Mobile flash is discontinued. And then there's the fact that Flash is buggy, resource intensive and just plain shit.Looks nice but no flash
html5 is even worse... less powerful and buggy too.... (ex. youtube html player is bs)
Mobile flash is discontinued. And then there's the fact that Flash is buggy, resource intensive and just plain shit.Looks nice but no flash
I don't think one example of embedded video protocol is an accurate way to measure the efficiency of an entire set of standards...Mobile flash is discontinued. And then there's the fact that Flash is buggy, resource intensive and just plain shit.Looks nice but no flash
html5 is even worse... less powerful and buggy too.... (ex. youtube html player is bs)
As a programmer too, still think html5 is still not mature enough.. flash may be more resource intensive but it's still much more powerful and stableI don't think one example of embedded video protocol is an accurate way to measure the efficiency of an entire set of standards...Mobile flash is discontinued. And then there's the fact that Flash is buggy, resource intensive and just plain shit.Looks nice but no flash
html5 is even worse... less powerful and buggy too.... (ex. youtube html player is bs)
As a programmer, that just reeks of "BS", in fact.
The problem with HTML5 is that it does not work the same on each browser. Everyone makes his own interpretation of this or that API and you end up spending hours, if not days making your code compatible with every browser, only to end up with dirty hacks everywhere... Which is not the case with Flash. Plus there's no real effective workflow or tools to develop HTML5 game easily, as opposed to Flash. And JavaScript can't really compete with AS3...I don't think one example of embedded video protocol is an accurate way to measure the efficiency of an entire set of standards...Mobile flash is discontinued. And then there's the fact that Flash is buggy, resource intensive and just plain shit.Looks nice but no flash
html5 is even worse... less powerful and buggy too.... (ex. youtube html player is bs)
As a programmer, that just reeks of "BS", in fact.
flash [...] stable
The problem with HTML5 is that it does not work the same on each browser. Everyone makes his own interpretation of this or that API and you end up spending hours, if not days making your code compatible with every browser, only to end up with dirty hacks everywhere... Which is not the case with Flash. Plus there's no real effective workflow or tools to develop HTML5 game easily, as opposed to Flash. And JavaScript can't really compete with AS3...
(inb4 "bullshit javascrept is awsum, flash iz dead blablabla", I'm a developer and work with both HTML5 and Flash everyday)
They're not obscure, they're simple features that should work out of the box with the same couple of functions on any browser, and it's not the case... I'm sick of mozSomeFunction, or having to have 8 lines of the same property on a css file with -moz, -o, -webkit, etc...obscure APIs like History or Fullscreen API
I wonder who you worked for, but our clients always want IE7/Firefox 3 compatibility...unless you're targeting ancient browsers like IE8
It doesn't. I guess there'll be another app for porntube or adult-comics or things like that.Btw, YouTube will make a separate app on the Wii U eShop too.
That means easier pRon for you I guess.
When did youtube offer porn?
flash [...] stable
http://www.cvedetail...ash-Player.html
Flash's stability and security are a travesty.
They're not obscure, they're simple features that should work out of the box with the same couple of functions on any browser, and it's not the case... I'm sick of mozSomeFunction, or having to have 8 lines of the same property on a css file with -moz, -o, -webkit, etc...
I also worked with WebSockets a lot. Different drafts implemented in different browsers, responding differently to different errors, and most of the time little to no way of correctly debugging it, especially on mobile browsers. It's a nightmare. Also had to code a C++ websockets server, that has to deal with all those different personalities... Couldn't they do REAL sockets like everywhere else ?? And more importantly, when is everyone gonna drop JavaScript for a real language with balls (and by balls I mean classes, real objects, imports and all that jazz...)
I wonder who you worked for, but our clients always want IE7/Firefox 3 compatibility...
When I say "obscure", I mean not often used at the moment, or in high demand, or whose specification hasn't been fully decided yet. That's why Microsoft doesn't implement a lot of new HTML5 features because they refuse to implement features that don't have a finalised specification yet. WebSockets being one of those features. Naturally you're going to have lots of issues if you're using experimental protocols. Steer clear from the experimental aspects of HTML5 and you shouldn't have any problems at all. As for those CSS vendor tags, not much you can do about it, but it's certainly not going to add "days" onto your development time. The only downside is that it might consume a little more bandwidth to send that CSS file down to the client.
JavaScript is just a functional language as opposed to an object orientated language. Take C for example, still very commonly used and very powerful, and it doesn't have classes at all. You can easily simulate classes in both JavaScript and C though, with JavaScript containing several different approaches. If you really want imports, take a look at something like require.js which encourages modular code. JavaScript has gotten so popular and powerful, that server software like node.js uses JavaScript as the language of choice, and Windows 8 allows developers to create "metro" applications in HTML5/JavaScript. It's a ridiculously flexible language. If you want to keep it functional-orientated, you can. If you want to make it object-orientated, you can. If you want to make it strict, you can. I believe the next revision of EMCAScript is going to add a lot of new features to be more similar to other languages anyways.
The company I work for will only support the latest browsers unless it's an internal tool (because internally, IE7 and IE8 are still being used). We want to be able to provide modern content, and to do that, we can only support up-to-date browsers. We haven't had a need for anything like WebSockets yet (Comet is working perfectly well). Don't want to say too much though for obvious reasons.
The problems are in flash player itself, meaning that the security issues affect the end-users who have it installed, not specifically anything a developer would make.can you tell me what problems you get with flash player?? -.- as for security, it is sure not that secured but if you develop carefully, it should be no problem
The problems are in flash player itself, meaning that the security issues affect the end-users who have it installed, not specifically anything a developer would make.can you tell me what problems you get with flash player?? -.- as for security, it is sure not that secured but if you develop carefully, it should be no problem
The link I posted has a good list.what security issues are you referring to concerning flash player? (every technology has its security flaws..) adobe provides quite frequent updates too nowadays.
The link I posted has a good list.what security issues are you referring to concerning flash player? (every technology has its security flaws..) adobe provides quite frequent updates too nowadays.
http://www.cvedetail...ash-Player.html
No you don't, because "HTML5" is a specification, not a single product.type html5 vulnerabilites on google and you can also get a list..