well joe consumer, a few months ago, i just created a very short flash movie for a client, using flash's motion editor. i exported to both flash 9 and flash 10 players.
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
there was no code involved, and i told them as much. there were pissed at me. there was nothing i could do. i went on all the forums to find out if there was anything i was doing wrong. turns out adobe simply put out a crappy product and the fault was in their own technology.
i'm already looking to html5. knock yourself out with your flash animations.
I really hope that each "subscription" isn't its own application. It really makes things feel clunky; I would much prefer for the content to "plug into" a reader application or just browser. Too many of the apps currently on the AppStore have too many different interfaces that it feels awkward.
The fact is, if Apple invested some time and money, they could sort out the issues osx has with flash, and even get it working fine on iphone os. Hell, if my windows mobile phone can run flash apps without a hitch, the iphone definitely can.
Once again with the meme that it's Apple's responsibility to fix Adobe's software.
well joe consumer, a few months ago, i just created a very short flash movie for a client, using flash's motion editor. i exported to both flash 9 and flash 10 players.
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
there was no code involved, and i told them as much. there were pissed at me. there was nothing i could do. i went on all the forums to find out if there was anything i was doing wrong. turns out adobe simply put out a crappy product and the fault was in their own technology.
i'm already looking to html5. knock yourself out with your flash animations.
You have no idea what your talking about at all. Most of what you are saying makes no sense in relationship to any kind of coherent HTML 5 vs Flash argument.
here are two reasons why:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac_dog
a few months ago, i just created a very short flash movie for a client, using flash's motion editor.
1. How will you create a movie using HTML5?
The HTML 5 <video> tag is not going to help you create movies, it does not offer an equivalent to the Flash Motion Editor. So "looking into HTML5" isn't going to help you here. IF you would like to actually CREATE animations without Flash you might want to learn Javascript or some kind of composting app like After Effects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac_dog
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
2. Did you not test what you created in ALL possible browsers BEFORE sending the project to the client?
If you do ANY kind of web development and aren't testing browsers you have problems. HTML5 isn't going to stop clients from being mad at you.
Flash may have its problems but this isn't the result of them. This is the result of you not doing proper testing and also not understanding what HTML 5 actually does.
I'm not fond of Flash, either, but I really don't like this Apple attitude of "we don't like it, so we're not going to let consumers have any choice in the matter. If you no longer have access to a large percentage of websites, that's not our problem. We know what's best for you, so suck it up." It's the very definition of a closed platform. What if they had the same attitude toward Javascript? Would people be as forgiving about Apple denying us choice about that? Why not just make a warning that says Flash may slow down your iPad and shorten your battery life? FWIW, I keep Safari open without quitting the app for weeks on end and don't have any issues with stability of either the browser or OS X, although I do use Click2Flash to block Flash content most of the time, usually animated ads.
I'm not fond of Flash, either, but I really don't like this Apple attitude of "we don't like it, so we're not going to let consumers have any choice in the matter. If you no longer have access to a large percentage of websites, that's not our problem. We know what's best for you, so suck it up." It's the very definition of a closed platform. What if they had the same attitude toward Javascript? Would people be as forgiving about Apple denying us choice about that? Why not just make a warning that says Flash may slow down your iPad and shorten your battery life? FWIW, I keep Safari open without quitting the app for weeks on end and don't have any issues with stability of either the browser or OS X, although I do use Click2Flash to block Flash content most of the time, usually animated ads.
I see it as forward thinking. Just like when they dropped the floppy diskette from their computers and only used CD/DVD drives. Everybody was upset and shocked...for a few months and then moved on with their lives. And when they starting phasing out CRT monitors and replaced them with flat panels. The rest of the industry started to do the same and followed Apples lead.
But you will probably say, that is different because that was hardware and this is software related and not the same thing. You might be right... but it's still forward thinking.
