HTML5 And Flash: Why It’s Not A War, And Why Flash Won’t Die

Advertisement

With all of the buzz going on in our Web community about HTML5 and Flash, I’ve decided to dive into the fray and offer my thoughts as a 10-year veteran of both Web design and Flash development. Let me preface by saying that this article is opinion-based, and that information is certainly out there that I am not aware of, and that none of us truly knows what the future holds.

New: For a German translation of this article – please follow this link1.

Use Of Flash Till Now

When Flash broke on the scene, it was a fairly revolutionary tool… and much simpler to use than it is today. I first started using it in 1999, when it was being produced by Macromedia. The current version then was 4. The simple benefit was that it allowed the average computer user to design graphics and create simple user interactions with almost no skill: quite a feat in the messy and over-complicated world of Netscape and IE4.

People didn’t take long to start using Flash as an engine to create full and complete websites, especially as the versions continued their march upward and ActionScript gained footing. Quite simply, it sped up development time and wow’ed all users with its animations—a far cry from the static-text Geocities websites around them.

But Flash started to be overused soon after. One can compare it to HTML tables, a framework that revolutionized the industry for a time, became overused and then receded to its proper role (which in this case was to structure data points rather than website columns).

Why They Don’t Have to Fight

I’ve read a lot of blog posts lately about HTML5 taking on Flash like a prize fighter and kicking it off the scene in some epic battle of Web standards and pragmatism. But this is a false scenario: HTML5 and Flash are not meant to be fighting in the same ring, or to be fighting at all. Each has its proper place on the Web and in the graphic community.

Flash’s Place

Interestingly enough, Flash’s place is not entirely on the Web at all, and certainly not to take over full website designs (or those dreaded Flash intros either). While bits of Flash will continue to be used in Web design for advertising and gaming, it will truly shine in two primary areas.

The first area is the corporate setting. I work part-time as a Web developer on the multimedia team of a major international telecommunications company. The majority of the team consists of Flash developers, and there is a huge demand for more of them. So, while Flash may be shrinking in the Web industry, it is booming at the corporate level through rich media, training and learning solutions, Intranet applications and the like.

While Flash may be simplistic and annoying for a website, its capabilities for database interaction, PHP integration, XML sourcing, external ActionScript 3, extensible plug-ins and import and export functionality make it an extremely robust tool that far outweighs the competition for certain uses. Flash has a profitable future in corporate settings.

The second area is still budding and turbulent: mobile platforms. Web content aside, if Flash could be used to produce applications and rich interaction on a variety of mobile platforms, it would empower designers and developers everywhere to contribute to a booming mobile industry (and give us the opportunity to make a sweet profit while we’re at it).

Why would Flash do so well in the mobile space compared to Web-based tools and frameworks? First of all, because Flash is a powerful development tool, beyond its graphic and animation capabilities. ActionScript 3 has brought serious improvements to the overall structure and functionality of applications, allowing developers to create powerful apps.

Secondly, Flash being used across multiple platforms brings a much higher probability of consistency and compatibility. Even if comprehensive Web standards were supported across all mobile devices, there is no guarantee that we wouldn’t run into the same cross-browser headaches on the variety of mobile browsers. If Flash were supported on all mobile devices, I could be reasonably certain that my Flash module would run smoothly on each one.

It’s like my parents fighting. I love Adobe. I love Apple. This really sucks.

— Terry Ranson

The Adobe and Apple cat fight disagreement may be discouraging, but consider that Android is releasing a Flash-enabled framework, and Adobe is releasing Flash Player 10.1 for smartphones, and Research in Motion has joined Adobe’s Open Screen Project, essentially committing the BlackBerry to Flash in the near future.

Flash should never have been used to the extent that it was purely for Web design. But it has capabilities beneath the hood that make it an extremely valuable resource for certain uses, particularly in the mobile space.

HTML5’s Place

HTML5’s place, on the other hand, is entirely on the Web. And this is an outstanding development. I remember switching from table-based designs to CSS, a liberating move that gave Web designers a freedom that only we could truly appreciate. Moving forward with standards-based browsers and rich functionality via CSS3 and HTML5 will take our industry to new heights and lead to a flourishing of gorgeous websites and functionality that we’ve never before witnessed.

Plenty of articles and resources outline the capabilities and benefits of HTML5 (I won’t cover them here), but rest assured that it is the future, and a sweet future at that.

The Web In Two Years

Where will the chips fall when the Web design industry reaches its next stage? I may be idealistic, but I would like to see (and I think we will see) the following:

  • HTML5 and CSS3 as the new Web standard;
  • All browsers being compatible and standards-based;
  • Flash being used more limitedly as a tool for multimedia and gaming and interaction, both online and offline;
  • Mobile platforms and mobile content development being the newest and fastest-growing subset of the industry:
    • Sporting Flash capabilities for robust application development across all platforms;
    • And offering HTML5, CSS3 and complex JavaScript capabilities for mobile browsing.

Conclusion

Flash has been misused and overused for the past eight years, spreading its tentacles too far into the fabric of Web design. But rather than getting beaten out of the picture by these practical new Web frameworks, Flash will retreat to its proper place: those niche areas where it belongs and can truly excel. The first niche is multimedia and learning solutions for the corporate space. Only time will tell if Flash finds its second niche on mobile platforms.

(al)

Footnotes

  1. 1 http://www.drweb.de/magazin/html-5-und-flash-koexistenz-statt-krieg/#more

↑ Back to top Tweet itShare on Facebook

Luke Reimer is a web project manager, designer, and developer currently operating Fluid Media web design group out of Waterloo, Canada.

Advertising
  1. 1

    I totally agree with your statement about Flash being over used. The number of times I have left a website simply because they have thought it would be a great idea to have an intro page (with a skip intro button!), if the intro can be skipped then why bother having it!
    Lets hope all browsers will become compatible and standards-based, Microsoft may be the ones dragging their heels on this one though.

    If more developers thought the same way as you about where HTML5 and Flash belong the internet would be a much faster and pleasant experience!

    0
    • 2

      I totally agree with you Owain about Flash been over used. I hate those intro pages to with the skip button, but what are you to do when the client demands thats what he/she wants.
      Many a times I have tried to talk clients out of this, but in the end it is their money and website.

      0
      • 3

        Mark Glynne-Jones

        May 18, 2010 9:49 am

        If it says ‘skip intro’ then do as you’re told I always say. Can’t be that important eh?

        0
        • 4

          I can’t even remember the last time I saw a website with a flash intro… that was years ago.

          0
          • 5

            I can’t even believe that “designers” are talking about that flash intros and skip buttons…:) Its like listening to my friends who work in not – web related industry and visit less website per year than I do in one week.

