Hi all,
There seems to be a heated and highly polarised debate in progress about Flash and HTML5. There also seems to be a lot of misinformation flying around and some misunderstandings about what Flash and HTML5 are, what they can do and how the future of the web is likely to shape up in the next few years. Most of the debate and the disagreements have little to do with what the best technology for the web is. Microsft, Apple, Adobe and Google are all competing for their own particular profit models and market share.
The following link is a sober, well-informed article written by Jeremy Allaire, founder of the Flash MX platform, ColdFusion and Brightcove:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/05/the-future-of-web-content-html5-flash-mobile-apps/
Please also note that the developments in HTML5 RIAs that they're talking about are in quite a long-term time frame by web technology standards. Don't be fooled by Google's "hard push" campaigns and their YouTube.com/html5 beta demo.
Please read!
Matt
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Mauno Korpelainen -
Matt,
if you search sober, well-informed and objective articles from Microsoft, Apple, Adobe or Google they will all give you different articles. 
It was a well written story but I prefer articles that are written by people who have no direct connections to any of these companies - for example
In reply to Mauno Korpelainen
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Urs Hunkler -
Lynch said. "I don't see this as one replacing the other, certainly not today nor even in the foreseeable future." That's the last sentence of the article Mauno offered the link to.
We will not be able to influence the way how these technologies evolve very much. But we can prepare to use the best techniques for our goals the market offers.
And we have many changes coming. CSS3, HTML5, a dying IE6, Moodle 2.0
. All these changes are more for the good than for the bad with great potential for better designed websites and learning environments.
I'll for example prepare to use HTML5 video with a flash fallback. The iPad will make a wonderful platform for exiting learning environments. So I hope that the Moodle video plugin will go to handle HTML5 video soon.
We will not be able to influence the way how these technologies evolve very much. But we can prepare to use the best techniques for our goals the market offers.
And we have many changes coming. CSS3, HTML5, a dying IE6, Moodle 2.0
I'll for example prepare to use HTML5 video with a flash fallback. The iPad will make a wonderful platform for exiting learning environments. So I hope that the Moodle video plugin will go to handle HTML5 video soon.
In reply to Urs Hunkler
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Nicolas Martignoni -
See http://camendesign.com/code/video_for_everybody for a good HTML5 -> Flash fallback solution.
In reply to Nicolas Martignoni
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Craig Gunderson -
I would love to see a version of the Multimedia Filter that does Video For Everybody.
“If your browser supports it, HTML5 video is used… In other browsers that do not support <video>, it falls back to QuickTime… If QuickTime is not installed, Adobe Flash is used. It’s important to note that the user is not prompted to install QuickTime if they don’t have it. Fallback is instant and automatic… Finally, if all else fails, a placeholder image is shown and the user can download the video using the links provided.”
In reply to Craig Gunderson
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Nicolas Martignoni -
Yes, it would be cool indeed!
In reply to Craig Gunderson
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
From what I understand, we're talking about having a series of conditional statements to use whatever a browser can read and find the lowest common denominator. I think this defeats the purpose of HTML5. Aren't we supposed to be reducing the developer overhead and have less code and fewer conditional statements on our web pages?
Then, there's the people who still want to use Windows Media formats like WMA, WMV and AVI. Will browsers that recognise the video tag handle those or not?
I think it would be wonderful to have a web standard for playing media, i.e. video, captions, audio, 2D & 3D interactive animation, slideshows, etc. with parameters for player controls, behaviour and skins. At the moment, it's Flash. It's up to the people who develop browsers to come up with something better not worse!
Then, there's the people who still want to use Windows Media formats like WMA, WMV and AVI. Will browsers that recognise the video tag handle those or not?
I think it would be wonderful to have a web standard for playing media, i.e. video, captions, audio, 2D & 3D interactive animation, slideshows, etc. with parameters for player controls, behaviour and skins. At the moment, it's Flash. It's up to the people who develop browsers to come up with something better not worse!
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Guy Thomas -
If Google open source VP8 next month we will be sorted for html5 video!
In reply to Guy Thomas
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
Hi guy,
Yes, I've always been impressed by On2's CODECs. The VP8 CODEC looks like it will be no exception. So far I've only seen On2's own comparisons between H.264 and VP8 which, of course, look very favourable. I'm pretty sure it'll be at least as good as H.264, maybe even better and we can be pretty sure that Adobe, who are at least as good a champion of open source as Google, will give it their full support, meaning that it'll most probably run on Flash Player and AIR.
With Google's backing, it should get pretty good distribution, especially on the wave of mobile devices on Android and Linux that are about to come out as competitors for Apple's products. Since they're multitasking and open software platforms, they'll be a lot more attractive to users who want full access to the web, including content that requires plugins such as Quicktime, Flash Player and WMP.
However, Apple and Microsoft have their own agendas and profit models to follow, so whether they'll support an open source video CODEC or not remains to be seen. That could mean the usual on-going cross-browser, cross-platform compatibility issues that plague the web now. If at some magical moment, the big players decide to "make nice", put users first and agree on some open web standards, we can all celebrate.
Yes, I've always been impressed by On2's CODECs. The VP8 CODEC looks like it will be no exception. So far I've only seen On2's own comparisons between H.264 and VP8 which, of course, look very favourable. I'm pretty sure it'll be at least as good as H.264, maybe even better and we can be pretty sure that Adobe, who are at least as good a champion of open source as Google, will give it their full support, meaning that it'll most probably run on Flash Player and AIR.
With Google's backing, it should get pretty good distribution, especially on the wave of mobile devices on Android and Linux that are about to come out as competitors for Apple's products. Since they're multitasking and open software platforms, they'll be a lot more attractive to users who want full access to the web, including content that requires plugins such as Quicktime, Flash Player and WMP.
