Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Farewell To Flash

Posted by Soulskill on from the not-a-decade-too-soon dept.

An anonymous reader writes: The decline of Flash is well and truly underway. Media publishers now have no choice but to start changing the way they bring content to the web. Many of them are not thrilled about the proposition (change is scary), but it will almost certainly be better for all of us in the long run. "By switching their platform to HTML5, companies can improve supportability, development time will decrease and the duplicative efforts of supporting two code bases will be eliminated. It will also result in lower operating costs and a consistent user experience between desktop and mobile web." This is on top of the speed, efficiency, and security benefits for consumers. "A major concern for publishers today is the amount of media consumption that's occurring in mobile environments. They need to prioritize providing the best possible experience on mobile, and the decline of Flash and movement to HTML5 will do just that, as Flash has never worked well on mobile."

202 comments

  1. Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    or at least an extension to NoScripts capabilities

    1. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What for? Blocking HTML5 data sources in hosts do the job already.

    2. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You realize its only a matter of time until companies splice ads into the content itself so filtering will be impossible.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    3. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And then I will find a way to manually skip 30 seconds ahead in the video content. Failing that I will wget it and do it myself.

      If they go ahead and start having video ads spliced into interviews and actual video content and thus piss off everyone, we win.

    4. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just try wget on new youtube vids, it don't work.

    5. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Nope. That is ALREADY done on broadcast TV and devices can filter out those ad's. my MythTV box strips out every single TV commercial that is spliced into the content.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So use the http://youtube-dl.org/ command line tool.

    7. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by lgw · · Score: 1

      You realize its only a matter of time until companies splice ads into the content itself so filtering will be impossible.

      It would hardly be new idea. And that's why I like Lucky Strike cigarettes, so round, so firm, so fully packed, so smooth and easy on the draw.(anyone else ever listen to old radio broadcasts?)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    8. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      In the US, at least, that happens only because the FCC mandates a 1-frame black burst before and after commercial breaks, and none in the middle of commercial breaks. Obviously, anyone can pick up on this and snip everything between them. Of course, networks now like to introduce them into the middle of programming to throw the count off and hopefully trick some DVR's into ruining a recording to teach the dirty rotten content thieves a lesson (or something). Most DVR's have a few other tricks up their sleeves to make sure they don't fall for it, though.

      The point, though, is that no such requirement to insert those start/stop markers exists for web video delivery. Your MythTV box would struggle quite a bit if it didn't have those convenient markers. It's like, instead of trying to find a needle in a haystack using a magnet, trying to find a toothpick in an uncut piece of lumber that is about to be used to make toothpicks. With a magnet. In other words, good luck with that.

    9. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Some podcasts actually have ads that remind me of those old radio spots.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    10. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by westlake · · Score: 1

      You realize its only a matter of time until companies splice ads into the content itself so filtering will be impossible.

      Integrated adds and protect placement are older than the silent films of 1915. The single most important thing that differentiates modern American radio and television from that of the 1940s and 1950s is the separation of sponsorship and production --- which Is why I am no great fan of add blocking.

    11. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anguirel · · Score: 1

      And what about product placement in the show itself? Watching your favorite characters drinking Brand drinks while using Brand computer, and wearing Brand clothing, while discussing how much they like Brand OtherProducts. In the background there's a couple billboards and posters that they can digitally replace ads on so even if you watch re-runs 10 years later there's current ad campaigns in it. That's spliced in. Good luck getting your automatic filter to pull that out.

      --
      ~Anguirel (lit. Living Star-Iron)
      QA: The art of telling someone that their baby is ugly without getting punched.
    12. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by jason.sweet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Failing that I will wget it and do it myself.

      If you are manually editing content just to eliminate something you could have easily spent 30 seconds ignoring, then you are in serious need fo some therapy.

    13. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Always wondered how the piracy sites were getting content that is "supposedly protected"

      Guess we'll just have to force DRM on all video streams so that potential blockers can't tell ads from content.

    14. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You realize its only a matter of time until companies splice ads into the content itself so filtering will be impossible.

      If that was feasible, it would have been done a long time ago.

      Web sites would love to be able to splice ads seamlessly into content -- it would render ad blockers useless. But if they do, the advertisers will stop advertising on a CPM (pay-per-impression) basis.

      The problem is that the advertisers do not trust the publishers to serve up the ads. A publisher has absolutely no incentive to tell the truth about how many times an ad was viewed. Ads must be pulled from a different server that's owned (or controlled) by the advertiser, so that the advertiser can trust the metrics.

      In fact, this lack of trust is the only reason that it's even possible to have ad blockers. If publishers could be trusted to serve up ads, then they would simply in-line the ads into their content -- and in that case, trying to tell the difference between ads and content could easily be beyond the capabilities of even the most advanced AI. But fortunately, publishers cannot be trusted, so ad blockers can simply use the domain to distinguish ads from content.

      I think it's amazing that the only reason the web is still a tolerable place is because of this total lack of trust. If publishers could be trusted, the web would be absolutely unusable by now.

    15. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can add "adds" as many as you want, sir.

    16. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Megane · · Score: 3, Interesting

      the FCC mandates a 1-frame black burst before and after commercial breaks

      Tell that to at least one of my local TV stations that does a multi-frame fade between one of their self-advertisements and the program being returned to. Yes, prime-time on a major US broadcast network. I don't have cable (antenna-only), and it's not the only channel that does a quick fade in and out of programs. The good news is that more often than not, there's usually at least one black key frame between commercials and program.

      I don't trust my MythTV box's ability to detect commercials, but I've got pretty good at manually snipping them from the shows that I want to keep around. But I still let it run so that the little flag icon is there to remind me to remove them myself. (yes, it's shameful)

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    17. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by easyTree · · Score: 1

      ProTip: there is no ignore. Once it's in ur brain, it's in...

      --
      Requiem for the American Dream
    18. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      As long as the ad companies insist on having the ads hosted on [i]their[/i] servers, this won't happen. Nobody trusts ad companies, but ad companies don't trust their partners to display ads and collect statistics accurately. As long as the splices and scripts come from 3rd-party servers, it should always be possible to block them.

      What concerns me more is the increasing trend of blocking content if the ad servers don't return a confirmation. More and more often, I'm seeing pleas from web sites for me to stop blocking their ads, so they can definitely detect that the ads are being blocked.

    19. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That depends on how much time it would take to edit out the ads and how many times you anticipate re-watching the content.

    20. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by dbIII · · Score: 1

      is the separation of sponsorship and production

      We almost lost "99" in "Get Smart" because the actress (Barbara Feldon) had done an advertisement for a company the sponsor considered a rival.

    21. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know how to skip ahead 30 seconds? Using a video player?

    22. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Fifth browser has that natively.

      http://fifth-browser.sf.net/

      Naturally Linux exclusive, and seemingly built by an old beardy crank, so you can expect it to stay free and on the good fight.

    23. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      real easy to filter that out. Stop watching that crap.

      It's why shows like that get cancelled in the first season.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    24. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by kmoser · · Score: 1

      It's only a mater of time before somebody writes software to detect major brand logos being broadcast, and snips out the segment that contains them. When the ad agencies figure this out, they will make the logos less obvious. Programmers will counter by simply blocking any short video sequence that has already been broadcast within the past hour.

    25. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by WallyL · · Score: 1

      Wow! So that explains my 4.0 GPA. Oh, wait... :(

    26. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine, I will prove easyTree's point.

      https://www.youtube.com/result...

    27. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anguirel · · Score: 1

      You... don't watch any TV shows, do you.

      --
      ~Anguirel (lit. Living Star-Iron)
      QA: The art of telling someone that their baby is ugly without getting punched.
    28. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Herp derp much?

  2. Again? by Lumpio- · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How many times have we already said farewell to Flash and it still refuses to die...

