Is there any other technology that can replace flash when it comes to
creating things like small trivial games that live on web pages?
I am a gamer myself and play on the 360, but I know a lot of younger
people play a lot of pretty advanced flash games. Last Weekend
I was introduced to "gosupermodel", that I think has flash components .--)
I heard someone had ported quake2 to HTML5, but "Hyper Text Markup
Language" doesn't sound like something you
should be writing games in... ?
My point is that we still havn't figured out a standard way to deliver
rich user experiences ("game like") - over the web in a
standardized way. We're miles away from Amazon.com opening up a
super-user-friendly bookshop with a "Minority report style" user
interface in a browser.
They could of course create a cool Andoird/iPad app...
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote:
> While we don't actually disagree, the practical fact of the matter is
> that Flash is currently being used on the web! For instance, unlike
> Microsoft, Oracle does not distribute tech video's in multiple formats
> but only supplies a Flash version (so much for embracing choice!).
>
> The net effect is that I am now watching Neal Gafter's talk from the
> JVM Lang Summit on my phone: http://medianetwork.oracle.com/media/show/15493
>
> Btw. the gray box syndrome has never really been associated with Flash
> (which undeniably has the best integration story of all the plugins)
> but more with Java applets. I believe there have been many bugs
> designated to this issue in the Sun bug database.
>
> /Casper
>
> On Sep 2, 6:03 am, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Why does everyone continue to insist that the whole grey-rectangle-in-
>> a-browser-window approach is feasible for the future of the web?
>>
>> Flash, *AND* crazy HTML5-powered experiments all aren't going to ever
>> run right on a phone. The notion that it ever will is a total pipe
>> dream. Adding flash support isn't going to help one iota, because, as
>> has been said, these apps are so interactive they almost invariably
>> HAVE TO make assumptions about the user interface; it has to assume
>> there's such a thing as hover (which you can do as well in HTML5 and
>> that would break your HTML5 no-flash web page just as effectively on
>> an iPhone or android phone as using flash will), it has to assume
>> there's a certain (minimum) size. It has to assume there's a certain
>> amount of processing power.
>>
>> In just about every case, writing such an app and presuming the shared
>> minimum amongst all platforms that the web is viewed on these days is
>> a pathetic platform that no one can write a nice app for. The screen
>> is no bigger than 400x300, there's only left click and absolutely
>> nothing else, not even a keyboard, you should be stingy with processor
>> intensive anything, and you can't assume there'll be good latency or a
>> big bandwidth pipe.
>>
>> Flash doesn't work for shit on android. DUH! Who was expecting
>> different?
>>
>> The few things where you can imagine a flash app that would work quite
>> nicely whether it runs on a phone or on a big iron desktop machine are
>> the kinds of apps that are just as easily written in HTML5, and for
>> these kinds of apps, flash just definitely just die off, because HTML5
>> is not controlled by a single company, and integrating flash + HTML5
>> is always going to be more difficult than doing something in all-flash
>> or all-HTML5. If the choice is between only flash and only HTML5, I
>> bet I'm not the only one that believes that HTML5 is a far nicer
>> environment than flash. So, if we must choose, we choose HTML5.
>> Conclusion: Flash has no place on a phone. Yes, it sucks you can't see
>> flash sites, but that is not fixed by adding flash support to phones.
>>
>> The only app
>>
>> On Sep 1, 4:48 pm, James Ward <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > “Can be done” is different than “done”. :) There is a lot of Flash
>> > content out there and it’s nice to have a phone that can render it.
>>
>> > In my experience more of the Flash content that is out there works on my
>> > Nexus One with Flash Player 10.1 than the HTML5 content and galleries.
>> > Many of the demos on the HTML5Rocks and apple.com/html5 sites just don’t
>> > work on my Nexus One.
>>
>> > As a developer and a consumer I like to have choices and the ability to
>> > pick the technology that is right for the problem. Sometimes that will be
>> > HTML / HTML5. Sometimes Flash.
>>
>> > -James
>>
>> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
>> > Behalf Of work only
>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 8:35 AM
>> > To: [email protected]
>> > Subject: Re: [The Java Posse] Re: flash on android
>>
>> > Hi
>>
>> > Nice sites :)
>>
>> > But when Google says HTML5 they really means (HTML5 + CSS + JS)
>>
>> > Actionscript is based on JavaScript ( ECMAScript )!
>>
>> > From that list of 10 sites - don't see anything that can't be done with
>> > HTML5 + CSS + JS :)
>>
>> > Paul
>>
>> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Steven Herod
>> > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> > Have a look at these and get back to me.
>>
>> >http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/best-flash-sites
>>
>> > On Sep 1, 2:19 pm, work only
>> > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> > > > It will be a while before HTML 5 comes remotely close to what can be
>> > > > done
>> > > > easily with Flash today.
>>
>> > > Plus that was just video (not really flash no) HTML5 can do that easy :)
>>
>> > > Plus what can flash do more then HTML5?
>>
>> > > 2010/8/31 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>>
>> > > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:59 PM, work only
>> > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> > > >> thats suck - Flash is not for mobile, just does not fit, we should
>> > > >> all use
>> > > >> HTML5 :)
>>
>> > > > It will be a while before HTML 5 comes remotely close to what can be
>> > > > done
>> > > > easily with Flash today.
>>
>> > > > --
>> > > > Cédric
>>
>> > > > --
>> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > > > Groups
>> > > > "The Java Posse" group.
>> > > > To post to this group, send email to
>> > > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
>> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> > > > [email protected]<mailto:javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googl
>> > > > egroups.com><javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups .com>
>> > > > .
>> > > > For more options, visit this group at
>> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> > "The Java Posse" group.
>> > To post to this group, send email to
>> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> > [email protected]<mailto:javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googl
>> > egroups.com>.
>> > For more options, visit this group
>> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>>
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> > "The Java Posse" group.
>> > To post to this group, send email to
>> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> > [email protected]<mailto:javaposse+unsubscr...@googleg
>> > roups.com>.
>> > For more options, visit this group
>> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
