon.
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...-horrified.ars
Like it or not. Both users and programmers are going to have a very very rough go with Windows 8 as older software may not be compatible with it. That new program that you just bought today and love may not survive windows 8. Software vendors may not be able to honor older license agreements with the new OS. Which means for the consumer everything you currently have licensed for will be out the window. It also means software developers will be working triple time to reproduce the products they already sell in an html5 compatible format. Less features for more money.
YEEA!!1
GO FRETS GO!
You're da maan!!
Let's take this HTML **** doowwn!!
Who's with me!?!?
:grouphug:
Absolutely right, but will customers just accept it! IMO this is one of the forks in the road. We live in a very different world from the one we have been used to for many years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frets
The difference between user demands and what is delivered by HTML5 and its bandwagon will leave room for something entirely different to come out of left field and change the game.
Paul
I don't think I agree. For a start, unlike previous verions of HTML, version 5 is meant to be completely backward compatible. This was not the case for earlier versions. I think this time they might be closer to getting it right.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frets
I feel confident most of the browser application developers will work towards more consistent support for all HTML5 features once they are finalised ( as you said, HTML5 is still just a work in progress - until early to mid 2012 I think).Quote:
Even with that there were and are still inconsistencies in how it is implemented cross browser. The WC3 has stated that html5 is still a proposition. No clear rules have been carved in stone. It's only a draft
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/
...possibly, but there already seems to be more consistent support for HTML5 in all browsers than with previous versions. Maybe it will go in the other direction, and there will be fewer compatibility issues.Quote:
Considering that browser vendors applied their own standards to previous incarnations and they are less bound to observe future standards it will mean more not less compatiblity issues.
david
I think there will be a tablet version of Windows 8 using ARM architecture and a PC version of Windows 8 using x86 architecture. Just like there is the iOS for apple mobile devices and OSX for their desktop machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frets
I like what one user said in this discussion -
Quote:
This entire saga about "the inevitability of ARM on the desktop is the beginning of the end for x86" reminds me of other entertaining, whimsical, slightly daft fairy tales like "Intel is going to make GPUs obsolete with Larrabee," and it is most instructive in this case to take Intel's take on Windows 8. Intel dearly loves Windows 8, warts, ARM, and all.
What is it with the mindless "one size must fit all" lunacy that seems to fill so many heads? There is no reason on earth why ARM would ever be thought to usurp and replace x86--rather, ARM will continue to do as it has always done--to compliment x86 as opposed to replacing it, exactly in the sense of how mobile functionality currently compliments desktop functionality. It may very well be, too, that with the passage of time and the continuing expertise in FAB process reduction and escalating yields, that x86 ultimately renders most commercial (as opposed to industrial) uses of ARM entirely void of either substance or importance. Few people today care to think about that, which is an oddity in itself.
Who is it who also thinks, with such a one track mind, that "mobile" is for some strange reason going to usurp "desktop" as in "replace" the desktop? As long as people enjoy gorgeous monitors that are measured diagonally in feet as opposed to inches, spacious and tactile, hand-sized keyboards, pointing devices with incredible accuracy, sound capability that rivals that of movie theaters--and much more--how is "mobile" supposed to replace the market for that? It isn't, plain and simple. Mobile always has been and always will be an entirely separate market for so many good, solid reasons that it would take me weeks just to think of most of them and write them all down.
Not only that--but ARM in any iteration whatever is in no position to "rival full x86 desktop support." It's not even close enough to shout. If Intel with all its muscle and money couldn't pull x86 out of the desktop and move it to Itanium, who else is going to do it? As far as nVidia and its newer ARM processors go, I recall no announcement from nVidia stating that at any time in the future it foresaw its ARM business overtaking and replacing its x86 business. Just like was done so often and so erroneously with Larrabee, all of these things have been twisted so far out of context that they no longer even make sense.