            The same arguments,… always. Guys, forget about this – it was long time ago.

            And if you have to because client asked..well … you can educate and waived , reduce to minimum, be creative and make it as a part of interface..

            Anyway , all this fight FLASHvsHTML – it brings us money – so lets hope there will be draw :)

            0
  2. 6

    Kristofor Lawson

    May 18, 2010 2:49 am

    For the most part I agree with all the arguments. However I think Adobe will really need to get it together for their mobile flash versions to be deployable to all devices. Apple is not a company known to backtrack so I think it will take real innovation from Adobe to resolve this dispute.

    Personally I love the interactivity which flash brings to the web and often recreating flash based sites in HTML5 would simply not be possible. There is a lot of stuff that HTML5 and CSS3 can do, but there is a lot of stuff it can’t do. Flash is an important part of the web’s future, but I think it will be a while for websites to fully transition across to HTML5 – which by the way hasn’t even been finalised yet.

    2
  3. 7

    While I don’t believe that HTML5 will be the end of Flash, I can’t say that I agree with your article either.

    HTML5’s place is not necessarily on the web and is just as interesting to use in Mobile Applications and Intranet as Flash. Even know there are frameworks that allow the use of HTML in iPhone applications, not just websites.

    The annoyance for Flash has mostly been caused by amateurs playing with it. Full Flash sites that are well programmed and offer an exciting way of navigating are no problem. It’s the amateur that makes a Flash intro that you can’t skip, that uses countless tweens and has bascially no knowledge of Actionscript who makes people hate Flash. That and the bad performance of the Flash plug-in.

    0
    • 8

      Hugh Isaacs II

      May 18, 2010 7:14 am

      I was thinking the same thing, one thing the article doesn’t point out is that another Adobe technology, Adobe Air, will be a component in bringing HTML5 to the desktop.

      And aside from that, what about the HTML5 offline capabilities? or apps like Google Chrome?

      Yes, there’s a browser in there at some point but the same could be said for the Flash runtime.

      These guys seem to have a thing for defending Flash whenever possible.
      Yes, I think Flash will still be around for a while, but not for the reasons stated.

      1
      • 9

        HTML5 is not going to take over the web. It still uses plugins and proprietary things; look at Apple and their idiotic adoption of H.264. Obviously Apple are too lazy to use gstreamer or something?

        -1
        • 10

          Well, H264 is not part of HTML5… Only open technology is and will be part of HTML5.

          I think Flash will die eventually. Database technologies are being developed for the HTML5 spec, there’s all sorts of 3D and 2D stuff, hardware acceleration and whatnot. In ten years time or so, when HTML5 is finished, Flash will loose all reason to exist. And the reason why it’s going to loose to HTML5 is, not only that you won’t need to install a plugin, but because HTML5 will be lighter and better integrated, and won’t be constantly crashing your browser like Flash does.

          -3
          • 11

            you are comparing what you think html5 will be against what flash is today? You don’t think flash will evolve at all? Its been constantly improving for the last 10 years…

            1
          • 12

            I don’t know what kind of computer you are running, but most people don’t have issues with their browser crashing from Flash.

            1
        • 13

          Their idiotic adoption of a standard?? Wow, hate Apple much, hater??

          -1
    • 14

      Actually, Flash is on par with other multimedia content delivery platforms when it comes to performance. The “bad performance” you’re referring to is caused by bad ActionScript, just like bad JavaScript can cripple a website. Mike Chambers put it best in his analysis:
      http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2010/05/10/top-flash-misperceptions-flash-is-a-cpu-hog/

      1
      • 15

        @Dan
        But the only real argument in favour of Flash is that it is easy for designers who are not good programmers to make entire websites (if you can call them that) _without_ understanding what they are doing, so blaming them for producing bad ActionScript is ridiculous in this context.
        As far as the main article is concerned, it was very one-sided. Flash has always been anti-standards, has always been a major problem for those with _any_ disability (not just those who are totally blind), and is ultimately an unnecessary layer on top of the web. Having praised all of the things that it can (occasionally) do well, you completely ignored the fact that pure HTML can do all of the same things, and do most of them better. A certain browser prevents this being easy, but Flash is largely responsible for this, by giving them an excuse.

        -1
  4. 16

    Relly Good! But I can’t understand why Apple disable “Flash” on their mobile devices like the iPhone or iPad.
    Let see what Apple will do in the next years.

    Greetings from Germany, Tommy

    0
    • 17

      Excure me? It is not a question of Apple “disabling” Flash on their mobile devices. There is NO Flash on mobile devices — anywhere. Maybe you are thinking of Flash Lite? That can’t play all Flash content that people are used to anyway, so what’s the point?

      All the Flash content now out there on the web will have to be re-tooled for mobile devices anyway. And Flash isn’t suited to Touch devices at the moment — too many rollovers requiring a mouse or stylus.

      Adobe are making empty promises, again; and breaking them, again. Adobe talked about putting Flash plugins on mobile devices three years ago. Adobe could not adequately support two desktop platforms; now they are talking about half-a-dozen mobile platforms; and they keep moving launch dates back. Android is due to get it soon… we’ll see. Flash 10.1 is now going to require something like at least an A8 processor at 1000MGhz to run decently. That cuts out just about anyone without a top-end mobile device from the last six months. Good thing Apple didn’t’ wait. Adobe has yet to produce the goods, as usual.

      Yes, let’s see what Adobe do in future years: might be interesting if they rehire their mobile development team and fire a few PR and marketers instead.

      -1
      • 18

        I’ve seen (full)Flash running on the Android platform…

        1
        • 19

          I’ve seen (full)Flash running on android as well,.. also blackberry is suppose to pick it up in it’s next version and Windows Mobile 7(when it’s finally released) is suppose to support it as well. The iPhone is going to be the only major player in the coming years that doesn’t support flash, java or silverlight. Not to mention the fact that last quarter it only captured 21% of the US market while android captured 28% and blackberry captured 38%.

          I agree with Luke that they each definetly have their place and that this really shouldn’t be viewed as a “fight”, but this will certainly hurt apple for not allowing their customers to view the entire internet. If all the other smartphones don’t end up boycotting flash and the other plugins like apple is doing, the iPhone’s/iPad’s are more than likely going to be viewed in the same light that ie6 has for so long. All providing apple still holds as strong of a portion of the market as they did lastyear.

          0
          • 20

            C’mon guys, Apple is right. Show me a consumer electronic device that costs about USD 500 and doesn’t bring a web camera (at least) with it (only Apple can do that).

