|
Without a doubt one of the themes of the year is being HTML5, the successor to the current version of HTML and that many of us also believe will replace Flash on the web, if not totally, quite significantly.
HTML5, the new standard which brings the vague promise of getting rid of proprietary runtimes on the web. And is that although Adobe has made efforts to release tools, the Flash runtime is still proprietary code. |
HTML 5 brings several enhancements that are sure to make our web experience more enjoyable. Thus, for example, it will allow the semantic web (Web 3.0), by introducing tags to describe what the meaning of the content is; it will also significantly improve the structure of web pages. Ultimately, with the introduction of applications (yes, the "cloud") to a world that was once considered a huge library of documents, HTML 5 will allow us to streamline and modernize our web experience.
However, perhaps one of the most anticipated and revolutionary features that HTML 5 has is the ability for video - terrain almost entirely dominated by Flash - to be distributed without going through Adobe's hoop.
Curiously, this makes another debate on open standards in codecs more topical, YouTube and other actors are betting on the formula "HTML5 + H.264 as a codec", something that Mozilla does not accept as it is not an open codec. Here we have another economic battle, those who have opted for open codecs like Theora + Vorbis + Ogg do not pay for the H.264 patents, but may suffer the costs of higher bandwidth by losing compression.
The bad guys: Flash (Adobe) and Silverlight (Microsoft)
Microsoft and Adobe play the baddies in this movie. Both have a firm commitment to proprietary runtimes as the engine of the web, something that breaks the very nature of the network: access from any node, whatever the client technology. Flash has achieved a reasonable level of multiplatform quality and as Enrique explains a brutal percentage of installations on personal computers. Its most significant frontier is mobile (despite offering "Real Flash") and closed platforms, where it is not nearly as relevant. In video they have become the technology par excellence, with a large business of licenses and development tools, but the latest movements make dark clouds appear in their vision of being the new Java.
On the Microsoft side, they have been following the same trend for years with Silverlight, a product that hardly anyone uses. Betting on a proprietary technology from Redmond to build the future of the web is something that very few are considering a good idea.
The ugly: Google and Microsoft
Apple has been rejecting Flash on iPhone for years and brings the debate back to the table with iPad. However, the main players in the fight between HTML5, Flash and Silverlight are, in my opinion, Google and Microsoft.
All browsers already support HTML5 to a greater or lesser extent. The problem is that Google hasn't gotten rid of Flash on YouTube, the world's largest multimedia content distributor. Microsoft, for its part, to the extent that it delays support for HTML 5 in Internet Explorer, it may also make things difficult for HTML 5 to become widespread. However, they could be "forced" to speed up and improve this support to the extent that, as we said, YouTube exclusively uses HTML 5.
In short, I sincerely believe that Google today has the greatest responsibility for HTML 5 to become widespread and to really succeed in what is most important: replacing Flash and proprietary video formats.
Learning HTML 5
From the hand of Alejandro Castillo Cantón, www.TheProc.es, we get an interesting material introduction to HTML5.
However, for those of you who are fluent in English, I recommend you take a look at the EXCELLENT tutorial that the people of w3schools:
It is a good article but this time I have to say that YouTube today is at a certain time to leave flash for the videos, mainly due to the fact that not all browsers support the vp8 code and that also html5 is very young, today html5 and css3 are nothing more than a group of non-standardized rules.
To give you an idea, there are css3 properties that allow to make round borders, which in chrome are supported, while in opera and firefox they are not supported.
Although it is not a crazy idea to say that in about 4 or 5 years html5 and css3 will be fully functional and technologies such as flash will be left only to make animations in a simple way, but far from the web (of course, unless adobe occurs to it release the code of the flash platform which would be something very positive)
How come rounded edges are not supported by firefox? of course. Although I understand what you say, each navigator incorporates the labels that he wants, it is not the norm that they do so and that is where the problem lies.
Personally I do not support at all the idea of having flash, even if it is free. Flash and his poor performance… you better get out of it.
But what are you saying? Adobe has never said that it is going to stop developing Flash, they have even published their roadmap (Search Flash Roadmap on Google and you will see).
I don't know what people hate Adobe, it is one of those that most supports the adoption of HTML5 (with a pretty strong message for people who program in Flex).
It is true that the performance in Linux is annoying, but what do we complain about if we are a minority, to wait for HTML5 but while they agree on which standards to standardize Flash will continue to advance.
I'm looking forward to HTML5 just to get them to stop fucking with Flash! .. jhehee.
Honestly I'm rotten with flash, more than I already announce that it is going to discontinue its development for Linux. This means that for now we suffer from flash-dependent sites: hundreds of thousands of YouTube videos, I think something like this happens on Facebook. I clarify that I do not use Facebook, but when from my PC they use it and say: "Haayy, why can't you see the video ???", I whistle in 10 languages to flash.
Beyond my anger with Flash, it would be good that being 2012, we all (myself included) learn to live without being Company-Dependents for everyday things. All these years we have seen millions of multimedia contents, thanks to the decisions of 1 (one) company. I think that in these moments of a certain «crisis / change» one should look favorably on those free and / or standard alternatives. At least to avoid, as far as possible, repeating these cycles of they do nothing other than harm Users and / or Developers.
Even Adobe has said that it is going to stop developing flash… so although I don't see the death of flash coming in at least three to five years, it is something that will happen. Flash will die.
In fact, Steve Jobs had been saying it for years. It's nothing new but I still think html5 needs a bit more development to be able to replace flash. I'm not a fan of flash, I hate it for its poor performance, as Carlos says below, but the truth is that there is still no stable and / or better quality substitute.
And my hatred of Flash is not for performance on Linux because I am basically new to this OS. I don't like it because it NEVER works well. It's not like it always leads to mistakes but many times I've had to fight Flash to make it work. I've been using Windows since the '90s and it's always been the same.
Read what I'm talking about above. I am not talking about the fact that in general it will not work and Flash will be left aside, but that they have started with mobile phones. Eventually it will pass and Flash will cease to exist or develop. It is my point of view and I think his death is imminent.
http://www.rpp.com.pe/2011-11-09-adobe-abandonara-flash-para-navegadores-en-moviles-aseguran-noticia_420670.html
http://www.rpp.com.pe/2011-11-09-conozca-las-circunstancias-en-que-adobe-deja-a-un-lado-flash-noticia_420859.html
Dear friend, read:
http://www.rpp.com.pe/2011-11-09-conozca-las-circunstancias-en-que-adobe-deja-a-un-lado-flash-noticia_420859.html
http://www.rpp.com.pe/2011-11-09-adobe-abandonara-flash-para-navegadores-en-moviles-aseguran-noticia_420670.html