Having just recently upgraded from 10.3.9 to 10.6.2 seeing the headline to this article reminded me to go and try out the HTML5 beta at YouTube. On my Mini (2.53) the CPUs ran at c.12% and 15% respectively, and when reverting back to the Flash version the same clip ran at c.24% and 26% respectively. So there was a big CPU saving, but there were three differences in Flash's favour. On the HTML5 version the clip did not start until it had all loaded, which would be a nuisance on a big clip. Although there was an expanded size screen available it could not go full-screen, nor did it have the click links on the screen at the end. I don't know if HTML5 will be able to add those capabilities as it develops (would it be possible to go full-screen i.e work outside the browser?) but it does seem to be a case of pros and cons as it stands.
The advantage of HTML5 over Flash is that HTML5 can be moved into any position without having to stream the content.
I prefer the loading of the entire clip over the autoplay of Flash because YouTube runs like a dog here in New Zealand and as such video tends to stutter as it tries to load and play at the same time. So if I have to wait until the video loads in Flash and in HTML5 I'm going to choose HTML5 as the preferred method instead.
I think this aritcle should have mentioned one major issue I have heard regarding HTML5 - the inability to protect copywrited content. That is not a trivial issue.[/QUOTE]How do you mean? By supporting DRM which HTML5 does due to using MP4 which includes MP4 DRM or do you mean by stopping people from downloading the content?
Either way it's trivial to download Flash content using Javascript. Using MP4 DRM you can theoretically just create a cookie that allows customers to view the video but not distribute it unless they know where the cookie is held. Flash video has no real ability to do this.
Let's be honest here, it doesn't really matter if the haters or fanboys of this board agree or not with what developers do. Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites.
And that's why we site visitors hate you developers because you just develop what YOU think people want to see.
I have to use the most horrid web based call centre system I have ever used. It has all this crap that the developers put in there because they only want to show off their development skills. People get brassed off with the site and hate you guys with a vengence.
In many cases two chimpanzees with crayons they've largely eaten could develop something more usable than what you guys force on us.
Developers just don't get interface. I want to read and interact with content and I don't need Flash getting in the way of that.
I have rarely seen anything Flash that makes me think it can't be done in some other way.
and that's why we site visitors hate you developers because you just develop what you think people want to see.
I have to use the most horrid web based call centre system i have ever used. It has all this crap that the developers put in there because they only want to show off their development skills. People get brassed off with the site and hate you guys with a vengence.
In many cases two chimpanzees with crayons they've largely eaten could develop something more usable than what you guys force on us.
Developers just don't get interface. I want to read and interact with content and i don't need flash getting in the way of that.
I have rarely seen anything flash that makes me think it can't be done in some other way.
Actually this game is built using php and javascript. not HTML and CSS. The game itself is probably ALL javascript and XML, so AJAX basically. I not sure this site is using ANY CSS. Again, this just illustrates how little the typical users actually understands development technology. He asked you for an example of a game using HTML and CSS and you showed him one built in Javascript and PHP.
And that's why we site visitors hate you developers because you just develop what YOU think people want to see.
Drivel. That would the same as saying you have never seen a site you actually like. I mean after all "you site goers hate developers because they don't develop things you like" (paraphrasing) .
The truth is you DO actually like some websites, and the developer of that site didn't ask you what you thought either.
Because in the REAL world there are plenty of sites you like and plenty that you don't and many of them are developed by the SAME people. Actually, it would be even more accurate to say that many of them are developed by a team of people with a variety of backgrounds and influences and only a FEW of those people are developers. More often than not the worst cog in the wheel isn't the Information Architect, the Designer or the Developer but the client. Again though, this is all stuff you would have to actually work in the industry to know.
The point here however is this, it's fine to want an open source alternative to video. I do. It would be way less work to just include a video tag and have it do the things I need it todo. Its just that it doesn't. And from an ideological view point its fine to want to do everything you can do with flash and silverlight with some other tool. Its just not an ACTUAL REALITY.
The reason developers don't ask consumers how they would develop something isn't because we are are all mean guys who hate consumers and only want to do cool code. Its because you don't have any idea what actually has to happen behind the scenes.
I'm sorry if you had a bad experience with a particular UI or system at some point and decided developers were out to make it hard for you, it may easily be that in fact the developers you are referring to just weren't any good. Every field has people who are in it that are good and people who suck. Web dev isn't any different. But expecting the development community to consult the consumer about which technology is right for the job is a bit like expecting your doctor to ask your mom what she thinks would be the best medical treatment.
Do you need to pay for that license or can you get it for free?
You can get it for free. He is referring to the possible royalties for H.264 which may or may not ever materialize. Although it is a legitimate concern. HTML5 itself is completely free and super fantastic.
Drivel. That would the same as saying you have never seen a site you actually like. I mean after all "you site goers hate developers because they don't develop things you like" (paraphrasing) .
The truth is you DO actually like some websites, and the developer of that site didn't ask you what you thought either.
Because in the REAL world there are plenty of sites you like and plenty that you don't and many of them are developed by the SAME people. Actually, it would be even more accurate to say that many of them are developed by a team of people with a variety of backgrounds and influences and only a FEW of those people are developers. More often than not the worst cog in the wheel isn't the Information Architect, the Designer or the Developer but the client. Again though, this is all stuff you would have to actually work in the industry to know.
The point here however is this, it's fine to want an open source alternative to video. I do. It would be way less work to just include a video tag and have it do the things I need it todo. Its just that it doesn't. And from an ideological view point its fine to want to do everything you can do with flash and silverlight with some other tool. Its just not an ACTUAL REALITY.
The reason developers don't ask consumers how they would develop something isn't because we are are all mean guys who hate consumers and only want to do cool code. Its because you don't have any idea what actually has to happen behind the scenes.
