Well, I'll step up to the plate then. Yes, you're wrong.
Photoshop costs money, MS Paint does not. But you're not going to see designers flocking to MS Paint just because it's free.

And by the way, HTML 5 is still nothing more than a concept. Assuming it gets adopted as a standard someday, and factoring in the average time it takes for major changes like that to work its way into full browser integration and then on down to all the actual users, HTML 5 won't be considered any kind of a "standard" for decades. (if ever).

Macromedia created something unique with both Flash & Director (Shockwave), that rocked the world. Adobe bought them out. Flash is capable of so much more than just displaying a video to a user, just as Photoshop is capable of so much more than just cropping thumbnails.

The important part is, Flash doesn't cost the end users anything, only the Flash developers. The developers will use whatever gets the job done the fastest, best, most efficient way, on a platform that reaches the most people. Right now, (for purposes of this discussion) that's Flash, not HTML 5. And when statistics show that IE6 is STILL the most widely used browser out there, it's pretty clear that end users aren't jumping on upgrades until they are forced to.

Flash isn't going anywhere, and Adobe is not shitting any bricks.

:2 cents:

pretty neat, but doesn't work with 90% of the browsers, making it useless at this point...

Within 10 years, maybe. BUT.. from your earlier posts I got the impression you were talking about months, maybe hours.

Anyhow.. anyone care to make a suggestion? Maybe if the browser developers would care to find a harmony and decide how and what codecs they'd support, since w3 doesn't. Some are free, some are not. :)

Also from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5

:)

Also read worthy: http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2010/...-html-5-video/

</end being an asshole>

Gonna go play hockey. Have fun arguing. I'll join back up later.

Adobe makes money off
a) A visual IDE for Flash development - command line compilation is now free.
b) Server architectures for complex callback/relationships with served media.

Both of these things (especially (a)) will be needed for html5 to 'replace' flash, and who do you think is best positioned to have market ready tools for development in these spaces. Actionscript is after all just a flavour of ECMA (as is javascript). Adapting their tools to output to html5 apps would not be a huge undertaking.

If you don't think Adobe is already working on this, then you're an arse.

Oh brilliant. Compare something shit to something good. :)

Equally, Kobe beef is better than macdonalds.

The key, that you usefully missed, is that both flash/html5 are/will be as good as the same in terms of DELIVERING VIDEO.

So now why would someone pay for something they could get for free?

2022 they reckon. And getting W3C this year.

Brilliant. Who denies that?

Again, no one is denying that.

Yes it is. Again, no one appears to be denying that?

a) no it isn't http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
b) who is saying end users jump on upgrades?

As I said, where did I suggest that? I didn't, did I?

I mean, I am sorry you assumed I said things I didn't, and you are now arguing against YOUR supposition as opposed to anything I actually said. :)

Hope hockey is fun.

They are? Maybe if browsers would support ALL codecs, which won't happen. Licensing fees. Mozilla doesn't like NON-opensource stuff, where as apple and Google seem to.

..and hockey will be fun, until I hurt myself.

So, what is it you want? I've given you my opinion, and the fact that Flash is used for more than just delivering end-user video is enough of a reason for developers who need it to continue paying for it. You can deliver video to your users right now without Flash or HTML5. You don't NEED either one.

I guess I'm not sure what your vantage point is on this. Are you just looking to save a buck by not purchasing Flash? That's not a good enough reason or argument to make claims of 'conceptual' HTML 5 killing off a staple of designer / developer tools that's been in play for decades.

DamienJ,

I guess, let me put this another way...
We can both agree that Flash is infinitely more advanced & better than Compuserve's old ass GIF in terms of banner design. Yet even as vastly superior as Flash is in every way and then some in that regard, the GIF format lives on to this day. So if HTML 5 is being viewed as a "Flash Killer" based solely on end user video delivery, do you honestly believe Adobe is just going to say, "Well, that's it then. Let's terminate Flash."? Or that developers & designers are going to stop using it?

When you speak of something as a Flash Killer, it's going to have to pack more of a punch than just saving a buck on video delivery. It's going to have to be a holographic tactile slut crawling out of the screen and sucking some dick.

original post

backtrack post 80 posts in when you realize what you said is false
when something is "dead" how can it be alive for another 10 years?

PS get off apples balls you just saw the iPad vid and got a boner.
--------

you = full of shit

And is the problem with your life and death argument and why you are defending and back peddling so rapidly. Macdonalds does not sell Kobe beef.

The following is taken from the URL you posted:

"W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to use Internet Explorer, since it comes preinstalled with Windows. Most do not seek out other browsers.

These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is used by at least 80% of the users.

Anyway, our data, collected from W3Schools' log-files, over a five year period, clearly shows the long and medium-term trends."

