How is web browsing with Flash (for IPad)

[ben pickerd]

As the IPad has no Flash capability, is web-browsing greatly affected?


Thanks

 

[Wrathh]

Not that I've really noticed except for video on local news.

 

[heatlesssun]

I don't own an iPad but I've spent a weekend with a borrowed a one few months back and I think that web browsing on the iPad just isn't very good, not for a $500+ device because too many things simply don't work. If you don't visit many Flash or Javascript heavy sites I could see you being happy and the lack of Flash does have the natural effect of being an ad blocker but for a device that's supposed to just work much of the web simply doesn't. Also while zooming and scrolling is very snappy page loading is SLOW compared to even an Atom netbook.

It's a matter of personal choice and I would recommend that you borrow one or just go to a Best Buy and surf for 20 minutes, I think you'll get a good feel for how well the iPad will suit you as a web browser in about that amount of time.

 

[0ptional]

We got my dad an iPad and he hasn't said a word about not having flash, and anyone with an iPhone can answer this question, no, it does not effect the web experience, the flash I run into is only ever ads anyway so I'm glad it's not there and I'm glad it doesn't destroy my battery life.

 

[mrgstiffler]

I thought it was going to be a pretty big problem at first, but I rarely ever run into flash issues these days.

 

[khanable]

I thought it was going to be a pretty big problem at first, but I rarely ever run into flash issues these days.

This

I haven't been stopped in any significant way as of yet.. and I've owned the device for over a month..

 

[valve1138]

Never had a problem

 

[Rombus]

With my iPhone, the only sites i seem to run into issues with are restaurant sites who put their menus in a flash app (WHY?!?!) and some oddball video sites that may have something you tube does not. Not really a hindrance at all, I've never thought to myself "Damn if it just had flash!"

 

[InorganicMatter]

None of the sites I visit use Flash for content, only for ads. And I'm certainly not crying that those don't work.

 

[Archer75]

I'm affected by the lack of flash on a daily basis. Seems there is always at least one site I go to everyday where I can't watch the video or main navigation page is flash. So it is frustrating.

 

[MavsX]

flash is gay

 

[Azazel90x]

No, not at all. Most sites I visit have switched to html5 and so the video content runs just fine. I haven't missed flash at all yet. I <3 my iPad.


Posted from my iPad.

 

[phide]

I wasn't able to use one feature of an investment planning site which relied on Flash, but apart from that, I haven't really been impacted. Browsing with an iPad is quite a bit like browsing with Flashblock on a desktop browser. You'll find that you're missing things, but typically those things are the most annoying aspects of the web. In one sense, the lack of Flash availability is actually a blessing. Other times, it can be annoying, but only mildly so.

But, yeah, you really don't need an iPad to find out what a world without Flash is like.

 

[MaxBurn]

Flash appears to be going away and I really don't miss it. I haven't found any pages I need that are flash.

 

[heatlesssun]

Don't be too quick to dismiss Flash, HTML 5 doesn't fully replace it not to speak of all of the Flash conent already out there and still being devloped.

 

[Serpico]

Not really, considering that most websites already have HTML5 containers for video with more being added constantly. It is rare when I find a page that is Flash video only.

Even when I try to fool it with random sites like Penny Arcade or Giant Bomb or wimp.com (really), they have video that works on the iPad.

Even streaming sties like UStream works with the iPad in Safari. At worst you have something like JustinTV that uses a separate app, but that's as bad as it gets.

 

[Serpico]

Don't be too quick to dismiss Flash, HTML 5 doesn't fully replace it not to speak of all of the Flash conent already out there and still being devloped.

Flash containers for video is already becoming a thing of the past. The iPad will sell 20 million units in its first year and is popular as hell. All of the major (and most of the minor) sites are on board, and the few that haven't become HTML5 friendly are moving to make it happen or they'll get left behind.

Flash for navigation became passe back in 2007, forget 2010. Any site that isn't using AJAX or regular HTML/CSS for that sort of thing is again, getting left behind.

Games and protected video content are the only excuses for going with a Flash container. Protected video content is taken care of on non-Flash devices with things like the free Hulu or MLB apps.

Even Microsoft has caved in and said that HTML5 is the way going forward, not proprietary plug-ins. Outside of mobile devices they are ditching Silverlight and it looks like IE9 is (finally) going to kick ass in terms of HTML5 speed and rendering.

