Tech Broiler

Jason Perlow and Scott Raymond

A Web Developer Speaks: Flash Player is Dead. HTML5 isn't ready. Long live AIR!

By | November 11, 2011, 10:14am PST

Summary: Poorly-coded HTML5 content will send the Web into the dark ages.

Jason Perlow: I received the following e-mail from a web and Flash developer that works for a large advertising/media production agency. With the exception of some minor editing to flow for style, the content is identical.

As a developer for a pretty large agency, I would like to put everything out on the table… it isn’t pretty for Adobe, Flash developers or even the general public.

In a nutshell, Adobe really screwed up the messaging. They left the entire community and evangelists in the dark/unprepared for this news and the developers are very pissed. That’s the real story here.

Despite what the industry will tell you about how bad a solution mobile Flash was, I have actually created screaming fast mobile Flash content for the browser… It’s completely possible! But not likely for most people.

I know and many other experienced Flash programmers know that the technology actually worked very well. The problem was that legacy content could never all be re-optimized/re-published for it.

There are literally billions of old, badly coded SWFs out there!

Creating well-performing interactive web content requires a serious understanding of things like blitting and other really difficult computer science concepts that current designer/psuedo-developers do not understand because they were never trained in those disciplines.

This means generally every piece of old Flash and uneducated Flash piece was viewed to be sub-par, hence Steve Jobs objection to using it in Apple’s iPad and iPhone.

On top of that, we have to add the fragmentation of the Android platform… Adobe literally couldn’t afford to keep up with the devices anymore considering developers were never targeting Flash Player for mobile anyway.

It was purely a financial decision on Adobe’s part to place the onus on the OEMs to continue maintaining the Flash player. Thats right: they stopped creating Flash for the mobile browser, but OEMs will now be in charge of implementing the player on their devices.

That’s another thing Adobe screwed up in their communications by just passively mentioning it!

So what does it all mean for desktop Flash? I’m not gonna lie, its not good. The damage is done. Most clients will be clamoring for the new HTML5 specification to be used in their sites from here on out.

Unfortunately, we can’t sell it to them yet. HTML5 isn’t ready for the desktop and clients don’t want to pay for two sites. So, instead, we will be falling back to DHTML and things like JQuery for both mobile and the desktop.

It stinks, but that’s the way it is from now on. You can now look forward to a lame internet.

As far as performance goes, Flash really is fast when developed correctly. JavaScript is faster only in computation, not rendering speed. But the next versions of the Flash player for the desktop are including real concurrency and performance on par with Java. Really, I’m not kidding.

In fact, you will see some of that power with each dot release of 11, 11.1 and so on… but an order of magnitude faster in future versions. I know this because I am a beta tester. Video performance, however, will not be addressed until version 12.

AIR 3 for mobile, TVs and oodles of other devices is amazing. The apps are already among the top performing apps on the App Store, and its a real shame Adobe’s abysmal marketing team isn’t getting the message out.

AIR 3 addresses every single issue its predecessor had with performance, captive run times and native extensions.

HTML5 tools are severely lacking right now. I have been playing around with Adobe Edge and Muse, and I have to tell you they pale in comparison to the features Flash has. What you can produce with these tools today is more more like what Flash 4 content was years ago.

The code it produces is not desirable by our current developer standards. And the files these tools produce are much heftier than their Flash counterpart. Adobe recently featured a banner ad created with Edge that was 1.8 MEGS! A similar Flash advertisement would have been around 25 kilobytes.

Bandwidth caps for mobile will explode if we have to use HTML5.

A side technical note: The reason for this vast difference in terms of file compression between Flash produced and HTML5 content is that that Flash can rely on vector artwork easier, and even their bitmaps are more optimized than HTML.

PNGs in Flash utilize JPEG compression on top of the PNG even with an alpha channel. This means that PNGs in Flash are literally 20% the size of stand alone PNG! JPEGxr has been added to the list of supported formats, meaning Flash Player 11’s JPEGs will be 60% their current size with no loss in quality.

HTML currently relies on many images, image sequences and paltry primitives for vectors. HTML5 will have exponentially more code too for describing motion. I’d rather see plain DHTML content then that animation.

Regardless of these technical issues, we really need competent HTML5 tools for visual editing. Our HTML5 projects are costing 3 times as much as traditional HTML and even Flash. Most of it is in cross-browser fallbacks and QAing.

HTML, JavaScript and CSS are simply too verbose to handle huge applications. JavaScript was never really meant for giant applications that truly require Object Oriented Programming.

