Showing posts with label flash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label flash. Show all posts

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Flash: why do you still need

After the defection of Flash on mobile platforms, supporters of HTML5 have in sight the battlefield following: computers. But things are far from a foregone conclusion, because Flash keeps some benefits that HTML5 can still claim.

Ubiquity Runtime

If Flash was given as a rapid adoption of browsers and web sites is that it offered a solution to a real headache for web developers: it offered a runtime unique and universal to all browsers, while the HTML often requires adaptation to each browser. This is the famous "write once, run anywhere" (write once, run anywhere) was once the promise of Java, fully completed by Flash, at least until the advent of mobile platforms.

Monday, September 26, 2011

Testimonials: you, your Mac and Flash

Nearly a year in October, Apple does preinstalls more Flash on his Mac. A decision that mimicked that of Microsoft Windows, but also followed the passage of arms around Flash iOS between Steve Jobs and Adobe. Hence the subject of this appeal to witnesses who asked the question whether the policy had changed your habits vis-à-vis this plug-in. The answers provided show various positions and trenches and strategies that are just as among those who kept Flash, but want to hold her bridle. Yes to FlashThe reasons are obvious to install Flash. Adobe technology is far from being replaced.

 Video sites have begun their moult - and yet not all, Canal + has been repeatedly cited as requiring the presence of the plug-in - but many others use it either for promotional content, either through to online tools "I surf more on iPad for some time and we must recognize that many sites require Flash. DIY sites, major retailers of home appliances, computer equipment, etc.. In fact, I will summarize the usefulness of the reader with access to catalogs, the realization of selections or purchases. So back to the iMac ... "wrote wsalado.Same is the ubiquity of Flash with vintz72 "In any new position (PC as Mac), I go very fast in general that he lacks Flash. There is indeed a lot of sites that still use it (partially, but sometimes the whole site is that the Flash).

Commercial sites use it extensively (Citroën, Peugeot, etc.. To name brands of cars). Those who say you do not need should not surf much. In short, until everyone has remade its site in HTML5, I must have Flash and I always install. On my iPod touch, I surf few specific apps and make up for the absence. ""I Flash in-dis-pen-sa-ble: I work in photography and graphic design, given the number of photographers Flash websites (including mine), you can not do without. This is the first plug-in installed in Firefox. And that's also why a iPad is irrelevant "says Norbert75. After the Flash users and those who would pass before there is the middle position.

That which is to have the plug-in on his machine, but use it sparingly, when you can not do otherwise."I do not use Flash Player as it slows down too much navigation and is too hot my MacBook Unibody 2008. But I use an extension (ClickToFlash) that allows me to see the contents when needed. ".This use ClickToFlash was mentioned several times. This extension hides the contents of web pages and Flash can play them on demand. You can also choose the sites where ClickToFlash can act and let down in others. "I use ClickToFlash since purchasing my iMac 27" 2009 and before that on my 24 "... This year, after buying a mini with Leo, the first installation of Flash site met, immediately followed by of ClickToFlash. Contrary to what I read, having lots of RAM (in my case) does not change much, it is mainly the processor that is sought. "Said Ianni.GasyKaManja alternates between two browsers "Mac's Safari or Camino with ClickToFlash with reading Flash blocked by default. I flash to 95% and I do this only when friends send me interesting links: YouTube, Daylimotion, only Flash videos.

Or on certain sites only (that of Disney, my bank) or when I have to book or buy something. "The use of a blocker is also highlighted by the older Mac users that the plug-in is broken down.ouviravecAnother solution for Flash without its drawbacks is to enlist the services of Chrome. The plug-in from Adobe is integrated into the Google browser. Therefore one can have a free OS X and Flash for Safari Chrome away when a site or page is needed. The switch from one to the other browsers is even easier. In the Safari menu "Development" contains the command "Open the page" that lists the browsers present. The current page in Safari will automatically be launched Chrome. To enable this menu, go to Safari Preferences and then at the bottom of the panel "Advanced".No FlashThe camp brings together different profiles of refractories. For example owners of older machines somewhat like that of Madalvée "I became a" no flash "in spite of myself on my Power Mac G5 with Tiger, where the software is not updated. Only a few fantasies we are prohibited, such as online shopping site of Adobe (too bad for them) and the sites of those who apply the latest (too bad for them too).

