HTML5 is a very flexible architecture but it is nothing like Flash, aside from the considerable similarities between ECMAScript and Actionscript.
As another web developer, I strongly disagree.
HTML5 simply makes HTML better. The audio and video tags are far simpler than using flash. The canvas tag lets you render complex bitmap images on the fly. Offline storage, client-side databases, and web sockets (advanced networking) create a level playing field.
ECMAScript ('JavaScript' to everyone else) is incredibly powerful. It really gives ActionScript a run for it's money. Sure, it's not 'user friendly', but neither is ActionScript. They both require learning and people will go with what is built-in instead of using third pary technologies. It was never intended for use by non-programmers.
If you still don't think ECMAScript is powerful, look at these graphics intensive demos:
As far as Im concerned HTML5 as a new standard which seem pretty exciting where as Flash should go away and die. SInce upgrading to ML I haven't installed flash and can browse the net for as long as I want without the fan on my macbook kicking in.
Funny thing is, when I get to a webpage that has Flash, I just grab my iPad and it usually has a HTML5 version. Go figure - the iPad, best Flash render device available.
HTML5 is a very flexible architecture but it is nothing like Flash, aside from the considerable similarities between ECMAScript and Actionscript.
As another web developer, I strongly disagree.
I guess after rereading that statement it might be construed to meaning I favored Flash over HTML5 which is not the case. I am only commenting that they are different but have some similarities. No argument or judgement, just different. If you are arguing that they are the same then I suppose I misunderstood your comment that you strongly disagree.
As far as Im concerned HTML5 as a new standard which seem pretty exciting where as Flash should go away and die. SInce upgrading to ML I haven't installed flash and can browse the net for as long as I want without the fan on my macbook kicking in.
Funny thing is, when I get to a webpage that has Flash, I just grab my iPad and it usually has a HTML5 version. Go figure - the iPad, best Flash render device available.
If you are surfing on your Mac and the site is offering Flash as the first alternative it is probably because the Flash version is higher quality and the programmer sees that you have it installed. If you don't want to view it in Flash you could uninstall it and then the site would offer HTML5 as a first alternative so long as the programmer is looking at the absence of a Flash browser plugin. Even if the animation was originally done in HTML5, the programmer is potentially giving the same but reverse courtesy to IE users by making an alternate version in Flash since IE<9 cannot read HTML5 very well.
If you are surfing on your Mac and the site is offering Flash as the first alternative it is probably because the Flash version is higher quality and the programmer sees that you have it installed. If you don't want to view it in Flash you could uninstall it and then the site would offer HTML5 as a first alternative so long as the programmer is looking at the absence of a Flash browser plugin. Even if the animation was originally done in HTML5, the programmer is potentially giving the same but reverse courtesy to IE users by making an alternate version in Flash since IE<9 cannot read HTML5 very well.
That is very kind of you to explain! I forgot to mention that I don't have Flash installed on my working machine, only on my test environment. Hats of to you sir, for all your informative posts.
That is very kind of you to explain! I forgot to mention that I don't have Flash installed on my working machine, only on my test environment. Hats of to you sir, for all your informative posts.
Thanks. I'm trying to be impartial but having given the topic more thought I would like to offer a few more opinions/observations/insights in case anyone is interested in discussing further.
As some may have noticed, the subhead of the article graphic says "We embrace and extend the coming wave of standards-based user interface technology"
This statement clearly defines the most useful part of the HTML5 specification, user interface. In the past people have created horrible Flash sites, (auto industry, restaurants) where all of the user interfaces were built in Flash just to provide some sense of transition, or blending as a means to convey elegance. This has all been superseded with HTML5. User interface is the most appropriate utilization of HTML5 and exposes the completely wrong implementation of Flash. Among many failures of Flash as a user interface is that it is not very indexable by search engines and is generally not very accessible to visually impaired users. But aside from that it is just not compatible with mobile devices so Flash has been reduced to a less than ideal media for typical Internet content delivery.
