As a programmer, you absolutely kill things that can be fixed. Killing them and moving on to something better is absolutely the right thing to do at times. As a programmer, knowing when it's the right time to throw something away, instead of trying to fix it, is essential. This sort of ruthlessness is something that Apple currently understands very well.
It isn't always better to use HTML5. If it was clearly better all the time and Flash was that outdated and didn't work well at all then I would agree its time to move forward and dump Flash.
However that isn't the case in many cases. Under Windows when using Chrome, Flash 10.1 is a far better option. Even when using a Mac if you are not using Safari HTML5 doesn't show a clear advantage under 10.1.
Flash 10.0 is a pig that is clear, but its also clear that Adobe as made some decent gains on cutting down CPU usage under 10.1.
If you are an Apple OSX only users then yes this without a doubt impact you more then if you used more then one OS. The situation is that if Apple and Adobe stopped the bullshit and worked together they could bring a very solid version of Flash OSX and even the iPhone and iPad.
This way as an end user you could use either HTML5 when it is offered or Flash so you don't miss any content on the web.
Its not like you hear me bashing HTML5, its a good option at times but the fact is Flash is not going away anytime soon everyone knows that so as long as its going to be around it benefits the end user ( that would be you and I) to make it work correctly.
I never understand it when Apple only users are willing to accept and even embrace limitations.
If some are to argue that Flash is no suited well for mobile devices that is a valid arguement but to say its valid for a fully functioning OS like OSX is just totally bullshit.
As soon as the iPad hits the market, Flash is going bye bye.
Adobe is lazy.
Is that the same logic you used when you came to the conclusion Apple shouldn't buy hardware from Samsung? You may want to just simply take your hands off the keyboard today and take a nap.
Generally speaking, if you have to tell people how well educated and intelligent you are, you are probably greatly overestimating your abilities.
Actually I didn't have to say it until you decided you wanted to question it. After 22 years of doing this I am fairly certain my abilities are rock solid.
The situation is that if Apple and Adobe stopped the bullshit and worked together they could bring a very solid version of Flash OSX and even the iPhone and iPad.
[...]
... the fact is Flash is not going away anytime soon everyone knows that
The situation is that Adobe sat on their little Flash empire for far too long, and now Adobe has no credibility regarding future Flash performance. They wouldn't even be doing anything now if their demise wasn't staring them in the face. Too little, too late, they can't be, nor should they be, trusted, especially now that a perfectly good alternative is available.
The situation also is that this is Adobe's problem, and it's disingenuous nonsense to try and lay it at Apple's door. Apple doesn't need to stop, or start, anything, the tools are, and have been there for Adobe to improve Flash performance, but they ignored them.
And, I think the situation is that Flash may go away a lot quicker than you think, that the move away from Flash, driven by mobile computing, will accelerate at a rapid pace, and that we are already at, or past, the tipping point.
The situation is that Adobe sat on their little Flash empire for far too long, and now Adobe has no credibility regarding future Flash performance. They wouldn't even be doing anything now if their demise wasn't staring them in the face. Too little, too late, they can't be, nor should they be, trusted, especially now that a perfectly good alternative is available.
The situation also is that this is Adobe's problem, and it's disingenuous nonsense to try and lay it at Apple's door. Apple doesn't need to stop, or start, anything, the tools are, and have been there for Adobe to improve Flash performance, but they ignored them.
And, I think the situation is that Flash may go away a lot quicker than you think, that the move away from Flash, driven by mobile computing, will accelerate at a rapid pace, and that we are already at, or past, the tipping point.
I won't disagree that Adobe should have done a better job with this on the Mac side a long time ago. However its not really an Adobe problem because if they can still keep the Windows population using Flash then nothing Steve Jobs says or does is giong to kill Flash.
This is a case where market share is going to play a factor.
What will happen is there will simply be dual code option to fun HTML5 version. Just becasue a company decides to create something that can be run via HTML5 doesn't mean Flash is going away anytime soon.
We are not at any tipping point even someone like Solipism that is pro HTML5 has said here many times that Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
The funny part is members here talk out of both sides of their mouth. Many say end users are stupid yet they think end users actually know or care how their web content is streamed. They could care less all they want is for it to work and they don't care how it works.
The reality of the situation is the OS market is still dominated by Windows and Flash works fine under Windows. Apple simply doesn't have the market share to kill Flash.
