That doesn't necessarily mean that Flash will still be popular or widely used at that time. Apple's goal in that respect is to set a precedent, on the mobile side, for using open standards as opposed to Flash, so that by the time smartphones do become the dominant Web-browsing platform, they'll be on the right track and "used to" doing things using those standards. (Naturally, whether it'll pan out like that remains to be seen.)
Agreed on all points. I just don't see it happening. My vision of the future is that Flash and Silverlight will be on mobile phones and offer developers a common way to makes mobile apps essentially giving those platforms free app stores and developers ubiquitous development tools. There is no reason all of this can't be accomplished by HTML5/JS/CSS and webkit I just don't see it happening.
I've read most of the opinions on this topic and most are short-sighted and uninformed.
First, lets agree on the obvious:
1. Flash ads are annoying
2. A huge Flash development community exists
3. Flash in its current form is a resource hog
4. Flash has a significant presence on the web.
Steve Jobs does not want Flash on the iPhone for 3 major reasons.
1. The Flash experience is not consistent from platform to platform
2. Flash would drain the iPhone battery because it does not run efficiently
3. MOST IMPORTANTLY - Flash Apps would rival the Apps in the App store and Apple would not have control over this.
So, lets think like a visionary for a moment and step out of our own personal whines and gripes:
Apple and Adobe have some of the brightest software engineers on the planet and they are well aware of all that I mentioned above. Apple made a move with HTML 5, do they expect for the Flash development community to embrace HTML 5....No....however, HTML 5 is a necessary progression anyway for the mobile space. Adobe has made their move to secure 19 out of the 20 prominent companies to support Flash in the mobile space. This will be the end result IMHO:
Adobe will compromise by opening the the Flash format and they will buy a little company called MDM. MDM has an application called Zinc that wraps Flash SWFs into real applications for Mac, Windows and Linux....MDM is waiting for Adobe to open the Flash format so they can....YES....wrap SWFs as iPhone Apps...what does this mean for Apple and Adobe you might ask:
Flash developers will swarm to create iPhone Apps and post them to the App store.... now Adobe will sell more Flash development tools because of the ease and speed of development AND Apple will in turn have the BEST apps from the best Flash developers available on the app store. This means that Apple would still be able to control revenue flow and eliminate the challenge that free Flash based games would have created in the web mobile space. In turn, Apple will be more accommodating to Flash as a web experience on the iPhone Safari browser....and of course, you will be able to enable/disable it dynamically in settings...EVERYONE WINS!
MDM...oh my......did I just give you a potential future stock tip?
Do you really want to download 100-200k of obnoxious blinking flash ads whenever you hit a Webpage? How about ads that cover content that you can't close because they don't work with multi-touch?
HTML5 has 3D and animation elements that will be much harder to disable. They won?t be as resource hungry, but they will just as annoying to view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
You think HTML5 will kill flash? I know you didn't say that exactly, but it won't.
It doesn?t have to kill Flash. Window 7 won?t kill WinXP and you can still buy PCs with VGA connectors on them. What may happen is that in HTML5 video tags and secure HTTP streaming may start to get used more for mobile devices. This is a fast growing segment and this promise of GPU accelerated Flash 10 on mobiles is still just vaporware at this point. Even when does come to fruition who knows if it will be viable for these small devices. The open technologies are considerably more resource friendly.
Hulu is apparently designing an app for the iPhone, but I can?t see that getting approved for anything other than WiFI, so they may have to go web-based with this open standards instead. It doesn?t have to kill Flash to hurt it, just take away a key use for using Flash in the first place. Adobe has already lost out with YouTube video for being too lazy to get Flash to work well on Macs, mobiles, add H.264 support or HW acceleration (the latter two only added after MS Silverlight added it).
Actually, thats not true. They CAN however be built with HTML 5, CSS 3 and Javascript. Or at least close enough, which would actually be fine by me, if IE supported all this as well. But then, it doesn't really, so the only way to do this kind of stuff in ALL browsers is flash.
ok right. Strictly speaking HTML5 is only the HTML syntax definition, but since HTML itself is useless for anything but the simplest websites, I tend to lump JavaScript and CSS in with it since the HTML syntax definition supports those technologies far more directly than it does proprietary technologies like Flash (which doesn't have a single mention in the HTML5 specification).
