People who say that are just liars or Apple makes special computers for me that don't ever have that problem.
Interesting. I see this problem happen quite a bit. Especially since I've started using an AIR app. I even wrote a nasty-gram to the company that switched their app to using AIR, as it sucks the life out of my 2011 MacBookPro.
Kill the Flash processes, and the computer comes back to life.
Actually I have many years of posting history of hating flash prior to Jobs' open letter last year. Mostly on sites like Arstechnica or the old ISCABBS telnet BBS, but it's been a PITA to me for ages. *shrug* Yes, many do just parrot, you aren't incorrect there.
And I'm not saying it has historically been a marvel of flawlessness, but to discredit it in its totality is ignorant at best. The flash player has come way further than any of the HTML5 efforts in the same time frame from what I've seen. After releasing Flash Player 11, I'd have trouble finding many shortcomings with it. This release will be a major hurdle conquered because they can start fine tuning the player in smaller releases as they have with 10, but all the support for 64bit, 3D, and H.264 can only get better. The advent of stage video, 64bit, 3D, H.264, and global error handling will make Flash as powerful as it needs to be to accomplish all but the most performance intensive applications (think assassins creed) and even those will still be doable in time.
On wikipedia, the Tegra/ARM roadmap has a processor debut in 2014-15 that is 75 times faster than todays Tegra 2. That's insanely fast for a mobile device. The future looks bright.
On wikipedia, the Tegra/ARM roadmap has a processor debut in 2014-15 that is 75 times faster than todays Tegra 2. That's insanely fast for a mobile device. The future looks bright.
You seems to don't know s*** about programming and developers environment. Flash VM got majors design flaw, it can't handle idle states properly and his ECMAscript interpreter is running at GWBasic efficiency. Pretending faster future CPU will handle current software is just plain dumb and it's exactly how Adobe is marketing it, since his first version of Futursplash before Macromedia and Adobe acquired it they always keep promising performance they never deliver.
Machinarium port on the iPad is the perfect example of what's wrong with Flash. Machinarium is a very light 2D game the first iPad should handle with CPU cycles to spare, instead it require a dual-core A5 iPad 2 at full speed wasting battery.
My question is why there is so many flash zealot? Do we still care and fight for other out of date tech like QBasic, DOS, FLI video, long gone in the already overcrowded tech graveyard? My only answer is Flash should serve well some interest: Advertiser that want to exploit Flash respawning cookies not committed to browser security policies and bad programers that never put efforts into learning how to code.
This must be some kind of joke that's not even funny. In one or two generations we will have "console quality" on iOS but it sure ain't gonna be AIR as an SDK, the target is "full-spec" Unreal Engine 3 and similar.
Really, who in the wide world of hell is in charge of Flash at Adobe? What is going on in that department? The rest of Adobe seems light years ahead.
Console-quality graphics, without that pesky multiple-frames-per-second issue we keep hearing about in other game engines!
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker
Epic Games and iD Software has 3D engines for iOS. Its not cheap but you get "console quality games".
Don't forget Unity, which does, in fact, now publish to both iOS and the major consoles in addition to the Mac and PC. They made the basic version free a while back, too (although iOS deployment requires an extra, paid license).
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker
Maybe Apple should mark all the Flash developed apps as a warning.
They don't roll that way, but ohh God, if only. All kidding and sarcasm aside, they would seriously be doing a service to their customers by letting them know which apps were more or less guaranteed to obliterate their battery.
My question is why there is so many flash zealot? Do we still care and fight for other out of date tech like QBasic, DOS, FLI video, long gone in the already overcrowded tech graveyard? My only answer is Flash should serve well some interest: Advertiser that want to exploit Flash respawning cookies not committed to browser security policies and bad programers that never put efforts into learning how to code.
I don't understand this either. I won't go as far as saying that Flash has no merits whatsoever, or that it could not be the right tool for some jobs, but all the pro-Flash arguments I have ever heard are along the lines of 'with Flash you can write once and deploy everywhere', so 'you will have access more content', 'HTML5 cannot match Flash in what you can do with it', or 'lots of websites still use Flash'. All these arguments are true, but I simply can't see why they would matter to me.