            (HTML 5 Canvas + Javascript) animations are lots more heavier and harder to deploy than Flash ones.

            2
          • 21

            it hurts Apple do you mean? because it does not support Flash at all? I don’t know if you mean aboout it xD my english too bad. but :
            check the Apple website and the link “thoughts in Flash by Steve Jobs”. I think Apple is different, apple devices are different way to browse, to call, to listen, to view… then why develope devices as the other companies do? why to do the same when Apple is Different.. ? why develope devices multi task and Flash just because the others support it? Apple is not “the others”. Think Different. they say :P

            0
      • 22

        Flash Works On Touch-Based Devices (Video) by Lee Brimelow.
        he says: “Several people have been making assertions that most Flash sites will not work properly on touch-based devices because these sites use rollovers or hovers for things like effects and navigation. Well I put together this little video together showing that Flash sites do indeed work the way you would expect since the Flash Player dispatches rollover events even on a touch screen.”
        http://theflashblog.com/?p=2027

        peace :)

        1
      • 23

        Wow guess you really missed the mark on this rant. Flash is now available on the majority of mobile devices in the market.

        0
  5. 24

    I like your article. On HTML5 tho, I really hope it won’t become the next Flash with up and running…

    0
  6. 25

    It’s all right, nothing to blame about it.
    Adobe and Apple must understand each other.

    and Yeah, it’s all back to the developers [not the users]

    0
  7. 26

    Chrsitopher Farrugia

    May 18, 2010 2:54 am

    so so true, flash has already retreated to only being useful for major brands and rich companies, that’s if they can afford to use and have flash sites created(and that’s diminishing daily). So bring on HTML5 and lets see how the future of the web really turns out :)

    0
  8. 27

    You make a valid point that at the time while Flash was still a Macromedia product it was filling in for all of the browsers’ shortcomings … It was providing same looking content under IE4 and NS4 which at the time was rather hard to achieve for something that’s not completely sliced in images.
    Anyhow exactly as IE4 and NS4 it served its purpose and either needs to adapt to the new realities or leave the scene and Adobe does not really seem to be certain on where things are going, they are defocused and heavy and throw things in the air like AIR which serve no monetizing purpose … but alas … let’s wait and see

    0
  9. 28

    HTML5 place is not entirely on the web. Steve Jobs emphasised the fact that it will be used to create the iAds.

    0
    • 29

      iAds are just little websites in reality…

      0
      • 30

        @Liam
        Yes, that is rather the point – most small application development these days uses HTML – MS has it HTA / HTC format, desktop widgets on all platforms are generally HTML, because actually it works a lot better than crap like Flash, or more particularly the crap flash-reading players.
        Just last night I had to spend fifteen minutes waiting for FireFox to shut down so that my PC was useable again because my wife was on some stupid flash game that had totally hung everything.

        0
  10. 31

    Nice to read a well balanced, fair and intelligent article on this debacle.

    0
  11. 32

    Christopher Dosin

    May 18, 2010 2:57 am

    Great article, i totally agree with u ;)

    0
  12. 33

    All hell broke loose! Smashing Magazine letting someone actually have a fair opinion and not bashing Flash and loving Apple + HTML5 is just beyond what I was expecting. Kudos for doing this.

    I agree with everything except one thing. Flash is still (and will be) the best way to deliver high multimedia, interactive, and cool websites. Just look at fwa.com and you will see that, in a near future, HMTL5 will still not be able to reproduce this type of content and will not have the strong foundations that a project in Flash is capable of. the new cool website from Wrangler is a fine example of that “http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/”.

    Another thing. Two years? I don´t know… With all the wars between Mozilla, Apple, Opera and so on, I don’t except for big companies to use all alone HTML5 for their websites.

    0
    • 34

      Actually, I’m pretty sure it would be possible to create that site with HTML5. I mean, when this is possible: http://www.craftymind.com/2010/04/20/blowing-up-html5-video-and-mapping-it-into-3d-space/

      0
      • 35

        Didn’t work at all in IE running on parallels – I’ve found that quite a few html5 and jquery things don’t work in this environment, but Flash does – has anyone else found this to be the case?

        0
    • 36

      Funny – since html5 + javascript will be able to do a website like this, but even better, and work across all platforms (even the iPhone).

      Not that this really is even a “great” example – unless of course 45 second loading times is your thing.

      0
    • 37

      Only partly I agree. Very rich media and game-like websites, yes, Flash will rule there for the near future. However, stating that “interactive and cool” websites can only be created in Flash is nonsense. Please define what interactive is and what cool is. I find a website or application that is simple, fast and looks good to be very cool and interactive. I find a bloated, slowloading eye candy production where you don’t know where to click not so cool.

      Cool or not, what matters is usability. Most users do not want cool, they want to get things done. Exceptions are some niche industries, like for example a ringtone site for teenagers.

      0
    • 38

      Why is that site cool, http://eu.wrangler.com/bluebell/ 10 minutes to download, to move a few frames of a guy wearing clothes and oh look I can rip his shirt off… Its like every bad advert on TV but takes longer, style over substance.

      What is its point. Is this going to make me buy more wranglers eh no! This is really boring and not very imaginative. This is NOT for me a good example of flash.

      0
      • 39

        Loading took only 5 to 10 seconds here, so the 10 minutes it took you are probably exaggerated..

        Why is it not a good example of of flash? If it were created using html5, would it have been a bad example of html5 also? In that case, perhaps the style of the site doesn’t suit your taste. But the technology behind it seems solid to me.

        What you need to understand about sites like this is that they indeed serve the same purpose the tv adverts you mention. Sites like this are there for branding and promotional purposes. If your visit there makes a lasting impression and you retain the name “Wrangler” then the next time you visit a store you will be more likely to buy their products.

        1
        • 40

          Took me 3 or 4 minutes to download too. I shudder to imagine how many people leave the site before ever seeing it load. I wonder how much they paid for it? The ROI would be terrible. Bad example.

          0
      • 41

        Over 3 minutes of waiting, I finally closed the window.

        As internet speeds have gotten faster, flash has become more bloated. If I have to sit and wait for sites to load and can’t do a thing until it does, I’m gone. I’d hate to be loading this site on a phone that supports flash.

        For branding and promo, this is a horrible example to use. You only have a few seconds to capture someone with a commercial before they tune out. Same applies to web ads. How about a nice quick loading promo to get the user interested, be it flash or html5 and then take them to the bloated version. Having to wait for a bloated version of who knows what you are waiting for is bad for business.

        0
  13. 42

    Great Article! Also a note people forget about the huge industry of online advertising and rich media advertising via flash banners. Systems like double click which Google has its hands in aren’t going to shift over night. Being realistic IE6 is still around, HTML 5 isn’t going to supported in IE till IE9, which isn’t even out yet!