I'm not fond of Flash, either, but I really don't like this Apple attitude of "we don't like it, so we're not going to let consumers have any choice in the matter. If you no longer have access to a large percentage of websites, that's not our problem. We know what's best for you, so suck it up." It's the very definition of a closed platform.
I agree. And if consumers don't like Apple's policy they can vote with their wallets and buy an iPhone, iPad or iPod Touch. Thing is, that very few if any people are doing that. Apple is selling these devices (minus the iPad since it's not out yet) like hot cakes. General consumers don't seem to care that the 'beloved' Flash isn't supported.
Apple has given the public a choice and they are choosing to forego Flash.
I don't 'hate' flash as much as some other folks seem to, but it truly is a resource hog on any platform - more so on MacOS X, but still a hog anywhere.
Flash has been abused by the advertising industry, but so will the next technology. The reason I like the idea of HTML 5 is simply the nature of open standards. Develop anything (video, animation, etc.) you want in whatever program you want to use, save it as a H.264 video file, and deploy. Easy. Works everywhere. Interactivity? Javascript.
Yes, there are probably a few holes where HTML 5, Javascript & H.264 will fall short... so, find the holes and develop a plug-in to patch them. Adobe doesn't have to drop Flash. Maybe Adobe could have their Flash tools generate standards based HTML 5 code instead of proprietary Flash code. How about that? Then the Flash plug-in could be rewritten to do nothing more than fill in the features that HTML 5, JS, and H.264 don't cover, if there are any.
You people are completely delusional if you think html5 is anywhere close to flash in terms of both functionality and codeability. Maybe in 3-5 years, but not in the short term. Also think in terms of browser support. IE doesn't even do the most recent CSS that's been out for a while now. You think html5 is going to be supported in IE any time soon? You nerds need to get out your Apple II's and go from there and let the rest of the world interact with the web the way we want to. All of this anti-flash stuff is going to regress web design and interactivity back to 1996. And don't give me this jquery crap either. It's pretty awesome, but also not anywhere close to flash. Also, AS is like any other language, if you don't code correctly, your app will be a mess. Java apps often totally suck, but nobody is killing java.
I'm a total apple fanboy, but I will not buy the ipad because of the lack of flash.
well joe consumer, a few months ago, i just created a very short flash movie for a client, using flash's motion editor. i exported to both flash 9 and flash 10 players.
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
there was no code involved, and i told them as much. there were pissed at me. there was nothing i could do. i went on all the forums to find out if there was anything i was doing wrong. turns out adobe simply put out a crappy product and the fault was in their own technology.
i'm already looking to html5. knock yourself out with your flash animations.
You have no idea what you're talking about, and it's ignorance like this that does flash a disservice. You can go "look into html5" all you want, but you have no idea about flash. I'd love to see people do serious interactive charting with some other web-based technology, or any other data-intensive app. I could care less about stupid worthless animations, but people use flash for serious things and it's amateurs like yourself that ruin it for the professionals.
So your trying to say my opinion on flash is uneducated...
I was a flash developer from the beginning (i forget the year 1994ish), and a director dev before that. Now I write osx software. I would say I'm clued up in the relevant technologies to have an opinion.
But Windows Mobile Phones CAN'T run Flash without a hitch. It's slow and resource hungry there too. Watch a flash stream and tell me how long your battery takes to drain. Yeah right...
Jobs' isn't making anything up. You just said above that Flash and OS X have issues... then contradict yourself below... you are trolling and this is flame bait. And I know you are full of it because no one WANTS more Flash on the net. People want videos and interactive content, whether that's Flash or not is outside the fact.
The bottom line is it took Apple to make all the shortcomings of Flash public knowledge. Adobe knew they had a dead horse long ago. And rather than come up with a new system, they rode their market share and enjoyed the revenue. But technology changes fast and they pretty much got caught with their pants around their ankles. It happens to everyone; just a byproduct of being a massive corporation. It'll happen to Apple one day too...
