NPR, WSJ plan Flash-free Web sites for Apple iPad

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 59
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tomfoolery View Post


    Sorry, but I'm not seeing any Flash on that site either. I've got Click to Flash installed, so if it were there I'd see big gear icons or whatever. I haven't spotted any. Not even that video on the about page you linked earlier.



    http://docs.jquery.com/Tutorials:Qui...8Screencast%29



    Is another. The video on the about page is a link that loads the Flash into a div but it is broken sort of so you may have to right click in Click2Flash and choose Load Flash in order to view it. Nevertheless, Flash is everywhere on the Net so don't go too picky on saying you can't find any examples.



    Also if you code your embed tag with a CSS background image you don't see the gray boxes or gear icon on iPhone or Click2Flash
  • Reply 42 of 59
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Anyway I'm not going to argue with anyone about Flash. If you don't like it don't use it. If I want to use it for some reason I will use it. I just think it is silly to think it is going away anytime soon. There are 1000s of people who own web sites that ask their web developers for Flash everyday because they think it is cool. Regardless of what you think, Flash/Actionscript is going to be relevant for for a few more years minimum even for video. HTML 5 editor Ian Hickson expects W3C will likely finalize the proposed recommendation in 2022.
  • Reply 43 of 59
    I think its premature of Apple to try to kill flash, because there is so much great stuff on the web that will be there for years. Also, HTML5 simply can't duplicate all that flash can do, so in terms of interactive material, it is a step backwards in interface quality. Flash should be allowed to decline at its own pace, when there are equal or better tools to replace it. I think its disingenuous of Apple to say "flash is a dying technology" while simultaneously stabbing it. It suits their business needs to say so, but it doesn't suit the resources of website operators or the legions of simple web users who want to be able surf the web as it is now, not as it will be in 4 years time. If you agree sign my online petition at http://flash4ipad.com/flash-for-ipad-petition
  • Reply 44 of 59
    irelandireland Posts: 17,547member
    Anyone want to buy a MacBook Air? I'm not joking.
  • Reply 45 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    Anyway I'm not going to argue with anyone about Flash. If you don't like it don't use it. If I want to use it for some reason I will use it. I just think it is silly to think it is going away anytime soon. There are 1000s of people who own web sites that ask their web developers for Flash everyday because they think it is cool. Regardless of what you think, Flash/Actionscript is going to be relevant for for a few more years minimum even for video. HTML 5 editor Ian Hickson expects W3C will likely finalize the proposed recommendation in 2022.



    I think most of us understand that flash isn't disappearing, but it's dominance in web video might very well be coming to an end, even though it will be used and needed for a while. Now maybe it'll be 50-50 instead of 90-10.



    On our side of the argument, flash is a legacy technology that was never optimized for delivering rich content efficiently anyway (look at it's development history and performance). You really need a pretty powerful machine to play flash well which kind of leaves out netbooks and tablets and now we have a way of delivering rich content to mobile computers that doesn't degrade the experience if it's scaled up to a desktop or laptop and in fact in most cases it will only improve it.



    Just a thought, but if Apple's in a rush to get there no one's going to be upset except maybe Adobe.
  • Reply 46 of 59
    iluviluv Posts: 123member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    The writing's on the wall.



    If your content doesn't play nicely with Apple devices, you're doing it wrong.



    It's about time,. We were ignored for decades by pretty much everybody except Microsoft and macromedia.
  • Reply 47 of 59
    sheffsheff Posts: 1,407member
    The phraze "if users dig deeper into the site they will find pages that are unconverted" is troubling. If they only do the front page news as iPad friendly, its almost not worth it. I applaud the effort, but WSJ has no excuse for half baked iPad apps considering they've had some advanced knowledge.
  • Reply 48 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stevetim View Post


    I program about 85% to 90% flash. I like it a lot ... as a matter of fact I have at least 5 sites that are 100% flash. One html page with flash movies loading and unloading as needed.



    I welcome flash's depart for one reason and one reason only.



    MOBILE Sites



    Not just talking iphone here. No mobile device parses it properly. Obviously this is a big issue for adobe ... if they don't hurry up, not sure it can survive in future.



    Just mobility in general. It is slow loading no matter what you use to load it, if you are on the go (notebooks on wifi included.) I like what you can do with it, but the cost (loading times) is not worth the benefit (good looking). I'd rather have a slightly less "rich" appearance, and go for functionality and speed.

    Take for example, Cisco's entire web-based curriculum, Net Academy. There is no reason it needs to be Flash. Navigation is a pain in the ass, and you can't print easily from the site. Maybe the print thing is by design, but the navigation part still sucks.
  • Reply 49 of 59
    I think it's amazing to see so many companies go out of their way to accommodate the iPhone/iPad with new apps and now websites. However, I found a curious situation the other day:



    I was on DisneyMovieClub.com using Safari and was prompted to use FireFox instead. I got a chuckle thinking about Steve's reaction in finding this out - being he is one of the biggest shareholders of Disney.
  • Reply 50 of 59
    nkhmnkhm Posts: 928member
    This entire debate with regard to create a flash site or create an alternative seems to be driven by incompetence. Two sites are not needed, any competent developer using flash elements should already be using detection scripts browser/plug-in and automatically providing alternative elements where the required plug-ins are not available.



    That sites such as WSJ do not already do this is utterly ridiculous - if I were to present work to a client that wasn't built to work on any platform - plug-in or not - I'd lose the contract.



