Quote:
Originally Posted by Trubu
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.
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.
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.
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.
|
Saw this after I posted.
but the flash kills battery life, no ANYTHING that uses resources kiling battery life. That is like me saying put a dvd in and watch a movie and watch your battery life die. You can't pin that just on flash. That is why I said really. It is a poor excuse. Using apple apps to watch stuff on my iPhone kills the battery.