Questions about the new HTML5?

[ram2500]

I have been hearing lately about HTML5 and primarily about it being a Flash replacement. My question is, how is it supposed to be a Flash replacement? Adobe apparently is concerned about this new standard and I have also heard about Apple's "abandonment" of it on its computers and portable products. My question is, what does it really do? I have read about HTML5 and its new features, but how does it replace Flash objects on a page? I am quite interested as I do teach Web page design (along with science) and my class works with Adobe Flash as well.

[smellyman]

I don't know all the ins and outs of it, but you can try it on youtube HERE (http://www.youtube.com/html5).

Make sure your browser supports it.

[TheNerdAL]

HTML5 is better than Flash because Flash uses a lot of CPU usage and HTML5 uses less than Flash, that's why it's better. I think Apple is going or has gone to HTML5. Steve Jobs doesn't want Flash in their products, I think.

[ram2500]

Does anyone know precisely how HTML5 can replace Flash? In other words, the items that are ordinarily Flash objects (banners, videos, ads, etc.)--what are they in HTML5? I have heard something about embedding...this is all new to me.

[KiraLexi]

HTML5 has <video> and <audio> tags. The problem is that no video codec has been standardized, with different browsers supporting some, all, or none of: VP8, H264, and Theora.

[Frak]

HTML5 is better than Flash because Flash uses a lot of CPU usage and HTML5 uses less than Flash, that's why it's better. I think Apple is going or has gone to HTML5. Steve Jobs doesn't want Flash in their products, I think.
That all depends on the implementation. If the decoder is poor, it could lag behind flash performance.

Is HTML5 a Flash killer? No. It won't be either. HTML5 allows the use of <video> which can produce a video player within the browser.

PROBLEM:
Safari only supports H.264
Firefox only supports Ogg and WebM
Opera only supports Ogg and WebM

Chrome supports H.264, Ogg and WebM
IE9 will support all codecs with DirectShow filters installed.

What this means is that you will need both H.264 and WebM formats to hit the largest portion of the market.

[3rdalbum]

To most people, Flash is the thing that lets you play Youtube videos in your browser. To some people, Flash is that PLUS you can create animations in it.

Flash is so much more. You can create full-featured programs and interactive presentations in Flash. For interactivity and multimedia, Flash absolutely OWNS HTML 5.

There's too much emphasis on "OMG, HTML5 on Youtube!!!!" and not enough thought about "What can we add to HTML 5 to replace the other 99% of Flash's functionality?".

[orlox]

Is HTML5 a Flash killer? No. It won't be either. HTML5 allows the use of <video> which can produce a video player within the browser.

HTML5 IS a potential flash killer. The low level canvas element allows to write graphics to a 2d bitmap allowing all kinds of stuff. Go look on youtube for o3d, and see what can be done with html5. Heck, there's even a version of quake that runs with pure html5!

Another amazing thing in html5 is the svg elements, that allows svg graphics to be displayed and modified through javascipt. Once again, the potential in this is amazing, allowing for impressive enhancements in websites that take advantage of this technologies.

In my opinion, html5 once adopted, and once it has mature tools to produce content with it, will kick flashs *** up to the next century. We will have happier web developers and happier users, browsing on more secure platforms (I believe that more than half of IE the critical exploits are produced not inherently by IE, but by adobe flash)

If you want to see some awesome stuff, go check:

http://www.chromeexperiments.com/

Chrome or chromium can load al of those nicely, firefox doesnt always play nice with all. I particularly reccomend this one:

http://www.chromeexperiments.com/detail/realtime-video-ascii-conversion/

And check the "never gonna give you up" video!

[lykwydchykyn]

CSS3 will also add a lot of features that obviate the need for flash in certain use cases, such as animated transitions, gradients, moving or rotating objects on the page, etc.

I don't think it's about replacing flash directly, but rather adding capabilities to HTML/CSS/Javascript that currently require flash to implement.

And it's not just about replacing flash, but adding a whole host of new capabilities to the web developer's toolbox. Wikipedia has a decent article on HTML5, for the curious.

[Frak]

HTML5 IS a potential flash killer. The low level canvas element allows to write graphics to a 2d bitmap allowing all kinds of stuff. Go look on youtube for o3d, and see what can be done with html5. Heck, there's even a version of quake that runs with pure html5!

Another amazing thing in html5 is the svg elements, that allows svg graphics to be displayed and modified through javascipt. Once again, the potential in this is amazing, allowing for impressive enhancements in websites that take advantage of this technologies.

In my opinion, html5 once adopted, and once it has mature tools to produce content with it, will kick flashs *** up to the next century. We will have happier web developers and happier users, browsing on more secure platforms (I believe that more than half of IE the critical exploits are produced not inherently by IE, but by adobe flash)

When you find an Illustrator to Canvas plugin, let me and a whole myriad of other web designers know.