Anyways, I think that as Firefox continues to make inroads as the standard browser on Windows by making technical advancements much more quickly, being able to support a greater percentage of websites, and educating/promoting the benefits of installing it, the need to worry about IE compatibility will decrease. Again, these things just take time. The more people push/demand, the quicker it will happen.
You probably don't realize it, but most of the websites you LIKE to visit are created by developers who are ALSO developing flash content for other sites. So the idea that the "flash developer" only knows how to make eye candy is inherently flawed because there are very few people who can actually make a living ONLY developing flash. Most developers create sites that use ALL of the available technologies including flash.
*Correct Answer
As I have mentioned before. Just because someone told you that HTML5 will replace Flash doesn't mean it is true. Have you even read the specs for HTML5? Have you tried to code anything remotely animated with HTML5? It is primitive compared to Flash.
But I'm not arguing that the phone should have Flash. The notion that common desktop Flash content would instantly become available, repurposed for a mobile touch interface with no changes is just plain wrong. Existing Flash apps almost 100% rely on hover or drag or both and that cannot be done on a touch interface[.]
I'm so glad that many people have finally come around and see Flash as a (mostly) unnecessary resource-hog. For me personally, what's even worse than that is the animated crap on the screen that makes it impossible to even read the articles. So disabling it is a must for me, although I do use ClickToFlash for the occasional video.
So here's the flaw with the "choice argument" when it comes to Flash.
With something like matte/glossy, having a choice does not affect anyone else negatively in any way. No matter the blend of matte/glossy screens in the world, I can still use my computer to do everything I want.
But, having more Flash-enabled devices in the world will lead to more Flash-only web sites. And that means lack of accessibility for those of us who either don't have Flash at all (iPhone/Touch), or use laptops and don't want to destroy our batteries.
This is the same reason why Macs almost disappeared from the face of the Earth not that many years ago. When a majority of developers write Windows-only applications it drives users to the Windows platform (still does). Which causes more developers to ignore the Mac, rinse, repeat cycle. For a few years, unless you were a pretty devout Mac user, the pull to the dark side was pretty strong.
In both cases, whether it's an OS or something like Flash, we're talking about a technology layer in the developer stack, and therefore one person's "choice" is often another person's "restriction".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
Well, that's your CHOICE and you made it. You have the tools to view Flash, but you choose not to use them.
It'd be one thing if a site operator made a Flash site and didn't provide you the tools to use it, but the tools are readily available to use Flash.
Not on the iPhone / iPodTouch. Which means that whenever a developer (or client) decides to use Flash they've cut off a significant chunk of the web-viewing audience. It doesn't matter who is to blame for the lack of ability, at the end of the day, the users cannot visit the site, period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s
Now whether Flash is a resource hogging whale; that's up to you. I use it on my 13" MacBook Pro and don't have any issues.
I would agree that on a desktop it's less of an issue, but with a laptop that's bordering on the unbelievable. Or do you not consider it an issue when Flash sucks your battery dry? Also, by causing extra cycles on the battery, the longevity of the battery itself is significantly reduced.
Do you monitor your CPU/battery usage? It's extremely common to have the CPU usage (and fan) go through the roof when Flash crap is onscreen. How is it that you're able to avoid what the vast majority of others see? This is a serious question.
Addendum, Windows Mobile 7 will come out and will be adopted by many users, it doesn't use webkit and it will matter. Microsft isn't just going to rollover and play dead, although I'm sure many of of wish they would.
Steve Balmer said Microsoft would look into using WebKit for future versions of Mobile IE. Either way Microsoft will have to support these new open web technologies or they will get left behind. Google Frame on the desktop side is a clear indication of where Google is heading. They are going to use their power and influence (and market share) to dictate what standards are used on the web. Apple, with the highest mobile Internet market share, is doing the same. Throw in a few other big players like Facebook and it's hard to see how Adobe & Microsoft have any future skirting away from open standards. We've seen many, very fast, shifts away from proprietary technologies in the history of the Internet so far. As soon as a reasonable alternative open solution exists it takes off pretty quickly. I imagine in 2 or 3 years at most Flash will start to become a legacy platform. In another 2 or 3 years after that it won't even be something most people bother to install.
I've read most of the opinions on this topic and most are short-sighted and uninformed.