- Run once, deploy anywhere
Why would *I* care about how much effort it takes *developers* to create platform-specific ports of their content, especially since history has proven time and time again that cross-platform is almost synonymous to 'sub-optimal', 'inefficient' and 'not making use of platform advantages'
- Access to more content
More content I don't care about in the first place, especially since I'm already drowning in a sea of even better content that was created and optimized specifically for my device and platform. There is no scarcity of great platform-specific content. I can't even remember longing for 'more interactive content' in my browser. In fact, the world-wide-web has become increasingly pleasant in my experience in the last few years, because more and more websites are dropping their stupid Flash crap and simply making a clean HTML version of it.
- HTML5 cannot match Flash in what you can do with it.
Maybe, but HTML5 can still do anything that matters for the purpose it was built for, ie: web content, and even the typical simple interactive Flash content and games. So according to Adobe now you can make 'console games' that run a browser, big deal. Is anyone really waiting for this? Are people really going to prefer playing through a 12 hour campaign behind a PC over playing the same game would be 10 times better if it ran natively?
- Lots of websites still use Flash
Yes, an 90% of these also work without Flash, using fallbacks, or by simply not showing me moving, blinking interactive crap I never asked for. The 10% that really need Flash are game sites full of the millionth bejeweled and FarmVille clones that already also have umpteen native ports on every platform imaginable. Strangely, all my web browsers on all my machines block all Flash content by default, with a button I can click to run them, and the number of times I do this each year can be counted on one hand.
Flash should stick to the single thing it is still useful for: online art projects, animation, or complicated applications that have a real benefit running from a browser and cannot be done using standard web tools, that kind of stuff. I estimate the market for such applications is less than 1% of all applications ever made. Adobe is trying to make us believe Flash is awesome for the other 99% as well, but that's all show and now substance.
You seems to don't know s*** about programming and developers environment. Flash VM got majors design flaw, it can't handle idle states properly and his ECMAscript interpreter is running at GWBasic efficiency. Pretending faster future CPU will handle current software is just plain dumb and it's exactly how Adobe is marketing it, since his first version of Futursplash before Macromedia and Adobe acquired it they always keep promising performance they never deliver.
Machinarium port on the iPad is the perfect example of what's wrong with Flash. Machinarium is a very light 2D game the first iPad should handle with CPU cycles to spare, instead it require a dual-core A5 iPad 2 at full speed wasting battery.
My question is why there is so many flash zealot? Do we still care and fight for other out of date tech like QBasic, DOS, FLI video, long gone in the already overcrowded tech graveyard? My only answer is Flash should serve well some interest: Advertiser that want to exploit Flash respawning cookies not committed to browser security policies and bad programers that never put efforts into learning how to code.
Because number of web sites still using it is huge?
I'm all for implementing newer and better technologies, but I'd expect them to be at least equally represented on the web in order to make a switch. Ditching Flash for HTML5 for me at present would be like ditching English (which is not my native anyway) and learning Esperanto. It is new and presumably much easier than English.
Except that chance of meeting someone speaking Esperanto is ridiculously lower than meeting someone speaking English.
Because number of web sites still using it is huge?
I'm all for implementing newer and better technologies, but I'd expect them to be at least equally represented on the web in order to make a switch. Ditching Flash for HTML5 for me at present would be like ditching English (which is not my native anyway) and learning Esperanto. It is new and presumably much easier than English.
Except that chance of meeting someone speaking Esperanto is ridiculously lower than meeting someone speaking English.
I don't see how technology follow language logic since tech get outdated and replaced all the time, Flash is a proprietary web plugins and not a open web standard. Flash was made in a time when HTML only interactivity was following links in a text, since then HTML add up those functionality. Maybe there still a lot of site who use Flash, but for what I can see, most of site where they use Flash as navigation UI is quickly replaced by non-flash counterpart. I'm using clicktoflash plugins for almost 2 years, and I don't miss not seeing those pesky Flash ads at all.
