On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Kerry Thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't see anything ironic about using QuickTime. It's one of Apple's > big success stories. > > I can kind of see them pushing HTML5 over Flash, for business reasons. > But why would they want to use HTML5 over their own product?
Of course you're right, *IF* you acknowledge that Steve Jobs' recent decisions have primarily been based on cold hard business calculations, which most of us do. But that's not the argument *he*, or other anti-Flashers are making. You hear all the time that the problem with Flash is that, as a plug-in, it exists outside the stack, in its own isolated box, whereas HTML5 is standards compliant and completely open and exists as part of the natural code flow. That is certainly true to a large extent, but the exact same thing can be said of Quicktime. Secondly, Jobs has made a very specific distinction between the iPhone vs the browser. While acknowledging that the iPhone is obviously a closed garden, he has said that when it comes to the *browser*, Apple is all about open, non-proprietary, standards compliant, HTML5, etc etc. And clearly, Quicktime is just as closed and proprietary as Flash, if not more so. Thirdly, I dont need to tell anyone here just how central the <video> tag has been in the whole debate. How often do you hear people saying that with the <video> tag, Flash is dead, completely ignoring everything else Flash does? If ever there was a proof of concept where Jobs & Co. should be putting their money where their mouth is, video is it. Especially since this video isnt DRM or in need of any other of the more advanced features that HTML5 can't handle yet. .m _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list [email protected] http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