Traditional web developers that will take to these web languages are not fit for real application development. It requires a lot more work to describe motion, interaction and application states.

Unfortunately any resulting object code that gets spit out from these next-generation HTML5 designer tools will be a rats nest. But it will definitely happen.

Designers will get their HTML5 tools, and the results will be exactly what we saw with early Flash sites. They aren’t computer scientists, and while they won’t necessarily make the same mistakes Flash developers made in the early days, they will make very poor decisions that everyone will pay for.

All of that being said, I do believe the Flash player’s image is too far gone now. HTML5 isn’t a good replacement but it’s all we have to look forward to for the Web. Except for games… it really cant handle it, so Flash Player will stick around for that and HD video and surround sound.

AIR is going to be a goldmine though. Since I am losing interest in web development, I’ll likely move solely in that direction as I’m sure many Flash developers will.

AIR is Flash’s phoenix rising.

Will poorly coded HTML5 content throw us back to the late 1990s? Talk Back and Let Me Know.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Jason Perlow, Sr. Technology Editor at ZDNet, is a technologist with over two decades of experience integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies.

Disclosure

Jason Perlow

My Full-Time Employer is IBM. I write as a freelancer for ZDNet.

Disclaimer: The postings and opinions on this blog are my own and don't necessarily represent IBM's positions, strategies or opinions.

I own no investments or direct financial instruments in the companies I write about.

Biography

Jason Perlow

Jason Perlow, Sr. Technology Editor at ZDNet is a technologist with over two decades of experience with integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies. A long-time computer enthusiast starting the age of 13 with his first Apple ][ personal computer, he began his freelance writing career starting at ZD Sm@rt Reseller in 1996 and has since authored numerous guest columns for ZDNet Enterprise and Ziff-Davis Internet. Jason was previously Senior Technology Editor for Linux Magazine, where he wrote about Open Source issues from 1999 to 2008.

In his spare time, Jason is an avid amateur chef and food writer, where his work reviewing New Jersey restaurants has appeared in The New York Times. He is also the founder of the popular food web site eGullet and blogs about restaurants and cooking at OffTheBroiler.com.

85
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

egjgrbh 23 gji
bmakrejktt27-24378966035464361491712869795637 24th Nov
fukrun,zkjoqsad67, omisp.
... wants messy "rich" sites instead of classy jobsian minimalism, then the content creation tools might be yet not that developed (though Adobe itself works on this).
That guy gets it. Javascript is completely a joke when used as a platform language.
It???s like we are taking massive steps backward in developing sound applications. JavaScript is just not a pancreas of a good development stack. JavaScript is so misunderstood by so many developers developing with it???s a crying shame. HTML5 its self has started down the road of fragmentation we have seen with IE6; Standard isn???t even finished it???s in Final Draft for another almost 18 months. Yet browser manufactures are offering full support for HTML5???? As you said @LBiege at least you and the writer of this get it.
@dderss Well, you don't expect "jobsian minimalism" when checking out say the website for the Mission Impossible movie. Audiences and companies hiring developers want more rich content in specific cases such as movies, bands, car companies, etc.
@Matt_Fabb@... So even "Mission Impossible" could follow that example and have site which does not have overload of "richness" and whistles.

However, for classy and cleanly designed sites to be really seen as classy and clean, messy sites are needed. So, I as wrote above, more developed tools might be required. But, again Adobe works on that -- HTML5 tools business will grow.
@Matt_Fabb@...i completely i agree with you.
0 Votes
+ -
@dderss JavaScript (jQuery) has always been a security issue. And experienced programmers loathe using it because of its limitations. Flash developers will fight back by teaching average users how to turn "off" JavaScript in their browsers. Then we will watch HTML5 purists squeal, as much of the JavaScript crutch code they rely upon to patch sites together and use animation for, will go bye bye.