First of all, I'm looking at an app right now called uConvert on my TP2. It runs flawlessly and needed Flash Lite 3.1 to run. Wanna keep talking about stuff you don't know about?
Secondly, don't spout off telling someone they're a troll based on little to nothing. I'm getting pretty fucking sick of being called a troll because I voice an opinion that's outside of this hive-mind mentality around here.
Now on to the whole blame game. Guess what, IT'S APPLE'S FAULT. To everyone below me, they really have drank the koolaid on this one lol.
The reason Flash doesn't work as well in OSX as it does in Windows has NOTHING TO DO with Adobe dropping the ball. Why would Adobe abandon osx when almost everyone at Adobe uses a Mac? The problem is Apple doesn't cooperate with Adobe as well as Microsoft does. Don't believe me? I can find you a quote right from Steve Jobs saying the thing he admires most of Microsoft is their ability to work well with others. It's a commonly known fact, and it stems from Apple's wanting to control as much as they can.
Seriously, listen to yourself. Adobe, the maker of photoshop, one of the most commonly used image editing programs, extremely popular in OSX, is suddenly going to say "fuck it" when it comes to flash on OSX? WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT?
So yes, if Apple invested more time in at least cooperating with Adobe, you all wouldn't have any flash problems and it would run as well as it does in Windows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstrosity
Please educate yourself before forming an opinion next time.
That's really the pot calling the kettle black LOL. BTW, did this post have a purpose other than to insult me and call me stupid? Nope? Hey there !...
Quote:
Originally Posted by iBill
Once again with the meme that it's Apple's responsibility to fix Adobe's software.
Nope, just cooperate a little and allow Adobe to make a great product for OSX users
Really, is it good business strategy for Adobe to just say screw it when it comes to osx? Again, what sense does that make?
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
if you believe that then you don't understand what the problem is.
Because the problem isn't OSX, it's the way that Flash for Mac was written. Adobe hasn't hidden that they took the Flash for Windows and changed perhaps 5 lines to make it work on Mac and never optimized it to work right. And this was in like 2005 and they haven't bothered to do any major fixes since then. Apple has been forced to create band aid measures to keep this hastily and poorly written code from killing browsers, freezing computers etc because Adobe won't fix the software. Their reply has been "it works great on Windows and the two versions of the code are 99.9% the same, so we don't understand how Macs could be having any problems".
Yeah, again, the difference between the Windows version and OSX version was Microsoft cooperated with Adobe while Apple, in their infinite wisdom, didn't.
What's more probable here: Adobe, who writes for osx creative suite, inDesign, illustrator, photoshop, goLive, acrobat, after effects, inCopy just suddenly decided osx wasn't important enough to write flash for
OR
Apple doesn?t cooperate with Adobe in making the Flash Player run better on OSX.
I don't 'hate' flash as much as some other folks seem to, but it truly is a resource hog on any platform - more so on MacOS X, but still a hog anywhere.
Flash has been abused by the advertising industry, but so will the next technology. The reason I like the idea of HTML 5 is simply the nature of open standards. Develop anything (video, animation, etc.) you want in whatever program you want to use, save it as a H.264 video file, and deploy. Easy. Works everywhere. Interactivity? Javascript.
Yes, there are probably a few holes where HTML 5, Javascript & H.264 will fall short... so, find the holes and develop a plug-in to patch them. Adobe doesn't have to drop Flash. Maybe Adobe could have their Flash tools generate standards based HTML 5 code instead of proprietary Flash code. How about that? Then the Flash plug-in could be rewritten to do nothing more than fill in the features that HTML 5, JS, and H.264 don't cover, if there are any.
Have you ever tried to write more than button rollovers with javascript? It's pretty much a nightmare. Jquery brings us closer, but it's still incredibly far off from where flash is today. Maybe the equivalent would be Flash version 5. There's also no vector action happening in jquery, ultimately resulting in far larger bandwidth usage. Exporting as html5 is a pipedream, especially since IE has no html5 support. It's an interesting idea, but a dream.