    1. Re:Again? by grimmjeeper · · Score: 4, Funny

      I predict we will only see the true end of Flash after we see COBOL finally retired...

    2. Re: Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Kinda like COBOL? :)

    3. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHAHA Too bad: https://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/2dc18b05-6375-4eee-b511-476e8815115f

    4. Re:Again? by halivar · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'll believe it when NetCraft confirms it.

    5. Re:Again? by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1
      I doubt if Flash will ever go away completely. However, youtube moving away from Flash was a HUGE push to making Flash go away.

      .
      At some point, however, the number who bother to load Flash into their browsers will be a small percentage of web users. That means if you have content that requires Flash, you've just reduced your audience very significantly.

    6. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Checks] Yep, Micro Focus is still selling a product named "Visual COBOL"... [heavy sigh] It's like a horror movie where the villian JUST WON'T DIE!!!!!

    7. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      it ain't going anywhere anytime soon. there is way too much content in flash already that exists on the internet. much of it cant be converted or would be too costly to convert to another technology.

      flash ain't the evil monster it's made out to be either. it's only real problem is adobe being only slightly better than oracle/sun at producing clean bug-free code for their browser plugins. adobe is the monster here, not flash. face it. if there wasn't a new 'flash exploit of the week' every week, flash wouldn't get the bad rap it gets. i would rather see adobe get their collective corporate asses in gear and clean up/fix/secure the code than flash disappear completely.

    8. Re:Again? by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yup. Besides, HTML5 has to match the critical features that attracted certain types of website to Flash in the first place.

      1. It has to support streaming. There's no universally supported protocol for streaming right now, not RTMP, not HLS, nothing.
      2. It has to be hard to rip the stream. There's kinda-sorta DRM in HTML5, but it requires plug-ins (actually, worse than that, in practice it requires the plug-ins be compiled into the browser executable. No more using unofficial Firefox builds), which means it has the same damned problem Flash had in the first place.

      Those are just the headline issues.

      We'll get there, eventually. But the DRM thing in particular isn't doing anyone any favors.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:Again? by grimmjeeper · · Score: 5, Insightful

      YouTube moving away was indeed a big step. The bigger step that is needed will be when porn moves away from Flash. Until they do, the installed base of flash will not significantly diminish and there will be little incentive for anyone else to move away.

    10. Re:Again? by j127 · · Score: 1

      Apparently, Flash is baked into Windows 10 and can't easily be uninstalled, so it will still take work to finish it off.

    11. Re:Again? by j127 · · Score: 1

      COBOL is making a comeback in the web development space: COBOL on Cogs.

    12. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well flash doesn't really have to die, for me it can still exist to give designers a tool to create games for examle without having to become a software engineer. But please let it die as a browser plugin (like the Java plugin did before).

    13. Re:Again? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you can watch it on a screen you can rip it... even if it means you point a videocamera at the screen you can rip it.

      Your comment is flawed for the same reason DRM is flawed. The only way to NEVER be able to copy digital content is to not allow anyone to see it.

    14. Re:Again? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      So was that a cut and paste you use whenever someone mentions DRM? Probably not a good idea to do that, as it makes you look silly when someone you're replying to isn't advocating DRM.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    15. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FRAPS FTW

    16. Re:Again? by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      The only way to NEVER be able to copy digital content is to not allow anyone to see it.

      And the only way to have every studio in Hollywood pull all their content from Netflix, Hulu, etc. is to tell them they can't put any DRM on it.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    17. Re:Again? by David_Hart · · Score: 1

      You forgot to add that legacy corporate apps will require flash for years to come. A lot of corporate training is still flash based.

    18. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      citation please? just curious

    19. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So was that a cut and paste you use whenever someone mentions DRM? Probably not a good idea to do that, as it makes you look silly when someone you're replying to isn't advocating DRM.

      For someone who isn't advocating DRM, you spend a lot of time arguing that HTML5 will only be successful when it has DRM.

      You are implicitly supporting the narrative that DRM is effective. As there is no reason to require DRM if it doesn't work. You replied to someone who argued that DRM is not effective. Probably not a good idea to do that if you can't even recognize the implicit statements of your own post. It makes you look silly.

    20. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're behind the times. Porn has been fleeing from Flash for a couple of years already. Sure, there are sites that are sticking with it (insert double-entendre here), but already the majority are using newer formats.

    21. Re:Again? by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      I don't want it to die. I just want most people to stop using it.

      Enough with the battle calls to kill Flash. I still want all those cartoons and games I downloaded to work.

    22. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way to NEVER be able to copy digital content is to not allow anyone to see it.

      And the only way to have every studio in Hollywood pull all their content from Netflix, Hulu, etc. is to tell them they can't put any DRM on it.

      And nothing of value was lost.

    23. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true. But you are appealing to logic. The hatred of Flash goes far deeper than just security holes around here.

      Most people have no idea how many sites use Flash. Google Analytics used it until very recently. Even geeky sites for coders use Flash -- although most users have no idea they're using it. (Ever click one of those "copy to clipboard" messages on a code snippet? Yeah. 90% are Flash, not .js like you would expect.)

        YouTube made the switch to HTML5 video less than a year ago. HTML5 games? Yeah, it can be done... but since there's no real IDE, the best online games are still Flash. (eg: Kingdom Rush)

      The issue ultimately is Flash advertising, and that's easily avoidable with AdBlock.

      So you'd think there'd be some respect given for the platform that made web multimedia lightweight, stable and blazing fast.

      Nope. None. It's irrational really. And it's not just about security.

      You'll also hear arguments about Flash design being "bad" design. This of course is as idiotic as saying Photoshop is responsible for bad design.

      It's a constant whine. Ignore it.

    24. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, the same way that every RIAA studio pulled all their music from iTunes?

      Give the movie studios a few years to realize where their income comes from, and then tell them no more DRM. They may want the old days back, but they are not going to pay for building new movie theaters.

    25. Re:Again? by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 1

      Porn websites use Flash if you have the plugin installed, otherwise most of them fall back to standard HTML .

      --
      There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
    26. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. You're making the same mistake.

      The point isn't that DRM is any good or useful. It isn't.

      It is, however, perceived as necessary by companies who don't know better and desperately wants to have some kind of DRM in any kind of streaming solution, because *they* believe that it works.

      Unfortunately, those people have a lot of money and connections (political, primarily) and thus have a lot of say in what happens when new protocols are specified and developed.

      And until *those* people finally understand the uselessness of DRM, we're stuck with it being injected everywhere and poisoning everything.

      Get it now?

    27. Re:Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't tell me where to insert my double-entendres!

    28. Re:Again? by RoverDaddy · · Score: 1

      You had me worried there for a second. Next thing you know we'll have Basic on Blimps or MASM on Mules or Fortran on Ferries.

      --
      RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
    29. Re: Again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whew, and I thought UK TV sucked. When the BBC starts advertising is when I save the money from the licence fee and turn the TV off, permanently. It's mainly rubbish repeats and NCIS and CSI anyway, I don't think I'll miss it much.

    30. Re:Again? by j127 · · Score: 1

      Or maybe Brainf*ck on Baboons.

  3. Looking at you, BBC... by mccalli · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Go to the BBC site with a desktop browser, it's Flash all the way. Now go on iOS (I would guess also Android) and magically it's HTML 5. Set the user agent to identify as an iPad and you get the identical layout to the desktop browsers but HTML 5 media.

    Now why on earth is that? That's actually more effort to maintain than just doing it right in the first place. OK so you have older version browser support, but there are better ways to identify those than just "are you a desktop OS trying to access me?".

    1. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am guessing at legacy. The new responsive layout is still just that -- new. It is a bit frustrating, this flash thing, but on the other hand they can clearly switch it off when they want to. Perhaps when their obligations to rights-manage certain older content on desktop have expired.

