or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Scribd "scrapping Flash and betting the company on HTML5"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Scribd "scrapping Flash and betting the company on HTML5"

post #1 of 52
Thread Starter 
Document sharing site Scribd, which allows users to upload PDF, Word, PowerPoint, and other documents on the web using Adobe's Flash Player, has announced that it will begin converting its file service to HTML5, starting tomorrow.

A report by TechCrunch cited Scribd cofounder and chief technology officer Jared Friedman as saying, We are scrapping three years of Flash development and betting the company on HTML5 because we believe HTML5 is a dramatically better reading experience than Flash. Now any document can become a web page.

Scribd's service will convert billions of documents into standard web pages supporting the pinch to zoom features of modern multitouch devices like iPad, as well as document wide search, bookmarks, and navigation controls. Shared documents or even books can be uploaded and shared through Twitter and Facebook.

The transition will begin tomorrow, with 200,000 of Scribd's most popular documents being converted to HTML5. Eventually, all of the company's shared documents will be migrated from Flash.

Ditching Flash for HTML5, like YouTube

Much like Google's YouTube service, Scribd originally used Flash to present shared documents due to limitations in previous web standards and the various implementations of those standards among web browsers. However, HTML5 is bringing a new level of interoperability to web browsers, along with sophisticated new features that don't require a separate proprietary plugin like Flash or Silverlight.

Right now the document is in a box, Friedman said, a YouTube-type of experience. There is a bunch of content and a bunch of stuff around it. In the new experience we are taking the content out of the box.

The report says Scribd has been working in secret on the project for the last six months. The new HTML5-based sharing service will use the new standard's native support for fonts, vector graphics, and rotating text.

Friedman estimated that 97% of web browsers will be able to read Scribds HTML5 documents, as the elements it uses are already widely adopted. Shared HTML5 documents can be embedded in existing pages using an iFrame.
post #2 of 52
that's good news.
I always find scrolling in the Flash PDF viewer thingy really annoying.
post #3 of 52
HTML5 kills Firefox?

Yes or no?
post #4 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

HTML5 kills Firefox?

Yes or no?

Firefox 3.6.3 scores 101 out of 160 on the following test: http://www.html5test.com/

Edit: That's on both Windows 7 and Leopard.
post #5 of 52
Yes! PDFs in Safari suck ass, so this will be good news if it sticks.

Of course Scribd is also facing a huge class-action for massive copyright infringement...

They tried to jump the gun on Google's identical service by just kind of forgetting about the legal ramifications of earning profit by distributing millions of copyrighted works without permission. Oops!
post #6 of 52
Hey Quado....looks like it's working! May I change my 'signature' now from 'Help Kill Flash....' to something like, 'McDonald's use's too much 'Poison,' ie., SALT or Coca-Cola uses too much 'Poison,' ie., SUGAR?'

post #7 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by William 3.0 View Post

Firefox 3.6.3 scores 101 out of 160 on the following test: http://www.html5test.com/

Edit: That's on both Windows 7 and Leopard.


Guess the question I should ask is if the video codec that is associated with HTML5 can´t work in Firefox?
post #8 of 52
Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.
post #9 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by William 3.0 View Post

Firefox 3.6.3 scores 101 out of 160 on the following test: http://www.html5test.com/

Edit: That's on both Windows 7 and Leopard.

my safari slaps your firefox with 113 on a mac mini. must be somethin wrong with the test page. I thought safari supports aac, but the test says it doesn't.
After 3 netbooks from acer, toshiba, hp, I find contentment in my 11.6 MB Air. Hoping the 8-hr battery version shows up soon.
Reply
After 3 netbooks from acer, toshiba, hp, I find contentment in my 11.6 MB Air. Hoping the 8-hr battery version shows up soon.
Reply
post #10 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.

Wow! Great comment! I always hated that app.
post #11 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Yes! PDFs in Safari suck ass, so this will be good news if it sticks.

PDF works fine for me on Safari ... what are you talking about.
post #12 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.

Nailed it. That is the fantastically Perfect analogy.
post #13 of 52
The damn is breaking.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #14 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by min_t View Post

my safari slaps your firefox with 113 on a mac mini. must be somethin wrong with the test page. I thought safari supports aac, but the test says it doesn't.

Hm, the latest WebKit Nightly Build scores 137 out of 160... getting there.
post #15 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Yes! PDFs in Safari suck ass, so this will be good news if it sticks.

Of course Scribd is also facing a huge class-action for massive copyright infringement...

