Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon To Stop Accepting Flash Ads

Posted by timothy on from the I-already-don't-accept-them dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Starting on September 1, Amazon will no longer support Flash across its advertising platform. The online retailer sites changes to browser support and a desire for customers to have a better experience as their reasons for blocking it. Google has been quite active recently in efforts to kill Flash; the Chrome beta channel has begun automatically pausing Flash, Google has converted ads from Flash to HTML5, and YouTube uses HTML5 by default now as well. Safari and Firefox also place limits on Flash content. Is Flash finally on its way out?

10 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. Cites for crying out loud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The online retailer sites changes to browser support

    CITES

  2. Never saw them anyway by krelvin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I block ads. never see them, don't care if they are flash or not.

  3. Good riddance to bad rubbish. by drdread66 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Flash? You mean the Fucking Large-Ass Security Hole? I have had it disabled on my machines for years now, all the way back to the "FlashToggler" software of from the early 2000s. It's about time the rest of the world ditches it too.

    The only good thing about Flash is it made blocking animated ads trivial simply by disabling the plugin. I have not had similar success with HTML5, and fear that the rise of HTML5 will signal the return of pages with so much animated ad content that I can't concentrate on the text. :(

    1. Re:Good riddance to bad rubbish. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, Slashdot: Firefox Will Run Chrome Extensions

      That headline sucks, the actual story is Firefox is dropping their current extension API (the one NoScript uses) entirely and replacing it with Chrome's. That would be the Chrome API that doesn't offer the hooks NoScript requires to work.

      You know how AdBlock works better on Firefox than Chrome? Same thing.

      They're also killing all extensions that change the Firefox UI, so you'll be forced into their new Chrome-knockoff look. Basically, they're killing the only reason to use Firefox instead of Chrome by making Firefox into a more bloated, slower version of Chrome.

      Sadly the new Slashdot regime has decided that people trying to hold conversations in comments sections are overrated so I'm not allowed to post this immediately. Who knows when I'll be allowed to answer your question. I guess that's why Slashdot can't do AMA-style interviews, the person being interviewed would get one answer and then be locked out.

    2. Re:Good riddance to bad rubbish. by narcc · · Score: 4, Informative

      How is this informative? Further, this was thoroughly debunked in the earlier thread.

      Mozilla is basing their new plugin architecture on Chrome's, but are extending it to ensure plugins like NoScript (which is specifically mentioned, btw) will still be possible.

      Relax. Both NoScript users will be able to enjoy their favorite plugin for years to come.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
  4. This is not all about bad flash its about blocking by Zeio · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Blocking flash is trivial. And of course adblock and the like make short work of ads in HTML5 but its harder to block categorically. I suspect the whole flash removal is dual purpose with increased advertising content to the browser being a major goal.

    --
    Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
  5. Cites, not sites by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 5, Informative

    The online retailer sites changes

    No, they cite changes.

    Not that I expect anyone do anything about it; Slashdot stories seem to get posted and abandoned. Correcting spelling mistakes that make you look stupid doesn't attract any more advertisers!

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  6. Re:I could choose to not install Flash. But HTML5 by byornski · · Score: 4, Informative

    In firefox you can disable the media stuff in about:config - media.mediasource.enabled. That will at least stop the videos....

  7. The last straw... by Twinbee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For years and years, I've put up with ads. Yes, I heard you guys talk about AdBlock here and elsewhere, but I've always learnt to ignore them, even fairly distracting ones.

    Then came the really "in your face" ads with automatic audio, giant sizes, and irremovable ones which obscured content. Irritating, but not a deal breaker. I've got a thick skin, or so I thought. I can deal with all that crap, especially if it helps pay for the site's bandwidth (though I never bother with ads personally, at least not consciously).

    End of story right? Oh no,.... they just had to go further didn't they. Then came the ones that suck up all my CPU, losing me money in electricity, heating up the CPU (so I can't have the fan quieter), and generally causing the PC to slow down. I like to open up many tabs in my browser, and this easily eats up the CPU in all four of my CPU cores. Same with the two cores on my laptop.

    Since I realized what was happening more clearly, I now hate the ad networks of course, and also hate the CPU management in Chrome and other browsers (Shift+ESC is oaky, but no maximum CPU limit for each process?), and you know what? I even hate Windows for not allowing better/easier CPU management/priority of the processes. Yes, no ability to throttle the percentage of CPU used for a process, let alone be able to define the limits independently for each process. And yes I know there are various apps, but not having this feature by default is insane, and so typical of the mindset at Microsoft.

    I installed AdRemover for Chrome (higher rated than Adblock by the looks of it), and have never looked back.

    Goodbye ads forever.

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  8. Re:On Its Way Out by Solandri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Jobs didn't want Flash on iOS because it tore down the wall of their garden. In the iOS ecosystem, the only way to install an app is via the App Store, where Apple gets a 30% cut. If they had allowed flash, anyone could write a flash app, put it on any web site, and you could browse to that site and run that flash app on your iDevice without paying Apple their 30%. Apple also disallows compilers and tightly controls emulators for the same reason.

    All that talk about flash draining battery life was just spin to put lipstick on this pig-headed decision. Flash on Android didn't run by default - any flash scripts on a web page were replaced by a stylized F. If you tapped on the F, only then would that flash script run. If you've used Flashblock on Firefox, exact same thing. So no excess battery drain from ads or whatnot unless you specifically allowed the flash app to run.

    Flash was originally created as an artist's animation tool. It was never intended to be the web's de facto executable scripting language. That's why it has so many security holes - because it was being used in ways it was never originally intended. Now that HTML5 adds many features which previously could only be accomplished via flash, and more importantly are designed from the get-go for web use, it is natural that flash is being phased out. Jobs had nothing to do with it, and certainly his decision a decade ago when HTML5 wasn't around still makes no sense (until you recognize the financial reason).