    2. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by dcavanaugh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, there are better ways to use browser agent id. But keeping Flash on the desktop means their HTML5 code does not need to be validated on lots of browsers. If the BBC implementation of HTML5 turned out to be buggy, the damage would be limited to platforms that couldn't run Flash anyway.

      If I were in charge at BBC, I would use mobile/portable devices as a beta test for implementing HTML5. Sooner or later, they have to bring HTML5 to the desktop, but it can wait until more of the obsolescent browsers are gone. Maybe the next project is to implement adaptive style sheets to get one code base that suits all browsers on all devices. At that point, Flash can finally take its rightful place in the Recycle Bin.

      When you have a huge user base and many of them are technologically illiterate, you end up doing things that are far from elegant. In a large organization, it takes longer than you would expect to get anything done.

    3. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by Blaskowicz · · Score: 2

      iOS computers all run the same browser and all have a h264 hardware decoder.
      All flash users run the flash plugin, which is (almost) the same regardless of browser, OS or hardware (though here the h264 decoder may be software or hardware).

      So in both cases, you have a single platform effect that makes it easy to run.
      With HMTL 5 on random computers, you do get a lot of variation between software, browser versions. For one thing you will have to support IE 9 till Vista end-of-line in 2017 in the least, which happens to coincide with end-of-line for Flash 11.2 on linux.

    4. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      For one thing you will have to support IE 9 till Vista end-of-line in 2017 in the least,

      by "support" you mean put up a dialog box stating "please upgrade to a modern browser"

    5. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I think he actually meant 'get the intranet developers off their lazy asses'.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    6. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're using a tuned automatic translator to translate working flash into "maybe it works" HTML5.

    7. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by flargleblarg · · Score: 1

      They're using a tuned automatic translator to translate working flash into "maybe it works" HTML5.

      Tell uncle if he gets a tuned automatic translator, be sure it speaks bocce.

    8. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      ? That's actually more effort to maintain than just doing it right in the first place

      You assume they're not writing it in Flash and exporting it as HTML5 for mobile. And some people still cannot use HTML5. Heck, I'm doing some work now in Flash for a client that still mandates IE7 on their machines (change is slow).

      But also, Flash is good in many ways. It isolates stuff in a plug-in, and not every site assumes you have it. Unlike JavaScript, which people have started to require to load static pages. For reasons.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    9. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by jafffacake · · Score: 1

      I use a desktop PC to access the BBC, and my PC does not have flash installed. I can't see any of the videos :-) the webpage insists I install flash. which i won't. silly BBC :-)

    10. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by WndSks · · Score: 0

      Yep, this sucks when you disable flash in IE, breaks a lot of sites. Most web designers are doing it wrong, you can just put the html5 video tag inside the flash tag or vice versa and get automatic fallback handling, no javascript detection required.

    11. Re:Looking at you, BBC... by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      if you had been going to the bbc site for a long time you would know that it's completely random what they decide technically.

      it's not about rights management either, they have the rights.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  4. Until the next change... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "By switching their platform to HTML5, companies can improve supportability, development time will decrease and the duplicative efforts of supporting two code bases will be eliminated."

    Well, until HTML6 or 7 is proposed with a complete overhaul of how these elements are handled. Then, it takes several years for the standard to coalesce, meanwhile browsers support bits-and-pieces of the emerging standard leading to inconsistent user-experiences on different platforms, while millions of older devices never get upgraded to support it. Content providers are then required to choose between sticking with HTML5 or providing an HTML5-compatible version while developing new HTML6/7 versions (i.e., getting left behind or supporting two code bases).

  5. Any HTML5 blockers? by sinij · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Any HTML5 blockers out there, because we know the scum from marketing department will have us Punching Monkeys in HTML5 in no time.

    1. Re:Any HTML5 blockers? by CauseBy · · Score: 2

      Yes here's one. Good luck.

  6. Tell your story walking. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Informative

    flash is an inextricable touchstone of practically every KVM in the datacenter that doesnt show up on a rickety cart.

    Flash is the mandatory model of how VMWare has decided (infuriatingly and incorrectly i might stress) we shall all interact with their products.

    Flash still powers billboards and advertisement hardware for countless products.

    and most important: Flash is still required to view a substantial amount of internet pornography.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:Tell your story walking. by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      And Flash can die in fucking fire!!!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:Tell your story walking. by Lisias · · Score: 1

      What the guy is saying is that Flash will not die due that fucking fire!

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
    3. Re:Tell your story walking. by CauseBy · · Score: 2

      "and most important: Flash is still required to view a substantial amount of internet pornography."

      Correct. Flash will die when YouPorn and XHamster switch to HTML5.

    4. Re:Tell your story walking. by towermac · · Score: 1

      Nobody cares about all that crap.

      What about Desktop Tower Defense, N Game, Bubble Tanks, and all that?

      Maybe Nintendo will make us a little handheld flash player. And then you can manage your VMs and take it to the bathroom with you...

    5. Re:Tell your story walking. by war4peace · · Score: 1

      We're looking as some loooong path to walk.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    6. Re:Tell your story walking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't need flash... so I'm told.

    7. Re:Tell your story walking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Because the internet is for porn. All that other stuff is what people do between faps.

    8. Re:Tell your story walking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and freegayporn

    9. Re:Tell your story walking. by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      It can if everybody says they refuse to use it ... if people in data centers are stuck with it, that's their damned problem.

      Getting Flash of the human facing internet is important. Because that's where it's the biggest for being malware.

      A jump server keeping it restricted to the data center will at least mean malicious ads and crap can't exploit the vulnerabilities in this pile of crap.

      Flash has been a gaping security hole for as long as it has existed. Removing it from the desktop will be a good start.

      What data centers and ad platforms use ... well, the rest of us shouldn't be stuck with this crap because of that. That's a terrible argument.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    10. Re:Tell your story walking. by gstoddart · · Score: 2

      I'm afraid to ask WTF XHamster is ... and rule #34 says I'm sure as hell not googling it ... so, "la la la" ... not sure I want to know.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    11. Re:Tell your story walking. by tepples · · Score: 1

      What about Desktop Tower Defense, N Game, Bubble Tanks, and all that?

      Yeah, what about them? Why aren't they ported to HTML5?

    12. Re:Tell your story walking. by DaMattster · · Score: 1

      And Flash can die in fucking fire!!!

      I certainly hope it does. I hate Flash!

    13. Re:Tell your story walking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      YouPorn and XHamster ALREADY support HTML5. Dump Flash from your computer and browser and you will see! Media Player Classic Home Cinema will also play .flv videos without haivnig Adobe Flash on your computer!

    14. Re:Tell your story walking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That is a good choice. Trust me. I have seen.... things.

    15. Re:Tell your story walking. by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 2

      It's actually not as bad as it sounds in this case. Search for the "Top 20 Best free porn sites" on google. The site you're afraid to ask about has made it to several of those lists, so you can get a synopsis of what it's about and its features without having to do a direct search and risk the rule #34 crosstalk that may occur from a direct search for the site name.

    16. Re:Tell your story walking. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      They work fine on iOS, so no flash requirements.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    17. Re:Tell your story walking. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Read the comments from VMware here:
      http://blogs.vmware.com/vspher...
      especially comments from Dennis Lu.

      Essentially, it was either deliver HTML5 code (leaving webUI in v5.1 state) or progress web UI until it was 'good', then move to HTML5. They chose the latter.

      I'm not sure why they didn't do a parallel development. Maybe they have & it's not releasable yet, but that's the state we're in now.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    18. Re:Tell your story walking. by rayd75 · · Score: 2

      flash is an inextricable touchstone of practically every KVM in the datacenter that doesnt show up on a rickety cart.

