Windows 8 Metro: No Flash - Page 2

elcreative · 09-17-2011, 03:47 AM

Great thread... I love the net... its independence... its lack of bias... open mindedness...

Ben Thornton · 09-17-2011, 05:36 AM

Given that the release of Windows 8 is a year away (according to what I've read), I don't think that we can be certain of what is in or out.

It sounds like they will have the full desktop OS available at least on Intel systems, and a more tablet oriented experience across the board. It seems ironic to me that they are saying that this isn't becoming a "post PC era" while at the same time planning to make their PC interface of over 20 years' standing into a kind of compatibility mode, while the front end becomes a finger friendly, tablet style interface.

It could be a stroke of genius. If they had delivered a separate metro-like interface on tablets alone, they may have been too late to compete with android/iOS. By making the same apps work on their tablets and desktops through the metro interface, they have the potential to offer developers access to a massive installed desktop/laptop user base as well as a fledgling tablet market. So, it will be interesting to see what happens.

kennyc · 09-17-2011, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djulian

Let me be the first to say I think MS is wrong to do this.

But let me also say that I think they are less wrong than Apple was, simply because Flash is less necessary now than it once was.

This.

Flash is still and may continue to be an necessary part of web browsing and media downloading.

Will it always be? Who knows, the future is uncertain, eat dessert first!

HarryT · 09-17-2011, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

This.

Flash is still and may continue to be an necessary part of web browsing and media downloading.

That's a personal opinion. I don't find it necessary in the slightest, personally. I do most of my web browsing on my iPhone which is happily "Flash-free".

kennyc · 09-17-2011, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's a personal opinion. I don't find it necessary in the slightest, personally. I do most of my web browsing on my iPhone which is happily "Flash-free".

No it's not Harry. Many sites require flash, just because you don't visit them, doesn't make my statement an opinion.

HarryT · 09-17-2011, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

No it's not Harry. Many sites require flash, just because you don't visit them, doesn't make my statement an opinion.

Sorry, Kenny, but it does. It is a self-evident truth that if I don't find the lack of Flash support to be an issue with the sites that I visit, then FOR ME Flash support is NOT "a necessary part of web browsing". For YOU, perhaps it is necessary, but for me, it isn't.

kennyc · 09-17-2011, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, Kenny, but it does. It is a self-evident truth that if I don't find the lack of Flash support to be an issue with the sites that I visit, then FOR ME Flash support is NOT "a necessary part of web browsing". For YOU, perhaps it is necessary, but for me, it isn't.

No Harry, you are wrong.

As I said, Your personal habits have nothing to do with whether my statement is an opinion or not.

I'm talking about the internet as a whole, I really could care less about your personal habits.

HarryT · 09-17-2011, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

No Harry, you are wrong.

As I said, Your personal habits have nothing to do with whether my statement is an opinion or not.

I'm talking about the internet as a whole, I really could care less about your personal habits.

I assume you mean that you COULDN'T care less about my personal habits

.

To return to the point, though, what you're saying is that sites which rely on a particular "plug in" to operate mean that support for this plug-in is essential for web browsing in general; this is the point which I really cannot agree with. What's necessary for web browsing is to have a browser which is reasonably compliant with the appropriate HTML standards.

Flash falls entirely outside the area of HTML standards conformance. If a particular site chooses to use Flash, they are of course entirely free to do so, but if Flash is essential for that site, they are removing themselves from the whole arena of web standards by making that choice. That site's choice to use Flash certainly doesn't (in my view) suddenly mean that Flash somehow becomes a part of web standards - it really doesn't.

The standards-conformant way to play video, etc, is to do so with HTML5, which is a certified standard, not a 3rd-party proprietary plug-in.

kennyc · 09-17-2011, 07:09 AM

My statement stands.

HarryT · 09-17-2011, 07:13 AM

That's fine, Kenny. If you choose to believe that, you're entirely free to do so. Personally, I will continue to maintain that what is "necessary" for web browsing is to have a browser which conforms to the HTML standards, and that Flash (and other such plug-ins) fall outside that remit.

kennyc · 09-17-2011, 07:21 AM

Yes Harry I will and you continue to believe what you want.

My statement is still true and is NOT an OPINION. It's a fact.

kennyc · 09-17-2011, 07:23 AM

At the moment I'm considering whether I want to install and try Win 8 out or not....Not sure how well it would suit my old laptop or an old desktop ... Hmmmm...

