The HTML5 and Flash Debate from a Flash Developer's Perspective

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVjIsL8qwNw

by lancer383 • 16 years ago

31 45 16 years ago

glhaynes• 16 years ago

Seems humorously apropos that it's in 10 minute long Flashy (errr HTML5y) video format rather than skimmable text as I'd prefer.

tomlin7• 16 years ago

Admitting he/she doesn't normally bother to read points in entirety - upvoted.

Ignorance is bliss.

Qz2• 16 years ago

Woe to the author who fails to provide content in the exact format you require.

BoppreH3• 16 years ago

I don't think he would be able to show the performance of HTML5 and Flash demos using text, even when coupled with some images. For that it requires video, and I prefer a single video showing all the "article" and demos together than clicking play on five or six different embedded players.

tomlin7• 16 years ago

The "vs." crowd won't watch/care for this. It has proof in it.

icefox• 16 years ago

so.... flash developers are to 'cool' to write things down? Are the people upvoting this actually watching it???

ilike• 16 years ago

It is more of a (biased?) demonstration than a debate, and obviously video is a better choice.

tomlin7• 16 years ago

I've watched it and also read several accounts in blogs. I'm one of those fools who looks at both perspectives, rather than being lampooned into one popular opinion.

silentium2• 16 years ago

wasted 10 min of lifetime. Really useless ...

raimondious3• 16 years ago

Why?

silentium2• 16 years ago

because it does not tell anything about flash vs html. It's just a statement from a flashdeveloper that is speaking about e.g. performance and showing cpu usage. It would be great if flashdeveloper would read Tinic Uro's Blog and understand boundaries on systems and browser. The performance of a flash animation/website also depends on how it was done. I've seen "BLING BLING" made by a flashdeveloper that uses 90-100% CPU. The same "BLING BLING" running on the same machine/browser done by an other flashdeveloper uses around 50% CPU ... Bla bla and no standardized tests.

lancer3832• 16 years ago

I found it to be pretty interesting.

I tend to fall on Apple's side when it comes to not wanting to be forced to support a technology that it is against. That being said, seeing the CPU usage on these simple HTML5/JS games was a bit shocking - no idea if that is due to sub-standard coding, or if it's inherent in JS, but it seems to blow a hole in the "Flash is a resource hog" argument.

I am wondering if better developer tools for creating graphical HTML5/JS and/or JIT compilation will help with this. Clearly an iPhone is capable of amazing things graphically, but that's all been on the native app side.

technomancy• 16 years ago

> I tend to fall on Apple's side when it comes to not wanting to be forced to support a technology that it is against.

How is that Apple's side? Allowing something to be installed is not by any means the same as being "forced to support" it.

Qz2• 16 years ago

That kind of CPU usage in HTML5/JS games is common, even on higher end systems.

raimondious3• 16 years ago

The most important part is when he shows a <canvas> demo running poorly and says something along the lines of "in my day to day work, I can't use this. It won't work as a solution."

The debate right now is one side saying you should use "HTML5" because it's more open than Flash while Flash is buggy, bloated, and proprietary. The other side is saying "I need Flash to give my clients what they want." Just like people started using CSS over table-based layouts when it was pragmatic, people will stop using Flash when Flash stops being the best tool for the job. There's nothing wrong with that.

bittersweet• 16 years ago

We are facing exactly the same thing with graphs, we're using a custom canvas based solution but we found out it just isn't up to the task anymore when we need them to display lots and lots of data. Browser lockups are a result because it is just that Javascript intensive.

We are looking at Flash solutions right now to solve that problem.

not_an_alien• 16 years ago

Yes, they will. It's a big "when" though.

I work with Flash and I don't think it's buggy or bloated - that's overblown. It's not perfect, but it's definitely much better than people paint it to be (specially people who don't work with it).

In the same vein, HTML5/canvas is unreliable both in terms of performance, adoption, and consistency among different environments. People like to think of "standards", but when it requires as much hacks as any other 'standard' work nowadays do, and when it's not even available in half the browsers out there, I wonder how can anyone think it's the golden goose people like to claim it is.

lukifer• 16 years ago

> I work with Flash and I don't think it's buggy or bloated - that's overblown.

Depends if you're using Windows or not. On Mac and Linux, the performance and reliability are pretty bad (compared to other modern software, anyway).

WilliamLP2• 16 years ago

> Just like people started using CSS over table-based layouts when it was pragmatic,

And vice versa. There's a nice table-based layout on the Google front page still!

