Home adobe Adobe versus the ‘Open Web’

33 Comments

1. 

   Danny Kopping

   May 27, 2009

   Well said Serge!

   The Flash Platform is revolutionizing the web in ways that are blowing peoples’ minds every day. With the impending release of Flash Catalyst, along with Alchemy, Stratus, PixelBender, etc, we can expect to see some ridiculous things being done with the Flash Platform (and we’re already starting to see such things). I mean, hell, they ported Python, PHP and Lua to ActionScript 3.0 using Alchemy… That’s downright insane.

   I think once ActionScript 3.0 becomes a formidable force on the server-side (if ever), the Flash Platform will grow even faster. Adobe is a fantastic company with dedicated employees, incredible developers and – above all – an open ear for little whiners like myself :D

   Thanks Serge!
2. 

   Ronny

   May 27, 2009

   Interesting read :)
   I share the same opinion on ‘open-sourcing the Flash Player’. I do wonder though what would happen if Adobe did.
3. 

   erik van nieuwburg

   May 27, 2009

   Nice post. People have been talking about Flash killers for as long as i can remember. Fact remains that Flash has always brought innovation to the table when it comes to a highly interactive web app. I think Adobe is doing such a good job with this, because there are hardly any competitors in this field that can match the innovation that Adobe is bringing. So thanks for that. Also love the Flex SDK and file formats being made open source. It really broadens the possibilities for 3rd parties and thus the range Flash of technology out there! Good job Adobe.
4. 

   Gilles Vandenoostende

   May 27, 2009

   Open sourcing the flash player would be a terrible mistake. One of the good things about developing for flash is that you can be 99.9% sure that your site will look & behave the same across your entire userbase.

   If the player itself became open source, that could mean people release their own player versions with different feature sets, which brings a whole bag of cross-player hurt down on everyone.

   Of course, it couldn’t hurt to selectively open up the source to respected, non-Adobe developers. Perhaps a “look-but-don’t-touch” license is in order, so suggestions/fixes/alterations could be made, but only Adobe holds the rights to release these changes as the one, true, official flashplayer?
5. 

   Peter Elst

   May 27, 2009

   Open sourcing the Flash Player has limited advantages IMHO — if I’m not mistaken part of the licensing restrictions that have been lifted as part of the Open Screen Project is that you can now create your own Flash Player, i.e. plugin that plays back the SWF format.

   Creating your own Flash Player is a non-trivial task of course, but in theory fragmentation is already a risk we run at the moment.

   What I am more worried about if the Flash Player gets open sourced is the exponential risk of finding exploits. On the other hand closer community involvement in development could result in some serious performance increases (just look at Haxe and talented developer out there improving each others bitmap encoders etc.).

   Regardless governance of the Flash Player, open source or not should ideally always be with Adobe. I’m happy with the route Adobe is taking now open sourcing what it can while making sure that nothing gets broken and providing commercial tools.
6. 

   Michael Chaize

   May 27, 2009

   Nice article. You can add Tamarin, the open AVM2 in your list.
7. 

   Natasha

   May 27, 2009

   The thing that gets me is the supposed ‘standards’ that people bang on about. The ‘Open Web’ is a actually a standards nightmare. Doing things that should be relatively simple, that work on all major browsers, have given some companies much difficulty and embarrassment in recent history. Notably, but not limited to Apple and MobileMe.

   I use Flash because it is far advanced of anything else and is the most functional, browser compliant ‘standard’ on the web today and probably for a long time.

   Some of the things people do with HTML / Javascript are very clever, but it took the Google’s and Apple’s of the world to do those things. Massive corporations. I can easily do the same things while curled up with a laptop on my sofa at home, using Flash.
8. 

   wonderwhy-er

   May 27, 2009

   Well I do agree that it will take some time but who knows… Java applets were there for ages but html applicatiosn clearly won over it where they could… Who knows…

   I actually am one of those who is enthusiastic about HTML5 stuff even tough I am Flash developer at the moment and love the platform. Flash is great platform but it does has some flaws that HTML5 will not have and that what makes it interesting. I think great example is iPhone where where in some way platform is not supporting Flash(probably some day it will but you can argue if HTML5 will come there faster). Then there is Pre coming where all apps are rumored to be HTML5 based only… Adobe tries to solve that with Open Screen project but still it is voluntary for firms to participate or not. Apple and Microsoft as far as I know are not participating but they will not have a choice but to implement HTML5 features when time comes. And yet they can resist for their own reasons Flash… How that benefits me as a developer? Does HTML5 serves me better here?

