Quote:
Originally Posted by rock
HTML5 is still a few years away. So why is he even bringing that up? I am glad he admits they basically do the same thing as adobe though, I will give him credit there, but you can't use HTML5 as your arguement if it isn't ready.
|
The HTML5 spec isn't finalized, but Safari, Chrome, and Firefox (and the forthcoming IE9) all support at least subsets of it. You can, for instance, serve an H.264 video using an HTML5 embed for Safari/Chrome and serve the same video via a Flash wrapper for older browsers. There's no reason not to start offering HTML5 solutions now if you want to reach the broadest possible audience.
Quote:
|
Also Adobe has shown flash running perfectly on the Droid, so that fails.
|
Adobe promo videos aside, it remains to be seen how Flash will work in real-world application on mobile platforms. I suspect the forthcoming versions will be much better than Adobe's previous attempts, but that's not saying all that much given how awful Flash Lite was.
Quote:
Fourth reason, battery life.
Really?
|
Yes, really. Load up Hulu or YouTube on a MacBook running on battery and see what happens. Now consider what will happen with a much smaller battery and much less capable hardware.
Quote:
|
Again I am not buying that either since I since touch devices can handle it (again adobe has shown videos).
|
Actually I think that this is the most compelling argument against Flash on mobile devices. The fact that a touch device can "handle" Flash doesn't mean it's going to be remotely usable on a lot of sites which were designed for 800px and up monitors and a mouse/keyboard interface. Sure, it may technically "work" on a phone, but the experience will be kludgy and frustrating.
All that being said, I think Apple would be well-advised to allow an Adobe-developed Flash app on the iDevices - as a discrete app rather than an integrated plugin, it would protect the integrity of the platform, and people could find out well Flash does (or doesn't) work on the iPhone OS.