Still Flash can have some value, but most of it use on the web have been wrong (Flash cookies Ads, Navigation UI, Embed video), at this point I don't see any good raison why someone would develop a new flash based web site.
Comments
People who say that are just liars or Apple makes special computers for me that don't ever have that problem.
Interesting. I see this problem happen quite a bit. Especially since I've started using an AIR app. I even wrote a nasty-gram to the company that switched their app to using AIR, as it sucks the life out of my 2011 MacBookPro.
Kill the Flash processes, and the computer comes back to life.
Actually I have many years of posting history of hating flash prior to Jobs' open letter last year. Mostly on sites like Arstechnica or the old ISCABBS telnet BBS, but it's been a PITA to me for ages. *shrug* Yes, many do just parrot, you aren't incorrect there.
And I'm not saying it has historically been a marvel of flawlessness, but to discredit it in its totality is ignorant at best. The flash player has come way further than any of the HTML5 efforts in the same time frame from what I've seen. After releasing Flash Player 11, I'd have trouble finding many shortcomings with it. This release will be a major hurdle conquered because they can start fine tuning the player in smaller releases as they have with 10, but all the support for 64bit, 3D, and H.264 can only get better. The advent of stage video, 64bit, 3D, H.264, and global error handling will make Flash as powerful as it needs to be to accomplish all but the most performance intensive applications (think assassins creed) and even those will still be doable in time.
On wikipedia, the Tegra/ARM roadmap has a processor debut in 2014-15 that is 75 times faster than todays Tegra 2. That's insanely fast for a mobile device. The future looks bright.
On wikipedia, the Tegra/ARM roadmap has a processor debut in 2014-15 that is 75 times faster than todays Tegra 2. That's insanely fast for a mobile device. The future looks bright.
You seems to don't know s*** about programming and developers environment. Flash VM got majors design flaw, it can't handle idle states properly and his ECMAscript interpreter is running at GWBasic efficiency. Pretending faster future CPU will handle current software is just plain dumb and it's exactly how Adobe is marketing it, since his first version of Futursplash before Macromedia and Adobe acquired it they always keep promising performance they never deliver.
Machinarium port on the iPad is the perfect example of what's wrong with Flash. Machinarium is a very light 2D game the first iPad should handle with CPU cycles to spare, instead it require a dual-core A5 iPad 2 at full speed wasting battery.
My question is why there is so many flash zealot? Do we still care and fight for other out of date tech like QBasic, DOS, FLI video, long gone in the already overcrowded tech graveyard? My only answer is Flash should serve well some interest: Advertiser that want to exploit Flash respawning cookies not committed to browser security policies and bad programers that never put efforts into learning how to code.
Maybe Apple should mark all the Flash developed apps as a warning.
Really, who in the wide world of hell is in charge of Flash at Adobe? What is going on in that department? The rest of Adobe seems light years ahead.
Epic Games and iD Software has 3D engines for iOS. Its not cheap but you get "console quality games".
Don't forget Unity, which does, in fact, now publish to both iOS and the major consoles in addition to the Mac and PC. They made the basic version free a while back, too (although iOS deployment requires an extra, paid license).
Maybe Apple should mark all the Flash developed apps as a warning.
They don't roll that way, but ohh God, if only. All kidding and sarcasm aside, they would seriously be doing a service to their customers by letting them know which apps were more or less guaranteed to obliterate their battery.
My question is why there is so many flash zealot? Do we still care and fight for other out of date tech like QBasic, DOS, FLI video, long gone in the already overcrowded tech graveyard? My only answer is Flash should serve well some interest: Advertiser that want to exploit Flash respawning cookies not committed to browser security policies and bad programers that never put efforts into learning how to code.
I don't understand this either. I won't go as far as saying that Flash has no merits whatsoever, or that it could not be the right tool for some jobs, but all the pro-Flash arguments I have ever heard are along the lines of 'with Flash you can write once and deploy everywhere', so 'you will have access more content', 'HTML5 cannot match Flash in what you can do with it', or 'lots of websites still use Flash'. All these arguments are true, but I simply can't see why they would matter to me.