   So problem actually is that Flash is not regarded as RIA standard for web… IT kind of unofficially is at the moment but many do not agree… There is Java, Unity, Silverlight, HTML5 and even more plugins that have intersecting areas with Flash and have their own benefits making them spread too… And this makes it hard for mobile platform makers to implement them all. But I think we can guarantee that they will implement HTML5 right?

   So even tough you are right that HTML5 is not right behind the corner and situation can change rapidly but I must say there is a serious reason behind that enthusiasm as there are needs that Flash platform can satisfy because of it’s nature of proprietary format and that will never change probably even with it becoming open.

   Tough in it’s own way it also benefits. HTML never had and may be will never have proper frameworks like Flash has, it will be developed very slowly as many interests should be met for it to progress and of course HTML has problems with no standardized core for browsers which makes it a horrible experience to develop for it sometimes…

   So while Flash is developing and innovating rapidly, has better tools and standardized player, HTML is accepted by a wider audience and platforms and and always will have a better penetration in the web as web is HTML while Flash is a plugin that enhances and enriches the web experience .
9. 

   Florent V.

   May 27, 2009

   My thoughts on the Flash platform vs. (?) the Open Web.

   I’m a front-end developer working with HTML, CSS and JavaScript. Even though there are implementation problems and things are moving slow, i like the Open Web concept and the related standards.

   For long i stayed away from Flash because 1) i hated the process of working visually with elements in Macromedia Flash and not understanding what was happening behind the scene, 2) it was proprietary, and i happen to be an opensource and most importantly open formats advocate, and finally 3) it had (and still has) important accessibility issues (both by design and because of developers who use the platform).

   In the past few years, Flash has become a better Web citizen by caring more for cross-platform compatibility, accessibility, and openness. And while a lot of Flash-based websites were crap (either total crap or beautiful usability failures), more recent uses for video, dynamic graphs and data visualization (many great examples on the NYT if i remember correctly), games and all kind of rich content have proven that the platform really was good for something.

   I was never tempted to learn Flash development/front-end dev, though, mainly because:

   1. Designing specific bits of rich content, such as interactive videos, data visualization, games and the like is not my job, and not what i’d like to do.
   2. Designing complete websites in Flash always seemed like a total mistake to me. There are a few great exceptions, but most of the time when, as a user, i end up on a full-Flash website, it just doesn’t feel right. No native (browser) context menu, you can’t open links in tabs, pages are not web documents with their own address that you can bookmark. Add to this the sometimes sluggish experience on my two platforms of choice, namely Linux and OS X, and the poor usability of MANY Flash-based websites where designers feel free to reinvent the wheel rather than using web conventions… my overall user experience for full-Flash websites is very poor.

   Now this could be only me, but i’ve heard users complaining of bloated full-Flash websites a lot, so maybe not? (Of course it could be that the platform itself is not to blame for this.) I’ve heard people complaining of Flash-base navigation (hey, no opening in tabs? hey, how come that navigation triggers pop-up blocking?), and of Flash-based forms as well. On the other hand, i haven’t heard many users complaining of Flash-based videos, games, and snippets of rich content. This could be a decent rule of thumb for when to use Flash, and when not to (with necessary exceptions).

   Finally, i believe some features should be handled natively by the browser, and not by Flash or by a clever construct of HTML+JS+CSS. It’s only logical to have native audio and video (we have images, why not sound and video?), simple vector graphics (SVG, Canvas), font embedding, advanced typography styling, etc. I think common form widgets and client form validation should be native too, it just makes sense. And i’m not sure that, pending HTML 5 implementations, Flash is the right answer to form usability (i’ve seen great advanced forms using JS, and not so great stuff that of course don’t feel native using Flash…).

