PDA

View Full Version : Ubuntu and HTML5?



8jwong14
May 10th, 2011, 12:35 AM
Some people say that HTML5 will kill of Flash but that is a bit doubtful. Firstly, are flash and HTML5 direct competitors? Do they do the same functions and more? Will Ubuntu move to support HTML5 and reduce any sort of compatibility issues unlike flash?

Dustin2128
May 10th, 2011, 12:41 AM
Some people say that HTML5 will kill of Flash but that is a bit doubtful. Firstly, are flash and HTML5 direct competitors? Do they do the same functions and more? Will Ubuntu move to support HTML5 and reduce any sort of compatibility issues unlike flash?
HTML5 is simply the next release of the HTML markup language used to create web pages already. It is fully open and supported by every modern browser, and also internet explorer 9 (e.g. no cross platform compatibility issues as soon as the damn codec wars finish up). It simply supports plenty of new features (primarily embedded video), which, when combined with a lot of new css3 features, could replace flash in many places. This is a good thing as flash is closed, slow, proprietary, and the source of oh so much vulnerability on otherwise secure systems. However, your post rings of being somewhat mis/underinformed about what exactly html5 is, so check these pages out:http://www.html5rocks.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5


Also, sorry if my posts are a bit incoherent today, I'm looped up on allergy meds.

PhillyPhil
May 10th, 2011, 12:44 AM
Well, Flash is mainly used for embedded video, which html5 can do; ads, which html5 can do; and lastly, (and probably least) games, which html5 can at least do most of.

It might not directly annihilate flash, but it will take a huge (majority) chunk of flash's 'market', and when that happens the percentage of machines with flash installed will drop, and that will push devs away from using flash in the first place.

8jwong14
May 10th, 2011, 12:47 AM
HTML5 is simply the next release of the HTML markup language used to create web pages already. It is fully open and supported by every modern browser, and also internet explorer 9 (e.g. no cross platform compatibility issues as soon as the damn codec wars finish up). It simply supports plenty of new features (primarily embedded video), which, when combined with a lot of new css3 features, could replace flash in many places. This is a good thing as flash is closed, slow, proprietary, and the source of oh so much vulnerability on otherwise secure systems. However, your post rings of being somewhat mis/underinformed about what exactly html5 is, so check these pages out:http://www.html5rocks.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5


Also, sorry if my posts are a bit incoherent today, I'm looped up on allergy meds.
That's good news for us Ubuntu users then?

Ah allergies... How I hate you I kept sneezing in class today and my eyes were so itchy I couldn't concentrate at all.

Dustin2128
May 10th, 2011, 12:50 AM
Well, Flash is mainly used for embedded video, which html5 can do; ads, which html5 can do; and lastly, (and probably least) games, which html5 can at least do most of.

It might not directly annihilate flash, but it will take a huge (majority) chunk of flash's 'market', and when that happens the percentage of machines with flash installed will drop, and that will push devs away from using flash in the first place.
While not directly tied to HTML5, webGL is coming along nicely and could most likely take care of the rest of flash. Check this out: http://chromeexperiments.com/webgl
Works fine in firefox 4. Usually really crappy in 3.6 and opera. Chrome obviously handles it fine.

Starks
May 10th, 2011, 01:06 AM
until html5 can do live streaming, it won't kill off flash

Retlol
May 10th, 2011, 01:19 AM
until html5 can do live streaming, it won't kill off flash

<video src="livestreamaddress"></video>

3rdalbum
May 10th, 2011, 01:24 AM
until html5 can do live streaming, it won't kill off flash

I'm pretty sure you could rig up something at the server end to do live streaming that will work on HTML 5 clients. Live streaming requires preparation at the server end anyway, so what's the difference?

I'll also point out that Flash currently provides some very sophisticated authoring tools for interaction and animation. There's nothing comparable for HTML 5's features. Until then, developers will naturally want to use Flash instead, because doing it all in HTML would take a lot longer. A LOT longer.