What is your view on flash

[nec207]

I hear from some people that flash is not that good .Many web sites and videos in web sites use flash these days .

Some problems are these .

-- flash is bloated does not work well on computers more than 5 years old ( computer not fast enough

-- flash does not work well on OS and browsers that are old.

--flash works well on windows and OS X but not Linux.

--flash is bad for malware.


I know that flash is way better than windows active-x do to active-x is very dangerous for malware .

[LowSky]

Flash made the internet they way it is today. People make a big stink about it for bad reasons, when it came out it made the internet more lively and did things nothing else could do, not to mention for cheap on the consumer side. Of course something is going to replace it, like anything else, and HTML5 is a great choice.

[forrestcupp]

Flash sucks. But a lot of web sites use it, so as an end user, I will too.

[KiwiNZ]

For Laptops and other mobile devices Flash drains power. It should never be used on these devices.

On Desktops it is a bit more tolerable.

[Paqman]

All of those points have at least an element of truth to them, but the fact remains that there's still a lot of content you just can't access without Flash. That will change, but it'll be a gradual transition.

[nec207]

For Laptops and other mobile devices Flash drains power. It should never be used on these devices.

On Desktops it is a bit more tolerable.

I tried to find the system requirements for flash but no luck.

When I go over to people there homes and use there old laptop or old desktops there computer slows down and gets well very hot.

That why I was thinking of trying to find the system requirements for flash.

[donkyhotay]

Flash sucks. But a lot of web sites use it, so as an end user, I will too.

That pretty much describes my opinion of flash.

[nec207]

That pretty much describes my opinion of flash.


Yap people tell me not to use flash has it is bad for malware.

But I would think that flash would be better than active-X as is really dangerous for malware.


But than most web sites would not work and I would not be able to see video on web sities if flash is not around.

[Mmmbopdowedop]

While Flash is good for it's online games and stuff, for videos and audio, HTML5 succeeds, so much more.

Whilst most browsers are still arguing on which format to support atleast with audio it's a case of running dir2ogg on a dir and having a script pick the right one.

Flash is way too heavy for just a simple audio player.

For games and the likes, it sure is easier to create them with flash, but with HTML5 and JavaScript, whilst do-able, it's a pain.

I don't mind flash really, it's not the issue.
The issue is from third parties like Apple, who refuse to use it on iPad and various others.

Now we're having to use 3 types of video playback. mp4, ogv and flash.

I wish they'd just pick a format and stick with it. Re-encoding video is heavy work and very time consuming.

[nec207]

While Flash is good for it's online games and stuff, for videos and audio, HTML5 succeeds, so much more.

Whilst most browsers are still arguing on which format to support atleast with audio it's a case of running dir2ogg on a dir and having a script pick the right one.

Flash is way too heavy for just a simple audio player.

For games and the likes, it sure is easier to create them with flash, but with HTML5 and JavaScript, whilst do-able, it's a pain.

I don't mind flash really, it's not the issue.
The issue is from third parties like Apple, who refuse to use it on iPad and various others.

Now we're having to use 3 types of video playback. mp4, ogv and flash.

I wish they'd just pick a format and stick with it. Re-encoding video is heavy work and very time consuming.


Apple does not use flash do to it is way to heavy and the problem with malware.Try playing flash with iPhone or iPad the thing well would overhead and slow down and may burn out the CPU and chips .

[Mmmbopdowedop]

Apple does not use flash do to it is way to heavy and the problem with malware.Try playing flash with iPhone or iPad the thing well would overhead and slow down and may burn out the CPU and chips .


As far as I know, the iPhone and iPad do not support flash, so trying it would be useless. We have no knowledgeable facts of your opinion.


I agree Flash may be too heavy for them, but I doubt it. I'm sure there's more discreet reasons as to why it's not supported, probably because the technology is not owned by Apple.

[nec207]

As far as I know, the iPhone and iPad do not support flash, so trying it would be useless. We have no knowledgeable facts of your opinion.


I agree Flash may be too heavy for them, but I doubt it. I'm sure there's more discreet reasons as to why it's not supported, probably because the technology is not owned by Apple.

Good way to test it well get a other smartphone or tablet that has same RAM,CPU and video card so on like the iPhone and iPad and see if really slow or gets really hot.


