Flash Mobile Not Quite Dead Yet, Coming to ICS Soon

[exfileme]

Android 4.0 "Ice Cream Sandwich" will receive Flash support by the end of the year, but it will be the last mobile Flash Player provided by Adobe.

Flash Mobile Not Quite Dead Yet, Coming to ICS Soon : Read more

 

[koga73]

As a Flash developer... the web may be shifting towards HTML 5, but as long as it requires me to program in JavaScript I refuse to jump on board. JavaScript is a horrible language that needs to be utterly destroyed.

 

[Thunderfox]

It would be absurd for ICS not to support flash. Flash may be on its way out, but it's still too important to be completely gone yet.

 

[ltdementhial]

[citation][nom]koga73[/nom]As a Flash developer... the web may be shifting towards HTML 5, but as long as it requires me to program in JavaScript I refuse to jump on board. JavaScript is a horrible language that needs to be utterly destroyed.[/citation]


Long live to the C++(?)

 

[royale_aus]

I agree, JavaScript sucks, it doesn't work the same in all browsers, it's not OO and it puts your code base out there to be stolen. Flash and Flex have their problems, but you right some pretty scalable code in Flex and you don't have to right a different version of the code for each browser.

We don't need HTML 5, we need a proper OO language that runs on a common runtime environment that runs cross browser and cross platform.

 

[Guest]

The real question is when is Google going to get Nestle to sell Android shaped Ice Cream Sandwhiches. I want some!

 

[Guest]

As a web designer, I've programmed in both JavaScript and ActionScript and I can easily say that anyone touting Flash over JavaScript should not be programming for the web. All languages have their faults, but just because it's different doesn't make it horrible. JS can totally be used in a OOP style, but is more popular in its functional style and it's A LOT easier to get things done with, especially with popular frameworks like jQuery. The ironic thing about all the JS hate is ActionScript is largely derived from the same language as JavaScript: ECMAScript. It's time to embrace the future of the web folks.

 

[gmarsack]

Totally agree with FPG. JavaScript is in fact OO. It may not be as strongly typed (which I assume is what koga73 was pointing at) but it is extremely power for developers who actually know what they are doing. I've worked with ActionScript since before it supported type casting and was essentially JavaScript compiled into a flash object. Those two languages are too similar to say one sucks while the other doesn't. It's like tell you're twin brother he's uglier than you are. In addition, JavaScript can be obfuscated and although that's not an end solution, complaining that someone can steel your code is like say; you own a car without a garage and have no place to lock it up at night. Someone can steel your car no matter where you park it if they tried hard enough.

 

[_Cubase_]

HTML5 is like the electric cars. They are a great idea, and I foresee a wonderful future with them, but it's not quite polished enough to be considered the platform alternative yet. On top of that, there are still so many combusion engines (Flash) in the wild and simply taking away the gas stations isn't going to solve the problem of slow or reluctant adoption. It will just piss a lot of people off!

 

[in_the_loop]

Is Adobe going to stop flash development for Windows too?

If so and if they only will release bug fixes for the current versions, then that would mean that flash still will work until all the sites are using html5 instead.

I mean, then we never would come to a point where a web page said that you need flash player 12 (or whatever the version that is the one that i required at a ceratain point in in the future) to play a video in the Android browser.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]_Cubase_[/nom]HTML5 is like the electric cars. They are a great idea, and I foresee a wonderful future with them, but it's not quite polished enough to be considered the platform alternative yet. On top of that, there are still so many combusion engines (Flash) in the wild and simply taking away the gas stations isn't going to solve the problem of slow or reluctant adoption. It will just piss a lot of people off![/citation]

except there was an electric car a number of years back before hydrogen was the big thing, that could get 300 miles per charge. sure it couldnt lug a soccer team like a suv can, but it gets you from point a to b and than some.

 

[Travis Beane]

A lot of the sites I like to browse on my phone are Flash only. I won't be updating any time soon.

 

[eddieroolz]

A lot of things still depend on Flash. Hence, a no-brainer.

 

[Rusting In Peace]

FPG you're completely missing the point in the difference between Javascript and Actionscript. It's all about the API not the language syntax.

Gmarsack, forget about Actionscript 2 and take a look at Actionscript 3 and Flex. It's radically different and steps in a far better programming direction that Javascript has.

At the company I work for we use Flex and Dojo for different projects. We estimate things take about 4 times longer in Javascript than Flex. HTML5 is not, and will not be, a silver bullet.

Any platform dropping or not providing Flash support is short sighted.

 

[back_by_demand]

As long as Flash content on the internet is still occupying 95% of all browser plug-in usage then development will never stop and to suggest so is ridiculous.

It's like saying because there are electric cars for sale we should close down every gas station immediately.

It is a slow process and is not dependant on Adobe, it is dependant on the people who own the websites to edit their content and seeing as there are billions of webpages, err, good luck with that.

 

[frenchy]

With the amount of flash objects written and used on websites, it will be awhile for flash to be out of the picture. That transition away from flash to html5 would be very slow if it weren't for smart phones and tablets. People are buying more of these devices and are becoming increasingly dependent on them Vs. just a computer.

Websites can no longer ignore the fact that mobile traffic is increasing significantly.

Website owners have to make tough decisions that they aren't necessarily comfortable with. They've traditionally used flash but now they have to consider html5 or rely on other options such as jQuery inorder to have a more uniform experience on all browsers and devices.

You also have the fact that flash is intrenched in the creative community. That's what they know and have always done. The fact that html5 is slowly becoming the new direction, that scares many of them as they have to learn new ways of doing things they were good at. Kind of like back in the day when Cobal was fading fast. The Cobal developers were forced to retool and that scared many of them. Many couldn't cope.

 

[unksol]

Earlier this month Adobe seemingly expressed defeat in the mobile sector, admitting that HTML5 is now universally supported on major mobile devices, in some cases even exclusively.

Lol you mean APPLE?!?!? Who cares? HTML5 is great but no one but isheep cares if they can't (BECAUSE THEY CAN'T) get flash. and flash is still used on desktops..... I really don't know ANYONE who browes in "mobile" mode instead of desktop. If you use mobile the website is worthless. Yea. we still need it to work. Yea. adobe is making it work. Yea. "i" devices are still worthless and can't view any content on the inernet. But whats the point? if you want to actually use the internet you can't use IOS till every site switches to HTML5. And its going to be a long time.

 

[john15v16]

What about silverlight? What makes it so different from Flash?