WildWestDesigns
Active Member
Especially for such old outdated tech.
-
I want to thank all the members that have upgraded your accounts. I truly appreciate your support of the site monetarily. Supporting the site keeps this site up and running as a lot of work daily goes on behind the scenes. Click to Support Signs101 ...
Flash on iPad's and iPhones?
- Thread starter CES020
- Start date
Especially for such old outdated tech.
CES020
New Member
Joe you are repeatedly reading something I'm not saying. Show me where I said Flash was bad. I didn't. So no need to come after me like I'm the "anti-flash" guy. I repeatedly said "Flash on the phone". Not Flash on my computer, not flash on an iPad, not flash in a Galaxie Tab, but flash on the phone.
Sure, it would be nice to have a choice to run it, but we don't. I don't make the rules in the game, I just live in the world where the rules are set.
Sure, it would be nice to have a choice to run it, but we don't. I don't make the rules in the game, I just live in the world where the rules are set.
Joe Diaz
New Member
I'm not reading into what you are saying. You're making a stink because people defended flash when Jobs wrote a letter saying that all flash is unstable and used too much resources and battery life. Now you have found an article from a PC magazine where you cherry pick one comment where the writer says that this new adobe product will use less resources. You see that as confirmation that Jobs was right about flash. Is that about right?
The problem is just because they have found a way to broadcast flash to those devices and make them use even less system resources, doesn't mean that they were too resource heavy to begin with. Especially compared to other technology that apple is pushing. Which consequently enough, is why people are questioning Apple's decision. Not because "Jobs is an idiot", "apple is overpriced junk" and "people that buy it are stupid"
AND I'm not coming after you. I'm TRYING to explain it to you. And I think I'm doing a decent job of being respectful towards you on this topic. If anyone on here has a right to be upset it's the guy who spent years trying to learn a technology and research ways of creating content using that technology in the most secure and light ways... only to have some company publish a letter where they pass the blame for a legitimate issue with their device onto other folks... THEN to have to hear misinformation spread about that technology by people that don't understand what they are talking about. The guy who makes money creating content with that technology, who now is being told to abandon all of that hard work and learn something new. So the fact that this guy isn't losing his cool on this topic is pretty remarkable.
CES020
New Member
No, that's not about right. I didn't cherry pick one comment to make a case, I just stated that it was odd that the same people who said Jobs was dishonest in his comments about flash being a resource hog on mobile devices, which he did say in his open letter, now say he was right, it is a resource hog on mobile devices. When Jobs said it, he wasn't genuine, according to many, but when you say it, then it's okay. I find that interesting, that's all.
I'm not a developer, so I couldn't care less. I have still yet to see where Jobs said Flash won't be able to be used on any Mac out there. Oh, that's right, he didn't say that. He said on a mobile device, it was a resource hog. Which you have admitted in this very thread. That's all I said, that's all Jobs said, and that's what you have said. So we're all saying the same exact thing, yet somehow, it's my fault..........
Whatever....
FrankenSigns.biz
New Member
Okay. I'll say it. Flash is CRAP. CRAP. CRAP. CRAP. CARP! I mean CRAP. Waitaminute. FLASH stinks like a dead CARP and should be fished out of existence. Yes, THATSRIGHT! Anyone caught using computer-crashing FLASH should be filleted. I know, I know, I am rich. I admit it. I have a lot of money and I can afford Travertine and all things APPLE.
Have at it boys. Have at your love of the outdated Flash. May it rest in peace...
;-)
Have at it boys. Have at your love of the outdated Flash. May it rest in peace...
;-)
Joe Diaz
New Member
So is having .biz in your web address and building your site out of tables and cells...
perhaps with all your wealth you can look into that.
ProWraps
New Member
So is having .biz in your web address and building your site out of tables and cells...
oh man, that burns all the way over here!
FrankenSigns.biz
New Member
It's amazing how you get so girly and bent out of shape she it comes to Flash and Macs. It's hilarious!
Custom_Grafx
New Member
Decaf offer is still on.
Joe Diaz
New Member
Wow you sure can dish it out but can't take it can you? I'm just messing with you man. I figured by the tone of your post you could handle some harmless ribbing. Sorry if I offended. I wasn't really offended but what you said. Hope you aren't mad at me.
I'll know better next time.
ProWraps
New Member
i think you got the wrong dude. joe gives calm educated information based on his countless experience with the product.
quite the opposite of some others on the countless mac/flash/fanboy threads.
iSign
New Member
I have to laugh at that IE 10 thing about a "plug-in free experience."
HTML 5 has a great deal of creative possibilities. Unfortunately real world support in computer web browsers and mobile devices is still not very good. And that's despite the fact certain elements of "HTML 5" have been around for more than a decade. Google Chrome 13 scores best at html5test.com, but is still more than 100 points shy of a perfect 450 score. Internet Explorer 9 is abysmal with supporting HTML5 and Internet Explorer 8 has almost no support for it at all.
What is and what isn't a plug in? I think a lot of software developers are playing very fast and very loose with the definition. Adobe Flash is the proverbial whipping boy as of late, but it is able to do a lot of things all within a single unified plug-in. This is why Flash still dominates everything from banners ads and Zynga games to videos on YouTube.
Many of the features being touted for "HTML 5" have to be "plugged in" to the native code of the browser for it to work. Not all the browser makers are supporting everything.
Google dropped MPEG-4 support out of Chrome for the HTML5 video tag because MPEG-4 isn't open source. IE, Firefox, Safari, etc. don't support all four of the video tag formats (MPEG-4, H.264, WebM, Ogg Theora) either. So it's a crap shoot on which codec to choose for encoding your web-based video. It's forcing developers to keep falling back on using Flash Video instead.
SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics) support should have been better by now. The latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Opera and IE support it. But IE 8 doesn't support SVG, yet IE 8 is still used by a great deal of people -particularly those using older computers running Windows XP. Adobe stopped supporting its SVG plug-in for Internet Explorer years ago. The situation with the Canvas element isn't any better.
Most browsers support all of the basics in Cascading Style Sheets. But get into CSS2 and CSS3 based tags and effects and you'll quickly run into lots of trouble without entering in all sorts of browser-specific code-fixes.
For all the performance complaints people have with Flash, the same issues are going to be there with animations based in SVG or Canvas. Get enough moving vector objects into a SVG file and it will bog down the computer system just like Flash. Put enough JavaScript events into a Canvas element or simply make the Canvas element big enough and it will lag the system. Add to this the likelihood anyone creating an animation based in SVG or Canvas will have to do a lot more programming than he would from building the same thing in Flash. Those elements in a HTML5 layout will end up in higher design bills for web site development customers.
I'm doing my best to embrace "HTML 5" at least to some conservative degree with new web design work. At some point you have to be willing to cut off users of older web browsers into to use certain new features, such as rounded corners and drop shadows on DIV boxes. Not all web design clients are going to go along with that. They want their web site to work on everything, including old web browsers. At least it's not mandatory to design sites using tables anymore.
HTML 5 has a great deal of creative possibilities. Unfortunately real world support in computer web browsers and mobile devices is still not very good. And that's despite the fact certain elements of "HTML 5" have been around for more than a decade. Google Chrome 13 scores best at html5test.com, but is still more than 100 points shy of a perfect 450 score. Internet Explorer 9 is abysmal with supporting HTML5 and Internet Explorer 8 has almost no support for it at all.
What is and what isn't a plug in? I think a lot of software developers are playing very fast and very loose with the definition. Adobe Flash is the proverbial whipping boy as of late, but it is able to do a lot of things all within a single unified plug-in. This is why Flash still dominates everything from banners ads and Zynga games to videos on YouTube.
Many of the features being touted for "HTML 5" have to be "plugged in" to the native code of the browser for it to work. Not all the browser makers are supporting everything.
Google dropped MPEG-4 support out of Chrome for the HTML5 video tag because MPEG-4 isn't open source. IE, Firefox, Safari, etc. don't support all four of the video tag formats (MPEG-4, H.264, WebM, Ogg Theora) either. So it's a crap shoot on which codec to choose for encoding your web-based video. It's forcing developers to keep falling back on using Flash Video instead.
SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics) support should have been better by now. The latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Opera and IE support it. But IE 8 doesn't support SVG, yet IE 8 is still used by a great deal of people -particularly those using older computers running Windows XP. Adobe stopped supporting its SVG plug-in for Internet Explorer years ago. The situation with the Canvas element isn't any better.
Most browsers support all of the basics in Cascading Style Sheets. But get into CSS2 and CSS3 based tags and effects and you'll quickly run into lots of trouble without entering in all sorts of browser-specific code-fixes.
For all the performance complaints people have with Flash, the same issues are going to be there with animations based in SVG or Canvas. Get enough moving vector objects into a SVG file and it will bog down the computer system just like Flash. Put enough JavaScript events into a Canvas element or simply make the Canvas element big enough and it will lag the system. Add to this the likelihood anyone creating an animation based in SVG or Canvas will have to do a lot more programming than he would from building the same thing in Flash. Those elements in a HTML5 layout will end up in higher design bills for web site development customers.
I'm doing my best to embrace "HTML 5" at least to some conservative degree with new web design work. At some point you have to be willing to cut off users of older web browsers into to use certain new features, such as rounded corners and drop shadows on DIV boxes. Not all web design clients are going to go along with that. They want their web site to work on everything, including old web browsers. At least it's not mandatory to design sites using tables anymore.
2972renfro
New Member
LOLOLOLOLOL
Whenever there is a thread about apple and flash on this forum, every PC guy blasts apple for not supporting it. Now that Microsoft is doing it, 1 reply. I can hear the crickets chirping.
FrankenSigns.biz
New Member
:U Rock::U Rock::U Rock::U Rock::U Rock:
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Is Flash dead yet? I give it 6 months tops.
Joe Diaz
New Member
He just posted it. The crickets haven't had a chance to crawl out of the ground yet. But fine, I'll "blast" MS for doing too. Not supporting flash but supporting flash alternitives like Canvas/HTML5 because of "performace" makes absolutly no sense. It made no sense when Apple said it, it makes no sense when MS says it. Similar content produced in those alternative will consume nearly the same resourses. Just because MS is doing it on one version of their IE dosn't change that.
However, the thing with the new windows 8 is you can still install what ever windows based browser you want. SOOOOOO, you want flash, install Chrome, Firefox, a different version of IE etc. etc. There you have it.
David Wright
New Member
IE will become more irrelevant before flash does.
Locals Find!
New Member
Flash isn't going to die and here is why
Source: http://mashable.com/2011/09/15/microsoft-internet-explorer-10-metro/
Source: http://mashable.com/2011/09/15/microsoft-internet-explorer-10-metro/