      Flash is the mandatory model of how VMWare has decided (infuriatingly and incorrectly i might stress) we shall all interact with their products.

      Flash still powers billboards and advertisement hardware for countless products.

      and most important: Flash is still required to view a substantial amount of internet pornography.

      Ironically, I can only find fault with the last point. Internet pornographers are actually surprisingly ahead of the curve here as compared to the likes of VMWare and other IT vendors.

    19. Re:Tell your story walking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why aren't they ported to HTML5?

      Uh, because they are? Hell, DHTML Lemmings is 11 years old. I don't know what you're worried about. Just play some Tappy Chicken or World's Biggest Pac-man or Pirates Love Daisies or HexGL or any of the many WebGL games out there.

      Flash is in its Autumn. Mourn it not. Look at the pretty lights.

    20. Re:Tell your story walking. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      YouPorn works on iPhones/iPads.

    21. Re:Tell your story walking. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who actually still uses KVMs?

    22. Re:Tell your story walking. by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      It's just a free porn site. The only hamster on the website is the logo -- but I know what you're talking about. Armagheddon!

      Maybe I need to update my porn knowledge. What sites are better than XHamster? Their vids don't stutter or show ads and it's easy to filter out the orientations that I don't find attractive. That's my low bar for judging porno sites.

    23. Re:Tell your story walking. by CauseBy · · Score: 1

      Good tip, thank you, I'll change my user agent string and see if I can get them to work in Ubuntu without flash. Because when I try today it doesn't work.

    24. Re:Tell your story walking. by Lisias · · Score: 1

      I think you had misunderstood the technology with the implementation.

      The Adobe's Flash Player is to be blamed, not Flash itself.

      There're some alternatives that could fill the gap once we get rid of this piece of sh*t from Adobe, and I don't see a problem in using them - being the open source ones my preferred.

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  7. Farewell to Flash, Hello by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more intrusive html5 ads that will be more a pain to block out

  8. What bunk! What utter BUNK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Moving to HTML5 just fucks things up.

    A traditional web site like Slashdot moves to HTML5? It becomes more and more unusable, cumulating in something as utterly awful as the thankfully-rejected Slashdot Beta site.

    Mobile apps are developed using natively-wrapped HTML5 web pages? They're slow, un-native, and often work like total shit.

    Advertisements move to HTML5? Now we can't block them as easily as we could with Flash, since it's harder to distinguish them from the content of the page.

    As the old saying goes, "Punch a man in the nose and he bleeds for an hour. Punch a man in the cock and his life is destroyed." HTML5 is a punch in the cock to all sorts of software and content.

    1. Re:What bunk! What utter BUNK! by war4peace · · Score: 2

      Try punching a midget in the cock and he'll bleed for an hour... from his nose.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    2. Re:What bunk! What utter BUNK! by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Then ask him to kiss you and he will give you a blow job!

    3. Re:What bunk! What utter BUNK! by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Flash is a hand in the wallet of that software & content.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  9. RIP Flash . . . by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

    Rust in pieces.

    You helped to delay the arrival of a reasonably free and open Web for longer than many Slashdotters have been alive.

    May every proprietary, insecure, single-vendor piece of battery-eating nonsense suffer the same fate or worse.

    --

    Nonaggression works!
    1. Re: RIP Flash . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JavaScript has done that more than flash. The open we was based on hypertext markup. That means: Create your text content. Then mark it up for presentation with tags that each type of browser device can best present it.

      But then a bunch of people decided that being a 'web developer' should mean more than selecting and resizing bipmaps and sound files to embed. And a new industry was created.

    2. Re:RIP Flash . . . by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      May every proprietary, insecure, single-vendor piece of battery-eating nonsense

      Except the AS engine was opensourced, Adobe offered to merge with JavaScript, and there are (or was, I dunno anymore) an active fork for FireFox.

      Heck, JS irks me a hell of a lot more, because Flash at least didn't try to pretend it was a web site when it was trying to run a ton of code.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  10. Browsers should have EnableVideo code by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All HTML5 browsers should have an EnableVideo code setting.

    So that I can turn it off.

    I don't need your video. I don't want your video. I don't want it to autoplay.

    If you have an ad, you can show it in text, and stop sucking up bandwidth.

    Now, if you want to give me a box that I can right click on to "play video", great.

    But as Leelu would say "Not without my permission!"

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Browsers should have EnableVideo code by lgw · · Score: 1

      But as Leelu would say "Not without my permission!"

      Leelu would say "seddan akta gamat": never without my permission.

      I've always been amused that scene, mostly because he asks the priest "what does akta gamat mean" and gets a translation of the whole line - as if Bruce couldn't remember his line and just fudged it. (Much as early Doctor Who gave us "reverse the polarity of the neutron flow", since it has meter and so the actor could easily remember it - though I can't remember whether that was Hartnell or Pertwee).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Browsers should have EnableVideo code by Eythian · · Score: 1

      Firefox has a config option to force HTML5 video not to autoplay, and the flashblocker I use also has options to block them in the same manner.

  11. Losing all credibility right there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    development time will decrease.

  12. A farewell to HTML5 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't wait for the first browsers to proudly state that they are not implementing HTML5.

  13. GIF animations are Flash, right? :p by Escogido · · Score: 1

    from TFA:

    >But make no mistake, there are still many Flash-powered multimedia items on the web, including graphics, videos, games and animations, like GIFs, a preferred method of expression for millennials and adults alike.

    1. Re:GIF animations are Flash, right? :p by tepples · · Score: 1

      YTMND uses a Flash preloader to load the audio and then start the GIF and audio at the same time.

  14. Flash home page by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1
    What I find very curious are the web sites whose home pages are fully and completely written in Flash. If you do not enable flash, you see nothing but a blank page.

    .
    The owners of those websites were probably sold a bill of goods for a "cool website" by the same designers who proffered flaming logos 20 years ago....

    1. Re:Flash home page by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      What I find very curious are the web sites whose home pages are fully and completely written in Flash. If you do not enable flash, you see nothing but a blank page.

      .

      The owners of those websites were probably sold a bill of goods for a "cool website" by the same designers who proffered flaming logos 20 years ago....

      I can name one of the world's largest and best-known automobile manufacturers who did a Flash-only site at a time when I didn't have any Flash-capable computers.

      I bought my new car from one of their competitors who had a site I could actually use.

    2. Re:Flash home page by PapayaSF · · Score: 1

      What I find very curious are the web sites whose home pages are fully and completely written in Flash. If you do not enable flash, you see nothing but a blank page.

      The owners of those websites were probably sold a bill of goods for a "cool website" by the same designers who proffered flaming logos 20 years ago....

      Or, the web developer thought it was not a good idea, but the client insisted on Flash. She wouldn't listen to me, and now her site is invisible on mobile....

      --
      Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
  15. Think of the children... by userw014 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    For all that I've hated Flash for years (for idiosyncratic reasons), and loathe Flash now (for all the usual reasons), there is a great deal of (old) content dependent on Flash. Will that content (like a Flash version of Portal) become inaccessible?

    Archivists are probably dreading dealing with this.

    1. Re:Think of the children... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      It's not hard to convert them to a more usable format.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Think of the children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you ever try to convert any non-trivial flash content with those "converters"?
      Because if you did, you'd know they don't actually work.

    3. Re:Think of the children... by yodleboy · · Score: 1

      "It's not hard to convert them to a more usable format."

      It has nothing to do with how hard it is or is not to convert Flash content. Like usual, it's about money. Who's going to do that conversion? How much will it cost? What else will have to change (because there's ALWAYS something else)?

      When the total cost of converting is exceeded by the money lost by not converting, you will see Flash die. I don't expect that day to come any time soon for most Flash content providers.