Adobe Flash security issues = 96
Average browser security issues w/ JavaScript on = 237
All five major browsers w/ JavaScript on = 1,185
0 Votes
+ -
Apple.com?
rhonin 11th Nov
@dderss

Not seeing what is so special......
@dderss If rich equals messy in your opinion then http://www.mercedes-amg.com/ is one of them! Maybe a designer portfolio will fit your 'jobsian minimalism' but no rich content website/showcase for movies, cars, etc.
Welcome back to AS2 flash sites with html5/js rebirth!
I am sorry to say HTML 5, especially Javascript, is not a mature object oriented language : no strict typing, no classes, no consistent API. That's why Google is building Dart to wrap it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dart_(programming_language). Then there is the spotty browser support. I am appalled when I read such a bunch of code as HTML 5 is considered as a viable alternative to Flash. In any case it won't be a cheap development alternative.
@JB5645 Hmmm C# has been moving towards scripting for a while now. You can have javascript like "var" variables [though compiler would infer it for you], dynamically add methods similar to prototype in Javascript. Moreover, one can write Object oriented code in Javascript - we can handle strict typing, create classes - Look at EXT JS
As with any dev tools, you'll have good and bad programmers. Writing code is actually not that difficult. Writing high performing code that's scalable and maintainable is really difficult no matter what dev platform you use. So I don't understand the author's argument that poorly coded HTML5 will be its doom. Just think of it this way. A paintbrush in the hand of Picasso produced master pieces. In the hand of you and me, not so much.
@m0j064
No, actually, it will be far easier to produce bad code with HTML 5 than with Flash Actionscript, which is much stricter.
@JB5645 Now that IS the truth.
@m0j064 What he's saying is the lack of mature tools, lack of experience in using HTML5 will result in a lot of bad content, repeating the early days of Flash. There will be some good stuff, especially from the larger software companies that can afford to spend the money, but there's likely to be a lot of bad content, or content that crashes your browser, consumes too much CPU, etc.
@Matt_Fabb@... Agree. Browser says,"unresponsive HTML5, force close HTML5",..LOL. HTML5 just like flash in different name, if poorly coded.
@m0j064 Agree. Very well. You hit the nail. HTML5 has what it takes. It just won't tolerate bad programming, but this will be a lesser risk. I doubt that lazy programmers will want to take shortcuts with HTML5. At least for now, we'll mostly see the work of the pros.
@m0j064 What tools you use matters. Bad languages make bad code much more likely. Writing scalable and maintainable code is much easier if you use a language that is designed for such.

Incidentally, your analogy is off:

"A paintbrush in the hand of Picasso produced master pieces. In the hand of you and me, not so much." -- Poor artists blame their tools. Great artists pick the right tools for the job. Whether it's painters, musicians, photographers, or whatever, you will find that serious artist are generally very serious about their choice of tools. Sure, they can use a cheap brush better than you can, but they'd rather use the right brush.
Poorly coded anything will send computing into the dark ages. Just look at pre-Vista Windows.
dark ages software, but because the powers-that-be at MS wanted to move on to a slightly more modern computing age. But, for most of what people do now with Vista/Windows 7/Mac OS, XP is still as capable.
@adornoe@... XP is a security nightmare. Most users run with full admin rights with no security barrier whatsoever. This is why, if a manlware author manages to get code to run under the user's session, that they generally have admin rights to your machine and can therefore do anything they want to your PC.

Vista introduced a SUDO-like feature known as User Account Control (UAC) which, by default, prevents code from running with admin rights unless the user explicitly grants their permission. This has massively reduced the attack surface area for malware authors and resulted in Vista + Win7 users being FAR more safe & secure than XP users.

THIS, along with the fact that XP is very old, it's graphics subsystem does not provide a secure channel from media to screen (a feature demanded by various digital media consortia), doesn't support many of the new multi-core, perf & power optimizations Microsoft have added to their newer OS'. Doesn't support USB3, doesn't support the new graphics driver model that allows graphics drivers to be stopped, started and replaced without needing to reboot the machine, and MANY, MANY other reasons are why Windows 7 (and even Vista) are a FAR better choice of OS than XP is.
@bitcrazed: Asking "are you sure"?, as in Vista, no matter how you word it, does not compare to real User Account Control, that requires entry of a root password to continue. Sudo is a windows-like shortcut made popular by Ubuntu, and hated by every responsible *nix admin for breaking the *nix security.
for most users and for most uses, XP is still as capable as the newer OSes.

Security aside (which isn't really that big of an issue after all of the security updates in the last 10 years), XP is still quite useful for most people's needs.
@Cylon Centurion

I think you need to include Vista there
0 Votes
+ -
Ax to grind
techboy_z 11th Nov
The ax to grind is obvious. As for "they aren???t computer scientists"...just plain wrong. Who is he to even know or speculate on this? Most of my team are. And we are doing HTML5/JS/CSS...and it's looking good from here. We are replacing a Flex app, and it is taking about the same hours to do in H5/JS/CSS as the original Flex app...same look and feel. Yes, some things are tedious. Others are elegant and easy. Same with any technology choice: each has strengths and weaknesses.