As for everything else, we'll be waiting a good five years before any of these technologies mature enough to be used. Until then, Flash will still be available on 98% of the platforms today. It's not going anywhere soon, and will probably exist for another decade in strong numbers. Also, if the tests are any indication, Flash still beats Canvas (most browsers) in rendering speed and capabilities.

[orlox]

When you find an Illustrator to Canvas plugin, let me and a whole myriad of other web designers know.

As for everything else, we'll be waiting a good five years before any of these technologies mature enough to be used. Until then, Flash will still be available on 98% of the platforms today. It's not going anywhere soon, and will probably exist for another decade in strong numbers. Also, if the tests are any indication, Flash still beats Canvas (most browsers) in rendering speed and capabilities.

Hence the words "potential", "once adopted" and "once it has mature tools to produce content with it" were used in my comments. However, I think the timespan for adoption is severely smaller than what you mention.

Adobe's next version of flash (CS5 I believe) WILL be able to export to html canvas. Though the quality of the export function can't be commented right now, it's important that soon, a well established tool to create content will be able to export to html5 (and older content could be ported if the export is good enough), and it's coming soon.

If anything, adobe is now on a race to keep flash relevant in the production of new content on the web. All big players on the web (microsoft with ie9, apple and google) are promoting web standards with html5 and css3, so adobe better get some good support for html5 soon, or I don't think flash (the editor, not the already generated content) will be very relevant...

[Dr. C]

Google releasing VP8 under a Free Software license and the WebM project will change all of this. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1487853&highlight=vp8

By the way Adobe is a supporter of VP8. The only opponents of VP8 are Apple and the MPEG-LA. WebM is already on the way to becoming the HTML5 standard.

[Frak]

Hence the words "potential", "once adopted" and "once it has mature tools to produce content with it" were used in my comments. However, I think the timespan for adoption is severely smaller than what you mention.

Adobe's next version of flash (CS5 I believe) WILL be able to export to html canvas. Though the quality of the export function can't be commented right now, it's important that soon, a well established tool to create content will be able to export to html5 (and older content could be ported if the export is good enough), and it's coming soon.

If anything, adobe is now on a race to keep flash relevant in the production of new content on the web. All big players on the web (microsoft with ie9, apple and google) are promoting web standards with html5 and css3, so adobe better get some good support for html5 soon, or I don't think flash (the editor, not the already generated content) will be very relevant...
Adobe holds the future of Flash in their hands, whether they see that or not. People will not just go use Canvas without an authoring tool, and Adobe are the only ones capable of releasing one that the market would accept.

Flash will be very relevant for the next decade. The technology exists, but the tools aren't there.

EDIT
Just thought, HTML5 doesn't provide the appropriate digital rights management or advertising solutions that Flash does. Those will be the main determining factors for companies.


Google releasing VP8 under a Free Software license and the WebM project will change all of this. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1487853&highlight=vp8

By the way Adobe is a supporter of VP8. The only opponents of VP8 are Apple and the MPEG-LA. WebM is already on the way to becoming the HTML5 standard.

W3C doesn't control formats. There will never be a standard video format.

[murderslastcrow]

http://www.canvasdemos.com/ A good example showing that media players, interactive video, web design, 3d, and games can all be made using HTML5 and used TODAY. Just try it out for yourself.

It's already this far, and Adobe Flash CS5 has basic support for it. HTML5 replacing Flash isn't all that farfetched, since they support the same features.

[Colonel Kilkenny]

Another amazing thing in html5 is the svg elements, that allows svg graphics to be displayed and modified through javascipt. Once again, the potential in this is amazing, allowing for impressive enhancements in websites that take advantage of this technologies.

SVG has nothing to do with HTML5. SVG has existed for a long time and for a long time only company that really tried to push SVG was Opera. Nowadays WebKit supports it okayish and Mozilla is getting there (still both (and especially Mozilla) suck compared to Opera).

[formaldehyde_spoon]

That all depends on the implementation. If the decoder is poor, it could lag behind flash performance.

Is HTML5 a Flash killer? No. It won't be either. HTML5 allows the use of <video> which can produce a video player within the browser.

PROBLEM:
Safari only supports H.264
Firefox only supports Ogg and WebM
Opera only supports Ogg and WebM

Chrome supports H.264, Ogg and WebM
IE9 will support all codecs with DirectShow filters installed.

What this means is that you will need both H.264 and WebM formats to hit the largest portion of the market.

Apple haven't actually said that they won't support WebM in the future.
... EDIT
Just thought, HTML5 doesn't provide the appropriate digital rights management or advertising solutions that Flash does. Those will be the main determining factors for companies.
I think this is a big issue for html5. Perhaps Apple will produce an answer? :p


W3C doesn't control formats. There will never be a standard video format.He meant de-facto standard, of course.

[madnessjack]

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1496359

I didn't believe it till I saw that