    4. Re:Think of the children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some developers, including Adobe, are working on various flash->HTML5/JS translation layers/utilities for old flash content.

      Flash was popular not just because it added a rich content system to browsers, but because it had some pretty good content creation tools. Most, yes, most of the animation programming you see on TV today (Eg Southpark, Archer, My Little Pony, etc) is actually made in Flash! Adobe's plan for a long time has been to continue to sell and produce said tools, but will let you create HTML5 based applications/content/whatever.

      Presumably said tools will include facilities for migrating your old flash content too.

    5. Re:Think of the children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NewGrounds.com has eighteen years' Flash content on it. Permit me to doubt that converting all or even a decent fraction of it to HTML5, Unity, or any other format will be "not hard."

      Also: At no point on Linux, throughout the 2000s, did I ever feel like a second-class citizen on Newgrounds. Why? Because flash works on linux like on windows. Guess what's happening with html5 and something called Unity?

      Oh, so sorry, your browser needs a plugin to play this!
      *click plugin dev's link*
      Ooooh, yeah, we're, uh, totally working on a Linux port, it's coming... soon, yeah, mhmm, soon, super-serial promise... Here's some random thing some guy threw up onto Github a few months back.
      *click*
      Ooookay, so, if you've got the following exact versions of X, Y, Z, W, QQ and P installed, #compiled_for_me...
      *tap tap tappity tap*
      ERROR: syntax error in...
      *facepalm*
      Oh well, fuck, it would've probably deliberately ignored my fully accelerated 3D video drivers (thanks nVidia!), hunted down a 100% software rendering lib and made my dual-Xeon workstation party like it was 1999 anyway.

      Hmmm, maybe I should get out that swfdec or whatever it is quarter-baked linux "Flash" player that is, in reality, a "Just enough of AS for video embedders to maybe work, but not enough to play any game newer than Pico's School" player. That's always fun!

      tl;dr: Can we please have usable versions of the new interactive plugin gizmos before we ragequit the only one I've ever really seen in Linux?

    6. Re:Think of the children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NewGrounds.com has eighteen years' Flash content on it

      I don't have much sympathy. That's the cost of going with a proprietary framework: you're in the pocket of the proprietor. It's a hard lesson, but one well learnt.

    7. Re:Think of the children... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Flash is an open specification.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:Think of the children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Controlled by one entity. It's proprietary.

    9. Re:Think of the children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a great deal of old content dependent on Java. Every once in a while I stumble on an "interactive simulation" that requires Java. Does the average user care? No.

    10. Re:Think of the children... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some developers, including Adobe, are working on various flash->HTML5/JS translation layers/utilities for old flash content.

      No they aren't. Adobe is working on HTML5+JS output, but only if you write new code. They can't compile existing code using the old frameworks to HTML5+JS.

      Most, yes, most of the animation programming you see on TV today (Eg Southpark, Archer, My Little Pony, etc) is actually made in Flash!

      That's BS. South Park is created in Maya (a 3D suite, but they mostly use it in 2D). Except the pilot episode, that was done with paper. The others, I can't tell for sure, but I suspect they use some animation software like Manga Studio or similar.

  16. Change is Scary by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many of them are not thrilled about the proposition (change is scary),

    More like change is expensive. It has nothing to do with scary.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Change is Scary by neminem · · Score: 1

      I would include "expensive" quite definitively as a subset of "scary". Imagine someone told you "you are required to do this thing which will cost several million dollars". Wouldn't you be scared? I would be...

    2. Re:Change is Scary by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      In that case, it's not the change that's scary, it's the expense.
      When people say "change is scary," they usually mean that the change itself is scary, not the rational assessment of expenses involved.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Change is Scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the main reason it's expensive is because it requires testing.

      Testing will reveal things going wrong that couldn't reliably have been foreseen.

      Ergo, scary.

  17. Before Videos, there was Vector Animations by Dwedit · · Score: 2

    I was a big fan and user of flash LONG before it did anything video related. Flash for videos? Let it die, it's awful for that purpose. Flash for anything else? I don't think it's going away any time soon.

    People have been making vector animations in Flash long before anyone thought of ruining web video by using Flash to play it, and Flash excels at that purpose better than anything else.

  18. Real Life by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

    I did an OS reinstall about a month ago. I just installed flash 2 days ago. I wasn't trying to avoid Flash, its just Saturday was the first day I discovered I needed it for a website I wanted to visit and didn't already have it installed. This is from someone who visits a lot of streaming and game websites. (NPR.org's streams for Wait Wait Don't Tell Me were the culprit, in case you were curious).

    Now the fact that I had to do it tells you flash isn't exactly history. However, in the past I don't believe I've ever made it a day after an OS install without having to install Flash. A whole month is pretty dang impressive. So yeah, for my uses at least it definitely looks like its on its way out.

  19. When Flash was awesome by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    Those where the days when the web was just getting exciting and java applets and gif were exiting. Man did I spend a LOT of time on Macromedia Flash 4 making animations. Still have them on floppies tucked away,not sure if they still work.

    http://www.thevoid.co.uk/
    http://www.nrg.be/archived/
    http://janit.iki.fi/shit/megac...

    https://www.adobe.com/showcase...

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:When Flash was awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The next Step that you take, Grasshopper, is just preparation for the Step after that.
      Flash, at one time, was GREAT! Even with low-end gear, People could do incredible things. New things.
      Now Flash is just the means for low-lifes of every stripe to irritate us. Too bad. And HTML5 will go the same way, and quickly.

      So what are _you_ Stepping into?
      The Internet of Things is _old_; I've been doing that stuff since 1979.
      Except that in 1979, we didn't even wonder about Security.

      3D hasn't been doing too well lately, because Mediocrity. (4D is a Future, and it's called "Tendrils"(tm).)
      The best WP was WriteNow, the best Spreadsheet was Excel 2.2, and the best Image Analyzer was NIH Image. All long gone due to Featuritis. Let's add Flash to this Featuritis Graveyard. Please.

      "AI" is Stupid, "Quantum XXXXX" is a fraud, the "Channel" is going through a long deserved and very painful death, YouTube has Democratized Video Creation, not often for the Best, Craigslist has _destroyed_ local Newspapers, not often for the Best, and Berke Breathed has returned... What? Ack!

      There is this Old Saying, which probably precedes COBOL:
      The Cream Always Rises.

  20. Am I the only one that sort of liked Flash? by Gordo_1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    By having the majority of undesirable web content stuck in easy-to-flag Flash buckets, it was inherently simple to block that content. I could simply whitelist a handful of sites whose flash content I wanted to see (e.g. Youtube) and block it pretty much everywhere else.

    Now with everything moving to HTML5, I fear the necessary blocking ruleset will gets many times more complicated and with more false positives and negatives to boot. Am I wrong?

    1. Re:Am I the only one that sort of liked Flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally agree. I'm sure the advertising companies are giving high fives all around in response to articles like this. I'd prefer my ads to remain easily blockable, for this use case flash works much better than HTML5

    2. Re:Am I the only one that sort of liked Flash? by DaMattster · · Score: 1

      By having the majority of undesirable web content stuck in easy-to-flag Flash buckets, it was inherently simple to block that content. I could simply whitelist a handful of sites whose flash content I wanted to see (e.g. Youtube) and block it pretty much everywhere else.

      Now with everything moving to HTML5, I fear the necessary blocking ruleset will gets many times more complicated and with more false positives and negatives to boot. Am I wrong?

      Well, I disagree. You can still block the ad serving URL. Simply have a block list of the most common ad servers and block them.

    3. Re:Am I the only one that sort of liked Flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can thank Google for that. They tricked the majority of web masters into using third party domains for essential parts of the web site, so blocking all third party content is no longer feasible. There is no good technical reason for doing it, but Google's recommendations made sure that unwanted content is now mixed into a sea of necessary assets loaded from separate domains.