However, Apple and Microsoft have their own agendas and profit models to follow, so whether they'll support an open source video CODEC or not remains to be seen. That could mean the usual on-going cross-browser, cross-platform compatibility issues that plague the web now. If at some magical moment, the big players decide to "make nice", put users first and agree on some open web standards, we can all celebrate.
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Nicolas Martignoni -
I'm not so convinced that Flash is so wonderful as you describe (memory hog, bad performance, security holes), and would prefer an open standard for video on the web. I do think that with HTML5 new "video" tag and either VP8 or H.264 (provided that patent problematic with the latter is cleared), we'll have such a standard.
We don't need any big player (Adobe, Microsoft or Apple) to block us in another proprietary pseudo-standard.
In reply to Nicolas Martignoni
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
Hi Nicolas,
You're right that we need an open replacement for video players and I welcome HTML5. It'll make including video in web design much easier to implement for everyone.
I've heard many accusations about Flash's performance and security. Flash Player 9 upwards is pretty secure and a lot more secure that Javascript. Actionscript 3.0 is also a fully OOP language and performs very well with the most demanding of tasks such as rendering real-time interactive 3D animation. Some performance issues arise from Mac OSX not exposing its graphics API properly for hardware acceleration. No such problems exist for Windows and they're improving performance all the time, especially with Flash Player 10.1. Adobe have openly invited Apple and anyone else who has found performance issues to give specific details so that they can address them.
Like Javascript, Actionscript's performance depends a lot upon whoever is writing the software. There are best practices for optimum performance but, as we well know, not everyone follows them. In any comparison, however, even with the more than 100x improvements in Javascript performance these days, Javascript is still a run-time compiled language and can't come close to platforms like Flash, Java and Silverlight. This is especially important for mobile devices with small CPUs and integrated graphics processing.
As you may or may not know, there have been a lot of propaganda campaigns against Flash through undisclosed sources (some suspect Apple). None of the accusations I've seen site any actual data, specs or specific problems, although I have to admit I haven't been looking too hard. There may also be a lawsuit brewing between Adobe and Apple over Apple's attempts to block Flash: http://theflashblog.com/?p=1888
You're right that we need an open replacement for video players and I welcome HTML5. It'll make including video in web design much easier to implement for everyone.
I've heard many accusations about Flash's performance and security. Flash Player 9 upwards is pretty secure and a lot more secure that Javascript. Actionscript 3.0 is also a fully OOP language and performs very well with the most demanding of tasks such as rendering real-time interactive 3D animation. Some performance issues arise from Mac OSX not exposing its graphics API properly for hardware acceleration. No such problems exist for Windows and they're improving performance all the time, especially with Flash Player 10.1. Adobe have openly invited Apple and anyone else who has found performance issues to give specific details so that they can address them.
Like Javascript, Actionscript's performance depends a lot upon whoever is writing the software. There are best practices for optimum performance but, as we well know, not everyone follows them. In any comparison, however, even with the more than 100x improvements in Javascript performance these days, Javascript is still a run-time compiled language and can't come close to platforms like Flash, Java and Silverlight. This is especially important for mobile devices with small CPUs and integrated graphics processing.
As you may or may not know, there have been a lot of propaganda campaigns against Flash through undisclosed sources (some suspect Apple). None of the accusations I've seen site any actual data, specs or specific problems, although I have to admit I haven't been looking too hard. There may also be a lawsuit brewing between Adobe and Apple over Apple's attempts to block Flash: http://theflashblog.com/?p=1888
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by sam marshall -
Apple don't need a secret propaganda campaign against Flash - they're running a public, open propaganda campaign against Flash...
It's a real problem for those who want to pick a tribal position. Flash clearly is a terrible piece of closed [whatever claims may be made about that], unnecessary software that maybe has a few very specific uses, but as a general media-playing tool needs to be ditched as soon as possible in favour of better alternatives such as HTML5 - so Apple are in the right there. But the way Apple are actually behaving (eg banning Flash-developed apps from iPhone) is obviously indescribably evil! Who to root for...
(all opinions mine not my employer's!)
By the way, there is apparently an API for video acceleration in OS X 10.6.3 or something, so maybe Flash will get better performance on Mac in future. That said I don't think there are really any technical problems with using Flash for video (I can perfectly happily play Flash video full-screen on my Mac, maybe it uses a high CPU percentage but whatever), it just shouldn't be necessary.
For now, pragmatically, I'm sure here we will continue to use Flash video for a while longer because it remains the 'most likely to work' option. And, as Moodle is a server-side application, nasty 'fallback hacks' are not required: it's easy to detect the user agent and serve different content for different browsers (so that .mp4 files can be served as html5 video if an iphone is being used, flash player for everyone else). Anyone implemented/implementing this?
--sam
It's a real problem for those who want to pick a tribal position. Flash clearly is a terrible piece of closed [whatever claims may be made about that], unnecessary software that maybe has a few very specific uses, but as a general media-playing tool needs to be ditched as soon as possible in favour of better alternatives such as HTML5 - so Apple are in the right there. But the way Apple are actually behaving (eg banning Flash-developed apps from iPhone) is obviously indescribably evil! Who to root for...
(all opinions mine not my employer's!)
By the way, there is apparently an API for video acceleration in OS X 10.6.3 or something, so maybe Flash will get better performance on Mac in future. That said I don't think there are really any technical problems with using Flash for video (I can perfectly happily play Flash video full-screen on my Mac, maybe it uses a high CPU percentage but whatever), it just shouldn't be necessary.