 

[heatlesssun]

Flash containers for video is already becoming a thing of the past. The iPad will sell 20 million units in its first year and is popular as hell. All of the major (and most of the minor) sites are on board, and the few that haven't become HTML5 friendly are moving to make it happen or they'll get left behind.

Flash for navigation became passe back in 2007, forget 2010. Any site that isn't using AJAX or regular HTML/CSS for that sort of thing is again, getting left behind.

Games and protected video content are the only excuses for going with a Flash container. Protected video content is taken care of on non-Flash devices with things like the free Hulu or MLB apps.

Even Microsoft has caved in and said that HTML5 is the way going forward, not proprietary plug-ins. Outside of mobile devices they are ditching Silverlight and it looks like IE9 is (finally) going to kick ass in terms of HTML5 speed and rendering.

First of all Microsoft hasn't ditched Silverlight at all on non-mobile platforms, it's still cross-platform and will continue to be so. What Microsoft said is that if you want your applications to have the broadest reach going forward (and Microsoft even said that included the iPad) that HTML 5 is the preferred platform. Not all apps need reach, many apps are vertical and things like the integration of data and fast development are more important and tools like Silverlight and Flash make sense.

HTML 5 has a LONG way to go before the tools and expertise are there to make RAD development on the level of Flash and Silverlight possible. There's a LOT of cost in switching over and until the need is really there beyond Apple's hatred of Adobe people aren't going to spend large sums of money to rewrite stuff that works fine sill on the VAST majority of devices above phones.

20 million iPads is a lot for one device but there's still a billion + others that work just fine with Flash and Silverlight. Even Google has said that for now Flash is better for higher end video have they not?

Also, high end HTML 5 apps run like crap on mobile devices anyway so the iPad isn't even ready at this point to really drive HTML 5's capabilities.

So all I'm saying is that sure HTML 5 might be the real deal write once run anywhere platform but its going to take a while and it still won't fully replace Flash or Silverlight though I do see the use of those being used less over time for broad reach applications. I see the migration to HTML 5 being similar to the 32 bit to 64 bit transition. It'll happen, but it's not going to be a fast transition at all.

And let's be honest, part of the reason why Apple doesn't like Flash is because it's bypasses the AppStore, plain and simple and for now HTML 5 isn't capable enough to do so. I do wonder what Apple's take on HTML 5 will be in the future if and when it becomes a solid and fast platform on the iPad and capable of replacing native apps. Something tells me they won't be as receptive to it as they are now. How could they be if HTML 5 started replacing the AppStore?

IE 9 is great, it's my primary browser on all of my main systems including my sig rig, tm2, W100 and will be the first thing I install on my HP Slate.

 

[Serpico]

The #1 logical use for Flash these days isn't website navigation (much better done with other web technologies), nor is it for applications outside of web games, it is for video.

Using Flash as a video container for anything other than protected content is becoming less relevant by the day. The number of websites that supported video on the iPad was huge when it launched, and that was eight months ago. It has only gone up from there. The number of places that support the iPhone/iPad is huge and the device is still pretty new. Again, I'm rarely ever aware that Flash is a hindrance on either device, most pages just work.

Also, the reasons they don't like Flash are simple, it is a CPU hog in OS X and it is a vector for malware that is completely out of their control. Nothing pegs CPU usage activity in OS X like Flash will do at random times. Literally the only time I've heard the fan spin up on my iMac was two times due to Flash. The moment I killed that process it immediately dropped back to normal. Adobe products and their security holes go without saying.

The App Store doesn't really pull income for Apple at <10% profit margin, it is mainly a means to keep people in the iDevice ecosystem. If they want rich web apps, I understand why HTML5 would be preferred. I mean, the threaded forums on Shacknews use heavy AJAX and it works great. If it used Flash it would be hell even on my Windows PC. Flash on websites is crap for the most part, and it is being made more redundant by the day. Literally the only good use I can think of it for is protected video content, and for iDevices it is easily sidestepped by free apps like the MLB and Hulu apps I mentioned.

So who's missing Flash?

 

[Terpfen]

The #1 logical use for Flash these days isn't website navigation (much better done with other web technologies), nor is it for applications outside of web games, it is for video.

And even then, HTML5 has overtaken Flash for video use.

So really, the only use for Flash an iPad owner would miss out on is gaming. Even that’s dicey given the amount of games in the App Store.

 

[heatlesssun]

All I'm saying is that there's MILLIONS of man hours in Flash development and people aren't going to go and re-engineer all that stuff anytime soon, it's going to take time.

