Sure thing, I tested some html5 basic animation stuff this morning, and while it worked in general on several browsers, it failed completely on the iphone.
So much for the present! oppps! Guess it's er, in beta or something...
Really? I don't think you've been consistent at all. I think you're shifting your position to sidestep your misstatements faster than Michael Flatley's feet move.
He's so stuck on HTML5's Canvas not being ready as proof that none of HTML5 is ready. I see CSS 3D Transforms as a better, more complete example Here are a few examples:
You can even copy the text elements from them as you'd expect from an open standards solution. The problem with this, Canvas and what is a major issue with Flash that Adobe has tried to hide is the ability to effectively interact with the animation with a touchscreen device.
yep. but what I really love is Adobe's stance that Apple is taking a step back, restricting the web etc.
And yet they love Apple. they are willing to 'dance with the devil', going for the money instead of saying that they feel so strongly about what they perceive as a cult of censorship that they are halting all Mac development and updates until Apple reverses their opinion.
Flash is wonderful. Flash gives us choice. Adobe is doing things right, even if they are lazy. Flash on iPhone is a dog (even though it isn't on iPhone), ...
That's just off the top of my head, and no one knows at this point what your position is, or was yesterday.
He's so stuck on HTML5's Canvas not being ready as proof that none of HTML5 is ready. I see CSS 3D Transforms as a better, more complete example Here are a few examples:
You can even copy the text elements from them as you'd expect from an open standards solution. The problem with this, Canvas and what is a major issue with Flash that Adobe has tried to hide is the ability to effectively interact with the animation with a touchscreen device.
if you follow what's happening at all, they haven't hid that at all.
Now I thought you'd repeat yourself, and you didn't disappoint. For the 20th time, we all know html5, parts of it anyway, is currently starting to get used. Unfortunately, you're stuck on repeat.
Once again, I am focusing squarely, on the parts that will replace flash. Mainly, the animation stuff. I want to see html5 sites that replace flash full out.
And out of the 3 links, one worked, one crashed the browser, and the 3rd stuttered pretty hard.
Well at least I got one that worked! Although these are merely concepts.
I have a client who asked me if I could use html5 to do a site similar to flash (he wants it to work on an iphone).
All I have are experiments, some working, some not, but no full real world examples. Any examples?
you need to go through your own posts and count the times you thrown around similar non-arguments... i know you can do better! \
Im not sure he can. He keeps telling everyone else to supply examples, they do, he claims they crashed his browser and wants even more examples. Yet all he can do is be hostile and supply no details or examples himself. Just BS in every post.
if you follow what's happening at all, they haven't hid that at all.
Now I thought you'd repeat yourself, and you didn't disappoint. For the 20th time, we all know html5, parts of it anyway, is currently starting to get used. Unfortunately, you're stuck on repeat.
Once again, I am focusing squarely, on the parts that will replace flash. Mainly, the animation stuff. I want to see html5 sites that replace flash full out.
And out of the 3 links, one worked, one crashed the browser, and the 3rd stuttered pretty hard.
Well at least I got one that worked! Although these are merely concepts.
I have a client who asked me if I could use html5 to do a site similar to flash (he wants it to work on an iphone).
All I have are experiments, some working, some not, but no full real world examples. Any examples?
Flash is wonderful. Flash gives us choice. Adobe is doing things right, even if they are lazy. Flash on iPhone is a dog (even though it isn't on iPhone), ...
That's just off the top of my head, and no one knows at this point what your position is, or was yesterday.
I can't say I'm too surprised that you'd summarize it that way. It tells me, that you are only interested in your own opinion, and being right. Having a discussion, I guess is a little over your head.
No, I've said I like the flash platform, I think the platform is a very platform to develop in. I know it's capabilities, and it hasn't been shown to me at all that html5 is capable of replacing more than some of it's capabilities.
However none of that matters if adobe doesn't release a fully functioning player for mobile. Being part of the industry, I have attended a few major conferences recently, and saw the beta player first hand. What I saw, showed there is a very good possibility they will do it. Sorry that's all I got.
As I said, I'm well aware of the reasons why the current flash player isn't on i-products currently. And never questioned it. I also am not fully against not developing apps in flash.
So, I really don't know why this is so difficult to understand. It seems a handful of you only have the ability to call people adobe shills if they even appear to disagree with your opinions. If you post inaccurate facts, I'll correct them. Only because I'm more interested in hearing what the truth is rather than simply regurgitating BS I read on a blog trying to look smart on a forum.
all three work fine on my mac and my iphone. what are you using to test them? IE?
no, they work great actually on the mac. In fact I've seen some really cool experiments done in html5 on mac. But the iphone, not so good. Bit then I have a 3G so perhaps it'll run better on 3gs or 4g.