First, lets agree on the obvious:
1. Flash ads are annoying
2. A huge Flash development community exists
3. Flash in its current form is a resource hog
4. Flash has a significant presence on the web.
Steve Jobs does not want Flash on the iPhone for 3 major reasons.
1. The Flash experience is not consistent from platform to platform
2. Flash would drain the iPhone battery because it does not run efficiently
3. MOST IMPORTANTLY - Flash Apps would rival the Apps in the App store and Apple would not have control over this.
So, lets think like a visionary for a moment and step out of our own personal whines and gripes:
Apple and Adobe have some of the brightest software engineers on the planet and they are well aware of all that I mentioned above. Apple made a move with HTML 5, do they expect for the Flash development community to embrace HTML 5....No....however, HTML 5 is a necessary progression anyway for the mobile space. Adobe has made their move to secure 19 out of the 20 prominent companies to support Flash in the mobile space. This will be the end result IMHO:
Adobe will compromise by opening the the Flash format and they will buy a little company called MDM. MDM has an application called Zinc that wraps Flash SWFs into real applications for Mac, Windows and Linux....MDM is waiting for Adobe to open the Flash format so they can....YES....wrap SWFs as iPhone Apps...what does this mean for Apple and Adobe you might ask:
Flash developers will swarm to create iPhone Apps and post them to the App store.... now Adobe will sell more Flash development tools because of the ease and speed of development AND Apple will in turn have the BEST apps from the best Flash developers available on the app store. This means that Apple would still be able to control revenue flow and eliminate the challenge that free Flash based games would have created in the web mobile space. In turn, Apple will be more accommodating to Flash as a web experience on the iPhone Safari browser....and of course, you will be able to enable/disable it dynamically in settings...EVERYONE WINS!
MDM...oh my......did I just give you a potential future stock tip?
Who is going to wake him up from his dream and does he have shares in MDM
It doesn?t have to kill Flash. Window 7 won?t kill WinXP and you can still buy PCs with VGA connectors on them. What may happen is that in HTML5 video tags and secure HTTP streaming may start to get used more for mobile devices. This is a fast growing segment and this promise of GPU accelerated Flash 10 on mobiles is still just vaporware at this point. Even when does come to fruition who knows if it will be viable for these small devices. The open technologies are considerably more resource friendly.
Hulu is apparently designing an app for the iPhone, but I can?t see that getting approved for anything other than WiFI, so they may have to go web-based with this open standards instead. It doesn?t have to kill Flash to hurt it, just take away a key use for using Flash in the first place. Adobe has already lost out with YouTube video for being too lazy to get Flash to work well on Macs, mobiles, add H.264 support or HW acceleration (the latter two only added after MS Silverlight added it).
Well that reasoning didn't work for MMS , nor glossy screens , nor SD slots, nor Blu-ray. And it won't work here either. you'll see.
Well I could reply it worked
with USB and aac. But you miss the
point. Apple is the
smartphone market
maker now. No major portal can NOT be on the iPhone for long. Either they create their own app like CNN just did or they have to add h264 or HTML media support to their site. It's
already happening. Jobs has adobe and MS outflanked and is looking fo win.
Sorry guys but it'd be easy enough to deactivate flash if the phone supported it. In the meantime every website that has any kind of video uses flash so its a serious problem whether you want to admit it or not.
I love my iphone but having flash would make be upgrade immediately.
Mmmm... YouTube re-compresed its video library to h.264, giving higher quality, lower bandwidth and ability to bypass the Flash plugin, to support the iPhone. Others who see the potential of 40 million active mobile web users will, likely, follow suit. For example, the LiveCasting site, Stickam, has just released an iPhone app.
Loads of websites use flash for menus and site navigation. It well entrenched. It makes no sense for Apple not to accommodate.
Really? that just seems to be bad design then. when their clients are going to see the need to cater to all those iphone and ipod touch users, you're going to see a shift away from that nonsense.
Really? that just seems to be bad design then. when their clients are going to see the need to cater to all those iphone and ipod touch users, you're going to see a shift away from that nonsense.
It kind of depends on the particular site. Some companies are already designing a mobile version of their site so it doesn't really matter if the "standard" version utilizes flash or not.
Comments
That doesn't necessarily mean that Flash will still be popular or widely used at that time. Apple's goal in that respect is to set a precedent, on the mobile side, for using open standards as opposed to Flash, so that by the time smartphones do become the dominant Web-browsing platform, they'll be on the right track and "used to" doing things using those standards. (Naturally, whether it'll pan out like that remains to be seen.)