That said, there are some stark differences between what Flash is really good at and what HTML5 is not so good at. The reason Flash originally rose to such prominence was because of the video codec wars. It became the universal ubiquitous format that all browsers could read and it is still necessary in that regard for IE<9. In my own experience I am doing many more versions of video since the supposed end of the video wars. I create five different versions now, I encode an MPG, an MP4, a WebM, an OGG, and an FLV to target all popular browsers. So the video wars still rage on. One thing to keep in mind is that if you are using the <video> tag in HTML5 be sure to put MP4 first as Safari has(had) a bug where unless they were first in the list they could not load the video. Not sure if that has been fixed yet but I just always put Apple first since the other browsers don't seem to have a problem sorting through the available codec list until they find one they like.
Returning to the Flash controversy, I think there is no real comparison necessary between HTML5 and Flash except in the regard to the HTML5 canvas tag. The canvas tag is severely limited compared to Flash. With Flash, the really unique quality is that with pure animation it offers unmatched performance and smoothness of animation qualities all within a single viewport. When considering a single viewport animation, Flash is far superior to the canvas tag because it offers many advantages among which is layers, buffering and user interaction. I could go into a lot of detail about the differences but as an overview the canvas tag is only useful to display an animation nothing more. There is no drag and drop, hit detection, pause, rewind, play backwards or any type of user initiated actions. Sure you can address some actions from Javascript controls outside of the canvas viewport but that is rather awkward compared to the total integration of Flash. But to be fair there is not much need for that type of integration unless your application needs to do things like a white board while video is playing and you also happen to be having a video conference while uploading files with a real time progress bar, yes, extreme but Flash can do it, where HTML5 cannot even come close.
Bottom line is I want to put an end to the Flash vs. HTML5 wars. They each excel at different things and the best industry practices is to not use either of them for the incorrect purpose.
No one commented on Hype so here's my 2 cents. I used it. It is certainly a start but the resulting creations tend to be sluggish. It's also not being progressed nearly fast enough. At first it seemed wonderful but lacking in many areas that I hoped would be filled in over the following year. It's been a while and nothing new seems to have occurred.
If Hype and iWeb could be combined and brought up to date with iCloud features as well as the ability to be in a 'pro' as well as a 'home' version ... Oh well I dream on ...
Thanks. I'm trying to be impartial but having given the topic more thought I would like to offer a few more opinions/observations/insights in case anyone is interested in discussing further.
[shamelessly truncated your post; people, please read it as it's very informative]
Bottom line is I want to put an end to the Flash vs. HTML5 wars. They each excel at different things and the best industry practices is to not use either of them for the incorrect purpose.
Wow, good write up, fantastic summery in the Bottom Line.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
HTML5 is a very flexible architecture but it is nothing like Flash, aside from the considerable similarities between ECMAScript and Actionscript.
As another web developer, I strongly disagree.
HTML5 simply makes HTML better. The audio and video tags are far simpler than using flash. The canvas tag lets you render complex bitmap images on the fly. Offline storage, client-side databases, and web sockets (advanced networking) create a level playing field.
ECMAScript ('JavaScript' to everyone else) is incredibly powerful. It really gives ActionScript a run for it's money. Sure, it's not 'user friendly', but neither is ActionScript. They both require learning and people will go with what is built-in instead of using third pary technologies. It was never intended for use by non-programmers.
If you still don't think ECMAScript is powerful, look at these graphics intensive demos:
http://www.playmycode.com/play/game/krakatomato/itopia
http://www.playmycode.com/play/game/joe/blurry-transforms
It does games well too:
http://www.playmycode.com/play/game/jayenkai/puzzobomb-jr
Funny thing is, when I get to a webpage that has Flash, I just grab my iPad and it usually has a HTML5 version. Go figure - the iPad, best Flash render device available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrubhar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
HTML5 is a very flexible architecture but it is nothing like Flash, aside from the considerable similarities between ECMAScript and Actionscript.
As another web developer, I strongly disagree.
I guess after rereading that statement it might be construed to meaning I favored Flash over HTML5 which is not the case. I am only commenting that they are different but have some similarities. No argument or judgement, just different. If you are arguing that they are the same then I suppose I misunderstood your comment that you strongly disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoadm
As far as Im concerned HTML5 as a new standard which seem pretty exciting where as Flash should go away and die. SInce upgrading to ML I haven't installed flash and can browse the net for as long as I want without the fan on my macbook kicking in.