I'm sorry if you had a bad experience with a particular UI or system at some point and decided developers were out to make it hard for you, it may easily be that in fact the developers you are referring to just weren't any good. Every field has people who are in it that are good and people who suck. Web dev isn't any different. But expecting the development community to consult the consumer about which technology is right for the job is a bit like expecting your doctor to ask your mom what she thinks would be the best medical treatment.
There's many sites I HAVE to use not want to use and case in point is the call system we use at work. I hate everything about it. It's slow, poorly designed, has crap that doesn't need to be there and has 100% zero thought put into it.
Not every site I want to use is designed how I like but I visit them FOR THE CONTENT not the design.
So the only drivel is your inane ability to listen to your site visitors. It's developers like you the are ruining the web and inevitably people will leave when they find the same content in a better place. LISTEN TO YOUR VISITORS and not just develop for the sake of developing.
I do know what happens behind the scenes and I do know that not everything that supposedly needs Flash actually needs Flash so don't try running that crap past me.
I do know that having an application that computes EVERY field you do is NOT a great interface and I do know that it is NOT needed at all.
Ever been to the Microsoft site to try and get information? Bad development because the content is not easy to find. Ever been to HP? Same deal. I need to access these sites for my job and it's not just these sites either. There are numerous sites that make no sense what so ever and become nothing more than developers trying to show off. REAL BAD idea.
There's many sites I HAVE to use not want to use and case in point is the call system we use at work. I hate everything about it. It's slow, poorly designed, has crap that doesn't need to be there and has 100% zero thought put into it.
Not every site I want to use is designed how I like but I visit them FOR THE CONTENT not the design.
So the only drivel is your inane ability to listen to your site visitors. It's developers like you the are ruining the web and inevitably people will leave when they find the same content in a better place. LISTEN TO YOUR VISITORS and not just develop for the sake of developing.
I do know what happens behind the scenes and I do know that not everything that supposedly needs Flash actually needs Flash so don't try running that crap past me.
I do know that having an application that computes EVERY field you do is NOT a great interface and I do know that it is NOT needed at all.
Ever been to the Microsoft site to try and get information? Bad development because the content is not easy to find. Ever been to HP? Same deal. I need to access these sites for my job and it's not just these sites either. There are numerous sites that make no sense what so ever and become nothing more than developers trying to show off. REAL BAD idea.
You have decided that our debate is about me having the belief that Flash is always needed when its used.
"I do know that not everything that supposedly needs Flash actually needs Flash so don't try running that crap past me."
Which is in fact something I never said. Nor is it something I believe. I was imply responding to your quote that "users like you hate developers like me because we do what we want and not what users want"(paraphrasing) which is just a blanket statement based on some bad experience you had with a particular product. And in response to THAT point I will simply reiterate the one line I think you must have missed.
"The truth is you DO actually like some websites, and the developer of that site didn't ask you what you thought either."
I will also add that you not only like some sites for their content but you probably also like some sites for the design they and technology they implement. My point being that unless you hate every site on the web your statement of "users hate developers because they do whatever they want" is wrong, because in fact many users love what developers come up with and you are probably one of them.
You are confusing the idea that because you have had a bad experience with some particular site or design that developers need you to give input in order to make any good site. When in fact they don't. Even the idea that what sites look like or how they are built is actually up to only the developer is a fallacy itself.
But again, it doesn't matter. Developers aren't reading AI and thinking OMG Flash is dead, they actually realize that its a WAY WAY more complicated issue than that and we talk about it all the time in users groups and developer centric forums etc.
I read appleinsider because I buy, use and love apple products and when I see articles that grossly oversimplify what is actually happening I chime in. AI has oversimplified this issue in the same way that your saying "developers do whatever they want to do" is a gross oversimplification based on a bad experience you had.
Thats all im going to say about that, because I'm not really interested in going back and forth on your bad experience with Microsoft tools or developers or whatever and the belief that as a result developers suck. You don't actually mean enough to me for me to bother and I'm sure its vice -versa.
I read appleinsider because I buy, use and love apple products and when I see articles that grossly oversimplify what is actually happening I chime in. ...
I hope you realize that the reason why you love Apple products, is because SJ and Jonny Ives has Apple's devs by the "Carachas", don't you?
Usability. Is. Priority. Number. 1.
Something that many devs don't understand nor care about.
You stated it proudly yourself: "...we don't care what users think or want". You and your buddies are cannon-fodder ad material, and the reason Apple is ever more successful.
You just don't get it!
BTW: still waiting on those 5 websites that absolutely need Flash, apart from games and video. However until then, here's a critique on 2 site links in this post.
The artwork is fantastic(!!!).... but tell us, why does the navigation to info about the site, have to be integrated in Flash? That nav bar at the bottom could just as easily be CSS and JS. Also, if it was, with possibly some screen shots in addition to the wallpapers, if I was browsing on a mobile device that doesn't have Flash, I could at least know what the site is about, so that I could come back to it later on my Mac. Again, I can't even read the FAQ because I can't zoom the text!
Now look at that! NO FLASH! Scalable so you can read it on hi-density monitors and devices, and with JS (mootools: great stuff!)) animations and transitions. Who'd ever thought it was possible???! (sarcasm)
Just a suggestion alkrantz, but you might want to broaden your mind and toolbox in the near future. Maybe you could care less what us users want, need, or value in a website.... but some how I think your clients just might care more when they see their analytics take a nose-dive.
Why would any developer or website, steadfastly wed itself "Til Death Do Us Part" with Flash, and eliminate a rather sizable and prosperous demographic like the Apple user base?
That base is only going to get much larger with the iPad, and will also introduce a whole new demographic and consumer to the mix: those that have never owned a computer before (elderly, tech-noobs, children).
As a developer, you're getting the chance of a life-time to be in on the ground-floor of a new business opportunity. Marketing products to the "untouched but touch-enabled", well-off consumer. That consumer can't see anything made with Flash, although there are other alternatives to get to that consumer... so why argue the point or the platform (Flash vs. HTML5 and standards)?