Agreed on all points. I just don't see it happening. My vision of the future is that Flash and Silverlight will be on mobile phones and offer developers a common way to makes mobile apps essentially giving those platforms free app stores and developers ubiquitous development tools. There is no reason all of this can't be accomplished by HTML5/JS/CSS and webkit I just don't see it happening.
First, lets agree on the obvious:
1. Flash ads are annoying
2. A huge Flash development community exists
3. Flash in its current form is a resource hog
4. Flash has a significant presence on the web.
Steve Jobs does not want Flash on the iPhone for 3 major reasons.
1. The Flash experience is not consistent from platform to platform
2. Flash would drain the iPhone battery because it does not run efficiently
3. MOST IMPORTANTLY - Flash Apps would rival the Apps in the App store and Apple would not have control over this.
So, lets think like a visionary for a moment and step out of our own personal whines and gripes:
Apple and Adobe have some of the brightest software engineers on the planet and they are well aware of all that I mentioned above. Apple made a move with HTML 5, do they expect for the Flash development community to embrace HTML 5....No....however, HTML 5 is a necessary progression anyway for the mobile space. Adobe has made their move to secure 19 out of the 20 prominent companies to support Flash in the mobile space. This will be the end result IMHO:
Adobe will compromise by opening the the Flash format and they will buy a little company called MDM. MDM has an application called Zinc that wraps Flash SWFs into real applications for Mac, Windows and Linux....MDM is waiting for Adobe to open the Flash format so they can....YES....wrap SWFs as iPhone Apps...what does this mean for Apple and Adobe you might ask:
Flash developers will swarm to create iPhone Apps and post them to the App store.... now Adobe will sell more Flash development tools because of the ease and speed of development AND Apple will in turn have the BEST apps from the best Flash developers available on the app store. This means that Apple would still be able to control revenue flow and eliminate the challenge that free Flash based games would have created in the web mobile space. In turn, Apple will be more accommodating to Flash as a web experience on the iPhone Safari browser....and of course, you will be able to enable/disable it dynamically in settings...EVERYONE WINS!
MDM...oh my......did I just give you a potential future stock tip?
If you aren't going to reliably view current Flash content on your iPhone are you asking Flash devs to maintain mobile vesions as well?
We are already maintaing mobile versions.
Do you really want to download 100-200k of obnoxious blinking flash ads whenever you hit a Webpage? How about ads that cover content that you can't close because they don't work with multi-touch?
HTML5 has 3D and animation elements that will be much harder to disable. They won?t be as resource hungry, but they will just as annoying to view.
You think HTML5 will kill flash? I know you didn't say that exactly, but it won't.
It doesn?t have to kill Flash. Window 7 won?t kill WinXP and you can still buy PCs with VGA connectors on them. What may happen is that in HTML5 video tags and secure HTTP streaming may start to get used more for mobile devices. This is a fast growing segment and this promise of GPU accelerated Flash 10 on mobiles is still just vaporware at this point. Even when does come to fruition who knows if it will be viable for these small devices. The open technologies are considerably more resource friendly.
Hulu is apparently designing an app for the iPhone, but I can?t see that getting approved for anything other than WiFI, so they may have to go web-based with this open standards instead. It doesn?t have to kill Flash to hurt it, just take away a key use for using Flash in the first place. Adobe has already lost out with YouTube video for being too lazy to get Flash to work well on Macs, mobiles, add H.264 support or HW acceleration (the latter two only added after MS Silverlight added it).
Actually, thats not true. They CAN however be built with HTML 5, CSS 3 and Javascript. Or at least close enough, which would actually be fine by me, if IE supported all this as well. But then, it doesn't really, so the only way to do this kind of stuff in ALL browsers is flash.
ok right. Strictly speaking HTML5 is only the HTML syntax definition, but since HTML itself is useless for anything but the simplest websites, I tend to lump JavaScript and CSS in with it since the HTML syntax definition supports those technologies far more directly than it does proprietary technologies like Flash (which doesn't have a single mention in the HTML5 specification).
Anyways, I think that as Firefox continues to make inroads as the standard browser on Windows by making technical advancements much more quickly, being able to support a greater percentage of websites, and educating/promoting the benefits of installing it, the need to worry about IE compatibility will decrease. Again, these things just take time. The more people push/demand, the quicker it will happen.