It's just really sad that in Adobe putting a heart in their response, journalists writing about this think that Adobe is showing love to Apple. Look at the headlines - it shows such superficiality.
Beyond the hearts, the Adobe letter is full of lies - the main one being despite all the words, Adobe Flash (registered trademark) is not open; it's proprietary.
no, they work great actually on the mac. In fact I've seen some really cool experiments done in html5 on mac. But the iphone, not so good. Bit then I have a 3G so perhaps it'll run better on 3gs or 4g.
i have a 3G myself. all three run smooth. maybe you didn't wait until it finished loading...?
Adobe on Thursday responded to Steve Jobs' "Thoughts on Flash" with an open letter of its own, and also began a new ad campaign in which the company says it "loves" Apple -- but dislikes "anybody taking away your freedom" to use the Web freely.
Yeah...... that's not an ad campaign. That's a PR campaign. They're not advertising anything, just defaming Apple. Compare the "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" ads, which, while they mostly are about slagging off Microsoft, do at least assert that Apple's products are better.
They aren't actually claiming to have any interest in freedom to use the web. They say:
"...to choose... what you experience on the web"
See, talking about experience rather than usage, as if they're going to tie your arms to your chair and parade a series of web pages in front of you. "Experience" is a word that suggests animated content, the only element of the web that Flash can claim to be distinctly good at. In that sense - that they care about users encountering as much Flash content as possible - I totally believe them.
Quote:
Apple's changes to its developer agreement could result in an antitrust inquiry from the U.S. federal government. The Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have reportedly begun looking into the matter after receiving complaints from developers and Adobe.
Apple sneezing could result in an antitrust inquiry from the US government. Let's not get excited until they've decided whether it actually has sufficient merit to pursue.
As for the open letter...
I think it's fantastic that they're continuing the 19th century metaphor with a sepia photo of them. Maybe this open letter was sent through time???
Quote:
If the web fragments into closed systems... their success will come at the expense of ... creativity and innovation.
I suppose they are talking about accessibility, the idea that there could be sections of the web which are not accessible by all.
Frankly, their own closed system does a fine job of proving this point, particularly on mobile devices: without an open Flash execution environment market, if you put Flash content on your site you know that there will be some people who cannot access it (properly), and that limits how much you can make your site integrate with your Flash content, while at the same time the plugin's ubiquity compared to open alternatives forces some people to have their creativity constrained by using Adobe's tools.
Quote:
We believe that consumers should be able to freely access their favorite [free] content and [free] applications, regardless of what computer they have...
Okay Adobe, I want you to compel all OS and browser makers to bundle a Spectrum emulator browser plug-in. Oh, are you not so interested in my freedom now?
Quote:
Adobe's business philosophy is based on a premise that, in an open market, the best products will win in the end... In the early days, PostScript attracted 72 clone makers, but we held onto our market leadership by out-innovating the pack
If it's an open market, there are no clones. Clone products are society's reaction to the limitations of closed markets. Apple clones (or would a better term be Mac clones?) came about because people wanted Apple products, but availability, price or features made them less desirable. Even though Apple granted the clone makers legitimacy by allowing resale of their OS, it was always a closed system because Apple's own products were the standard.
Let us not forget that Microsoft "out-innovated the pack" too, with Internet Explorer and with Java. Open market? I don't think so.
Quote:
We publish the specifications for Flash ? meaning anyone can make their own Flash player. Yet, Adobe Flash technology remains the market leader because of the constant creativity and technical innovation of our employees.
We believe that Apple, by taking the opposite approach, has taken a step that could undermine this next chapter of the web ? the chapter in which mobile devices outnumber computers, any individual can be a publisher, and content is accessed anywhere and at any time.
Note that "creativity and technical innovation" means changing the spec, which suppresses everyone else's innovation because they spend all their time trying to maintain compatibility.
Apple does happily publish the specifications for iPhone applications (I'm sure that Adobe are not trying to assert that they should be able to make their own iPhones), with the admitted exception of some frameworks, and certainly can't be said to be both uncreative and uninnovative. Even if Apple's behaviour were consistent with Adobe's outlandish claims, by championing javascript and HTML5 (of which there are a few competing implementations) over Flash they vastly increase the chance of web content being accessible on mobile devices, since that means that mobile device makers would not be at the mercy of Adobe's unfathomable interest in supporting their OS and would rather be able to choose something suitable from a variety of different browser rendering engines.