The sites of fans who wear a FrontPage design (a web authoring tool from Microsoft, ndr) of the 2000s are still rich and interesting! "There are also Mac users very recent and have not installed the plug-in after purchase "In my case, not at all in Flash for over a year and a half of my machines, including a MacBook Air 2011 "written rom54" and frankly it is rather a big advantage over any pub is almost more than the browser crashes, less consumption for the computer (the fans do take longer depending on the way sites visited by cons ... I installed Java). Ditto for my wife who has turned his cell phone and flash using the Internet to view iPad. Short life without Flash is rather pleasant.

"Since moving to Leo, I have not bothered to install flash. He has no real use in certain specific web applications ... that I do not personally. Now, the videos can be played natively, and YouTube (video-only service I use) allows, in its HTML5. "Said MacArthurEU.Another module quoted on a few occasions, one designed for these sites and videos that will force them to play their content in HTML5 with options on the definition used by default. This extension, YouTube5 can work with YouTube, Vimeo and Facebook.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Flash 10.2 Android arrives today

Announced in early February after its release on Mac and PC, Flash 10.2 shall be offered for download today via its Android Market or updates OTA. This book is written for Android 2.2 (Froyo), 2.3 (Gingerbread) as well as some users already blessed Android 3.0 (Honeycomb).

In the latter case, it is still a beta and the audience is smaller - even if that geographically - as consisting of Xoom customers. The tablet Motorola will simultaneously receive its first revision system 3.0.1. More will follow before Flash 10.2 do it is proposed final version.

This new Flash Androphones provides video acceleration on H264, but only for Honeycomb. Another novelty reserved for shelves next Android 3.0, an improved browser integration, resulting in navigation and view more smoothly pages. Flash content embedded in Web pages should be better supported as well.

More generally, the performance should be slightly up on today's mobile. Flash applications and data on the PC that used to be used with a physical keyboard can be better managed on devices that offer a virtual keyboard. It will be displayed, for example automatically by the application when necessary. Adobe maintains a list of compatible devices with Flash.

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Apple and Samsung: the enemy brothers

Apple and Samsung are currently two of the largest companies in the field of consumer electronics. They have much in common, often work together, depend on each other on certain points, but are also competing in highly strategic. So, Apple and Samsung partners can they stay long-term goals?

With the success in the first instance of the iPod and the iPhone and iPad, Apple has become one of the biggest buyers of components in the world. Sign a contract with the Cupertino Company is the assurance of almost an order book well stocked for many months. Apple has often used his position elsewhere to rain or shine on the market for flash memory.

If in the 80s at the time of the Macintosh, Apple could afford to live in isolation and develop almost everything she, in a globalizing world, this is simply not possible.

Corporation deemed to be tough in business, Apple has managed to forge some strategic partnerships. Besides Samsung, Intel may be mentioned (for the supply of processors on the Macintosh), NVIDIA (which has created several GPUs for Apple) and Foxconn (one of the largest subcontractors to Apple). Among these companies, it is certainly with Samsung that relationships are more complex. Apple remains true to its culture of secrecy and rarely evokes its relations with its partners.

Proof, if needed, she remained evasive on the processor design A4. On its website, the Apple brand wrote: "Apple engineers designed the chip A4 into a mobile processor both incredibly powerful and energy efficient.”

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Indeed, it is difficult to imagine that Google may delete the H.264 on YouTube

Now in only 32.89% of Internet users could continue to visit in the state, an unthinkable sacrifice. Even when Flash will integrate WebM will require that users update their version to be able to take advantage of: the current version of Flash does not pose this problem (Flash supports H.264 since version 9 was released in December 2007). Moreover, it is hard to imagine that Google has not contractually committed with partners like Apple to maintain compatibility with their devices.

