04-06-12 12:18 PM
59 123
tools
  1. lssanjose's Avatar
    Adobe buying flash was the worst thing done to it. The direction it took it made high end machines necessary. FLV playback still isn't hardware accelerated, but other formats are

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
    avt123 likes this.
    04-04-12 06:07 PM
  2. FSeverino's Avatar
    The fact that no NEW flash development is occuring does not take anything away from the fact that many sites still use mostly flash to function.

    I completely understand that flash is not the best way to do things, but i also completely understand that because my playbook (and android devices) have flash they can do A LOT more then the ipad can. And to say that the playbook NEEDS netflix is really funny because it doesnt NEED it due to flash, but in order to watch a range of media on the iPad you NEED APPS due to the lack of flash.

    Of course this will change in the future, but we arent living in the future... yet.
    kbz1960 likes this.
    04-04-12 06:33 PM
  3. apengue1's Avatar
    I probably don't understand the question, what are the URLs? I go to your Youtube page from sig, the movie plays fine without Flash.

    We're probably not saying two different things. The flash work is done, those sites don't take it away, they add HTML5, and new development is in HTML5.

    If every newspaper publisher switched to green ink tomorrow and no one used black ink anymore, we could make two statements. 99.9% of all newspapers ever published were with black ink, and 100% of newspapers published now are in green ink, and all that nearly everyone cares about would be in green ink within a few weeks because (generally) people read newspapers for news.
    Thanks for visiting my youtube page

    Youtube primarily uses flash and is a great example. Why? You can see my video, I know. They obviously are developed in html5 as well. With most of the work done, if its that much better, why dont they just base their whole website in html5? You don't get the full functionality of youtube when you're NOT visiting their desktop site.

    Facebook also uses flash. Yeah, you might be able to see videos through their app cause its in html5, but if so, it means it is already actively in place, yet their desktop website still uses flash. Why? There must be a reason..

    If someone can answer this, then you may finally have a valid point.

    Whether you like it or not, most of the internet STILL USES FLASH! So why are you telling me to stop using it?
    I refuse to stop using flash, and as long as its around, I refuse to not have it one of my devices. I guess its no Apple products for me then.

    Bottom line, I'll say it again, and will keep mentioning it until SOMEONE actually has a factual answer.

    Do you know why the most popular websites still use flash?
    Last edited by apengue1; 04-04-12 at 07:42 PM.
    FSeverino likes this.
    04-04-12 07:29 PM
  4. avt123's Avatar
    AVT -
    And this isn't ignorance? That was the point of my comment. I was waiting for someone to call me out on it. Way to generalize that we don't know enough about computers

    I didn't comment on that post, I commented on yours. His post was pretty bad as well. I do however agree with him that flash is a resource hog.

    Flash is good to have right now, because flash is being used on many sites. Do I personally care if I have it or not? No. That's why no flash on iOS means nothing to me and many of the people on it. If everyone cared about flash so much more people would be on Android since it had it first.

    When someone comes up with an answer as to why the most popular websites in the world still use flash, then I'll start taking your arguments into consideration. For now, all I see are people with flash-uncapable devices trying to convince the world that flash is dead.
    Flash is still in use. HTML5 numbers are growing. Once HTML5 surpasses the use of flash, flash will be dead.

    On that note, it just reinforces Steve Jobs' superior marketing stategies. Almost brain-wash like, but I don't want to get into that conversation. Whatever stifles the competition and sells devices....
    I agree, Steve announcing flash as dead before Adobe even came out to say something did brainwash a lot of people. After that many articles came out claiming the same thing and they went with it. For me, I have never liked flash besides to play games in highschool. Flash has always been buggy, crashes, and just bogs down sites on many PCs.

    I don't even use my stock Android browser anymore (it supports flash). I use mobile Chrome because I prefer faster page loading and more personal/user features over flash.
    Last edited by avt123; 04-05-12 at 09:15 AM.
    04-05-12 08:48 AM
  5. avt123's Avatar
    Adobe buying flash was the worst thing done to it. The direction it took it made high end machines necessary. FLV playback still isn't hardware accelerated, but other formats are

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
    This. I have never seen flash work correctly on a decent machine. Mid-ranged PCs even have some problems with it.

    My MacBook Pro barely has problems with it, but I really don't try to use it.
    04-05-12 08:57 AM
  6. olblueyez's Avatar
    It always a toss up. Less maintenance vs more flexibility.

    Kinda like the phones.

    I got some old iPods out a few weeks ago and set them up. iTunes reminded me why those original 4GB Nano's were the first, second, and last Apple products I will ever own.

    DRM? FS
    04-05-12 10:04 PM
  7. olblueyez's Avatar
    This. I have never seen flash work correctly on a decent machine. Mid-ranged PCs even have some problems with it.



    My MacBook Pro barely has problems with it, but I really don't try to use it.

    I never seem to have any issues with Flash. I wonder what is different? hummmmm,,...
    04-05-12 10:08 PM
  8. avt123's Avatar
    I never seem to have any issues with Flash. I wonder what is different? hummmmm,,...
    Flash has always worked horribly for me (on non gaming machines). Crashes a lot. Crashes browsers a lot. Even when I did use it to play games I would be lucky if they worked (school computers weren't the greatest Dells).

    When I had my two gaming machines it worked fine (high end machine). I don't know what is different. You just seem to have an overall better experience. It happens. Just like some people never had to pull their BBs battery, some have to pull it every day.
    04-06-12 09:25 AM
  9. apengue1's Avatar
    I didn't comment on that post, I commented on yours. His post was pretty bad as well. I do however agree with him that flash is a resource hog.

    Flash is good to have right now, because flash is being used on many sites. Do I personally care if I have it or not? No. That's why no flash on iOS means nothing to me and many of the people on it. If everyone cared about flash so much more people would be on Android since it had it first.



    Flash is still in use. HTML5 numbers are growing. Once HTML5 surpasses the use of flash, flash will be dead.



    I agree, Steve announcing flash as dead before Adobe even came out to say something did brainwash a lot of people. After that many articles came out claiming the same thing and they went with it. For me, I have never liked flash besides to play games in highschool. Flash has always been buggy, crashes, and just bogs down sites on many PCs.

    I don't even use my stock Android browser anymore (it supports flash). I use mobile Chrome because I prefer faster page loading and more personal/user features over flash.
    This is a well constructed response. I do want flash and that's the difference between me and you. I don't mind if you don't want to use it, that's your choice. But it definitely isn't dead, clearly. It also performs quite well for me.
    04-06-12 12:18 PM
59 123
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD