[FizixRichard]

padioland, on 25 August 2010 - 03:18 PM, said:

It is funny how emotive this issue can be, I personally can see flash becoming less relevant in the next 3 years. One of the downfalls of flash is its ease of use, that has mean that many people with no talent created a lot of rubbish, however on the upside a lot of creative people were able to realise some positive creative ideas using it.

I agree with much of your post, the biggest problem with Flash is that is allows talentless people with no skill to grab the SDK and create something fairly quickly and fairly easilly. The problem there is that if you put crap in you get crap out.

Of course in regards to a debate on the relevance of Flash now and in the future, where it will stand, where it should stand and working with facts this is a dull debate as the exact same argument can be applied to HTML/CSS and JS.

Look at Frontpage and its ilk, which allow amateurs to produce shoddy websites and free JS libraries that have absolutely terrible, browser crashing JS classes you can drop into a webpage with no required skill what-so-ever.

As I have said earlier, more HTML sites have slowed or crashed my computer, infected it with a virus, been unusable or ruined my user experience than any Flash site has ever been able to do.


Bad use is not a platform issue but a developer issue.


With regards to your comment about Flash being less relevant in 3 years time, I disagree strongly in part but agree strongly in part also. Before I explain myself I shall quote a poster after you as they are relevant to my stance.

Quote

Flash = GAMES

the rest are html,css, html5 etc..

I think with HTML 5/CSS3/AJAX your latter comment is true but only in part. I say this because its only true if you're view of "everything else" is constrained to brochure websites, standard content social networks, ecommerce websites, information websites, blogs and those kinds of application.

However that view of the internet is a narrow view and is becoming narrower all the time.

I agree that the use of Flash for applications such as brochure websites will decrease massively as HTML 5/CSS3/AJAX provides a gateway to introducing true interactive experiences to users which fills the void that Flash was cumbersomely employed to achieve.

There aren't many full flash social networks, ecommerce suites, information websites, blogs and those kinds of websites out there, Full Flash Websites are normally brochure websites, portfolio sites or concept sites. Sure there are exceptions but on the whole this is true.

However by stating "the rest are html,css, html5 etc.." is overlooking some pretty massive subject areas where Flash is currently employed and where it will take center stage in the future, provided something better doesn't come along.

So, if everything other than games are HTML/CSS/HTML5/AJAX what about:

1. Live TV Broadcasting
2. Broadcast Television / Film requiring sophisticated DRM solutions (its coming)
3. Webcam / Conferencing and Live, Interactive Social Applications
4. Product Visualisation
5. 3D Applications
6. High-End Interactive Products
7. Interactive Animated Content (talking proper animation, not moving elements about and interactions)
8. DRM Critical Alternative Media Applications

Just to name a few areas Flash is currently employed and will only grow (nothing currently out there beats Flash Media Server for broadcast and media applications, most of the above use it).


Also as a professional in the field you should also be aware that Flash isn't the ideal solution for browser based games, that of course would be Unity if we want to be pedantic about it.

[Synjyn]

Still at the end of the day html/css/js are open standards, and in my opinion as the web should be, Flash is not. That is what grates me about it.

HTML5 will support video evetually, and youtube is in the process of moving away from flash to html5. FLash may well be here for a long while yet, but I hope some day it is replaced with open standard alternatives.

[FizixRichard]

Synjyn, on 27 August 2010 - 11:31 PM, said:

Still at the end of the day html/css/js are open standards, and in my opinion as the web should be, Flash is not. That is what grates me about it.

HTML5 will support video evetually, and youtube is in the process of moving away from flash to html5. FLash may well be here for a long while yet, but I hope some day it is replaced with open standard alternatives.

The latest buzz line Apple have jumped on, the most closed standards company in the world.

We can take closed standards in a number of ways, if you mean the platform itself, thats a myth, anyone can create a Flash authoring tool and anyone can create flash applications with or without Adobe technologies.

What you cannot do is create you're own Flash player, but then I'd prefer that to be the case for security reasons. I doubt there would be any particular legalities of creating an alternative player though. But I dont know, I've never looked into it.

If you mean the end application itself being compiled and thus closed source (so you cannot view the source of the application) that for one isn't technically 100% true, you can easilly reverse engineer a Flash movie.

But closed standards can be important, particularly in regards to applications that depend on maintaining the integrity of copyright.

It's not going to be that long before you can log on to you're Sky or Cable TV providers website and provided you have a subscription watch the channels online as they are broadcast.

I also believe that it wont be that long before you can watch every movie thats released online as opposed to the cinema (so online cinema).

Sophisticated DRM and stream encryption will be critical to the emergent of these services and closed standards will to a large extent be absolutely essential in order to protect the copyright of the broadcasted media.

With applications such as video conferencing & chat, again secure streams are important to maintain privacy (I know there are alternatives for text chat, but I'm thinking about voice and video as well; in which case FMS provides the best platform for these and will continue to do so).


While HTML 5 will have good video support and we will see more outlets using it for video we have to keep in mind applications that require more sophisticated broadcast mediums, they wont be jumping onto HTML 5, not for a long time.

[Synjyn]

I do not agree that closed standards are necessary to provide secure or protected content. Look at the project canvas web tv project which was also recently approved by the bbc trust, they are using the open marlin standard for thier DRM solution. There is still a long way to go but open does not mean unsecure, in fact open can often result in the opposite due to the huge amount of 'free' testing it can employ as it evolves which no single organisation can match.

Still time will tell, and as often proved in the past, its not always the 'best' or most suitable technology that wins through either.

By the way - I like your site, that is a good example of flash used to deliver a slick and pleasant user experience

This post has been edited by Synjyn: 28 August 2010 - 12:00 AM

[KieranA]

Use it in tiny doses, that is all.


Sometimes having a closed platform can be the better choice (coming from someone who loves open source.) Take for example HTML5 & CSS.. There are many browsers all of which use a variety of engines to parse HTML&Javascript. If the Javascript spec is updated it takes years for browsers to implement the changes. When Adobe need/want to release an update there is no middle man they just roll it out themselves providing us all with a consistant experience.

[Synjyn]

KieranA, on 28 August 2010 - 05:19 PM, said:

.. When Adobe need/want to release an update there is no middle man they just roll it out themselves providing us all with a consistant experience.

and at their mercy

consistent - true it doesnt work on my ipad or iphone