What I have *always* imagined Win8's x86 ARM support would be is one GUI interface for tablets and other mobile devices as they develop, coexisting nicely with Microsoft's traditional x86 *Desktop* GUI. Yea, I mean, I certainly am not going to be happy with greasy fingerprints all over my "whopping" 1024x768 screen--just won't cut it--not even slightly interested. I think Microsoft has got it exactly right. There is a market for mobile and there is a market for desktop and no matter how it is sliced, mobile will never replace the desktop tomorrow, any more so than it has replaced it today.
Last, Intel isn't going anywhere--any notion to the contrary is absolute fantasy...;) (Where do these notions--like Larrabee--originate?) The world markets are far larger and far more complex than the very simple "ARM vs x86" or "mobile vs. desktop" scenarios people like to imagine, for some reason. Surely cross compatibility will come--but one market completely replacing the other? Nah--not gonna' happen.
Except on web applications, which seem logically to become more wide-spread as people use mobile devices instead of desktop machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by loydall
Being meant to be backward compatible and actually implemented that way by browser developers who have zero obligation to do so are two different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by david petley
What has changed that makes you think HTML5 implementation will be any different than the poo-fest browser implementation has been to date?Quote:
Originally Posted by david petley
There is? That hasn't been our experience at all and we do a lot of each kind of development. Feature support for HTML5 in browsers is currently all over the place. Also, more and more people are using mobile devices to browse, making the variations of implementations that much worse. We've had to work directly with hardware manufacturers on changing low-level architecture just to get apps that they want installed on their own phones to work.Quote:
Originally Posted by david petley
The whole mess is laid out well here: http://html5test.com/results.html
How many mobile device users you know who use their tablets or phones for anything but media, texts, phone calls and information-only applications? I do not see that anything based on the ARM processors will ever be suitable for anything more, but I might be wrong (anything is possible;)). I know it will take a really, really great tablet to outperform and run my software applications with the same ease my x86 desktop machine does.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashLackey
yes, I agree. I was responding to the automatic assumption that "html5 will fall prey to the same failures of html1,2,3 only moreso".Quote:
Being meant to be backward compatible and actually implemented that way by browser developers who have zero obligation to do so are two different things.
I am assuming the opposite, and will wait and see the outcome before calling doom and gloom. At the least, I don't think it will be worse than the current situation in terms of support for standards and I think it will be better.
The webkit, gecko and presto engines are all doing OK with html5 support right now. IE9 and IE10 (trident) are doing less well. None of them seem to care about the Element specific attributes laid out in the spec. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...engines_(HTML5).
This may just be a difference in our anecdotal experience. Most people I've known and seen are using these devices for games and other apps with non-html like UIs. We have 2 ipads at our house that are loaded with 95% games, photo editing apps, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by david petley
I guess I just don't understand what the basis is for assuming the opposite. We have over 10 years of experiencing the status quo. It's the same companies in the same process. So, why should we expect anything different?Quote:
Originally Posted by david petley
No platform has all features. Even when features are shared, they are sometimes implemented differently, requiring multi-browser hacks and painful troubleshooting. Support is lacking in many browsers for many of the most important features (video, audio).Quote:
Originally Posted by david petley
And remember, the flaw in this entire concept of relying on browsers to implement a standard is that only one browser needs to be different in order to create more work or prevent something from working. Clients see a project not working in one browser as a "bug" that has to be fixed. So, every browser in the world could be perfect, but if a feature doesn't work in IE 8, clients just aren't going to let it go. Standards based programming relies on all browsers to work the same in unison. One works differently and a massive amount of additional work has been created (and wasted imo) across the world of development.
This is a fundamental flaw in the standards-based concept that will not go away with HTML5.
I agree, building browsers isn't easy. You want yours to be better then the others and you want to do it on the cheap because no one pays for a browser. Sometimes harsh bugs results and the developer has to make choices between the lesser of two evils.Quote:
And remember, the flaw in this entire concept of relying on browsers to implement a standard is that only one browser needs to be different in order to create more work or prevent something from working
As the saying goes. The software isn't done till the user is dead.