    0
    • 43

      To add to that, IE9 will only work on Windows 7+. IE 6, 7, 8 currently own over 50% of the browser market and it will be a while before that changes. I think “2 years” figure in the article is rather optimistic. Flash is not going away any time soon. Let’s hope that in “2 years” HTML5 is no longer a draft standard and is at least implemented consistently across leading browsers.

      0
  14. 44

    Always refreshing with an HTML5 vs Flash article that isnt more of an I love/hate Apple article.

    Coulden´t agree with you more, as a developer I will always look at what technique suits the end-product the best and I see benifits with them both.

    0
  15. 45

    And what about iPhone OS ?

    0
  16. 46

    Finally, a sensible article. I was getting tired of the “HTML5 is the new Flash” argument.

    0
  17. 47

    Me as flash/flex/AIR developer I disagree with the opinion that flash is not for the web and its only for multimedia,advertisements and games. Its also being used for Enterprise applications and for ecomerce websites.Flash has lot more potential and it will grow.

    0
    • 48

      You can disagree, it’s your right/choice. Though Flash blows on the desktop just as much as it does on the web! Be it straight Flash or Flex/Air or whatever else Adobe can pull out of their incompetent rear end.

      Bottom line what kills Flash is Adobe’s inability to create a decent, stable virtual machine that would run without crashing or using 100% of the computer’s processing power and do so without leaking memory like a sieve!

      So you can disagree but I hope Flash dies sooner rather than later!

      -1
    • 50

      Rajveer Singh Rathore

      May 19, 2010 10:55 pm

      When HTML 5 is going to do what it takes to have Flash for web interaction then it’s better to call end of days for Flash. Sooner the better!

      I personally never liked Flash on a web page, rather I have been seeking ways to reconsider the information architecture and get the results using JavaScript.

      0
  18. 51

    Fre says:

    “Full Flash sites that are well programmed and offer an exciting way of navigating are no problem.”

    No, this is also a problem. I don’t want or need to install the Flash plugin, it’s useless to me (as it only serves to crash all my browsers). In this case I wouldn’t be surfing these sites, then the problem wouldn’t be mine. There’s no need to exciting way of navigating. Better saying: there’s no exciting way of navigating with Flash.

    0
    • 52

      My two years MacBookPro and other computers I have at home never crashed due to Flash…

      No exciting way of navigating in Flash websites? lol?

      You can use anything! From your mouse, to your keyboard, to a combination of this two, you can navigate through gestures, eck! Even with your own movement!

      And yes, you are missing a great opportunity of having great user experiences…

      0
      • 53

        “My two years MacBookPro and other computers I have at home never crashed due to Flash…”

        It’s only your experience. The reality is far behind. :-) (read Google/Microsoft/Mozilla/Opera ASA thoughts about this)

        “No exciting way of navigating in Flash websites? lol?”

        No at all. D-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y. :-)

        “You can use anything! From your mouse, to your keyboard, to a combination of this two, you can navigate through gestures, eck! Even with your own movement!”

        I’ve all this with just (X)HTML, so I don’t need Flash (it’s a browser feature). Thank you. :-)

        “And yes, you are missing a great opportunity of having great user experiences…”

        Nope, I’m sure I have the best experience without Flash. I’m a user-centric developer, I really know that I don’t need neither Flash, Java or XYZ plugin to surf the web with really good experience. I know that I only need good developers behind the sites that I surf. :D

        0
        • 54

          “I’ve all this with just (X)HTML, so I don’t need Flash (it’s a browser feature). Thank you. :-)”

          Hum… no.

          “Nope, I’m sure I have the best experience without Flash. I’m a user-centric developer, I really know that I don’t need neither Flash, Java or XYZ plugin to surf the web with really good experience. I know that I only need good developers behind the sites that I surf. :D”

          As far as User Experience goes I give you that. But every site in exery technologie can have good and bad experiences. It depends on who builds it. But you can’t argue that Flash sites really have impact on costumers and, if made it right, it will always be a plus and not a bad thing.

          0
          • 55

            The most important thing of course is purpose. Remember a site is designed for a purpose, to serve information to the end-user. It’s whichever technology is best suited to serving the user that counts not the designers ego.

            Both technologies have their place, just don’t choose one over the other because you think it’s cool or you want to try something new or that you want something for the portfolio or even how can I wow the client.

            The question that should always be answered is “what technology will best serve the needs of the user”.

            0
          • 56

            “Hum… no.”

            I’ve all this browser features with (X)HTML sites. If you no, it isn’t my problem… :-P

            I’m a user too (power user I would say). And I’m out of websites builded in Flash or Java (nor have these plugins installed). I can be your target audience, and then you may be losing a potential customer. Sorry. :-|

            0
          • 57

            @Paulo

            You mention Java. Do you mean JavaScript? Java is more of a server-side and application development language. There is no JavaScript plug-in, so I don’t understand how you say you don’t have it installed.

            I have worked in the creative development and advertising for a long time and users with Flash or JavaScript turned off is not in any of our clients customers demographics.

            We have consistently found that the largest demographics – the general public – have Flash and JavaScript turned on, and so we choose to develop rich interactive experiences for them rather than a watered-down, bland experience that hits the lowest common denominator.

            0
          • 58

            @MattL, he means Java as in Java applets. They used to be everywhere but have largely been replaced by Flash. If you’re using Windows, you still might see the Java coffee cup icon pop up in the toolbar from time to time. Quite a few ticketing, airline and cinema websites use it for the little app that allows you to select a seat.

            @Paolo, there’s some great websites out there using Flash. If you have either the Click2Flash or FlashBlock extensions in Firefox or Chrome, you can choose when to view Flash and when not to. Aviary and Prezi are good examples of useful Flash websites.

            0
        • 59

          Flash Became popular on the web because of its new and exciting ways to navigate content. it didn’t take a user-eccentric-developer to make them exciting, just a fancy imagination. I’ve had plenty of GREAT experiences on Flash websites and look forward to the improvement of both Apple and Adobe products :) respectfully your opinion matters as well as everyone else but i must say i care more about the opinion of joe-schmo than power-user-bob

          0
        • 60

          do you see the FWA daily? those sites are made for those who want to experience it.
          can HTML 5 bring that level of experience? seriously those sites are not just sliding and fading. don’t blame the technology use it the way you want.

          0
    • 61

      Jon, 8 years ago I had the same though, “Flash is dead”, seriously. It was moving from a simple time-line with some lines of codes to a more complex thing. At that point designers started to hate flash cause it was becoming to difficult for most of them.

