Why are people complaining about flash support?

[DrHouse]

Hi all

Almost every day, someone will ask about flash support on iOS devices and complain about that... Darn, the only thing flash does over the net is showing ads and make some games available... I would say that flash is actually useless. There is no real benefit of using flash technology now that HTML is a lot more powerful than a few years ago.

On some sites, it is used as a video viewer, which actually is a bit useless since all computers already have a native media player plugin on all oses. The only case that flash maybe useful is for webcam capture when you want to broadcast, and even then, there are other solutions that can be used. Have you notice that flash does require a lot of CPU resource when loaded? I really don't want that running on my iPad/iPhone as it would drain the battery so fast.

I hope that Apple will keep it's position and keep working with technology that are power efficient.

I am a longtime Ubuntu user, and now an iOS devices user for the last year. I'm not a fanboy of any kind, but I like my stuffs to be working as expected and being efficient. And flash, for me is just a pain as it is currently used on the net.

So, before complaining, do some reading first, and don't consider that a device is defective if it was not built for the use that you want to give it. There are always limitations that have to be considered, on all kind of devices or even computers.

I wonder why the less knowledgeable are always the loudest in forums. Darn, if you don't even understand how it works, how can you assume that what you are asking for is easy to do and should be done just because you want it?

Ok, feeling better now!

 

[DaveSt]

It isn't that difficult to understand why people complain about it really. They are complaining because the lack of Flash is interfering with their consumption of web information. When you hit a site and find out it requires Flash and thus won't display on the iPad you either just close the site and move on or I guess you get upset about it. That doesn't make people less knowledgeable, it just upsets them that they can't view what they were hoping to.

HTLM5 might be the future, but people want the "now" to work also. There are still a ton of sites out there with Flash content. As to the native media plugins, which one would you have everyone use for streaming video? Quicktime? Windows media? Silverlight? Heck, the HTML5 crowd still hasn't decided on what codec to use for streaming video as it is. Not all OS's support all formats, that is what Flash and what HTML5 aim to avoid. Right now more media is available through Flash and that's why there are so many complaints about iOS's lack of it despite whatever shortcomings it has.

 

[matt_90036]

Simple reason.
1. Flash does not consume more power that html5 and apple spreads misinformation.
2. A lot of people require flash to do their work or school.
3. Flash offers a lot of free games.

 

[DaveSt]

I think it is going to be interesting to see how well iOS actually handles HTML5 video content once more sites start using it. Unlike Flash, HTML5 video is dependent on whatever codec the supplier decides to use. I imagine Apple devices will only show HTML5 video that is using the .H264 codec although that isn't the only format supported by HTML5. Not surprisingly, that IS the codec supported by Safari's implementation of HTML5. It is quite conceivable that our iPads still won't be able to view many sites that have switched over to HTML5 simply because they need a codec not supported by iOS. That would be funny and sad at the same time.

 

[DrHouse]

If a site is built entirely in flash, then it is not a "website" but a flash site. Like those website using Java applets... Thus, it means that for getting the information, I have to install a plugin, meaning Flash. It's a bit like what flash was trying so solve at the media level. There was so many codec format used, that it was sometime hard to play those media files. But now, flash is kind of doing the same thing for the accessibility and information. Imagine if all sites were using only flash, silverlight and Java instead of HTML ... It would be hell on the net.

I don't have anything against Adobe, or Flash, but the way the dev are using it annoys me. Beside games, flash is not really needed to build an interactive website. I've seen some sites where they use Flash do display pictures or menus. Darn, HTML has been created for that. As for media codec support, it is just a matter of having only a few of them used, not like in the 90's where you had all kind of codecs used and not really well supported by third parties. Now, all media are encoded in h264 or flv and that's because flash only support a few codecs actually. The codec jungle has disappeared in a vast majority. Yep, there is still some sites that broadcast using real media or ms only codec, but it's up to them to upgrade to the current technology.

My gripe was toward those who are yelling a lot, but never take time to read the answers, and at a least understand them. I wasn't targeting newbies who are discovering and simply asking for support.

 

[Thphilli]

Because I hate reading a news story on the iPad which refers to an embedded video that I cant watch. Because I hate receiving links from friends of an awesome video through IM that I open and it fails completely because its in flash. My phone can play the videos flawlessly, but apparently its too much for my tablet.

 

[slothead]

Almost every automobile website uses flash (as far as I can tell), and every time I go car shopping (or researching) the page falls on its face one way or another because it can't do flash. That's my complaint.

