Firefox VP Sides With Apple: Flash has to Go

19

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Shalbatana

I would respectfully disagree with some of the comments below.

The article to me does not say "we're incapable of building  a product that works with flash", it says flash is an older system built on an older philosophy of implementation (that of plug-ins). Neither does it say that IE is more stable with flash, because it isn't. Try a page that crashes in ff (flash games on kids sites like nick jr are a good example), and it will crash just as often in ie. I've tried them side by side. In my personal experience you'll have just as many flash related crashes in IE as FF. It might be different as to the extent of the crash, but they still halt playback/interactivity.

Also, flash adds to coding in many ways that will be (emphasis on "will") outdated very soon. It's full of exploits, it's a proprietary format.

What I do agree with is that there is no replacement yet. But there will be. Even if HTML 5 does not provide the ultimate solution it's a step in the right direction... implementing features and code options that should have been there in html 4. ALso, many people combine html 5 with webm... while proposed together, one is a subset of the other, they are not the same thing. HTML 5 is a good thing. WebM is still out for debate.

DOn't get me wrong. flash was great in it's day, like the model T... but it's time has come. It NEEDS a replacement based on new technology and a new approach.

 

avatar

Mighty BOB!

When you can play online games with HTML then Flash will be redundant and obsolete.  Until then, it is never going away, even if 100% of all video streaming on the Internet gets replaced with HTML.

avatar

aaronj2906

This article really says vendor #1 is unable to build a browser that properly allows vendor #2 product to run within it. Meanwhile, vendor #3, does not have nearly the problems that vendor #1 has.

In this case, we will call vendor #1 Mozilla. Vendor #2 Adobe, Vendor #3 Microsoft.

"Anyone care to level a prediction as to what year we will finally be rid of flash?"

Flash is still one of the corner stones of web content delivery. Unless HTML5 can completely replace it, which is not 100% possible currently, this will remain unchanged.

 

Personally, I only use IE8 when I encounter a website that FF cannot render properly. Also, some of the plugins for FF (such as adblock) make FF much more nimble that IE. For the people that would label me a M$ "fanboi," I do use FF as my primary browser.

I would estimate that Flash content runs 99% OK with it, even across multiple tabs.

avatar

Emgtek

YouTube already offers a HTML5 version of YouTube and it works using less resources than flash.

avatar

Vano

But for now it doesn't give all the bells and whistles as flash version give and the video quality is not as good either. Perhaps in time it will change

avatar

majorsuave

As long as devoted tablet and phone makers will make their device "Flash Ready" Flash will stay. And frankly, it's a good thing,

Flash allows a lot of content to be delivered the way content programmers were taught to embed them at school. Learning a new tool can be a long process especially when the one you know does the job already.

avatar

Neufeldt2002

If everyone followed that kind of thinking we would still be listening to tube radio, watching tube tv (black and white), vinyl records, horse and buggy, and on, and on. Just because something works doesn't mean we shouldn't be striving for better tech, and better implimentation, and new standards.

avatar

TechJunkie

So, we should just bow down to crapple and FF and ditch flash for HTML 5? Why? Because they say HTML 5 is superior? Flash is consistantly updated, adding new or shall I say fixing security flaws, but updated nonetheless for new technology. I'm not saying HTML 5 is a bad thing by no means and should be implemented along side flash giving the end user a choice and when that choice favors HTML 5, then they should start phasing out flash. But Flash is by no means still stuck in the dark ages and HTML 5 is just another itteration of the same thing....just backed by crapple and FF at the moment. We should strive forward and make innovation work for us, instead of new standards being rammed down our throats.

On the same note, FF needs to fix their own crap before spewing junk like this. 

avatar

Hamburger

Amen! 

avatar

Emgtek

Ab-so-lutely! [as]

avatar

bpstone

A lot web developers like the idea of HTML5. Many are now integrating it into their websites with flash only being used as a backup for older browsers. As soon as these newer browsers take off you will see HTML5 being used much more often. HTML6 along with CSS4 will probably start to kill off flash alltogether in 2012. ;)

avatar

Vano

Oh, so that what mayan calendar predicted?

avatar

bpstone

lol

avatar

MleB

Firefox and Apple can 'harrumph' all they like, but until there is a standard that is, you know, a standard (one that everyone uses and that all browsers recognise) and that allows viewers of websites to see them as they do now - or better - then Flash will still remain the default product.

avatar

Markitzero

Youtube uses flash for the player and the connection I am on I can't do html5. my 3G at home I have a hard time getting 100Kbps and 3G is all I can get for broadband in my area because it is Rural and I don't want Dial-up because that is the only Landline service I can get and 4G has not made it to my area yet. There are alot of area were DSL is being phazed out by companies like Verizon to were all they can get is Dial-up or a Wireless provider like Satellite internet"which is crap" or 3G, the lucky ones have access to WiMAX or 4G. Why don't they do a setting in "about:config" and have flash turned off by default but the adavnce user can turn it on.

avatar

Dexter243

isdn is a old school but you can still get it and it is allot better then dial up and allot better then any wirless for gaming do to stibilityand the ping id very low and will be just as tight as DSL or ADSL

i know the download and up load are crap for larg files but the 128k up and 128k down is just as good for on line gaming as any DSL

now i bet also if you want to pay for you you can get a T1 line

 

avatar

Markitzero

I looked in to ISDN I can't get it the Telecom in my Area is Verizon and it is $70US for a Phoneline from them. And there is NO DSL at all, Verizon is keeping any DSL slots from people that cancel they have been keeping it closed. There was DSL before I moved were I am back in Oct 09 after I got settled they said that all they can offer me is Dial-up. Also there is no T1s around my area.The only other service is Satellite internet through HugesNet and Wildblue. There is no 4G or WiMAX. You can see my area do a google maps for Phelan, CA

The sad thing is that right by my property is a Verizon FiOS trunk line but from I heard Verizon charges $8,000 to tab Verizon FiOS line when my Step Dad was starting a Store.

avatar

bloodgain

The cost to tap a line for a business is usually much higher than for a residence.  I'm sure it won't be super-cheap, like an "outlet activation" charge for a cable or DSL line, but it shouldn't cost you $8K if FIOS is running right past your house and is lit.

avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

Can't be soon enough. Nothing but open standards for the Web.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.