Is Adobe flash going to die?

[treeman]

Prompted by a comment on Twitter, I thought it might be time to re-start old arguments over the merit, or not, of flash sites.

I'm sure I read somewhere, possibly here, that Flash would not be around in a couple of years time.

I'd be interested to hear what the good folk of TP think

 

[trencheel303]

When it's used properly, it's a very effective tool. Unfortunately many people overuse it for all the wrong purposes, and Flash websites that won't show anything until the entire applet has been loaded never get seen by me - I hit back straight away.

 

[neil_1980]

I agree with above... a couple of sites use flash very well... unfortunately 99% of sites use it very badly.

Personally I don't like a good chunk of photography album sites that use flash, they seem to be a lot slower and take more system resources than you'd expect. More often than not if a photo gallery site uses it I leave the site

 

[arad85]

Jeez.. does it matter. With loads of processing power and memory available, it shouldn't make a difference.

I believe there are some significant CE devices that will make use of flash coming up in the next year or so....

 

[trencheel303]

Jeez.. does it matter. With loads of processing power and memory available, it shouldn't make a difference.

If you are an advocate of bloated, inefficient crap software then no it doesn't matter...

 

[DemiLion]

The principles of Flash have taken animation forward light years in terms of rendering and story boarding, which is what it is primarily designed for. It's use as a driver for websites is just an offshoot, and it was never really meant to be used as a whole site solution.

It's going to be around for a good few years yet, no matter what Steve Jobs thinks.

 

[arad85]

If you are an advocate of bloated, inefficient crap software then no it doesn't matter...

Tee hee... Most software out there is bloated... Don't worry about it! It's a standard, and doesn't get used unless the website uses it. I've a few megs free, so will leave it on as it enhances my web browsing experience...

It will live for the moment, but will get superseded at some point...

 

[kokakaste2]

Think flash is not going to die out so quickly because people will keep on using it. There are so many webpages that are built on flash, think how long would it take someone to redo them in something like HTML5.

Personally I don't like webpages that are all flash, e.g. takes minutes to load just to see anything, but flash definitely have its use

 

[trencheel303]

Tee hee... Most software out there is bloated... Don't worry about it! It's a standard, and doesn't get used unless the website uses it. I've a few megs free, so will leave it on as it enhances my web browsing experience...

It will live for the moment, but will get superseded at some point...

I' know, I'm just a luddite in that I am very intolerant of bloated software, which as you say most software today is bloated.

 

[Photodiva]

I'm not a fan of flash-based websites, but I think Flash has lots of other uses, from banner advertising, games, all sorts of things. I do hope that eventually a lot of flash-based websites go the same way as the old framed sites. Consigned to history!

 

[redddraggon]

I use flashblock in Chrome and Firefox, so I get to avoid it.

 

[treeman]

I use flashblock in Chrome and Firefox, so I get to avoid it.

So what happens when you go to a flash site, does it warn you or just not open it?

 

[grum]

For animation and games it will carry on, for websites, adverts and video - I hope not.

 

[onomatopoeia]

Tee hee... Most software out there is bloated...

Mine isn't. The important bits and processor intensive loops etc are written in assembly language, the remainder in 'C'. No OO, no .net, no interpreted languages like VB.

It will live for the moment, but will get superseded at some point...

On my computers (home and my work place) it is dead, just like javascript. Yes, this means a lot of photographers' websites are dead to me.

Any business that puts up a "you must install adobe flash player" message on their home page does not get any money from me.

 

[buckle247]

Can't see it dieing TBH. What with the likes of Youtube, BBC iplayer etc all runing on flash

 

[arad85]

Mine isn't. The important bits and processor intensive loops etc are written in assembly language, the remainder in 'C'. No OO, no .net, no interpreted languages like VB.



On my computers (home and my work place) it is dead, just like javascript. Yes, this means a lot of photographers' websites are dead to me.

Any business that puts up a "you must install adobe flash player" message on their home page does not get any money from me.

Oooh.. Do you ever eat quiche

 

[trencheel303]

Mine isn't. The important bits and processor intensive loops etc are written in assembly language, the remainder in 'C'. No OO, no .net, no interpreted languages like VB.



On my computers (home and my work place) it is dead, just like javascript. Yes, this means a lot of photographers' websites are dead to me.

Any business that puts up a "you must install adobe flash player" message on their home page does not get any money from me.

YOU DA MAN!!!

 

[redddraggon]

So what happens when you go to a flash site, does it warn you or just not open it?

