"Ryan Stewart, a Flash Platform evangelist at Adobe, demoed Flash Player 10.1 running on his Nexus One phone. When I realized he was going to show it, I got excited — I’ve been wanting to see how well Flash really works on a phone for years."
"On his Mac, Ryan pulled up a site called Eco Zoo. It is, seemingly, a pretty intense example of Flash development — full of 3D rendering, rich interactions, and cute little characters. Then, he pulled up the same thing on his Nexus One. The site’s progress bar filled in and the 3D world appeared for a few seconds before the browser crashed. Ryan said (paraphrasing), “Whoops! Well, it’s beta, and this is an intense example — let’s try it again.” He tried it again and got the same result. So he said to the audience, “Well, this one isn’t going to work, but does anyone have a Flash site they’d like to see running?” Someone shouted out “Hulu.” Ryan said, “Hulu doesn’t work,” and then wrapped up his demo, telling people if they wanted to try more sites they could find him later and he’d let them play with his Nexus One."
I witnessed it with 1200 other developers at the design and technology festival in Toronto a few weeks ago, 1200 in attendance at the keynote, they ran 10.1 latest release on an android phone. I didn't get this from a link, a blog, nor did I google it like this guy. If one is interested in more than finding examples in google of flash player performing badly, you can find it. I didn't take video, nor did I take down names of the participants sitting beside me. However, this is well known. The only video I know of that shows of flash on android, is 2 months old. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbmnvikY0rg What I saw, was the more recent update. I could try to see if anyone took video at the event. But really, I doubt that's going to stop this pair from calling me a liar or an adobe shill. They're more interested in flash hating at all costs...
But I'm not the one throwing around the name liar here. I'd like to see where it is I 'lied'. I've been honest about what I know, seen, and my opinion. I don't need some poster calling me a liar.
The video you linked is quite good... what I would expect of a beta product.
I find it odd that the presenter in the link (via Gruber) didn't do a presentation similar to that. Possibly, he was trying to wow em' with a later (buggier) version... if so, bad choice.
I understand your reasons for not being able to cite other developers ... fair enough.
Now, let me state my opinions:
1) I am a Mac user-- always have been, Flash on the Mac Sucks, In my experience. In 2004 I tried to program a Stock market site with Flash: Update a 10 column, 30 row table of stocks where the price changed every minute and the total value of each stock was calculated (price * shares = value) and the total value was summed. All the data acquisition and calculations were done server side, and sent to a Flash window on a web page. The Flash could not run fast enough to refresh 61 table fields (out of 301) every 60 seconds. I had friends at Macromedia/Adobe at that time and several Flash experts looked at the code... Long story short, after much effort, we could not make it perform on a Mac (though it worked fine on slower PCs).
2) Fast forward to current Flash running on a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 4 Gig RAM. After visiting several sites containing Flash the computer slowed. I closed all the Flash windows so Flash was not running at all:
Here's the Flas performance hit:
Also, most of my browser crashes (~95%) were Flash-related. I installed Click2Flash and things "just work" again.
My final point(s)
-- this is an Apple related site for discussion of Apple-related topics, pro and con
-- well-considered, and well-presented points are appreciated by most who choose to participate.
-- several of the members that you are sparring with fit the above description and are generally appreciated
-- while I do not always agree with these members, I enjoy the discussion and sometimes alter my views because of their posts
-- when there is a lot of unproductive bashing going on, I generally look at the participants and my experience with them.
-- often, the contentious posting can be traced to a few anti-Apple Trolls.
-- You and a few others have recently joined this forum (you within the last 8 days) and have made a lot of controversial posts
-- while that in itself does not make you a troll, it does raise suspicion
-- In these situations, I tend to give more credence to members I know (but do not necessarily agree with) than members I do not know.
Finally, I am not going to reread all the posts... but I really doubt that you have been called a "liar'"
Challenging your facts or the "truth" of what you say... is not calling you a liar!
BTW, I read the link via Gruber and all the comments-- I found it a pretty even-handed discussion, and the blogger made considerable effort to be fair and challenge obvious trolls.
Actually, it's no more viable there than on the iPhone. Content producers aren't going to stick with Flash on the "desktop" for very long once they realize how viable the alternative is; that would be duplicating efforts and Flash just doesn't have the legs even on the desktop to make that duplication worthwhile. Flash is dead everywhere because it's stillborn on mobile. People have a choice of clinging to an outdated technology and falling ever further behind, or getting on board now with HTML5 and reaping the benefits.
I mean HP Slate, the device Ballmar had in his hands with the Twilight image of the hands holding 'apple' on it. Courier was a just animation of vapourware that MS said was coming (eventually) in hopes that no one would buy the iPad. Has that type of marketing ever worked?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groovetube
Should there be a circle jerk on posting bad performance of html5 on the ipad? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4 Does this prove anything? Are we gonna have a flurry of googled links screaming "I'M RIGHT" now?
OMG, why did I click on his kid's post? But glad I did, as it's yet another strike against the bloat of Flash and ineptitude of Adobe.
Now he's implying that Canvas is HTML5 when it's clearly just one aspect of it that is known to be processor intensive. HTML5 has been used since the first iPhone and is used throughout all modern mobile OS browsers.
He probably doesn't even realize the asinine stance of comparing CPU intensive Canvas 3D animations in HTML5 with the Flash video issue. He also probably doesn't even notice the elephant in the room, that Adobe can't even get video to play on Cortex-A8 @ 1GHz w/512MB RAM Nexus One yet HTML5 video plays great on mobiles.
His blinders surely didn't let him see that while the 1st Canvas demo (which pushes my brand new MBP in Safari to use 100%/200% CPU) doesn't crash my iPhone with a 600MHz CPU or the guy's iPad, yet the Nexus One can't even play video or simply crashes altogether.
The last issue — I'm not sure if the Elmer FUD in the video is really good at spreading lies or just a complete buffoon — is his choosing mostly Canvas demos that specifically need a mouse pointer for input, not a touchscreen. We're not going to see this single aspect of HTML5 being used for mobiles until it's much more mature, but HTMl5 for video, the most common use of Flash today, will take over as well as many other aspects of HTML5.
You all can try these demos yourself. Here's the first one...
PS: You can also see how much CPU heavy Flash is by installing the latest Beta on your desktop OS and then switching between YouTube's Flash and HTML5 options.