Solution: Developers, get your head wrapped around the new tech that those new consumers can see, and offer that to your respective clients as a reason why they should choose you for the job rather than the wiz-bang Flashy crowd. Why build your own wall, when the market is throwing 'em up daily for you?
Instead of bitchin' and moanin' about Apple not supporting Flash, take the opportunity that Apple has thrown your way to practically print money and have jobs coming out of your ears, by converting and "upgrading" your client's websites to be standards compatible.
Google is your friend on this one... so get the reports, studies and analytics to support your sales proposition.
Because Apple matters. Apple consumers matter more. You can take that to the bank, just as Apple has. Can't sneeze at 40bil and counting.
I think i'll play some Mafia Wars (a Facebook game) on my iPhone...
...OMG! I'm circumventing the App store.
Nothing happened, the world didn't end.
Remember, developers get 70% of App store revenue, the SDK is free, so Adobe wants to charge developers $1800 (RRP CS4) to produce "free" content?
SHOW ME THE MONEY.
btw what does Intel have to do with ARM based chips in the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad plus almost every smartphone currently made?
So is this a combined effort to destroy ARM?
How's Gnash coming along, how much is Adobe contributing to it's development?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmerryhaus
Finally a voice of reason. Thanks for that well written, level-headed response.
The real reason Apple doesn't want Flash on the iPhone is it would let developers circumvent the App Store. Adobe's CEO said this same thing last week.
A lot of people really fail to understand that "Flash != Video" and Flash provides developers with a lot of capabilities like VOIP, Chat, 2D vector graphics, print-quality fonts, dynamic digital rights that are out of scope for HTML5 and oh-yeah: it provides cross-platform, cross-device, cross-OS reach which is getting more and more important instead of less. Flash 10.1 optimized for mobile, will be on 19 of 20 smartphones by the end of the year.
So - you could interpret all of this as Apple is trying, Microsoft-style, to lock developers inside a walled-garden so they can extract revenue from their activities.
Ie., it is not a technical issue and it really isn't about Flash being a CPU hog on Mac. (prediction: Flash player 10.1 will run as well on Mac as it does on the PC.)
Take a look at "The Open Screen Project" -- Consortium of TV, mobile devices and hardware providers are building and optimizing their systems for Flash. E.g., Intel announcing SoC platforms that are optimized for Flash and targeting mobile devices and TVs. One of the videos on the site shows Flash-based rich internet applications running on multiple mobile devices.
Adobe actually puts a lot of effort into international standards (PDF is now ISO 32000, ActionScript and ECMA javascript are on a convergence path...) and they have a lot of open source projects underway. Sure companies do exist to make money, but they also get started by developers who are passionate about what they do and the value they provide to their customers. There's a tradeoff between developing a standard by a committee process vs building an innovative proprietary system that you control and can adjust as needed to react to a changing landscape. When a technology is still undergoing rapid change/evolution it makes more sense to keep it proprietary. Once it has matured it makes sense to offer it up to the standardization process.
So, yes it's a war, but no it's not anywhere near a conclusion. It's really just the opening sprint of what's likely to be a marathon. The mobile web is in its infancy and networked TVs are still incubuating. Flash isn't going away anytime soon.
With no Flash because we don't need stinking Flash there ARE alternatives despite the explosion of doom and gloom merchants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkrantz
Actually this game is built using php and javascript. not HTML and CSS. The game itself is probably ALL javascript and XML, so AJAX basically. I not sure this site is using ANY CSS. Again, this just illustrates how little the typical users actually understands development technology. He asked you for an example of a game using HTML and CSS and you showed him one built in Javascript and PHP.
I hope you realize that the reason why you love Apple products, is because SJ and Jonny Ives has Apple's devs by the "Carachas", don't you?
Usability. Is. Priority. Number. 1.
Something that many devs don't understand nor care about.
You stated it proudly yourself: "...we don't care what users think or want". You and your buddies are cannon-fodder ad material, and the reason Apple is ever more successful.
You just don't get it!
BTW: still waiting on those 5 websites that absolutely need Flash, apart from games and video. However until then, here's a critique on 2 site links in this post.
The artwork is fantastic(!!!).... but tell us, why does the navigation to info about the site, have to be integrated in Flash? That nav bar at the bottom could just as easily be CSS and JS. Also, if it was, with possibly some screen shots in addition to the wallpapers, if I was browsing on a mobile device that doesn't have Flash, I could at least know what the site is about, so that I could come back to it later on my Mac. Again, I can't even read the FAQ because I can't zoom the text!
Now look at that! NO FLASH! Scalable so you can read it on hi-density monitors and devices, and with JS (mootools: great stuff!)) animations and transitions. Who'd ever thought it was possible???! (sarcasm)
Just a suggestion alkrantz, but you might want to broaden your mind and toolbox in the near future. Maybe you could care less what us users want, need, or value in a website.... but some how I think your clients just might care more when they see their analytics take a nose-dive.
Just to set a coupe things straight:
I Actually said:
"Let's be honest here, it doesn't really matter if the haters or fanboys of this board agree or not with what developers do. Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites."
NOT
"...we don't care what users think or want".
They are actually different, and do you know why? Because the users of AI forums are not actually the end all be all of web users. To make it easier for you to understand, what I meant by that comment was, developers have to listen consider their clients and the technology needs of the projects. Not AI users. So you are taking that out of context.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
I hope you realize that the reason why you love Apple products, is because SJ and Jonny Ives has Apple's devs by the "Carachas", don't you?
How does that even make sense at all? I just like Apple products because they are good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc
Just a suggestion alkrantz, but you might want to broaden your mind and toolbox in the near future. Maybe you could care less what us users want, need, or value in a website.... but some how I think your clients just might care more when they see their analytics take a nose-dive.
Obviously you haven't actually read my posts. You have just read enough to think you don't agree and gotten angry. You have no idea what tools I actually use or even what I actually do. The truth is I use all sorts of development tools including PHP and JS which would be the ACTUAL competitors to Flash if this were an informed discussion. Flash is only a part of the tools I use, I also implement analytics all the time and I am well aware of what clients are looking for because I deal with them daily.