They tried to jump the gun on Google's identical service by just kind of forgetting about the legal ramifications of earning profit by distributing millions of copyrighted works without permission. Oops!

PDFs are great unless you use Adobe's plugin. Maybe you should disable Adobe's piece of junk plugin? It is worse then Flash...
post #16 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

Guess the question I should ask is if the video codec that is associated with HTML5 can´t work in Firefox?

:sigh: HTML5's video tag currently supports H.264/MPEG-4 AVC AND Ogg Theroa, the latter is used by Firefox and Opera, but any can be used. This article has nothing to do with the HTML5 video tag.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.

Right?! Excellent comparison. That had nearly complete penetration, too. Look where they are now. Of course, Flash has many more uses than RealPlayer and HTML5 is still very far from replacing many aspects of Flash. But for video, audio and other simpler aspects it's on the way out, which comprising the majority of Flash uses on the web.


Quote:
Originally Posted by William 3.0 View Post

Firefox 3.6.3 scores 101 out of 160 on the following test: http://www.html5test.com/.

The new Chrome 5 Beta scores 142 out of 160.

Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

The damn is breaking.

Picking up momentum. The biggest thing I see missing from the HTML5 video option is full screen. Once modern browsers are updated with that ability I think we'll see a pretty jump in that as the default option for those desktop browsers.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #17 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotOn View Post

Guess the question I should ask is if the video codec that is associated with HTML5 can´t work in Firefox?

The HTML 5 spec is actually completely silent on video codecs. Anyone can use any codec they want and still be compliant with HTML 5.

What will kill FireFox is the fickle nature of their fans and the existence of Chrome. Chrome eats FireFox's market share while hardly making a dent in Safari's.
post #18 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

The HTML 5 spec is actually completely silent on video codecs. Anyone can use any codec they want and still be compliant with HTML 5.

What will kill FireFox is the fickle nature of their fans and the existence of Chrome. Chrome eats FireFox's market share while hardly making a dent in Safari's.

Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005

Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.

Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.

Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...
post #19 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005

Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.

Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.

Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...

1) Many people prefer Safari and IE over other options. I certainly do for their respective OSes. They both have better OS integration and are better at power consumption than 3rd-party browsers.

2) Chrome has extension support.

3) Mozilla isn't doing so great with Firefox engine speeds and it's pretty hard to only have Opera in your corner with Ogg Theora support when every major player from HW decoders to OSes to browsers to websites are supporting H.264 because it's the best option. They're in a tough spot they can't win. Their only savior right now looks to be Google's VP8, but who know if that will be widely adopted.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #20 of 52
Mobile Safari on iPad scores 115 with AAC support!

I've abhorred scribd for it's use of flash to display docs. I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with HTML 5.
post #21 of 52
Once Flash is dead, then the market just needs to kill MS Office.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #22 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005

Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.

Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.

Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...

I just downloaded Chrome. I like it best already and 142/160. Wow!
post #23 of 52
Why do people always have such a beef with Safari? I think it is a fine browser. And lets face it, there aint much difference between modern browsers nowadays. Especially when comparing webkit driven ones.
post #24 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.

Man you ARE old!

Now I remember, paying (if I remember correctly) $AU29.95 for my subscription. What a joke!

BTW guys how about laying off poor old Adobe, like c'mon guys, it's not like they deserve it, or anything?
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #25 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Flash reminds me of RealPlayer.

Yes.

They are both skankware. However, at least it was easy to survive without RealPlayer. A lot of sites are unusable without Flash; fortunately that is changing and folks like Scribd are helping make the Internet a better place.

Die Flash, die!
post #26 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005

Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.

Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.

Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...

Damn, your right, hate to admit it myself, I just use Safari cause I'm lazy, damn you
and your logic!

EDIT: hey, no I'm not! - I don't trust/like/care-for GOOG as a purveyor of all things on TEH NET, any longer.
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
May the Blue Bird of Happiness leave a deposit with you and yours.
Reply
post #27 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

The damn is breaking.

I'm pretty sure you meant "dam"... but I still got it.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #28 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity View Post

Why do people always have such a beef with Safari? I think it is a fine browser. And lets face it, there aint much difference between modern browsers nowadays. Especially when comparing webkit driven ones.


Agreed. That's the reason for open standard based browsers so they look the same.