Erm, the name / joke analogy is actually a little boneheaded. How many hugely successful products and companies of the last decade have nonsensical names? I don't even need to provide an example. Your style of thinking might be better suited to hygiene accessory manufacturers.
I just started to read this thread so if some one beat me to it, but how about google?
The video you linked is quite good... what I would expect of a beta product.
I find it odd that the presenter in the link (via Gruber) didn't do a presentation similar to that. Possibly, he was trying to wow em' with a later (buggier) version... if so, bad choice.
I understand your reasons for not being able to cite other developers ... fair enough.
Now, let me state my opinions:
1) I am a Mac user-- always have been, Flash on the Mac Sucks, In my experience. In 2004 I tried to program a Stock market site with Flash: Update a 10 column, 30 row table of stocks where the price changed every minute and the total value of each stock was calculated (price * shares = value) and the total value was summed. All the data acquisition and calculations were done server side, and sent to a Flash window on a web page. The Flash could not run fast enough to refresh 61 table fields (out of 301) every 60 seconds. I had friends at Macromedia/Adobe at that time and several Flash experts looked at the code... Long story short, after much effort, we could not make it perform on a Mac (though it worked fine on slower PCs).
2) Fast forward to current Flash running a a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 4 Gig RAM. After visiting several sites containing Flash the computer slowed. I closed all the Flash windows so Flash was not running at all:
Here's the Flas performance hit:
Also, most of my browser crashes (~95%) were Flash-related. I installed Click2Flash and things "just work" again.
My final point(s)
-- this is an Apple related site for discussion of Apple-related topics, pro and con
-- well-considered, and well-presented points are appreciated by most who choose to participate.
-- several of the members that you are sparring with fit the above description and are generally appreciated
-- while I do not always agree withe these members, I enjoy the discussion and sometimes alter my views because of their posts
-- when there is a lot of unproductive bashing going on, I generally look at the participants and my experience with them.
-- often, the contentious posting can be traced to a few anti-Apple Trolls.
-- You and a few others have recently joined this forum (you within the last 8 days) and have made a lot of controversial posts
-- while that in itself does not make you a troll, it does raise suspicion
-- In these situations, I tend to give more credence to members I know (but do not necessarily agree with) than members I do not know.
Finally, I am not going to reread all the posts... but I really doubt that you have been called a "liar'"
Challenging your facts or the "truth" of what you say... is not calling you a liar!
BTW, I read the link via Gruber and all the comments-- I found it a pretty even-handed discussion, and the blogger made considerable effort to be fair and challenge obvious trolls.
.
Actually the pair of them said I said something, and when I asked where, they never responded. I know why, because I never said them. They took many of my statements, and twisted them, and rarely if ever stayed in a straight enough line. This is my introduction here, I don't know them, all I have to base my impression is that. And:
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Don't add to Groovetube's lies and anti-Apple/pro-Adobe agenda....
I never heard what my "lies" were. Then I head I was getting ready for the ban hammer. Well.
I'm not anti-apple, and certainly no troll. I switched to macs back when very few of my developer friends were on macs, and took a little ribbing for it. My PC corrupted when I had a deadline for the last time, and I had a beige G3 souped up for testing and premier video edits, I downloaded the trials, and even with less than half the power, finished all my work that day. I went out and bought a dual G4 with Jaguar the next day. I've bought a hell of a lot of macs, my shop is pretty much all apple, I own an iphone, bought my wife one, have an apple tv, (love it), and I'm typing on a relatively new 17 MBP tricked out. If I were anti apple, I have a screw loose.
Despite being a card carrying apple user, if Apple, or Steve Jobs does something I really disagree with, I'm going to say so. I disagree with his hard line on flash, not because I think it should have -been- on the phone, because I really DON'T, but because I believe, based on my experience, and involvement, he isn't being altogether truthful. Certainly, not anymore than adobe has been. And I stand firm on that, despite being called an adobe shill, and a liar.
I am at a disadvantage here, because adobe hasn't released 10.1 mobile yet. Personally, it's my business to stay very on top of where this is going, and certainly, I have concerns. I'm hopeful based on what I saw, I know well where the industry is on all this, and we are very far, from the demise of flash. I've developed in flash since version 3 professionally. And this, is certainly by far, not the first time I've heard flash will be killed. It's waaaay to ubiquitous to die that quickly by any means. Flash will take it on the chin over video, but again, it seems people are forgetting something. I've been around long enough, to remember when flash had no video support, and it did just fine then too. It's a point that seems completely missed by everyone.
Flash on the mac has pissed me of since switching. It's always ran about 10 to 20 fps second slower, and things like no kerning tables available on export etc. has been minor annoyances. Adobe has been lazy on developing for mac. Sure it's been frustrating. I think adobe underestimated apple, and 6ish% of the market for it's player just wasn't important enough.
Now we are looking at 16% in the mobile space (though apple guys want you to feel it's 95...), and the ipad will be an important entry into the market. I try to look past all the chest thumping, the flash is GONA DIE! the high fiving, googling of links designed to prove a point, because none of it has any value at the end of the day. I'll make my decisions based on what I see. I, and many hundreds of thousands of developers, are watching adobe right now, and I'm sure they're keenly aware of it. All eyes are on android, the flight to support android in the developer community lately has been rather breath-taking. It was rather almost unknown to me until a number of weeks ago all hell breaks loose. I think google needs to send SJ a note of thanks...
Anyway, now this gets turned into an us and them somehow, all I was trying to do was inject -some- sanity and truth, or perhaps balance, a devil's advocate, if that were even possible. What resulted, is I'm a anti apple troll or lying adobe shill. Cripes. Is it really that religious here? I think things are very much in the balance right now. No one can say with any degree of certainty what is going to result ina couple years, though some seem to have quite the crystal ball. One can only wish...
As for your flash trouble, data enabled flash is something I hae a lot of experience in. Namely I write a lot of PHP, and I can't say I've had the kind of trouble you've experienced. 60 seconds is a hell of a lot of time, and I've pushed a hell of a lot more data in a 1/4 of the time with no problems, but, there's a lot factors that could be in play there. I hope you didn't use adobe's -horrible- components...
Out of curiosity, what flash sites did you visit to get it to 800megs? I just surfed the hell out of youtube, and the best I could get was just over a 100 megs.
do some research, go see for yourself in person before mouthing off about something you obviously know zero about. It's annoying to see the constant barrage of crap posted everywhere by apple fanbois that has little merit, or basis in fact at all.
