Fast Learner
First Post
Running Flash will soon be a moot point since Adobe's no longer planning to pursue mobile Flash, instead focusing on turning Flash apps into native mobile apps and using HTML5 for the mobile web.
the tablet war is heating up
- Thread starter falcarrion
- Start date
I just saw a similar article Adobe ending mobile Flash Player, cutting 750 jobs - latimes.com and came here to post it....
I'm no big fan of Flash, for no particular reason. So I'd like to see it die.
I find their logic to be odd. If HTML5 is supported on all the major mobile devices, would it not also be supported on all the major PC devices? Therefore, why not just code for HTML5 in the first place...
I suspect we'll continue to have mobile browser issues until everybody who makes web-sites wakes up and considers mobile browsers as part of the supported mix. That's been the whole crux of the problem, is nobody plans for an Android, iThing to connect to the site.
falcarrion
First Post
That is correct. I loaded the software on my computer and the app on my ipad. I have had no problems at all when printing. They recomend trying the lite version first to make sure it will work with your system.
falcarrion
First Post
Now that adobe officailly anounced that they are discontinueing mobile flash.
does that mean that the no flash debate is mute?
does that mean that the no flash debate is mute?
Now that adobe officailly anounced that they are discontinueing mobile flash.
does that mean that the no flash debate is mute?
I suspect its going to make things worse.
We already have the problem that not all sites support mobile devices.
Flash being a good part of the problem. By not supporting Flash, we'll have some devices with the last release of Flash out there that work on sites relying on the older flash version.
Then the newest sites will require the newest flash, and those sites won't work.
I suspect web-sites will still be too lazy to actually code for 2 different platforms (mobile vs. PC).
If flash were totally dead (not likely to happen), and everybody used html5, there'd be a pretty good chance every site would render on your mobile and PC devices. Which was the original point of the html specification.
How will any of that make Flash moot? The majority of those websites out there that use custom Flash apps aren't likely to decide to reinvent them from the ground up. This is nothing new. Internet Explorer 6 still has a massive foothold in enterprises, despite MS trying to shuffle everyone off at all costs.
Take my number one reason for wanting Flash: Marvel Digital Comics Unlimited. Marvel has been very slow to make needed adaptations to that interface. Even with the emergence of mobile devices, they're still not making efforts to position it for that market. They just don't want to throw the needed resources at it.
Fast Learner
First Post
Yes, this is the death of Flash.
Those sites that use it but have absolutely no need to, e.g. restaurants, will take a while to get rid of it, though mostly because they pay so little attention to their websites that they won't bother to change things quickly.
Those sites that use it and have done so because at the time there weren't good alternatives but there are now, e.g. video-based sites, are already replacing it very quickly. Only the TV networks are dragging their feet, but they have been creating mobile apps that serve the same function, so Flash will still be there for another 5 years maximum.
Those sites that use it and haven't had good alternatives in the past, e.g. Flash games, are Adobe's target right now for their Flash-to-app conversion options (limited now, but as they've stated, are now their focus).
Sites built from the ground up will completely avoid Flash. There's a strong theme in web design right now known as "mobile first": design your site so it works great on mobile devices, then for the non-mobile version add only things that are strictly necessary. This not only completely obviates the use of Flash, but it generally produces cleaner and easier to use sites, which is nice.
Those sites that use it but have absolutely no need to, e.g. restaurants, will take a while to get rid of it, though mostly because they pay so little attention to their websites that they won't bother to change things quickly.
Those sites that use it and have done so because at the time there weren't good alternatives but there are now, e.g. video-based sites, are already replacing it very quickly. Only the TV networks are dragging their feet, but they have been creating mobile apps that serve the same function, so Flash will still be there for another 5 years maximum.
Those sites that use it and haven't had good alternatives in the past, e.g. Flash games, are Adobe's target right now for their Flash-to-app conversion options (limited now, but as they've stated, are now their focus).
Sites built from the ground up will completely avoid Flash. There's a strong theme in web design right now known as "mobile first": design your site so it works great on mobile devices, then for the non-mobile version add only things that are strictly necessary. This not only completely obviates the use of Flash, but it generally produces cleaner and easier to use sites, which is nice.
For managing content, you literally plug your phone or tablet in via USB cable, and drag and drop files via Windows Explorer. It's that easy. None of the headaches Apple's been in the past.
If you want to do something like move an iPhone music collection over, you download Doubletwist from the Market (it's a free app), plug your phone in, and it'll sync everything from your iTunes library (or what you designate from that library) to your Android device. There's a Pro version that's like $4 that includes wireless syncing.
You have full file system access. I recommend staying away from your OS directories....but you can create your own directories and subdirectories, see all the files, and put things wherever you want them.
It's really not difficult to use...
Banshee
Because HTML 5 isn't capable of half of what Flash is. Yeah, if you want to just show movies, or have a simple animation on a website, then yeah, HTML 5 will do it, but it's in its infancy compared to Flash, and does not really support the development of rich application environments...which Flash *does*. I've got friends and business associates who work in companies who do very advanced Flash/Flex/Air application interfaces etc.....and the stuff they do can't be done in HTML 5, and likely won't be able to be done for several years still. And by the time it *can* be done, likely HTML 5 will have just as many problems as Flash has had.
That stuff is big bucks development though, only really purchased by companies with deep pockets. The more simple, entertainment related stuff that people on iPod Touches etc. would be intending to look at, can be replaced by HTML 5...hence Apple's stance. But saying to get rid of it is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The whole thing is complicated further in that some companies such as RiM have purchased the sourcecode for Flash, and plan on continuing to support it. Either they have it stuck in their heads to compete against iPad by trumpeting that their devices support Flash, or there are very real business cases.....like that web applications that have been developed by companies who are large RiM clients are based out of Flash (as an example).
Adobe may, like HP, realize that they made a mistake, and reverse the decision, given what they're seeing is happening to their share price since they made this announcement.
Who knows what will happen, longterm? Adobe's effectively just thrown their community of developers under the bus, and may get a bigger backlash than they expected.
Banshee
Last edited:
There's lots of it out there. Stuff as simple as NHL.com - The National Hockey League. The mobile (non-Flash) version of the site isn't nearly as nice as the Flash enabled desktop experience.
As to platform buy in, it's a legitimate problem. It's somewhat mitigated by the fact that so many apps on Android are free, that are charged for in the App Store. I haven't really come across any instances where I have to consider paying for an app I already bought on my iPhone.
But......anyone contemplating a jump should do their research, as they may have different selections of apps. I've got 85 on them on my tablet at the moment, and have only had to pay for 1 (which had no cousin on iOS).
Banshee
