This is interesting or perhaps strange. On one hand, it seems like Microsoft has seen the *light* and will forsake Flash. But what of Silverlight? Regardless, Metro does not come alone. It is part of Windows 8, which will have a *standard* IE, and will presumably be plug-in-capable. Is it me or does it not sound strange that the same *tablet* will be compatible and incompatible with plug-ins, including Flash?
MSFT has always taken the kitchen sink approach, but this may be breaking new ground.
What sense would it make to use a plugin (Flash or otherwise) for the interface of a mainstream OS? You guys have lost your minds with this spin. Flash still works with Windows. I even installed it last night and it works great.
This is interesting or perhaps strange. On one hand, it seems like Microsoft has seen the *light* and will forsake Flash. But what of Silverlight? Regardless, Metro does not come alone. It is part of Windows 8, which will have a *standard* IE, and will presumably be plug-in-capable. Is it me or does it not sound strange that the same *tablet* will be compatible and incompatible with plug-ins, including Flash?
MSFT has always taken the kitchen sink approach, but this may be breaking new ground.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Will the METRO version of the tablet computers also have a desktop option. If this is true, then they continue the kitchen sink approach.
But many are speculating that it is simply not possible and the tablets will have to dump desktop option. MS is mum on this point so far. But I think they will eventually have the "kitchen sink" approach but warn you about battery consumption when you move to desktop mode.
The reason I think I may be wrong about the kitchen sink theory is this quote from Windows chief Steven Sinofsky
?We?re not going to port the installed base of x86 applications to ARM. They don?t take advantage of the things that make ARM a great architecture,? he said, referring to the power-efficiency of ARM-based processors in mobile devices such as tablets."
Regardless, I like METRO and will be following the progress. I doubt they will be as good as iOS, but they got my interest.
GMail's security features (specifically their two step mobile authentication) are second to none. Unless Apple can match this, I won't even bother trying MobileMe or iCloud.
Apple needs to learn that it is no longer sufficient to protect something as important as an email account with only a password.
Are you back again with that weird statement about Google's "second to none security features". What does that even mean, and how does it make any of Google's services so much more secure?
As far as I know, Google uses passwords just like iCloud and MobileMe, and if someone gets your password, you are screwed. Trying to decide what you are actually talking about, the only thing I can come up with is the 2-step password reset feature that Google offers, but I fail to see how this makes Google Web services so much more secure than anything else, since it would simply mean someone hacking you would need access to your cell phone, instead of access to your e-mail account. Either way you are f*d, and realistically, someone who wants to hack your account, would simply try to fish for your password anyway.
Unless I'm missing something, the weakest link with Google services is the same one that every other web/cloud system has: the passwords.
To date, I can remember some GMail hacks, but I've never heard anything about mobileme or .Mac getting hacked in any way. You really look like a shill posting this same hollow and unsubstantiated statement about Google security over and over again.
People that believe HTML 5 is magically more efficient or somehow better than flash or any other graphics intense web framework are in for a dose of reality here in a few years.
1) Of course flash takes more battery and CPU than a static image. It's doing work! HTML animations are actually LESS CPU and power efficient. Uninformed people equate the lack of animations in HTML in most web sites to "better" performance. The truth is, there are simply fewer options for animations in HTML, so developers of HTML produce less complex content, which results in less CPU usage.
When HTML 5 becomes the standard graphics package, you'll find that your device uses MORE CPU and battery than it did with flash. Flash is a compiled language like Java, and HTML 5 is an interpreted script. That means more work for an equivalent task.
2) Today you block ads by simply blocking flash. You truly believe all of those ad companies aren't going to produce badly written HTML 5 banners that eat CPU? And guess what, you can't block them!
3) All of HTML 5 rhetoric today is a bunch of hot air. The truth is there are currently ZERO products that are produced in HTML 5. Why? Because the development and maintenance of a cross browser solution for HTML 5 is a nightmare. Most of the common browsers that do support HTML 5 aren't anywhere near compatible with a single code base. This will change over time, but the truth is that currently HTML 5 is still in it's infancy.
4) Contrary to the common rhetoric, video producers HATE HTML 5 video. Why? Because there are NO reporting tools that come close to Flash Media servers metrics for reporting, or flash players intelligent buffering. HTML 5 uses MORE bandwidth and provides LESS feedback to the provider. That's why all these video sites still default to the flash player option.