In the end though, it doesn't matter, I have a job and I cant spend all day on these boards arguing why the HTML5 <video> tag isn't going to kill Flash to a group of people who just want to hear that it is. Because you are in love with Apple, hate Adobe and Microsoft and want to see yourselves as the good guys.
The truth is I love Apple, Adobe and MS. I think all do great stuff and should do some stuff differently.
I was going to post you what I believe are useful examples of flash as you asked, but lets be honest, it doesn't matter what I post because in the end I think you believe there is no use for Flash. Just as you believe everything Flash does can be accomplished with HTML 5. To that I say...believe what you want to. It isn't true, in fact a lot of what AI writes isn't true, and I don't really care if you are misinformed anymore because your exhausting to deal with and I have a real life outside of this forum.
"Let's be honest here, it doesn't really matter if the haters or fanboys of this board agree or not with what developers do. Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites."
NOT
"...we don't care what users think or want".
My sincere apologies for paraphrasing and being too lazy to direct quote you. I get your point: you don't care what the people on AI want or think. However, you dug your hole separately from that phrase with the next sentence, quote: "Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites." So this is just a personal rant about the AI users? May I ask why we should give a flyin' F*** what you think about us?
To tell ya the truth, you can develop as many Flash sites as your heart desires... we don't care... and we won't be visiting. You lost us as an audience at YOUR CHOOSING! Good for you. It just so happens, that we as a demographic might have the monetary means to make your efforts financially feasible. But hey? Ya wanna do it for fun or to prove a point that all AI posters are idiots, we'll gladly keep our pocketbooks closed when it comes to your client's websites. Couldn't be simpler. Some other developer will take yours/your client's websites place.
Quote:
They are actually different, and do you know why? Because the users of AI forums are not actually the end all be all of web users. To make it easier for you to understand, what I meant by that comment was, developers have to listen consider their clients and the technology needs of the projects. Not AI users. So you are taking that out of context.
I don't think this is the only website that has Apple users commenting about their "distaste" for Flash. Why the hate here for AI posters? Are you repeating this rant at 9to5, Macworld, MacNN, MacFixIt, et al?
Quote:
How does that even make sense at all? I just like Apple products because they are good.
I was trying to point out the reason why you like them and why they are good.
Apple's and SJ's philosophy, is that you have to create an experience for the user that takes the tech side out of the equation and makes tech transparent to the user. Within this topic's argument and with Apple products, Flash does not do that. BTW: there are problems on the Windows side as well with Flash. Not as many, but the fact that Flash is not yet 64-bit, causing Win7 users to use a 32-bit browser, has opened the door to a less secure environment then it should be.
Quote:
Obviously you haven't actually read my posts. You have just read enough to think you don't agree and gotten angry. You have no idea what tools I actually use or even what I actually do. The truth is I use all sorts of development tools including PHP and JS which would be the ACTUAL competitors to Flash if this were an informed discussion. Flash is only a part of the tools I use, I also implement analytics all the time and I am well aware of what clients are looking for because I deal with them daily.
I've read your posts word for word. No, I am not angry. Yes, PHP and JS are competitors to Flash, as well as other assorted frameworks. Every developer I know has a huge toolbox. Part of the reason I'll stick to the design end. But again... with the knowledge of what can be done... and should be done or accomplished by the devs looking into the future. Not yesterday's or today's analytics... but tomorrow's so that my clients can get a reasonable ROI on a project, from today going forward.
Quote:
In the end though, it doesn't matter, I have a job and I cant spend all day on these boards arguing why the HTML5 <video> tag isn't going to kill Flash to a group of people who just want to hear that it is. Because you are in love with Apple, hate Adobe and Microsoft and want to see yourselves as the good guys.
Nice to hear you're working. I've owned my own business for some 30 years. On a Mac since Summer of '84 and using version 1 of almost every design program every created, including all of Adobe's and Macromedia's (Altsys). Throw in a handful of years with WinNT, XP, and 2000... plus developing internet awareness and design since 1994 (the Mosaic and 14.4 modem years). At every step, I've been successful, as well have my clients, by being aware of what's coming next, and keeping up with advances in tech. Tech is admittedly my hobby... design and image consulting is my business.
Quote:
The truth is I love Apple, Adobe and MS. I think all do great stuff and should do some stuff differently.
I'm having some serious doubt's lately regarding Adobe... and MS lost me as a fan completely some 5 years ago, after becoming seriously frustrated with my "tech-hobby" creating far too many lost days of frustration to cleaning registries, defragging, and "normal" Windows maintenance tasks. Time is money... as I'm sure you would agree
Quote:
I was going to post you what I believe are useful examples of flash as you asked, but lets be honest, it doesn't matter what I post because in the end I think you believe there is no use for Flash. Just as you believe everything Flash does can be accomplished with HTML 5. To that I say...believe what you want to. It isn't true, in fact a lot of what AI writes isn't true, and I don't really care if you are misinformed anymore because your exhausting to deal with and I have a real life outside of this forum.
Off to work..
Woah! Nice back-out there!
OK....so when ya get back from work, please (with a cherry on top?)...show us just 1 site then that needs Flash (other than a game or video). Just 1 (one). If ya can't do that much, I would say we here at AI are correct that Flash is not needed... and maybe I should reconsider my openess towards Flash for "some" things (at the present at least), and wish it to die as well.
I don't HATE Flash. I DO hate when any tech and code is not used efficiently, and/or for a specific feature that will add value to the experience. IF there's a way to make anything better, faster, and reach more people with less hassle... that's my path.