As for click to play/pause I mean clicking the actual video, not the play/pause button.
Jeesh, isn't that kind of , I dunno, picky?
You probably don't realize it, but most of the websites you LIKE to visit are created by developers who are ALSO developing flash content for other sites. So the idea that the "flash developer" only knows how to make eye candy is inherently flawed because there are very few people who can actually make a living ONLY developing flash. Most developers create sites that use ALL of the available technologies including flash.
*Correct Answer
As I have mentioned before. Just because someone told you that HTML5 will replace Flash doesn't mean it is true. Have you even read the specs for HTML5? Have you tried to code anything remotely animated with HTML5? It is primitive compared to Flash.
But I'm not arguing that the phone should have Flash. The notion that common desktop Flash content would instantly become available, repurposed for a mobile touch interface with no changes is just plain wrong. Existing Flash apps almost 100% rely on hover or drag or both and that cannot be done on a touch interface[.]
So here's the flaw with the "choice argument" when it comes to Flash.
With something like matte/glossy, having a choice does not affect anyone else negatively in any way. No matter the blend of matte/glossy screens in the world, I can still use my computer to do everything I want.
But, having more Flash-enabled devices in the world will lead to more Flash-only web sites. And that means lack of accessibility for those of us who either don't have Flash at all (iPhone/Touch), or use laptops and don't want to destroy our batteries.
This is the same reason why Macs almost disappeared from the face of the Earth not that many years ago. When a majority of developers write Windows-only applications it drives users to the Windows platform (still does). Which causes more developers to ignore the Mac, rinse, repeat cycle. For a few years, unless you were a pretty devout Mac user, the pull to the dark side was pretty strong.
In both cases, whether it's an OS or something like Flash, we're talking about a technology layer in the developer stack, and therefore one person's "choice" is often another person's "restriction".
Well, that's your CHOICE and you made it. You have the tools to view Flash, but you choose not to use them.
It'd be one thing if a site operator made a Flash site and didn't provide you the tools to use it, but the tools are readily available to use Flash.
Not on the iPhone / iPodTouch. Which means that whenever a developer (or client) decides to use Flash they've cut off a significant chunk of the web-viewing audience. It doesn't matter who is to blame for the lack of ability, at the end of the day, the users cannot visit the site, period.
Now whether Flash is a resource hogging whale; that's up to you. I use it on my 13" MacBook Pro and don't have any issues.
I would agree that on a desktop it's less of an issue, but with a laptop that's bordering on the unbelievable. Or do you not consider it an issue when Flash sucks your battery dry? Also, by causing extra cycles on the battery, the longevity of the battery itself is significantly reduced.
Do you monitor your CPU/battery usage? It's extremely common to have the CPU usage (and fan) go through the roof when Flash crap is onscreen. How is it that you're able to avoid what the vast majority of others see? This is a serious question.
Addendum, Windows Mobile 7 will come out and will be adopted by many users, it doesn't use webkit and it will matter. Microsft isn't just going to rollover and play dead, although I'm sure many of of wish they would.
Steve Balmer said Microsoft would look into using WebKit for future versions of Mobile IE. Either way Microsoft will have to support these new open web technologies or they will get left behind. Google Frame on the desktop side is a clear indication of where Google is heading. They are going to use their power and influence (and market share) to dictate what standards are used on the web. Apple, with the highest mobile Internet market share, is doing the same. Throw in a few other big players like Facebook and it's hard to see how Adobe & Microsoft have any future skirting away from open standards. We've seen many, very fast, shifts away from proprietary technologies in the history of the Internet so far. As soon as a reasonable alternative open solution exists it takes off pretty quickly. I imagine in 2 or 3 years at most Flash will start to become a legacy platform. In another 2 or 3 years after that it won't even be something most people bother to install.
I've read most of the opinions on this topic and most are short-sighted and uninformed.
First, lets agree on the obvious:
1. Flash ads are annoying
2. A huge Flash development community exists
3. Flash in its current form is a resource hog
4. Flash has a significant presence on the web.
Steve Jobs does not want Flash on the iPhone for 3 major reasons.