The commitment of Google behind WebM at least has the merit of clarifying the situation regarding the giving of the codec on the field of patents: MPEG-LA has repeatedly stated that the free format violated certain of its patents, and that license was under development. The industry association cannot shake indefinitely without its threats would be implemented, and assuming that they are based, Google would be a prime target, except for example, at least for damages that it might represent. Adding however that nothing prevents the MPEG-LA to choose sparingly opponents court, especially since Google has made it clear she would not come to the aid of its partners.

In short, Google's decision is a stir of HTML5, which only give relevance to Flash, where Apple had done the opposite. And so exactly was the effect of strip searched? By restoring the importance of Flash, Google could very well work to the advantage of Android, which supports this format, unlike the IOS ... while going for the white knight of free formats.

But Google did not she simply followed the logic of ecosystem? Indeed, ownership of a video codec, it was destined to become a standard, not a major strategic issue, since interoperability is a crucial element specifically for industry standards. Exclusivity is the less put on a free. Google can certainly preside freely on the future of the codec and decide its future developments, but the side effects seem even more decisive than this one advantage, at least in the medium term.

These explanations do they justify the significant costs of investing behind Google WebM? He has still cost $ 100 million into the acquisition and conversion of over 120 million videos on YouTube will certainly be expensive that few others can afford. These figures are still to put into perspective: according to various estimates, the deficit would amount to YouTube about 500 million dollars just for 2009. A straw in comparison with 6.5 billion profits made last year by Google.

Friday, December 10, 2010


Then move on to content providers: the first one, YouTube, supports both the H.264 WebM. Beyond that, we must also look to find videos in WebM. And for good reason: this waltz codec has a cost, not just storage, but also encoding.

Content providers are primarily looking for the highest common denominator between all browsers and all platforms. For now, the duo Flash and H.264 that wins, because the plug-in Adobe can play H.264 video in browsers that do not have this feature. Similarly, IOS, Flash private, can play videos in H.264 format, like most mobile platforms.

Take the case of Daily motion, which hosts some 16 million videos, the 3G format (240p), SD (380p), HQ (480p) and HD (720p). To fully support the WebM, should convert each video to each of these resolutions, to ultimately do not get absolutely any benefit from the perspective of the host: support for WebM would not increase the scope of the site. Besides Daily motion receives many videos already encoded in H.264 with regard to the quantity of material to support this format natively, and encoders WebM are two to three times slower than their counterparts in H.264. Recognizing further that the MPEG-LA has decided to permanently abandon his royalties on the free dissemination of content in H.264, WebM does not even compensating on that plane.

Adobe has already announced plans to add support of WebM in Flash, and Google also speaks of a plug-in to read the WebM (probably as a codec for QuickTime and Windows Media rather than a plug-ins for each browser, read WebM: freedom, politics and ... installing plug-ins). It nonetheless remains that IOS cannot read the WebM. Site publishers who wish to remain accessible on the Apple devices will be well advised to keep H.264, which will remain readable in Firefox, Chrome and Opera through Flash.

And that's where Google's announcement demonstrates its adverse effects, far from encouraging the abandonment of Flash, it only strengthens his position. Some observers have also not failed to raise an inconsistency in the attitude of Google, if it abandons the H.264 for philosophical questions relating to proprietary code, what does the code of Flash within the one Chrome? And what about other Google products that retain their support H.264? Olivier Poitrey, technical director of Daily motion, does not mince words: "Google wants us to believe that his only interest is to advance open source, but keeping the support of this proprietary format in YouTube, Google Android and TV it demonstrates the hypocrisy of his actions. "

Also remains the thorny question of hardware acceleration, which is crucial for mobile devices, and so far the exclusive domain of H.264. Certainly, the support of WebM in hardware has been promised, but what about the current generations of hardware, and various contractual commitments with its partners YouTube?