HTML5..? Who cares? If it's "Sheng Fui 13"* and it works across platforms and devices... use it! (*intentional misspelling)
Comments
Having just recently upgraded from 10.3.9 to 10.6.2 seeing the headline to this article reminded me to go and try out the HTML5 beta at YouTube. On my Mini (2.53) the CPUs ran at c.12% and 15% respectively, and when reverting back to the Flash version the same clip ran at c.24% and 26% respectively. So there was a big CPU saving, but there were three differences in Flash's favour. On the HTML5 version the clip did not start until it had all loaded, which would be a nuisance on a big clip. Although there was an expanded size screen available it could not go full-screen, nor did it have the click links on the screen at the end. I don't know if HTML5 will be able to add those capabilities as it develops (would it be possible to go full-screen i.e work outside the browser?) but it does seem to be a case of pros and cons as it stands.
http://jilion.com/sublime/video
The advantage of HTML5 over Flash is that HTML5 can be moved into any position without having to stream the content.
I prefer the loading of the entire clip over the autoplay of Flash because YouTube runs like a dog here in New Zealand and as such video tends to stutter as it tries to load and play at the same time. So if I have to wait until the video loads in Flash and in HTML5 I'm going to choose HTML5 as the preferred method instead.
I'm pretty sure that's on the list.
I think this aritcle should have mentioned one major issue I have heard regarding HTML5 - the inability to protect copywrited content. That is not a trivial issue.[/QUOTE]How do you mean? By supporting DRM which HTML5 does due to using MP4 which includes MP4 DRM or do you mean by stopping people from downloading the content?
Either way it's trivial to download Flash content using Javascript. Using MP4 DRM you can theoretically just create a cookie that allows customers to view the video but not distribute it unless they know where the cookie is held. Flash video has no real ability to do this.
Don't you know, you can't build a website using HTML5 unless you license it. I think you can get on at your local courthouse.
Do you need to pay for that license or can you get it for free?
Let's be honest here, it doesn't really matter if the haters or fanboys of this board agree or not with what developers do. Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites.
And that's why we site visitors hate you developers because you just develop what YOU think people want to see.
I have to use the most horrid web based call centre system I have ever used. It has all this crap that the developers put in there because they only want to show off their development skills. People get brassed off with the site and hate you guys with a vengence.
In many cases two chimpanzees with crayons they've largely eaten could develop something more usable than what you guys force on us.
Developers just don't get interface. I want to read and interact with content and I don't need Flash getting in the way of that.
I have rarely seen anything Flash that makes me think it can't be done in some other way.
and that's why we site visitors hate you developers because you just develop what you think people want to see.
I have to use the most horrid web based call centre system i have ever used. It has all this crap that the developers put in there because they only want to show off their development skills. People get brassed off with the site and hate you guys with a vengence.
In many cases two chimpanzees with crayons they've largely eaten could develop something more usable than what you guys force on us.
Developers just don't get interface. I want to read and interact with content and i don't need flash getting in the way of that.
I have rarely seen anything flash that makes me think it can't be done in some other way.
this↑
Okay flash haters, how do you make flash style games in HTML5/CSS? Show me a demo, impress me.
http://www.elizium.nu/scripts/lemmings/
It's so faithful Sony took them to court.
http://www.elizium.nu/scripts/lemmings/
It's so faithful Sony took them to court.
Actually this game is built using php and javascript. not HTML and CSS. The game itself is probably ALL javascript and XML, so AJAX basically. I not sure this site is using ANY CSS. Again, this just illustrates how little the typical users actually understands development technology. He asked you for an example of a game using HTML and CSS and you showed him one built in Javascript and PHP.
And that's why we site visitors hate you developers because you just develop what YOU think people want to see.
Drivel. That would the same as saying you have never seen a site you actually like. I mean after all "you site goers hate developers because they don't develop things you like" (paraphrasing) .
The truth is you DO actually like some websites, and the developer of that site didn't ask you what you thought either.
Because in the REAL world there are plenty of sites you like and plenty that you don't and many of them are developed by the SAME people. Actually, it would be even more accurate to say that many of them are developed by a team of people with a variety of backgrounds and influences and only a FEW of those people are developers. More often than not the worst cog in the wheel isn't the Information Architect, the Designer or the Developer but the client. Again though, this is all stuff you would have to actually work in the industry to know.
The point here however is this, it's fine to want an open source alternative to video. I do. It would be way less work to just include a video tag and have it do the things I need it todo. Its just that it doesn't. And from an ideological view point its fine to want to do everything you can do with flash and silverlight with some other tool. Its just not an ACTUAL REALITY.
The reason developers don't ask consumers how they would develop something isn't because we are are all mean guys who hate consumers and only want to do cool code. Its because you don't have any idea what actually has to happen behind the scenes.
I'm sorry if you had a bad experience with a particular UI or system at some point and decided developers were out to make it hard for you, it may easily be that in fact the developers you are referring to just weren't any good. Every field has people who are in it that are good and people who suck. Web dev isn't any different. But expecting the development community to consult the consumer about which technology is right for the job is a bit like expecting your doctor to ask your mom what she thinks would be the best medical treatment.
Do you need to pay for that license or can you get it for free?
You can get it for free. He is referring to the possible royalties for H.264 which may or may not ever materialize. Although it is a legitimate concern. HTML5 itself is completely free and super fantastic.
Drivel. That would the same as saying you have never seen a site you actually like. I mean after all "you site goers hate developers because they don't develop things you like" (paraphrasing) .
The truth is you DO actually like some websites, and the developer of that site didn't ask you what you thought either.
Because in the REAL world there are plenty of sites you like and plenty that you don't and many of them are developed by the SAME people. Actually, it would be even more accurate to say that many of them are developed by a team of people with a variety of backgrounds and influences and only a FEW of those people are developers. More often than not the worst cog in the wheel isn't the Information Architect, the Designer or the Developer but the client. Again though, this is all stuff you would have to actually work in the industry to know.
The point here however is this, it's fine to want an open source alternative to video. I do. It would be way less work to just include a video tag and have it do the things I need it todo. Its just that it doesn't. And from an ideological view point its fine to want to do everything you can do with flash and silverlight with some other tool. Its just not an ACTUAL REALITY.