   Summary:
   - I quite like Flash for rich content, and often dislike it for complete websites (with exceptions).
   - As a Linux and OS X user, i wish the Flash Player team is working on performance. Right now i tend to avoid Flash because it’s SLOW (especially on Linux).
   - I like the fact that the SWF format has finally become an open specification (with no restrictions on competing players).
   - Some features that are now thought of as “advanced” are actually obvious stuff that should be native. Flash might be a nice solution while we wait for implementations, and sometimes not. The Flash platform will continue to provide more than the native stuff, and that’s great.
10. 

    Francesco Bongiovanni

    May 27, 2009

    The Web is an open platform which welcomes any ‘good’ technology that proves its efficiency. Sure some standards help but you can see that reaching a consensus among every major people involved in the Web is not an easy task and therefore you can be sure that great technology such as Flash will remain in place for a loooonnngg time :D now people should differentiate ‘how’ the technology is used and by ‘whom’ it’s used… Like every good piece of technology out there in the world => some use it for good and others use it for bad…, let’s try to use for good things people ! Adobe is a great company, Macromedia was a great company , their motivation and their work is inspiring and unlike other IT companies, they don’t do evil :) ps: from a developer point of view, i’m personally waiting for a free lightweight IDE for doing Flash efficiently , some kind of Flex Builder Express , a bit like Microsoft did , it could be really nice ;)
11. 

    chinmay

    May 27, 2009

    nicely said,
    the very good feature of FP that keeps it ahead of HTML is that as a developer u never need to think abt browser compatibility. :)
12. 

    Martin Heidegger

    May 27, 2009

    I don’t really bother whether Flash is good or bad. But what I do feel is that certain things are better in html which I can’t solve in Flash and its hard to mix them. Operating System styled form fields (with the native speed of editing). Easy formatable text ( definitly a domain of HTML) or transparent access to the content are not really comfortable. What I want to say is:

    If you write your Ajax stuff you can be sure: Everything displayed is available in the DOM node, if you write a extension it can be modified. Copy Paste, Right Click Actions etc. all still working consistently. Who is not annoyed by stucking in a Flex application because “Firefox: Ctrl+T” doesn’t work?

    The important thing is: Every feature HTML gives means that its one hurdle less to not-use flash technolgy. I avoid flash wherever its not necessary (necessities could be right now: performance, painting, video issues) because it does not help the user expirience.

    Perhaps you could remove some of those “bad karma” by working on a real integration with browsers. It would be very cool to see that border getting thinner and thinner.
13. 

    zimzum

    May 27, 2009

    The big elephant in the room for HTML5 is that it’ll take more than a DECADE for it to get the desired penetration after it’s properly standardized. See MSIE6: shitty browser, released in 2001, still 22% of the global web users rely on it.

    Saying HTML5 is gonna replace anything anytime soon is just wishful thinking, and a pathetic one at that. The technology and its advantages are one thing. The reality begs to differ.
14. 

    King InuYasha

    May 27, 2009

    I agree about what you said Serge, but my personal issue about Flash is that unlike the Player, the authoring tools are not totally cross-platform.

    I do not own a Mac, and I will never own a Mac. I have a single Windows PC simply because of my TV Tuner, and it seems to have such a weak constitution that it falls to pieces when it gets warm enough in there. So any CPU & GPU intensive apps are a no-no.

    So, I do most of my CPU intensive work on my various Linux machines. The Linux people like Moonlight because you can create Moonlight content on Linux using MonoDevelop. The only stick in Moonlight is that Microsoft created Silverlight, and people are rather wary of Microsoft. HTML5 is liked because Linux users can make their content regardless of platform. Flash is NOT liked because it has been abused as an advertising platform, it is buggy as hell on any platform and gets buggier with each successive release of Firefox. Additionally, Linux users do not have the level of creative tools that Windows or Mac users have, simply because of “marketshare.”