    4. Re:Am I the only one that sort of liked Flash? by swillden · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can thank Google for that. They tricked the majority of web masters into using third party domains for essential parts of the web site, so blocking all third party content is no longer feasible. There is no good technical reason for doing it, but Google's recommendations made sure that unwanted content is now mixed into a sea of necessary assets loaded from separate domains.

      I don't know what recommendations you're speaking of, but there are actually very good security reasons for using separate domains wherever possible. The Same Origin policy implemented by all modern browsers enables the use of domains as client-side content sandboxes of a sort. You can safely load content, including scripts, from one domain with good reason to believe it cannot access or manipulate content from another domain.

      http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/8264/why-is-the-same-origin-policy-so-important

      And, yes, Google does this extensively with its own web properties, using different domains to carefully separate components unless the components have specific and valid reasons to interact. Not because Google thinks that one of its components might be malicious, but because subtle and unanticipated interactions can cause unexpected problems and leaks.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:Am I the only one that sort of liked Flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Same Origin policy implemented by all modern browsers enables the use of domains as client-side content sandboxes of a sort.

      The fundamental problem with this is that you, the website developer, are talking about how this allows you to improve the client's security. That's not your job. The client should be treating you as an enemy, assuming your code is possibly malicious, and figuring out how to display your website safely despite this, if possible.

  21. Slashdot ads by wikthemighty · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's why I disable ads on Slashdot: VIDEO!

    If all their ads were static, I would be happy to uncheck Disable Ads...

    --
    "There are people who do not love their fellow human being, and I _hate_ people like that!" - Tom Lehrer
    1. Re:Slashdot ads by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's why I disable ads on Slashdot: VIDEO!

      If all their ads were static, I would be happy to uncheck Disable Ads...

      Agreed. Same here. Back in the days of flat banner ads - which could be "click to follow link that will play video" - I let the ads display. But sound and giant honking autoplay downloads mean I disable advertising on Slashdot.

      If advertising behaved, I'd turn it on again.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    2. Re:Slashdot ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, crazy frog made me install Adblock too. Until then I'd been willing to put up with adds, but when that blared out of my speakers I knew it was time to fight back.

  22. correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "as Flash has never worked well on mobile"
    Should be "as Flash has never worked well on Apple phones". It works pretty well on my android device that I managed to load flash onto.

  23. Orphan works by tepples · · Score: 1

    From the upload page:

    By selecting the checkbox, you understand that you may not convert content unless you have the right to do so. Uploading content that you do not have the right to convert into HTML5 is a violation of copyright law and against the Google terms of service.

    In other words, the author has to perform the conversion; viewers are forbidden to do so. And for most of the vector animations in SWF format on Newgrounds or Dagobah or Albino Blacksheep, I imagine the author has left the scene and can no longer be contacted, making the animations orphan works. This is why mass conversion of SWF to SVG- or Canvas-based HTML5 isn't likely to happen any time soon.

    Even for the author, it can be a pain. From the extension page:

    please note that the Swiffy extension isn't compatible with Creative Cloud.

  24. Google Finance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just want to know when Google is going to get off their righteous asses and fix their finance.google.com page. That flash crap is still up through all their delisting of flash efforts. I wonder if they delisted their own content? Anyway, Google, it's way past time to clean it up.

  25. But what will happen to Homesterrunner.net? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    (It's dot com.)

    1. Re:But what will happen to Homesterrunner.net? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The system is down.

  26. Go ahead and bloat them by 10x by tepples · · Score: 2

    People have been making vector animations in Flash long before anyone thought of ruining web video by using Flash to play it

    Agreed. But a lot of Slashdot users have recommended rendering vector animations to video and serving them to viewers as video, viewer's monthly caps be damned. That's how modern Flash cartoons such as My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic are produced. Apparently bloating the data size by a factor of ten (in my tests) is worth not having to worry about the speed of the viewer's computer.

    and Flash excels at that purpose better than anything else.

    Do you mean Adobe Flash is better for making them than Adobe Edge Animate, or Flash Player is better for playing them than HTML5 Canvas?

    1. Re:Go ahead and bloat them by 10x by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      viewer's monthly caps be damned.

      Well, I sure wouldn't want you to blow your cap. Just watch Peasant's Quest: The Movie and be happy. Don't make me burninate you.

    2. Re:Go ahead and bloat them by 10x by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see some data for that 'factor of ten' stat you've mentioned here and once before.

      Here is the data for a quick comparison I did just now for Homestar Runner's Flash is Dead:

      8.13 MiB on YouTube (480p, combined audio/mp4 and video/mp4)
      3.25 MiB on Homestar Runner, (flashisdead.swf, application/x-shockwave-flash)

      Not exactly a 'factor of ten'.

      I don't think Flash is dead just yet; what it does really well is vector animation with sound and (optionally) interactivity. There's no substitute for Flash in that area, at least not yet. (Animated) SVG doesn't do sound (at least not without the addition of embedded Javascript and surrounded by an HTML5 browser; even then it wouldn't work very well since the sound is separate from the animation). Plus, being XML and Javascript-based, I can't imagine it being as small as the binary Flash files are.

    3. Re:Go ahead and bloat them by 10x by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      even then it wouldn't work very well since the sound is separate from the animation

      Sound being separate from the animation seems to work well with HTML5.

    4. Re:Go ahead and bloat them by 10x by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8.13 MiB on YouTube (480p, combined audio/mp4 and video/mp4)
      3.25 MiB on Homestar Runner, (flashisdead.swf, application/x-shockwave-flash)

      It also depends on the codecs used and the data rates chosen. I downloaded the 720p version of the video (H.264, AAC) from YouTube which is about 18 megabytes. I transcoded it to VP9 and Opus using the encoding guide and set low rate targets for the video (250 kilobits) and audio (64 kilobits). I ended up with a video one third the size at 6.1 megabytes which looked and sounded comparable to the H.264 version. So my VP9 version is less than a factor of 2.

  27. Upgrading and switching are different things by tepples · · Score: 0

    For one thing you will have to support IE 9 till Vista end-of-line in 2017 in the least

    by "support" you mean put up a dialog box stating "please upgrade to a modern browser"

    Which modern browser? IE 9 is the most recent version of Internet Explorer that will run on Windows Vista. It is impossible for the owner of a PC running Windows Vista to upgrade to a modern version of Internet Explorer without first buying a newer version of Windows. So it isn't upgrading to a modern browser as much as switching to a modern browser, which would likely cost a user his bookmarks, saved sessions, and saved passwords. Technical users such as Slashdot's reader base tend to forget how hard it would be for a non-technical user to restore that information.

    1. Re:Upgrading and switching are different things by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      IE 9 is the most recent version of Internet Explorer that will run on Windows Vista.

      IE is deprecated. Any time you spend on it is wasted. There are lots of browsers for Windows.

      which would likely cost a user his bookmarks, saved sessions, and saved passwords.

      no, browsers import those things from each other

      Technical users such as Slashdot's reader base tend to forget how hard it would be for a non-technical user to restore that information.

      It is REALLY hard to check off that box during the installation, isn't it?

    2. Re:Upgrading and switching are different things by tepples · · Score: 1

      It is REALLY hard to check off that box [to import bookmarks, saved passwords, and cookies] during the installation, isn't it?

      But can a site guarantee, for all modern browsers to which a user of Internet Explorer 9 would consider switching, that the browser's installer won't fail to import at least one bookmark, saved password, or saved cookie? Otherwise, it'll incur support costs.

    3. Re:Upgrading and switching are different things by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      But can a site guarantee, for all modern browsers to which a user of Internet Explorer 9 would consider switching, that the browser's installer won't fail to import at least one bookmark, saved password, or saved cookie? Otherwise, it'll incur support costs.

