HTML5 is not a Flash replacement and shouldn’t be seen that way
There seems to be a huge misconception going around the Web and Media lately that the new fandangled HTML5 is going to be be the final technology that essentially kills and replaces the use of Flash on the web. The way I see it is that Flash or any other multimedia plugin is not going to be threatened by HTML5. The new Video, Audio and Canvas APIs will really only steal the more boring work that Flash has had to adopt over the last several years to fill a gap that HTML, up until now, was not capable of doing.
The main misconception I see is that people associate Video playback as the major reason to use Flash. Whilst it is quite a significant percentage, Flash was not originally designed to be a Video player, it just evolved that way, due to lack of any better alternative. If you want to see the amazing uses that Flash has outside of Video Players, just pop on over to the Flash Favourite Website Awards, spend a few moments browsing and let me know what you think. But even now with the widespread adoption of HTML5 Video, I still see Flash Video living on. Features such as Live Streaming, Digital Rights Management and rich interactive video controls will keep a lot of the community from switching any time soon.
Another thing that people don’t seem to understand is exactly what HTML5 is. I recently came across Apple’s HTML5 demo. From what I could see (after installing Safari) the only actual elements it uses from the HTML5 specification are the <video> and <canvas> tags. Everything else is is just either running using the new CSS3 standards or kickass Javascript. This just confuses the issue. It turns HTML5 into a buzz word which is counterproductive to the way in which we want this technology to be viewed.
I am not in any way a Flash-fanatic. I am Front End Developer (HTML, Javascript etc) but I will continually push to utilize the best technology for the job. If the combination of HTML5, CSS3 and JS allows me to develop quicker and more efficiently, then I will use that. But there are still times when I will head over to Flash Developers desk and task them with the job if I deem it to be the best tool for what I am trying to achieve. And whilst I believe the Flash platform will continue to advance, I believe it’s also the case that as basic browser technology catches up, those advances will be in increasingly niche areas.
In the end its all about the user experience. If you believe you audience will get the most benefit out of HTML5, CSS3 and javascript then go for it. But if your audience actually comes from the real world, you will have to decide between using Flash with a 99.6% market penetration or HTML5 with roughly less then 40% of users browsers capable of understanding it.
Let me know if you agree or disagree and why. I am interested in hearing other peoples opinions on this hot topic.
EDIT: This article got picked up on Reddit. There are some interesting discussions going on over there about this topic. Both negative and positive.
HTML5 can support live video streaming. It even has a draft spec for webcams and other devices connected via serial or USB ports. When combined with CSS3 and JS, it also has the ability to offer “rich interactive video controls”.
DRM is a valid point, though you may be surprised to know that most sites with flash media content aren’t using DRM anyway. YouTube & Pandora are wide open to allow you to download the underlying video and audio files if you know how to get it.
As a technology umbrella, the industry seems to be stuck with the name HTML5, just like DHTML, Web 2.0 and AJAX before it.
We aren’t there yet, but with IE9 set to come out within the next year, and Apple products becoming increasingly popular, HTML5 is set to catch on very quickly. I think that 1 year from now people will see the tone changed to be very different.
Sure, it’s probably a year away from being feasible, but it will take about 6 months to really implement good HTML5/CSS3 solutions that work nicely and provide a good experience, so we might as well start now.
Posted 1 year ago
#While I agree wholeheartedly; HTML5 cannot 100% replace flash as it currently stands, I think for the most part it can. With the addition of the canvas element, the scripting associated, the video and audio tags, and the relevant libraries to that, you have the ability to make a truly rich user experience unlike before.
With the open-sourcing of the WebM format, we have a good standard that is based on proven container formats and codecs and is freely available for all to use. We’re almost to the point where it will be feasible to use these things as the default method, since adoption continues to grow at an explosive rate.
At the same time, HTML5 still can’t yet compete with some of the hardware acceleration and 3D rendering features of flash, not to mention the fact that by using a third-party application you aren’t quite so burdened by the red-tape of trying to change a standard, which means new features can be implemented and distributed much faster and easier.
