Slashdot Mirror

Man, I am so tired of this meme going around. Have you ever quantitatively compared Flash's performance to HTML? Because others have, and they found Flash to be twice as fast . Have you ever quantitatively measured Flash's impact on battery life? Because it turns out battery life is almost exactly the same as equivalent HTML content (despite running 2x-4x faster in many cases). And do you have statistics on how often Flash crashes on mobile devices, compared to other apps? In my experience at least, Safari on my iPad crashes more often than Flash on my Android devices (which has never crashed to my knowledge).

crashed on my phone or used lots of CPU and killed my battery

Fwiw, that only hard data I've ever seen totally contradicts what you're saying. In performance tests, Flash runs 2x as fast as equivalent "HTML5" content, so it's actually more CPU efficient. This means it's probably more battery-efficient too. Another test shows an older, less optimized version of Flash running up to 4x faster but only using 10% more battery than HTML.

I can't find any statistics on crashing, but anecdotally... for a year I've owned three mobile devices that run Flash, and it has never crashed on any of them. Not once. Meanwhile I also have an iPad, and Safari crashes on it once every several weeks. Safari doesn't need Adobe's help to be crashy :-)

Actually your meme is more of a meme than a fact. According to the April 2010 Symantec Internet Security Report ( http://www4.symantec.com/Vrt/wl?tu_id=Lfsd1271711507050126203 ) the number 2 attacked vulnerability in 2009 was in Adobe products. ... You sure did misrepresent that report, didn't you?

I don't think accurately quoting statistics straight out of a core part of the report is "misrepresenting" it. You're now citing statistics that measure something different, and it's reasonable to disagree about which figures imply what, however.

Which I do: you could argue that number of vulnerabilities is a function of the quality of the product, while the popularity of exploiting any given vulnerability is more a function of the ubiquity of the product. So while Safari had about 6x more vulnerabilities than Flash in 2009, it also had only 5% market share vs. 99% for Flash. Which is the more attractive target?

Another quote from the report was "Browser security features and add-ons should be employed wherever possible to disable JavaScript(TM), Adobe Flash Player . . . ".

So if you disable both JavaScript and Flash, as they recommend... what are you proposing as an alternative? Do you think the HTML video tag can replace everything DHTML/JS and Flash do today?

And regarding buggy, I'll take Microsoft and Apple's word on Adobe Flash's effect on their browser/OS.

I don't know what MS has said about this (link?), but Apple has said a lot of disingenuous and/or outright false things about Flash lately, so I'm not inclined to trust their word, especially when no one else has access to the data to back it up.

It's been 3 years since the iPhone intro and Adobe still does not have a Flash runtime to show that runs fast, doesn't drain batter, etc.

Actually, yes they do. It is fast enough to outperform HTML 5, especially on mobile, and the unoptimized beta only drains the battery 5-15% faster than equivalent HTML content (while delivering up to 4x the framerate).

People fail to see one very very big factor in the silly HTML5 vs Flash debate:
The web is ruled by web DESIGNERS and not developers/coders.

Unless someone comes up with a tool that does the same dynamic websites, animations, vector image drawing etc in HTML5 with the ease that non-coder designers can do in Flash, you won't be seeing Flash dying anytime soon.

Moreover, Adobe is in the business of selling creative authoring tools and not directly with Flash itself.

As such, with HTML5 as an emerging standard, Adobe is now going try to make the best darn-tootin' tools for creating HTML5 content according to Adobe's CTO Kevin Lynch.

When will Flash 10.1 be available for my Android G1 phone?

AIR and Flash Player coming for Android and Mobile Devices. Adobe has been showing demo videos of Flash running on Android phones since last year. This week at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, they showed Flash 10.1 and AIR 2.0 running on a whole number of devices. It's running on the Motorola Droid, Google Nexus One and other new Android phones like the HTC Desire & Legend.

They've also got it running for Blackberry and Palm Pre. Symbian has been running Flash Lite for some time now, so you'll also see Flash 10.1 and AIR coming to it. Browser Flash has running on Maemo for some time too, so no problem there.

Yes, Adobe's reluctance to support any platform other than a PC is the main reason why I think Flash should die a horrible (but quick) death

On the contrary, Adobe has been making a major effort to provide Flash for every single device and modern OS out there (The Open Screen Project). The fruits of this can now be seen at the Mobile World Congress where they're showing Flash 10.1 and AIR running on a whole bunch of mobile and internet devices. Check out the list of Adobe Open Screen partners (the only one missing is Apple who refuses to have Flash run on the iPhone and iPad, so Adobe got around that by providing export to native iPhone apps with Flash CS5)

If the "byte array mapped to RAM" installed in Tamarin allows the code to store anywhere in the interpreter's space, that's a huge security hole. It can do anything the user process can do. If you're going to allow that, you may as well just load executable machine code directly, as with Active-X.

Anyway, the article is a blog post that rehashes an interview from last year. The info in that article is better.

Yeah because http://xullicious.blogspot.com/2005/06/xul-music.h tml is much better than: http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com/?p=75