For now, pragmatically, I'm sure here we will continue to use Flash video for a while longer because it remains the 'most likely to work' option. And, as Moodle is a server-side application, nasty 'fallback hacks' are not required: it's easy to detect the user agent and serve different content for different browsers (so that .mp4 files can be served as html5 video if an iphone is being used, flash player for everyone else). Anyone implemented/implementing this?
--sam
In reply to sam marshall
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
Hi Sam,
Since I seem to be in the position of defending the Flash corner...
"Flash clearly is a terrible piece of closed [whatever claims may be made about that], unnecessary software that maybe has a few very specific uses, but as a general media-playing tool needs to be ditched as soon as possible in favour of better alternatives such as HTML5..."
Could you provide a clearer explanation of what you mean by "clearly terrible", "closed" and "unnecessary"?
Since I seem to be in the position of defending the Flash corner...
"Flash clearly is a terrible piece of closed [whatever claims may be made about that], unnecessary software that maybe has a few very specific uses, but as a general media-playing tool needs to be ditched as soon as possible in favour of better alternatives such as HTML5..."
Could you provide a clearer explanation of what you mean by "clearly terrible", "closed" and "unnecessary"?
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Pablo Angulo -
Do you really need someone to explain the term "closed"? It's not only closed, it's the only closed piece of software in a lot of linux installations.
It's unnecesary from a developer perspective because we can write software with the same functionality without forcing the user to use closed software.
It's unnecesary from a user perspective because, except for video, most of the Flash in the web is just clutter. I've heard there's a 64 bit flash plugin now, but it's pretty recent and incomplete. I know a lot of users of 64 bit linux who only missed flash for youtube and similar video sites.
I'm the maintainer of a little plugin showing video (currently with flowplayer), and using html5 was in my TODO list, so this discussion is greatly welcome. Everybody, please post if you opt for any of the alternatives mentioned!
Regards
It's unnecesary from a developer perspective because we can write software with the same functionality without forcing the user to use closed software.
It's unnecesary from a user perspective because, except for video, most of the Flash in the web is just clutter. I've heard there's a 64 bit flash plugin now, but it's pretty recent and incomplete. I know a lot of users of 64 bit linux who only missed flash for youtube and similar video sites.
I'm the maintainer of a little plugin showing video (currently with flowplayer), and using html5 was in my TODO list, so this discussion is greatly welcome. Everybody, please post if you opt for any of the alternatives mentioned!
Regards
In reply to Pablo Angulo
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
OK, the closed bit. Where did you hear that Flash is closed?
Fact: Actionscript 3.0 is open source. There's a wide choice of authoring tools and compilers of which some are closed source and some are open source.
Another fact: Open source Flash player: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash
Fact: Actionscript 3.0 is open source. There's a wide choice of authoring tools and compilers of which some are closed source and some are open source.
Another fact: Open source Flash player: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnash
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Marcus Green -
Could you provide a link to source code to ActionScript 3.0?
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Pablo Angulo -
Another fact: Only Adobe has anything to say wrt Actionscript. As a result, some free tools like gnash work for some time, but then a new something appears, and they stop working. gnash could handle youtube video a couple of years ago, but suddenly it stopped working. Similar situtation to Microsoft so-called open xml format.
In reply to Pablo Angulo
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
The current video battle is much more complicated than the OOXML-war!
What I don't understand is, rather than telling Matt not to implement Flash, why not the other party implement a HTML5 competitor?
What I don't understand is, rather than telling Matt not to implement Flash, why not the other party implement a HTML5 competitor?
In reply to Visvanath Ratnaweera
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Pablo Angulo -
> The current video battle is much more complicated than the OOXML-war!
I agree, there are many parties involved.
> What I don't understand is, rather than telling Matt not to implement Flash, why not the other party implement a HTML5 competitor?
Nicolas and Stuart have come with practical solutions that do not force a solution onto user.
I agree, there are many parties involved.
> What I don't understand is, rather than telling Matt not to implement Flash, why not the other party implement a HTML5 competitor?
Nicolas and Stuart have come with practical solutions that do not force a solution onto user.
In reply to Pablo Angulo
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
>> The current video battle is much more complicated than the OOXML-war!
> I agree, there are many parties involved.
Yes, that was one of the main reasons. It was MS against the free world. ECMA, various ISO commities ware just working for them, I have first hand experience in SNV, the Swiss branch. Money rules
>> What I don't understand is, rather than telling Matt not to implement Flash, why not the other party implement a HTML5 competitor?
> Nicolas and Stuart have come with practical solutions that do not force a solution onto user.
Glad that, this is sorted out. Let there be a Flash-version and a HTML5-version and leave the choice to the learned users.
> I agree, there are many parties involved.
Yes, that was one of the main reasons. It was MS against the free world. ECMA, various ISO commities ware just working for them, I have first hand experience in SNV, the Swiss branch. Money rules
>> What I don't understand is, rather than telling Matt not to implement Flash, why not the other party implement a HTML5 competitor?
> Nicolas and Stuart have come with practical solutions that do not force a solution onto user.
Glad that, this is sorted out. Let there be a Flash-version and a HTML5-version and leave the choice to the learned users.
In reply to Visvanath Ratnaweera
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Patrick Pollet -
>Let there be a Flash-version and a HTML5-version and leave the choice to the learned users.
+1 especially after reading the free excerpt of the latest Forrester report
http://www.forrester.com/rb/Research/does_html_5_herald_end_of_ria/q/id/56768/t/2
Will HTML 5 make rich Internet application (RIA) technologies such as Adobe Flash/Flex and Microsoft Silverlight obsolete? For at least the next five years, the answer is a definite "no"; inconsistent implementations of the draft HTML 5 specification and immature tooling make building HTML 5 apps that work consistently across browsers and operating systems a real challenge. Furthermore, this "either/or" scenario is driven only by vendor politics, not by developer realities. Ultimately, HTML 5 and RIA platforms will be complementary technologies, and enterprise development shops will need to invest in both approaches to deliver expressive applications that combine reach and richness.