However, I wish that there were a better solution to this sandboxed-environment-problem than flash. Flash is an utter pile of garbage, it’s got some of the most buggy and inefficient hackery that I’ve ever seen in a platform, and on no OS does it perform even remotely reasonably. As much as I despise Microsoft, I hear silverlight is a pretty good solution, at least better than flash, but I haven’t worked with it first hand very much. Hopefully the opensource implementations can remain in sync with it well enough that the linux community keeps an up to date plugin.
We’ll have to see what the future brings, maybe this push toward a more interactive web may put the standards committees in the right state of mind to maybe even come up with a good alternative for flash. Maybe silverlight will do it.
Posted 1 year ago
#I’m looking through the FWA, and I’m not seeing anything that couldn’t be done easily with HTML5 + JS + CSS3.
Posted 1 year ago
#Ok Patryk, what about the Flash Website the currently is on the FWA homepage. (http://danceoff.jayjays.com.au/).
It utilizes Full screen Video (3D), it allows the user to pause the video, take a snapshot and then dynamically interact with it. It tags clothes the dancer is wearing and allows people to find out more. Pretty neat stuff.
Maybe it can be done using just Javascript and HTML5, but Flash can do it on time and on budget with full market penetration. And unfortunately, in today’s revenue driven market, that’s whats important.
Posted 1 year ago
#Just tried the most basic thing: open a link in a new tab. Middle-click? Doesn’t work. Drag’n'drop to the tab bar? Doesn’t work.
So, that website is a joke. A bit too late for April’s fool, don’t you think?
Posted 1 year ago
#These are conventions of web browsers you are applying to plugin content. That’s like trying to copy and paste text from a photo of some text.
In Flash a navigateToURL can be set to open in a new window. In modern browsers, this will result in a new tab. However, Flash leaves it up to the developer to decide if they want to implement this functionality. In Flash the middle-click can have any interactivity attached to it, allowing developers to use it for secondary interactions. It would definitely be possible to setup the following in Flash:
- Left-click = open link in current window
- Middle-click = open link in new window/tab
Just because most developers are not in the mindset of doing this, does not mean that Flash itself is inherently bad for making web sites.
Posted 1 year ago
#Ahem – Flash support for “features” like DRM are more likely to encourage early adoption.
Posted 1 year ago
#Flash will still play in important role for heavy animation tasks in areas where Flash provides the most optimized way of achieving the end result.
- Complex scripted animation of dozen of objects at the same time (i.e. games)
- Complex timeline-based animation in a small file size (no competition here)
Incidentally, I recently showed some students an example of 3D rotation of video using HTML5 canvas (almost 100 lines of JS, performance issues in some browsers). I compared this to the same effect in Flash (6 lines of AS3, smooth playback in all browsers with lower CPU utilization). The Flash version worked in more browsers than the HTML5 version, so the only real disadvantage of the Flash solution was additional download overhead of the SWF file (55KB).
But I definitely look forward to using HTML5/CSS/JS for all of my semantic content needs – when browser support has evolved enough to ensure that the user experience will be reasonably similar for the majority of users.
Posted 1 year ago
#@Fabian and @homer.simpsoy — regarding the open-link-in-new-tab question:
My take away from Fabian’s point is that people are used to a particular interaction style on the web, and most don’t have as sensitive plugin-detectors in their brains as us web folks do. So they get frustrated when things don’t work in the ways they expect to. And even us savvy people can get frustrated when we have to depend on the developer putting in extra effort (and *very* few do in my experience) to provide functionality like opening in a new tab.
That said, I have seen my share of ajaxy sites that highjack all the links with javascript actions, making it similarly impossible to open any of them in a new tab. So Flash is hardly the only culprit in this particular issue.
Now, I have seen a decent number of ajaxy sites which take great pains to allow deep linking, opening-in-tabs, booknmarking, etc. I have seen precious few Flash-based sites that do this. I understand that it’s equally possible in both styles, but clearly one camp is making an effort and the other camp isn’t.
Posted 1 year ago
#I don’t think “Digital Rights Management”, and “In the end its all about the user experience.” quite belong together.
Posted 1 year ago
#Why not? Users want fairly easy access to content. Media organizations are happy to provide content as long as it is reasonably protected. For these purposes encrypted RTMP has worked quite well for streaming content so far. RTMPE basically enforces a watchable-but-not-downloadable model that users seem quite accepting of.
If anything, Flash and RTMPE have actually made it slightly easier for DRM and user-experience to be mutually compatible concepts.