Note I have some PC's in house laptops and desktops about 5 years old and can hardly run flash with out the computer slowing down and getting really hot.

[lykwydchykyn]

I think it stinks that a buggy, proprietary plugin with limited platform support dominates so much of the web. Same can be said for silverlight.

That said, for the longest time there was no better alternative, and "HTML5" isn't going to be a solution for 3-5 years at least. I can't blame people for using it.

[oldos2er]

I haven't had any big problems with flash, knock wood. Been using the 64-bit version on my almost-five-year-old PC (with video card & RAM upgrades) for a long time.

[bouncingwilf]

I gave up on Macromedia products in the nineties - they were the most appalling buggy, virus infested nagware imaginable! and I've seen nothing to change my mind since. Somehow I've managed to live without them and strangely, I don't think I've missed anything of consequence.

Bouncingwilf

[Mmmbopdowedop]

I gave up on Macromedia products in the nineties - they were the most appalling buggy, virus infested nagware imaginable! and I've seen nothing to change my mind since. Somehow I've managed to live without them and strangely, I don't think I've missed anything of consequence.

Bouncingwilf

Being on a Linux forum, I really doubt you have never visited youtube.

If you have never visited it, then you really have missed a _lot_.

Infact, even checking the news require flash nowadays. To say you've missed nothing, well. *shock face

[nothingspecial]

I haven't had any big problems with flash, knock wood. Been using the 64-bit version on my almost-five-year-old PC (with video card & RAM upgrades) for a long time.

All the computers in the house have run Ubuntu since 7.04.

I have never, ever had a problem with flash.

[jrothwell97]

I hear from some people that flash is not that good .Many web sites and videos in web sites use flash these days .

Some problems are these .

-- flash is bloated does not work well on computers more than 5 years old ( computer not fast enough

-- flash does not work well on OS and browsers that are old.

--flash works well on windows and OS X but not Linux.

--flash is bad for malware.


I know that flash is way better than windows active-x do to active-x is very dangerous for malware .

Except that on Windows, Flash for Internet Explorer is delivered as an ActiveX plugin.

Just sayin'.

[Copper Bezel]

That said, for the longest time there was no better alternative, and "HTML5" isn't going to be a solution for 3-5 years at least. I can't blame people for using it.
HTML5 video works swimmingly right now. I keep hearing that there's a bunch of other HTML5 stuff that isn't very well defined yet, but the video player works fine. It's just that not every browser right now implements it, so it's easier to use Flash. (And HTML5 does have the disadvantage of having to offer two different encodings of every video, due to the two video standards.)

Flash was great, and it doesn't give me any real problems; I don't honestly see a huge difference in performance between HTML5 and Flash video. It's just nice that video won't require a proprietary plugin anymore.

[Supermouse]

Flash is a cancer that should be extirped from the internet.

Having said that, unfortunately we won't have an efficient alternative to it in the near future, so we must endure it for some more years.



Also, Apple doesn't like flash on their iCrap line because then you would play stupid flash games for free on the webz instead of purchasing stupid games from the app store, it's just that simple.

[lykwydchykyn]

HTML5 video works swimmingly right now. I keep hearing that there's a bunch of other HTML5 stuff that isn't very well defined yet, but the video player works fine. It's just that not every browser right now implements it, so it's easier to use Flash. (And HTML5 does have the disadvantage of having to offer two different encodings of every video, due to the two video standards.)

Flash was great, and it doesn't give me any real problems; I don't honestly see a huge difference in performance between HTML5 and Flash video. It's just nice that video won't require a proprietary plugin anymore.

Flash is far more than embedded video, and for me even that feature has worked inconsistently. Even in webkit browsers.

[MisterGaribaldi]

Flash exists for three reasons:

1. It provided a means for web-based content for which at the time there was no alternative;
2. Inertia; and
3. The biggest issue with things like HTML 5 and CSS 3 is that the source code is in the open, whereas you can compile Flash and hide your code.

My ideal world preference would be for a very media-rich HTML 5 and CSS 3, leaving no need at all for Flash. But do I think that's going to happen? I dunno, it's still a little too early to tell.

[WinterMadness]

flash is nice and all, but I cant wait for it to be replaced.