Cheers.
+1 especially after reading the free excerpt of the latest Forrester report
http://www.forrester.com/rb/Research/does_html_5_herald_end_of_ria/q/id/56768/t/2
Will HTML 5 make rich Internet application (RIA) technologies such as Adobe Flash/Flex and Microsoft Silverlight obsolete? For at least the next five years, the answer is a definite "no"; inconsistent implementations of the draft HTML 5 specification and immature tooling make building HTML 5 apps that work consistently across browsers and operating systems a real challenge. Furthermore, this "either/or" scenario is driven only by vendor politics, not by developer realities. Ultimately, HTML 5 and RIA platforms will be complementary technologies, and enterprise development shops will need to invest in both approaches to deliver expressive applications that combine reach and richness.
Cheers.
In reply to Patrick Pollet
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
I find it interesting that some people here feel so strongly about the topic that they'll tell/advise developers to start/stop using a particular platform. Personally, I'm quite happy to use both, whichever is the best tool for the job at the time.
At the moment and for the last decade or so, everyone's been falling over themselves to create interactive learning applications in Flash. Admittedly, many authorware programs publish Flash apps. that are big and slow and don't do anything that you can't do with HTML and Javascript but is that a problem with Flash or the authorware?
It's relatively quick and easy to develop very subtle and intricate interactions between users and apps. that add greatly to their learning experiences. I've yet to see anything approaching this level of interactivity in any other web based technologies that don't involve plugins of one kind or another. The only stuff I've seen that even approaches it are slow, heavy Javascript apps. such as Google Maps, which runs much more quickly and smoothly in Flash and allows far more flexibility and possibilities by the way, and Google Wave which slows down even my fairly powerful PC.
If we want ALL the bells and whistles, I'm afraid plugins, which are getting better and more efficient all the time, are here to stay for the foreseeable future.
At the moment and for the last decade or so, everyone's been falling over themselves to create interactive learning applications in Flash. Admittedly, many authorware programs publish Flash apps. that are big and slow and don't do anything that you can't do with HTML and Javascript but is that a problem with Flash or the authorware?
It's relatively quick and easy to develop very subtle and intricate interactions between users and apps. that add greatly to their learning experiences. I've yet to see anything approaching this level of interactivity in any other web based technologies that don't involve plugins of one kind or another. The only stuff I've seen that even approaches it are slow, heavy Javascript apps. such as Google Maps, which runs much more quickly and smoothly in Flash and allows far more flexibility and possibilities by the way, and Google Wave which slows down even my fairly powerful PC.
If we want ALL the bells and whistles, I'm afraid plugins, which are getting better and more efficient all the time, are here to stay for the foreseeable future.
Is it that we feel strongly, or just that we like a good religious war? Emacs/vim flamewar, anyone
In reply to Tim Hunt
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
What Emacs 
?
Seriously, what are we talking about?
a) Which is "better" Flash or HTML5?
b) Which is technically superior (features/ressources)?
c) Which politically better (propriotory, vendor lock-in, open, free, sustainable, ...)?
d) does Moodle want give its users the choice (even to be non-free if they wish)?
?Seriously, what are we talking about?
a) Which is "better" Flash or HTML5?
b) Which is technically superior (features/ressources)?
c) Which politically better (propriotory, vendor lock-in, open, free, sustainable, ...)?
d) does Moodle want give its users the choice (even to be non-free if they wish)?
In reply to Visvanath Ratnaweera
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Mark Johnson -
I think d) is closest to what we're talking about. But I think the conversation was started more to stop people getting ahead of themselves thinking that we're going to need to hurry and switch Moodle to HTML5 video just because it's "more" free.
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by sam marshall -
I think many of us don't want the bells and whistles! Probably most people have antipathy to Flash because it's generally used to add 'flashiness' (not surprisingly)... and subtract 'usability', 'accessibility', and 'user control'.
For example, most of us are familiar with the Flash application which should have been a normal web page, complete with no bookmark support, no back button support, tiny text that doesn't respond to the normal resize options, and horrible scrollbars that don't work properly.
Add to that the fact that most people are familiar with Flash's audio/visual capabilities mainly through adverts...
Personally, I don't get that worked up about Flash any more, but that's probably partly because I have the FlashBlock plugin installed! So I only see Flash when I want to - I don't get it forced on me. As a result, I only get annoyed when there is content I want which is only available in Flash.
Right now on a practical level Flash is still the #1 most reliable single way to play video. And I don't like horrible JavaScript hacks (if you have an iPhone then we'll use HTML5, or if you have Safari, but not if you have Firefox, where it doesn't work because Apple won't support the open-source format so instead we'll generate an alternative video format, or in Internet Explorer, there we'll use Flash again, or if there's an R in the month, then we'll install an entirely new javascript framework to download a java applet which might - just MIGHT - actually play the damn video).
So, while I certainly want html5 video tag to actually work with a single video & audio format that is high quality and is supported in all common browsers (preferably also an open = patent-free format that can be generated using free tools), wishes aren't ponies, and right now, meh, we'll have to keep using Flash.
--sam
For example, most of us are familiar with the Flash application which should have been a normal web page, complete with no bookmark support, no back button support, tiny text that doesn't respond to the normal resize options, and horrible scrollbars that don't work properly.
Add to that the fact that most people are familiar with Flash's audio/visual capabilities mainly through adverts...
