Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 14th Feb 2010 22:17 UTC
Internet & Networking There's a bit of ruckus going on at the moment in the world of HTML5. A number of people are claiming that Adobe has blocked the latest publication of the HTML5 standard. However, after diving into the actual mailing list threads, it becomes obvious quite quickly that it's nothing but a misunderstanding. Update: Masinter replies: "No part of HTML5 is, or was ever, 'blocked' in the W3C HTML Working Group - not HTML5, not Canvas 2D Graphics, not Microdata, not Video - not by me, not by Adobe."
Permalink for comment 409398
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by mtzmtulivu
by wargum on Mon 15th Feb 2010 12:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by mtzmtulivu"
Member since:

* FOSS and OS X users for being neglected with sub-standard ports

Admitted, the quality of the Windows version is superior, but for 10.1, Adobe will improve at least the OS X version heavily. They promise to bring CPU decoded video on par with the Windows version. They can't use the graphics processor's decoder chips directly on OS X though, because Apple does not have an API for that, yet. This is clearly Apple's fault, we have to be fair here. Second, they announced that 10.1 will use Core Animation on the Mac, which will probably boost graphic calculations a lot.

* Users who don't have powerful machines and find simple webpages can often max out their machine.

No sympathy from my side, here. Look, if you buy an Atom based device and expect it to do everything that a "real" laptop/desktop can do, that is your fault. Adobe does improve H.264 based video decoding with Flash Player 10.1 though, by using specialised decoder chips available in some of these machines.

* Surfers who stumble across a whole site built in Flash and find they can use the most basic of functions (back buttons, copy/paste, open in new window/tab)

That is a problem, Adobe needs to improve on accessibility, very true. But you know what? This is ultimately the task of the site author(s). Let's say Adobe's authoring tools will support HTML5 tomorrow, with all canvas glory and stuff. How can you even assume that people will not just continue building unaccesible sites, because they don't care? Technology can help, but it will always be misused, bear this in mind, please.

* People who like to browse the web on internet-ready non-PC / Mac equipment (portable devices, integrated devices like games consoles and TVs, etc).

You haven't heard of the Open Screen Project yet, right? Adobe hands you the code, if you need to port the Flash Player. That's the main focus of Adobe right now, bring Flash to more devices like smartphones, etc. and use dedicated hardware for "heavy" tasks like video decoding or graphic calculations. And btw, Flash is available on the Wii and the PS3, that's 2 out of 3 for the current generation of game consoles, not too shabby, heh? ;-)

* People who just get sick of intrusive ad banners (some even come bundled with sound effects).

Are HTML5 based ads less intrusive? Why? Sorry, but this is not an argument. Ads will stay with us even if Flash becomes irrelevant.

And the problem is compounded by the fact that if and when you do stumble across a Flash heavy site (excluding ads), there's often no way to view the site without Flash - thus either forcing the user to run Flash or lose content.

Again as stated before, this is ultimately the task of the site author(s).

Reply Parent Score: 2