Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 27th Jan 2010 19:45 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 406460
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-12
It could be that Adobe has an underperforming and bug laden version of flash that is fantastic (if you like having your fans spool up way fast) Flash video is a kluge and not a very effective one that gets slower each version. Adobe seem sto have come to the party late and convinced people that this closed system is better.
How is having flash an advantage? h264 seems faster than .flv and process viewer and some ballpark benchmarks bear this out. Are we in the days of ubiquitous broadband? so why flash, does it make my life or my users lives easier? And for the obvious 'because web page X requires it' dig into the page, most quality (and SFW) sites have a non flash stream available.
I suppose it is not Apple's Job to support flash but Adobe's job to support flash.