Every single one of my sites logs shows that IE6 is the most popular browser.

I wanted to point out your paint/photoshop analogy wasn't really very accurate.

It's just Flash isn't all that, and things change. Not sure why everyone is so busy sucking Adobe's cock?

No, I do marketing. I don't buy any Flash licences.

I just think it's FASCINATING how so many people have run into this thread so oddly aggressively. Like I was saying America isn't very good!

The only point I was really making is that that link had a really nice clip of video.

Hehe! Brilliant post!

Oh, is THAT what you got so annoyed about. That's a thing people say in monarchies and have done since 1272. The King is dead, long live the king. It's a phrase, or saying.

Headlines are meant to get people's attention.

Worked.

Like the hand egg one.

Google just announced it was dropping support of ie6.

Considering the aggressive nature of the topic you posted, I am not sure why you are surprised.

Another brilliant contribution, refund. You keep on rocking, girl.

Love your work

x

Yeah I know you do sweety, maybe cause its always been legal. Don't make me mention that nasty illegal shit you sold for years. Now be a good boy and get back on message. I really hate to see people blow holes in their feet. And you were being so well behaved. So don't be raising shit all over again. Your veneer is very, very thin. And I can see you have lit your own fuse one more time.

I apologize if my comments appeared aggressive, that wasn't my intent.

I agree, things change all the time, and that's usually good. But I've heard this HTML 5 battle cry a hundred times all over the Internet, and it's never put into the perspective of reality.

I was doing Flash interface design all the way back in 1997, and trying to get clients to understand the merits of Flash was like beating my head against a brick wall while simultaneously stabbing myself in the eye with a fork.

Here we are 13 years later and everyone finally 'gets it'. Flash isn't the big scary unknown mystery tech they all thought it was. But that had a lot to do with merely overcoming the plugin 'scariness' factor. With HTML 5 we're talking about fully supportive browsers, agreement between collaborators, and the ever growing end-user apathy towards upgrading anything. Most users can't manage to keep spyware off their systems, let alone get themselves off IE6.

So anyway, I just think you're being overly optimistic about HTML 5 replacing Flash any time soon. (and again, if ever). And from reality's perspective, if your goal is to deliver to as many of your users as possible, then of course you have to use the tech that will accomplish that.

That's all.

:2 cents:

Absolutely right. You beat me by 3 years. I was involved in flash sites in 2000.

However, I bet Real Player weren't that worried when Flash came out. :)

Still, the video looked purdy.

in the thread title :2 cents:

"flash is dead"

if i started a thread that said "george bush is dead" would you assume i meant bush is dead now or bush will eventually die someday ?

lol.....very succinct

I suppose that if someone just read the thread title and not the rest of my post where I simply link to a pretty video clip, then maybe people could get confused about my 'the king is dead long live the king' reference. Conceeded.

It was not a long live the king reference. Far from it. Closer to long live the pretender.

im not annoyed at that, it just isnt that hard to say anything about 10 years from now. a decade long call is kind of pointless in such a rapid changing world.

maybe wont be called flash in 10 years. who knows? HTML5 may not even exist in 10 years. so how does your call matter then?

i am just annoyed because you are only mentioning this because of the recent apple news where they are not using flash.

No, I mentioned it cos I thought the video in the link looked pretty darn cool.

Fuck an iPad. I don't want one. Not cos of Flash, but because of the stupid aspect ratio.

rev2 with 16:9 and OLED might tempt me though.

Thanks but, browser not supported.

Nice video - it worked well for me on Safari (didn't try other browsers). Regardless of which is better, HTML5 is definitely something to watch.

Very nice!

:2 cents::2 cents:

I guess you can incorporate it now and have about 20% of users able to see your content.

What statistics are those? Not mine.

Of course he'd say that. It's in his interest.

Unfortunately HTML 5 video is not widely support and there is still some debate about what codec to use. H.264 has some serious licensing issues for something that is supposed to be a standard and the open source codecs don't really compete.

Google acquired On2 a while back and there is some speculation that they will open up VP8. I'm hoping that will be the case.

Sorry, IE6 has slipped in the last month down to 20%, just under IE8. But two months ago 6 was still on top. Browser Version Market Share

Still, that is pretty damn significant numbers when we're talking about replacing Flash with HTML 5.

I am getting sick to death of this standards debate. H.264 works fine. Any standard is better than no standard.

Browser not supported and i have them ALL, great promo LOL

r.i.p flash

Worked on my Chrome and I was able to move around the video very fast.

Nice.

Post proof, a retraction, or ask for this to be removed. Alluding to the fact that someone sold something illegal with out proof is grounds for banning.

You have 1 hour!

holy crap!

Eric has the hammer cocked!

(that is a pretty harsh accusation though)