Why would HTML5 hulu be a paid subscription? I think it is possible to put ads into HTML5 vids, no? Or is the whole site transitioning to subscription now, as has been rumored for a while now?
It might be paid because Hulu might finally decide to charge, something they've been planning for a long time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasenj1
Couldn't this just be CBS moving to HTML5 to support every browser except IE?
1) MS already supports aspects of HTML5, though the HTML5 video tag will appear in IE9.
2) Firefox may be behind IE on this front since MS has put their weight behind H264, something Intel, Apple, and Google.
3) Only Mozilla and Opera are the H.264 holdouts and Ogg Theora isn't going to be the next standard of internet video. On the desktop this isn't a big deal as site designers can just call Flash as a back up. Same goes for older versions of IE. What they aren't likely to do is encode both H.264 and Ogg so they can use the HTML5 video tag for Firefox, too. That is too much work and effort on their part. The real problem for Mozilla comes in when they finally get Firefox Mobile on other platforms outside of Meamo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleRulez
As soon as the iPad hits the market, Flash is going bye bye.
Adobe is lazy.
Go away, iGenius, your theory that only people who talk out against Apple has already failed with your lack attempt at going to the other extreme. No need to test it any further. The results are in: a douchebag is a douchebag no matter what name they use.
This is a case where market share is going to play a factor.
What will happen is there will simply be dual code option to fun HTML5 version. Just becasue a company decides to create something that can be run via HTML5 doesn't mean Flash is going away anytime soon.
Market share is not going to be a factor at all, very shortly. Even IE, in v9 will have HTML5 support. There won't be a significant browser or platform without HTML5 support, making market share a non-issue. (Edit: Desktop Linux is not a significant platform.)
What will drive this issue is content providers, and content providers will prefer not to have to maintain multiple versions of their content, primarily because it costs them money to do so. This will follow the curve that the adoption of (successful) new technologies almost always follows. First a few, then more and more, and then a rush to switch.
If Adobe were smart, they'd be knocking themselves out to make tools for creating HTML5 content, rather than clinging to the past and Flash. Time and technology wait for no company.
The reality of the situation is the OS market is still dominated by Windows and Flash works fine under Windows. Apple simply doesn't have the market share to kill Flash.
If advertisers want to reach the Apple audience, they will reject Flash. The Apple installed base is the wealthiest of any group of consumers. They have good taste. They are an advertiser's best target market.
Given that, why would anyone continue to use Flash?
Actually I didn't have to say it until you decided you wanted to question it. After 22 years of doing this I am fairly certain my abilities are rock solid.
Funny how he and his ilk trash and trash Adobe Flash as if nobody designs using flash anymore.
If advertisers want to reach the Apple audience, they will reject Flash. The Apple installed base is the wealthiest of any group of consumers. They have good taste. They are an advertiser's best target market.
Given that, why would anyone continue to use Flash?
Because 90% of the World uses a PC and could care less what Steve Jobs wants on his iPad?
The results will vary depending on your system setup. As an example my Windows system runs a extreme edition quad core and an Nvidia 280GTX. Clearly my system is not the average and with hardware acceleration streaming Flash 10.1 uses under 5% CPU. Yet again my system would not be considered average.
So that's 20% in the way that Apple measures it? Did I get that right? In MS world you measure % usage over all 4 cores but in Apple land they use 1 core as the benchmark so you can get a figure like 125% CPU usage.
With the Pwn2Own hacking contest coming up at Vancouver's CanSecWest security conference later this month, Italian computer security blog OneITSecurity took some time to interview Charlie Miller. Miller, in case you're not familiar, is a security expert who has won Pwn2Own two years running by hacking Apple's Safari browser with incredible speed. Safari isn't the only target -- this year, all major browsers and a selection of mobile operating systems will serve as Pwn2Own challenges - but it's fair to say that Miller knows a thing or two about keeping your browser secure.
Here are the highlights from Miller's interview:
He thinks Windows 7 will prove more secure than OS X Snow Leopard this year, in part because it doesn't have Java and Flash enabled by default. Windows' full ASLR (address space layout randomization) also gives it a security advantage.
When asked what he thought would make the safest OS and browser combo, he opted for Chrome or IE8 on Windows 7, with no Flash installed, although "there probably isn't enough difference between the browsers to get worked up about."
For my money, the juiciest quote from the interview was "The main thing is not to install Flash!"