5) Video is not the only thing HTML 5 and flash provide. In fact, it's only one tiny thing amongst a vast library of important features. Most of those features have been used only in flash for enterprise applications for many years. The general public is only now getting a taste of these features through sites like Google docs (offline apps, push data, etc). The truth is that Flash provides vastly more advanced implementations of these features TODAY. Most of the newest browsers only support a subset of the much more meagerly portioned features in HTML 5. Even if every browser supported every HTML 5 feature, there are still huge gaps in functionality that flash in the enterprise has enjoyed for over 7 years.
6) The reason flash is perceived as "bad" is that it's easy for an inexperienced developer to produce and publish anything on the flash platorm. Meanwhile a language like C++ requires a skilled developer just to get basic functionality out the door, so of course a skilled developer will produce efficient code as well.
A well written flash/flex app is one of the most enjoyable experiences the web has to offer. It's just a shame that the general public never sees them, because they are mostly in enterprise and big government solutions. The general public sees only the rushed banner ads, and little games.
7) Steve Jobs is a master of the red herring argument. The truth is that Flash runs very well on iOS. Many of the top games and business apps in the App store today are written in flash! And they're indistinguishable from native apps. Steve recognized before the iPhone was produced, that the mobile app store was going to be a huge revenue source. The problem with flash in the browser was that it could be used to by pass the App store to deliver apps to users. Thus a "loss" of revenue for Apple.
8) use your mobile device and google HTML 5 charts. Visit any one of the top links to see some HTML 5 charts. Reply to this post with your experience. Hint: it's going to be terrible.
The only one that I find to be a nuisance is BBC.co.uk - the football (soccer) highlights are not shown via their iphone/ipad app and are flash only on the normal web page.
At this point, that's BBC's problem. They're the ones who need to get with the program.
They will, if their users get off of their butts and complain enough.
The article takes the anti-Flash angle, but not supporting plug-ins, period is a big deal. That also means no Skype plug-in or any other plug-ins. Not that IE was ever great with plug-ins; they had some basic functionality, but I don't think they ever really took it to the level of Firefox's Add-on extensibility, did they?
MS has been wanting to dump Flash for years; Apple gave them the excuse to do it. They sought to replace Flash with Sliverlight, which I assume will continue to be supported as an OS-level install.
7) Steve Jobs is a master of the red herring argument. The truth is that Flash runs very well on iOS. Many of the top games and business apps in the App store today are written in flash! And they're indistinguishable from native apps. Steve recognized before the iPhone was produced, that the mobile app store was going to be a huge revenue source. The problem with flash in the browser was that it could be used to by pass the App store to deliver apps to users. Thus a "loss" of revenue for Apple.
What!? You are saying flash is running on iOS devices?
Are you back again with that weird statement about Google's "second to none security features". What does that even mean, and how does it make any of Google's services so much more secure?
As far as I know, Google uses passwords just like iCloud and MobileMe, and if someone gets your password, you are screwed. Trying to decide what you are actually talking about, the only thing I can come up with is the 2-step password reset feature that Google offers, but I fail to see how this makes Google Web services so much more secure than anything else, since it would simply mean someone hacking you would need access to your cell phone, instead of access to your e-mail account. Either way you are f*d, and realistically, someone who wants to hack your account, would simply try to fish for your password anyway.
Unless I'm missing something, the weakest link with Google services is the same one that every other web/cloud system has: the passwords.
To date, I can remember some GMail hacks, but I've never heard anything about mobileme or .Mac getting hacked in any way. You really look like a shill posting this same hollow and unsubstantiated statement about Google security over and over again.
I don't think you understand the system. To log in on a new PC, you need to know my password AND also have access to my phone. Having just one of those things will not give you access to my account, because the code sent to the phone is not a replacement for the password, it is used in addition to it.
If you knew my password and tried to log in to my account, you'd be prompted for a code that is sent to my phone. Likewise, if you had my phone you would need my password to get to the point where it sends an authentication code to the phone.
It's not a complicated system at all, but it means that my account is so much more secure than a MobileMe or Hotmail account.
7) Steve Jobs is a master of the red herring argument. The truth is that Flash runs very well on iOS. Many of the top games and business apps in the App store today are written in flash! And they're indistinguishable from native apps. Steve recognized before the iPhone was produced, that the mobile app store was going to be a huge revenue source. The problem with flash in the browser was that it could be used to by pass the App store to deliver apps to users. Thus a "loss" of revenue for Apple.