The reason developers don't ask consumers how they would develop something isn't because we are are all mean guys who hate consumers and only want to do cool code. Its because you don't have any idea what actually has to happen behind the scenes.
I'm sorry if you had a bad experience with a particular UI or system at some point and decided developers were out to make it hard for you, it may easily be that in fact the developers you are referring to just weren't any good. Every field has people who are in it that are good and people who suck. Web dev isn't any different. But expecting the development community to consult the consumer about which technology is right for the job is a bit like expecting your doctor to ask your mom what she thinks would be the best medical treatment.
There's many sites I HAVE to use not want to use and case in point is the call system we use at work. I hate everything about it. It's slow, poorly designed, has crap that doesn't need to be there and has 100% zero thought put into it.
Not every site I want to use is designed how I like but I visit them FOR THE CONTENT not the design.
So the only drivel is your inane ability to listen to your site visitors. It's developers like you the are ruining the web and inevitably people will leave when they find the same content in a better place. LISTEN TO YOUR VISITORS and not just develop for the sake of developing.
I do know what happens behind the scenes and I do know that not everything that supposedly needs Flash actually needs Flash so don't try running that crap past me.
I do know that having an application that computes EVERY field you do is NOT a great interface and I do know that it is NOT needed at all.
Ever been to the Microsoft site to try and get information? Bad development because the content is not easy to find. Ever been to HP? Same deal. I need to access these sites for my job and it's not just these sites either. There are numerous sites that make no sense what so ever and become nothing more than developers trying to show off. REAL BAD idea.
There's many sites I HAVE to use not want to use and case in point is the call system we use at work. I hate everything about it. It's slow, poorly designed, has crap that doesn't need to be there and has 100% zero thought put into it.
Not every site I want to use is designed how I like but I visit them FOR THE CONTENT not the design.
So the only drivel is your inane ability to listen to your site visitors. It's developers like you the are ruining the web and inevitably people will leave when they find the same content in a better place. LISTEN TO YOUR VISITORS and not just develop for the sake of developing.
I do know what happens behind the scenes and I do know that not everything that supposedly needs Flash actually needs Flash so don't try running that crap past me.
I do know that having an application that computes EVERY field you do is NOT a great interface and I do know that it is NOT needed at all.
Ever been to the Microsoft site to try and get information? Bad development because the content is not easy to find. Ever been to HP? Same deal. I need to access these sites for my job and it's not just these sites either. There are numerous sites that make no sense what so ever and become nothing more than developers trying to show off. REAL BAD idea.
You have decided that our debate is about me having the belief that Flash is always needed when its used.
"I do know that not everything that supposedly needs Flash actually needs Flash so don't try running that crap past me."
Which is in fact something I never said. Nor is it something I believe. I was imply responding to your quote that "users like you hate developers like me because we do what we want and not what users want"(paraphrasing) which is just a blanket statement based on some bad experience you had with a particular product. And in response to THAT point I will simply reiterate the one line I think you must have missed.
"The truth is you DO actually like some websites, and the developer of that site didn't ask you what you thought either."
I will also add that you not only like some sites for their content but you probably also like some sites for the design they and technology they implement. My point being that unless you hate every site on the web your statement of "users hate developers because they do whatever they want" is wrong, because in fact many users love what developers come up with and you are probably one of them.
You are confusing the idea that because you have had a bad experience with some particular site or design that developers need you to give input in order to make any good site. When in fact they don't. Even the idea that what sites look like or how they are built is actually up to only the developer is a fallacy itself.
But again, it doesn't matter. Developers aren't reading AI and thinking OMG Flash is dead, they actually realize that its a WAY WAY more complicated issue than that and we talk about it all the time in users groups and developer centric forums etc.
I read appleinsider because I buy, use and love apple products and when I see articles that grossly oversimplify what is actually happening I chime in. AI has oversimplified this issue in the same way that your saying "developers do whatever they want to do" is a gross oversimplification based on a bad experience you had.
Thats all im going to say about that, because I'm not really interested in going back and forth on your bad experience with Microsoft tools or developers or whatever and the belief that as a result developers suck. You don't actually mean enough to me for me to bother and I'm sure its vice -versa.
Take care.
...
I read appleinsider because I buy, use and love apple products and when I see articles that grossly oversimplify what is actually happening I chime in. ...
I hope you realize that the reason why you love Apple products, is because SJ and Jonny Ives has Apple's devs by the "Carachas", don't you?
Usability. Is. Priority. Number. 1.
Something that many devs don't understand nor care about.
You stated it proudly yourself: "...we don't care what users think or want". You and your buddies are cannon-fodder ad material, and the reason Apple is ever more successful.
You just don't get it!
BTW: still waiting on those 5 websites that absolutely need Flash, apart from games and video. However until then, here's a critique on 2 site links in this post.
The artwork is fantastic(!!!).... but tell us, why does the navigation to info about the site, have to be integrated in Flash? That nav bar at the bottom could just as easily be CSS and JS. Also, if it was, with possibly some screen shots in addition to the wallpapers, if I was browsing on a mobile device that doesn't have Flash, I could at least know what the site is about, so that I could come back to it later on my Mac. Again, I can't even read the FAQ because I can't zoom the text!
Now look at that! NO FLASH! Scalable so you can read it on hi-density monitors and devices, and with JS (mootools: great stuff!)) animations and transitions. Who'd ever thought it was possible???! (sarcasm)
Just a suggestion alkrantz, but you might want to broaden your mind and toolbox in the near future. Maybe you could care less what us users want, need, or value in a website.... but some how I think your clients just might care more when they see their analytics take a nose-dive.
That base is only going to get much larger with the iPad, and will also introduce a whole new demographic and consumer to the mix: those that have never owned a computer before (elderly, tech-noobs, children).
As a developer, you're getting the chance of a life-time to be in on the ground-floor of a new business opportunity. Marketing products to the "untouched but touch-enabled", well-off consumer. That consumer can't see anything made with Flash, although there are other alternatives to get to that consumer... so why argue the point or the platform (Flash vs. HTML5 and standards)?