On the mobile side, Miller guessed that the iPhone 3GS would be more easily exploitable than the Motorola Droid, mainly because the iPhone's been around longer, and has been subjected to more extensive security research.
You can check out Miller's full answers (in English or Italian!) at OneITSecurity.
So that's 20% in the way that Apple measures it? Did I get that right? In MS world you measure % usage over all 4 cores but in Apple land they use 1 core as the benchmark so you can get a figure like 125% CPU usage.
Excuse my ignorance.
Cheers
fl
It depends. You can measure each core independently so a quad-core system would have a 400% value or all together. Each has their uses. Extremeskater using Flash 10.1 on Windows also means that he's offloading work to the GPU, which isn't being registered on the CPU even though processing is occurring. This is good in that the GPU is often left unused and if its for video using HW acceleration over SW is more efficient, but it still is using the system's resources so there is a power drain because of it, which is one of the primary issues with Flash. Of course, without knowing how much the GPU is affected or how it compares, say, to an H.2.64 video from HTML5 video tag or via Flash 10.1 there isn't much that can de discussed, just speculation.
Funny how he and his ilk trash and trash Adobe Flash as if nobody designs using flash anymore.
Its also funny how people want to have this pent up anger about the past instead of living in the now and understanding whats happening in the future. The fact is Flash 10.1 addresses several issues so clearly Adobe and Flash are not going anywhere.
This is an OSX issue at this point and if Apple decides not to work with Adobe to resolve the issue then its simply nothing more then an issue Apple wants to create.
Comments
Of course, they make most their money through iTunes, so they don't need web lock-in tricks anyway.
No they don't. They make most of their money through hardware sales.
Generally speaking, if you have to tell people how well educated and intelligent you are, you are probably greatly overestimating your abilities.
Funny that. It's like the guy who has to say "I get it" instead of simpy laughing when he hears a joke.
As a programmer, you absolutely kill things that can be fixed. Killing them and moving on to something better is absolutely the right thing to do at times. As a programmer, knowing when it's the right time to throw something away, instead of trying to fix it, is essential. This sort of ruthlessness is something that Apple currently understands very well.
It isn't always better to use HTML5. If it was clearly better all the time and Flash was that outdated and didn't work well at all then I would agree its time to move forward and dump Flash.
However that isn't the case in many cases. Under Windows when using Chrome, Flash 10.1 is a far better option. Even when using a Mac if you are not using Safari HTML5 doesn't show a clear advantage under 10.1.
Flash 10.0 is a pig that is clear, but its also clear that Adobe as made some decent gains on cutting down CPU usage under 10.1.
If you are an Apple OSX only users then yes this without a doubt impact you more then if you used more then one OS. The situation is that if Apple and Adobe stopped the bullshit and worked together they could bring a very solid version of Flash OSX and even the iPhone and iPad.
This way as an end user you could use either HTML5 when it is offered or Flash so you don't miss any content on the web.
Its not like you hear me bashing HTML5, its a good option at times but the fact is Flash is not going away anytime soon everyone knows that so as long as its going to be around it benefits the end user ( that would be you and I) to make it work correctly.
I never understand it when Apple only users are willing to accept and even embrace limitations.
If some are to argue that Flash is no suited well for mobile devices that is a valid arguement but to say its valid for a fully functioning OS like OSX is just totally bullshit.
As soon as the iPad hits the market, Flash is going bye bye.
Adobe is lazy.
Is that the same logic you used when you came to the conclusion Apple shouldn't buy hardware from Samsung? You may want to just simply take your hands off the keyboard today and take a nap.
Generally speaking, if you have to tell people how well educated and intelligent you are, you are probably greatly overestimating your abilities.
Actually I didn't have to say it until you decided you wanted to question it. After 22 years of doing this I am fairly certain my abilities are rock solid.
If the CPU usage is less, Adobe could just wrap the Flash engine in a Windows emulation layer and be ahead of the game.
- Jasen.
P.S. Gah. Why do I feed the trolls?
The situation is that if Apple and Adobe stopped the bullshit and worked together they could bring a very solid version of Flash OSX and even the iPhone and iPad.
[...]
... the fact is Flash is not going away anytime soon everyone knows that
The situation is that Adobe sat on their little Flash empire for far too long, and now Adobe has no credibility regarding future Flash performance. They wouldn't even be doing anything now if their demise wasn't staring them in the face. Too little, too late, they can't be, nor should they be, trusted, especially now that a perfectly good alternative is available.