    The problem is that Adobe and the rest of the corporate world that holds the cards of the killer apps, they don’t want to take the plunge when they have the coffers to afford it. Back in the days of when Windows was a weak little thing and fairly unpopular, a company that popularized the Apple computers called Aldus decided to port their PageMaker software to Windows. This opened doors for a lot of people since PCs were and still are cheaper than their Apple counterparts. That was how Windows 3.0 actually became popular. On its own, it wouldn’t have been able to sustain that popularity. When Adobe ported Photoshop to Windows 3.0, that sustained the popularity of Windows. Adobe is a big brand in all industries. Adobe is what people would call a “trend-setter.” The fact that they are following like baby chicks around everybody else is pitiful. I bet if Adobe were to release Linux versions of their Creative Suite and put out a press release for it, then we would start seeing a huge change in “marketshare” numbers. People won’t use Linux unless their needed apps have a valid equivalent available. On top of it, video manipulation is not even there in Linux, so Adobe has the power to take advantage of that.

    However, that doesn’t change the fact that most marketshare numbers for Linux are not accurate because most Linux browsers fake their platforms to be able to access some sites. I would say that Linux is actually equal to Mac in marketshare, but there are no hard numbers.

    What I’m surprised about is that even with the stigma and myth that only geeks and devs use Linux, they never ported even a part of the Creative Suite to Linux. Some apps, like Flash Studio, Dreamweaver, and other tools that are more code based than WYSIWYG design based should have at least been made available. But meh, now even those of the non-technically inclined use Linux, especially since Ubuntu arrived on the scene.

    All in all, I want to see Adobe bring everything to Linux, and it is disappointing that Adobe doesn’t think that they will make a profit in doing so.
15. 

    Wade Arnold

    May 27, 2009

    As someone who received a cease and desist legal notice from Macromedia for AMFPHP I can attest that Adobe’s focus on open source initiatives as been tremendous. With the opening of the AMF specification Adobe reached out to me with some monitory support, 100% access to Adobe’s engineering team, marketing of the open source project, and paying for my attendance to speak at open source conferences such as last weeks PHP | Tek. I was also able to work on Flash Builder 4 and the feature set for PHP integration. Total transparency versus a black box that you have to decipher with tcpdump. I am excited to work on RTMP support in PHP 6 and commend the open source initiative that Adobe has made.

    Wade Arnold
    Author: Zend Amf
16. 

    Robin Lambell

    May 27, 2009

    Debating HTML5 vs. Flash is moot. Adobe killed this kind of comparison when ECMAScript 4 wasn’t ratified : Standards Boards can and should standardise in the interest of the future web, meanwhile, Adobe innovates. A more suiting comparison would be the Flex framework and HTML 5, and even then HTML5 comes up very short.

    The HTML 5 standard needs to “skip intro” and start showing something for itself before even geting close to Flash as it existed 5 years ago.

    Until next time naysayers, http://www.thefwa.com

    Rant over.
17. 

    Peter van Dam

    May 27, 2009

    Why is Flash evil?

    Since ALL browsers crash because of the plugin, your PC becomes 80% slower when visiting a flash website that uses several effects at the same time, and the many times IT IS being used in annoying ways. Think about cursors that dissapear, things like that.

    So yes, flash is evil, and Silverlight will definitly kill Flash. And HTML5 will be used for the light parts that don’t require plugins.
18. 

    logic

    May 27, 2009

    I think many of you guys are missing the bigger picture here… this isn’t about what’s best, this is all about market domination (let’s be honest, the web could easily be converted to Flash standards ;-))

    Apple has learned a (pretty hard) lesson from Microsoft, so they are devoted to use the same market strategy but with other principles in mind. They will use open (source) standards (again, thanks Microsoft, and all the lawsuits you have lost). So they are focussed on making sure to follow standards, take some sort of control on that standard, and be the one that uses them like no other can. That’s why I believe Safari (and of course Chrome) will be the best browsers available, now, and in the future. The same strategy applies for the iPod/iPhone. Apple will not support flash (why should they?), because they can’t control it, therefore they will always be dependent on others. I believe if things won’t change and Apple continues their way forward, things could shift towards HTML5. I will be shocked the day that will happen, but it’s a possibility.
19. 

    yo man

    May 27, 2009

    It’s almost like the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.
    http://ossguy.com/?p=398
20. 

