Apple, Flash the iPad and premature speculation
With Apple's announcement of the iPad and the subsequent storm about it not supporting Flash a lot has been written about Flash's demise. People are pointing to Apple's decision to not provide Flash support in the iPad and iPhone as a sure indicator that Flash's days must surely be numbered. As a freelance Flex developer, Flash (Flex) is my bread and butter, it literally puts food on my table so I have a vested interest in what happens with Flash and it's continued use and adoption on the next generation of internet devices.
The release of the iPad seems to have polarized developers into one of two camps, traditional HTML/Javascript/open source purist developers who say Flash is going down for the count and the Flash development community and it's supporters who are screaming bloody murder at Apple, running around like the sky is falling since the iPad doesn't support Flash. I think both sides are missing something, the elephant in the room that a few days of reflection has made very clear in my mind.
Everyone seems to be solely focused on video and the fact that HTML 5 can do video and that's why Apple doesn't need to include Flash on the iPad. True, HTML 5 can do video and video is a part of what Flash does quite well, but that is like comparing newspaper to television. Sure they both provide information, they tell stories, communicate points of view and provide entertainment, but no one would argue that newspapers are going to replace televisions (or vice versa), yet I think that's what is happening with the current debate that Apple's decision seems to have reignited.
HTML is great at what it does. Flash is great at what is does. However I think that a developer who understands both, their strengths and their weaknesses, would not argue that HTML5/javascript will replace Flash. HTML is a great general, blunt force tool for presenting information over the internet. Flash is a more specialized tool, that when used properly, can augment HTML to better present information. Much of the backlash against Flash is from people who have experienced it when developers tried to use Flash for purposes it likely really should not have been used for.
The Flash community seems to have forgotten the above statements to some extent and the HTML purists seem to be oblivious to many of the things that are simply not possible in a browser without the Flash (or something other ie Java) plugin.
This is a short list of things Flash can do that HTML/Javascript can't:
- cross platform support for video
- cross platform support for audio
- video camera capture
- microphone capture
- read/write access to the local file system
- sockets (ie xml socket connection)
- bitmap manipulation
- graphics/3D rendering and animation
- speed of xml parsing and searching (e4x)
Jan 31, 2010 at 2:17 PM
Great post, Derrick.
Surely, these purists have been predicting our demise since at least 2001 (SVG anyone?) but we're still here.
I totally agree with you. If you look at your core skill set as a Flash or Flex developer, this gravy train will eventually end. It has to. Open technologies are just better for everyone (except maybe Adobe).
But there will always be a need for hand-crafted, complex, beautiful interfaces. Just watch Star Trek if you don't believe me. If Flash died tomorrow, those of us with years of "RIA" experience would be far better positioned to build complex interfaces in HTML5 than your average forms, CSS and CRUD web monkey.
If I was Adobe, I'd be creating a Flex-ish product and a Flash-ish product that rendered to javascript and html before someone else does (GWT, Cappuccino, etc).
Flash is dieing. We know that. The only thing that we don't know is how long it will take.
Jan 31, 2010 at 2:40 PM
Great post Derrick. Like Tim, I completely agree with you, and I completely agree with Tim on his statements. For proof that Flash isn't going anywhere any time soon, you just have to look at 80% of the web who use IE. IE doesn't support HTML 5 and it will be awhile before it does. And even when it does "support" HTML 5, who knows if it will be a complete spec. This isn't the first time browsers haven't agreed on a spec. When that happens it means more work for developers, more testing, more expense.
And yes, HTML 5 does support video. Will codecs be browser specific? What about cue points? What about dynamic audio tracks for localization, video synching, full screen, interface overlay, dynamic close captioning, I could go on. Will HTML 5 support any of this, no one knows yet. Over time, yes, it probably will, over that same amount of time Flash Technology will only improve (we hope) also.
Who knows what future versions of Flash will include. Maybe the IDE will include a way to compile to HTML 5, or maybe to compile to a hybrid solution that will make the best of both worlds.
And lastly, the other big advantage of Flash is its ability to "publish" to multiple devices. There is a reason Adobe is concentrating so much on the open screen project. Build once, use on set top boxes, computers, (some) mobile devices, cars, ATMs, toys, the list goes on and on. Try and do that with HTML/JS/CSS.
With that said, HTML 5 still has a prominent place on the Internet and I will be keeping up with it so when a client or my employer asks I am not replaced by a pimpled 22 year old spring chicken straight out of mcHTML college. Technology changes, I like to think that's what keeps us on top of our game. Personally I am excited for the challenges that are bound to come in the next few years. Bring it on!
Feb 01, 2010 at 12:04 AM
Nice Post,
the other elephants in the room
1) silverlight - does the iPad support silverlight? I don't know, no-one has said, probably not supported, are Microsoft developers running in panic - doesnt look that way.
2) what if the iPad is a flop - just an extra large Newton. Every blog has started with the assumption that the iPad will be a huge success but honestly I wouldn't buy one even if it had Flash, I'd rather have a netbook.
Feb 01, 2010 at 12:33 AM
The iPad is a failure before it even gets out of the gate and the only thin that will save it, is if they add flash support and at minimum a webcam. Since I don't see Apple doing either of these, they're going to box themselves into a niche product that will sell, but only in a limited amount. Think Apple TV and Mac Mini and now you'll be able to add the iPad to this same weak category.
Apple is so focussed on trying to change the way media is viewed, they want full control and to suck up users money in anyway they can.
What they're missing out on, is the opportunity to create a truly earth shattering and ground breaking new product that everyone and their mother will want. They could have crushed the netbooks into bolivian, just as the VHS did to the Betamax.
Huge opportunity missed on Apples part.
Feb 01, 2010 at 6:34 PM
I'm far from a fanboi, but I love Apple products. I wanted to want an iPad, but I can't find a reason to spend money on something less functional than an iPhone when I could either get an iphone, or save up a little more money and get a macbook or 13" macbook pro. I really can't see it doing very well in markets other than the hardcore fanbois, teenagers and severely computer illiterate. I agree that they are wasting a huge opportunity, but maybe Jobs will move on it in future updates.