      You have to pay extra for your new car because we can't insure that we will remove all of the crumbs and stains from your old car and apply them to exactly the same places in your new car.

    4. Re:Upgrading and switching are different things by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Nice then that a 'deprecated' browser receives security support until year 2023 (IE 11 on Windows 8.x) or even later, depending on what it gets in Windows 10.

      If there's a deprecated Android phone that gets updates for the next 8 years, let me know!

    5. Re:Upgrading and switching are different things by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Nice then that a 'deprecated' browser receives security support until year 2023 (IE 11 on Windows 8.x) or even later, depending on what it gets in Windows 10.

      COBOL is still supported on many platforms, but you will tell me that it isn't deprecated

    6. Re:Upgrading and switching are different things by tepples · · Score: 1

      Bookmarks, saved passwords, and cookies are tools for visiting and authenticating to a web site. I don't see the analogy to crumbs and stains.

    7. Re: Upgrading and switching are different things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what will you with all the medical companies that require IE9 in order to access client medical records? You can't just change to another browser because the software developer hardcode IE requirements in.

  28. Ethical plausible deniability by tepples · · Score: 1

    You can still block the ad serving URL. Simply have a block list of the most common ad servers and block them.

    But then you're specifically blocking ads, which loses the ethical plausible deniability of blocking something that just happens, wink wink nudge nudge, to be correlated with ads.

  29. No Flash Player on recent Android by tepples · · Score: 1

    [Flash Player] works pretty well on my android device that I managed to load flash onto.

    Adobe Flash Player breaks in recent versions of Android. What version of Android does your device run?

    1. Re:No Flash Player on recent Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5.0.1, flash is working great.

  30. Old standards die hard by daveywest · · Score: 1

    Windows XP is no longer a standard. Doesn't mean I don't use it every goddamn day. An industry website I use weekly just rolled out an update based on flash. They update on an 8 year or so update cycle. I need them, they don't need me. The funny thing about markets is there's almost always a secondary market willing to use and abuse the rest of the world's castoffs.

    1. Re:Old standards die hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still support a lot of Win 2k servers ...

    2. Re:Old standards die hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They deserve to die.
      "They update on an 8 year or so update cycle...."
      Three Update Cycles back, Flash didn't even exist.
      What did they use back then, ASCII Art?

  31. I like Flash by Lost+Race · · Score: 1

    I like Flash because it's easy to disable. Everything that's awful about Flash (i.e. all of it) is now being integrated into HTML, which makes annoying flashy crap much harder to avoid.

    Can we get an EverythingThatUsedToBeInFlashButIsNowInHTML_Block add-on for our browsers?

  32. "Never"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Flash was originally small, fast, and scalable vector graphics animations, the size of the plugin was a few hundred KB. Video streaming was added later and everybody jumped on the bandwagon because it was less expensive than Windows Media or RealNetworks streaming. On the other hand, SVG never really caught up with Flash in vector graphics for the Web, because SVG it's free and no company can patent the technology to develop it further. Most people don't seem to care about bitmap vs. vector animations now because bandwidth is finally "cheap" (is it?) but you may have noticed that some North American mall Wi-Fi providers block YouTube. At the moment mobile users can't really block video ads in browsers to decrease bandwidth usage but this is unlikely to last (http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/11/8764437/iphone-adblock-safari-ios-9). Wait until advertisers realize their video ads are blocked on mobiles just like they are on Desktops; I wouldn't be surprised to see a return to animated vector graphics ads.

  33. I wish the corporate applications would move too by acoustix · · Score: 1

    Doesn't the VMware web console still require flash?

    --
    "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
  34. Uninstalled in 2009 by xororand · · Score: 4, Informative

    I uninstalled Flash in 2009 and for some reason I'm still alive! :-O

    youtube-dl downloads and streams video and audio from about 500 legacy sites in the quality of your choice.

    livestreamer streams live video from about 70 legacy sites such as the popular "Twitch".

    VLC and mpv also can play video from some sites directly, e.g. YouTube.

  35. Is this really all there is to talk about on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Flash? Just how many stupid stories will we have about flash? Seems to be 2-3 a week.

  36. Hardly think advertising will go away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember how people hated pop up ads and so browsers got blockers, then we got Flash ads and we saw ad blockers come into play. Now I know everyone hates
    ads everywhere. But free web sites, free apps, free OS means somehow marketing to you in order to pay people who did these products. The real question was always when will Flash go away? It does look closer to being put to rest. But ads will not be going away, and you can bet the next solution to blocking them might be harder then some users think. I myself don't care, I don't use a blocker and I manage to still enjoy the web sites even with all that going on in the web page. I choose to ignore it. I get Flash ads were a security risk, a resource hog on weaker hardware and a real annoyance for some.

  37. liberation is on the way for users by sribe · · Score: 1

    This, and content blocking are going to crater intrusive overbearing advertising. Of course it will take decent ads along for the ride, but hey, the industry refused to even marginally police itself, and abused our goodwill terribly, so here goes...

    1. Re:liberation is on the way for users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are so right on this, but I would add the following Warning to the Ad Biz:
      By Content Blocking, we are not merely blocking the displaying of Ads, but also the Bandwidth of serving those Ads.
      Oh, I know that you and the Carriers will bemoan the loss of Revenue that comes from the nonacceptance of Advertising, either by the MB, or by the Minute, but...
      Screw You, and the Carrier you rode in on.

  38. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This does exactly that - APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. browser addons & locally installed DNS servers @ home + fixes DNS' redirect security issues - obtaining its data vs. online threats & adbanner blocking from 10 reputable sites in the security community - using something you already have vs. "bolting on browser addons 'MOAR' that's usermode slower & increases messagepassing, cpu + ram overuse overheads!

    * :)

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's GUARANTEED safe & clean per it being checked by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    In its 32-bit model also https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    ---

    "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"...

    APK

    P.S.=> By "yours truly" - "The Lord of Hosts" so-to-speak:

    PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:

    "The image this title brings to mind is of a mighty military commander, one who can at a mere word summon rank upon rank of protective power" from https://answers.yahoo.com/ques... & THAT WORD = hosts!

    (Accept NO substitutes!)

    ...apk

    1. Re:APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, do go away, you persistent obnoxious Prick.
      Especially since You, your Website, and your Coding was so easily compromised, as has been recently mentioned, right here, on Slashdot.

  39. I agree except on the development time will decrea by neutrino38 · · Score: 2

    I am all for HTML5 improved support and standard but our experence with various HTML5 implementation is that developpers actually spend a LOT of time accomodating the differences between browsers and browser versions.

    Not only between mobile and desktop but between different browsers and different version of the SAME browser.

    Different implementations of the same standards are almost always breaking the code.

    So on the contrary using HTML5 increases the development time and maintenance cost as web sites or web apps have to be "corrected" to follow browser support or interpretation of HTML5.

    In comparison, such maintenance for flash applications is close to nil even flash was upgraded from version 5 to version 11.

    However, I agree that flash beiing proprietary, it is not the way to go now.

  40. The death of Homestar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://www.homestarrunner.com/flashisdead.html

  41. Apple example by neutrino38 · · Score: 1

    I remember when apple rolled out iOS 8 and our web app broke (it was a simple form with buttons !)

    Also when you are using advanced feature such as webrtc, then you have to block users for loading the page with Safari or Internet Explorer. I am sorry but while on paper HTML5 is the best approach, it does not yet offer the uniform API an behavior that web developper need to save time and money.

    1. Re:Apple example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "... that web developper need to save time and money."
      If you had any real skill, and if you could actually spell, and form a grammatically correct statement, (This speaks greatly of your Coding Abilities...), this would not be an issue.
      Have you considered returning to the Family Trade of digging ditches?