I'm not an iOS developer, but my understanding is that Flash can compile the app into a native format, so that it's not actually running Flash.
I don't think you understand the system. To log in on a new PC, you need to know my password AND also have access to my phone. Having just one of those things will not give you access to my account, because the code sent to the phone is not a replacement for the password, it is used in addition to it.
If you knew my password and tried to log in to my account, you'd be prompted for a code that is sent to my phone. Likewise, if you had my phone you would need my password to get to the point where it sends an authentication code to the phone.
It's not a complicated system at all, but it means that my account is so much more secure than a MobileMe or Hotmail account.
Is that extra security something that you have to enable? It does not behave like that for me - I can get in with just email address and password from any machine - or at least all that I have tried. It has never asked for a code.
EDIT: OK - found it. It is an optional extra functionality.
Is that extra security something that you have to enable? It does not behave like that for me - I can get in with just email address and password from any machine - or at least all that I have tried. It has never asked for a code.
EDIT: OK - found it. It is an optional extra functionality.
Is that extra security something that you have to enable? It does not behave like that for me - I can get in with just email address and password from any machine - or at least all that I have tried. It has never asked for a code.
EDIT: OK - found it. It is an optional extra functionality.
If you have an Android or Apple phone, you can get an app that will generate the code for you. If you don't have one of these phones they can send the code to you by text message (even for those not in the USA) or call your phone and an automated voice will read the code to you.
It's a very impressive system (I especially liked the QR Codes used during setup!) and it really does "just work". I've never had any problems receiving the codes or logging in.
At the very least, it reduces the risk of your account being brute forced to almost 0.
Microsoft invested significant time researching the decision. The IE team examined the top 97,000 sites around the world, determining that, of the 62 percent of those sites that use Flash, many of them already have an HTML5 option as well. Beyond Flash, other plug-ins were rare, with the next most common one used on just 2 percent of sites examined.
I wonder what percent of websites require Silverlight. We know it is less than 2%. Plug-ins may be out but I wouldn't be surprised if Silverlight is 'quietly' baked into the browser.
They're following Apple's 'lead'...that is to say, COPYING...again!
Nobody's buying those damn things anyway...good luck with that.
Cheers,
Cameron
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
The tablet-optimized Metro version of Internet Explorer 10 in Microsoft's upcoming Windows 8 will be a "plug-in free experience," as the company follows Apple's lead in abandoning Adobe Flash in favor of HTML5 on tablets.
Microsoft revealed Wednesday on its Building Windows 8 blog that the Metro version of IE10 will drop plug-ins because the experience that they provide is "not a good match with Metro style browsing and the modern HTML5 web." The company will, however, continue to support Adobe Flash and other plug-ins on the desktop version of Internet Explorer 10.
Metro is Microsoft's name for the custom interface and touch layer for tablet devices built into Windows 8 . The Redmond, Wash., software company offered up details on Windows 8 at its Build conference in Southern California this week, providing developers with a "pre-beta" version loaded on a Intel Core i5-powered Samsung tablet.
IE team lead Dean Hachamovitch wrote in the post that going plug-in free in for the Metro version of IE10 "improves battery life as well as security, reliability and privacy for consumers."
"Plug-ins were important early on in the web?s history. But the web has come a long way since then with HTML5. Providing compatibility with legacy plug-in technologies would detract from, rather than improve, the consumer experience of browsing in the Metro style UI," he noted.
Microsoft invested significant time researching the decision. The IE team examined the top 97,000 sites around the world, determining that, of the 62 percent of those sites that use Flash, many of them already have an HTML5 option as well. Beyond Flash, other plug-ins were rare, with the next most common one used on just 2 percent of sites examined.
"Most sites work fine in IE without plug-ins; others work fine in IE when IE identifies itself as another browser or runs the site in a different mode," Hachamovitch noted, adding that users can tap a "Use Desktop View" button from the Metro style app to view sites that require Microsoft's own legacy ActiveX controls.
For its part, Apple has made known its commitment to open web standards over proprietary technologies. "Every new Apple mobile device and every new Mac ? along with the latest version of Apple?s Safari web browser ? supports web standards including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. These web standards are open, reliable, highly secure, and efficient," the company's page on HTML5 reads.
Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs criticized Flash last year after receiving numerous complaints about the technology's incompatibility with iOS. He presented six points condemning Flash -- openness; the "full Web;" reliability, security and performance; battery life; touch; and the substandard quality of third-party development tools.