At this moment, there is simply no replacement for flash for serious interactivity and data presentation.
It doesn't sound like the readers of their publication are going to miss the Flash content much. If it catches on Conde Nast will find a way.
By the way, Conde Nast-- if you port away from Flash you won't have "two baselines to support"... you'll have one. HTML5.
Too bad HTML5 can't do even 1% of what can be done with Flash. As soon as whatever eventually does do what Flash can do, we will all be happy to embrace it. Until then you will need to code two versions of everything, that is if you want real interactive multimedia. Of course if you just want the lowest common denominator then HTML/CSS/JS works, sort of. But who is really ever satisfied with the lowest common denominator?
Javascript is good and all, but if you don't have an intuitive development environment to work in it makes it really difficult to be productive. Someone needs to deliver the authoring software for that platform before it will become as ubiquitous as Flash.
By the way I have this nice tip for dealing with Click2Flash blocks.
Put your Flash in a div with a background image of the poster-image for your Flash. That way even though the Flash is blocked the user can see what the still image looks like. This serves two purposes. One, they might like what they see and click on it, and two, it makes the page look artistically balanced instead of an ugly gray box.
Too bad HTML5 can't do even 1% of what can be done with Flash. As soon as whatever eventually does do what Flash can do, we will all be happy to embrace it. Until then you will need to code two versions of everything, that is if you want real interactive multimedia. Of course if you just want the lowest common denominator then HTML/CSS/JS works, sort of. But who is really ever satisfied with the lowest common denominator?
Javascript is good and all, but if you don't have an intuitive development environment to work in it makes it really difficult to be productive. Someone needs to deliver the authoring software for that platform before it will become as ubiquitous as Flash.
Totally agree. It's not that I'm married to Flash. I could care less what the tools are as long as there's a decent IDE and API. I would flat out love if html 5 were ready to roll today and replace most of what flash can do. But the fact is that it's not. People need to drop the apple kool aid (of which I also often drink) on this. Most of the anti-flash people clearly have no idea what they're talking about.
Jquery brings us closer, but it's still incredibly far off from where flash is today.
The problem as I see it with the JS libraries such as jQuery, Dojo, Prototype, etc. is that they all try to simplify the coding process by just substituting their own function calls for the actual JS functions behind the scenes.
For a sudo code example: ("myObj").animate("fast") ;
instead of 25 lines of real JS with a for loop and a setTimeOut function, you get a dumbed down version that you don't even understand how it works, don't know where it lives in the 100s of include files, and most of all you can't customize it beyond "Slow or Fast". And on top of that it causes conflicts with the other JS libraries and has virtually no error reporting.
Go view the source of Google's home page and tell us if you understand even one little piece of that code. That's open standards for you.
That's really the pot calling the kettle black LOL. BTW, did this post have a purpose other than to insult me and call me stupid? Nope? Hey there
I'm sorry, but what you said was just nonsense. I'm not sure why people have to blame Apple at every given opportunity. It is NOT apples fault that flash is buggy, and I'm fairly sure you know this.
I'm sorry, but what you said was just nonsense. I'm not sure why people have to blame Apple at every given opportunity. It is NOT apples fault that flash is buggy, and I'm fairly sure you know this.
No, what I said isn't nonsense, and what you said was just insulting, and completely baseless. You really think I'm just pulling this stuff out of thin air to be argumentative?
Let me ask you: If Apple didn't cooperate with Adobe in making the Flash Player run better on OSX, who's fault is it that flash is buggy? You guys can sit here and bash Adobe all you want, but what if you're wrong? What if Adobe tried to work with Apple to get Flash to work correctly but Apple very characteristically snubbed them? Suddenly Flash is outdated garbage that everyone should drop!?
