it just may be. Just not now. not at all. That's old school thinking. As i said, such users now what they are in for. This is the modern web. Black and white tv users need not apply. and CSS 2.1 only finalized two years ago. Did you wait till then? Standards are based on implementation. You can implement all the html5 stuff now. wrong! As I said, anything in the final must be implemented by at least two browsers first. You will have complete implementation before the recommendation is finalized., for several more years, yes, but this will pass. In five years, few will consider flash for anything since it can all be done with new libraries for js coming out. yeah. There's a guy who doesn't know what he's talking about. What a failure.
It depends. HTML 5 is developing very fast. It handles the basics of video, however it lacks many of the extra features that sites like YouTube, Vimeo and Hulu currently offer through Flash-based video players.
Flash is a proprietary program created by Adobe that is often used to show movies and stuff in browsers (it has plugins for many browsers). HTML 5 video is something new which is hopefully open (currently pending lots of legal stuff) and will be in an entirely different format. It uses the HTML5 <video> tag rather than a flash object. I'm not sure how else to explain it, but this probably isn't the best explanation, so everyone else should feel free to add to this.
Such as: - Standard Video Format - Robust video streaming - Content Protection - Encapsulation + Embedding - Fullscreen Video - Camera and Microphone access Youtube said "HTML5 does not yet meet all of ours needs".
Right, SO I'm going to make this clear for all the fanboys that worship steve's gonads. Here is the practicality of html5 for iPad and iPhone. Please observe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfmbZkqORX4 Full demo, clear and fair. You guys can see how amazing html5 support is on the iPad .
Again you guys are trying to compare Flash with something that's been out for six months or so. I wonder how good Flash was six months after intro. I doubt it was that good. Plus, this demo shows how well the iPad runs it with no reference to anything else. Bad example.
A) Watch the full demo. B) It's an argument against rushing to develop html5 apps. C) Who gives a crap about how good flash was six months in? When SteveO claims html5 is superior and lists out his "reasons why". His own bloody products can't properly render the language he is touting as superior -_-.
Make your point. The demo means nothing. Never saw that but I don't see the point of the video. You're trying to compare years old flash to six month old HTML5 and apps which are, perhaps, weeks old. First attempts at new technology. Give it time. No. It may be the writers of those apps are asking too much. How can you claim HTML5 apps are inferior to flash by showing a demo on the iPad with no comparison to Flash? It doesn't make sense.
Look man, it's pretty simple. Why the hell try to fragment the internet by disallowing a popular plugin that is used by so many to deliver amazing content. It's a dick move. Flash isn't going anywhere. I'm all in favor of HTML5 development but I can't stand iDiots that claim flash is dying because of it. It may take a hit in it's marketshare, sure. But Flash is not going anywhere for a long long time .
As Jobs said, Flash causes more crash problems than anything else on Safari and the Mac, that's why. I agree flash will be around for a while but what can flash do that the HTML5 stuff can't? Yes, there are some things right now but for most purposes HTML5 will do the same things just as well without crashing, installing anything, and all that. Eliminating flash eliminates a language you need to learn. If you know javascript then you know how to code the HTML5 stuff. You have to know javascript anyway so this means you don't need to learn actionscript.
For more information about YouTube's attitude towards Adobe Flash and HTML5, you can check my blog - http://youtubeking10.blogspot.com/2010/07/adobe-flash-is-still-best-platform-for.html