      Now I am a fulltime flash designer/developer, I had no more cross-browsers nightmares, I can easily move to java or c#, I do much more interesting stuff then simple sites or e-commerce, and I quintupled my income.

      I’m already trying some “HTML5″ stuff (javascript is a joke) and I’m better than HTML5 supporters I know, but it feels old, and it’s not even out yet. It also didn’t start well, it’s already cross-browser inconsistent , and apple push it in an unnatural way.

      The point is that I’m happy to learn new things as long as they are better than what I already know. And “HTML5″ it’s not. Unfortunately most of the people don’t know what they are talking about.

      The people who don’t wants Flash alive, is because they don’t know it.

      2
  19. 64

    A well balanced article. I think the HTML5 vs Flash idea is strange too. A designer should use whatever tools at their disposal to fit the task. Whether that is HTML, XML with an XSLT, Flash, Shockwave, javascript, Gears or new technology X we don’t know about yet.

    What must be remembered is that a large portion of the users of the web is still stock Windows XP machines running IE. The current version of IE (8) is not HTML5 compatible, so your Canvas enhancements can’t be seen without additional install. If you’re reading this comment, it’s not likely that you’re a stock user of the web.

    HTML5 won’t kill flash, as it’s not got the breadth of features. Just because one mobile company doesn’t want to support it doesn’t mean that it’s going away. There might be an arms race but browsers have become complex and so do not upgrade as quickly as in 1996. IE – love it or hate it – is still the stock choice and will always be behind the curve. In reality, you’re more likely to get sites that have a high-bandwidth, rich-functionality parts and then low-bandwidth, simple-functionality parts. Which is good because I don’t want to view a site fixed at 1024×768 on my Nexus One.

    I would like to see a tighter integration and interoperability to between Flash and the markup and javascript. At the moment, calls outside of Flash are limited and Flash object embeds rarely interact with the rest of the content.

    Your view of large corporations using Flash a lot might be skewed to personal experience. My experience is that they don’t care what happens as long as it runs on IE6 (stock XP install) and they don’t have to change group policy, they are happy.

    HTML version X might finally make Flash redundant but I imagine that is a very, very, long way off.

    [Web designer since 1996]

    0
    • 65

      You CAN use most of canvas already even from IE7, there are javascript libraries for that do NOT require a plugin install, unlike Flash, which always needs this.

      0
  20. 66

    Hugo Fernandes

    May 18, 2010 3:24 am

    Actually I do believe that the most promising future for Flash will happen on mobile devices.
    With Android 2.2 and Flash Player 10.1 you will be able to have rich internet experiences on mobile websites (not apps) that html5 or javascript can’t deliver yet. One example is the drag behavior. On html/js websites, you simply can’t drag your finger to draw on stage. It will drag the browser scroller and/or window. One new feature in FP10.1 is the ability to “activate” the embed Flash object (with holding your click) and it will activate the behaviors inside flash so you can drag, draw or wathever you want to do with your objects inside the website.

    One good point is the usage of Flash outside the webdesign world. I work in a company that produces Digital Signage content and Flash is definitely the number 1 tool for that. All the capabilities of AS3 with the integrations you talked about is simply unbeatable outside the web.

    0
    • 67

      You’re missing the point. The mobile platform isn’t best used for “rich” experiences. You’re going the wrong way… it needs to be about usability, with a lightweight power requirement.

      Mobile users will not be searching for the same experience as desktop users, and as I’m sure you know, mobile will be a larger audience, very soon.

      0
      • 68

        Watch out for slider slider framework for flex specially designed to be used in mobile apps for performance and robustness with less resource heavy and it is lightweight framework for building user interfaces for mobile and deploying as a flash or Air Applications.More info on it is available here
        http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flex/mobile/.

        0
      • 69

        The base functionality of a site should in general be HTML. But because HTML5 haven’t full rich experiences in a near future, why should we be limited to that and not use Flash? If a lot of mobiles have Flash a lot will develop for it (with simple or no fallback for Apple). It’s utopia that everything on internet is lightweight, perfect and work good everywhere. In reality HTML5 doesn’t work so good on Iphone/Ipad, you have often to do a custom solution.

        0
      • 70

        Hugo Fernandes

        May 18, 2010 5:41 am

        Sorry to disagree, but I think your missing my point…
        When I talk about “rich” experiences on mobile web I’m not talking about “rich” experiences for desktop pcs with 10MB of video and multiple animations viewed on mobile devices.
        What area apps anyway? Rich experiences that a browser mobile device can’t deliver. That, with Flash Player 10.1, will change.

        0
    • 71

      You can do draggable in HTML with jQuery. http://jqueryui.com/demos/draggable/

      This identifies a recurrent problem, few people know both technologies well so they argue within the context they know – claiming it is the best.

      -1
      • 72

        He was talking about dragging in a touch device, not just simply have draggable elements. -.- Your judgment seems better suited for yourself, no?

        0
  21. 73

    Good article but I don’t think so much will happen in two years. Ok for developers it can be better but because complex HTML5 will have exactly the same problem as Flash (if not even worse) and as a visitor Flash has pushed the limits, and HTML5 just trying to keep up. It’s good with open-source and standards but it will not go fast.

    I’m just waiting for the animation or other stuff to arrive in HTML5 and you will see sites go crazy about it. It’s the new “cool HTML5″ everyone want to show.

    Learn both technologies and advantages and don’t let anything stop you, there is no exact right or wrong.

    0
    • 74

      spot on

      0
      • 75

        no it’s not, HTML5 is simply a markup language, nothing more. CSS3 transistions is the animation we will be getting in the near future, NOTHING to do with HTML5.

        0
        • 76

          Yes but you also have to think of HTML5 video feature, which would usually involve flash until HTML5 came along …….. Flash is the equivalent to Windows while HTML5 is equivalent to Apple ……. No matter what anyone says Flash is never better then HTML5 just like Windows is never better then Apple

          0
        • 77

          HTML5/CSS3 to be more correct but it was not the point. It is really a mess.

          0
  22. 78

    Gonzo the Great

    May 18, 2010 3:41 am

    Hi Luke,

    the first, well-written and realistic article in the blogs that I’ve read so far, covering this topic: ‘HTML5 vs. Flash’.

    I fully agree with you that each has it’s place on the internet and in graphic design, you can’t compare them! Both have their unique and specific qualities and advantages, so use them where they’re best fitted to do the job.

    Once again, thanks for sharing your opinion on this topic, it was a delight reading it! Cheers& Ciao ..

    0
  23. 79

    There would not be any disagreements if Flash was completely open source. But Adobe will not let that happen, so I understand Apple’s point of view.