It's already been said that adobe certainly missed the boat, has been lazy, blah blah. I already said I firmly believe and support apple's decision NOT to put flash in it's current form on the iphone. And, it's now up to adobe, to deliver. And I meant it.
But the BS has to stop at some point. I love apple stuff too, but that doesn't mean I swallow and parrot everything his Steveness spouts.
the BS will stop once adobe actually ships flash for mobiles. then we'll see if adobe can deliver.
it's been 3 years since this debate started and so far we haven't seen much that's promising.
in the meantime content providers have started to move away from flash for video playback. that's obviously not all flash does, but i'm sure it represents a sizeable chunk of adobe's flash market.
with iphone os devices likely never supporting flash, it's a no-brainer for businesses to abandon flash, if they want the eyeballs of iphone os using customers. in the end it's really up to them (the content providers) to make that decision. it's about their business, not about adobe, and not about apple. the underlying technology is irrelevant if the content does not reach the desired demographic.
the BS will stop once adobe actually ships flash for mobiles. then we'll see if adobe can deliver.
it's been 3 years since this debate started and so far we haven't seen much that's promising.
in the meantime content providers have started to move away from flash for video playback. that's obviously not all flash does, but i'm sure it represents a sizeable chunk of adobe's flash market.
with iphone os devices likely never supporting flash, it's a no-brainer for businesses to abandon flash, if they want the eyeballs of iphone os using customers. in the end it's really up to them (the content providers) to make that decision. it's about their business, not about adobe, and not about apple. the underlying technology is irrelevant if the content does not reach the desired demographic.
we will indeed see how things pan out when adobe finally releases they're player. It's up to adobe at this point as to whether flash will survive, as I've made abundantly clear several times.
Let's remember, apple's smartphone share, -is- only 16%. It's sizeable, worth considering, and a good market. But it isn't big enough to kill flash, even if it grew significantly. I personally don't care if flash ever makes it to iphone, really, but I'd like to see it on tablets.
I think this war is very far, from over, it's just beginning, and already people are placing their bets. This happened in the late 80s I recall...
the best thing about that blog is that i can switch to vimeo and then use their html5 player to watch it without my macbook's fans going into overdrive...
we will indeed see how things pan out when adobe finally releases they're player. It's up to adobe at this point as to whether flash will survive, as I've made abundantly clear several times.
Let's remember, apple's smartphone share, -is- only 16%. It's sizeable, worth considering, and a good market. But it isn't big enough to kill flash, even if it grew significantly. I personally don't care if flash ever makes it to iphone, really, but I'd like to see it on tablets.
I think this war is very far, from over, it's just beginning, and already people are placing their bets. This happened in the late 80s I recall...
while apple's smartphone share is indeed fairly low, the share of phones on the market that come with flash right now is exactly 0%. with the reported hardware requirements being what they are, the market share of full flash capable phones on the market are likely going to be around 1% when adobe finally gets around to actually releasing it.
that means that any business looking for a content delivery vehicle is already looking elsewhere in the meantime. i think the window of opportunity has closed on adobe. the writing has been on the wall for 3 years. i think adobe chose not to read it.
if they had a version for the iphone ready to go (as they have claimed), why didn't they have an android version ready to go that works with the current crop of android phones?
while apple's smartphone share is indeed fairly low, the share of phones on the market that come with flash right now is exactly 0%. with the reported hardware requirements being what they are, the market share of full flash capable phones on the market are likely going to be around 1% when adobe finally gets around to actually releasing it.
that means that any business looking for a content delivery vehicle is already looking elsewhere in the meantime. i think the window of opportunity has closed on adobe. the writing has been on the wall for 3 years. i think adobe chose not to read it.
if they had a version for the iphone ready to go (as they have claimed), why didn't they have an android version ready to go that works with the current crop of android phones?
well there's no doubt adobe has been lazy. I think that's clear. Though I think they may have been referring to flash lite at that point. Apple wasn't interested in flash lite...
But I'll have to disagree that the window of opportunity has closed. The mobile space is very much in it's infancy, and I think a lot of people are jumping to conclusions far too early. And I think Steve Jobs, is keenly aware of this. Clearly, he considers google, a very formidable threat.
Flash certainly has plenty of time to shoot itself in the foot in the future yet.
while apple's smartphone share is indeed fairly low, the share of phones on the market that come with flash right now is exactly 0%. with the reported hardware requirements being what they are, the market share of full flash capable phones on the market are likely going to be around 1% when adobe finally gets around to actually releasing it.
An exact null percentage isn't entirely correct. The Nokia N900 runs Maemo 5 which runs Flash, not Flash Lite. Though I think it's disabled by default because of how shitty it really is. Still, if you look at units sold I doubt that would even round up to a 1/100,000th of a percent.
what's interesting about the marketshare fight here, is people are asserting that no one is going to care about a really small marketshare of flash enabled devices.
Yet somehow, when apple had less than 5%, that was something to really pay attention to.
It doesn't work both ways. I suspect, -if- adobe is successful in deploying a good player that becomes well received, you're going to see some fairly high percentages at the end of 2010. Perhaps, and I'll go out on a limb that I'm sure someone will happily shoot down with all sorts of colorful names, a higher percentage than iphone's marketshare of 16%.
<ducks>
I might remind people that html5, has quite a ways to go yet. Years, in fact...
well there's no doubt adobe has been lazy. I think that's clear. Though I think they may have been referring to flash lite at that point. Apple wasn't interested in flash lite...
But I'll have to disagree that the window of opportunity has closed. The mobile space is very much in it's infancy, and I think a lot of people are jumping to conclusions far too early. And I think Steve Jobs, is keenly aware of this. Clearly, he considers google, a very formidable threat.
Flash certainly has plenty of time to shoot itself in the foot in the future yet.
i'm not arguing that the window is closed over apple's 'high' percentage of market share. i'm predicting that apples customers and demographic - even at say 12% - are important enough for content providers to decide on alternatives that work everywhere.
microsoft's announcement that they will support html5 video through h.264 in IE9 makes flash a less viable product. adobe has coasted on the '97% of computers have flash installed' talking point for years. if we replace 'computers' with 'devices capable of reaching your customers' that is no longer the case.
even if adobe releases a killer version for android, minmo, webos, blackberry and whoever else wants to play - you're locking out a desirable market if you choose flash for video delivery on mobile platforms. since there are viable alternatives out right now, why go that way?
i'm curious to hear if anyone has any numbers on use of flash that's not video related. my guess is that it's not near the numbers that adobe claims for the whole of flash (they're likely always counting video).
i think that 3 years of iphone and ipad touch sales have pretty much proven that flash availability is not nearly as important as adobe wants us to believe. the fact that other mobile manufacturers have jumped to add a checkbox to their specsheets has more to do with wanting to have one advantage over the iphone, than with genuine support for flash as a platform.