As far as who misses Flash it all depends on the person. I don't limit where I go on the web so yeah, I'd miss it because I expect EVERYTHING on the web to just work, period.

Sure Flash has it's issues but it delivered a decent cross platform presentation layer and streaming video years ahead of any else. All of my company's online training is Flash based and the companies that produce it from what I hear have no plans of abandoning Flash anytime soon. Flash will be with us for a very long time even if it won't be as widely deployed.

I still say that Apple is hiding behind Flash's faults as an excuse to lockout iDevices. Plenty of people complain about Flash, Microsoft, Google and others but none has been as hostile about it as Apple and even if the AppStore is <10% of Apple's dough that's still millions and the margins on it are high.

Apple has ZERO intrest in a solid cross platform technology that could render the AppStore pointless and iDevices nothing more than terminals just like Microsoft was hostile towards Java in relation to Windows. But I do believe that there will always be value in native client platforms simply because standardized platforms will always be behind the curve.

 

[SoAndSo]

cant watch videos on NBA.com on my iPad. Cant even watch the same video on youtube as it says the video is not formatted for iPad. I didnt buy my iPad, it was a gift.

 

[heatlesssun]

And even then, HTML5 has overtaken Flash for video use.

So really, the only use for Flash an iPad owner would miss out on is gaming. Even that&#8217;s dicey given the amount of games in the App Store.

Video is a whole different animal than programmatic content and is much easier to migrate and that's not what I'm talking about. Re-encode file, change HTML tags, no big deal.

Rewriting complex interactive applications is MUCH harder and more expensive.

 

[Terpfen]

Cant even watch the same video on youtube as it says the video is not formatted for iPad.

Use the YouTube app.

Also, strange that YouTube offers a mobile site with playable videos on the iPhone, but not the iPad.

complex interactive applications

I struggle to think of any site worth visiting that implements Flash in the manner you describe.

 

[SoAndSo]

Use the YouTube app.

the one that goes on the "desktop"? its the same result

 

[Sly]

I struggle to think of any site worth visiting that implements Flash in the manner you describe.

Company product sites and artist sites.

The product sites i've done simply cannot be reliably done in HTML. They involve algorithms, maskings and full multimedia content that is either too complex, too resource intensive, too dynamic, to be done in html. The personal and artists sites, are even more so since they want multiple features with complex transitions and the ability to add their own content any time.

Developmentwise. The company sites have a fixed description on how they want it to work. Artist sites are a headache since they keep changing the specs at the last minute. ("I want sparkles added here", "Add borders around each of the gallery thumbnails", "I want this cute icon added to each button", "Make videos go slowmo in either direction"). Worst one was the recent one, a fully multimedia flash site for an ad production company and was almost done with the site when the client called and said "I want it to run on my iPad too", so i started from scratch and reproduced all the transitions and effects into HTML. Which ended up being broken in some browsers, or just plain impossible in others (Like the 3D and shadow effects), and the <video> support was a headache, as shown in my other thread.

One site i've done has an animated background supplied by the client. Solution was to turn it into an FLV (400kb) and run it as the background. The HTML version couldn't do it, so had to revert an animated GIF (2MB and dropped frames). It was the first full site i've done that has both Flash and HTML5 versions, and the HTML version uses a lot more CPU than the flash one.

Researching for ways to speed up HTML only showed that others have done their own comparisons with the same results. Some have done comparison on their android browsers as well and found the HTML versions uses up their batteries faster.

 

[heatlesssun]

I struggle to think of any site worth visiting that implements Flash in the manner you describe.

Value judgments won't pay for the millions of man hours to convert this content or the training that developers will need to get up to speed to replace this content with HTML 5. The computer based training at my company alone has thousands of hours of Flash based interactive content. Why would we pay to redo stuff that works perfectly fine?

These are the simple facts, you can ignore them but the reality is still there I'm afraid. Flash is FAR more widely deploy than the iPad, it's not going away soon if ever. I don't know why iPadders think that people are going to spend all the money to go just to HTML 5. In time perhaps, but in plenty of time.

 

[heatlesssun]

Researching for ways to speed up HTML only showed that others have done their own comparisons with the same results. Some have done comparison on their android browsers as well and found the HTML versions uses up their batteries faster.

