Allow me to disagree here.

What is Flash? Flash is a rich media plugin. What even the latest WebKit has that can compete with Flash? Neither of these: CSS transformations, Multiple backgrounds, HTML5 Video, Local storage, Canvas. Most vendors won't even think of using these new technologies. Why? IE doesn't support them. Heck, even not that older FF and WebKit doesn't support them.

SVG can compete with Flash a little (vector based and can do some animation, but no video), but is largely unusable if its not inline (for instance one of my favorites is that WebKit thinks that starting an HTML javascript function from the embedded SVG object is an XSS attack (and that's the only way to propagate a mouse click on the SVG to the underlying HTML document)). BUT... SVG inline is not supported in IE and requires application/xhtml+xml content type which IE doesn't even parse. In fact Microsoft won't even try to include SVG or Canvas support in IE. Why? Because they directly compete with Silverlight too.

Now we're talking - Silverlight is currently the only Flash competitor. And do you trust a browser vendor that openly disregards any new technology that competes with their own rich media plugin to be any better than Adobe?

I don't.

In fact I believe it will get much worse.

You owe me a keyboard. Took a sip of my tea the moment before reading this funny statement.

Flash is a bad thing only in some people's views because honestly it was abused at first. Flash intros were horrible. Cheesy. Stupid. A waste of time.

But now, as a Flash/Flex and occasional Silverlight dev - RIA is where I'm at mostly now - I'd rather do it all in Flash/Flex than HTML5 and the like. Only Ajax gives Flash competition.

The fact that FP10 isn't on my Nokia Tablet does make it hard for me to show some things. Let alone no Adobe AIR apps as well - and AIR runs on Mac, Windows and Linux.

Perhaps ARM and Adobe will finish up accelerating FP10 for those cpu's.

Tried this on the Amazon VOD site, but get an error saying that Javascript is required and you can not complete a purchase without it. Thanks for the tip though, I'll try this on other sites if I come across one that requires Flash 10.

Really trying to figure out a work around for the Amazon site though, just seems crazy to need the latest Flash just to make a purchase...I'm downloading to a TiVo, so it isn't like I'm trying to watch a movie on the N800, I just want to buy it on the go so it will be waiting for me by the time I get home.

You could use ssh and vnc to remotely control a desktop computer that has the latest Flash... Clunky workaround, but hey.

Don't want too get too off topic here but my main problem with Flash is that it can/is used to take control away from me. That it has been used as a virus infection vector tipifies why this is bad.

That being said I do want viable content delivery systems for my browsers. Be they on my PC or smaller device. I would love to be able to watch streaming web content from my IT like for example from adultswim.com. But such sites are all really Flash 10 these days so...

That's a good idea, but I tend to not keep my computer on all the time, and this isn't a big enough want to change that practice.

VNC = no sound

What about the Open Screen Project? I thought Adobe wanted flash on everything, so they were lessening restrictions or something.

Getting a bit off topic here

At my mom's company, ezschool.com, we are actually moving from PDF to Flash. Adobe Acrobat takes ages to load, and a lot of people complain (also crashes a lot). Flash is quick and simple, and allows for dynamic linking, etc. We usually publish in Flash 5 or Flash 8, because who needs action script 3 and fancy stuff for something simple? I hate websites that check the exact version of flash, and refuse to even TRY and display if it is a version too old...

Most vendors would certainly think of providing a version of their pages using these new technologies if there was a significant audience they could not reach any other way. Right now that audience is a fast-growing number of iPhone and Android phone owners.

The explosion of mobile web browsing alongside improvements to rich media handling in standards-based content runtimes has provided us with an opportunity to relegate Flash to the role of a legacy technology used for IE compatibility, for the benefit of a more free and more technologically sound web.

Or it maybe had - until Apple proved its lack of vision and promised Flash to iPhone users. We will see. And no, I don't care any more for Silverlight than I care for Flash.

PS.: Tear just froze up while composing this post. I wonder if hanging while disagreeing with you is a built-in feature .



No offense, but AJAX refers to a set of techniques, not a technology, and as such is not distinct from HTML 5 or the other technologies I listed. Rather, the AJAX techniques are used with these technologies. I recommend you read up more on web technology. Though I find that most Flash/Silverlight guys tend to care little about standards, sadly.

Okay now we're pretty far off topic but I'll continue the thought here... AJAX as stated has huge appeal because of it's flexibility. You can take any HTML developer, anyone with a basic coding background, and any web designer, and migrate them from working on traditional web development into the AJAX scenario with as much, or as little, "rich enhancement" as you want. Same story goes for performance and devices; you can have a lot of very basic AJAX techniques that make a website soooo much easier to use, especially on things like mobile devices, without incurring a lot of overhead. You have the ability to go all out ape crazy too, but those aren't the majority of cases that you run into. And thanks to web standards cross device cross platform issues are pretty minimal.

Flash has it's uses, and even in the AJAX paradigm it can be handy for doing things that other technologies aren't as well suited for; at the moment video handling, things like socket connections, etc. The problem with Flash generally is two fold: 1) developers and people who use it subscribe to the "flash or nothing" mentality typically. Because you have to learn to use a whole new methodology of authoring and developing, you end up trying to use Flash for more than just what's it's really good at, which adds overhead and in the end a reduced user experience. 2) The flash player is horribly inefficient, especially on mobile devices, simply because it has always been designed as a high level runtime. And the problem here is that it's inefficient because you incur the same base level of overhead whether you have a flash movie that's just a green blinking dot, or a whole interface, because the player still has to load up and process the swf. Now obviously more complex swf's can require more memory or CPU cycles to deal with, but the point remains.

Anyways enough of that... as I tell my students (I teach AJAX development at a local college), it really just comes down to the best tools to do the job; only incur the overhead of Flash if you actually need the features of Flash and you've already got a Flash background.

jolouis: Can you point me to any good "AJAX for newbies" sites? I like the ideas behind it, but I don't know how to begin.