I've got to say, Adobe's convinced me: for the future of the web, content needs to be standards-based, and thus not Flash.
I can't say I'm too surprised that you'd summarize it that way. It tells me, that you are only interested in your own opinion, and being right. Having a discussion, I guess is a little over your head.
No, I've said I like the flash platform, I think the platform is a very platform to develop in. I know it's capabilities, and it hasn't been shown to me at all that html5 is capable of replacing more than some of it's capabilities.
However none of that matters if adobe doesn't release a fully functioning player for mobile. Being part of the industry, I have attended a few major conferences recently, and saw the beta player first hand. What I saw, showed there is a very good possibility they will do it. Sorry that's all I got.
As I said, I'm well aware of the reasons why the current flash player isn't on i-products currently. And never questioned it. I also am not fully against not developing apps in flash.
So, I really don't know why this is so difficult to understand. It seems a handful of you only have the ability to call people adobe shills if they even appear to disagree with your opinions. If you post inaccurate facts, I'll correct them. Only because I'm more interested in hearing what the truth is rather than simply regurgitating BS I read on a blog trying to look smart on a forum.
It's not "webkit proprietary code". It's currently only supported in Webkit because of where and why it was created, and it being part of CSS3, which is still very new and a working draft. I'm not even sure Chrome yet supports it which is Webkit-based. It's easy to code while using low resources so I expect this one to pass and be widely adopted. You can't expect everyone to adopt something out of the gate. I gate Adobe 2 years to get Flash straightened out. All I heard were promises. It's now been almost 3.5 years and it's still not available for a single Android phone.
Comments
Sure thing, I tested some html5 basic animation stuff this morning, and while it worked in general on several browsers, it failed completely on the iphone.
So much for the present! oppps! Guess it's er, in beta or something...
Really? I don't think you've been consistent at all. I think you're shifting your position to sidestep your misstatements faster than Michael Flatley's feet move.
He's so stuck on HTML5's Canvas not being ready as proof that none of HTML5 is ready. I see CSS 3D Transforms as a better, more complete example Here are a few examples:You can even copy the text elements from them as you'd expect from an open standards solution. The problem with this, Canvas and what is a major issue with Flash that Adobe has tried to hide is the ability to effectively interact with the animation with a touchscreen device.
You got to love wars between companies
yep. but what I really love is Adobe's stance that Apple is taking a step back, restricting the web etc.
And yet they love Apple. they are willing to 'dance with the devil', going for the money instead of saying that they feel so strongly about what they perceive as a cult of censorship that they are halting all Mac development and updates until Apple reverses their opinion.
care to elaborate?
Flash is wonderful. Flash gives us choice. Adobe is doing things right, even if they are lazy. Flash on iPhone is a dog (even though it isn't on iPhone), ...
That's just off the top of my head, and no one knows at this point what your position is, or was yesterday.
He's so stuck on HTML5's Canvas not being ready as proof that none of HTML5 is ready. I see CSS 3D Transforms as a better, more complete example Here are a few examples:You can even copy the text elements from them as you'd expect from an open standards solution. The problem with this, Canvas and what is a major issue with Flash that Adobe has tried to hide is the ability to effectively interact with the animation with a touchscreen device.
if you follow what's happening at all, they haven't hid that at all.
Now I thought you'd repeat yourself, and you didn't disappoint. For the 20th time, we all know html5, parts of it anyway, is currently starting to get used. Unfortunately, you're stuck on repeat.
Once again, I am focusing squarely, on the parts that will replace flash. Mainly, the animation stuff. I want to see html5 sites that replace flash full out.
And out of the 3 links, one worked, one crashed the browser, and the 3rd stuttered pretty hard.
Well at least I got one that worked! Although these are merely concepts.
I have a client who asked me if I could use html5 to do a site similar to flash (he wants it to work on an iphone).
All I have are experiments, some working, some not, but no full real world examples. Any examples?
yeah see it all comes down to that doesn't it. When you can't discuss the issue head on, just either call them a liar, or adobe shill.
classic.
you need to go through your own posts and count the times you thrown around similar non-arguments... i know you can do better!
you need to go through your own posts and count the times you thrown around similar non-arguments... i know you can do better!