Solution: Developers, get your head wrapped around the new tech that those new consumers can see, and offer that to your respective clients as a reason why they should choose you for the job rather than the wiz-bang Flashy crowd. Why build your own wall, when the market is throwing 'em up daily for you?
Instead of bitchin' and moanin' about Apple not supporting Flash, take the opportunity that Apple has thrown your way to practically print money and have jobs coming out of your ears, by converting and "upgrading" your client's websites to be standards compatible.
Google is your friend on this one... so get the reports, studies and analytics to support your sales proposition.
Because Apple matters. Apple consumers matter more. You can take that to the bank, just as Apple has. Can't sneeze at 40bil and counting.
If every flash content was QUALITY like Machinarium...
...OMG! I'm circumventing the App store.
Nothing happened, the world didn't end.
Remember, developers get 70% of App store revenue, the SDK is free, so Adobe wants to charge developers $1800 (RRP CS4) to produce "free" content?
SHOW ME THE MONEY.
btw what does Intel have to do with ARM based chips in the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad plus almost every smartphone currently made?
So is this a combined effort to destroy ARM?
How's Gnash coming along, how much is Adobe contributing to it's development?
Finally a voice of reason. Thanks for that well written, level-headed response.
The real reason Apple doesn't want Flash on the iPhone is it would let developers circumvent the App Store. Adobe's CEO said this same thing last week.
A lot of people really fail to understand that "Flash != Video" and Flash provides developers with a lot of capabilities like VOIP, Chat, 2D vector graphics, print-quality fonts, dynamic digital rights that are out of scope for HTML5 and oh-yeah: it provides cross-platform, cross-device, cross-OS reach which is getting more and more important instead of less. Flash 10.1 optimized for mobile, will be on 19 of 20 smartphones by the end of the year.
So - you could interpret all of this as Apple is trying, Microsoft-style, to lock developers inside a walled-garden so they can extract revenue from their activities.
Ie., it is not a technical issue and it really isn't about Flash being a CPU hog on Mac. (prediction: Flash player 10.1 will run as well on Mac as it does on the PC.)
Take a look at "The Open Screen Project" -- Consortium of TV, mobile devices and hardware providers are building and optimizing their systems for Flash. E.g., Intel announcing SoC platforms that are optimized for Flash and targeting mobile devices and TVs. One of the videos on the site shows Flash-based rich internet applications running on multiple mobile devices.
Adobe actually puts a lot of effort into international standards (PDF is now ISO 32000, ActionScript and ECMA javascript are on a convergence path...) and they have a lot of open source projects underway. Sure companies do exist to make money, but they also get started by developers who are passionate about what they do and the value they provide to their customers. There's a tradeoff between developing a standard by a committee process vs building an innovative proprietary system that you control and can adjust as needed to react to a changing landscape. When a technology is still undergoing rapid change/evolution it makes more sense to keep it proprietary. Once it has matured it makes sense to offer it up to the standardization process.
So, yes it's a war, but no it's not anywhere near a conclusion. It's really just the opening sprint of what's likely to be a marathon. The mobile web is in its infancy and networked TVs are still incubuating. Flash isn't going away anytime soon.
Actually this game is built using php and javascript. not HTML and CSS. The game itself is probably ALL javascript and XML, so AJAX basically. I not sure this site is using ANY CSS. Again, this just illustrates how little the typical users actually understands development technology. He asked you for an example of a game using HTML and CSS and you showed him one built in Javascript and PHP.
I hope you realize that the reason why you love Apple products, is because SJ and Jonny Ives has Apple's devs by the "Carachas", don't you?
Usability. Is. Priority. Number. 1.
Something that many devs don't understand nor care about.
You stated it proudly yourself: "...we don't care what users think or want". You and your buddies are cannon-fodder ad material, and the reason Apple is ever more successful.
You just don't get it!
BTW: still waiting on those 5 websites that absolutely need Flash, apart from games and video. However until then, here's a critique on 2 site links in this post.
The artwork is fantastic(!!!).... but tell us, why does the navigation to info about the site, have to be integrated in Flash? That nav bar at the bottom could just as easily be CSS and JS. Also, if it was, with possibly some screen shots in addition to the wallpapers, if I was browsing on a mobile device that doesn't have Flash, I could at least know what the site is about, so that I could come back to it later on my Mac. Again, I can't even read the FAQ because I can't zoom the text!
Now look at that! NO FLASH! Scalable so you can read it on hi-density monitors and devices, and with JS (mootools: great stuff!)) animations and transitions. Who'd ever thought it was possible???! (sarcasm)
Just a suggestion alkrantz, but you might want to broaden your mind and toolbox in the near future. Maybe you could care less what us users want, need, or value in a website.... but some how I think your clients just might care more when they see their analytics take a nose-dive.
Just to set a coupe things straight:
I Actually said:
"Let's be honest here, it doesn't really matter if the haters or fanboys of this board agree or not with what developers do. Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites."
NOT
"...we don't care what users think or want".
They are actually different, and do you know why? Because the users of AI forums are not actually the end all be all of web users. To make it easier for you to understand, what I meant by that comment was, developers have to listen consider their clients and the technology needs of the projects. Not AI users. So you are taking that out of context.
I hope you realize that the reason why you love Apple products, is because SJ and Jonny Ives has Apple's devs by the "Carachas", don't you?
How does that even make sense at all? I just like Apple products because they are good.
Just a suggestion alkrantz, but you might want to broaden your mind and toolbox in the near future. Maybe you could care less what us users want, need, or value in a website.... but some how I think your clients just might care more when they see their analytics take a nose-dive.
Obviously you haven't actually read my posts. You have just read enough to think you don't agree and gotten angry. You have no idea what tools I actually use or even what I actually do. The truth is I use all sorts of development tools including PHP and JS which would be the ACTUAL competitors to Flash if this were an informed discussion. Flash is only a part of the tools I use, I also implement analytics all the time and I am well aware of what clients are looking for because I deal with them daily.
