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

Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 110 posts

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#21

Post by ugh »

huggyface wrote: post #8
estel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there an extent to which forced deprecation of software like Flash might hasten the uptake of newer technologies like HTML5? Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. But reduced support can always encourage more websites to move to HTML5.

Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. By pushing everyone to apps? iOS is no shepherd in the movement to standardized, cross-platform solutions. It is probably the greatest setback the open web has faced in over a decade.

Kind of hard to believe, given that iOS was and still is the only mobile OS with a browser that does not suck. Even Android has only been catching up. iOS and Android have been an unambiguous blessing for the open web on mobile devices.

I don't even understand what you want Apple to do. Not allow third party developers to make native apps for iOS? Apple did that and nobody liked it. I can't imagine that you think this is a realistic solution.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#22

Post by estel »

hahaiamatwork wrote: post #13
estel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there an extent to which forced deprecation of software like Flash might hasten the uptake of newer technologies like HTML5? Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. But reduced support can always encourage more websites to move to HTML5.

I agree, but as another poster said, the technology simply isn't there. I haven't tested an iPhone 4S yet, but I did develop some javascript canvas based animations for some time, and the performance was extremely poor. The old benchmark I used was http://themaninblue.com/writing/perspective/2010/03/22/ I believe, and I have yet to see HTML outperform flash on it.

I agree too (though I can't remember the last time I myself had to use Flash on my phone); but it doesn't feel like an entirely unreasonable argument for not supporting Flash.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#23

Post by Turing_Machine »

mberning wrote: post #10
hahaiamatwork wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Can you present a coherent argument against enabling flash that isn't just "I don't want to use it so nobody else should be allowed to"?

Coherent argument? Sucks battery Poor usability on touch interfaces Memory hog Buggy, leads to browser crashes

Let's not forget the security hole of the week.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#24

Post by 51Cards »

mberning wrote: post #10
hahaiamatwork wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Can you present a coherent argument against enabling flash that isn't just "I don't want to use it so nobody else should be allowed to"?

Coherent argument? Sucks battery Poor usability on touch interfaces Memory hog Buggy, leads to browser crashes

The battery argument is just silly. Playing HD movies on a phone will suck battery faster but we don't remove the user's ability to do that.

As for the others, I use Flash frequently on my phone and none of them have occurred for me in the last year or so. I have Flash set to load on demand. It's not about Flash being the future (it's not), or even continued development in it. It's about access to existing content here and now and for some users that is a continued need.

Edit: One quick edit since HN doesn't seem to want to let me reply to the below. I think the crux of it is that it removes the option to access content... key word option. If it's not the default, etc, that's fine... but you're placing the disadvantages of Flash over my ability to get to content I feel is important. The "no Flash for you" argument hinges on saying "our opinion that Flash is bad is more important than your opinion that you want to see the content you desire, even if it's not available in other formats". And for the users like myself that like to retain that option, we feel very strongly the other way.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#25

Post by nyellin »

hahaiamatwork wrote: post #5
ryandvm wrote: post #2

Thank God.

Why? Can you present a coherent argument against enabling flash that isn't just "I don't want to use it so nobody else should be allowed to"?

Flash is a proprietary standard with one major implementation, HTML 5 is an open standard supported by multiple vendors.

Accessibility (i.e. for the blind) used to be an issue, but Wikipedia claims that has mostly been fixed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_HTML5_and_Flash#A...

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#26

Post by bni »

huggyface wrote: post #8
estel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there an extent to which forced deprecation of software like Flash might hasten the uptake of newer technologies like HTML5? Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. But reduced support can always encourage more websites to move to HTML5.

Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. By pushing everyone to apps? iOS is no shepherd in the movement to standardized, cross-platform solutions. It is probably the greatest setback the open web has faced in over a decade.

There will always be native code in one form or another. It used to be Windows applications now it is iOS apps. The web will coexist and thrive in parallell to this.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#27

Post by eschulte »

51Cards wrote: post #17
EnderMB wrote: post #4

I have a Galaxy Nexus, and I know this will be an unpopular opinion, but I find Flash works pretty well on the device. Granted, I only use it for video content on sites like the BBC, but the underlying functionality is fine. I don't think Flash has a future on mobile devices, but HTML5-based solutions aren't up to scratch for general use yet, so I don't think Adobe should throw in the towel just yet.

Agreed as well. I often make use of Flash on both my tablet and my Nexus One. The times I notice it most is when I'm using the new Firefox Mobile and I have to copy the URL and paste it into the stock browser to get to flash content. That tedious process makes me realize I do it a lot more than I expected I would. I am very very disappointed by this decision.

Sure this is a temporary inconvenience, but you're just feeling the growing pains of the web leaving behind flash (yes everywhere, not just mobile) which simplifies the space and long-term is a good thing for developers and consumers of web content.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#28

Post by bookwormAT »

mberning wrote: post #10
hahaiamatwork wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Can you present a coherent argument against enabling flash that isn't just "I don't want to use it so nobody else should be allowed to"?

Coherent argument? Sucks battery Poor usability on touch interfaces Memory hog Buggy, leads to browser crashes

Flash does not use any battery power at all, except when you choose to use a flash based application.

The stock Android browser has the option to load plugins on demand. That is: no flash application is loaded within the browser until you click on the application to enable it. The same is true for memory usage or bugs.

I don't think there are any advantages a browser without flash has over one that supports it.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#29

Post by Turing_Machine »

huggyface wrote: post #8
estel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there an extent to which forced deprecation of software like Flash might hasten the uptake of newer technologies like HTML5? Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. But reduced support can always encourage more websites to move to HTML5.

Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. By pushing everyone to apps? iOS is no shepherd in the movement to standardized, cross-platform solutions. It is probably the greatest setback the open web has faced in over a decade.

Safari and Chrome are both based on Webkit. SVN here: http://www.webkit.org/building/checkout.html

Apple's original plan was that third-party stuff would be in web app form. They took tons of flak from the developer community over that, so no, they didn't "push everyone to apps".

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#30

Post by huggyface »

ugh wrote: post #21
huggyface wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately iOS already did most of this on its own. By pushing everyone to apps? iOS is no shepherd in the movement to standardized, cross-platform solutions. It is probably the greatest setback the open web has faced in over a decade.

Kind of hard to believe, given that iOS was and still is the only mobile OS with a browser that does not suck. Even Android has only been catching up. iOS and Android have been an unambiguous blessing for the open web on mobile devices. I don't even understand what you want Apple to do. Not allow third party developers to make native apps for iOS? Apple did that and nobody liked it. I can't imagine that you think thi…

Kind of hard to believe, given that iOS was and still is the only mobile OS with a browser that does not suck.

Yeah, I see John Gruber likes to say that.

It is, so to speak, horse shit. I apologize for the language but it's all that satisfactorily delivers my opinion on that. Have you ever actually used the Android browser?

Post reply on HN