I can answer the above scenario: If you were all shown beyond a doubt that you were wrong, nothing would change. Apple wouldn't listen to you pleading for them to do what they need to do to give Flash a fighting chance, and instead they would tell you html5 is better and you would convince yourselves everything Apple tells you is right, because what else can you do? Get mad at Apple? Hell to the no! It's your beloved overlord Apple
edit:
And BTW, I am more than willing to accept that the answer lies in the middle, where Apple didn't give the level of cooperation Adobe needed, so Adobe put less effort into Flash for osx as sort of a punishment to Apple. If this is true, however, Adobe gave Apple all the more reason to convince people Flash is horrible.
Comments
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
there was no code involved, and i told them as much. there were pissed at me. there was nothing i could do. i went on all the forums to find out if there was anything i was doing wrong. turns out adobe simply put out a crappy product and the fault was in their own technology.
i'm already looking to html5. knock yourself out with your flash animations.
The fact is, if Apple invested some time and money, they could sort out the issues osx has with flash, and even get it working fine on iphone os. Hell, if my windows mobile phone can run flash apps without a hitch, the iphone definitely can.
Once again with the meme that it's Apple's responsibility to fix Adobe's software.
Anyone who develops a Flash-only website is just being lazy, and the stakeholders that pay their salaries should know just how lazy they are...
Adobe, infecting the world with lazy.
well joe consumer, a few months ago, i just created a very short flash movie for a client, using flash's motion editor. i exported to both flash 9 and flash 10 players.
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
there was no code involved, and i told them as much. there were pissed at me. there was nothing i could do. i went on all the forums to find out if there was anything i was doing wrong. turns out adobe simply put out a crappy product and the fault was in their own technology.
i'm already looking to html5. knock yourself out with your flash animations.
You have no idea what your talking about at all. Most of what you are saying makes no sense in relationship to any kind of coherent HTML 5 vs Flash argument.
here are two reasons why:
a few months ago, i just created a very short flash movie for a client, using flash's motion editor.
1. How will you create a movie using HTML5?
The HTML 5 <video> tag is not going to help you create movies, it does not offer an equivalent to the Flash Motion Editor. So "looking into HTML5" isn't going to help you here. IF you would like to actually CREATE animations without Flash you might want to learn Javascript or some kind of composting app like After Effects.
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
2. Did you not test what you created in ALL possible browsers BEFORE sending the project to the client?
If you do ANY kind of web development and aren't testing browsers you have problems. HTML5 isn't going to stop clients from being mad at you.
Flash may have its problems but this isn't the result of them. This is the result of you not doing proper testing and also not understanding what HTML 5 actually does.
I'm not fond of Flash, either, but I really don't like this Apple attitude of "we don't like it, so we're not going to let consumers have any choice in the matter. If you no longer have access to a large percentage of websites, that's not our problem. We know what's best for you, so suck it up." It's the very definition of a closed platform. What if they had the same attitude toward Javascript? Would people be as forgiving about Apple denying us choice about that? Why not just make a warning that says Flash may slow down your iPad and shorten your battery life? FWIW, I keep Safari open without quitting the app for weeks on end and don't have any issues with stability of either the browser or OS X, although I do use Click2Flash to block Flash content most of the time, usually animated ads.
I see it as forward thinking. Just like when they dropped the floppy diskette from their computers and only used CD/DVD drives. Everybody was upset and shocked...for a few months and then moved on with their lives. And when they starting phasing out CRT monitors and replaced them with flat panels. The rest of the industry started to do the same and followed Apples lead.
But you will probably say, that is different because that was hardware and this is software related and not the same thing. You might be right... but it's still forward thinking.
I'm not fond of Flash, either, but I really don't like this Apple attitude of "we don't like it, so we're not going to let consumers have any choice in the matter. If you no longer have access to a large percentage of websites, that's not our problem. We know what's best for you, so suck it up." It's the very definition of a closed platform.