Personally, I don't get that worked up about Flash any more, but that's probably partly because I have the FlashBlock plugin installed! So I only see Flash when I want to - I don't get it forced on me. As a result, I only get annoyed when there is content I want which is only available in Flash.
Right now on a practical level Flash is still the #1 most reliable single way to play video. And I don't like horrible JavaScript hacks (if you have an iPhone then we'll use HTML5, or if you have Safari, but not if you have Firefox, where it doesn't work because Apple won't support the open-source format so instead we'll generate an alternative video format, or in Internet Explorer, there we'll use Flash again, or if there's an R in the month, then we'll install an entirely new javascript framework to download a java applet which might - just MIGHT - actually play the damn video).
So, while I certainly want html5 video tag to actually work with a single video & audio format that is high quality and is supported in all common browsers (preferably also an open = patent-free format that can be generated using free tools), wishes aren't ponies, and right now, meh, we'll have to keep using Flash.
--sam
In reply to sam marshall
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
Hi sam,
I'm with you on this. I think browser plugins that block Flash are wonderful too! I'd rather blame the sponsored content business model and advertisers than the medium for the annoying adverts though, the same deal with TV. If there wasn't Flash, it'd be some other medium and sometimes is (That's why I also like the NoScript Javascript blocker plugin).
I also understand the dismay at Flash websites that really should be HTML. I'm with everyone on that too. I too, think that there is a lot of misuse of Flash and developers often do "clever" stuff just because they can. I don't think this is limited to Flash though.
Regarding accessibility, like HTML, Flash supports accessibility but it does require a little extra work by developers so I can see how a lot of sites and apps are a nightmare for users with disabilities.
Regarding browser controls and the back button, Flash also supports this (called "deep linking") but again, it requires some extra work on the part of developers.
I guess in the race to meet deadlines at the lowest possible cost, developers won't include essential features that they consider as superfluous or optional. Perhaps the accessibility laws in various countries need to be tightened for the very significant sections of our societies who stand to benefit most from web access.
I'm with you on this. I think browser plugins that block Flash are wonderful too! I'd rather blame the sponsored content business model and advertisers than the medium for the annoying adverts though, the same deal with TV. If there wasn't Flash, it'd be some other medium and sometimes is (That's why I also like the NoScript Javascript blocker plugin).
I also understand the dismay at Flash websites that really should be HTML. I'm with everyone on that too. I too, think that there is a lot of misuse of Flash and developers often do "clever" stuff just because they can. I don't think this is limited to Flash though.
Regarding accessibility, like HTML, Flash supports accessibility but it does require a little extra work by developers so I can see how a lot of sites and apps are a nightmare for users with disabilities.
Regarding browser controls and the back button, Flash also supports this (called "deep linking") but again, it requires some extra work on the part of developers.
I guess in the race to meet deadlines at the lowest possible cost, developers won't include essential features that they consider as superfluous or optional. Perhaps the accessibility laws in various countries need to be tightened for the very significant sections of our societies who stand to benefit most from web access.
In reply to sam marshall
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
BTW, those bells and whistles I mentioned. Many people do want them. To demonstrate what I mean, check out the demos of the Media Player activity module I've been developing: http://matbury.com/moodle/course/view.php?id=9#section-9
This and its predecessor, the FLV Player, have been very popular. I've done searches on Google for the module help pages and they're installed on a wide range of university, college, school and business Moodle sites. It's a one-stop solution for the majority of course content developers' needs for using multimedia as a learning resource and it's relatively easy for non-technical staff to deploy some very complex features.
If IE, Safari, FF, et al agreed on a web standard, and we assume that content developers had no problem transcoding video files into the proscribed CODEC and container without serious file degradation and leaving "artefacts" in the streams, how easy do you think it would be to implement similar features as this (see the demos) in HTML5?
This and its predecessor, the FLV Player, have been very popular. I've done searches on Google for the module help pages and they're installed on a wide range of university, college, school and business Moodle sites. It's a one-stop solution for the majority of course content developers' needs for using multimedia as a learning resource and it's relatively easy for non-technical staff to deploy some very complex features.
If IE, Safari, FF, et al agreed on a web standard, and we assume that content developers had no problem transcoding video files into the proscribed CODEC and container without serious file degradation and leaving "artefacts" in the streams, how easy do you think it would be to implement similar features as this (see the demos) in HTML5?
Here's some more on accessibility in Flash from none other than Web AIM. The author claims that in many ways, Flash content can be made more accessible than HTML: http://www.webaim.org/techniques/flash/
Flash also supports multi-touch so it doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to see how this can help with accessibility, e.g. scalable graphics for menu buttons for the visually impaired, touch for assistance, less of a reliance on tabbing, etc. : http://theflashblog.com/?p=1975
Flash also supports multi-touch so it doesn't take a great leap of the imagination to see how this can help with accessibility, e.g. scalable graphics for menu buttons for the visually impaired, touch for assistance, less of a reliance on tabbing, etc. : http://theflashblog.com/?p=1975
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Penny Leach -
Just for interest (I am dreadfully behind on reading Moodle forum emails, woe), one of our guys here at Liip recently did some **really amazing** work on making a complicated Flash game completely accessible and achieved the highest rating possible (AA+) from the Swiss company "Access 4 All" who audit sites for accessibility (http://access4all.ch/blog/?p=1333 (German))
You can read more about what he did on our blog here:
http://blog.liip.ch/archive/2010/06/21/the-quest-for-accessible-flash-part1.html
and here:
http://blog.liip.ch/archive/2010/06/21/the-quest-for-accessible-flash-part2.html
I know this is a gratuitous plug, but I was totally impressed with it, and it definitely proves that Flash *can* be accessible.