    There should be no flash OR html5 debate, it should be a debate about web standards, accessibility and competent developers doing their jobs properly. Flash can achieve things that no other technology currently can, that it's currently being used for video delivery is irrelevant - it was never intended to deliver video and there are already plenty of alternatives out there that don't use flash - again it's lazy/incompetent designers using pre-built/off the shelf flash delivery components rather than having the technical competence to deliver video using quicktime etc. etc. - html5 is not required to replace flash for video delivery and those that are stating that html5 will 'kill' flash frankly have no idea what they're talking about.



    The whole idea of modern web development is that content is modular and separated from style/aesthetic - a professionally developed site should detect it's environment, load the required CSS/content modules/detect plug-in development and deliver accordingly. There should not be "two versions of the site" there should be one professionally developed web solution that fits all platforms. If people can't achieve this, they really shouldn't be calling themselves web developers, and they certainly wouldn't be employed by my company.
  • Reply 51 of 59
    iluviluv Posts: 123member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nkhm View Post


    those that are stating that html5 will 'kill' flash frankly have no idea what they're talking about.




    Steve is the one who will kill flash!
  • Reply 52 of 59
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Until advertisers start ditching Flash, this is meaningless. There's no way even die-hard Flash-haters like Prince McLean will go Flash-free until that happens.
  • Reply 53 of 59
    Sure you can remove Flash from places in favor of HTML5 but you can't do absolutely everything as well.



    For instance in the argument for Silverlight, Windows Phone 7 whole interface is basically Silverlight, the same as the browser plug in. If HTML5 was as good, then why isn't the whole iPhone interface just made in HTML?
  • Reply 54 of 59
    thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nkhm View Post


    This entire debate with regard to create a flash site or create an alternative seems to be driven by incompetence. Two sites are not needed, any competent developer using flash elements should already be using detection scripts browser/plug-in and automatically providing alternative elements where the required plug-ins are not available.



    That sites such as WSJ do not already do this is utterly ridiculous - if I were to present work to a client that wasn't built to work on any platform - plug-in or not - I'd lose the contract.



    There should be no flash OR html5 debate, it should be a debate about web standards, accessibility and competent developers doing their jobs properly. Flash can achieve things that no other technology currently can, that it's currently being used for video delivery is irrelevant - it was never intended to deliver video and there are already plenty of alternatives out there that don't use flash - again it's lazy/incompetent designers using pre-built/off the shelf flash delivery components rather than having the technical competence to deliver video using quicktime etc. etc. - html5 is not required to replace flash for video delivery and those that are stating that html5 will 'kill' flash frankly have no idea what they're talking about.



    The whole idea of modern web development is that content is modular and separated from style/aesthetic - a professionally developed site should detect it's environment, load the required CSS/content modules/detect plug-in development and deliver accordingly. There should not be "two versions of the site" there should be one professionally developed web solution that fits all platforms. If people can't achieve this, they really shouldn't be calling themselves web developers, and they certainly wouldn't be employed by my company.



    +1! Very well said!



    My biggest pet-peeve is when a so-called "web developer" users Flash for navigation.
  • Reply 55 of 59
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member
    Interesting, it downloads an .flv format file which I can play in Quicktime, so where's the Flash?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    http://jquery.org/about



  • Reply 56 of 59
    iluviluv Posts: 123member
    Those publication's will get LOT'S of new reader's because if it. Others will go bankrupt, like these:



    —Mail Online MD James Bromley: “These are still really really embryonic devices that are great and fantastic, and I want to be at the top of the queue to buy one and play with it. But we’re talking about a very, very narrow subsection of society that will have these in 2010. This is the time that we learn about these devices – ‘11, ‘12, ‘13 is when these might become slightly more mainstream.”



    —Conde Nast Digital UK manager Emanuela Pignataro: “E-readers will be the novelty of 2010. I don’t think it is a short-term adoption – it will take years.”



    —Thomson Reuters consumer GM Tim Faircliff: “I don’t think we’re quite there yet.”



    —Incisive Media digital manager John Barnes: “The issue with tablets is, they’re not really servicing the needs of color, with graphics and diagrams – it’s a bit like version one of the iPod.”
  • Reply 57 of 59
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kevin Winsness View Post


    Bu bye flash!!!!!



    Bahhh



    This is simply AI spreading F-U-D pure and simple...



    Inexcusable! Especially when we __ALL__ know that it's totally impossible to build a web site today without FLASH...
  • Reply 58 of 59
    successsuccess Posts: 1,039member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post


    That's a pretty broad statement to be true. allot of us do write code and in fact it's been my experience that web devs are the biggest proponents of HTML5.



    BTW. Just took a look at jquery.org and there doesn't seem to be any flash. Are you unfamiliar with code yourself? I know allot of our clients think we've used flash for animated menus etc. If I'm mistaken please share.



    I've already switched to jQuery and CSS3 using things like Lightbox but then again I'm not creating complex animations etc. I want to Flash to disappear too but how is non Flash technology going to create those big time animated Flash sites that big corporations like Universal Studios, movie companies etc use for promotions? I mean those are hugely complex full on animated web sites.
  • Reply 59 of 59
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by plovell View Post


    Why limit it to just the iPad/iPhone?



    I want it for my everyday (desktop) browsing too !!



    Safari, Develop menu, User Agent
Sign In or Register to comment.