    Jens Wegar

    May 27, 2009

    I do not think that the Flash player is breaking the open web. I think it is part of the web just as much as e.g. the quicktime plugin. It is a way to deliver rich content that would not be possible otherwise. I do however believe that Flash is often used in the wrong places. E.g. I would not use Flash for content driven sites, where the data and searchability using public search engines (Google, Yahoo…) is important. In such content driven sites I would however use Flash for data visualization. Then again, for campaign sites and games searchability becomes less important, since most visitors to the site are driven by ads and not search engines. So here I would be happy to create full flash sites.

    The biggest issue currently I think is that Flash still isn’t search engine friendly (even though Google and Adobe have made some progress on this). This is the number one reason why I and others I know advise against building full flash sites. Granted, there are ways around this, but they come at a cost. In the end, I think it all comes down to simply using the right tool for the job.

    Some comment comments:

    Re: Sluggish Flash performance. I think this is an issue in Flash because it is possible to do such graphic intensive things in Flash and there are a lot of people out there building Flash sites who do not know how to optimize their full screen transitions etc. I’m pretty sure you’ll see a similar issue arise when the HTML standard begins to allow for more and more visual effects.

    Re:Open sourcing the Flash Player. I would see a benefit in the sence that there would be more developers available to fix bugs etc. However, all patches should be checked and approved by Adobe and Adobe should maintain control over releasing the Flash player. Otherwise I for one wouldn’t trust the player anymore.

    Re: The Palm Pre not supporting Flash. Granted, apps are built using basic HTML+CSS+Javascript. However, at the same time there is a very strong rumor that WebOS (the OS of the Pre) will be the first to have full Flash player 10 support, because Palm is part of the Open Screen Project. So I wouldn’t rule out Flash on the Pre.
21. 

    Eamonn Faherty

    May 28, 2009

    Very nice post Serge!

    I think Adobe’s open source contributions have been amazing!

    I think a lot of other companies should be doing the same. We should be comparing Adobes contributions to other vendors of a similar size or who have a similar offering (M$). Internet Explorer and Safari are not open source, neither is the Silverlight player. If we do that, then people will see the wealth of resources from Adobe (flexunit 4, flex sdk and devnet to name only a few).

    I do, however, disagree with you about the flash player. I think open sourcing the player will lead to faster progression within the flash platform. Look at how well the KDE, Gnome and Linux kernel projects have done.

    I understand Adobes reasons for not open sourcing the player and i think instead of focusing on that people should appreciate what they are doing! I think Adobe have really kept the bedroom programming culture in flash. This is obviously still alive and visible in the user groups. I think Adobe has helped keep this culture with staff appearances at FITC, FOTB etc.

    Eamonn
22. 

    Kevin Suttle

    May 28, 2009

    Awesome post Serge. I had (and am now again having with Google I/O) the same feelings when I saw a post claiming Flash would die at the hands of the Canvas tag. I wrote a post in response ( http://kevinsuttle.com/?p=5 ) I just don’t get why Flash got lumped in with RealPlayer and Windows Media as an annoying plugin. This concept of a browser ‘sans-plugins’ doesn’t make sense to me. It also doesn’t make sense to me that Flash is seen as a hack and isn’t a true web development platform because it’s compiled and not interpreted by the browser. Why is the goal to eliminate Flash? Why aren’t we working together on this?
23. 

    nojyfied

    May 29, 2009

    Why silverlight is good? I have been impressed by the way silverlight has been implementing features.
    http://www.uxpassion.com/2009/03/silverlight-3-beta-list-of-new-features/ . I think this will give Flash competition, and drive more innovation. On the other side, after going through tutorials for silverlight I noticed they got many things from the basics wrong. Their XAML is inferior to MXML. The way i can extend MXML, it offers me much more customizability. See Mate a Tag diven MVC framework. Binding in flex is like “[Bindable]” boooom!!! It works out of box with curly braces in expressions. In silverlight you have to dispatch custom events.

    I have heard adobe is working on a linux flex builder IDE. Please make that work adobe!! It is for your own good. If you are a real geek, just use VIM and the command line compiler. It works!

    I agree Flash should somehow let the browser access to its display list. Just like DOM so browsers can add the right click “open in new tab” e.t.c or create some special UI components e.g buttons that can talk to the browser and give the right context menus.