You can read more about what he did on our blog here:
http://blog.liip.ch/archive/2010/06/21/the-quest-for-accessible-flash-part1.html
and here:
http://blog.liip.ch/archive/2010/06/21/the-quest-for-accessible-flash-part2.html
I know this is a gratuitous plug, but I was totally impressed with it, and it definitely proves that Flash *can* be accessible.
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Mark Johnson -
I don't want to turn this into a debate about the Open Source definition, but Adobe Flash is definitely a closed source application, and SWF is a proprietary file format. Actionscript is based on ECMAScript which is an open standard, and there are open source tools made by people other than Adobe for creating/reading swf files, but to call Flash "open" in a software sense is a definite misue of the term.
In reply to Mark Johnson
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
@Mark Johnson, please read this: http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Blogs/Beagleblog/Apple-s-Steve-Jobs-is-spreading-FUD-on-Flash?blogbox
Also, the Flash source file format has changed from the binary FLA format to XML (XFL) with CS5 so it's more open to editing across different IDEs and compilers than ever before. It's also handy for doing search and replace across large numbers of projects: http://theflashblog.com/?p=1986
Also, the Flash source file format has changed from the binary FLA format to XML (XFL) with CS5 so it's more open to editing across different IDEs and compilers than ever before. It's also handy for doing search and replace across large numbers of projects: http://theflashblog.com/?p=1986
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Mark Johnson -
I read Steve Jobs's letter with a large handful of salt at the ready. I certainly don't think that H.264 is the answer to open video on the web (we need to look to Ogg or VP8 for that), and Apple calling Adobe closed is like the Pope calling the Vicar of Dibley pious.
However I stand by my point that Flash isn't open. I wasn't aware that Flash had switched to XML formats for it's project files, but at the end of the day the only people who control Flash's formats is Adobe. If they decide to change the format of Flash files from one version of the Creative Suite (or Player!) to the next, they can, in exactly the same way Microsoft have changed formats between versions of Office in the past.
By contrast, HTML5 is an open W3C standard which while it may evolve over time, won't change on the whim of one company once the standard is defined.
None of that really has anything to do with Moodle, but it clarifies my position somewhat
However I stand by my point that Flash isn't open. I wasn't aware that Flash had switched to XML formats for it's project files, but at the end of the day the only people who control Flash's formats is Adobe. If they decide to change the format of Flash files from one version of the Creative Suite (or Player!) to the next, they can, in exactly the same way Microsoft have changed formats between versions of Office in the past.
By contrast, HTML5 is an open W3C standard which while it may evolve over time, won't change on the whim of one company once the standard is defined.
None of that really has anything to do with Moodle, but it clarifies my position somewhat
In reply to Mark Johnson
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by sam marshall -
Ogg Theora may be a great video format (I've seen criticisms of the container format but in practice, who really cares) but unfortunately, current implementations do appear to have occasional problems. In Firefox, my home Mac seems to peg a CPU playing it (although the actual playback is fine). Doesn't happen on my much slower PC at work, so it must be a glitch in Firefox or whatever, but... Again, HTML5 and .ogv are certainly the least-closed web video solution available, but there's definitely no rush to use it for something relatively staid and stable like a learning environment.
I don't think there's a fundamental performance problem but, for example, it may be that current decoder hardware in system-on-chips such as those used in all smartphones and mobile devices cannot be used to decode Theora; or that it's harder to use it that way. The current decoder certainly has an Intel-optimised build, but similarly, it may need work to optimise it to run on the ARM processors used in all mobile devices. I'm speculating here but - wait, let's follow the write-speculation-first-look-it-up-later approach - oh look, I'm right. See this article about investment in an ARM-based codec. Some of this may be responsible for Apple's stance; they wouldn't want to support a format that their money-spinning mobile devices can't play, can't play well, or that forces a significant decrease in battery life on those devices.
As for Flash being 'open', I agree control of the format is one important way to consider this, but not the only one. W3C these days requires interoperable implementations by three different suppliers before something is considered final, right? If at some point in future there are a couple other people making Flash players, at least one of which is open-source, and all of which (a) reliably play the vast majority of Flash content including all the 'major names', and (b) keep pace with Flash updates, then Flash will indeed start looking a lot more open.
Flash fans shouldn't worry too much that their preferred system is considered not to be truly open. Java isn't even considered truly open, despite the vast majority of Java code being released as open-source, despite many alternative implementations, and despite that Sun/Oracle put 'Open' into the name of the product... (Oh, and the Java virtual machine/class format was 'open', to the extent of being published in a book, since version 1.0 or before, but...)
--sam
I don't think there's a fundamental performance problem but, for example, it may be that current decoder hardware in system-on-chips such as those used in all smartphones and mobile devices cannot be used to decode Theora; or that it's harder to use it that way. The current decoder certainly has an Intel-optimised build, but similarly, it may need work to optimise it to run on the ARM processors used in all mobile devices. I'm speculating here but - wait, let's follow the write-speculation-first-look-it-up-later approach - oh look, I'm right. See this article about investment in an ARM-based codec. Some of this may be responsible for Apple's stance; they wouldn't want to support a format that their money-spinning mobile devices can't play, can't play well, or that forces a significant decrease in battery life on those devices.
As for Flash being 'open', I agree control of the format is one important way to consider this, but not the only one. W3C these days requires interoperable implementations by three different suppliers before something is considered final, right? If at some point in future there are a couple other people making Flash players, at least one of which is open-source, and all of which (a) reliably play the vast majority of Flash content including all the 'major names', and (b) keep pace with Flash updates, then Flash will indeed start looking a lot more open.
