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

81–90 of 110 posts

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#81

Post by posabsolute »

tomkin wrote: post #79
notatoad wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I interpreted the was to mean it was an option. Flash used to be the easiest option. Now with the runtime not being present on apple devices and it's total demise imminent, it's still just as easy to use but it's no longer a viable option.

If you're an iOS user, HTML5 is a magical place where you can do anything – outside of iOS, it's hit or miss. And if it's hit or miss, it might as well be Flash. Remember that a client's perspective is often neat, cool and fun rather than works on all devices the exact same . Flash will die when HTML5 signs the cheques that it's collective evangelicals cash.

Can you expand about what is neat with HTML(5) on ios? personally the only thing I saw was desolation and poor performance. I rarely saw anything neat cool and fun in html5 for ios..

I surely missed something I guess. I think it's a shame we are not going to have flash on android tablets, it's somewhere it could have perform well.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#82

Post by posabsolute »

tomkin wrote: post #79
notatoad wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I interpreted the was to mean it was an option. Flash used to be the easiest option. Now with the runtime not being present on apple devices and it's total demise imminent, it's still just as easy to use but it's no longer a viable option.

If you're an iOS user, HTML5 is a magical place where you can do anything – outside of iOS, it's hit or miss. And if it's hit or miss, it might as well be Flash. Remember that a client's perspective is often neat, cool and fun rather than works on all devices the exact same . Flash will die when HTML5 signs the cheques that it's collective evangelicals cash.

Can you expand about what is neat with HTML(5) on ios? personally the only thing I saw was desolation and poor performance. I rarely saw anything neat cool and fun in html5 for ios..

I surely missed something I guess. I think it's a shame we are not going to have flash on android tablets, it's somewhere it could have perform well.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#83

Post by jseims »

As someone who works with both Flash and HTML5, this news makes me sad.

Flash just works for much better. There are no cross-browser issues (except those that don't support it at all -- thanks, Apple). And ActionScript is a better language for building complex apps than JavaScript.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#84

Post by Karunamon »

jseims wrote: post #83

As someone who works with both Flash and HTML5, this news makes me sad. Flash just works for much better. There are no cross-browser issues (except those that don't support it at all -- thanks, Apple). And ActionScript is a better language for building complex apps than JavaScript.

The main problem with Flash is that it's completely proprietary, and therefore, as 4chan would say, OH EXPLOITABLE.

Worse is the fact that Adobe has been sitting with their thumbs wedged in their arses for months, in some cases, while known vulnerabilities were being exploited in the wild.

It's hard to imagine a better argument for moving away from closed technologies like this.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#85

Post by Karunamon »

untog wrote: post #56
starwed wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

A massive percentage of the internet's video consumption (YouTube and related sites) is already served by HTML5.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#86

Post by batista »

tomkin wrote: post #73
mvip wrote: post #64

Flash is the new Internet Explorer. I remember a point in time when it was painful to use browsers other than IE, because so many developers took the easy way out and only supported IE (and their managers didn't know/care). Those days are of course over (well, mostly at least). Flash is, or at least used to be, the easy way out. People used it because it was easier than HTML5. Hence, when a company asks for a quote o…

> People who used it because it was easier than HTML5. Having developed both HTML5 and Flash applications, your use of the word was shows a bit of ignorance when it comes to Flash. It is still easier in Flash to do a high-velocity, interactive site that works across multiple browsers. If you think differently, you're not actually doing the work. Armchair critics of Flash just regurgitate what they perceive is truth –…

They are far from over. People cite YouTube HTML5 player without considering how vlogs are actually recorded, processed and uploaded through Flash. As the viewer, it's a nice luxury to say it can all be done through HTML5, but as a producer of content you'd have a different opinion.

Huh? How many vlogs are "actually recorded, processed and uploaded through Flash"?

I don't think many people, and certainly not many professional vlogers, use a Flash based vlog recording and processing solution. (Including both the Adobe Flash authoring environment/flv encoding tools AND any bizarro online flash vlog recording service which uses the computer's camera).

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#87

Post by laconian »

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.

My experience is that Flash executes fine, but it's awful for touchscreens - dragging, zooming, and clicking get all muddied up within the context of a Flash plugin rectangle.

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#88

Post by saturdaysaint »

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.

How is HTML5 not up to scratch?

Genuinely curious. It's probably been over a year since I've needed to reach for a PC for a Flash site (then again, "apps" have filled many of those use-case gaps).

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#89

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

Re: Adobe confirms: no Flash for Chrome on Android

#90

Post by talmand »

gsa wrote: post #68
talmand wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Answering both ThomPete and talmand here: In Flash, browser shortcuts like ^L are always broken and you have no choice about that, because that's the way Flash is designed. If a similar thing happens in a non-Flash environment, it's because the developer designed it so. If many users complain to the developer about stuff being broken, it has to count for something.

Again, how do they "force" developers to fix their code? Asking nicely is one thing but forcing is another. You implied that the user has more control over the developer in a JS+HTML+CSS environment over Flash. Plus, if some commonly used commands are broken in Flash then it's broken in all of them which doesn't mean broken; it means unsupported, there's a difference.
Post reply on HN