    0
    • 80

      A lot of flash is open source, you don’t need to use Flash to create an SWF because adobe has allowed developers access to create their own authoring envrionments. Adobe does not make you use Flash to create flash.

      0
    • 81

      You know you can actually build from a website to a full desktop application in Flash without paying 1cent to Adobe right? err….

      0
  24. 82

    Hi Check out open source initiative for the flash player to meet the standards

    http://allievi.sssup.it/techblog/?p=260

    0
  25. 83

    Raphael Pudlowski

    May 18, 2010 3:47 am

    very good article.
    One of the strenght of flash was that it could by used by a non programmer to do interactive stuff, but with the latests versions it become more and more complicated…
    People hate flash because of all the annoing advertising online, i’m curious how they will react when all that “annoingness” will be made in HTML5 and you can’t block it…

    0
  26. 84

    Topic-out-of -Box … Nice bundled information with unique discussion topic :)

    0
  27. 85
  28. 86

    John Pallister

    May 18, 2010 3:56 am

    “limitedly”?!?

    0
  29. 87

    Tom Giannattasio

    May 18, 2010 4:00 am

    I’m glad to see a realistic perspective on this debate. While HTML 5 seems very promising and will no doubt change the way we build websites, it will still fall short when it comes to the over-the-top, rich-media, uber-engaging sites that Flash is so well-known for. Semantic, open-source code is beautiful in our eyes, but the average consumer could care less. They care about the content and the experience. A majority of sites – blogs, news sites, Facebook, etc. – will benefit from HTML5, because their content becomes more accessible. However, pushing content does not always mean serving up text and images. Many large companies would agree that content can also refer to an experience. Words and images are easily forgotten, but a unique experience will linger and spread organically. HTML5 has a long way to go if it wants to bury Flash when it comes to weaving rich experiences.

    0
  30. 88

    Ecommerce Mechanics

    May 18, 2010 4:00 am

    No matter how into HTML 5 people get, Flash is going to be around for a long time. Every time I hear someone say that “People will just convert their Flash content to HTML 5″, I immediately wonder if that person will think that when they get to the real world. No one is going to go back and rewrite thousands of Flash sites and apps into HTML 5 for free and maybe 1 in 10,000 will be a paying gig. This entire conversation is a mental exercise in the developer community. Corporations are completely oblivious to any aspect of that conversation. If you thought getting rid of IE6 is tough, try selling “use HTML 5 instead of Flash” to a corporate marketing head. You’re not going to be the one walking out the door with the check.

    0
  31. 89

    leon Nikoosimaitak

    May 18, 2010 4:01 am

    Developing mobile flash apps would be a great thing and bring many
    opportunities for brands that may not have the budget to do a iphone apps.

    0
  32. 90

    I agree! How can anyone say that flash is a dying technology when you can do so much with it.

    I love flash and i also love jQuery and HTML5 couldn’t come to be standards quick enough. But i think saying flash will die is just wishful thinking from the flash haters!

    0
  33. 91

    Hans Gerhard Meier

    May 18, 2010 4:07 am

    Interesting read, I’v got my product design students making their web portfolios in Flash. They already use Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign. So getting a functional web site up and running is done in much less time than if they were introduced to HTML. I’m no programmer myself, and I still love tables (waiting patiently for a CSS wysiwyg editor). Flash is for the people, let the programmers write their code.

    Cheers
    Hans g

    0
    • 92

      HTML is not programming.
      Any modern wysiwyg editor can very easily build a site using floated divs and CSS, but even then, you really should learn how to do it yourself.

      0
    • 94

      Flash is for the people who can afford the high price tag?

      0
    • 95

      (facepalm)

      This is one of my biggest problems with design teachers. Once you leave the industry, so many of you fall behind so quickly and have no desire to keep up with the curve. It’s outdated design teachers who continue to spread misinformation about web design to future generations and encourage their students to use flash to make presentations in place of well designed websites. You are not helping your students at ALL.

      0
    • 96

      Christopher Healey

      May 18, 2010 5:27 am

      And people like you are exactly why flash has been over used and abused. This is also my problem with design & development instructors, so many are so far behind the times it’s not worth paying attention to anything they say.

      You stated that you still love tables, and you’re waiting on a wysiwyg css editor… (epic facepalm). Are you serious? First of all, most decent wysiwyg editors can throw together sites using css. And there are editors specifically dedicated to css, such as CSS EDIT by Mac Rabbit. Heck, there is even a point and click css solution in CODA, and let’s not forget the epitome of point and click IDE’s FLUX 2.

      You have to stay up to date with the technology or you are setting your students up for failure. How is getting your students to setup their web portfolios in flash in any way going to help them in their careers? It’s not, except to teach them that they have wasted a good bit of time and money attending your class.

      0
      • 97

        Hans Gerhard Meier

        May 18, 2010 6:48 am

        Mr Healey and Mr Annoyed

        Do you believe PRODUCT design students should learn CSS? Or could flash do for these students? I think web designers and developers should know CSS, so they can make nice web sites for product designers (Only of course when the product designers have made great products they want to sell, so they can pay Healey and Annoyed for their fresh new HTML5 site).

        And to clear things up I meant “What You See Is What You Get (WYSIWYG)” like Flash and Dreamweaver, not “To See What You Get You Need To Hit The Preview Button (TSWYGYNTHTPB)” like CSSedit.

        Luckily I teach only 50% so I’ve got time to keep up with the curve, but I’m probably not in the lead like Healey And Annoyed.

        Good luck with exams guys!
        Healey thanks for Flux, downloading it now:-)

        Hans g
        PS Brainwipe I agree with the pricetag

        0
        • 98

          Christopher Healey

          May 19, 2010 12:28 am

          Hans,

          I don’t believe product design students should learn web development in the first place actually. But if the do, then It is my opinion that they should learn the proper ways to do something, and why those methods are proper.

          If you are dedicating a portion of your class to helping them to build websites, then either show them the proper way to do it. Or teach them how to utilize their resources by purchasing templates, or hiring web developers in order to best display what they do best, which is product design.

          You’re welcome for Flux 2, I personally don’t like the IDE, but I’m a hand-coder and that’s not who it was built for, hopefully it will help you and your students if you do choose to continue devoting a portion of your product design class to web development.

          0
        • 99

          But that is exactly what you get in CSS Edit (and it’s big brother Espresso): You have a preview window that shows your changes live. WYSIWYG. You preview the site in a built-in browser as you are making edits. Firefox has some plugins that also do this, on live sites as you are visiting them.

