Performance isn't what worries me.  Well, it would with my phone
slooooooow.  Power consumption and batteries are my worry about mobile
flash.


On Sep 2, 10:36 am, James Ward <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Flash doesn't work for shit on android. DUH! Who was expecting different?"
>
> Have you actually tried Flash on an Android 2.2 phone?
>
> I am continually surprised with just how much Flash stuff actually does work 
> (especially when compared to how much HTML5 stuff doesn't work).  And the 
> hover issue is not nearly as big of an issue as you may think.  In Flash when 
> you touch the screen it dispatches a mouse over and a mouse down event.  If 
> you touch somewhere and then drag your finger over something then it will 
> dispatch a mouse over event for that object - just like with a cursor on the 
> desktop.  I've only found a small number of Flash sites that just don't work 
> due to the lack of a true mouse cursor.
>
> -James
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
> Behalf Of Reinier Zwitserloot
> Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 10:03 PM
> To: The Java Posse
> Subject: [The Java Posse] Re: flash on android
>
> 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
> > > > javaposse+...@googl
> > > > javaposse+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 
> 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.

Reply via email to