Mobile won't make developers think twice about using flash because they still have to support the desktop environment and the only way to reasonably do that is with flash.
Right now, developing for mobile devices is a different animal than developing for desktop platforms because of screen real-estate and user input devices. A site like hulu for example, would need a whole separate user interface for delivering its content to mobile devices. They wouldn't use flash to do that because of the diversity of devices and their capabilities, but this is not going to stop them from using flash on the desktop, because its still the best solution.
What would help, is if everyone could agree on a standard video format (not likely, I know), like h.264. It would be playable in web pages that use flash, and could be playable an any mobile device that supported it. Then developers could build simple mobile apps that use the same back-end infrastructure for video delivery that they use for their regular website which uses Flash for its front-end.
Back when I developed web sites, if you were smart, you used the lowest-common-denominator of features and tested on the major browsers on the major platforms. If you could run on 70% of these combinations, you were pretty much satisfied. You tended to avoid Flash (or other plugins) for anything except video, as they introduced another layer of complication.
Then along came WAP to support cell phones... it just wasn't worth the effort to accommodate the mobiles!
OK, that all changed with the iPhone. Now a mobile browser is practical, albeit Flash and other plugins are not.
So you are right, that Flash will continue for the desktop video environment, and that another means (maybe h264) is needed for the mobiles.
What is different, today, is: if you want to get the maximum eyes on your content, you you need to design for mobile first, then accommodate the desktop.
It's a switch of emphasis. Not only will plugins become less important, but web developers need to rethink how a site is designed so it supports the incidental way a mobile user will access and use the content.
I believe Flash will be a BIG part of mobile internet, maybe even bigger then on web. Why?
How many phone brands and models are out there which all have there own specifications, screensizes, etc.? Flash (Lite) is good, probably the best, to create applications that will work on all devices without porting, if they support Flash offcourse. But luckily that will keep on growing:
"According to Strategy Analytics, the number of Flash Lite shipped devices will reach 1 billion in 2009 and more than 2.5 billion by the end of 2010."
BUT you have to know how to do it...
Example: http://GamesPlaza.mobi . These games, well at least the ones created by BoosterMedia, can be played on all Flash Lite 2.0 handsets. This means Nokia, HTC, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG, touchscreen, non-touchscreen, etc. handsets.
I agree with you Peter the scope of Flash shouldn't be underestimated. By the same factor the scope of Silverlight shouldn't be underestimated.
Although Microsoft don't seem to have realized it yet, while Window Mobile ain't great, Silverlight could be the perfect technology to power a phone. Being part of the .NET framework it would also mean there would also be plenty of developers ready to build apps irrespective of if there desktop or web developers as its all the same language.
As good as Safari on the iPhone is, viewing normal websites isn't always perfect (e.g. its almost impossible to write this post on an iPhone as there's no way to see the form box all at once). With .NET and Silverlight though, a website can have a normal HTML front end for desktops and a silverlight front end for mobile all running off the same functional code. That in itself could be an amazing thing.
Another thing to question is why does the iPhone need iPhone apps as well as web apps? Silverlight can do everything and iPhone app can do and it can be used over the web. If HTML5 can replace Silverlight, doesn't that mean it should also replace iPhone apps?
I believe Flash will be a BIG part of mobile internet, maybe even bigger then on web. Why?
How many phone brands and models are out there which all have there own specifications, screensizes, etc.? Flash (Lite) is good, probably the best, to create applications that will work on all devices without porting, if they support Flash offcourse. But luckily that will keep on growing:
"According to Strategy Analytics, the number of Flash Lite shipped devices will reach 1 billion in 2009 and more than 2.5 billion by the end of 2010."
BUT you have to know how to do it...
Example: http://GamesPlaza.mobi . These games, well at least the ones created by BoosterMedia, can be played on all Flash Lite 2.0 handsets. This means Nokia, HTC, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG, touchscreen, non-touchscreen, etc. handsets.
Yet Safari on the iPhone/iPod touch have over 30% of the world wide mobile browser market share and well over 50% mobile browser market share in the US.
Other mobile devices such as android will support HTML5 (via Webkit), which will result in HTML5 being available in a higher percentage of the actual mobile web market than Flash light.
Another thing to question is why does the iPhone need iPhone apps as well as web apps? Silverlight can do everything and iPhone app can do and it can be used over the web. If HTML5 can replace Silverlight, doesn't that mean it should also replace iPhone apps?