Actually the pair of them said I said something, and when I asked where, they never responded. I know why, because I never said them. They took many of my statements, and twisted them, and rarely if ever stayed in a straight enough line. This is my introduction here, I don't know them, all I have to base my impression is that. And:
I never heard what my "lies" were. Then I head I was getting ready for the ban hammer.
Again, I am not going to reread all the posts... Let me just say this: Most of the members you are sparring with are quite open minded, and I try to be. Sometimes, though, it gets frustrating when someone challenges every statement or frequently takes positions opposite to their prior positions (changing sides). It usually looks something like this: I am a total Apple fan, but they really suck on this issue (and everything else too)!
Sometimes it wears thin and people get into "fighting mode"... I know do.
Do you realize that you say that people with 10 of thousands of posts (over many years) to this forum are calling you a liar. And that you, with less than 100 posts in 8 days, are calling them trolls?
Quote:
Anyway, now this gets turned into an us and them somehow, all I was trying to do was inject -some- sanity and truth, or perhaps balance, a devil's advocate, if that were even possible. What resulted, is I'm a anti apple troll or lying adobe shill. Cripes. Is it really that religious here?
Devil's advocates are often mistaken for the Devil, himself. It is a difficult role for a newcomer to carry off... maybe lead in with: "Let me play Devil's advocate and..."
I have been guilty of name calling/insinuation in the heat of a frustrating exchange that appears to be a circular argument that contributes nothing (except to clutter the discussion with cruft).
I think someone mentioned a "Circle Jerk"... at least that could give some satisfaction.
Quote:
I think things are very much in the balance right now. No one can say with any degree of certainty what is going to result ina couple years, though some seem to have quite the crystal ball. One can only wish...
Agree!
Flash may have under-supported the Apple side of things. However, If they can deliver a boffo mobile solution that supports, rather than threatens, the Apple platform...
...SJ could change his mind. Not likely, but it's happened before!
Quote:
As for your flash trouble, data enabled flash is something I hae a lot of experience in. Namely I write a lot of PHP, and I can't say I've had the kind of trouble you've experienced. 60 seconds is a hell of a lot of time, and I've pushed a hell of a lot more data in a 1/4 of the time with no problems, but, there's a lot factors that could be in play there. I hope you didn't use adobe's -horrible- components...
This was in 2004-5, the server-side was ColdFusion MX (Compiled Java ByteCode). Actually, I think I did use Flash Components-- they were the latest, greatest thing!
BTW, Mike Chambers (now with Adobe) was a fellow independent ColdFusion developer and was quite reasonable and helpful... a "good guy".
Quote:
Out of curiosity, what flash sites did you visit to get it to 800megs? I just surfed the hell out of youtube, and the best I could get was just over a 100 megs.
I normally keep 1 browser window open with tabs for all the forum sites I frequent (below). Most of these are loaded with Flash ads and/or videos. I have a few, single tab sites for stocks Apple iPhone SDK, etc. As I find a site or tab that interests me I will right-click and open that topic in a separate window:
I review, but don't participate in the roughly drafted site (second from last)-- it's way too pro-Apple biased for me (The author of that blog is also the author of this thread.)
An exact null percentage isn't entirely correct. The Nokia N900 runs Maemo 5 which runs Flash, not Flash Lite. Though I think it's disabled by default because of how shitty it really is. Still, if you look at units sold I doubt that would even round up to a 1/100,000th of a percent.
i stand corrected. i forgot about the N900. i do seem to recall that it's using flash 9 and popular sites such as hulu don't work on it. soooo - is that still full flash?
what's interesting about the marketshare fight here, is people are asserting that no one is going to care about a really small marketshare of flash enabled devices.
Yet somehow, when apple had less than 5%, that was something to really pay attention to.
It doesn't work both ways. I suspect, -if- adobe is successful in deploying a good player that becomes well received, you're going to see some fairly high percentages at the end of 2010. Perhaps, and I'll go out on a limb that I'm sure someone will happily shoot down with all sorts of colorful names, a higher percentage than iphone's marketshare of 16%.
<ducks>
I might remind people that html5, has quite a ways to go yet. Years, in fact...
i don't think there was a market share fight. flash's market share on mobile is not high enough yet to really fight over...
apple's market share may have been belowe 5%, but both adobe and microsoft have certainly paid attention to it. adobe for the ca. 50% of their CS suite revenue and microsoft... well... somebody had to show them what's next, right?
i stand corrected. i forgot about the N900. i do seem to recall that it's using flash 9 and popular sites such as hulu don't work on it. soooo - is that still full flash?
Technically, yes, but that brings up the next issue in this long list of Flash related issues. As you stated earlier, it "add a checkbox to their specsheets."
I suspect Adobe could have had a stable version of Flash 10.x running on Android a year or two ago, the problem is that is would be as pointless as Flash on the N900. I suspect the instability is from Adobe trying desperately to reduce the resource unfriendly nature of Flash so that it's not technically working on the Nexus One but working well. If they don't offer that then it will just knock them down even further.
After they deal with that issue, then there is the issue of battery life, which they can't solve without being more efficient than the HTML5 video tag option in mobile browsers. The newest lie is that Flash doesn't adversely affect battery life. Let's think about that for a moment. For it not affect battery life it would mean playing HTML5 video would use the same or more CPU cycles than playing that same video in Flash. from my testing with YouTube on the desktop, my CPU is pushed harder (using more power) which generates heat which in turn pushes my fans (using more power). A mobile won't have the fan power issue, but it will have the additional CPU issue even when H.264 is being decoded by the GPU.
Comments
first, change the name. we can't champion something we can't even pronounce. that's why the iceland volcano never went viral.
...or maybe you shall start learning your very first foreign language.
On topic: yeah, we really need yet one more "flash player"?!