    For those who are saying flash is slow!! I would recommend you guys trying to do the following with AJAX.
    http://www.unitzeroone.com/blog/2009/03/18/flash-10-massive-amounts-of-3d-particles-with-alchemy-source-included/

    With pixel bender which runs multi-threaded you can crunch number will all ur CPU’s much faster than anything. Not even chrome beats that speed. And as mentioned with Alchemy people have ported many languages to produce swf bytecode. Someone should write a .NET and java compiler to swf code as well, so people complain less. But even then someone’s gotta update it, not everyone has all the freetime in the world to do it. Alchemy and Pixel bender are the best additions to flash player 10. Not even silverlight or HTML 5 is going to give you that low level control. Or you know what try doing dynamic audio with HTML5. http://www.hobnox.com/index.1056.de.html
    Try getting the camera and audio from mic with silverlight or HTML5.

    I guess those of you who complain about flash and flex haven’t been using it. Do you know how fast AMF is to communicate between server and client. I have been using AJAX for quite a number of years. the only problem with HTML5 is that the javascript they will use is untyped. Its so easy to kill yourself. Because of it its hard for the compiler (JIT compiler) to do optimisations. Even loading with JSON, it was a hell lot slower than AMF. Because AMF is right down in the flash player its Fast, Very Fast!!. So is transforming XML with e4x. Do some research on how companies are using Flex Apps. For those who think HTML5 will kill flash player, even Google maps API runs faster on flash than the google maps website, due to the low level control flash gives to a developer. If you have done graphics course in uni you understand why Matrices are so useful for laying out stuff on the screen. Flash lets you manipulate display objects the way you want. With Jquery effects and other AJAX libraries, when they run the effects it hogs your CPU unlike anything. With TweenLite you can tween 5000 objects simultaneously on the stage, that my friend is speed!! Try doing that with HTML5.

    Flex has great features such as custom css tags, custom MXML tags, its so easy to do things. Much more easier than HTML, because the way engineers structured the language. I have gone through HTML5 specs, and I find the specs bloated. There is alot they could do to make it better. Flash 10 Graphics API 2.0 vs SVG canvas API. HTML5 could have borrowed alot of ideas such as drawPath(), which lets you send vectors of numbers to drawing in a single command. Way faster than doing it command by command.

    On the bottom line, I feel silverlight is not doing anything new, its just copying alot of flash features. They yet haven’t given me a reason why I should ditch flash for silverlight. As always I have never found Microsoft innovative. HTML is a text markup language. I like it for what it is. Its a great way to display text on the web. Flash is totally different. Flash doesn’t have the interest of taking over HTML. In adobe air they implemented a full webkit browser, adobe could have done the same and implemented a full HTML rendering engine in flash. Solved all the problems of cross browser issues, but THEY DIDN’T. Its not their domain.

    Flash is a different tool to solve different problems than HTML, only that they overlap a bit. Silverlight is another story, I don’t even understand what they want to create another flash player. Will all that money microsoft can create much better innovative web technologies. Do something the flash player + HTML can’t already do. Solve better problems.
24. 

    Martin Heidegger

    May 29, 2009

    I thought about it a little more: What i really want would be something like activity and visibility areas: Which means: That once you run a flash, its content can define where it is active and where not.

    Where activity area means: mouse/keyboard/focus interaction triggered in this area. The browsers input is fetched by it. With a additional property it should also be able to retrain focus.

    And visibility areas means: Here I have a block where I behave like a Image: Meaning: here is a image, here html code has to wrap, here swf takes over drawing.

    A activity area should be allowed only within visibility areas ( can be verified by browser or swf ).

    Additionally it would be very cool if there would be some information exchange system which allowes to give the swf on runtime dynamic properties which are read by the browser: tooltiphint, link, etc.

    Okay: enough of wet phantasies ….
25. 

    Steffest

    May 30, 2009

    Somehow you are all focussing on how great Flash is …
    Yes, nobody is denying that; Flash is super duper awesome!
    However, the point is, flash is not OPEN, html is …
    And I’m not talking about open sourcing the flash player or the file format,
    I’m talking about decentralization and transparency and third-party Integratable.
    oh, How I love Flash, I really do, but don’t pretend your not breaking the open web, because erm … you do :-)
26. 