 

[nateccnn]

Why do people keep posting the same stupid question..."why do people complain about lack of flash?"? Seems like a really stupid question. Like someone who thinks they are more informed but it turns out they don't know squat about the Internet viewing. Lol

As stated above...news agencies use it, auto advertisers use it, most consumers sites use it. When I view a page and it tells me I can't view it because my equipment doesn't support it I always say "Revolutionary my ***"!

if android can deliver flash, then apple can deliver it. give us the choice. If we don't want to burn the battery up then we can opt out. Jeezzz...the battery lasts all day...I can afford a few minutes of battery life. Or is it that apple inks we will laugh at the performance? I don't know...but I don't see myself laughing any harder then I do now every time I hit a site that requires flash. Lol

Nate

 

[DrHouse]

You're right that car dealers do use a lot of flash in their website. Remember the time when we had to have all kinds of plugins to be able to view contents?
- flash
- shockwave
- java
- vrml viewer
- midi player
- media player
- real player

And i'm probably forgetting some others...

Flash was a fast way for devs to create great looking sites before HTML was powerful enough to make interactive sites.

The reality now is that flash is everywhere and for everything. So for users, it means that flash plugin is mandatory. The browser is becoming just a container for a plugin. But this is a bit tricky since there is only one flash provider, Adobe... But HTML does provide now the means to create beautiful sites without relying on plugins. And doing so ensure portability since browsers are being developed on the specs of HTML. Flash is not portable, even if it is available on a lot of systems. Apple is trying to push the trend to use HTML and not flash.

As I said in a previous post, we're going backward and going back to the time where the user must have several plugins installed to be able to navigate the web. Imagine that Ford uses Flash, Hyundai using Java, Toyota using silverlight... That would be just crazy!

So in a way, Apple is trying to push in the right direction. Problem is that web masters just don't have a clue about portability and ensuring that any site can be viewed by any browser. It feels like that time when some websites were forcing people to use Internet Explorer only... Sorry, we've detected that you are using Safari so you cannot view the site. Please download Internet Explorer!

Flash is the new Internet Explorer, but this time, we really don't have a choice.

 

[DaveSt]

You make plenty of good points with your argument, but perhaps you have simplified a little bit on what Flash gives developers. It not only provides a way to make nice looking websites, it also provides an entire toolbox that allows for web based applications that simply were not possible before Flash came around. When it came to offering these powerful tools Flash was the only game in town. You can't blame developer's for being slow to buck the Flash trend when they have invested a great deal of time and money into learning Flash and developing Flash based applications. You also cannot blame them for being slow to change over to HTML5 when the final standard will not be released until 2022.

I also remember the days of needing countless plug-ins to surf the web, but in a large way Flash eliminated that because it quickly became the standard. I haven't run into any major computing platform except iOS that cannot handle Flash, so I'm not sure about the portability angle. I agree that a pure HTML solution is the future, and that is for the good. We are just in the very beginning of the transition however and it seems to me that Apple was a little quick in abandoning Flash completely. Then again, they have the muscle right now and it will be interesting to see how flexing it will work or backfire for them in the next couple of years.

 

[DrHouse]

Why do people keep posting the same stupid question..."why do people complain about lack of flash?"? Seems like a really stupid question. Like someone who thinks they are more informed but it turns out they don't know squat about the Internet viewing. Lol

As stated above...news agencies use it, auto advertisers use it, most consumers sites use it. When I view a page and it tells me I can't view it because my equipment doesn't support it I always say "Revolutionary my ***"!

if android can deliver flash, then apple can deliver it. give us the choice. If we don't want to burn the battery up then we can opt out. Jeezzz...the battery lasts all day...I can afford a few minutes of battery life. Or is it that apple inks we will laugh at the performance? I don't know...but I don't see myself laughing any harder then I do now every time I hit a site that requires flash. Lol

Nate

So if I understand you well, if a website does require Internet Explorer, then you want IE on the iPad? Or Firefox, or Silverlight, or Java, or Chrome? So, it would means that we would have to download at least 3 browsers, several plugins, switching between browsers to be able to view all sites... That was the issue 10 years ago! That's why all players decided to put their energy on a common protocol: HTML.

The problem is not the iPad not playing flash content, it's that some websites are built in such a way that you need to have Flash to view the content. The web is not flash based, it is HTML based.

This is because i'm more "informed" that I am asking the "stupid" question? It's a matter of seeing a little further down the road and not repeat the mistakes of the past. And in my opinion, this is what Apple is trying to achieve.

But since the arrival of the iPhone and other smartphone, the web is becoming more about providing web services than actual web pages. Meaning that more and more sites are relying not on browsers but on applications. The new trend is app based and not browser based as it was a few years ago. Think about facebook, twitter, myspace... Web UI is available, but smart phones offers a lot of apps to connect to those sites.

Having a feeling of déjà vu, but now it's a plugin war...