- Run once, deploy anywhere
Why would *I* care about how much effort it takes *developers* to create platform-specific ports of their content, especially since history has proven time and time again that cross-platform is almost synonymous to 'sub-optimal', 'inefficient' and 'not making use of platform advantages'
- Access to more content
More content I don't care about in the first place, especially since I'm already drowning in a sea of even better content that was created and optimized specifically for my device and platform. There is no scarcity of great platform-specific content. I can't even remember longing for 'more interactive content' in my browser. In fact, the world-wide-web has become increasingly pleasant in my experience in the last few years, because more and more websites are dropping their stupid Flash crap and simply making a clean HTML version of it.
- HTML5 cannot match Flash in what you can do with it.
Maybe, but HTML5 can still do anything that matters for the purpose it was built for, ie: web content, and even the typical simple interactive Flash content and games. So according to Adobe now you can make 'console games' that run a browser, big deal. Is anyone really waiting for this? Are people really going to prefer playing through a 12 hour campaign behind a PC over playing the same game would be 10 times better if it ran natively?
- Lots of websites still use Flash
Yes, an 90% of these also work without Flash, using fallbacks, or by simply not showing me moving, blinking interactive crap I never asked for. The 10% that really need Flash are game sites full of the millionth bejeweled and FarmVille clones that already also have umpteen native ports on every platform imaginable. Strangely, all my web browsers on all my machines block all Flash content by default, with a button I can click to run them, and the number of times I do this each year can be counted on one hand.
Flash should stick to the single thing it is still useful for: online art projects, animation, or complicated applications that have a real benefit running from a browser and cannot be done using standard web tools, that kind of stuff. I estimate the market for such applications is less than 1% of all applications ever made. Adobe is trying to make us believe Flash is awesome for the other 99% as well, but that's all show and now substance.
You seems to don't know s*** about programming and developers environment. Flash VM got majors design flaw, it can't handle idle states properly and his ECMAscript interpreter is running at GWBasic efficiency. Pretending faster future CPU will handle current software is just plain dumb and it's exactly how Adobe is marketing it, since his first version of Futursplash before Macromedia and Adobe acquired it they always keep promising performance they never deliver.
Machinarium port on the iPad is the perfect example of what's wrong with Flash. Machinarium is a very light 2D game the first iPad should handle with CPU cycles to spare, instead it require a dual-core A5 iPad 2 at full speed wasting battery.
My question is why there is so many flash zealot? Do we still care and fight for other out of date tech like QBasic, DOS, FLI video, long gone in the already overcrowded tech graveyard? My only answer is Flash should serve well some interest: Advertiser that want to exploit Flash respawning cookies not committed to browser security policies and bad programers that never put efforts into learning how to code.
Because number of web sites still using it is huge?
I'm all for implementing newer and better technologies, but I'd expect them to be at least equally represented on the web in order to make a switch. Ditching Flash for HTML5 for me at present would be like ditching English (which is not my native anyway) and learning Esperanto. It is new and presumably much easier than English.
Except that chance of meeting someone speaking Esperanto is ridiculously lower than meeting someone speaking English.
Because number of web sites still using it is huge?
I'm all for implementing newer and better technologies, but I'd expect them to be at least equally represented on the web in order to make a switch. Ditching Flash for HTML5 for me at present would be like ditching English (which is not my native anyway) and learning Esperanto. It is new and presumably much easier than English.
Except that chance of meeting someone speaking Esperanto is ridiculously lower than meeting someone speaking English.
I don't see how technology follow language logic since tech get outdated and replaced all the time, Flash is a proprietary web plugins and not a open web standard. Flash was made in a time when HTML only interactivity was following links in a text, since then HTML add up those functionality. Maybe there still a lot of site who use Flash, but for what I can see, most of site where they use Flash as navigation UI is quickly replaced by non-flash counterpart. I'm using clicktoflash plugins for almost 2 years, and I don't miss not seeing those pesky Flash ads at all.
Still Flash can have some value, but most of it use on the web have been wrong (Flash cookies Ads, Navigation UI, Embed video), at this point I don't see any good raison why someone would develop a new flash based web site.