    Robert Brookes

    June 1, 2009

    Although I’m a big fan of the Open Web and most open movements of all kinds, I don’t think that we can really criticise an organisation just because they’re more innovative and bring better functionality than the open world does yet. Instead I think we should be competing based on functionality and features. Flash has had a huge role in popularising the modern web – without it we wouldn’t have half of the great functionality we do right now.

    I think Flash will be around for a long time to come, and I think we’ll see more and more innovative uses for it.

    If we were talking about Adobe Reader however that would be a different matter. What a load of bloatware! :-P
27. 

    Jaime

    June 4, 2009

    I’ll tell you a true story based on facts that will make you think a lot.
    A few months ago I was in the final stage of one of my first projects as a freelancer, specifically a corporate website. I spent around 4 workdays making my layouts and bits and pieces standards-browser-semantically compliant.
    In the middle of the meeting the following week I was thrilled showing my code with beautiful colored characters but in a twist of fate nobody understood a thing; not exactly what I pictured the meeting was going to be…
    so, I decided I would show them a piece I worked just 2 1/2 fun hours; it was their logo, brand and some content built and made elegant in flash….
    Jesus, you should have seen their faces, the managers were congratulating me, telling me ‘NOW you have me impressed’, and I knew right and then I would focus on that technology, that if Pareto was right, this had to be my 20%.
    A few months later I am happy I’ve decided working 80% of my websites using flash; mainly because I spend my ‘work’ (fun) days doing only the things that thrill me, in code and design.
    It has not been easy, the learning curve is much more involved than with simple HTML/CSS, and I had to let go a couple prospects, but when I see what I have created (and sold) I marvel, and so my prospects and customers.
    It is a fact as a freelancer being able to differentiate my proposal, being able to close those sales while at the same time I have all the fun in the world when my days pass like when playing is short of a miracle.
    .
    All of that thanks to Adobe Flash (The IDE – sorry Flex-Flash developer guys) .
    A note for those who are freelancing and are unsure of using the Flash IDE vs HTML/CSS/JS is : You can use all those technologies inside or beside your Flash marvels.
    And of course, if you have the freedom to choose your platform and you can have your own vision of what is good for the customer (and you) then start making a change. Create beautiful interfaces, elegant unique effects, integrate your work with a CMS, do great SEO and I guarantee you that despite some stones in the way you will have fulfilling days at the expense of those who will be drinking coffee late at night figuring out how to apply a thousand lines of fixes that nobody in the real world cares about.
28. 

    brendan

    June 16, 2009

    me being nice: the “open web” is still locked up in proprietary-ish ( at least non-standard ) browsers… so….

    me being a jerk: get at me when you don’t have to have a logic to detect which browser you are in. Then we are open.

    big up to Adobe for having the original workaround to IE6 ! thanks for giving me the time to learn how to program cool stuff and not just hack the DOM or crappy browsers!
29. 

    rydell

    June 16, 2009

    Please open source the flash player.

    Frankly, I’m tired of hearing people whine about it. Think about having a community of developers that are more comfortable with the codebase because they can see it, and when properly authorized, patch it.

    Don’t worry about folks forking the codebase. Sure it’s possible, and it will probably happen, but Adobe has the knowledge. Adobe will still be the driving force behind the direction of flash.

    I don’t want to hear that there are particular parts of the flash player that can’t be open sourced because of patent issues. Find a way, don’t use this as an excuse to fall back on.

    Right now, the main reason that flash is attractive it offers the richest feature set, and it is nearly as ubiquitous as the browser itself. But because of its checkered past, developers want to move to something they believe to be more elegant and more pure.

    But we all know that it will take forever, and we’ll be hacking non-standard javascript for another five years to achieve what flash had five years ago. Adobe should embrace the poor uses of flash in its past and do everything everything that it can to be the best web citizen possible.

    Don’t be afraid. For the love of all things that aren’t evil, please, open source the flash player.
30. 