Timmy_C• 16 years ago

I don't know about the old Google home page but the current one I see only has one <table> and it's wrapping what I would consider to be tabular data.

ZeroGravitas• 16 years ago

People (in general) started using CSS over table-based layouts way after it was pragmatically beneficial, because they didn't want to learn new stuff or were stuck in the old mindset (e.g. the design of Hacker News).

And all those people not using CSS layouts for non-pragmatic reasons actually held up progress because it stifled the market for tools (and skills and frameworks etc.) that would work in the new manner.

So good analogy, but I think it argues well for the opposite of what you intended.

raimondious3• 16 years ago

I'd argue CSS took hold early: it was in an era where you needed a lot of hard-to-maintain hacks to get it to work in all browsers. Today as in the past, many people get CSS layouts just usable in IE 6, while they look as intended in standards-compliant browsers. If you want a site to look pixel-perfect in all browsers, it's still not pragmatic to use CSS rather than tables (or Flash). What's changed are the constraints: more people started using browsers that weren't IE 6, all the other browsers became more consistent with each other (or use the same rendering engine, Webkit), and clients have become more OK with websites looking different in different browsers as they've become more used to the way the web actually works.

But this will eventually boil down to a difference in opinion, and I agree with your point that it would be better for everyone if more people were quick to adopt technologies that are better in the long-run.

emehrkay• 16 years ago

I'm not going to comment on the subject matter, but this guy is pissed. You can tell by his nervousness -- shows that he is passionate about his tools. Good for him

BoppreH3• 16 years ago

Passionate about his tools or really angry because he thinks the other arguments are stupid. Either way, it makes no difference in his argument.

WiseWeasel8• 16 years ago

Or it shows that he's freaking out, because some people are telling him he's hitched his cart to a dying horse, and trying his best to rationalize them away.

tomlin7• 16 years ago

Flash developers (read: not designers hacking together an intro/banner) don't care if the Flash technology dies.

Flash developers want the development experience that Flash offers. HTML5 doesn't offer it...yet. When it does, I personally would love to migrate to it.

Your assumptions are pitiful and illogical.

WiseWeasel8• 16 years ago

Useless FUD. Yes, let's compare a 15-year-old mature platform to one in its infancy, and dismiss the latter on grounds of the performance of its more esoteric features. We get it, Flash developers fear change; cry me a river. Considering the relative rates of progress of Adobe, the only company that can advance the Flash platform, and every other tech company in existence currently working on HTML5, I know where the safer bet five years from now is, barring Adobe doing something smart and opening up the Flash runtime. So HTML5 is still rough around the edges, big surprise there.

The fact is, for video playback, it does just fine today, even on limited mobile devices, and if sites were to only replace Flash with HTML5 for video and audio playback, we're talking about 90% of Flash's popular use right there. As HTML5 matures, including content creation tools and the performance of various browser runtime implementations, it'll eat into Flash's share for other tasks as well. Apple is creating a market demand for HTML5 development tools and expertise, which is the first necessary step in order to bring the platform to maturity. After that happens, Flash developers will jump on board and forget this thing ever happened. Until then, just keep coding your crappy Flash ads and leave the rest of us who actually want some progress for the open web alone.

ThomPete6• 16 years ago

Yes lets compare them. Why shouldn't we?

The mature platform and an immature platform.

HTML5 holds promise but it's simply not capable of delivering anything close to what the flash platform can.

Just because something is new doesn't mean it's better. Let it naturally outperform flash once it's better, nothing hinders that.

So if you believe HTML5 will be better then let it prove itself.

So far it's no where near.

WiseWeasel8• 16 years ago

My point is that HTML5 does do SOME things better, some things that Flash is quite commonly used for, like video playback without pegging my CPU quite as much. To say that all of HTML5 is useless because it doesn't replace Flash for games or because Canvas and SVG browser support aren't quite up to snuff, is idiotic. That support will come, and HTML5 will become a practical replacement for those functions as well at some point. For now, people will keep using Flash for that, and figuring out something else for iDevices. Adobe Flash CS5 can already export to Canvas, so the content creation support is obviously on its way. Flash isn't the end-all web platform either, and webGL can do many things in 3D that Flash developers could only dream of. Flash has its place, but that place is at the periphery, not the core of the web; Flash-only sites deserve to die in a fire. To think that HTML5 will stand still now that there's a market pressure to support it is incredibly short-sighted.

The HTML5 and Flash Debate from a Flash Developer's Perspective

Related Stories