"On his Mac, Ryan pulled up a site called Eco Zoo. It is, seemingly, a pretty intense example of Flash development — full of 3D rendering, rich interactions, and cute little characters. Then, he pulled up the same thing on his Nexus One. The site’s progress bar filled in and the 3D world appeared for a few seconds before the browser crashed. Ryan said (paraphrasing), “Whoops! Well, it’s beta, and this is an intense example — let’s try it again.” He tried it again and got the same result. So he said to the audience, “Well, this one isn’t going to work, but does anyone have a Flash site they’d like to see running?” Someone shouted out “Hulu.” Ryan said, “Hulu doesn’t work,” and then wrapped up his demo, telling people if they wanted to try more sites they could find him later and he’d let them play with his Nexus One."
ON THE ANDROID FLASH DEMO AT FLASHCAMP SEATTLE
I witnessed it with 1200 other developers at the design and technology festival in Toronto a few weeks ago, 1200 in attendance at the keynote, they ran 10.1 latest release on an android phone. I didn't get this from a link, a blog, nor did I google it like this guy. If one is interested in more than finding examples in google of flash player performing badly, you can find it. I didn't take video, nor did I take down names of the participants sitting beside me. However, this is well known. The only video I know of that shows of flash on android, is 2 months old. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbmnvikY0rg What I saw, was the more recent update. I could try to see if anyone took video at the event. But really, I doubt that's going to stop this pair from calling me a liar or an adobe shill. They're more interested in flash hating at all costs...
But I'm not the one throwing around the name liar here. I'd like to see where it is I 'lied'. I've been honest about what I know, seen, and my opinion. I don't need some poster calling me a liar.
The video you linked is quite good... what I would expect of a beta product.
I find it odd that the presenter in the link (via Gruber) didn't do a presentation similar to that. Possibly, he was trying to wow em' with a later (buggier) version... if so, bad choice.
I understand your reasons for not being able to cite other developers ... fair enough.
Now, let me state my opinions:
1) I am a Mac user-- always have been, Flash on the Mac Sucks, In my experience. In 2004 I tried to program a Stock market site with Flash: Update a 10 column, 30 row table of stocks where the price changed every minute and the total value of each stock was calculated (price * shares = value) and the total value was summed. All the data acquisition and calculations were done server side, and sent to a Flash window on a web page. The Flash could not run fast enough to refresh 61 table fields (out of 301) every 60 seconds. I had friends at Macromedia/Adobe at that time and several Flash experts looked at the code... Long story short, after much effort, we could not make it perform on a Mac (though it worked fine on slower PCs).
2) Fast forward to current Flash running on a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 4 Gig RAM. After visiting several sites containing Flash the computer slowed. I closed all the Flash windows so Flash was not running at all:
Here's the Flas performance hit:
Also, most of my browser crashes (~95%) were Flash-related. I installed Click2Flash and things "just work" again.
My final point(s)
-- this is an Apple related site for discussion of Apple-related topics, pro and con
-- well-considered, and well-presented points are appreciated by most who choose to participate.
-- several of the members that you are sparring with fit the above description and are generally appreciated
-- while I do not always agree with these members, I enjoy the discussion and sometimes alter my views because of their posts
-- when there is a lot of unproductive bashing going on, I generally look at the participants and my experience with them.
-- often, the contentious posting can be traced to a few anti-Apple Trolls.
-- You and a few others have recently joined this forum (you within the last 8 days) and have made a lot of controversial posts
-- while that in itself does not make you a troll, it does raise suspicion
-- In these situations, I tend to give more credence to members I know (but do not necessarily agree with) than members I do not know.
Finally, I am not going to reread all the posts... but I really doubt that you have been called a "liar'"
Challenging your facts or the "truth" of what you say... is not calling you a liar!
BTW, I read the link via Gruber and all the comments-- I found it a pretty even-handed discussion, and the blogger made considerable effort to be fair and challenge obvious trolls.
.
... Flash is still viable on a desktop. ...
Actually, it's no more viable there than on the iPhone. Content producers aren't going to stick with Flash on the "desktop" for very long once they realize how viable the alternative is; that would be duplicating efforts and Flash just doesn't have the legs even on the desktop to make that duplication worthwhile. Flash is dead everywhere because it's stillborn on mobile. People have a choice of clinging to an outdated technology and falling ever further behind, or getting on board now with HTML5 and reaping the benefits.
I think you meant the Courier.
I mean HP Slate, the device Ballmar had in his hands with the Twilight image of the hands holding 'apple' on it. Courier was a just animation of vapourware that MS said was coming (eventually) in hopes that no one would buy the iPad. Has that type of marketing ever worked?
Should there be a circle jerk on posting bad performance of html5 on the ipad? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4 Does this prove anything? Are we gonna have a flurry of googled links screaming "I'M RIGHT" now?
OMG, why did I click on his kid's post? But glad I did, as it's yet another strike against the bloat of Flash and ineptitude of Adobe.
Now he's implying that Canvas is HTML5 when it's clearly just one aspect of it that is known to be processor intensive. HTML5 has been used since the first iPhone and is used throughout all modern mobile OS browsers.
He probably doesn't even realize the asinine stance of comparing CPU intensive Canvas 3D animations in HTML5 with the Flash video issue. He also probably doesn't even notice the elephant in the room, that Adobe can't even get video to play on Cortex-A8 @ 1GHz w/512MB RAM Nexus One yet HTML5 video plays great on mobiles.
His blinders surely didn't let him see that while the 1st Canvas demo (which pushes my brand new MBP in Safari to use 100%/200% CPU) doesn't crash my iPhone with a 600MHz CPU or the guy's iPad, yet the Nexus One can't even play video or simply crashes altogether.
The last issue — I'm not sure if the Elmer FUD in the video is really good at spreading lies or just a complete buffoon — is his choosing mostly Canvas demos that specifically need a mouse pointer for input, not a touchscreen. We're not going to see this single aspect of HTML5 being used for mobiles until it's much more mature, but HTMl5 for video, the most common use of Flash today, will take over as well as many other aspects of HTML5.
You all can try these demos yourself. Here's the first one... PS: You can also see how much CPU heavy Flash is by installing the latest Beta on your desktop OS and then switching between YouTube's Flash and HTML5 options.
Erm, the name / joke analogy is actually a little boneheaded. How many hugely successful products and companies of the last decade have nonsensical names? I don't even need to provide an example. Your style of thinking might be better suited to hygiene accessory manufacturers.
I just started to read this thread so if some one beat me to it, but how about google?
I just started to read this thread so if some one beat me to it, but how about google?