There's a big blank space with a small flash icon* in the middle where the flash ad/app/video would be and if I want to see it I can just click on the icon.

* like this but a lot smaller:

 

[Richard King]

No

As much as I hate it it is useful for
- banners and animations
- very controlled templates that work cross browser for things like lightroom slideshows etc..

 

[Andyman]

Mine isn't. The important bits and processor intensive loops etc are written in assembly language, the remainder in 'C'. No OO, no .net, no interpreted languages like VB.

Embedded Real-time? I can't think of many technologies that require that level of performance and can afford the luxury of ignoring platform independence.

Andy.

 

[Dman]

I've just made the decision to move away from a flash site and go back to html. I don't think that it will be dead in a couple of years though.

 

[Andyman]

Exactly what I did. I had site run entirely by Flash and it was a nightmare. Slow, difficult to maintain and the number of comments I had from clients saying they couldn't get it to load was incredible.

Mine is now driven by ASP.NET and renders entirely to HTML. I'm currently developing a Silverlight gallery control to be served up to clients who can support it but the default will remain a basic HTML control as I know everyone can use it.

IMO ‘pools’ of flashiness in an HTML site are fine as long you develop parallel default behaviour for clients who can't support the flashy. It should require no interaction. No "Click here to install Flash/Silverlight".

BTW, don’t get me started on Flash sites that play music!

Andy.

 

[Dman]

Exactly what I did. I had site run entirely by Flash and it was a nightmare. Slow, difficult to maintain and the number of comments I had from clients saying they couldn't get it to load was incredible.

Mine is now driven by ASP.NET and renders entirely to HTML. I'm currently developing a Silverlight gallery control to be served up to clients who can support it but the default will remain a basic HTML control as I know everyone can use it.

IMO ‘pools’ of flashiness in an HTML site are fine as long you develop parallel default behaviour for clients who can't support the flashy. It should require no interaction. No "Click here to install Flash/Silverlight".

BTW, don’t get me started on Flash sites that play music!

Andy.

Mine was actually lightning quick, but the penny slowly dropped that not everyone likes a flash site, and add to that the growing number of iPad users, the decision had to be made. I've now got a Prophoto Wordpress site which allows for flash galleries, and to quote them 'ProPhoto Flash galleries now fall-back to javascript-based Lightbox galleries on the iPad' and my flash galleries now work fine on the iPad and iPhone, not to mention the enhanced seo options now, even if I wasn't doing too badly on that front with the flash site.

 

[Andyman]

Agreed. Fallback is the key. If you can present the nice to have stuff to users who can, that's great. But don't forget the users who can't.

If this is the case and you commit yourself to parallel development having a site based entirely in Flash means you need the ability to serve up another site based entirely in HTML to others. Thats a heck of a maintenance commitment.

Andy.

 

[onomatopoeia]

Embedded Real-time? I can't think of many technologies that require that level of performance and can afford the luxury of ignoring platform independence.

Andy.

No. What I sell is sort of like an SDK for software developers (it isn't, but that's the closest I can get). I only support native Windows on x86 / x64.

Without going into details, the whole thing is massively CPU intensive due to the way it has to work. It could run more slowly, but since it is redistributable we get complaints if that part of it takes more than a second or so to do its work. So CPU bound tasks, limited time available, efficiency rules.

 

[Andyman]

Without going into details, the whole thing is massively CPU intensive due to the way it has to work. It could run more slowly, but since it is redistributable we get complaints if that part of it takes more than a second or so to do its work. So CPU bound tasks, limited time available, efficiency rules.

Interesting. Off topic but interesting.

Having come from a C background and progressing into C++ and now C# I have found it quite a challenge to convince some people. There is definitely much fear over adding layers of abstraction but typically the issue is that people are stuck in an old paradigm which doesn't lend itself to achieving performance with abstracted architecture. Working with the architecture now I'm achieving greater performance than years ago developing at a lower level. Its mostly about understanding the constraints and intended use of the architecture. The scientific applications I've developed and productionised in C++ and C# wouldn't have been viable in anything lower level.

Would be interesting to hear more that sometime.

Andy.

 

[gman]

I like Flash which is integrated into HTML sites, such as a gallery embedded in a site which uses flash to allow the images to slide across the page instead of loading a new pages each time. But then I'm sure there's HTML ways to do that also

 

[arad85]

Working with the architecture now I'm achieving greater performance than years ago developing at a lower level. Its mostly about understanding the constraints and intended use of the architecture. The scientific applications I've developed and productionised in C++ and C# wouldn't have been viable in anything lower level.