Adobe appears to be gradually conceding ground to HTML5. Last week, the company announced support for HTML5 video in an upcoming version of its Flash Media Server product. Though Adobe billed the added feature as being able to "deliver Flash technology to Apple iPhone and iPad devices," the tool simply adds the ability to serve standards-based HTML5 video.
But, Apple has also relinquished some control over the iOS platform with respect to Flash. Last fall, the iPad maker removed its ban on third-party development tools, paving the way for Adobe to release tools that create iOS-friendly versions of Flash applications.
It's really just the opposite. Video should never be run through Flash.
To clarify when I say "Flash should only be used for Video", I don't mean Video should always be in Flash. Just that I can't see any use for Flash other than delivering video to a browser that doesn't support HTML5 video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent
This is interesting or perhaps strange. On one hand, it seems like Microsoft has seen the *light* and will forsake Flash. But what of Silverlight?
Well Microsoft has always had the view that Silverlight should be used only when you want some functionality not offered through HTML. e.g. On MS Skydrive silverlight is used so you can drag and drop files from your machine into a skydrive folder.
I imagine like Apple, part of the reason is they want users to download apps rather than have links to websites. So Silverlights still there it's just in app form, like it is on WP7.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Will the METRO version of the tablet computers also have a desktop option. If this is true, then they continue the kitchen sink approach.
But many are speculating that it is simply not possible and the tablets will have to dump desktop option. MS is mum on this point so far. But I think they will eventually have the "kitchen sink" approach but warn you about battery consumption when you move to desktop mode.
I don't think they have been mum. I believe they have made it crystal clear is that METRO is part of Windows 8 but will not be standalone. True, some have questioned the feasibility of this. And I agree with the doubters. IPad uses 512MB of RAM. Windows 8 will need ≥ 4GB. That does not sound like a tablet that can compete with iPad on price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevetim
The reason I think I may be wrong about the kitchen sink theory is this quote from Windows chief Steven Sinofsky
“We’re not going to port the installed base of x86 applications to ARM. They don’t take advantage of the things that make ARM a great architecture,” he said, referring to the power-efficiency of ARM-based processors in mobile devices such as tablets."
I don't see this being related to whether METRO will or can stand alone. Remember that what they demo'ing regularly right now is Windows 8, with METRO as a feature, and not METRO as a product on its own. That has been very, very consistent.
I use ClicktoFlash on my Mac. Very rarely does it actually play Flash video. Most everyone offers pure H.264 stream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timgriff84
The two that annoy me the most would be Engadget and BBC Radio 1. Plus whenever your following a link to a video on a blog or other smaller site, 30 - 40% of the time there in flash.
Comments
MSFT has always taken the kitchen sink approach, but this may be breaking new ground.
What sense would it make to use a plugin (Flash or otherwise) for the interface of a mainstream OS? You guys have lost your minds with this spin. Flash still works with Windows. I even installed it last night and it works great.
Geez.
This is interesting or perhaps strange. On one hand, it seems like Microsoft has seen the *light* and will forsake Flash. But what of Silverlight? Regardless, Metro does not come alone. It is part of Windows 8, which will have a *standard* IE, and will presumably be plug-in-capable. Is it me or does it not sound strange that the same *tablet* will be compatible and incompatible with plug-ins, including Flash?
MSFT has always taken the kitchen sink approach, but this may be breaking new ground.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Will the METRO version of the tablet computers also have a desktop option. If this is true, then they continue the kitchen sink approach.
But many are speculating that it is simply not possible and the tablets will have to dump desktop option. MS is mum on this point so far. But I think they will eventually have the "kitchen sink" approach but warn you about battery consumption when you move to desktop mode.
The reason I think I may be wrong about the kitchen sink theory is this quote from Windows chief Steven SinofskyRegardless, I like METRO and will be following the progress. I doubt they will be as good as iOS, but they got my interest.
GMail's security features (specifically their two step mobile authentication) are second to none. Unless Apple can match this, I won't even bother trying MobileMe or iCloud.
Apple needs to learn that it is no longer sufficient to protect something as important as an email account with only a password.
Are you back again with that weird statement about Google's "second to none security features". What does that even mean, and how does it make any of Google's services so much more secure?