Flash fans shouldn't worry too much that their preferred system is considered not to be truly open. Java isn't even considered truly open, despite the vast majority of Java code being released as open-source, despite many alternative implementations, and despite that Sun/Oracle put 'Open' into the name of the product... (Oh, and the Java virtual machine/class format was 'open', to the extent of being published in a book, since version 1.0 or before, but...)
--sam
In reply to sam marshall
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
Reported in the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10095730.stm
"IE9 promises to support HTML5, the next-generation standard for coding web pages, which aims to reduce the need for software plug-ins, such as Flash.
Apple remains a key rival for Microsoft in the browser market and it has seen its Safari browser gain market share but the two rivals are united when it comes to supporting the HTML5 web standards.
Apple sees HTML5 - along with other technologies such as the h.264 standard for video - as a replacement for Flash and has been involved in a high-profile spat with Flash owners Adobe.
Apple has banned the video standard Flash on many of its products."
Is the top technology news http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10095730.stm and even linked from the main page http://news.bbc.co.uk !
"IE9 promises to support HTML5, the next-generation standard for coding web pages, which aims to reduce the need for software plug-ins, such as Flash.
Apple remains a key rival for Microsoft in the browser market and it has seen its Safari browser gain market share but the two rivals are united when it comes to supporting the HTML5 web standards.
Apple sees HTML5 - along with other technologies such as the h.264 standard for video - as a replacement for Flash and has been involved in a high-profile spat with Flash owners Adobe.
Apple has banned the video standard Flash on many of its products."
Is the top technology news http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/10095730.stm and even linked from the main page http://news.bbc.co.uk !
In reply to Visvanath Ratnaweera
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
A lot of the opinions here seem to regard Flash only as a means to display frame animation (cartoons) and video. I welcome the day that browsers do away with the need to use plugins to play video and audio content. I think it should be as easy as displaying images and text but the problem is that browser development hasn't kept up with the demands of content providers and users and that's why plugins such as Flash and Quicktime have been necessary for that.
AFAIK, for the foreseeable future, there isn't any web alternatives to Flash, Java and Silverlight in browsers for all the other things they can do. What about web conferencing, VoIP, shared desktops and whiteboards, real time interactive 3D modelling, speech recognition, etc. that are currently being done on these platforms? Are we going to see practical, effective alternative HTML5 implementations of these?
AFAIK, for the foreseeable future, there isn't any web alternatives to Flash, Java and Silverlight in browsers for all the other things they can do. What about web conferencing, VoIP, shared desktops and whiteboards, real time interactive 3D modelling, speech recognition, etc. that are currently being done on these platforms? Are we going to see practical, effective alternative HTML5 implementations of these?
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Mauno Korpelainen -
Matt,
that day may not be so far as you (and many others?) seem to believe (year 2022)
Since the day when people in Microsoft started to support ideas of HTML5 everything changed and we will see the new IE9 soon supporting most features of HTML5 like all other modern browsers. Read the latest articles from http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/
Dean Hachamovitch from MS said it actually well:
"The future of the web is HTML5."
"...Despite these issues, Flash remains an important part of delivering a good consumer experience on today’s web."
Some people live always in the past, some in the future and most people try to find the balance between the past and the future.
Most likely we will see practical or at least demo versions of all of those applications you mentioned before the end of this year.
There is no good reason why HTML5 could not do the same things as flash in modern browsers - HTML5 can do a lot more...
Some people will use IE6 even in 2022 and flash will always be available for current browsers (as a downloadable plugin).
In reply to Mauno Korpelainen
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
I found a nice slide show comparing Flex and HTML5: http://www.slideshare.net/wuzziwug/flex-vs-html5-for-rias-presentation
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Mauno Korpelainen -
That slide show was done in 2009 - and for HTML5 http://caniuse.com/ it was "Far past"
Quite many things have changed during 2009-2010...and will change during the coming years.
Chrome 5 supports already 90% of currently displayed HTML5 features and other browsers will follow - if you check any mobile phone company pages the same trend can be seen in mobile browsers before the end of this year.
In reply to Mauno Korpelainen
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
Good to see that everyone's pushing ahead with it.
I hope that HTML5 support will encourage more users towards better web browsers too.
I hope that HTML5 support will encourage more users towards better web browsers too.
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
I may be vastly behind in this debate but I see things moving in the right direction, see for example "Firefox 4 Beta 1 Shines On HTML5"
http://developers.slashdot.org/story/10/07/08/1943208/Firefox-4-Beta-1-Shines-On-HTML5
http://developers.slashdot.org/story/10/07/08/1943208/Firefox-4-Beta-1-Shines-On-HTML5
In reply to Visvanath Ratnaweera
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Visvanath Ratnaweera -
Amazing things happening here, see http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2011/03/investigating_p.html
Found in /. http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/03/12/1412234/Investigating-the-Performance-of-Firefox-4-and-IE9
Found in /. http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/03/12/1412234/Investigating-the-Performance-of-Firefox-4-and-IE9
In reply to Nicolas Martignoni
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Stuart Lamour -
Been using the jquery plugin oiplayer http://www.openbeelden.nl/oiplayer/
which seems to do the trick (html5 if supported, otherwise flash and even java player) with very little code.
which seems to do the trick (html5 if supported, otherwise flash and even java player) with very little code.
In reply to Nicolas Martignoni
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Adrian Norman -
Hello I'm trying to find the best solution to stream video from within Moodle 1.9.10 courses. I have a couple of questions:
Does Moodle 1.9.10 support HTML5? I have Multimedia plugins disabled and the Embed Object Code enabled. I noticed if I try to use the Video element with either of this options the other way around, Moodle would spew up a fatal error. I've also noticed once I put the HTML5-Object code into an html element Moodle changes it. I've been using the code from the Dive into HTML5 guide which is an HTML5 and Flash fallback strategy... and it is a bit dodgy - meaning Moodle changes the code if I go back to edit it.