HarryT · 09-17-2011, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes Harry I will and you continue to believe what you want.

My statement is still true and is NOT an OPINION. It's a fact.

No, it's an opinion. Flash is not an open standard - that's a fact. HTML5 is an open standard - that's a fact, too. If you rely on proprietary software for your web site, you're setting yourself up for a fall when the vendor of that software changes something and your site breaks. Stick with open standards, and you're good for the future.

Ben Thornton · 09-17-2011, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kennyc

Flash is still and may continue to be an necessary part of web browsing and media downloading.

I have to agree with Harry that this doesn't strike me as a fact - I use my iPad for most browsing now, and don't miss flash. It is true, of course, that there are sites which require flash, so my iPad doesn't deal with them. This is more of a problem for my son than me - he'd like access to web games and club penguin etc.

Why are you so vehement about it being a fact? Surely we don't disagree about the underlying facts (i.e. that some sites require flash, some not, some people are bothered by that, some not). In that case it seems to boil down to whether you'd accept my iPad activities as web browsing or not.

It seems to me a bit like saying "a Kinect is a necessary part of playing Xbox games" - true for some games, not others, and I play Xbox games quite happily without one.

Sil_liS · 09-17-2011, 09:34 AM

If you guys care about this, one of you could start a poll on it: flash - necessary or not.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Recipe for Metro UK	Bogg	Recipes	10	10-07-2011 01:06 PM
Metro News NL	drMerry	Recipes	1	07-07-2011 07:23 PM
To Flash or Not to Flash? For the Eee Transformer	Ken Maltby	Android Devices	4	06-28-2011 04:58 PM
Metro Map Viewer	faxi	PocketBook	7	07-31-2010 07:50 AM
Can't get new f/w - flash site broken again and non-flash not updated	jusmee	Astak EZReader	8	03-13-2010 11:26 AM

09-17-2011, 03:47 AM	#16
elcreative Wizard Posts: 2,888 Karma: 5875940 Join Date: Dec 2007 Device: PRS505, 600, 350, 650, Nexus 7, Note III, iPad 4 etc	Great thread... I love the net... its independence... its lack of bias... open mindedness...

09-17-2011, 05:36 AM	#17
Ben Thornton Guru Posts: 900 Karma: 779635 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: UK Device: Kindle 3, iPad 2 (but not for e-books)	Given that the release of Windows 8 is a year away (according to what I've read), I don't think that we can be certain of what is in or out. It sounds like they will have the full desktop OS available at least on Intel systems, and a more tablet oriented experience across the board. It seems ironic to me that they are saying that this isn't becoming a "post PC era" while at the same time planning to make their PC interface of over 20 years' standing into a kind of compatibility mode, while the front end becomes a finger friendly, tablet style interface. It could be a stroke of genius. If they had delivered a separate metro-like interface on tablets alone, they may have been too late to compete with android/iOS. By making the same apps work on their tablets and desktops through the metro interface, they have the potential to offer developers access to a massive installed desktop/laptop user base as well as a fledgling tablet market. So, it will be interesting to see what happens.

09-17-2011, 07:09 AM	#24
kennyc The Dank Side of the Moon Posts: 35,904 Karma: 119230421 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire	My statement stands.

09-17-2011, 07:13 AM	#25
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,554 Karma: 93383099 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	That's fine, Kenny. If you choose to believe that, you're entirely free to do so. Personally, I will continue to maintain that what is "necessary" for web browsing is to have a browser which conforms to the HTML standards, and that Flash (and other such plug-ins) fall outside that remit.

09-17-2011, 07:21 AM	#26
kennyc The Dank Side of the Moon Posts: 35,904 Karma: 119230421 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire	Yes Harry I will and you continue to believe what you want. My statement is still true and is NOT an OPINION. It's a fact.

09-17-2011, 07:23 AM	#27
kennyc The Dank Side of the Moon Posts: 35,904 Karma: 119230421 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire	At the moment I'm considering whether I want to install and try Win 8 out or not....Not sure how well it would suit my old laptop or an old desktop ... Hmmmm...

09-17-2011, 09:34 AM	#30
Sil_liS Wizard Posts: 4,896 Karma: 33602910 Join Date: Oct 2010 Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+	If you guys care about this, one of you could start a poll on it: flash - necessary or not.