Back on topic, one more nail in the Flash coffin. Another 99 to go
post #29 of 52
Tick tock tick tock.
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
2011 13" 2.3 MBP, 2006 15" 2.16 MBP, iPhone 4, iPod Shuffle, AEBS, AppleTV2 with XBMC.
Reply
post #30 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by William 3.0 View Post

Firefox 3.6.3 scores 101 out of 160 on the following test: http://www.html5test.com/

the HTML5Test.com page does not seem to be very useful. It gives equal weigh to important and trivial features, and gives points for things that are not even part of the HTML5 spec, including Ogg Vobis support.

It just seems like a random list of features, some critically important and some trivial decoration.

Scoring really low indicates a browser hasn't many any effort to adopt HTML5 features, but scoring above 100 starts to enter meaningless territory.
post #31 of 52
I took the test for my Safari browser got 115/160 and then out of interest took the test for IE 8 24/160!!
post #32 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...

I'm sure that statement is supposed to be somewhat (or downright) demeaning but honestly I've tried them all and I still find Safari preferable to any alternative I've used. So for me I've tried them and you're right I can't find better but you're wrong is saying I haven't looked.
post #33 of 52
Now what's become of all the screaming Adobe fanatics? You know, the ones who a few days ago were eviscerating Steve Jobs for doing the same thing, but bluntly and without all the corporatese?

"In the new experience we are taking the content out of the box."

Which is to say, "Flash sucked and we're dumping it."

Do we suppose they do pickup lines in technobabble? "Mr. Happy 2.0 has been developed to provide a revolutionary, paradigm-shifting application for users who demand a fully optimized solution." Oooh baby.
post #34 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...

I don't think that is accurate at all. Why do people impose their feelings about a product as if it is the only natural and correct way to feel about it and all others are just wrong or lazy?

I intentionally use Safari over other browsers because I like it better. I prefer how Safari handles RSS feeds. I keep a folder in the bookmarks bar with all of my feeds in one folder. It is really nice with the badge (a number in parenthesis) showing the new feed count. To me it is much better than any other feed option out there.

There are many reasons why I prefer Safari and it has nothing to do with me not being bothered to find anything better.
post #35 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

The HTML 5 spec is actually completely silent on video codecs. Anyone can use any codec they want and still be compliant with HTML 5.

What will kill FireFox is the fickle nature of their fans and the existence of Chrome. Chrome eats FireFox's market share while hardly making a dent in Safari's.

Exactly!

The whole Mozilla Foundation is getting all religious about the video codec (which is not even a specified part of HTML5) while Chrome is eating them for lunch. They need to stop wasting their time fighting a battle which even if they win, they lose (even if Theora becomes the specified codec in HTML5, the limited mobile support, and the non-existent content will kill it.

Also, this whole religious battle form Mozilla's side is stupid. Lets get some facts:

Mozilla CAN afford the license. The license is 5 million / year at the MOST, but Mozilla earns about 70mn / year, the majority of which is straight up profits, with very little expenses. They already support proprietary non-free codecs. You need to look no further than MP3, JPEG, and GIF's, all of which Firefox supports (not sure about MP3 though) to find non-open, non-free formats that Mozilla already supports.

I honestly don't understand why the Mozilla Foundation is trying to fight this battle. It can, at best, be a pyrrhic victory for them. If Theora is indeed established as the go-to codec, all that is going to happen is all video on the internet will continue being delivered as H.264 through Flash (the majority of Flash video currently is encoded in H.264).
post #36 of 52
Good for them. They see the writing on the wall.
post #37 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass View Post

Actually, Firefox and Safari are both basically holding steady while Chrome takes share from Explorer...

http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-w...-200904-201005

Firefox doesn't really compete with Chrome in my opinion.

Firefox is all about extensions and add-ons, while Chrome is focused more on being clean and minimalistic.

Safari and Explorer are for people who can't be bothered to find something better...

why are you so right?
sent from my... internet browser of choice.
Reply
sent from my... internet browser of choice.
Reply
post #38 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Ditching Flash for HTML5, like YouTube...

YouTube has a long way to go. Their HTML5 beta is very buggy, and I haven't seen any improvements since they first announced the public HTML5 beta. They make HTML5 look bad.
post #39 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

Wow! Great comment! I always hated that app.

Me too, "real" player has been relegated to the dustbin of history, and so will flash, very soon....
post #40 of 52
I like Safari's simplicity. And as long as I have the clickToFlash thing, I don't need a thousand add-ons. But I use Firefox once in a while and I root for them a bit.
I've accomplished my childhood's dream: My job consists mainly of playing with toys all day long.
Reply
I've accomplished my childhood's dream: My job consists mainly of playing with toys all day long.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Scribd "scrapping Flash and betting the company on HTML5"