As far as I know, Google uses passwords just like iCloud and MobileMe, and if someone gets your password, you are screwed. Trying to decide what you are actually talking about, the only thing I can come up with is the 2-step password reset feature that Google offers, but I fail to see how this makes Google Web services so much more secure than anything else, since it would simply mean someone hacking you would need access to your cell phone, instead of access to your e-mail account. Either way you are f*d, and realistically, someone who wants to hack your account, would simply try to fish for your password anyway.
Unless I'm missing something, the weakest link with Google services is the same one that every other web/cloud system has: the passwords.
To date, I can remember some GMail hacks, but I've never heard anything about mobileme or .Mac getting hacked in any way. You really look like a shill posting this same hollow and unsubstantiated statement about Google security over and over again.
Hachamovitch wrote in the post that going plug-in free in for the Metro version
Typo parade continues unabated
1) Of course flash takes more battery and CPU than a static image. It's doing work! HTML animations are actually LESS CPU and power efficient. Uninformed people equate the lack of animations in HTML in most web sites to "better" performance. The truth is, there are simply fewer options for animations in HTML, so developers of HTML produce less complex content, which results in less CPU usage.
When HTML 5 becomes the standard graphics package, you'll find that your device uses MORE CPU and battery than it did with flash. Flash is a compiled language like Java, and HTML 5 is an interpreted script. That means more work for an equivalent task.
2) Today you block ads by simply blocking flash. You truly believe all of those ad companies aren't going to produce badly written HTML 5 banners that eat CPU? And guess what, you can't block them!
3) All of HTML 5 rhetoric today is a bunch of hot air. The truth is there are currently ZERO products that are produced in HTML 5. Why? Because the development and maintenance of a cross browser solution for HTML 5 is a nightmare. Most of the common browsers that do support HTML 5 aren't anywhere near compatible with a single code base. This will change over time, but the truth is that currently HTML 5 is still in it's infancy.
4) Contrary to the common rhetoric, video producers HATE HTML 5 video. Why? Because there are NO reporting tools that come close to Flash Media servers metrics for reporting, or flash players intelligent buffering. HTML 5 uses MORE bandwidth and provides LESS feedback to the provider. That's why all these video sites still default to the flash player option.
5) Video is not the only thing HTML 5 and flash provide. In fact, it's only one tiny thing amongst a vast library of important features. Most of those features have been used only in flash for enterprise applications for many years. The general public is only now getting a taste of these features through sites like Google docs (offline apps, push data, etc). The truth is that Flash provides vastly more advanced implementations of these features TODAY. Most of the newest browsers only support a subset of the much more meagerly portioned features in HTML 5. Even if every browser supported every HTML 5 feature, there are still huge gaps in functionality that flash in the enterprise has enjoyed for over 7 years.
6) The reason flash is perceived as "bad" is that it's easy for an inexperienced developer to produce and publish anything on the flash platorm. Meanwhile a language like C++ requires a skilled developer just to get basic functionality out the door, so of course a skilled developer will produce efficient code as well.
A well written flash/flex app is one of the most enjoyable experiences the web has to offer. It's just a shame that the general public never sees them, because they are mostly in enterprise and big government solutions. The general public sees only the rushed banner ads, and little games.
7) Steve Jobs is a master of the red herring argument. The truth is that Flash runs very well on iOS. Many of the top games and business apps in the App store today are written in flash! And they're indistinguishable from native apps. Steve recognized before the iPhone was produced, that the mobile app store was going to be a huge revenue source. The problem with flash in the browser was that it could be used to by pass the App store to deliver apps to users. Thus a "loss" of revenue for Apple.
8) use your mobile device and google HTML 5 charts. Visit any one of the top links to see some HTML 5 charts. Reply to this post with your experience. Hint: it's going to be terrible.
The only one that I find to be a nuisance is BBC.co.uk - the football (soccer) highlights are not shown via their iphone/ipad app and are flash only on the normal web page.
At this point, that's BBC's problem. They're the ones who need to get with the program.
They will, if their users get off of their butts and complain enough.
MS has been wanting to dump Flash for years; Apple gave them the excuse to do it. They sought to replace Flash with Sliverlight, which I assume will continue to be supported as an OS-level install.
7) Steve Jobs is a master of the red herring argument. The truth is that Flash runs very well on iOS. Many of the top games and business apps in the App store today are written in flash! And they're indistinguishable from native apps. Steve recognized before the iPhone was produced, that the mobile app store was going to be a huge revenue source. The problem with flash in the browser was that it could be used to by pass the App store to deliver apps to users. Thus a "loss" of revenue for Apple.
