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

51–60 of 110 posts

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#51

Post by melling »

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.

The real problem is that most developers have to build with mobile in mind. Android tablets (and phones) running Chrome will be great. Apple has sold 55 million iPads and the rate will increase. We're going to have a billion mobile devices that won't run Flash in 2-3 years.

Yes, Flash can still do stuff that HTML5 can't, but it really doesn't matter.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#52

Post by starwed »

mcav wrote: post #15

This should be old hat at this point. Flash is done on mobile. (Had it ever begun?)

Anytime there was a post about firefox mobile on /r/reddit, folk came out of the woodwork saying they would never even consider using it until it supported flash. (Which, interestingly, it now does.)

I have no fucking idea what people find attractive about mobile flash (maybe games?) but it certainly seems to be a thing.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#53

Post by talmand »

zura wrote: post #49
huggyface wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same experience -- Flash works close to perfectly on my Galaxy S II. This isn't a technology move, however, but rather is a revenue move: Adobe makes no money from Flash, but instead makes money from authoring tools. The lack of an iOS target is killing the authoring tools on the Flash side (who would build a new site or delivery mechanism using Flash when you know it cuts out a huge portion of the market?). So Adobe…

Regarding targeting iOS, there are tools such as http://www.haxenme.org/ Not really Flash but quite close.

AIR is Adobe's way of targeting iOS.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#54

Post by ugh »

huggyface wrote: post #48
ugh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and it sucked. I have been quite happy with the browser that comes with ICS, so I would say there's parity now. But nice job ignoring the actual point I was making.

The point you were making was that the iOS browser is so superior to its competitors that it demonstrated Apple's commitment to the web. Only the Android browser doesn't actually suck. I've never, ever heard someone actually describe why it sucks, they just repeat that going meme and smile and nod at each other. Yet despite all of its CSS chrome, many mobile dev projects abandon the effort and switch to an app after…

Huh? Why are you so sure that people don't use the iOS browser?

I use an RSS reader and the Twitter app (both pf which I also use on my PC). The rest (and majority of my time) on iOS devices I spend in a browser and I love it. The web experience on my iPad is awesome. I just don't see how Apple is hindering or sabotaging the open web with iOS. Sure, people like apps, but that's not unique to iOS, that's also true for Android. It's a property of native apps, not a property of Apple pushing native apps.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#55

Post by talmand »

51Cards wrote: post #24
mberning wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 he…

I agree, most of the arguments from individuals I've seen against Flash are simply, "I don't like it therefore I want to stop others from using it".

I find it interesting that one of the leading arguments against Flash is that it's a proprietary plugin that is not "open". So clearly the solution to this is to close off the option of using it, doesn't seem like a very "open" attitude. I thought it was about choice but I guess it was wrong.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#56

Post by untog »

starwed wrote: post #52
mcav wrote: post #15

This should be old hat at this point. Flash is done on mobile. (Had it ever begun?)

Anytime there was a post about firefox mobile on /r/reddit, folk came out of the woodwork saying they would never even consider using it until it supported flash. (Which, interestingly, it now does.) I have no fucking idea what people find attractive about mobile flash (maybe games?) but it certainly seems to be a thing.

I have no fucking idea what people find attractive about mobile flash

Being able to watch video?

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#57

Post by talmand »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #23
mberning wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Then I guess we should stop using a good chunk of internet capable software, such as browsers.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#58

Post by talmand »

gsa wrote: post #50
ThomPete wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So does HTML+CSS+JS I still have a hard time seeing the point here

With Flash, the user or the developer has no choice if scroll and keyboard shortcuts break. With JS+HTML+CSS, the user has a choice to force the developer to fix their code (and a developer to not write code which breaks browser stuff).

How exactly does a user "force" a developer to fix their code when they use HS+HTML+CSS?

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#59

Post by mberning »

talmand wrote: post #57
Turing_Machine wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Then I guess we should stop using a good chunk of internet capable software, such as browsers.

Wrong. We should limit the number of attack vectors as much as possible. Flash has a horrific security track record. Firefox and Chrome are pretty solid.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#60

Post by seanalltogether »

veemjeem wrote: post #44
51Cards wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 he…

disagree. flash is often used for other content that may equally suck battery just as badly. Sometimes when I visit techcrunch on my laptop, one of the badly written flash ads causes my processor fan to crank on... when I close the tab the problem goes away. How does one explain that?

and when that becomes an html5 ad in the future, it will do the same or worse
Post reply on HN