This is EXACTLY the point I'm trying to make. So you spend all that effort, for what purpose? To avoid using Flash? One of the most widely deployed pieces of software ever that works fine for most. Where is the business case to make the investment in HTML 5 at least at this point? It's not even finalized yet. The anti-Flash crowd simply isn't thinking in practical terms on this issue, I just don't get it.

If and when Flash dies it'll happen over the course of time and people aren't going to go out of their way to spend the money without VERY good cause. Maybe iPad support is that cause but even the iPad at this point is just a gant in a sea of computers that run Flash just fine. That day may very well come but it is not today.

The most ironic thing about this debate is that iPadders bemoan Flash partly because of it's proprietary nature and yet the iPad is a closed, proprietary platform and Flash would be running fine on it in an official maner if the iPad was an open platform. Hilarious!

 

[Terpfen]

the one that goes on the "desktop"? its the same result

Then the video was uploaded before YouTube enacted its policy of converting all new uploads to H.264 for mobile viewing, and there&#8217;s nothing you can do.

Company product sites and artist sites.

&#8220;And nothing of value was lost.&#8221;

Value judgments won't pay for the millions of man hours to convert this content or the training that developers will need to get up to speed to replace this content with HTML 5.

As end users, this is not our problem, nor should we care. This is not the first time that a transition happens in the world of technology, and it won&#8217;t be the last.

Actually, I would say converting from Flash to HTML5 is less painful than weaning the enterprise off IE6. Which, by the way, is still ongoing.

The anti-Flash crowd simply isn't thinking in practical terms on this issue, I just don't get it.

Here are the practical terms dictating the move away from Flash:

&#8220;I want to browse this site on my phone.&#8221;
&#8220;I don&#8217;t want my browser to crash because of a plugin.&#8221;
&#8220;This site is draining my notebook&#8217;s battery life, but isn&#8217;t doing anything special."
&#8220;Why does this site slow my computer down?&#8221;

If Flash were a better product, then perhaps we wouldn&#8217;t be having this discussion. As it stands, Flash 10.1 is too little too late.

 

[Sly]

&#8220;And nothing of value was lost.&#8221;

These are the companies and people that are actually paying for your 'free' internet.

See that banner on top of this page? Where do you think it links to? Wanna bet those companies are using flash on their sites?

Here are the practical terms dictating the move away from Flash:
&#8220;I want to browse this site on my phone.&#8221;

Android

&#8220;I don&#8217;t want my browser to crash because of a plugin.&#8221;

Only if you're on a Mac.

&#8220;This site is draining my notebook&#8217;s battery life, but isn&#8217;t doing anything special."

As have been shown by other web developers, HTML uses up more battery than flash.

&#8220;Why does this site slow my computer down?&#8221;

Funny coz product sites that uses HTML sites are actually SLOWER than flash sites.

http://www.focalpoints.info/tiletest.html

http://www.focalpoints.info/tileflash.html

If Flash were a better product, then perhaps we wouldn&#8217;t be having this discussion. As it stands, Flash 10.1 is too little too late.

Flash IDE is second to none. Need a new icon? Need shadows? Filtering? 3D effects? Do it right on the IDE, no need to go to Photoshop. Need embedded video? Just encode it once and it'll work on any browser. No variable conflicts, multiple layers, embedding multiple flash sites. Made a cool looking module? Save it as a library object and paste it into future projects with minimal coding. Client wants multiple interfaces? It's as easy as entering gotoandstopframe

 

[Terpfen]

These are the companies and people that are actually paying for your 'free' internet.

See that banner on top of this page? Where do you think it links to? Wanna bet those companies are using flash on their sites?

Want to bet they’ll find a solution that doesn’t use Flash? I’ll take that.

Android has no problem

Partially true depending on how you define “problem."

Only if you're on a Mac.

False again.

As have been shown by other web developers, HTML uses up more battery than flash.

People are still referencing that test? Yeah, SVG is going to run slow on phones. SVG doesn’t have the advantage of GPU acceleration like Flash 10.1. Good thing there are other ways!

Funny coz product sites that uses HTML sites are actually SLOWER than flash sites.

Huh? The HTML version of your demo runs smoother than the Flash version. Doesn’t spike my CPU usage either.

Flash IDE is second to none. Need a new icon? Need shadows? Filtering? 3D effects? Do it right on the IDE, no need to go to Photoshop. Need embedded video? Just encode it once and it'll work on any browser.

And your users suffer as a result.

It’s always worth a chuckle when someone with a vested interest in an established but flawed technology tries to resist the replacement tech. Welcome to your IE6 moment.

