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."

126 of 202 comments (clear)

  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 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
    2. 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.

    3. 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.
    4. Re:Now we need a NoHTML5Media plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

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

    5. 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.
    6. 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.

    7. 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
    8. 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.

    9. 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.
    10. 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.

    11. 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.

    12. 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.

    13. 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; }
    14. 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
    15. 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.

    16. 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.

    17. 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.
    18. 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.

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

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

    20. 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.
  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 halivar · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'll believe it when NetCraft confirms it.

    4. 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.

    5. 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.

    6. 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.
    7. 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.

    8. 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.

    9. Re:Again? by j127 · · Score: 1

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

    10. 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.

    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.

    14. 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.

    15. 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__()
    16. 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
    17. 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 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.

    7. 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!
    8. 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 :-)

    9. 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 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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?

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

      And Flash can die in fucking fire!!!

      I certainly hope it does. I hate Flash!

    10. 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!

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

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

    12. 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.

    13. 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
    14. 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
    15. 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.

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

      YouPorn works on iPhones/iPads.

    17. 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.

    18. 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.

    19. 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. 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 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!
  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. 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
  11. 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 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.

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

      Flash is an open specification.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  12. 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."
  13. 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)
  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. 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*
  17. 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 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.

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

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

  19. 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! --
  20. 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.

  21. 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.

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

    (It's dot com.)

  23. 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?

  24. 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.

  25. 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?

  26. 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?

  27. 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.

  28. 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.

  29. 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.

  30. 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!

  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. 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
  33. 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

  34. 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
  35. 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.

  36. 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.

  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...

  38. 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.

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

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

  40. 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.

  41. 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.

  42. 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".

  43. 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?

  44. 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...

  45. 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.