As for the web going back to the dark ages, I'd submit that we are emerging from it: rich content available without plugins, and *all* major browsers working heartily on standards compliance to an unprecedented degree (for certain parties more than others...names need not mentioning). Additionally, stay tuned for other alternatives that leverage an even broader base of developers (i.e., JavaFX for RIA!! Stunning results shown on mobile, including iOS, at JavaOne.)
@techboy_z That's great! There needs to be solid developers building applications for the web. There also needs to be good creatives who understand technology. You aren't going to put computer scientists on banner ads are you? No. And do you know what kind of "developers" they will find. The bottom barrel. That's why there is hatred towards Flash. There isn't enough talent in this world to cover every facet of the web. And when you give incredible power to people who have no idea how to wield it, you get crumby websites for all.
0 Votes
+ -
HTML5/JS/CSS
Razorz1 Updated - 11th Nov
@techboy_z Flash developers will be teaching the average user how to turn "off" JavaScript in their browser. So I guess we will see how well all of those JavaScript infused applications fare when half of the Web has JS in the off position.
@Razorz1 Most people haven't turned off Flash, because there is more benefit than annoyance. Even less people will turn off Javascript because it is more infused throughout any given web page and pages often don't work very well without it.
@K B Well that's the point! The "Turn Off Your JavaScript" campaign will be a demonstration that JS is also a plug-in that can be turned off, and it will show just how weak HTML5 is without the crutch of JS holding it up. Since every one is on the plug-in hate train, then JavaScript can also die with the rest of them. If they don't want interactivity from Flash, then let's see the HTML5 purists develop an interactive multimedia site without the aid of JS!
0 Votes
+ -
Good points
Richard Flude 11th Nov
@techboy_z we also moved our analytics platform from win32, then flex web portal, now HTML5. It has be a challenge, but no different to any big change in platform (also migrated to Java EE backend).

HTML5 across the webkit browsers (safari & chrome) and Firefox is pretty good now. IE is way off.

We do plenty of vector graphics. I suggest the author look into SVG.
It's perfectly possible to do fantastic web content without using Flash, you just need a decent SDK and some tools. We're working on that here at Sencha. And here's an example of a web agency that switched from Flash to Web and didn't look back:

http://www.sencha.com/blog/dyad-communications-spotlight
@mmullany@... Exactly! You really can develop really cool **** with HTML5 and Flash. Unfortunately the tools that make it accessible will make for a lot of crapware out there on both fronts.
0 Votes
+ -
Facepalm
Robert Hahn 11th Nov
The web site of the 'agency that switched and never looked back' says This site requires Adobe Flash player.
Developer misses the point Flash content is not the issue, per se. Flash browser plugin is the issue. It is a slow, buggy, insecure piece of garbage that Adobe has utterly failed to repair and optimize despite years of attempting to fix it. I'd rather have slow "featureless" HTML5 that is safe than slow whizbang Flash that paints a giant neon bullseye on my browser. Personally, I consider it a feature if it makes advertisers replace ridiculous flash ads with stripped down HTML5 versions. Flash is not a website. When I go to a website I expect to find a website. Not a thin wrapper around a browser plugin that may or may not work correctly.
@cabdriverjim You are missing the point. Flash works well when developed well. Adobe isn't creating these SWFs, uneducated designers publish them with little or thought to compression and performance. THEY are to blame. If you want to blame Adobe. Blame them for the lack of educating their consumers. Because its going to happen again for HTML5. I guarantee it.
0 Votes
+ -
@cabdriverjim A slow, buggy, insecure piece of garbage... You are confused, because you are describing JavaScript.
Javascript is just a language, by definition neither slow nor buggy. Some implemenations may be slower or buggier than others but very much more secure than the flash plugin. That said javascript is a terrible lanuage choice for trying to build a robust app platform in. Personally I have never clicked on a web ad and I just ignore them so the more minimal they are the better.
@Johnny Vegas

It is 100% a lie that Flash is more insecure than JavaScript. It's JS that is the huge security risk on the Web. That's why people would be much safer by turning it off in their browser.