Funny thing is, when I get to a webpage that has Flash, I just grab my iPad and it usually has a HTML5 version. Go figure - the iPad, best Flash render device available.
If you are surfing on your Mac and the site is offering Flash as the first alternative it is probably because the Flash version is higher quality and the programmer sees that you have it installed. If you don't want to view it in Flash you could uninstall it and then the site would offer HTML5 as a first alternative so long as the programmer is looking at the absence of a Flash browser plugin. Even if the animation was originally done in HTML5, the programmer is potentially giving the same but reverse courtesy to IE users by making an alternate version in Flash since IE<9 cannot read HTML5 very well.
That is very kind of you to explain! I forgot to mention that I don't have Flash installed on my working machine, only on my test environment. Hats of to you sir, for all your informative posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
That is very kind of you to explain! I forgot to mention that I don't have Flash installed on my working machine, only on my test environment. Hats of to you sir, for all your informative posts.
Thanks. I'm trying to be impartial but having given the topic more thought I would like to offer a few more opinions/observations/insights in case anyone is interested in discussing further.
As some may have noticed, the subhead of the article graphic says "We embrace and extend the coming wave of standards-based user interface technology"
This statement clearly defines the most useful part of the HTML5 specification, user interface. In the past people have created horrible Flash sites, (auto industry, restaurants) where all of the user interfaces were built in Flash just to provide some sense of transition, or blending as a means to convey elegance. This has all been superseded with HTML5. User interface is the most appropriate utilization of HTML5 and exposes the completely wrong implementation of Flash. Among many failures of Flash as a user interface is that it is not very indexable by search engines and is generally not very accessible to visually impaired users. But aside from that it is just not compatible with mobile devices so Flash has been reduced to a less than ideal media for typical Internet content delivery.
That said, there are some stark differences between what Flash is really good at and what HTML5 is not so good at. The reason Flash originally rose to such prominence was because of the video codec wars. It became the universal ubiquitous format that all browsers could read and it is still necessary in that regard for IE<9. In my own experience I am doing many more versions of video since the supposed end of the video wars. I create five different versions now, I encode an MPG, an MP4, a WebM, an OGG, and an FLV to target all popular browsers. So the video wars still rage on. One thing to keep in mind is that if you are using the <video> tag in HTML5 be sure to put MP4 first as Safari has(had) a bug where unless they were first in the list they could not load the video. Not sure if that has been fixed yet but I just always put Apple first since the other browsers don't seem to have a problem sorting through the available codec list until they find one they like.
Returning to the Flash controversy, I think there is no real comparison necessary between HTML5 and Flash except in the regard to the HTML5 canvas tag. The canvas tag is severely limited compared to Flash. With Flash, the really unique quality is that with pure animation it offers unmatched performance and smoothness of animation qualities all within a single viewport. When considering a single viewport animation, Flash is far superior to the canvas tag because it offers many advantages among which is layers, buffering and user interaction. I could go into a lot of detail about the differences but as an overview the canvas tag is only useful to display an animation nothing more. There is no drag and drop, hit detection, pause, rewind, play backwards or any type of user initiated actions. Sure you can address some actions from Javascript controls outside of the canvas viewport but that is rather awkward compared to the total integration of Flash. But to be fair there is not much need for that type of integration unless your application needs to do things like a white board while video is playing and you also happen to be having a video conference while uploading files with a real time progress bar, yes, extreme but Flash can do it, where HTML5 cannot even come close.
Bottom line is I want to put an end to the Flash vs. HTML5 wars. They each excel at different things and the best industry practices is to not use either of them for the incorrect purpose.
No one commented on Hype so here's my 2 cents. I used it. It is certainly a start but the resulting creations tend to be sluggish. It's also not being progressed nearly fast enough. At first it seemed wonderful but lacking in many areas that I hoped would be filled in over the following year. It's been a while and nothing new seems to have occurred.
If Hype and iWeb could be combined and brought up to date with iCloud features as well as the ability to be in a 'pro' as well as a 'home' version ... Oh well I dream on ...
Wow, good write up, fantastic summery in the Bottom Line.
Thank you, mstone.