Posted 1 year ago
#Absolutely. Developers got used to a particular model. When browsers changed people’s understanding of how to use the Web (rapid uptake of middle-mouse-clicking), most developers forgot that Flash can handle this as well.
Many developers got used to 2 old web conventions:
- Most people only interact with the left mouse button (true when Flash was popular)
- Don’t force content to open in a new window
This is primarily an issue with developers and not the Flash platform. As use correctly state, we are seeing the same issue when using AJAX/JS solutions. Many sites now have JS-driven “open in a new window” links that do not work at all with middle-click.
Posted 1 year ago
#@homer.simpsoy Thanks for great input on this topic.
I agree that adoption comes down to user expectations. If the technology, be it Flash or Javascript, performs against the model they are used to it will create a negative experience in regards to that technology or product. Developers need to make sure they pick the right technology for the job. And that they build it to deliver the functionality that the user expects.
Posted 1 year ago
#Great article ! Oh and this is not the Flash website awards but the favourite website awards
Posted 1 year ago
#Flash breaks the web; closed standard that search engines can’t understand, horrible user behaviour, inspecific results on mobile devices; it’s basically just a slut.
HTML5 replaces the only thing worth having that only flash could do well (video).
I browse with javascript turned off. The web is so much better that way. Make your page work that way or you lose me as a visitor. My choice not yours.
Posted 1 year ago
#Yes HTML5 is a flash replacement, you fail big time.
Posted 1 year ago
#Google can index text found in SWF files. Developers are able to add accessibility text to anything in Flash – most don’t. though I do wish devs would stay away from Flash where it offers no major advantage to presentation.
Again, a developer issue – not a platform or tool issue
10.1 is the first Flash Player designed with modern mobile devices in mind. At the moment, many HTML5 demos are just as bad when viewed in a range of common browsers.
As the article states, Flash was not originally designed with video in mind. It became a defacto-standard for video due to the lack of good alternatives (Quicktime, WMP, Real Player, anyone?). Flash video saved devs and users from years worth of platform compatibility issues.
Thus rendering most of the HTML5 vs. Flash argument as a non issue. Try browsing Apple’s HTML5 showcase demos without JS. Video aside, HTML5 without JS to leverage the power of the new APIs and CSS3, the experience could be closely replicated using HTML4 and a few images.
Posted 1 year ago
#Sigh… Haters gonna hate.
Posted 1 year ago
#I agree with the author and I enjoy developing on the flash platform. I’m building specialized applications not public-facing websites. RSLs, modules, application domains, robust cross domain, AMF, p2p, AS3 is fine language, opensource flex sdk a strong community… Flash (still) exists for a reason. Flash is far from perfect of course – any developer would say that of their own platform of choice. There are plenty of problems with flash – security, stability, bugs etc. Traits of software that we as developers have to deal with and patch.
Posted 1 year ago
#There are words, but I fear you wouldn’t like them.
Posted 1 year ago
#I totally agree with you Andrew. It doesn’t matter what HTML5 can or can’t do. It’s going to come down to what the clients are going to be willing to pay to get the work done. Sure 75% of the stuff done in Flash can be done in HTML5 but at what cost? I can animate a ball bouncing in 5min in Flash. Do that in HTML5 and you have quite a bit of work before. Especially some of the more complex Flash sites would require a CSS/JS guru to pull off.
Sure HTML5 has some capability, but are clients willing to pay twice the price to “not break the web”? I doubt it. Until a dev tool is out there that can build Flash-like sites in HTML as quickly and easily I’m pretty sure Flash is going to be around for a long long while. The ROI is just too good with Flash at this point.
Posted 1 year ago
#the FWA stands for:
Favorite Website Awards.
http://www.thefwa.com/about
Posted 1 year ago
#HTML5 has BIG issues:
- the standard will be pushed only if it will be profitable for big companies.
- javascript is easily downloadable and reusable – do you think big firms will be invest time and money coding something clever and new that can be cloned by anyone in seconds?
HTML5 will be the standard for some years. Even today is not capable of emulate each of the multimedia features of flash.
If tomorrow Adobe will implement some new feature, expect to find it in HTML5 only in a couple of year
You should realize that multimedia content need state of the art technology; event today html is not a decent multimedia platform, it will be obsolete in 2 years.