Would be interesting to hear more that sometime.

Andy.

And I can quote you a number of systems that have been crippled by abstraction. Admittedly these are in the RT "embedded" system space. I use embedded in quotes as Linux is now common in digital TV systems and will become more so in time. How you can have a full featured OS and describe it embedded is beyond me but there you go...

@onomatopoeia: did you miss my quiche quote or are you just too young

 

[Andyman]

Exactly.

[Way off topic]

My current clients are a prime example. I've just reworked a single task for them which was taking around 4-5 hours to complete. They had been putting up with this for several years. That's now running in just under 3 seconds. And that was all due to whoever wrote the thing not properly understanding the architecture. :shrug:

[/Way off topic]

Andy.

 

[Richard King]

I use flashblock in Chrome and Firefox, so I get to avoid it.

That in a nutshell is the whole current issue with web design and development

Standards are a joke, because there are a whole bucket full of browsers that INTERPRET code differently and respect the rules differently. this means instead of writing the code once, you are now required to write things 2/3/4 times to make things work evenly across browsers. If the build cost cant merit this, things wont work well in all browsers

On top of that users do or dont install plugins like quicktime and flash. In addition they set up security, choosing from a myriad of options that do and dont block genuine functions on sites. In addition to that, they do or dont turn client side scripting on or off

Meanwhile the demand from users as a whole is more interaction, more finesse

If you write a site that uses fancypants animation/interaction/client side coding then a percentage of uses will not be able to use the site. If you produce a plain vanilla site, the masses will ignore it

 

[whiteflyer]

On top of that users do or dont install plugins like quicktime and flash. In addition they set up security, choosing from a myriad of options that do and dont block genuine functions on sites.

Is this not one of the main ideas behind HTML5, you won't need plugins, it will just be there.


As for will flash die, well YES it will in the UK. with the government agreeing to a two speed internet, where user AND providers have to pay more for heavy bandwidth sites, then the providers will be looking at ways to reduces the bandwidth usage of their site and it's bye bye to flash.


PS: I too am a user of flashblock, adblock and a script to hide sigs in vbulliten forums

 

[Richard King]

Is this not one of the main ideas behind HTML5, you won't need plugins, it will just be there.


As for will flash die, well YES it will in the UK. with the government agreeing to a two speed internet, where user AND providers have to pay more for heavy bandwidth sites, then the providers will be looking at ways to reduces the bandwidth usage of their site and it's bye bye to flash.


PS: I too am a user of flashblock, adblock and a script to hide sigs in vbulliten forums

believe it or not, the UK isnt the only place with internet. I'm looking at a stats page, and some users are still in IE2, firefox1 and Netscape 4.61

 

[JonathanRyan]

So 2 art directors go out for a Pinot Grigio. One says to the other "hey, I saw this great new photographer today - we should get him to do some works for us". "Sweet - let's fire up his website on our iPads - oh. So anyway, there's this other guy who's really good....".

If the big companies didn't believe this was already happening or that Big Steve would relent then they wouldn't be altering all the major portfolio skins to serve up a a special version for the iPad. Soon they will remember that coding 2 versions of a site is harder than coding 1 and adios Flash.

'Course it won't die completely. People still use tables for layout and the flashing text tag...

 

[Andyman]

I'm looking at a stats page, and some users are still in IE2, firefox1 and Netscape 4.61

IE2, FF1...

 

[Richard King]

IE2, FF1...

yep

Basically - design a site, and choose who to disenfranchise

A lot of corporate networks have thing clients running IE5/6 with no flash - the only way to make decisions about what to do is look at your stats, and your bounce rates

 

[KayJay]

Is this not one of the main ideas behind HTML5, you won't need plugins, it will just be there.


As for will flash die, well YES it will in the UK. with the government agreeing to a two speed internet, where user AND providers have to pay more for heavy bandwidth sites, then the providers will be looking at ways to reduces the bandwidth usage of their site and it's bye bye to flash.


PS: I too am a user of flashblock, adblock and a script to hide sigs in vbulliten forums

With all due respect this statement is absolutely ridiculous when you consider what other forms of multimedia are transmitted over the internet. You're basically saying that video will die on the internet because of bandwidth issues.

 

[KayJay]

No

As much as I hate it it is useful for
- banners and animations
- very controlled templates that work cross browser for things like lightroom slideshows etc..

You obviously don't have extensive experience with Flash development to arise to that conclusion.