I believe it is derived from this:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Googol.html
It means "a whole lot" of anything.... likely, more pennies than I'll make in my lifetime
.
The video you linked is quite good... what I would expect of a beta product.
I find it odd that the presenter in the link (via Gruber) didn't do a presentation similar to that. Possibly, he was trying to wow em' with a later (buggier) version... if so, bad choice.
I understand your reasons for not being able to cite other developers ... fair enough.
Now, let me state my opinions:
1) I am a Mac user-- always have been, Flash on the Mac Sucks, In my experience. In 2004 I tried to program a Stock market site with Flash: Update a 10 column, 30 row table of stocks where the price changed every minute and the total value of each stock was calculated (price * shares = value) and the total value was summed. All the data acquisition and calculations were done server side, and sent to a Flash window on a web page. The Flash could not run fast enough to refresh 61 table fields (out of 301) every 60 seconds. I had friends at Macromedia/Adobe at that time and several Flash experts looked at the code... Long story short, after much effort, we could not make it perform on a Mac (though it worked fine on slower PCs).
2) Fast forward to current Flash running a a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 4 Gig RAM. After visiting several sites containing Flash the computer slowed. I closed all the Flash windows so Flash was not running at all:
Here's the Flas performance hit:
Also, most of my browser crashes (~95%) were Flash-related. I installed Click2Flash and things "just work" again.
My final point(s)
-- this is an Apple related site for discussion of Apple-related topics, pro and con
-- well-considered, and well-presented points are appreciated by most who choose to participate.
-- several of the members that you are sparring with fit the above description and are generally appreciated
-- while I do not always agree withe these members, I enjoy the discussion and sometimes alter my views because of their posts
-- when there is a lot of unproductive bashing going on, I generally look at the participants and my experience with them.
-- often, the contentious posting can be traced to a few anti-Apple Trolls.
-- You and a few others have recently joined this forum (you within the last 8 days) and have made a lot of controversial posts
-- while that in itself does not make you a troll, it does raise suspicion
-- In these situations, I tend to give more credence to members I know (but do not necessarily agree with) than members I do not know.
Finally, I am not going to reread all the posts... but I really doubt that you have been called a "liar'"
Challenging your facts or the "truth" of what you say... is not calling you a liar!
BTW, I read the link via Gruber and all the comments-- I found it a pretty even-handed discussion, and the blogger made considerable effort to be fair and challenge obvious trolls.
.
Actually the pair of them said I said something, and when I asked where, they never responded. I know why, because I never said them. They took many of my statements, and twisted them, and rarely if ever stayed in a straight enough line. This is my introduction here, I don't know them, all I have to base my impression is that. And:
Don't add to Groovetube's lies and anti-Apple/pro-Adobe agenda....
I never heard what my "lies" were. Then I head I was getting ready for the ban hammer. Well.
I'm not anti-apple, and certainly no troll. I switched to macs back when very few of my developer friends were on macs, and took a little ribbing for it. My PC corrupted when I had a deadline for the last time, and I had a beige G3 souped up for testing and premier video edits, I downloaded the trials, and even with less than half the power, finished all my work that day. I went out and bought a dual G4 with Jaguar the next day. I've bought a hell of a lot of macs, my shop is pretty much all apple, I own an iphone, bought my wife one, have an apple tv, (love it), and I'm typing on a relatively new 17 MBP tricked out. If I were anti apple, I have a screw loose.
Despite being a card carrying apple user, if Apple, or Steve Jobs does something I really disagree with, I'm going to say so. I disagree with his hard line on flash, not because I think it should have -been- on the phone, because I really DON'T, but because I believe, based on my experience, and involvement, he isn't being altogether truthful. Certainly, not anymore than adobe has been. And I stand firm on that, despite being called an adobe shill, and a liar.
I am at a disadvantage here, because adobe hasn't released 10.1 mobile yet. Personally, it's my business to stay very on top of where this is going, and certainly, I have concerns. I'm hopeful based on what I saw, I know well where the industry is on all this, and we are very far, from the demise of flash. I've developed in flash since version 3 professionally. And this, is certainly by far, not the first time I've heard flash will be killed. It's waaaay to ubiquitous to die that quickly by any means. Flash will take it on the chin over video, but again, it seems people are forgetting something. I've been around long enough, to remember when flash had no video support, and it did just fine then too. It's a point that seems completely missed by everyone.
Flash on the mac has pissed me of since switching. It's always ran about 10 to 20 fps second slower, and things like no kerning tables available on export etc. has been minor annoyances. Adobe has been lazy on developing for mac. Sure it's been frustrating. I think adobe underestimated apple, and 6ish% of the market for it's player just wasn't important enough.
Now we are looking at 16% in the mobile space (though apple guys want you to feel it's 95...), and the ipad will be an important entry into the market. I try to look past all the chest thumping, the flash is GONA DIE! the high fiving, googling of links designed to prove a point, because none of it has any value at the end of the day. I'll make my decisions based on what I see. I, and many hundreds of thousands of developers, are watching adobe right now, and I'm sure they're keenly aware of it. All eyes are on android, the flight to support android in the developer community lately has been rather breath-taking. It was rather almost unknown to me until a number of weeks ago all hell breaks loose. I think google needs to send SJ a note of thanks...
Anyway, now this gets turned into an us and them somehow, all I was trying to do was inject -some- sanity and truth, or perhaps balance, a devil's advocate, if that were even possible. What resulted, is I'm a anti apple troll or lying adobe shill. Cripes. Is it really that religious here? I think things are very much in the balance right now. No one can say with any degree of certainty what is going to result ina couple years, though some seem to have quite the crystal ball. One can only wish...
As for your flash trouble, data enabled flash is something I hae a lot of experience in. Namely I write a lot of PHP, and I can't say I've had the kind of trouble you've experienced. 60 seconds is a hell of a lot of time, and I've pushed a hell of a lot more data in a 1/4 of the time with no problems, but, there's a lot factors that could be in play there. I hope you didn't use adobe's -horrible- components...
Out of curiosity, what flash sites did you visit to get it to 800megs? I just surfed the hell out of youtube, and the best I could get was just over a 100 megs.
do some research, go see for yourself in person before mouthing off about something you obviously know zero about. It's annoying to see the constant barrage of crap posted everywhere by apple fanbois that has little merit, or basis in fact at all.