Posted 1 year ago
#Thank you! Another thing that seems to be constantly overlooked when people trot out this misinformed notion that HTML5 will replace Flash is audio. I’d love it if Mr. “you fail big time” would take a look at something like AudioTool.com and explain to me just how one might produce that on the web without Flash.
The other thing that’s been brought up in the comments that amateur hacks apparently have no concept of is the server-side tools that Adobe integrates with Flash, most notably Flash Media Server.
Posted 1 year ago
#Can definitely do that (incl. the 3D video) except the full screen, and I’d imagine it would require similar effort, but then the extent of my Flash experience is a 3D ping pong game so I could be wrong.
You won’t get penetration to iOS devices or 64-bit linux, among other targets.
And regardless of whether developers have failed to use the tools Flash gives them, Flash solutions have a consistent and uniform reputation for completely breaking the user experience model on the web, and frustrating everyone without a Windows 7 machine and 2GB+ RAM running IE.
Posted 1 year ago
#Thanks, Andrew. Sorry about all the adamant pseudonyms who tried to fix you.
Even the question is dysfunctional, “Can HTML replace Flash?” It’s smarter to focus on what markup should do to become more successful at what it does.
“I will continually push to utilize the best technology for the job.” I think that’s the right approach. Religion is for other venues.
tx, jd/adobe
Posted 1 year ago
#>> Flash breaks the web; closed standard that search engines can’t understand, horrible user behaviour
So when everyone needs to script their canvas tag to get fancy text and animations, what happens to SEO for HTML5 then? All your content is generated by JavaScript, now you’re screwed. I also like how everyone yelling about “standards” talks about how Flash interfaces are clunky and their features are superfluous then turn around and create the same thing in HTML5 and want everyone to rant and rave about something Flash 4 did.
Posted 1 year ago
#The reason Steve Jobs cares so much about HTML5 is that he has a sort of vendetta against Adobe.
Back in the early days of Adobe (and Apple), Adobe coded for Apple and made Apple money. In 1996 when it looked like Apple was going to go under, Adobe started coding for Windows primarily. This made Apple very mad, and now that Apple is doing very well, they are smearing Adobe.
Thus Steve Jobs’s unconditional backing of HTML5. There are likely other reasons, but this is the main one.
(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/04/12/businessinsider-the-real-reason-steve-jobs-wants-to-kill-adobe-2010-4.DTL)
Posted 1 year ago
#HTML 5 is an upgraded compromise to the lowest common denominator that should have been handled long ago. Flash, while processor intensive on leaner devices, is a broad reaching and extensible plug-in that fills a lot of gaps. Let’s just leave it at that…
Posted 1 year ago
#Great post, Andrew.
I really dislike this mentality that if you do something in HTML5, it’s somehow better than if you’d done the exact same thing in Flash. The problem with most Flash sites isn’t the tool used to build them. It’s just unfortunate for Adobe that Flash makes it really easy to create web content that impresses marketers and managers rather than users.
I do have one qualm:
…Flash with a 99.6% market penetration or HTML5 with roughly less then 40% of users browsers capable of understanding it.
If you look at the methodology Adobe used to come up with that number, the 99.6% penetration refers to home desktop computers only (although work computers aren’t excluded).
http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/methodology/
It doesn’t take into account any devices that aren’t home desktop computers. We need some decent Flash version penetration statistics that take all web-enabled devices into account.
Posted 1 year ago
#Amazing Post Andrew.
You have clearly put it into perspective. I am tired of reading article after article about this topic without backing up and logical reasoning.
the digital world is changing, YES, but at the way things are going Flash will still be king in many ways.
Posted 1 year ago
#I think HTML 5 is over rated, I get that eventually it will get there, my biggest issue is by the time all the newest techs are supported (HTML5, CSS3) by that point we will be using the internet in a far different way and thus the cycle with continue. The browsers/ users move to slow to catch up with it all its a shame.
Maybe they should think of a new tech like HTML flexable, which uses something else that can be updated sort of like a lirary so it moves quickly and all sites will update at the same time. Thinking of Chromes way of doing things here. we should take the browsers out of users hands and your just on the latest. Its for there own good.
Would be safer for them as well as better for all of us.
Posted 1 year ago
#