Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

bitmovin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 242 posts

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#181

Post by csours »

nacs wrote: post #114
romanlevin wrote: post #39

You can still use Flash if you click-to-play, or you can white-list an address.

Right now yes, this is an upcoming change.

> Details:

Later this year we plan to change how Chromium hints to websites about the presence of Flash Player, by changing the default response of Navigator.plugins and Navigator.mimeTypes. If a site offers an HTML5 experience, this change will make that the primary experience. We will continue to ship Flash Player with Chrome, and if a site truly requires Flash, a prompt will appear at the top of the page when the user first visits that site, giving them the option of allowing it to run for that site (see the proposal[2] for the mock-ups). [1]

1. https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/ch...

2. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/106_KLNJfwb9L-1hVVa4i...

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#182

Post by dang »

oolongCat wrote: post #51

Getting really frustrated with all the things chrome is starting to change. We are starting to become a bunch of sheep, if google wants something, they announce it, and implement it, we developers, users have to fall in line and start doing everything they want. What the hell is going on, why are we not pissed off about this. Look I hate Flash as much as the other guy, but blocking an extention just because a company…

> And to all the fan-boys/girls down-voting me. Have the decency to leave a comment as to why you are downvoting.

Going on about getting downvoted breaks the HN guidelines, as does name-calling. Please (re-)read them and don't do this.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#183

Post by samsonradu »

I hate it when I see people talking about Flash as if it's the Web's cancer. Remember Flash pushed the web heavily forward back when we had to install all sorts of desktop applications and codecs just to watch a video or play a simple game. It is an optional plugin that you can always disable. Not having it at all would lead to a poorer UX in my opinion. Can't Chrome just have a toggle Flash on/off in the toolbar and get over it? And let Flash die naturally, when HTML5 catches up?

Edit

Also the propaganda [1] against it makes me laugh. The reason Google wants it out is probably because it can't track the ads inside Flash apps.

[1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3160644/Googl...

"Leaked documents have revealed the program has a serious vulnerability that lets hackers take over anyone's computer."

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#184

Post by djjddkfjd »

simonsarris wrote: post #48

Google Finance still uses Flash: https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOG I really wish they didn't leave it to rot.

I'm almost 99% certain that there are no engineers staffed on Google Finance. It's funny how many zombie Google products are out there.

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#185

Post by djjddkfjd »

simonsarris wrote: post #48

Google Finance still uses Flash: https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AGOOG I really wish they didn't leave it to rot.

I'm almost 99% certain that there are no engineers staffed on Google Finance. It's funny how many zombie Google products are out there.

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#186

Post by azakai »

Tloewald wrote: post #104
franciscop wrote: post #17

> DRM is a hugely important part of the online video workflow and HTML5 offers a very useful tool with Encrypted Media Extensions. DRM has never been important for online video workflow and it's only useful in the way a walled garden is useful... it will require that each pair of browser-website (with EME) negotiate before allowing it, basically making it impossible for smaller browsers to become useful at all

If you want to critique that sentence, you're going about it the wrong way. The whole reason for Flash's tenacity in the video market was its thorough support for DRM. This is decidedly _not_ an advantage of HTML5.

Flash had video long before HTML5 did, and HTML5 video support has only very recently been consistent (e.g., the codec wars). Those made Flash a better option for a long time, regardless of DRM, and might also be reasons why Flash has stuck around in this space. DRM is not the whole story.

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#187

Post by azakai »

acdha wrote: post #60
BugsBunnySan wrote: post #16

well, good riddance to flash, but Encrypted Media Extensions are definitly not an advantage, see for example https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/04/save-firefox

EME is a huge advantage from a security perspective because it avoids pulling in a massive platform (Flash, Silverlight) just to play video. We can debate other aspects but from a security perspective moving to a small, tightly-scoped module is a big win and that's important when the cost of vulnerabilities is in the billions per year. It's also somewhat good for the web since both of those platforms are competitors…

> all of the DRM opposition since the 90s has failed to move public opinion much

In the music space, opposition to DRM was very successful.

The same could have been true for video, we'll never know, because Google, Microsoft, and Netflix created EME.

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#188

Post by mastax »

fixermark wrote: post #138
yaur wrote: post #73

While the focus is rightly on video, there are a huge number of games written in flash. In the short term this s probably a hug boost for unity... But as flash dies there will be a lot of games that die with it.

Unity is itself a proprietary, single-vendor, closed-source plugin. Though I don't disagree at all, transitioning from one proprietary, single-vendor, closed-source plugin to another isn't actually going to solve the problems that killing Flash is supposed to solve (apart from the one where Flash is also a gigantic legacy-code monument to all our sins, of course ;) ).

Unity you output WebGl-based games, see http://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/webgl-building.html

From what I remember it's not as performant or reliable as the plugin, so there's some work to be done on unity's end. Beyond that, if browser makers want to replace native code plugins they have to give a better alternative. WebAssembly might help, but since it's essentially running in the same vm as JS I'm not sure it'll be faster other than the parsing overhead.

Re: Google moves to replace Flash with HTML5

#190

Post by exodust »

This article has the vibe of drawing attention to something else other than the subject of the piece. Is that unfair to say? Not for me to judge I suppose, but the final paragraph says it all.

Anyway, a couple of things from the article...

> "Netflix have already switched to HTML5...due to the benefits of HTML5 based streaming"

> "...HTML5 outperforms plugin based playback in almost every department"

> "...delivering high bandwidth products such as 360° video and Virtual Reality in a more efficient manor."

Such generic statements! Netflix HTML5 playback in both Chrome and Firefox is limited to 720p. That's not a benefit and is why I must use silverlight in IE on Windows 7 to watch 1080p Netflix. They really should cover things like this to better reflect how things actually are.

The claims about HTML5 performance over plugins should only come from people who have done side by side comparisons. So many bloggers telling it according to something they read somewhere.

Finally, "360° video in a more efficient manor". I like efficient manors, even bad manors, but again this claim should be backed up with evidence. If you look at VR, if you look at 360 video, the evidence for better performance in HTML5 for these technologies is simply not there. Even with still image panoramas, anyone who has made these in something like KrPano will know that Flash panoramas generally outperform HTML5 panoramas. Smoother motion, better memory management, better cross-browser performance. We may wish it weren't so, but we should get facts straight regardless of whether it leaves HTML (which we love) a little bruised in the comparison.

Post reply on HN