Our word is our bond. Unfortunately, it's a number. 007
|
|
|
Google will use Flash in Chrome
AS A SOFTWARE HOUSE, Google is going to support Adobe with better support for Flash in its Chrome browser.
This is encouraging news for Adobe, as it means that it is far too early to declare the death of Flash in favour of the native video rendering alternative available in HTML5.
HTML5 is a revision of HTML that doesn't require a special player for video. It has been gaining ground thanks to its use on Apple devices like the IPhone, IPod Touch and IPad instead of Flash, which Apple has not disregarded but rather publicly deprecated.
Google's support also means that Adobe can focus on improving Flash rather than worrying too much about Apple's complete refusal to have anything to do with Flash on its IPhone and upcoming IPad.
For Google, it says its reason for doing this is that it needs to work with companies like Adobe and Mozilla to develop a next-generation browser plug-in API to address the problems of the current browser plug-in model.
As Adobe Flash is the most widely used web browser plug-in, it makes sense. With the support of Google and Chrome pledged, along with support in most other web browsers, it remains to be seen what sort of impact Apple's stance will have.
Flash is still the dominant form of media for online video, but if Google had taken the same attitude as Apple then the long term viability of Flash might have begun to fall under a cloud.
As it is, Chrome and other browsers' support for Flash means that its future on websites is reasonably secure - that is if the Iphone and IPad don’t become the dominant devices for viewing video on the Internet. µ
Share this:
Share
At least, Flash video format on YouTube. It's stored linearly, so users don't have to wait for the entire video to load to see part of it, and the codec is programmed well enough that anybody can click another loaded point in the progress bar mid-play and the player instantly goes to that point and plays.
Formats and codecs that don't work like this are a major mistake.
No enough CPU power for so much bloated colorful stupid futility jumping all over your screen when all you want is to click the damn link right away.
nope, it's just different concept that's what you need to understand, you don't have a cursor which you control using your fingers, so there's no hover :) the thing is you would need to re-think interaction on your web sites to fully support touch devices, navigation and so on.
i'm facing the same thing as quite a lot of code i write actually uses hover states on lot of elements and based on that there some function running.
Because Intel likes Adobe Flash too.
Google would support Flash for Chrome. It's because they own DoubleClick, which does a lot of Rich Media *Flash* advertising.
On a multitouch interface, you can take your data or image and drag it, stretch it, squeeze it and twist it. I don't see why there shouldn't be an operation equivalent to "hover" - drawing little idle circles on the screen, perhaps, although probably that's taken. Or just sliding from off the hover-sensitive application to on it.
But since it's an advertisement, why would you want to?
One type of screen that apparently is regaining popularity, at least on desktops, uses light across the surface of the screen to detect where it's being touched, and I gather that this is typically implemented so that pointing to the screen without quite touching it is also recognised, to move the Windows cursor. And the first Windows XP Tablet Edition for Tablet PCs depended on a special stylus being detected by, um, magic, distinguishing whether it was touching the screen or not. Actually, I miss that.
Hehe, yeah, isn't that why the Safari browser is rubbish for web browsing? No real hover so pure CSS popups don't work.
Such a shame it seems to work correctly with Opera Mobile 10 on Sybian / WM phones.
you don't know what you're talking about, sorry
The real reason Apple refuses to support Flash on the iPhone is that 80% of the apps on its app store would:
1. Be implemented in flash instead.
2. Be accessible to non-iPhones.
3. Bring in no money for Apple for the above reasons.
i think it doesn't need a rocket science to understand basic reason why there's no flash on touch enabled devices from Apple - content.
why would you show content if user cant' interact with it?
most of the flash sites/animations depend on 'hover' which isn't possible on touch enabled devices
So rather than showing useless (and bandwidth consuming) content they've chosen lesser evil - not show it at all
So there's nothing like an Apple propaganda against flash, it's just a common sense put in place.
It's kinda tiresome interrupting with every update and large MBytes!
gosh, remember the web before flash?
i miss that bugger =[