[donkyhotay]

My ideal world preference would be for a very media-rich HTML 5 and CSS 3, leaving no need at all for Flash. But do I think that's going to happen? I dunno, it's still a little too early to tell.

Probably not, there's a lot of money invested already in flash so I doubt SW companies are going to want to change.

[bouncingwilf]

Being on a Linux forum, I really doubt you have never visited youtube.

If you have never visited it, then you really have missed a _lot_.

Infact, even checking the news require flash nowadays. To say you've missed nothing, well. *shock face

Well I'm sorry to shock you but no, I've never bothered to look at you tube. Being ancient and incredibly curmudgeonly, I only tend to use the internet to browse for things I want ( this forum has many valuable nuggets worth mining). Other peoples puerile posturing on bad video is not on my wish list. Generally, I use computers to work for me crunching all sorts of valuable (to me) data and try and avoid being sucked into areas where my data is "scraped" . As you probably gathered, you won't find me on face-book or similar and no - I don't use Google either ( there are other ways to find what you want). However, in the unlikely event that I have missed something, I'll trade it off against the reduction in stress that not having to deal with incessant demands to upgrade and crashed installs has given me.


Bouncingwilf

[nec207]

However, in the unlikely event that I have missed something, I'll trade it off against the reduction in stress that not having to deal with incessant demands to upgrade and crashed installs has given me.

flash requirements


Windows


2.33GHz or faster x86-compatible processor, or Intel® Atom™ 1.6GHz or faster processor for netbooks
Microsoft® Windows® XP (32-bit), Windows Server® 2003 (32-bit), Windows Server 2008 (32-bit), Windows Vista® (32-bit), Windows 7 (32-bit and 64-bit)
Internet Explorer 7.0 and above, Mozilla Firefox 4.0 and above, Google Chrome, Safari 5.0 and above, Opera 11
128MB of RAM (1GB of RAM recommended for netbooks); 128MB of graphics memory

Mac OS


Intel Core™ Duo 1.33GHz or faster processor
Mac OS X v10.6 or v10.7
Safari 5.0 and above, Mozilla Firefox 4.0 and above, Google Chrome, Opera 11
256MB of RAM; 128MB of graphics memory

Linux


2.33GHz or faster x86-compatible processor, or Intel Atom 1.6GHz or faster processor for netbooks
Red Hat® Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 5.6 or later (32-bit and 64-bit), openSUSE® 11.3 or later (32-bit and 64-bit), Ubuntu 10.04 or later (32-bit and 64-bit)
Mozilla Firefox 4.0 or Google Chrome
512MB of RAM; 128MB of graphics memory

Solaris


1600 MHz Sun™ UltraSPARC® IIIi or faster processor
Solaris™ 10
Mozilla Firefox 4.0
2GB of RAM; 128MB of graphics memory

Android


ARMv7 processor with vector FPU, minimum 550MHz, OpenGL ES 2.0, H.264 and AAC HW decoders
Android™ 2.2, 2.3, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, and 4.0
256MB of RAM
Android web browser

BlackBerry Tablet OS


BlackBerry PlayBook and a version of the BlackBerry® Tablet OS that supports Adobe® Flash® Player 11

Flash Access Clients


Microsoft® Windows XP (32-bit), Windows Vista® (32-bit and 64-bit), or Windows 7 (32-bit and 64-bit)
Mac OS X v10.6, v10.7 (32-bit and 64-bit) Linux®: openSUSE® 11.3 or greater (32-bit and 64-bit); Red Hat® Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 5.6 or greater (32-bit and 64-bit); or Ubuntu 10.04 or greater (32-bit and 64-bit)
http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/tech-specs.html

[bouncingwilf]

At the time of writing, there are three requests for help with solving flash related problems in the first three pages of recent posts. I respectfully rest my case.

Bouncingwilf

[Paqman]

Well I'm sorry to shock you but no, I've never bothered to look at you tube. Being ancient and incredibly curmudgeonly, I only tend to use the internet to browse for things I want ( this forum has many valuable nuggets worth mining). Other peoples puerile posturing on bad video is not on my wish list.

On the flipside you're missing dogs riding skateboards, so I'd say you've achieved a Pyrrhic victory at best.