What!? You are saying flash is running on iOS devices?
Are you back again with that weird statement about Google's "second to none security features". What does that even mean, and how does it make any of Google's services so much more secure?
As far as I know, Google uses passwords just like iCloud and MobileMe, and if someone gets your password, you are screwed. Trying to decide what you are actually talking about, the only thing I can come up with is the 2-step password reset feature that Google offers, but I fail to see how this makes Google Web services so much more secure than anything else, since it would simply mean someone hacking you would need access to your cell phone, instead of access to your e-mail account. Either way you are f*d, and realistically, someone who wants to hack your account, would simply try to fish for your password anyway.
Unless I'm missing something, the weakest link with Google services is the same one that every other web/cloud system has: the passwords.
To date, I can remember some GMail hacks, but I've never heard anything about mobileme or .Mac getting hacked in any way. You really look like a shill posting this same hollow and unsubstantiated statement about Google security over and over again.
I don't think you understand the system. To log in on a new PC, you need to know my password AND also have access to my phone. Having just one of those things will not give you access to my account, because the code sent to the phone is not a replacement for the password, it is used in addition to it.
If you knew my password and tried to log in to my account, you'd be prompted for a code that is sent to my phone. Likewise, if you had my phone you would need my password to get to the point where it sends an authentication code to the phone.
It's not a complicated system at all, but it means that my account is so much more secure than a MobileMe or Hotmail account.
7) Steve Jobs is a master of the red herring argument. The truth is that Flash runs very well on iOS. Many of the top games and business apps in the App store today are written in flash! And they're indistinguishable from native apps. Steve recognized before the iPhone was produced, that the mobile app store was going to be a huge revenue source. The problem with flash in the browser was that it could be used to by pass the App store to deliver apps to users. Thus a "loss" of revenue for Apple.
I'm not an iOS developer, but my understanding is that Flash can compile the app into a native format, so that it's not actually running Flash.
I don't think you understand the system. To log in on a new PC, you need to know my password AND also have access to my phone. Having just one of those things will not give you access to my account, because the code sent to the phone is not a replacement for the password, it is used in addition to it.
If you knew my password and tried to log in to my account, you'd be prompted for a code that is sent to my phone. Likewise, if you had my phone you would need my password to get to the point where it sends an authentication code to the phone.
It's not a complicated system at all, but it means that my account is so much more secure than a MobileMe or Hotmail account.
Is that extra security something that you have to enable? It does not behave like that for me - I can get in with just email address and password from any machine - or at least all that I have tried. It has never asked for a code.
EDIT: OK - found it. It is an optional extra functionality.
I'm not an iOS developer, but my understanding is that Flash can compile the app into a native format, so that it's not actually running Flash.
It is in a "native" format. But it's produced in Flash, so why couldn't the same thing be done in the browser? The answer is, it could!
Is that extra security something that you have to enable? It does not behave like that for me - I can get in with just email address and password from any machine - or at least all that I have tried. It has never asked for a code.
EDIT: OK - found it. It is an optional extra functionality.
it's opt in
Is that extra security something that you have to enable? It does not behave like that for me - I can get in with just email address and password from any machine - or at least all that I have tried. It has never asked for a code.
EDIT: OK - found it. It is an optional extra functionality.
If you have an Android or Apple phone, you can get an app that will generate the code for you. If you don't have one of these phones they can send the code to you by text message (even for those not in the USA) or call your phone and an automated voice will read the code to you.
It's a very impressive system (I especially liked the QR Codes used during setup!) and it really does "just work". I've never had any problems receiving the codes or logging in.
At the very least, it reduces the risk of your account being brute forced to almost 0.
Microsoft invested significant time researching the decision. The IE team examined the top 97,000 sites around the world, determining that, of the 62 percent of those sites that use Flash, many of them already have an HTML5 option as well. Beyond Flash, other plug-ins were rare, with the next most common one used on just 2 percent of sites examined.
I wonder what percent of websites require Silverlight. We know it is less than 2%. Plug-ins may be out but I wouldn't be surprised if Silverlight is 'quietly' baked into the browser.
Nobody's buying those damn things anyway...good luck with that.
Cheers,
Cameron
The tablet-optimized Metro version of Internet Explorer 10 in Microsoft's upcoming Windows 8 will be a "plug-in free experience," as the company follows Apple's lead in abandoning Adobe Flash in favor of HTML5 on tablets.