  42. Typo. by westlake · · Score: 1

    Integrated adds and product placement are older than the silent films of 1915

    There was a long-standing joke about the 50s television series based on Cary Grant's "Topper" that you couldn't see the actors through the clouds of tobaccco smoke.

  43. Re:I agree except on the development time will dec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.linux.com/learn/tutorials/360557-weekend-project-open-source-alternatives-to-adobe-flash-on-linux

    If you can get smart folks to work on something like Gnash... securing it... I don't see why it couldn't be more secure than proprietary Adobe shit. I'm sure it wouldn't take a good coder very long at all.

    The fact that Flash player is modular is a good thing. HTML5 is another unnecessary intertwining of built-in browser features with the justification being "anything but Flash".

    You can also disable Flash and it's ads very easily. Other people are picking up on this. Being able to disable ads lowers ad revenue. I know I sure as fuck don't see any ads when I use Windows Linux BSD or Mac OS X. Firefox FTW.

    Literally the only reason to have a Windows install at all is recent games. With Windows 10 being the worldwide spyware that it is, on top of being a load of monolithic security hole shit, everybody should be running at least one good Linux right now. Cyberspace is already Linux, and so is your router. The only thing Windows at all is possibly your PC. Notice Windows is a piece of shit? So did billions of others. Google search for Windows sucks.

    Dickheads will be telling you [but if you store your data in our "cloud" (meaning: their computers) it will be so much safer and more convenient.] Well... "cloud" servers are usually Linux. Amazon AWS sure is. Now why in the flying fuck would you use Windows at all except for a couple of games. And you would have to have some huge data sharing requirements to ever need cloud storage. Yet, look at all the companies wanting to sell you "cloud" storage. It's not a fucking cloud, that is a marketing gimmick. It is "our company's hard drives". But but it's a cloud with rainbows right? Rainbows maybe. Not clouds.

    Get out of Microsoft's "ecosphere" and everything gets real nice again.

  44. old flash games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But how will I play all my old games? There needs to be a wine and DOSbox equivalent.

  45. Why don't we all move to one platform?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MUCH easier to maintain your code! In fact, let's have to government decide which one is best!

    I like the competition. yields better quality. Adobe cancelled its tech due to pressure from apple. They should make a javascript port for portability to non-compliant platfprms like ios.

  46. And I thought they were talking about flash memory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I thought they were talking about flash memory circuits (and there are many x10 alternatives on the way), and then they suddenly start talking about HTML5 and what the what? Then Macromedia Flash is the demon and the proprietary video player in HTML5 comes to mind.

  47. Decline, here to stay: where are we? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The decline of Flash is well and truly underway." Wasn't the very opposite conclusion posted just the other day? http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/08/18/152231/the-agonizingly-slow-decline-of-adobes-flash-player

  48. Amount of motion by tepples · · Score: 1

    "Flash Is Dead" is also a far lower motion clip than the clip I tried, which is "We Drink Ritalin".

  49. One out of five games worked by tepples · · Score: 1

    DHTML Lemmings

    Of the five games you listed, this is the only one that worked as advertised. Yet no sound in Firefox 40.

    Just play some Tappy Chicken

    How do I get past "Please expand your window to play!"? I've already put Firefox into full screen with F11 but it's still there.

    or World's Biggest Pac-man

    After I clicked it, it warned me that only Facebook.com members are allowed to create mazes. Not being a Facebook.com member (I graduated before it even started), I clicked "Just play for fun" to continue. The play screen appeared, and "Loading" appeared and disappeared, leaving the playfield blank. The same thing happened after a reload. It failed to load because a line of code in the game produced the error ReferenceError: _gaq is not defined, in turn because I have configured Firefox to block scripts from Google Analytics. I haven't seen a Flash game misbehave when scripts from Google Analytics are disabled. Because the HTML5 execution environment differs so much not only from browser to browser but also from individual computer to individual computer, it's harder to get it right as opposed to a sloppy job that falls over when Google Analytics is not responding.

    or Pirates Love Daisies

    Audio was choppy as it first started, and even the title screen was taller than my laptop's monitor (1024x600). This must be what the warning on Tappy Chicken was trying to prevent. At least Flash Player automatically resizes an animation or game to the size of the object element that contains it.

    or HexGL or any of the many WebGL games out there.

    Error message: "WEBGL IS NOT SUPPORTED!" It took me to get.webgl.org which states: "Hmm. While your browser seems to support WebGL, it is disabled or unavailable. If possible, please ensure that you are running the latest drivers for your video card." about:support in Firefox states "WebGL Renderer: Blocked for your graphics card because of unresolved driver issues." WebGL is based on OpenGL ES 2.0 and thus requires a GPU that supports OpenGL 2.0, but this 5-year-old laptop's Intel integrated graphics processor supports only up to OpenGL 1.4. Yes, I know, it's old enough that I ought to replace it. Do you have a recommendation for a newer 10" laptop or 10" detachable laptop that supports X11/Linux well?

    1. Re:One out of five games worked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WebGL is based on OpenGL ES 2.0 and thus requires a GPU that supports OpenGL 2.0, but this 5-year-old laptop's Intel integrated graphics processor supports only up to OpenGL 1.4.

      Your 5 year old laptop only supports up to an OpenGL version that was released 13 years ago? Either the GPU is truly awful or you've got driver issues. Did you keep the receipt?

  50. Make me, & WHERE was that? Show me... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Especially since You, your Website, and your Coding was so easily compromised, as has been recently mentioned, right here, on Slashdot." - by UNIDENTIFIABLE NO BALLS Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24, 2015 @10:23PM (#50385183)

    See subject, & PROVE that - ok? I didn't see anything about that!

    ---

    "Oh, do go away, you persistent obnoxious Prick." - by UNIDENTIFIABLE NO BALLS Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24, 2015 @10:23PM (#50385183)

    Why don't you MAKE me? You can't, you powerless no balls whimp.

    APK

    P.S.=> This is EXACTLY how I know I'm doing well - when the NO BALLS WORM "ne'er-do-wells" ON /. have to post as UNIDENTIFIABLE ac's & can't back up their falsehoods!

    (They post ac, unidentifiably, since I've obviously validly & technically DUSTED THEM BEFORE under their "registered 'luser'" accounts they're forced to effetely + vainly 'harass me' via falsehoods & such now like the truly cowardly little WORMS they are, lol...)

    ... apk

    1. Re:Make me, & WHERE was that? Show me... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi Mr. APK. You're the coding community's equivalent of this person:
      http://www.mercurynews.com/pen...

      You should check into a mental health institution. They have useful meds for people like you.

  51. Inverse of Linux on desktop? by Imazalil · · Score: 1

    Flash is the inverse Linux on desktop.

    1. Re:Inverse of Linux on desktop? by Lumpio- · · Score: 1

      Maybe somebody should port Linux to Flash...

  52. Fuck flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck flash, I disabled it last year - never to be used by me again.

  53. Intel GMA: Graphics My... by tepples · · Score: 1

    Your 5 year old laptop only supports up to an OpenGL version that was released 13 years ago? Either the GPU is truly awful or you've got driver issues.

    It's a GMA 3150, which is only a modest improvement over the GMA 950. Intel sucked back then; the joke was that it stood for "Graphics My Ass". It didn't start to stop sucking until Intel replaced GMA with HD Graphics. I remember some 3D Flash games; I'm not sure if they used some sort of software rendering or fixed-function OpenGL.

    1. Re:Intel GMA: Graphics My... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the joke was that it stood for "Graphics My Ass"

      That's no joke. That's the product description.

  54. Mr. unidentifiable little worm... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: You've got to live with that & yourself Mr. no balls.

    APK

    P.S.=> That's all I need to say in response to trash like you. You have NO balls... apk