Do I need to use a Multimedia player plugin like the one Matt Bury has created? Would this be a better option? I am trying to make the video playable across browsers and devices. The main problem is, here in Sydney, a lot of our users are using IE8.
Anyone have any ideas?
Thanks!
Adrian
In reply to Adrian Norman
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
Hi Adrian,
I'm assuming you mean playing video files (progressive download) from within Moodle rather than streaming them. Streaming requires a media server and HTML5 doesn't currently support media streaming.
A few things to mention:
- A significant percentage of web browsers still don't support HTML5 video tags. This percentage increases on managed networks in schools, colleges, universities and businesses who often insist on using older versions of web browsers, like IE6!
- All new web browsers support HTML5 video tags but they use different CODECs. MS IE9 and Apple Safari 5 use H.264 (owned by MPEG - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mpeg and you'll eventually need to purchase licences), Firefox uses OGG (open source) and Google Chrome uses WebM (On VP8 which Google bought and released as open source).
- Most web browsers support Flash. Only those on iOS (iPhone and iPad) don't.
This means that you have two options to target all the major browsers for video deployment:
- Use HTML5 video tags in triplicate and encode each video in triplicate to match the tags, one for each MIME type mp4, ogg and webm. Browsers should select the correct MIME type to match its built in CODEC and media player.
- Deploy video as Flash encoded with H.264 (Flash supports H.264 as well as a range of other CODECs) which will play in all browsers that support Flash. Use HTML5 video tags that target the mp4 MIME type as the alternative embed code for when Flash isn't supported, i.e. on iOS (iPhone and iPad). The Media Player module already provides HTML5 fallback automatically. You can see it work, or not work, depending on your browser's support for the video CODEC and HTML5, if you disable the Flash plugin in your browser.
Finally, HMTL5 video tags don't support any of the advanced features of the Media Player module (the JW Media Player). Some people are working on Javascript workarounds for things like captions and live streaming but they're a long way from being stable and put a heavy load on users' CPUs.
I hope this helps!
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Hubert Chathi -
Firefox (as of version 4) supports WebM, so you "only" need to encode twice. And I've heard that IE will play WebM as well if you have the right codec installed.
In reply to Hubert Chathi
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Adrian Norman -
So you don't need to worry about OGG?
In reply to Matt Bury
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Adrian Norman -
Thanks Matt for your reply. So, am I right in thinking Moodle 1.9 doesn't do anything funky to the Video element code? (I have multimedia plugins turned off and Embed Object code turned on) I seem to be getting erratic results. I'm using the following code (from dive into HTLM5 by Mark Pilgrim).
<video id="video" width="400" height="225" preload controls>
<source src="i/pr6.webm" type='video/webm; codecs="vp8, vorbis"' />
<source src="i/pr6.ogv" type='video/ogg; codecs="theora, vorbis"' />
<source src="i/pr6.mp4" />
<object width="400" height="225" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"data="http://releases.flowplayer.org/swf/flowplayer-3.2.1.swf">
<param name="movie" value="http://releases.flowplayer.org/swf/flowplayer-3.2.1.swf" />
<param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" />
<param name="flashvars" value='config={"clip":{"url":"","autoPlay":false,"autoBuffering":true}}' /><p>Download video as <a href=i/pr6.mp4>MP4</a>, <a href=i/pr6.webm>WebM</a>, or <a href=i/pr6.ogv>Ogg</a>.</p>
</object>
</video>
(hmmmm... I see that my browser (Chrome) tries to play the mp4 in the code above)
I've noticed the code gets mangled when I go back to edit it... and doesn't work. Now I've noticed, even playing in the latest version of Firefox and Chrome that the Flash player is invoked in both instances (as I see the Flowplayer controller).... so would I be right in thinking that somehow the Video element is not working as it should for some reason???
Now, I'm wondering now if using your excellent Media Player might be worth trying. I guess as it's a flash solution it won't work on iPads and iPhones.
I'm finding this whole video thing a minefield!
Thanks!
Adrian
In reply to Adrian Norman
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Matt Bury -
In reply to Urs Hunkler
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Joseph Rézeau -
Urs:
I suppose you meant to write "... for existing learning environments", not "for going away from them"The iPad will make a wonderful platform for exiting learning environments.
In reply to Joseph Rézeau
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Glenys Hanson -
Hi Joseph,
Oh, I thought Urs intended to write, "The iPad will make a wonderful platform for exciting learning environments."
And thanks for giving me an opportunity to contribute to the developer forum when I'm not one.
Cheers,
Glenys
Oh, I thought Urs intended to write, "The iPad will make a wonderful platform for exciting learning environments."
And thanks for giving me an opportunity to contribute to the developer forum when I'm not one.
Cheers,
Glenys
In reply to Glenys Hanson
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Mauno Korpelainen -
Glenys,
that's exactly what I thought when I read that previous post - the exciting learning environments in the near future...but I don't mind seeing new features of HTML5 in the existing learning environments too...including moodle...
In reply to Joseph Rézeau
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Urs Hunkler -
Yep Joseph, I meant quite different from what we know now - but certainly with Moodle 2.
In reply to Urs Hunkler
Re: Developer announcement: Flash vs. HTML5 - Please read this
by Josué Plante -
It's now more than two years later and HTML5 is still not fully supported in any major browser... See by yourself at http://www.html5test.com. Are there any solution to replace an HTML5 document with an XHTML or Flash if the user's browser doesn't support HTML5 ?