Im not sure he can. He keeps telling everyone else to supply examples, they do, he claims they crashed his browser and wants even more examples. Yet all he can do is be hostile and supply no details or examples himself. Just BS in every post.
if you follow what's happening at all, they haven't hid that at all.
Now I thought you'd repeat yourself, and you didn't disappoint. For the 20th time, we all know html5, parts of it anyway, is currently starting to get used. Unfortunately, you're stuck on repeat.
Once again, I am focusing squarely, on the parts that will replace flash. Mainly, the animation stuff. I want to see html5 sites that replace flash full out.
And out of the 3 links, one worked, one crashed the browser, and the 3rd stuttered pretty hard.
Well at least I got one that worked! Although these are merely concepts.
I have a client who asked me if I could use html5 to do a site similar to flash (he wants it to work on an iphone).
All I have are experiments, some working, some not, but no full real world examples. Any examples?
Maybe you just don't know what you're doing.
if you follow what's happening at all, they haven't hid that at all.
snip
And out of the 3 links, one worked, one crashed the browser, and the 3rd stuttered pretty hard.
snip
all three work fine on my mac and my iphone. what are you using to test them? IE?
Flash is wonderful. Flash gives us choice. Adobe is doing things right, even if they are lazy. Flash on iPhone is a dog (even though it isn't on iPhone), ...
That's just off the top of my head, and no one knows at this point what your position is, or was yesterday.
I can't say I'm too surprised that you'd summarize it that way. It tells me, that you are only interested in your own opinion, and being right. Having a discussion, I guess is a little over your head.
No, I've said I like the flash platform, I think the platform is a very platform to develop in. I know it's capabilities, and it hasn't been shown to me at all that html5 is capable of replacing more than some of it's capabilities.
However none of that matters if adobe doesn't release a fully functioning player for mobile. Being part of the industry, I have attended a few major conferences recently, and saw the beta player first hand. What I saw, showed there is a very good possibility they will do it. Sorry that's all I got.
As I said, I'm well aware of the reasons why the current flash player isn't on i-products currently. And never questioned it. I also am not fully against not developing apps in flash.
So, I really don't know why this is so difficult to understand. It seems a handful of you only have the ability to call people adobe shills if they even appear to disagree with your opinions. If you post inaccurate facts, I'll correct them. Only because I'm more interested in hearing what the truth is rather than simply regurgitating BS I read on a blog trying to look smart on a forum.
That's for losers.
all three work fine on my mac and my iphone. what are you using to test them? IE?
no, they work great actually on the mac. In fact I've seen some really cool experiments done in html5 on mac. But the iphone, not so good. Bit then I have a 3G so perhaps it'll run better on 3gs or 4g.
Flash has always workded fine on Safari, just not on the mobile platform.
fine? i think you're being generous...
Beyond the hearts, the Adobe letter is full of lies - the main one being despite all the words, Adobe Flash (registered trademark) is not open; it's proprietary.
MacDailyNews has a great response : http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/25224/
no, they work great actually on the mac. In fact I've seen some really cool experiments done in html5 on mac. But the iphone, not so good. Bit then I have a 3G so perhaps it'll run better on 3gs or 4g.
i have a 3G myself. all three run smooth. maybe you didn't wait until it finished loading...?
all three work fine on my mac and my iphone. what are you using to test them? IE?
Not working in FF
View the source all webkit proprietary code.
Adobe on Thursday responded to Steve Jobs' "Thoughts on Flash" with an open letter of its own, and also began a new ad campaign in which the company says it "loves" Apple -- but dislikes "anybody taking away your freedom" to use the Web freely.
Yeah...... that's not an ad campaign. That's a PR campaign. They're not advertising anything, just defaming Apple. Compare the "I'm a Mac/I'm a PC" ads, which, while they mostly are about slagging off Microsoft, do at least assert that Apple's products are better.
They aren't actually claiming to have any interest in freedom to use the web. They say:
"...to choose... what you experience on the web"
See, talking about experience rather than usage, as if they're going to tie your arms to your chair and parade a series of web pages in front of you. "Experience" is a word that suggests animated content, the only element of the web that Flash can claim to be distinctly good at. In that sense - that they care about users encountering as much Flash content as possible - I totally believe them.
Apple's changes to its developer agreement could result in an antitrust inquiry from the U.S. federal government. The Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have reportedly begun looking into the matter after receiving complaints from developers and Adobe.
Apple sneezing could result in an antitrust inquiry from the US government. Let's not get excited until they've decided whether it actually has sufficient merit to pursue.
As for the open letter...