 

[DrHouse]

You make plenty of good points with your argument, but perhaps you have simplified a little bit on what Flash gives developers. It not only provides a way to make nice looking websites, it also provides an entire toolbox that allows for web based applications that simply were not possible before Flash came around. When it came to offering these powerful tools Flash was the only game in town. You can't blame developer's for being slow to buck the Flash trend when they have invested a great deal of time and money into learning Flash and developing Flash based applications. You also cannot blame them for being slow to change over to HTML5 when the final standard will not be released until 2022.

I also remember the days of needing countless plug-ins to surf the web, but in a large way Flash eliminated that because it quickly became the standard. I haven't run into any major computing platform except iOS that cannot handle Flash, so I'm not sure about the portability angle. I agree that a pure HTML solution is the future, and that is for the good. We are just in the very beginning of the transition however and it seems to me that Apple was a little quick in abandoning Flash completely. Then again, they have the muscle right now and it will be interesting to see how flexing it will work or backfire for them in the next couple of years.

Changing takes time... Of course that flash based website won't change overnight to HTML 5. But at the same time, it has become a trap in which everybody is stuck. Have a look at your resources when loading a website with a lot of flash content, this is pretty amazing how much memory it is using and also at the CPU level. Since the new trend is using low powered devices (smart phones, net books, tablets), web masters must rethink their design and architecture. It will be interesting to see what will happen in the next few years.

 

[Taylork1]

I like nateccnn's suggestion. Give us the plugin and let us decide if it's worth the resources/ value on our own ipad. There are lots of things we can turn off, like Java, why not Flash? Lots of people want it - can't all be stupid.

 

[nateccnn]

Why do people keep posting the same stupid question..."why do people complain about lack of flash?"? Seems like a really stupid question. Like someone who thinks they are more informed but it turns out they don't know squat about the Internet viewing. Lol

As stated above...news agencies use it, auto advertisers use it, most consumers sites use it. When I view a page and it tells me I can't view it because my equipment doesn't support it I always say "Revolutionary my ***"!

if android can deliver flash, then apple can deliver it. give us the choice. If we don't want to burn the battery up then we can opt out. Jeezzz...the battery lasts all day...I can afford a few minutes of battery life. Or is it that apple inks we will laugh at the performance? I don't know...but I don't see myself laughing any harder then I do now every time I hit a site that requires flash. Lol

Nate

So if I understand you well, if a website does require Internet Explorer, then you want IE on the iPad? Or Firefox, or Silverlight, or Java, or Chrome? So, it would means that we would have to download at least 3 browsers, several plugins, switching between browsers to be able to view all sites... That was the issue 10 years ago! That's why all players decided to put their energy on a common protocol: HTML.

The problem is not the iPad not playing flash content, it's that some websites are built in such a way that you need to have Flash to view the content. The web is not flash based, it is HTML based.

This is because i'm more "informed" that I am asking the "stupid" question? It's a matter of seeing a little further down the road and not repeat the mistakes of the past. And in my opinion, this is what Apple is trying to achieve.

But since the arrival of the iPhone and other smartphone, the web is becoming more about providing web services than actual web pages. Meaning that more and more sites are relying not on browsers but on applications. The new trend is app based and not browser based as it was a few years ago. Think about facebook, twitter, myspace... Web UI is available, but smart phones offers a lot of apps to connect to those sites.

Having a feeling of déjà vu, but now it's a plugin war...

Well...you obviously don't understand me well. You seem to think you do, but you don't.

Now that we have that established. There is no problem, per se. iPad is developed by apple and it will be what apple wants it to be. Consumers should do their homework and apple should tell them exactly what it can't do. Then anyone who buys an iPad will know exactly what it is and what it is not. If both parties did their due diligence, there would be no "problem".

I for one did my due diligence. I told my wife I wanted to want an iPad but based on what I read I could not see it fitting my needs, especially for the price they charge for these things. But guess what she did at Christmas. She got me an iPad. So here I sit trying to figure out how to kale it do things it is not designed to do. And yes, I get frustrated when I can't get my mpeg4 DVD security system to play on the safari browser, and I can't watch the news video I want to watch. I really get disappointed when the 31 page word catalog I use at work crashes when I am showing off this revolutionary device to my compliance officer at work. It has limitations. It is a neat device for simple web browsing and it has certainly soaked me for abut 100 more dollars through the app store. But I see nothing revolutionary about this thing. So when I see a fan boy defend apple for not putting flash on it I get a little testy.

But no, there really is no problem with the iPad. The rest of the world just needs to catch up to their revolution. Meanwhile, I am going to bed so I can snore some more.

Nate ( who really does like his iPad...just being realistic is all)

 

[Studor13]

I just don't get this "Give us the Flash option and let us decide" shooters.

If you buy an electric only car then don't yell at all the petrol station attendents.

You knew in advance what you get and more importantly what you are not going to get.

Why not ask Steve to give you an App to your local porn shop? You aint gonna get it.

He has his reasons and standards. And he has given you a choice.

If you want Flash, get a Galaxy Tab.