In the end though, it doesn't matter, I have a job and I cant spend all day on these boards arguing why the HTML5 <video> tag isn't going to kill Flash to a group of people who just want to hear that it is. Because you are in love with Apple, hate Adobe and Microsoft and want to see yourselves as the good guys.
The truth is I love Apple, Adobe and MS. I think all do great stuff and should do some stuff differently.
I was going to post you what I believe are useful examples of flash as you asked, but lets be honest, it doesn't matter what I post because in the end I think you believe there is no use for Flash. Just as you believe everything Flash does can be accomplished with HTML 5. To that I say...believe what you want to. It isn't true, in fact a lot of what AI writes isn't true, and I don't really care if you are misinformed anymore because your exhausting to deal with and I have a real life outside of this forum.
Off to work..
Got bored waiting for it to load, moved on.
lol it loaded up real quick for me. I'm having a good time playing the demo
Just to set a coupe things straight:
I Actually said:
"Let's be honest here, it doesn't really matter if the haters or fanboys of this board agree or not with what developers do. Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites."
NOT
"...we don't care what users think or want".
My sincere apologies for paraphrasing and being too lazy to direct quote you. I get your point: you don't care what the people on AI want or think. However, you dug your hole separately from that phrase with the next sentence, quote: "Because those of us who are developers are not going to ask you for your opinion when we develop websites." So this is just a personal rant about the AI users? May I ask why we should give a flyin' F*** what you think about us?
To tell ya the truth, you can develop as many Flash sites as your heart desires... we don't care... and we won't be visiting. You lost us as an audience at YOUR CHOOSING! Good for you. It just so happens, that we as a demographic might have the monetary means to make your efforts financially feasible. But hey? Ya wanna do it for fun or to prove a point that all AI posters are idiots, we'll gladly keep our pocketbooks closed when it comes to your client's websites. Couldn't be simpler. Some other developer will take yours/your client's websites place.
They are actually different, and do you know why? Because the users of AI forums are not actually the end all be all of web users. To make it easier for you to understand, what I meant by that comment was, developers have to listen consider their clients and the technology needs of the projects. Not AI users. So you are taking that out of context.
I don't think this is the only website that has Apple users commenting about their "distaste" for Flash. Why the hate here for AI posters? Are you repeating this rant at 9to5, Macworld, MacNN, MacFixIt, et al?
How does that even make sense at all? I just like Apple products because they are good.
I was trying to point out the reason why you like them and why they are good.
Apple's and SJ's philosophy, is that you have to create an experience for the user that takes the tech side out of the equation and makes tech transparent to the user. Within this topic's argument and with Apple products, Flash does not do that. BTW: there are problems on the Windows side as well with Flash. Not as many, but the fact that Flash is not yet 64-bit, causing Win7 users to use a 32-bit browser, has opened the door to a less secure environment then it should be.
Obviously you haven't actually read my posts. You have just read enough to think you don't agree and gotten angry. You have no idea what tools I actually use or even what I actually do. The truth is I use all sorts of development tools including PHP and JS which would be the ACTUAL competitors to Flash if this were an informed discussion. Flash is only a part of the tools I use, I also implement analytics all the time and I am well aware of what clients are looking for because I deal with them daily.
I've read your posts word for word. No, I am not angry. Yes, PHP and JS are competitors to Flash, as well as other assorted frameworks. Every developer I know has a huge toolbox. Part of the reason I'll stick to the design end. But again... with the knowledge of what can be done... and should be done or accomplished by the devs looking into the future. Not yesterday's or today's analytics... but tomorrow's so that my clients can get a reasonable ROI on a project, from today going forward.
In the end though, it doesn't matter, I have a job and I cant spend all day on these boards arguing why the HTML5 <video> tag isn't going to kill Flash to a group of people who just want to hear that it is. Because you are in love with Apple, hate Adobe and Microsoft and want to see yourselves as the good guys.
Nice to hear you're working. I've owned my own business for some 30 years. On a Mac since Summer of '84 and using version 1 of almost every design program every created, including all of Adobe's and Macromedia's (Altsys). Throw in a handful of years with WinNT, XP, and 2000... plus developing internet awareness and design since 1994 (the Mosaic and 14.4 modem years). At every step, I've been successful, as well have my clients, by being aware of what's coming next, and keeping up with advances in tech. Tech is admittedly my hobby... design and image consulting is my business.
The truth is I love Apple, Adobe and MS. I think all do great stuff and should do some stuff differently.
I'm having some serious doubt's lately regarding Adobe... and MS lost me as a fan completely some 5 years ago, after becoming seriously frustrated with my "tech-hobby" creating far too many lost days of frustration to cleaning registries, defragging, and "normal" Windows maintenance tasks. Time is money... as I'm sure you would agree
I was going to post you what I believe are useful examples of flash as you asked, but lets be honest, it doesn't matter what I post because in the end I think you believe there is no use for Flash. Just as you believe everything Flash does can be accomplished with HTML 5. To that I say...believe what you want to. It isn't true, in fact a lot of what AI writes isn't true, and I don't really care if you are misinformed anymore because your exhausting to deal with and I have a real life outside of this forum.
Off to work..
Woah! Nice back-out there!
OK....so when ya get back from work, please (with a cherry on top?)...show us just 1 site then that needs Flash (other than a game or video). Just 1 (one). If ya can't do that much, I would say we here at AI are correct that Flash is not needed... and maybe I should reconsider my openess towards Flash for "some" things (at the present at least), and wish it to die as well.
I don't HATE Flash. I DO hate when any tech and code is not used efficiently, and/or for a specific feature that will add value to the experience. IF there's a way to make anything better, faster, and reach more people with less hassle... that's my path.
HTML5..? Who cares? If it's "Sheng Fui 13"* and it works across platforms and devices... use it! (*intentional misspelling)