The situation also is that this is Adobe's problem, and it's disingenuous nonsense to try and lay it at Apple's door. Apple doesn't need to stop, or start, anything, the tools are, and have been there for Adobe to improve Flash performance, but they ignored them.
And, I think the situation is that Flash may go away a lot quicker than you think, that the move away from Flash, driven by mobile computing, will accelerate at a rapid pace, and that we are already at, or past, the tipping point.
After 22 years of doing this I am fairly certain my abilities are rock solid.
Yes, I'm convinced you are.
The situation is that Adobe sat on their little Flash empire for far too long, and now Adobe has no credibility regarding future Flash performance. They wouldn't even be doing anything now if their demise wasn't staring them in the face. Too little, too late, they can't be, nor should they be, trusted, especially now that a perfectly good alternative is available.
The situation also is that this is Adobe's problem, and it's disingenuous nonsense to try and lay it at Apple's door. Apple doesn't need to stop, or start, anything, the tools are, and have been there for Adobe to improve Flash performance, but they ignored them.
And, I think the situation is that Flash may go away a lot quicker than you think, that the move away from Flash, driven by mobile computing, will accelerate at a rapid pace, and that we are already at, or past, the tipping point.
I won't disagree that Adobe should have done a better job with this on the Mac side a long time ago. However its not really an Adobe problem because if they can still keep the Windows population using Flash then nothing Steve Jobs says or does is giong to kill Flash.
This is a case where market share is going to play a factor.
What will happen is there will simply be dual code option to fun HTML5 version. Just becasue a company decides to create something that can be run via HTML5 doesn't mean Flash is going away anytime soon.
We are not at any tipping point even someone like Solipism that is pro HTML5 has said here many times that Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
The funny part is members here talk out of both sides of their mouth. Many say end users are stupid yet they think end users actually know or care how their web content is streamed. They could care less all they want is for it to work and they don't care how it works.
The reality of the situation is the OS market is still dominated by Windows and Flash works fine under Windows. Apple simply doesn't have the market share to kill Flash.
Yes, I'm convinced you are.
Now if I could just feel as convinced you have a clue how any of this really works.
Why would HTML5 hulu be a paid subscription? I think it is possible to put ads into HTML5 vids, no? Or is the whole site transitioning to subscription now, as has been rumored for a while now?
It might be paid because Hulu might finally decide to charge, something they've been planning for a long time.
Couldn't this just be CBS moving to HTML5 to support every browser except IE?
1) MS already supports aspects of HTML5, though the HTML5 video tag will appear in IE9.
2) Firefox may be behind IE on this front since MS has put their weight behind H264, something Intel, Apple, and Google.
3) Only Mozilla and Opera are the H.264 holdouts and Ogg Theora isn't going to be the next standard of internet video. On the desktop this isn't a big deal as site designers can just call Flash as a back up. Same goes for older versions of IE. What they aren't likely to do is encode both H.264 and Ogg so they can use the HTML5 video tag for Firefox, too. That is too much work and effort on their part. The real problem for Mozilla comes in when they finally get Firefox Mobile on other platforms outside of Meamo.
As soon as the iPad hits the market, Flash is going bye bye.
Adobe is lazy.
Go away, iGenius, your theory that only people who talk out against Apple has already failed with your lack attempt at going to the other extreme. No need to test it any further. The results are in: a douchebag is a douchebag no matter what name they use.
This is a case where market share is going to play a factor.
What will happen is there will simply be dual code option to fun HTML5 version. Just becasue a company decides to create something that can be run via HTML5 doesn't mean Flash is going away anytime soon.
Market share is not going to be a factor at all, very shortly. Even IE, in v9 will have HTML5 support. There won't be a significant browser or platform without HTML5 support, making market share a non-issue. (Edit: Desktop Linux is not a significant platform.)
What will drive this issue is content providers, and content providers will prefer not to have to maintain multiple versions of their content, primarily because it costs them money to do so. This will follow the curve that the adoption of (successful) new technologies almost always follows. First a few, then more and more, and then a rush to switch.
If Adobe were smart, they'd be knocking themselves out to make tools for creating HTML5 content, rather than clinging to the past and Flash. Time and technology wait for no company.