          CSS Edit extracts all the CSS files from any webpage automatically so you can save them locally and use them to override the files on the site. You can set up CSS Edit or Expresso to sync the edits you make back to the live files on the site. In this way Espresso is like Dreamweaver (without the price tag). I use Espresso to help customize CMS sites; though this isn’t necessary as everything needed to update content and extend as site is on the server — a browser and FTP client are sufficient. I’m starting to rely less too on PhotoShop for graphics, as there are lots of new and innovative graphics programs for a fraction of the price. Adobe needs to stop milking their cash cows and start innovating.

          0
  34. 100

    The think that pisses me off the most about this entire fiasco is that Apple is blocking iPhone Apps created with Flash CS5. I’m was a part of the Flash CS5 beta and developed apps using Flash and they work just as well as natively coded apps. Its just a giant pissing match between two huge companies. FYI… Note to Stevie Jobs… I’m running Flash Player 10.1 on my Nexus One and it works beautifully.

    0
    • 101

      Apple has to account for inefficient code created by the Flash IDE, which will compromise its plan for power conservation and multitasking stability.

      Even if Flash was available in the browser experience on the iPhone OS (if Adobe ever got their act together with the quality of the plugin), Apple would still insist, and rightly so, that apps themselves not be created with Flash due to the aforementioned reasons.

      0
    • 102

      Yeah, and sites built using Front Page work just fine too, despite the plethora of tables and formatting junk that gets into the code that is output. Frontpage users will be at the mercy of MS to update its features when advancements are made to web standards, like HTML, CSS, Java libraries, etc. Oh, but FrontPage users will of course get MS extensions shoved at them so that they can continue to build near proprietary websites that only work with IE.

      The parallels between this Fiasco, which has held the internet back by a decade, and your alleged “fiasco” are amazing. Why should Apple prop up someone else’s business for them, especially when Adobe’s track record is to completely let their code languish despite repeated pleas over years to keep up with the technology in use.

      Apple just announced thousands of new APIs ready for iPhoneOS 4 advancements. Do you think CS5 is going to support them? Of course not. Writing your application once in Flash and having it compile to multiple platforms is only going to promote a lowest common denominator approach. I’m glad that Apple is saving me from Flash compiled apps.

      0
  35. 103

    Finally a clever and steady thought !
    I totally agree with you.

    0
  36. 104

    Is this supposed to be some kind of compensation for the stupidity in this article?
    http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/04/12/the-gradual-disappearance-of-flash-websites/

    0
  37. 105

    I want to believe that “flash” is not going to be assassinated by “HTML5” since both have different features that allow us to develop powerful contents but I confess, I am devotee of “flash” so I hope they can coexist maintaining their territory each other.

    0
  38. 106

    I highly disagree with the statement that Flash should only be used on for gaming, ads and the like and not for full website design. I’m a web designer for a company that develops Flash sites for financial institutions. For these institutions, security and usability are key and Flash helps keep them secure by not allowing external scripts to be included in their site through the Flash-based CMS.
    Banks and credit unions all over the US are trusting Flash to keep their site secure and attractive in order to increase ROI. Isn’t that what it’s all about?

    0
    • 107

      Using Flash for *security* reasons?!? That’s a new one… And how in the world is it that external scripts can’t be filtered out through PHP, .NET or Java? Or do you mean that they make their sites so absolutely everything runs in the browser and only an absolute minimum of information is passed back and forth to/from the server? I really can’t see the big security benefit with that either? But then, you’re probably more of a security expert than me…

      0
  39. 108

    Did you have to mention Flash and Flash intros? I was eating breakfast when I read it. Ruined it for me.
    I agree with most of your points. Flash is a great tool in the business world and I think it should stay there.

    0
  40. 109

    Bjørn Johansen

    May 18, 2010 5:01 am

    There is absolutely nothing that Flash can do, that HTML5+CSS3+JS+LAMP can’t. Want a standalone app? Toss in Adobe Air as well, and there you go.

    0
    • 110

      AS3 is a proper OOP programming language, javascript isn’t, ie only supports a 10 year old version. What kind of developer would cripple him/herself by choosing to develop in javascript? Yes, it’s useful for quick manipulation of html DOM, but for anything more complicated it’s poor.

      0
      • 111

        OOP is a programming methodology, not a religion. The majority of the major systems that you and I use in this world are not OOP and work just fine. Don’t be blind for the fact that OOP is nothing more than reusable, maintainable code, and only when applied correctly, which is hardly ever the case.

        0
    • 112

      That is simply not true. You obviously don´t really know about what Flash can do…

      0
  41. 113

    Coming at this from a ‘traditional’ programming background, I’ve always had serious reservations about Flash as an x-platform development solution.

    It’s one we’ve used on the web, but not one I’d adopt for desktop application development – which leads me to question why I’d adopt it for mobile development.

    From a tool-agnostic point of view, the question is ‘what gives the best result for a given investment’ – but I think a lot of people approach this from ‘what do I currently know’. It’s possible that the Android or iPhone SDK may actually be a much better solution than Flash for many apps.

    0
  42. 114

    This article is in now way “fair”, it is clearly biased.

    Flash’s “place” and HTML5’s “place”. The author cites 2 places for Flash, the corporate setting and mobile. Mobile? Excuse me? What % of mobile phones run Flash today? 0? The author then goes on to say HTML5’s place is “entirely on the Web.” What does he mean by that? Does HTML5 have no place in the corporate setting? Or mobile?

    “If Flash were supported on all mobile devices, I could be reasonably certain that my Flash module would run smoothly on each one.”

    This is the exact same argument I’ve heard from a Flash developer at a friend’s company arguing in favor of an insipid Flash slideshow on their companies home page (my friend wants it re-done in HTML/js). Problem is, that Flash slideshow is *broken* on Mac’s. The developer conveniently ignores that fact, and hasn’t the time to troubleshoot his own Flash file. So, no, I completely disagree with the “write once, run anywhere” assertion.

    Please. This article is not “fair”. It is veiled HTML5 bashing while trumpeting Flash vaporware (mobile flash baby!)

    0
    • 115

      Exactly, I caught that too. Though I suppose he meant not suited to the web ideologically, but would be really cool on mobiles because it could bring all the different platforms together into one big happy family. Huh? But we have the web for lowest common denominator content and apps, and putting Adobe on mobiles will be MS on PCs all over again. Mobile hardware and software producers need to be able to differentiate themselves. Apple for one will do fine without Flash. I suppose a few of the others would all like to hide under a Flash blanket so that their own shortcomings are a little less noticeble; I hope it meets their expectations.