It's already been said that adobe certainly missed the boat, has been lazy, blah blah. I already said I firmly believe and support apple's decision NOT to put flash in it's current form on the iphone. And, it's now up to adobe, to deliver. And I meant it.
But the BS has to stop at some point. I love apple stuff too, but that doesn't mean I swallow and parrot everything his Steveness spouts.
the BS will stop once adobe actually ships flash for mobiles. then we'll see if adobe can deliver.
it's been 3 years since this debate started and so far we haven't seen much that's promising.
in the meantime content providers have started to move away from flash for video playback. that's obviously not all flash does, but i'm sure it represents a sizeable chunk of adobe's flash market.
with iphone os devices likely never supporting flash, it's a no-brainer for businesses to abandon flash, if they want the eyeballs of iphone os using customers. in the end it's really up to them (the content providers) to make that decision. it's about their business, not about adobe, and not about apple. the underlying technology is irrelevant if the content does not reach the desired demographic.
the BS will stop once adobe actually ships flash for mobiles. then we'll see if adobe can deliver.
it's been 3 years since this debate started and so far we haven't seen much that's promising.
in the meantime content providers have started to move away from flash for video playback. that's obviously not all flash does, but i'm sure it represents a sizeable chunk of adobe's flash market.
with iphone os devices likely never supporting flash, it's a no-brainer for businesses to abandon flash, if they want the eyeballs of iphone os using customers. in the end it's really up to them (the content providers) to make that decision. it's about their business, not about adobe, and not about apple. the underlying technology is irrelevant if the content does not reach the desired demographic.
we will indeed see how things pan out when adobe finally releases they're player. It's up to adobe at this point as to whether flash will survive, as I've made abundantly clear several times.
Let's remember, apple's smartphone share, -is- only 16%. It's sizeable, worth considering, and a good market. But it isn't big enough to kill flash, even if it grew significantly. I personally don't care if flash ever makes it to iphone, really, but I'd like to see it on tablets.
I think this war is very far, from over, it's just beginning, and already people are placing their bets. This happened in the late 80s I recall...
I'm not sure which one you've seen, but this might be number two.SNIP.
the best thing about that blog is that i can switch to vimeo and then use their html5 player to watch it without my macbook's fans going into overdrive...
we will indeed see how things pan out when adobe finally releases they're player. It's up to adobe at this point as to whether flash will survive, as I've made abundantly clear several times.
Let's remember, apple's smartphone share, -is- only 16%. It's sizeable, worth considering, and a good market. But it isn't big enough to kill flash, even if it grew significantly. I personally don't care if flash ever makes it to iphone, really, but I'd like to see it on tablets.
I think this war is very far, from over, it's just beginning, and already people are placing their bets. This happened in the late 80s I recall...
while apple's smartphone share is indeed fairly low, the share of phones on the market that come with flash right now is exactly 0%. with the reported hardware requirements being what they are, the market share of full flash capable phones on the market are likely going to be around 1% when adobe finally gets around to actually releasing it.
that means that any business looking for a content delivery vehicle is already looking elsewhere in the meantime. i think the window of opportunity has closed on adobe. the writing has been on the wall for 3 years. i think adobe chose not to read it.
if they had a version for the iphone ready to go (as they have claimed), why didn't they have an android version ready to go that works with the current crop of android phones?
while apple's smartphone share is indeed fairly low, the share of phones on the market that come with flash right now is exactly 0%. with the reported hardware requirements being what they are, the market share of full flash capable phones on the market are likely going to be around 1% when adobe finally gets around to actually releasing it.
that means that any business looking for a content delivery vehicle is already looking elsewhere in the meantime. i think the window of opportunity has closed on adobe. the writing has been on the wall for 3 years. i think adobe chose not to read it.
if they had a version for the iphone ready to go (as they have claimed), why didn't they have an android version ready to go that works with the current crop of android phones?
well there's no doubt adobe has been lazy. I think that's clear. Though I think they may have been referring to flash lite at that point. Apple wasn't interested in flash lite...
But I'll have to disagree that the window of opportunity has closed. The mobile space is very much in it's infancy, and I think a lot of people are jumping to conclusions far too early. And I think Steve Jobs, is keenly aware of this. Clearly, he considers google, a very formidable threat.
Flash certainly has plenty of time to shoot itself in the foot in the future yet.
while apple's smartphone share is indeed fairly low, the share of phones on the market that come with flash right now is exactly 0%. with the reported hardware requirements being what they are, the market share of full flash capable phones on the market are likely going to be around 1% when adobe finally gets around to actually releasing it.
An exact null percentage isn't entirely correct. The Nokia N900 runs Maemo 5 which runs Flash, not Flash Lite. Though I think it's disabled by default because of how shitty it really is. Still, if you look at units sold I doubt that would even round up to a 1/100,000th of a percent.
Yet somehow, when apple had less than 5%, that was something to really pay attention to.
It doesn't work both ways. I suspect, -if- adobe is successful in deploying a good player that becomes well received, you're going to see some fairly high percentages at the end of 2010. Perhaps, and I'll go out on a limb that I'm sure someone will happily shoot down with all sorts of colorful names, a higher percentage than iphone's marketshare of 16%.
<ducks>
I might remind people that html5, has quite a ways to go yet. Years, in fact...
well there's no doubt adobe has been lazy. I think that's clear. Though I think they may have been referring to flash lite at that point. Apple wasn't interested in flash lite...
But I'll have to disagree that the window of opportunity has closed. The mobile space is very much in it's infancy, and I think a lot of people are jumping to conclusions far too early. And I think Steve Jobs, is keenly aware of this. Clearly, he considers google, a very formidable threat.
Flash certainly has plenty of time to shoot itself in the foot in the future yet.
i'm not arguing that the window is closed over apple's 'high' percentage of market share. i'm predicting that apples customers and demographic - even at say 12% - are important enough for content providers to decide on alternatives that work everywhere.
microsoft's announcement that they will support html5 video through h.264 in IE9 makes flash a less viable product. adobe has coasted on the '97% of computers have flash installed' talking point for years. if we replace 'computers' with 'devices capable of reaching your customers' that is no longer the case.
even if adobe releases a killer version for android, minmo, webos, blackberry and whoever else wants to play - you're locking out a desirable market if you choose flash for video delivery on mobile platforms. since there are viable alternatives out right now, why go that way?
i'm curious to hear if anyone has any numbers on use of flash that's not video related. my guess is that it's not near the numbers that adobe claims for the whole of flash (they're likely always counting video).
i think that 3 years of iphone and ipad touch sales have pretty much proven that flash availability is not nearly as important as adobe wants us to believe. the fact that other mobile manufacturers have jumped to add a checkbox to their specsheets has more to do with wanting to have one advantage over the iphone, than with genuine support for flash as a platform.