I agree. And if consumers don't like Apple's policy they can vote with their wallets and buy an iPhone, iPad or iPod Touch. Thing is, that very few if any people are doing that. Apple is selling these devices (minus the iPad since it's not out yet) like hot cakes. General consumers don't seem to care that the 'beloved' Flash isn't supported.
Apple has given the public a choice and they are choosing to forego Flash.
Wired is going to be free, right? I mean... Chris Anderson said:
...the trend lines that determine the cost of doing business online all point the same way: to zero.
Free! Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business
Just sayin'
gc
Flash has been abused by the advertising industry, but so will the next technology. The reason I like the idea of HTML 5 is simply the nature of open standards. Develop anything (video, animation, etc.) you want in whatever program you want to use, save it as a H.264 video file, and deploy. Easy. Works everywhere. Interactivity? Javascript.
Yes, there are probably a few holes where HTML 5, Javascript & H.264 will fall short... so, find the holes and develop a plug-in to patch them. Adobe doesn't have to drop Flash. Maybe Adobe could have their Flash tools generate standards based HTML 5 code instead of proprietary Flash code. How about that? Then the Flash plug-in could be rewritten to do nothing more than fill in the features that HTML 5, JS, and H.264 don't cover, if there are any.
I'm a total apple fanboy, but I will not buy the ipad because of the lack of flash.
well joe consumer, a few months ago, i just created a very short flash movie for a client, using flash's motion editor. i exported to both flash 9 and flash 10 players.
after testing, the client comes back to me and tells me to check my coding because the movie isn't playing on all their tested browsers.
there was no code involved, and i told them as much. there were pissed at me. there was nothing i could do. i went on all the forums to find out if there was anything i was doing wrong. turns out adobe simply put out a crappy product and the fault was in their own technology.
i'm already looking to html5. knock yourself out with your flash animations.
You have no idea what you're talking about, and it's ignorance like this that does flash a disservice. You can go "look into html5" all you want, but you have no idea about flash. I'd love to see people do serious interactive charting with some other web-based technology, or any other data-intensive app. I could care less about stupid worthless animations, but people use flash for serious things and it's amateurs like yourself that ruin it for the professionals.
that works both ways
just saying
So your trying to say my opinion on flash is uneducated...
I was a flash developer from the beginning (i forget the year 1994ish), and a director dev before that. Now I write osx software. I would say I'm clued up in the relevant technologies to have an opinion.
Just sayin.
But Windows Mobile Phones CAN'T run Flash without a hitch. It's slow and resource hungry there too. Watch a flash stream and tell me how long your battery takes to drain. Yeah right...
Jobs' isn't making anything up. You just said above that Flash and OS X have issues... then contradict yourself below... you are trolling and this is flame bait. And I know you are full of it because no one WANTS more Flash on the net. People want videos and interactive content, whether that's Flash or not is outside the fact.
The bottom line is it took Apple to make all the shortcomings of Flash public knowledge. Adobe knew they had a dead horse long ago. And rather than come up with a new system, they rode their market share and enjoyed the revenue. But technology changes fast and they pretty much got caught with their pants around their ankles. It happens to everyone; just a byproduct of being a massive corporation. It'll happen to Apple one day too...
First of all, I'm looking at an app right now called uConvert on my TP2. It runs flawlessly and needed Flash Lite 3.1 to run. Wanna keep talking about stuff you don't know about?
Secondly, don't spout off telling someone they're a troll based on little to nothing. I'm getting pretty fucking sick of being called a troll because I voice an opinion that's outside of this hive-mind mentality around here.
Now on to the whole blame game. Guess what, IT'S APPLE'S FAULT. To everyone below me, they really have drank the koolaid on this one lol.
The reason Flash doesn't work as well in OSX as it does in Windows has NOTHING TO DO with Adobe dropping the ball. Why would Adobe abandon osx when almost everyone at Adobe uses a Mac? The problem is Apple doesn't cooperate with Adobe as well as Microsoft does. Don't believe me? I can find you a quote right from Steve Jobs saying the thing he admires most of Microsoft is their ability to work well with others. It's a commonly known fact, and it stems from Apple's wanting to control as much as they can.