      Besides, Adobe has promised Flash for mobile devices for three years… “Run smoothly on each one”? Adobe hasn’t gotten Flash to run smoothly on two desktop platforms in the last 10 years: now they are talking about supporting half-a-dozen mobile platforms? Pull my other leg. This is pure vapor. Adobe do not have a good track record. They bought out Macromedia for Flash, killed off GoLive and FreeHand, and have sat on Flash since. The latest estimate for Flash requirements on mobile devices is at least a Cortex Core8 at 1GHz with 512MB RAM. That leaves out all but the top end of mobile devices that are less than six months old. Just like with MS, we are waiting for new hardware so their old kludgey software will function as promised. Let’s improve and innovate with what we have now.

      Sure, people can create Flash content any old how, but the runtime plugin/player is, wait for it, proprietary; it’s Adobe’s and requires software playback. Flash video is not optimized for mobile hardware playback like, for example, H.264 is. And CS5 will likely not keep up with the latest platform advancements and APIs from the developers so the mobile apps produced will be of a lowest common denominator — but hey, that’s the beauty of write once, run anywhere.

      0
  43. 116

    In my eyes Flash will not die it is too good but maybe it will change or have extra options to export certain parts to HTML 5 eg video

    Flash has so many ways of being used and right now it is far easier to use than coding with such frameworks as jQuery for animations as an example.

    One thing that does stand out is those who use them.
    Designers can use Flash with relative ease depending on how complex their project is for creation and deployment but HTML 5 doesn’t let you edit an animation so this could how they can coexist together.

    What the big problem we encounter is how Apple have chosen not to support it. While that is up to them it does cause us web designers / developers a problem and in some ways a IE6 type headache as in the future if we want to support iPhones and iPads etc we will need to have fallbacks for both. So more work for us and really could be a big pain in the backside.

    I think Apple should support Flash and HTML 5 like everything else will do in the future

    0
  44. 117

    Christopher Healey

    May 18, 2010 5:09 am

    The thing is Flash requires software to decode video and the like which is power intensive. Where as using other methods the video can be decoded via Hardware H.264 chip. So PARTICULARLY with mobile devices as it stands now flash is not the proper choice. Not to mention the security flaws flash has always had. Semantic even stated that flash had one of the worst security records in 2009. And last but not least, flash was not built for touch devices but rather PC’s with Mice. So again, the way mobile devices are going, flash fails in yet another area.

    Using flash for things such as AIR is great, but even more methods for cross platform are arising, it’s losing the battle and becoming somewhat of the IE6 of web development in terms of a technology. I agree some things are still better done in flash, but they’re small components and parts of much larger GUI’s, Websites & Applications.

    It’s been abused for far to long, and if Adobe truly does want Flash to come back, they are at the mercy of Us as developers, how it continues to be used will reflect whether it does indeed parish, or if it will change direction and prosper.

    0
    • 118

      Every Browser has security flaws.They fix it by hot fixes. So do Adobe . Secondly flash does support multitouch and touch points as much that are available. Check this

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y7XJI4NN7k

      Flash has more potential then just . flash adds,games and videos. ITs good for RIA,Desktop and mobile equally.

      0
  45. 119

    Nice article.

    I never quire figured out what benefit flash brings me as a user. When I visit a website I want to use it to inform myself and not to play around with. When I want to play I use a videogame. This gets even more important when I surf the web using my mobile phone. All I want is information, nothing else, so for me personally flash has no advantages and I wouldn’t matter if it vanishes from the web.

    0
  46. 120

    Good article.

    On the web, Flash filled a void created by the lack of a proper, open standards based multimedia format for a long time. That void is now being filled. It’s going to take a while because of IE6 (I don’t think IE7 and IE8 will suffer from the same slow upgrade cycle), but Flash needs to go away and it will.

    Desktop applications and presentations are a great place to use Flash, and appropriate. The web isn’t an environment that supports proprietary technology very well, and that’s a good thing.

    0
    • 121

      Flash is open.

      0
    • 122

      download Flash Develop, download the Flex sdk and you can create anything by not paying a cent to Adobe… You know that right? You can even create your own builder / player…

      0
      • 123

        You cannot create graphics in Flash Develop of Flex sdk like you can in Flash. You can only do the coding end of things.

        0
    • 124

      and while we’re at it throw away this proprietary quicktime shit out, too. and also the H.264 Codec for HD Video on the web, the videocodec of choice when it comes to MS and A$$LE Browers. Anything else?

      0
  47. 125

    Sean McCambridge

    May 18, 2010 5:18 am

    Is it an oversight that there is no discussion of video in HTML5 vs. .flv? The most common use of Flash is watching video on YouTube, etc. The most common frustration with not having Flash on my iPhone is that I can’t watch web video. Think anyone would care about the Apple vs. Adobe fight if it weren’t for video? I don’t.

    0
    • 126

      Agreed. Consider this: Google owns two of the largest video delivery mechanisms on the web. Pair that with Google’s consistent embracing of open source technology (GNU/Linux, Android, Chromium, etc.) and I see a huge shift from Flash/FLV to HTML5 and an open source video codec that performs better on mobile hardware. Maybe not in 2 years, but definitely on the horizon.

      0
      • 127

        H.264 is open source for now. When they decide to charge, you’re going to wish evil things to the people who own it.

        0
  48. 128

    It’s like my parents fighting. I love Adobe. I love Apple. This really sucks.

    — Terry Ranson

    Great saying by Terry……….I totally agree………….No War………Only Peace and good work to go ahead.

    0
  49. 129

    The number of times I stayed on a site because it was extremelly Flashy (good flashy) outnumbers the times I left because of Flash. The web succeded because does not look like Nielsen’s dream.
    We could be going in circles, in 2 years we will see tutorials on how to make water ripples with JavaScript for the top banners ;)
    It is all about how you use the tools, Flash or any other, if you do sucky work you suck and not the tool.
    Peace,
    Ric

    0
  50. 130

    All this HTML5 vs Flash Bashing ususally comes from people who dont have a clue about either of these technologies.

    Just remember Video on the web 5 years ago. Without Flash we would have to wait 5 more years before a site like Youtube would be thinkable with HTML5. Thats the speed of progress you get when 3-4 Browser-Developers cannot agree on standards.

    0
    • 131

      I don’t buy it, video has existed on the web since way before flash started being used for youtube in 2005. Previously, it just loaded a dedicated video player plugin like quicktime or windows media. Videos played fine – actually, they played better than they do now with flash. And the player windows were not littered with stupid animations, ads, popup bait, and inconsistent UIs.

      So its not like you tube would have had to wait on html5, they could have just standardized on some other video format container/codec that played fine using existing video player plugins.

      0

↑ Back to top