1. The Flash experience is not consistent from platform to platform
2. Flash would drain the iPhone battery because it does not run efficiently
3. MOST IMPORTANTLY - Flash Apps would rival the Apps in the App store and Apple would not have control over this.
So, lets think like a visionary for a moment and step out of our own personal whines and gripes:
Apple and Adobe have some of the brightest software engineers on the planet and they are well aware of all that I mentioned above. Apple made a move with HTML 5, do they expect for the Flash development community to embrace HTML 5....No....however, HTML 5 is a necessary progression anyway for the mobile space. Adobe has made their move to secure 19 out of the 20 prominent companies to support Flash in the mobile space. This will be the end result IMHO:
Adobe will compromise by opening the the Flash format and they will buy a little company called MDM. MDM has an application called Zinc that wraps Flash SWFs into real applications for Mac, Windows and Linux....MDM is waiting for Adobe to open the Flash format so they can....YES....wrap SWFs as iPhone Apps...what does this mean for Apple and Adobe you might ask:
Flash developers will swarm to create iPhone Apps and post them to the App store.... now Adobe will sell more Flash development tools because of the ease and speed of development AND Apple will in turn have the BEST apps from the best Flash developers available on the app store. This means that Apple would still be able to control revenue flow and eliminate the challenge that free Flash based games would have created in the web mobile space. In turn, Apple will be more accommodating to Flash as a web experience on the iPhone Safari browser....and of course, you will be able to enable/disable it dynamically in settings...EVERYONE WINS!
MDM...oh my......did I just give you a potential future stock tip?
Who is going to wake him up from his dream and does he have shares in MDM
Jeesh, isn't that kind of , I dunno, picky?
No. Ease-of-use isn't being picky. For now, Flash is fundamentally more useable on YouTube.
It doesn?t have to kill Flash. Window 7 won?t kill WinXP and you can still buy PCs with VGA connectors on them. What may happen is that in HTML5 video tags and secure HTTP streaming may start to get used more for mobile devices. This is a fast growing segment and this promise of GPU accelerated Flash 10 on mobiles is still just vaporware at this point. Even when does come to fruition who knows if it will be viable for these small devices. The open technologies are considerably more resource friendly.
Hulu is apparently designing an app for the iPhone, but I can?t see that getting approved for anything other than WiFI, so they may have to go web-based with this open standards instead. It doesn?t have to kill Flash to hurt it, just take away a key use for using Flash in the first place. Adobe has already lost out with YouTube video for being too lazy to get Flash to work well on Macs, mobiles, add H.264 support or HW acceleration (the latter two only added after MS Silverlight added it).
Good point.
Well that reasoning didn't work for MMS , nor glossy screens , nor SD slots, nor Blu-ray. And it won't work here either. you'll see.
Well I could reply it worked
with USB and aac. But you miss the
point. Apple is the
smartphone market
maker now. No major portal can NOT be on the iPhone for long. Either they create their own app like CNN just did or they have to add h264 or HTML media support to their site. It's
already happening. Jobs has adobe and MS outflanked and is looking fo win.
You forgot to somehow or another tie in how hot the ATV is and how it doesn't have an on/off button. You're off your game this morning.
no. it was there. just nobody took the bait so far...
Sorry guys but it'd be easy enough to deactivate flash if the phone supported it. In the meantime every website that has any kind of video uses flash so its a serious problem whether you want to admit it or not.
I love my iphone but having flash would make be upgrade immediately.
Mmmm... YouTube re-compresed its video library to h.264, giving higher quality, lower bandwidth and ability to bypass the Flash plugin, to support the iPhone. Others who see the potential of 40 million active mobile web users will, likely, follow suit. For example, the LiveCasting site, Stickam, has just released an iPhone app.
*
Loads of websites use flash for menus and site navigation. It well entrenched. It makes no sense for Apple not to accommodate.
Really? that just seems to be bad design then. when their clients are going to see the need to cater to all those iphone and ipod touch users, you're going to see a shift away from that nonsense.
http://newsticker.welt.de/?module=smarthouse&id=949121
Apparently at least some iteration of flash is coming to iPhone via CS5
Really? that just seems to be bad design then. when their clients are going to see the need to cater to all those iphone and ipod touch users, you're going to see a shift away from that nonsense.
It kind of depends on the particular site. Some companies are already designing a mobile version of their site so it doesn't really matter if the "standard" version utilizes flash or not.