Seriously, listen to yourself. Adobe, the maker of photoshop, one of the most commonly used image editing programs, extremely popular in OSX, is suddenly going to say "fuck it" when it comes to flash on OSX? WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT?
So yes, if Apple invested more time in at least cooperating with Adobe, you all wouldn't have any flash problems and it would run as well as it does in Windows.
Please educate yourself before forming an opinion next time.
That's really the pot calling the kettle black LOL. BTW, did this post have a purpose other than to insult me and call me stupid? Nope? Hey there !...
Once again with the meme that it's Apple's responsibility to fix Adobe's software.
Nope, just cooperate a little and allow Adobe to make a great product for OSX users
Really, is it good business strategy for Adobe to just say screw it when it comes to osx? Again, what sense does that make?
if you believe that then you don't understand what the problem is.
Because the problem isn't OSX, it's the way that Flash for Mac was written. Adobe hasn't hidden that they took the Flash for Windows and changed perhaps 5 lines to make it work on Mac and never optimized it to work right. And this was in like 2005 and they haven't bothered to do any major fixes since then. Apple has been forced to create band aid measures to keep this hastily and poorly written code from killing browsers, freezing computers etc because Adobe won't fix the software. Their reply has been "it works great on Windows and the two versions of the code are 99.9% the same, so we don't understand how Macs could be having any problems".
Yeah, again, the difference between the Windows version and OSX version was Microsoft cooperated with Adobe while Apple, in their infinite wisdom, didn't.
What's more probable here: Adobe, who writes for osx creative suite, inDesign, illustrator, photoshop, goLive, acrobat, after effects, inCopy just suddenly decided osx wasn't important enough to write flash for
OR
Apple doesn?t cooperate with Adobe in making the Flash Player run better on OSX.
hmmmmmmmmmmm
I don't 'hate' flash as much as some other folks seem to, but it truly is a resource hog on any platform - more so on MacOS X, but still a hog anywhere.
Flash has been abused by the advertising industry, but so will the next technology. The reason I like the idea of HTML 5 is simply the nature of open standards. Develop anything (video, animation, etc.) you want in whatever program you want to use, save it as a H.264 video file, and deploy. Easy. Works everywhere. Interactivity? Javascript.
Yes, there are probably a few holes where HTML 5, Javascript & H.264 will fall short... so, find the holes and develop a plug-in to patch them. Adobe doesn't have to drop Flash. Maybe Adobe could have their Flash tools generate standards based HTML 5 code instead of proprietary Flash code. How about that? Then the Flash plug-in could be rewritten to do nothing more than fill in the features that HTML 5, JS, and H.264 don't cover, if there are any.
Have you ever tried to write more than button rollovers with javascript? It's pretty much a nightmare. Jquery brings us closer, but it's still incredibly far off from where flash is today. Maybe the equivalent would be Flash version 5. There's also no vector action happening in jquery, ultimately resulting in far larger bandwidth usage. Exporting as html5 is a pipedream, especially since IE has no html5 support. It's an interesting idea, but a dream.
At this moment, there is simply no replacement for flash for serious interactivity and data presentation.
It doesn't sound like the readers of their publication are going to miss the Flash content much. If it catches on Conde Nast will find a way.
By the way, Conde Nast-- if you port away from Flash you won't have "two baselines to support"... you'll have one. HTML5.
Too bad HTML5 can't do even 1% of what can be done with Flash. As soon as whatever eventually does do what Flash can do, we will all be happy to embrace it. Until then you will need to code two versions of everything, that is if you want real interactive multimedia. Of course if you just want the lowest common denominator then HTML/CSS/JS works, sort of. But who is really ever satisfied with the lowest common denominator?