I think it's fantastic that they're continuing the 19th century metaphor with a sepia photo of them. Maybe this open letter was sent through time???
If the web fragments into closed systems... their success will come at the expense of ... creativity and innovation.
I suppose they are talking about accessibility, the idea that there could be sections of the web which are not accessible by all.
Frankly, their own closed system does a fine job of proving this point, particularly on mobile devices: without an open Flash execution environment market, if you put Flash content on your site you know that there will be some people who cannot access it (properly), and that limits how much you can make your site integrate with your Flash content, while at the same time the plugin's ubiquity compared to open alternatives forces some people to have their creativity constrained by using Adobe's tools.
We believe that consumers should be able to freely access their favorite [free] content and [free] applications, regardless of what computer they have...
Okay Adobe, I want you to compel all OS and browser makers to bundle a Spectrum emulator browser plug-in. Oh, are you not so interested in my freedom now?
Adobe's business philosophy is based on a premise that, in an open market, the best products will win in the end... In the early days, PostScript attracted 72 clone makers, but we held onto our market leadership by out-innovating the pack
If it's an open market, there are no clones. Clone products are society's reaction to the limitations of closed markets. Apple clones (or would a better term be Mac clones?) came about because people wanted Apple products, but availability, price or features made them less desirable. Even though Apple granted the clone makers legitimacy by allowing resale of their OS, it was always a closed system because Apple's own products were the standard.
Let us not forget that Microsoft "out-innovated the pack" too, with Internet Explorer and with Java. Open market? I don't think so.
We publish the specifications for Flash ? meaning anyone can make their own Flash player. Yet, Adobe Flash technology remains the market leader because of the constant creativity and technical innovation of our employees.
We believe that Apple, by taking the opposite approach, has taken a step that could undermine this next chapter of the web ? the chapter in which mobile devices outnumber computers, any individual can be a publisher, and content is accessed anywhere and at any time.
Note that "creativity and technical innovation" means changing the spec, which suppresses everyone else's innovation because they spend all their time trying to maintain compatibility.
Apple does happily publish the specifications for iPhone applications (I'm sure that Adobe are not trying to assert that they should be able to make their own iPhones), with the admitted exception of some frameworks, and certainly can't be said to be both uncreative and uninnovative. Even if Apple's behaviour were consistent with Adobe's outlandish claims, by championing javascript and HTML5 (of which there are a few competing implementations) over Flash they vastly increase the chance of web content being accessible on mobile devices, since that means that mobile device makers would not be at the mercy of Adobe's unfathomable interest in supporting their OS and would rather be able to choose something suitable from a variety of different browser rendering engines.
I've got to say, Adobe's convinced me: for the future of the web, content needs to be standards-based, and thus not Flash.
I can't say I'm too surprised that you'd summarize it that way. It tells me, that you are only interested in your own opinion, and being right. Having a discussion, I guess is a little over your head.
No, I've said I like the flash platform, I think the platform is a very platform to develop in. I know it's capabilities, and it hasn't been shown to me at all that html5 is capable of replacing more than some of it's capabilities.
However none of that matters if adobe doesn't release a fully functioning player for mobile. Being part of the industry, I have attended a few major conferences recently, and saw the beta player first hand. What I saw, showed there is a very good possibility they will do it. Sorry that's all I got.
As I said, I'm well aware of the reasons why the current flash player isn't on i-products currently. And never questioned it. I also am not fully against not developing apps in flash.
So, I really don't know why this is so difficult to understand. It seems a handful of you only have the ability to call people adobe shills if they even appear to disagree with your opinions. If you post inaccurate facts, I'll correct them. Only because I'm more interested in hearing what the truth is rather than simply regurgitating BS I read on a blog trying to look smart on a forum.
That's for losers.
i have a 3G myself. all three run smooth. maybe you didn't wait until it finished loading...?
I'll try rebooting the phone later and give it another go.
Not working in FF
View the source all webkit proprietary code.
wonderful. Soooo, this needs to be developed more than once, to support all browsers????
Not working in FF
View the source all webkit proprietary code.
It's not "webkit proprietary code". It's currently only supported in Webkit because of where and why it was created, and it being part of CSS3, which is still very new and a working draft. I'm not even sure Chrome yet supports it which is Webkit-based. It's easy to code while using low resources so I expect this one to pass and be widely adopted. You can't expect everyone to adopt something out of the gate. I gate Adobe 2 years to get Flash straightened out. All I heard were promises. It's now been almost 3.5 years and it's still not available for a single Android phone.