 

[Richard King]

You obviously don't have extensive experience with Flash development to arise to that conclusion.

So with your mass of wisdom, explain how a user of a client on a corporate network, on a thin client with IE6, and no flash, and no permission to upgrade views a site that is totally flash based?

While I know you are going to think alternate content, the blunt reality is that (for example looking at photographers sites) many popular templates and companies offering flash based website systems aimed at photographers dont offer alternatives. Additionally, many clients want flash, but then dont want to pay the additional premium to create the alternate content. On that subject, what's the point in creating a site in one technology, if you then need to duplicate it in another to accommodate what isnt a significantly small group of users?

We can argue about XML until the cows come home, If the client machine doesn't do Flash, then the site is a dud. If you need to provide alternate content, then what's the point of having flash in the first place?

You are right, we do flash fairly competently. However we haven't had the need to particularly develop too much with it. Basically because for the work we do we haven't had the need to. We Looked at the market place and decided that PHP/SQL/CSS/DHTML was more advantageous to concentrate on


To illustrate this need to decide what not to concentrate on.. here is a non-exhaustive list of technologies we use/program/deal with at on a day to day basis

- Php
- SQL
- SQL
- AJAX
- HTML
- DHTML
- CSS
- Zend framework
- Mootools
- Jquery
- scriptalicious
- JS
- Perl
- CGI scripting
- Apache/Linux servers
- IIS/MS servers
- Smarty template engine

And the list of platforms we have worked on in the last couple of weeks:

- Drupal
- Joomla
- CushyCMS
- Wordpress
- Magento
- OScommerce
- Gallery2
- Vbuliten
- the odd static page

You will appreciate that we have to draw some lines somewhere. Do we concentrate on technologies that are clients are using and wanting, or ones out clients dont use, and are not using?

In the last 2 weeks, we have spent just 2 hours dealing with Flash content

 

[KayJay]

So with your mass of wisdom, explain how a user of a client on a corporate network, on a thin client with IE6, and no flash, and no permission to upgrade views a site that is totally flash based

While I know you are going to think alternate content, the blunt reality is that (for example looking at photographers sites) many popular templates and companies offering flash based website systems aimed at photographers dont offer alternatives. Additionally, many clients want flash, but then dont want to pay the additional premium to create the alternate content. On that subject, what's the point in creating a site in one technology, if you then need to duplicate it in another to accommodate what isnt a significantly small group of users?

We can argue about XML until the cows come home, If the client machine doesn't do Flash, then the site is a dud. If you need to provide alternate content, then what's the point of having flash in the first place

You are right, we do flash fairly competently. However we haven't had the need to particularly develop too much with it. Basically because for the work we do we haven't had the need to. We Looked at the market place and decided that PHP/SQL/CSS/DHTML was more advantageous to concentrate on

With the list of technologies we look at on a day to day basis include the following non-exhaustive list

- Php
- SQL
- SQL
- AJAX
- HTML
- DHTML
- CSS
- Zend framework
- Mootools
- Jquery
- scriptalicious
- JS
- Perl
- CGI scripting
- Apache/Linux servers
- IIS/MS servers
- Smarty template engine

And the list of platforms we have worked on in the last couple of weeks:

- Drupal
- Joomla
- CushyCMS
- Wordpress
- Magento
- OScommerce
- Gallery2
- Vbuliten
- the odd static page

You will appreciate that we have to draw some lines somewhere. Do we concentrate on technologies that are clients are using and wanting, or ones out clients dont use, and are not using?

In the last 2 weeks, we have spent just 2 hours dealing with Flash content

That's great. But what's that got to do with Flash only being good for banners and animations? That was after all the comment you made that I was addressing.

As for listing every mainstream technology going, it's not really all that an impressive list. And given there are not flash related technologies on that list it shows that you don't really have the experience to form an informed opinion.

For someone who likes to think of themselves as being at the forefront of web technology it astounds me you don't know much about one that is on 98% of machines connected to the internet.

 

[Richard King]

That's great. But what's that got to do with Flash only being good for banners and animations? That was after all the comment you made that I was addressing.

As for listing every mainstream technology going, it's not really all that an impressive list. And given there are not flash related technologies on that list it shows that you don't really have the experience to form an informed opinion.

For someone who likes to think of themselves as being at the forefront of web technology it astounds me you don't know much about one that is on 98% of machines connected to the internet.

I cant discuss my business properly on here, so please dont push me down the path where I need to defend my position. Rather than being negative about someone else, why not add something positive to the debate