Javascript is good and all, but if you don't have an intuitive development environment to work in it makes it really difficult to be productive. Someone needs to deliver the authoring software for that platform before it will become as ubiquitous as Flash.
By the way I have this nice tip for dealing with Click2Flash blocks.
Put your Flash in a div with a background image of the poster-image for your Flash. That way even though the Flash is blocked the user can see what the still image looks like. This serves two purposes. One, they might like what they see and click on it, and two, it makes the page look artistically balanced instead of an ugly gray box.
<div id="pageImageDiv" style="width:567px; height:296px; background:url(images/poster.jpg); background-repeat:no-repeat;">
<script type="text/javascript">
AC_FL_RunContent( 'codebase' ...
//the rest of your loading script here
Too bad HTML5 can't do even 1% of what can be done with Flash. As soon as whatever eventually does do what Flash can do, we will all be happy to embrace it. Until then you will need to code two versions of everything, that is if you want real interactive multimedia. Of course if you just want the lowest common denominator then HTML/CSS/JS works, sort of. But who is really ever satisfied with the lowest common denominator?
Javascript is good and all, but if you don't have an intuitive development environment to work in it makes it really difficult to be productive. Someone needs to deliver the authoring software for that platform before it will become as ubiquitous as Flash.
Totally agree. It's not that I'm married to Flash. I could care less what the tools are as long as there's a decent IDE and API. I would flat out love if html 5 were ready to roll today and replace most of what flash can do. But the fact is that it's not. People need to drop the apple kool aid (of which I also often drink) on this. Most of the anti-flash people clearly have no idea what they're talking about.
Jquery brings us closer, but it's still incredibly far off from where flash is today.
The problem as I see it with the JS libraries such as jQuery, Dojo, Prototype, etc. is that they all try to simplify the coding process by just substituting their own function calls for the actual JS functions behind the scenes.
For a sudo code example: ("myObj").animate("fast") ;
instead of 25 lines of real JS with a for loop and a setTimeOut function, you get a dumbed down version that you don't even understand how it works, don't know where it lives in the 100s of include files, and most of all you can't customize it beyond "Slow or Fast". And on top of that it causes conflicts with the other JS libraries and has virtually no error reporting.
Go view the source of Google's home page and tell us if you understand even one little piece of that code. That's open standards for you.
That's really the pot calling the kettle black LOL. BTW, did this post have a purpose other than to insult me and call me stupid? Nope? Hey there
I'm sorry, but what you said was just nonsense. I'm not sure why people have to blame Apple at every given opportunity. It is NOT apples fault that flash is buggy, and I'm fairly sure you know this.
I'm sorry, but what you said was just nonsense. I'm not sure why people have to blame Apple at every given opportunity. It is NOT apples fault that flash is buggy, and I'm fairly sure you know this.
No, what I said isn't nonsense, and what you said was just insulting, and completely baseless. You really think I'm just pulling this stuff out of thin air to be argumentative?
Let me ask you: If Apple didn't cooperate with Adobe in making the Flash Player run better on OSX, who's fault is it that flash is buggy? You guys can sit here and bash Adobe all you want, but what if you're wrong? What if Adobe tried to work with Apple to get Flash to work correctly but Apple very characteristically snubbed them? Suddenly Flash is outdated garbage that everyone should drop!?
I can answer the above scenario: If you were all shown beyond a doubt that you were wrong, nothing would change. Apple wouldn't listen to you pleading for them to do what they need to do to give Flash a fighting chance, and instead they would tell you html5 is better and you would convince yourselves everything Apple tells you is right, because what else can you do? Get mad at Apple? Hell to the no! It's your beloved overlord Apple
edit:
And BTW, I am more than willing to accept that the answer lies in the middle, where Apple didn't give the level of cooperation Adobe needed, so Adobe put less effort into Flash for osx as sort of a punishment to Apple. If this is true, however, Adobe gave Apple all the more reason to convince people Flash is horrible.