    JulesLt

    June 17, 2009

    Few comments – I’ve taken a look at some of the Canvas and CSS 3 animation examples, and yes, they do eat CPU like Flash does – so at least some of complaints about Flash will also apply there / are just inherent to the problem.

    However, it also notable how rapidly performance has improved, particularly on the WebKit project, which is a good argument for open source – Apple, Google, Nokia and Palm all have a vested interest in improving WebKit, particularly on low-power devices like phones. Progress on WebKit has been easily as rapid as Flash development over the last 4 years, and even Microsoft have improved things with IE7-8 – there is no guarantee that Flash development will continue to outpace browser development.

    In contrast, as some people have noted, Flash performance on OS X and Linux is far worse than Windows, which does not bode well for Adobe’s ability to optimise Flash on various mobile operating systems. (That said, I do admire how much the Flash team have managed to get inside such a small plug-in, and the huge performance improvements they’ve also made between 8 and 10 – and I’m aware that it is a small team, with limited resources).

    As for anyone who thinks Silverlight or JavaFX will kill/replace Flash – there’s no proof that Microsoft or Sun will be able to do a better job of plug-in implementation than Adobe have – I always find it amusing when people put faith in the quality of an unreleased product – remember the gPhone, which was going to address every single issue people had with the iPhone? The reality turned out to be less so.

    My other concerns about Flash apps, in general, is that , when my browser or OS introduces improvements like system wide spell-checking or resizable text fields, data detectors/accelerators, or other right-click/drag-n-drop actions based on the type of content – those improvements upgrade my web experience – but not Flash apps. I’ve also noted the CPU impact on leaving Yahoo mail running in the background, compared to a native application. But I guess most people are willing to overlook these issues – they don’t really utilise their OS, or notice the affect apps have on battery life.

    What I also think people get wrong is seeing Adobe want to use Flash to control a proprietary web – judging by their actions, they’ve actually opened up a large amount of the IP they acquired from Macromedia, and moved Flash video towards MPEG standards. Adobe’s profits come from tools, and some server-side software for delivering video streams – if you replace Flash with web standards, the market for the tools is still there – Dreamweaver survives despite plenty of alternatives, and something like the Flash authoring tool will be wanted for canvas animations, something like Flex/Flash Catalyst for RIA development, richer text and font control will reduce the need for PDF, but increase the market for DTP-like tools for web authoring.

    Are Adobe realistically going to hand those markets over to their rivals, for the sake of locking people into the Flash runtime (that costs them money to develop?).
31. 

    johnnybgoode

    June 18, 2009

    Please see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=662655
32. 

    san1t1

    June 18, 2009

    Browser development sucked because of the DOM. Roll on JQuery (and then Web Selectors). Fixed (or at least, getting there)

    Browser development sucked because Javascript interpreters are slow. This is now moot with modern browsers. Fixed.

    Until you can view source and copy and paste code (without the pain of decompliation) Flash will remain ON the web and not OF the web.

    There are more Javascript developers on the planet than any other language, building libraries and frameworks, These will evolve with HTML5, and we will get to the point, where, regardless of the new bells and whistles added to Flash, YAGNI.

    Now, if Adobe produce an IDE that allows developers to use ActionScript/MXML/Flash, and the output cross compiled into JS/HTML5/CSS, and then degraded where browsers do not support the necessary features to use the plug in, then Flash development will continue apace. And we could all have our cake and eat it.

    Let’s not forget that Adobe doesn’t sell Flash Player, they sell IDEs. An IDE which provided a seamless migration path away from the proprietary nature of the plug in as new open web standards are deployed that replace it would sell by the ton.
33. 

    Smin Rana

    June 20, 2009

    Hello Everyone,

    First things is i am a new, young and learner ActionScript Programmer..so ExcuseMe

    What i do understand that what i can build with Flex SDK its simply outstanding..Listen, you can not do with any other technology as it is in Flash like video chat room with cocomo sdk, simple phone with Ribbit and 3D product viewer.. i like those applications , also i like that Adobe controls Flash..

    If you talk about HTML 5 i don’t give…

    So stop compare Flash (Wonderful) with HTML 5