HTML5 is a Flash killer. Hmmmmm. Say it over in your head a few times. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it?
In fact, if I wrote a blog post with such a snappy, eye-catching title as that, it might even get a few Diggs. Heck, it might even make the front-flipping-page! (Front page of the Programming section, maybe – let's not go nuts.)
Unfortunately, there's a little problem with my initial statement. OK – I admit it – it's a big problem. It's the kind of hulking problem that, if it asked to borrow a quid from you, would end up with your wallet, any loose change in your pockets and the keys to your car. And that problem?
- Check out 'How to add HTML5 video to your site' from .net magazine.
Well, you may have guessed by now, but the whole premise that HTML5 will kill Flash is utter bunkum. Unfortunately, that hasn't stopped the idea gaining some serious traction in recent months – among people and groups that should really know better.
A few days ago I was listening to one of my favourite technology podcasts, This Week in Tech. (For those of you who aren't familiar with the show, as the name suggests, it's an insightful look at the biggest tech stories of the week.) But, in that most august of podcasts, I heard the 'HTML5 is a Flash killer' argument put forward by a guest on the show – with not one dissenting voice to be heard. Not one.
I've also seen it pop up on various web design forums, and it's even made its way onto my Twitter feed on more than one occasion (I'm @danoliver if you're interested, and aren't offended by the kind of language that would make a miner blush).
Behind the theory
There are a number of reasons why so many people believe HTML5 will be the technology that finally consigns Flash to the recycle bin.
Firstly – and it has nothing to do with the merits of HTML5 – there's a deep-seated loathing of Flash, primarily brought about by a decade of annoying intro sequences on websites.
The case for the prosecution: Flash intros, in the main, are a complete waste of time and bandwidth, and should, in any self-respecting society, result in the public flogging of anyone who considers introducing them to a site. You'll get no argument from me on that front.
Next up, and this is where I start to seriously waiver, some maintain that there's never a need to use Flash and that you can achieve the requirements of a Flash project in other ways – in this instance using HTML5. This just isn't true.
ActionScript 3 can do things that have had web developers scratching their heads for years, and even Google has had to fall back on Flash programming because there's simply no other way to successfully achieve certain functions within their web apps, such as elegantly attaching files in Gmail (thanks to Olivier Gambier over at Zoomorama for that one). HTML5 is no ActionScript 3, and was never intended to be.
And then there's video. In the past few years a number of huge websites – including YouTube – have used Flash to deliver video online. Why? Well, the Flash Player is – according to Adobe – on 99 per cent of connected PCs, and authoring video content and components using Flash is a piece of cake.
"But wait!" I hear you cry. "HTML5 has a video codec, right? And this could replace Flash as the primary way of delivering video content – with no plug-in needed at all. Yeah, baby! Go HTML5!"
The codec that could
Unfortunately, the key word there is 'could'. As things stand, the HTML5 <video> element has no default codec and, despite some support from browsers such as Firefox and Chrome, Internet Explorer still won't play ball and isn't likely to while Microsoft's Silverlight plug-in is still pushing for penetration as a Flash Player alternative.
What you're left with is the following: an HTML5 working group, lacking consensus and pushing an element that won't be adopted by all browsers any time soon; versus a proprietary plug-in, with a passionate developer community, which is used by millions. I know where my money's going in the short term.
I'm not a Flash fanboy, far from it, but I hope we can put an end to talk of HTML5 killing Flash. Despite the fact that most people agree the internet would be a better place without plug-ins, while browsers continue to support different standards, and the people pushing said standards are unable to come to a consensus, then a plug-in is often the only way to achieve a uniform user experience across multiple browsers.
Some of the internet's most successful websites and apps simply wouldn't exist without a little help from Flash and for this reason we should at least give this oft-maligned plug-in some credit. And please, please stop these misinformed proclamations of its imminent demise.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First published in PC Plus Issue 292
Liked this? Then check out Is the internet making us stupid?
Sign up for TechRadar's free Weird Week in Tech newsletter
Get the oddest tech stories of the week, plus the most popular news and reviews delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up at http://www.techradar.com/register
Your comments (4) Click to add a new comment
marco
March 14th 2010
4. Your kidding, right? Our web design firm hasn't built a web site with any flash in it, a year - no web designer with half a brain puts flash in anymore - it's a menace. It's like progamming and purposly putting viruses in your code. We have 40 company sites we are updating right now, removing all flash, and a waiting list a mile long. Flash is already dead.
Alert a moderator
mack
March 14th 2010
3. Thanks for the reasonable article, in addition it's also worth mentioning the gaming side of things, in which html5 is unlikely to ever approach the abilities of flash, much less Unity3d.
Then there's the development community and tools... free tools like FlashDevelop are superior in quality to Adobe's IDE and it's incredibly easy to get started with nothing but a few days spent reading through the hundreds of web tutorials and a couple of thick reference books.
Alert a moderator
tech89
March 13th 2010
2. I don't mind what the format of a video is but Flash seems to turn my laptop into a furnace, whenever I watch flash videos on the net it's not long before I hear the fans go to maximum rpm. If a new format can reduce this effect then I'm interested.
Alert a moderator
syganymede
March 13th 2010
1. There are two separate issues. Flash can do some wonderful things as a graphical programming language, and it is not covered by anything HTML5, Java, etc has to offer.
But in the question of video FLash is no more than a container for video using other codecs. It can easily be replaced by H264 in MP4 container, this will be supported by more and more browsers (IE may lag but that's there problem).
So what I say is let's get to it and support H264, after all this is the codec now used for everything from mobile phones to HDTV, it is flexible and scalable.
Alert a moderator
Tell us what you think
You need to Log in or register to post comments