The reality of the situation is the OS market is still dominated by Windows and Flash works fine under Windows. Apple simply doesn't have the market share to kill Flash.
If advertisers want to reach the Apple audience, they will reject Flash. The Apple installed base is the wealthiest of any group of consumers. They have good taste. They are an advertiser's best target market.
Given that, why would anyone continue to use Flash?
Actually I didn't have to say it until you decided you wanted to question it. After 22 years of doing this I am fairly certain my abilities are rock solid.
Funny how he and his ilk trash and trash Adobe Flash as if nobody designs using flash anymore.
If advertisers want to reach the Apple audience, they will reject Flash. The Apple installed base is the wealthiest of any group of consumers. They have good taste. They are an advertiser's best target market.
Given that, why would anyone continue to use Flash?
Because 90% of the World uses a PC and could care less what Steve Jobs wants on his iPad?
Even Disney uses Flash!
"China without Google is like United States without Baidu."
Nobody cares.
The results will vary depending on your system setup. As an example my Windows system runs a extreme edition quad core and an Nvidia 280GTX. Clearly my system is not the average and with hardware acceleration streaming Flash 10.1 uses under 5% CPU. Yet again my system would not be considered average.
So that's 20% in the way that Apple measures it? Did I get that right? In MS world you measure % usage over all 4 cores but in Apple land they use 1 core as the benchmark so you can get a figure like 125% CPU usage.
Excuse my ignorance.
Cheers
fl
First off I am highly educated and on your best day you wouldn't understand 10% of what I know about coding.
I do not believe you are as intelligent as the one and only Charlie Miller:
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2010/03...o-install-fla/
Reigning Pwn2Own champion:
"The main thing is not to install Flash!"
With the Pwn2Own hacking contest coming up at Vancouver's CanSecWest security conference later this month, Italian computer security blog OneITSecurity took some time to interview Charlie Miller. Miller, in case you're not familiar, is a security expert who has won Pwn2Own two years running by hacking Apple's Safari browser with incredible speed. Safari isn't the only target -- this year, all major browsers and a selection of mobile operating systems will serve as Pwn2Own challenges - but it's fair to say that Miller knows a thing or two about keeping your browser secure.
Here are the highlights from Miller's interview:
He thinks Windows 7 will prove more secure than OS X Snow Leopard this year, in part because it doesn't have Java and Flash enabled by default. Windows' full ASLR (address space layout randomization) also gives it a security advantage.
When asked what he thought would make the safest OS and browser combo, he opted for Chrome or IE8 on Windows 7, with no Flash installed, although "there probably isn't enough difference between the browsers to get worked up about."
For my money, the juiciest quote from the interview was "The main thing is not to install Flash!"
On the mobile side, Miller guessed that the iPhone 3GS would be more easily exploitable than the Motorola Droid, mainly because the iPhone's been around longer, and has been subjected to more extensive security research.
You can check out Miller's full answers (in English or Italian!) at OneITSecurity.
http://www.oneitsecurity.it/01/03/20...iller-pwn2own/
***BTW: Windows 7 64-bit and IE8 fell first and took the home-run prize... although the iPhone also got pwned.
So that's 20% in the way that Apple measures it? Did I get that right? In MS world you measure % usage over all 4 cores but in Apple land they use 1 core as the benchmark so you can get a figure like 125% CPU usage.
Excuse my ignorance.
Cheers
fl
It depends. You can measure each core independently so a quad-core system would have a 400% value or all together. Each has their uses. Extremeskater using Flash 10.1 on Windows also means that he's offloading work to the GPU, which isn't being registered on the CPU even though processing is occurring. This is good in that the GPU is often left unused and if its for video using HW acceleration over SW is more efficient, but it still is using the system's resources so there is a power drain because of it, which is one of the primary issues with Flash. Of course, without knowing how much the GPU is affected or how it compares, say, to an H.2.64 video from HTML5 video tag or via Flash 10.1 there isn't much that can de discussed, just speculation.
Funny how he and his ilk trash and trash Adobe Flash as if nobody designs using flash anymore.
Its also funny how people want to have this pent up anger about the past instead of living in the now and understanding whats happening in the future. The fact is Flash 10.1 addresses several issues so clearly Adobe and Flash are not going anywhere.
This is an OSX issue at this point and if Apple decides not to work with Adobe to resolve the issue then its simply nothing more then an issue Apple wants to create.