That was the original plan - developers wanted native tools, which lets them leverage code written for their desktop apps and allows for apps that can't be written in either HTML5 or Flash.
Comments
Mobile won't make developers think twice about using flash because they still have to support the desktop environment and the only way to reasonably do that is with flash.
Right now, developing for mobile devices is a different animal than developing for desktop platforms because of screen real-estate and user input devices. A site like hulu for example, would need a whole separate user interface for delivering its content to mobile devices. They wouldn't use flash to do that because of the diversity of devices and their capabilities, but this is not going to stop them from using flash on the desktop, because its still the best solution.
What would help, is if everyone could agree on a standard video format (not likely, I know), like h.264. It would be playable in web pages that use flash, and could be playable an any mobile device that supported it. Then developers could build simple mobile apps that use the same back-end infrastructure for video delivery that they use for their regular website which uses Flash for its front-end.
Back when I developed web sites, if you were smart, you used the lowest-common-denominator of features and tested on the major browsers on the major platforms. If you could run on 70% of these combinations, you were pretty much satisfied. You tended to avoid Flash (or other plugins) for anything except video, as they introduced another layer of complication.
Then along came WAP to support cell phones... it just wasn't worth the effort to accommodate the mobiles!
OK, that all changed with the iPhone. Now a mobile browser is practical, albeit Flash and other plugins are not.
So you are right, that Flash will continue for the desktop video environment, and that another means (maybe h264) is needed for the mobiles.
What is different, today, is: if you want to get the maximum eyes on your content, you you need to design for mobile first, then accommodate the desktop.
It's a switch of emphasis. Not only will plugins become less important, but web developers need to rethink how a site is designed so it supports the incidental way a mobile user will access and use the content.
*
How many phone brands and models are out there which all have there own specifications, screensizes, etc.? Flash (Lite) is good, probably the best, to create applications that will work on all devices without porting, if they support Flash offcourse. But luckily that will keep on growing:
"According to Strategy Analytics, the number of Flash Lite shipped devices will reach 1 billion in 2009 and more than 2.5 billion by the end of 2010."
BUT you have to know how to do it...
Example: http://GamesPlaza.mobi . These games, well at least the ones created by BoosterMedia, can be played on all Flash Lite 2.0 handsets. This means Nokia, HTC, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG, touchscreen, non-touchscreen, etc. handsets.
Although Microsoft don't seem to have realized it yet, while Window Mobile ain't great, Silverlight could be the perfect technology to power a phone. Being part of the .NET framework it would also mean there would also be plenty of developers ready to build apps irrespective of if there desktop or web developers as its all the same language.
As good as Safari on the iPhone is, viewing normal websites isn't always perfect (e.g. its almost impossible to write this post on an iPhone as there's no way to see the form box all at once). With .NET and Silverlight though, a website can have a normal HTML front end for desktops and a silverlight front end for mobile all running off the same functional code. That in itself could be an amazing thing.
Another thing to question is why does the iPhone need iPhone apps as well as web apps? Silverlight can do everything and iPhone app can do and it can be used over the web. If HTML5 can replace Silverlight, doesn't that mean it should also replace iPhone apps?
I believe Flash will be a BIG part of mobile internet, maybe even bigger then on web. Why?
How many phone brands and models are out there which all have there own specifications, screensizes, etc.? Flash (Lite) is good, probably the best, to create applications that will work on all devices without porting, if they support Flash offcourse. But luckily that will keep on growing:
"According to Strategy Analytics, the number of Flash Lite shipped devices will reach 1 billion in 2009 and more than 2.5 billion by the end of 2010."
BUT you have to know how to do it...
Example: http://GamesPlaza.mobi . These games, well at least the ones created by BoosterMedia, can be played on all Flash Lite 2.0 handsets. This means Nokia, HTC, Sony Ericsson, Samsung, LG, touchscreen, non-touchscreen, etc. handsets.
Yet Safari on the iPhone/iPod touch have over 30% of the world wide mobile browser market share and well over 50% mobile browser market share in the US.
Other mobile devices such as android will support HTML5 (via Webkit), which will result in HTML5 being available in a higher percentage of the actual mobile web market than Flash light.
Another thing to question is why does the iPhone need iPhone apps as well as web apps? Silverlight can do everything and iPhone app can do and it can be used over the web. If HTML5 can replace Silverlight, doesn't that mean it should also replace iPhone apps?
That was the original plan - developers wanted native tools, which lets them leverage code written for their desktop apps and allows for apps that can't be written in either HTML5 or Flash.