From Secunia:
Adobe Flash security issues = 96
Average browser security issues w/ JavaScript on = 237
All five major browsers w/ JavaScript on = 1,185
@cabdriverjim Flash has done fine for years and can run quite fast. Apple and specifically the iPad are what's killing Flash. I don't buy Apple's security argument that Flash is too insecure to put on iOS. If it is so insecure, they would have blocked it in OS X as well. My view is that Apple felt that Flash could threaten their app store (and it could have), so they didn't want to allow it.
@K B
Someone remembers the original arguments...... grin
I mentioned it on the other post here, but with Windows 8 arriving next year, all your browser plug-in's will only be usable in browsers on the Windows Desktop, NOT in the default Metro style IE10. That means Java, Flash, and all the other browser crapware add-ins under the sun will get to die a nice long in-the-browser death as people begin to get tired of having to switch to a non-touch-friendly desktop just to correctly see a Flash-based web site. Actually, it won't be slow at all--people aren't that patient. They'll just stick with their full-screen, *responsive* browser rather than the old dog-slow Desktop one. (Thank you, Steve Jobs & iPads everywhere for proving this is a feasible approach.) Not rocket science. The clock is ticking.
@vhhughes The low life's who target people's personal data are to blame. Of course they are going to target the most wide-spread technologies. If you are going to design an exploit, Flash, PDFs and Windows are the perfect targets.
It's like the Mexican/US border. Everyone wants to live in America. Does that mean America is less secure than Mexico when no one wants to go there unless they want to get really drunk and party for a week?
@vhhughes I think the financial pressure of trying to keep pace with all of the new monthly tablets and phones was too much for Adobe. And the fact that Microsoft wasn't willing to play Flashball was collectively what broke Adobe down. Adobe already understands how influential Windows 8 is going to be.
0 Votes
+ -
Flash Security
vhhughes 11th Nov
One other note that everyone seems to love to forget: Flash has been in the dog house in terms of security for a long time. Everyone I know is sick and tired of it--and of the seemingly weekly updates & patches. In the security community Flash has had a bad name for a very long time. It's a great place to go if you're looking for an exploit that lets you pwn anyone's machine.
0 Votes
+ -
Javascript Security
7stringdude 11th Nov
@vhhughes And you think Javascript is any more secure?
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Flash Security
Razorz1 11th Nov
@vhhughes You are dead wrong. Look at the numerical facts against JS.

From Secunia:
Adobe Flash security issues = 96
Average browser security issues w/ JavaScript on = 237
All five major browser security issues w/ JavaScript on = 1,185
@Razorz1
It doesn't mean anything if you don't compare it to sometyhing else (like a non flash solution, js). It's like saying that there are 120 birds...
0 Votes
+ -
More posts like these and less rants that remind me of a "evil" Andy Rooney (not endearing).

-M
"Creating well-performing interactive web content requires a serious understanding of things like blitting and other really difficult computer science concepts . . . "

. . . blitting isn't a high level computer science concept, it's a low level algorithm. It's actually pretty easy to learn, and if you can't learn that then you might as well forget real computer science.

And it's outdated, actually. Today, more stuff is done using alpha compositing and shaders, rather than BitBlt.

". . . that current designer/psuedo-developers do not understand . . ."

If you're designing software and don't know how to code - I don't ever want to actually buy your softare. If you're designing software, you should know how to write code.

If that's true, it explains a lot of crappy software out there.

"But the next versions of the Flash player for the desktop are including real concurrency and performance on par with Java."

About d*** time. Lack of concurrency is a major issue with the current versions of Flash.

Not that it matters anymore, IMO Flash may be on its way out.

"PNGs in Flash utilize JPEG compression on top of the PNG even with an alpha channel."

Can they do that and maintain a proper PNG format? And doesn't that kill the purpose of a PNG, ie to be a lossless format? Why not go straight JPEG?
@CobraA1 There are a lot of secrets to optimizing Flash. Blitting being one of them. You need 6-8 years of experience to find all of them. Things like filters work better when blurred in powers of 2. Try not to update large areas of the screen, avoid masking where you can and so on. Because Flash is so approachable, you have designers who have no clue what they are doing and who don't even try to optimize their content. That's what leads to people hating preloaders and chunky animation.

These HTML5 tools that are coming out? I am afraid we are going to have designers f'ing up traditional websites! You can't turn off HTML! So you are going to see the same issues as Flash.

Embedding PNGs in Flash allows the PNG to perserve the alpha channel AND use the JPEG compression. It's a great way to reduce the load on your user. And there is no similar option outside of the Flash player for PNGs.
0 Votes
+ -
egjgrbh 23 gji
bmakrejktt27-24378966035464361491712869795637 24th Nov
fukrun,zkjoqsad67, omisp.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix