Major Porn Studio: We Can't Wait to Ditch Flash

[Gin Fushicho]

Will HTML5 have GPU acceleration?

 

[bebangs]

HTML5 is overrated.

 

[vectorm12]

What I'm thinking is even though I do agree that flash is far from a good platform HTML5 is far from the "ultimate" platform either. Sure it may not put as high of a strain on CPUs today but it's far from being "classic" HTML powerfriendly.

Just running the HTML5 demos on whichever website of your choice will still make your system drain your battery at a significantly higher rate than normal. Now at this point I haven't bothered even writing up an efficiency demo to test the difference in battery-life between the two but I'm quite sure there's a far from overwhelming difference between the two. Most likely we'll be complaining about HTML5 engines being bloated, unstable and powerhungry within the next few years instead.

Again I'm all for dumping flash but do remember that HTML5 is far from the "revolution" Apple wants us to believe it is.

 

[princeofdreams]

I really don't understand how people can build up such hatred over simple things, everyone here is being so negative and hateful towards flash, how it has doomed PC's to smoking piles of burnt out hardware, and how HTML 5 will ride in on a white horse and save everyone from the evil clutches of Adobe, what a load of utter crap

You all scream how you hate Flash, but look at the facts, Flash was just a software tool, it enabled online gaming in your browser, online animations, online streaming video and a host of other benefits, yeah it can be clunky and ponderous, but the benefits of flash far outweighed those negative points, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE ALL USED FLASH WEBSITES, we only go on about how it could be better because FLASH DID IT FIRST.

Will HTML 5 make things better? Perhaps but then time allows development, things should progress and get better, that's why we all it progress. It is like saying Henry T Ford should be vilified for developing the Model T, just because by today's standards it is lacking as a car forgetting he redefined what car ownership was about. Flash may not be perfect, BUT a lot of the technology we embraced and demand in our "Web experience" are available only BECAUSE of Flash, so rather than pouring out your bile and hatred be grateful for the improved web experience they (Adobe) brought you

 

[annymmo]

[citation][nom]ravewulf[/nom]I had put "video tag" with "video" surrounded by the triangle bracket things, but it got removed as if it was real HTML code. Ah well..Another cool thing about having the source URL like that is it makes the videos a lot easier to download. No more Flash downloader plugins! Just think if we could save a video just as easily as we can save pictures now. "Right-click > Save Video As..."Hmm, that does become more of an issue when trying to download an HTML5 animation though. It wouldn't be as simple as saving an .swf file. You would have to get all the resources and save the HTML code that puts it all together.... Someone should work on a plugin that does that and saves it as a single file for offline use.[/citation]

Simple animations should be done with SMIL.
Usually used with .svg or when raster images involved also svg with embedded jpg or png's in it.

 

[sviola]

[citation][nom]thejerk[/nom]uh... to hellwig - embedded wmp, rm, and especially qt vids also ruined the browsing experience in the past (think 1990s). iirc, rm was the least awful of the three. if any of the other formats would've worked out their problems with overhead, things might be different today, and the majors (besides apple) might not have started supporting an open standard like html5 anyway. and, trust me, you want open standards.[/citation]

You know that html5 does not do the streaming, right? And Apple, along Microsoft and Google will be using h.264, which is a closed standard (I think only firefox is supporting a open standard for streaming).

 

[crom]

People always focus on Flash as a video streaming and DRM platform. It does a whole lot more than that. Flash is FAR better than HTML5 Canvas and SVG when it comes to doing multimedia on a web page. The difference is like having an integrated Intel graphics card vs the latest Nvidia or ATI card.

I agree that Flash does have its own share of problems, like crashing a browser, killing battery life, and general CPU usage. Adobe is responding to it with adding CUDA support and integrating the updater for Flash into Chrome and Firefox. It still needs work but its progress.

I don't see HTML5 replacing it anytime soon. Flash comes pre-installed in just about everything, and most users don't update or upgrade their systems. Its why you still see high counts of people running legacy versions of almost every browser out there.

 

[adipose]

[citation][nom]hellwig[/nom]I'm confused what Flash has to do with streaming. Remember when you would click a video link on a webpage, and either QuickTime, Windows Media Player, and RealPlayer would start up and start streaming the video? We got so entrenched in "everything must fit in the browser window", that we all sat back while Flash slowly crept its way into our nether regions. There's no reason that Flash and Streaming Content should have anything to do with each other. [/citation]

I think you forgot the part where every 3rd video you clicked on did not play, because you didn't have the right codec. You had to install realplayer, quicktime, windows media, and whatever new codecs the video might be using.

What happened with flash was, content distributors realized it was the most installed video player across all platforms and started targeting it. When I first heard of youtube, I thought, "how are they making sure everyone can play it?" The answer was flash, since almost no one didn't have it. Bottom line, even though flash has its problems, youtube and other sites would not exist today without it.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't replace it, but in order to replace it, we have to not make the same mistakes as before: requiring every user to install codecs, video players, or use specific browsers. HTML5 still is not free of those issues, and until at least the top 3 browser makers agree, it won't replace flash video.

 

[Guest]

Always a major player in format wars of the past, it's a wonder no one thought to ask the porn industry to weigh in on the Flash versus HMTL5 debate before now.

HMTL ? Is that some new standard I never heard of ?

 

[Guest]

Yes thats why blu-ray won, not because of the catchy name or the greater storage capacity or the fact that it was backed by SONY and the ps3 no no, it was porn. The thing that people almost never buy dvd's of and almost universally consume via the internet. Put it back it your pants sweaty bald fat guys who buy porn on blu-ray.

 

[deltatux]

Once WebM is baked into every browser, Flash is useless. The only thing Flash will be useful would be ad banners or actual animations on websites but not video support.

 

[Guest]

ofcourse they can't wait to ditch flash, many popup blockers and ad blockers block porn flash files automatically!
It's much harder to block html5 content than it is to block flash ads!

 

[hellwig]

[citation][nom]adipose[/nom]I think you forgot the part where every 3rd video you clicked on did not play, because you didn't have the right codec. ... HTML5 still is not free of those issues, and until at least the top 3 browser makers agree, it won't replace flash video.[/citation]
Yeah, if Microsoft and Apple go with H.264 while Google, Mozilla, and Opera go with Ogg Theora, we won't solve anything. the problem is and always has been codecs. The reason you needed Quicktime AND Media Player AND RealPlayer was because they each used proprietary codecs and thus, would not understand the other's formats. This still isn't being resolved in HTML5 (heck, even Flash can have codec issues, I had to upgrade my Divx to get one websites videos to work).

My original point was, if your phone can stream video without flash, why can't your computer? Take whatever apps Android and iOS use, port them to the PC, and we won't need Flash nor HTML5 for video. We'll still need one or both for interactive websites and games, but not video (which was the focus of the article).

 

[annymmo]

@hellwig, your phone is using h.264 with javascript/html5-tag.
(I assume you're speaking about iPhone.)

 

[ravewulf]

[citation][nom]Gin Fushicho[/nom]Will HTML5 have GPU acceleration?[/citation]
Depends on how the browser implements it and if the format used can be accelerated in the first place.

I KNOW h.264 is accelerated in IE9 and I ASSUME is (or will be) accelerated in Safari and Chrome. Firefox on the other hand has chosen not to support h.264 at all (at least for the moment)

VP8 is not currently able to be accelerated by existing video cards, but ATI has expressed interest in making it accelerated.

Theora (an extention of VP3) is not and will not be hardware accelerated. It is also not as efficient as h.264 or VP8.

 

[ravewulf]

My little rant on Firefox and HTML5 h.264 video.

I can perfectly understand why they don't want to include an h.264 decoder with the browser, but why can't they allow decoding to be handed off to decoders already installed on the OS?

For example, while IE9 does not contain a VP8 decoder, it will work through DirectShow/Media Foundation if a VP8 decoder is installed on the system. Likewise Safari supports anything that QuickTime can play. So why can't Firefox do something similar?

Windows has DirectShow/Media Foundation, OSX has QuickTime, and Linux has GStreamer/Xine so they could take advantage of whatever is installed on the system if they added support for it.

And then there is always the FFmpeg project which is open source and used by tons of media programs (both closed and open source editors, players, etc).