Actually the pair of them said I said something, and when I asked where, they never responded. I know why, because I never said them. They took many of my statements, and twisted them, and rarely if ever stayed in a straight enough line. This is my introduction here, I don't know them, all I have to base my impression is that. And:
I never heard what my "lies" were. Then I head I was getting ready for the ban hammer.
Again, I am not going to reread all the posts... Let me just say this: Most of the members you are sparring with are quite open minded, and I try to be. Sometimes, though, it gets frustrating when someone challenges every statement or frequently takes positions opposite to their prior positions (changing sides). It usually looks something like this: I am a total Apple fan, but they really suck on this issue (and everything else too)!
Sometimes it wears thin and people get into "fighting mode"... I know do.
Do you realize that you say that people with 10 of thousands of posts (over many years) to this forum are calling you a liar. And that you, with less than 100 posts in 8 days, are calling them trolls?
Anyway, now this gets turned into an us and them somehow, all I was trying to do was inject -some- sanity and truth, or perhaps balance, a devil's advocate, if that were even possible. What resulted, is I'm a anti apple troll or lying adobe shill. Cripes. Is it really that religious here?
Devil's advocates are often mistaken for the Devil, himself. It is a difficult role for a newcomer to carry off... maybe lead in with: "Let me play Devil's advocate and..."
I have been guilty of name calling/insinuation in the heat of a frustrating exchange that appears to be a circular argument that contributes nothing (except to clutter the discussion with cruft).
I think someone mentioned a "Circle Jerk"... at least that could give some satisfaction.
I think things are very much in the balance right now. No one can say with any degree of certainty what is going to result ina couple years, though some seem to have quite the crystal ball. One can only wish...
Agree!
Flash may have under-supported the Apple side of things. However, If they can deliver a boffo mobile solution that supports, rather than threatens, the Apple platform...
...SJ could change his mind. Not likely, but it's happened before!
As for your flash trouble, data enabled flash is something I hae a lot of experience in. Namely I write a lot of PHP, and I can't say I've had the kind of trouble you've experienced. 60 seconds is a hell of a lot of time, and I've pushed a hell of a lot more data in a 1/4 of the time with no problems, but, there's a lot factors that could be in play there. I hope you didn't use adobe's -horrible- components...
This was in 2004-5, the server-side was ColdFusion MX (Compiled Java ByteCode). Actually, I think I did use Flash Components-- they were the latest, greatest thing!
BTW, Mike Chambers (now with Adobe) was a fellow independent ColdFusion developer and was quite reasonable and helpful... a "good guy".
Out of curiosity, what flash sites did you visit to get it to 800megs? I just surfed the hell out of youtube, and the best I could get was just over a 100 megs.
I normally keep 1 browser window open with tabs for all the forum sites I frequent (below). Most of these are loaded with Flash ads and/or videos. I have a few, single tab sites for stocks Apple iPhone SDK, etc. As I find a site or tab that interests me I will right-click and open that topic in a separate window:
Here are the forum tabs:
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/Quote.dll?s...x=26&multi.y=4
http://daringfireball.net/
http://www.patentlyapple.com/
http://www.macrumors.com/
http://www.macbytes.com/
http://www.appleinsider.com/
http://www.macworld.com/
http://www.macsimumnews.com/
http://www.macnn.com/
http://macdevcenter.com/
http://apple.slashdot.org/
http://www.macsurfer.com/
http://arstechnica.com/index.ars
http://www.eweek.com/
http://roughlydrafted.com/
http://www.tuaw.com/
I review, but don't participate in the roughly drafted site (second from last)-- it's way too pro-Apple biased for me (The author of that blog is also the author of this thread.)
.
An exact null percentage isn't entirely correct. The Nokia N900 runs Maemo 5 which runs Flash, not Flash Lite. Though I think it's disabled by default because of how shitty it really is. Still, if you look at units sold I doubt that would even round up to a 1/100,000th of a percent.
i stand corrected. i forgot about the N900. i do seem to recall that it's using flash 9 and popular sites such as hulu don't work on it. soooo - is that still full flash?
what's interesting about the marketshare fight here, is people are asserting that no one is going to care about a really small marketshare of flash enabled devices.
Yet somehow, when apple had less than 5%, that was something to really pay attention to.
It doesn't work both ways. I suspect, -if- adobe is successful in deploying a good player that becomes well received, you're going to see some fairly high percentages at the end of 2010. Perhaps, and I'll go out on a limb that I'm sure someone will happily shoot down with all sorts of colorful names, a higher percentage than iphone's marketshare of 16%.
<ducks>
I might remind people that html5, has quite a ways to go yet. Years, in fact...
i don't think there was a market share fight. flash's market share on mobile is not high enough yet to really fight over...
apple's market share may have been belowe 5%, but both adobe and microsoft have certainly paid attention to it. adobe for the ca. 50% of their CS suite revenue and microsoft... well... somebody had to show them what's next, right?
i stand corrected. i forgot about the N900. i do seem to recall that it's using flash 9 and popular sites such as hulu don't work on it. soooo - is that still full flash?
Technically, yes, but that brings up the next issue in this long list of Flash related issues. As you stated earlier, it "add a checkbox to their specsheets."
I suspect Adobe could have had a stable version of Flash 10.x running on Android a year or two ago, the problem is that is would be as pointless as Flash on the N900. I suspect the instability is from Adobe trying desperately to reduce the resource unfriendly nature of Flash so that it's not technically working on the Nexus One but working well. If they don't offer that then it will just knock them down even further.
After they deal with that issue, then there is the issue of battery life, which they can't solve without being more efficient than the HTML5 video tag option in mobile browsers. The newest lie is that Flash doesn't adversely affect battery life. Let's think about that for a moment. For it not affect battery life it would mean playing HTML5 video would use the same or more CPU cycles than playing that same video in Flash. from my testing with YouTube on the desktop, my CPU is pushed harder (using more power) which generates heat which in turn pushes my fans (using more power). A mobile won't have the fan power issue, but it will have the additional CPU issue even when H.264 is being decoded by the GPU.