Microsoft revealed Wednesday on its Building Windows 8 blog that the Metro version of IE10 will drop plug-ins because the experience that they provide is "not a good match with Metro style browsing and the modern HTML5 web." The company will, however, continue to support Adobe Flash and other plug-ins on the desktop version of Internet Explorer 10.
Metro is Microsoft's name for the custom interface and touch layer for tablet devices built into Windows 8 . The Redmond, Wash., software company offered up details on Windows 8 at its Build conference in Southern California this week, providing developers with a "pre-beta" version loaded on a Intel Core i5-powered Samsung tablet.
IE team lead Dean Hachamovitch wrote in the post that going plug-in free in for the Metro version of IE10 "improves battery life as well as security, reliability and privacy for consumers."
"Plug-ins were important early on in the web?s history. But the web has come a long way since then with HTML5. Providing compatibility with legacy plug-in technologies would detract from, rather than improve, the consumer experience of browsing in the Metro style UI," he noted.
Microsoft invested significant time researching the decision. The IE team examined the top 97,000 sites around the world, determining that, of the 62 percent of those sites that use Flash, many of them already have an HTML5 option as well. Beyond Flash, other plug-ins were rare, with the next most common one used on just 2 percent of sites examined.
"Most sites work fine in IE without plug-ins; others work fine in IE when IE identifies itself as another browser or runs the site in a different mode," Hachamovitch noted, adding that users can tap a "Use Desktop View" button from the Metro style app to view sites that require Microsoft's own legacy ActiveX controls.
For its part, Apple has made known its commitment to open web standards over proprietary technologies. "Every new Apple mobile device and every new Mac ? along with the latest version of Apple?s Safari web browser ? supports web standards including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. These web standards are open, reliable, highly secure, and efficient," the company's page on HTML5 reads.
Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs criticized Flash last year after receiving numerous complaints about the technology's incompatibility with iOS. He presented six points condemning Flash -- openness; the "full Web;" reliability, security and performance; battery life; touch; and the substandard quality of third-party development tools.
Adobe appears to be gradually conceding ground to HTML5. Last week, the company announced support for HTML5 video in an upcoming version of its Flash Media Server product. Though Adobe billed the added feature as being able to "deliver Flash technology to Apple iPhone and iPad devices," the tool simply adds the ability to serve standards-based HTML5 video.
But, Apple has also relinquished some control over the iOS platform with respect to Flash. Last fall, the iPad maker removed its ban on third-party development tools, paving the way for Adobe to release tools that create iOS-friendly versions of Flash applications.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
It's really just the opposite. Video should never be run through Flash.
To clarify when I say "Flash should only be used for Video", I don't mean Video should always be in Flash. Just that I can't see any use for Flash other than delivering video to a browser that doesn't support HTML5 video.
This is interesting or perhaps strange. On one hand, it seems like Microsoft has seen the *light* and will forsake Flash. But what of Silverlight?
Well Microsoft has always had the view that Silverlight should be used only when you want some functionality not offered through HTML. e.g. On MS Skydrive silverlight is used so you can drag and drop files from your machine into a skydrive folder.
I imagine like Apple, part of the reason is they want users to download apps rather than have links to websites. So Silverlights still there it's just in app form, like it is on WP7.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Will the METRO version of the tablet computers also have a desktop option. If this is true, then they continue the kitchen sink approach.
But many are speculating that it is simply not possible and the tablets will have to dump desktop option. MS is mum on this point so far. But I think they will eventually have the "kitchen sink" approach but warn you about battery consumption when you move to desktop mode.
I don't think they have been mum. I believe they have made it crystal clear is that METRO is part of Windows 8 but will not be standalone. True, some have questioned the feasibility of this. And I agree with the doubters. IPad uses 512MB of RAM. Windows 8 will need ≥ 4GB. That does not sound like a tablet that can compete with iPad on price.
The reason I think I may be wrong about the kitchen sink theory is this quote from Windows chief Steven Sinofsky
I don't see this being related to whether METRO will or can stand alone. Remember that what they demo'ing regularly right now is Windows 8, with METRO as a feature, and not METRO as a product on its own. That has been very, very consistent.
The two that annoy me the most would be Engadget and BBC Radio 1. Plus whenever your following a link to a video on a blog or other smaller site, 30 - 40% of the time there in flash.