 

[Sly]

Want to bet they&#8217;ll find a solution that doesn&#8217;t use Flash? I&#8217;ll take that.

HTML = Doing things the hard way.

Partially true depending on how you define &#8220;problem."

You mean this?

False again.

Hasn't crashed on mine and i'm only using an atom netbook.

People are still referencing that test? Yeah, SVG is going to run slow on phones. SVG doesn&#8217;t have the advantage of GPU acceleration like Flash 10.1. Good thing there are other ways!

SVG? I was referring to every other performance test by other people on google. Remeber that i've been spending a considerable amount of time researching on how to make HTML faster.

Huh? The HTML version of your demo runs smoother than the Flash version. Doesn&#8217;t spike my CPU usage either.

Dunno what your system is, but i've posted that test on a lot of other forums, including this one. General concensus is that Flash runs on less than 10% (2% on my I5-750 quad), while HTML runs a core at 100% (The guys that had single core PCs had to shut down their browsers)

And your users suffer as a result.

How so? I live in a third world country, my demographic consists of low end PC's. How my web sites perform on the target audience matters. And heck, i'm running them on a netbook!

It&#8217;s always worth a chuckle when someone with a vested interest in an established but flawed technology tries to resist the replacement tech. Welcome to your IE6 moment.

Denial much? I use both HTML and Flash. I get paid either way and i watch my applications performance on the various PC's (Most of which are low end). What kind of PC are you running that it's being out performed by my Atom?!

 

[dr.stevil]

As the IPad has no Flash capability, is web-browsing greatly affected?


Thanks

nope as others have said, you occasionally run into a website that still uses flash, but it's becoming more and more rare these days. Most video sites that are worth visiting have either switched to html5 or created a native phone/ipad app or layout for viewing their content.

The only real downside to not having flash on the idevices is probably the flash games, but as someone already said, with the tens of thousands of games on the appstore, there really isn't a huge reason to need it.

If you really want flash, you can try frash on cydia or wait for the skyfire browser to hit the appstore.

 

[lightp2]

your thoughts?

1. If you find iPad offering what you need, buy it.

2. If you need Adobe Flash to be operational now on iPad, do not buy it.

3. If you find iPad attractive but cannot let go of the fact Flash is not there for half-a-year, you are just torturing yourself. The western philosophy --> "I will take my money elsewhere". I firmly believe many firms will welcome your decision. Just like MS welcomes iPod non-believers coming to Zune.

4. Everyone sorta semi-guess/almost-agree Apple is in some kind of schemes in protecting its self-interest. no disagreement. OK, if you agree with the the generic products/services, go ahead and buy. If you do not agree, no big deal, let go, HP/DELL/Samasung/Acer/so many more are waiting for your attentions! According to many forum members, they all offer tremendously more satisfying products and services. Let the free market decide for itself.

5. And we now turn back to the issue of Adobe Flash. As a matter of fact I think Flash is EXTREMELY important for the following reasons.

5.1 Flash is the MOST significant enabler of Linux-based computing. Why?

5.2 Because almost all the MS client technology advances are only specific/available to Windows, and as recent post discussion about consumer desktop linux minimal precense, most of the current MS consumer infrastructure/technologies/tools are not available/viable for Linux. The claim of cross-platform is none.

5.3 If Adobe Flash technology advances to the full-scale development environment such that it becomes cross-platform development choice meeting every kind of software development, with Adoeb Flash Player available everywhere including consumer Linux desktop, the chance of deploying affordable custom BSD/QNX/Meego/other-Linux desktop/tablets for task-oriented generic computing also increases.

6. When that time comes, with wide-availability of Flash-enabled computing everywhere, maybe Apple will reconsider? No? well, we can always choose other options! And if you really like Apple's product, the Mac OS X machines still support Adobe Flash, I think. with touch-computing feature coming in future iteration.

Cheers

Edit : the only problem is if your (longterm grumbling) continuous disagreement (which is perfectly fine) and yet insistent that Apple must follow certain trend or way, that implies Apple has something you dearly want, but are not getting. In that case, learn to deal with it, let go. And if you can't, then there's another issue not simply related to Flash. technical analysis and disagreement is fine. Too much attachment perhaps need deeper observation.

 

[Sly]

Found this just now, from another web developer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVjIsL8qwNw

1:29 is pretty much an example of the kind of sites we regularly do. The 3D picture flip effect, the animated background of the guy flipping cue cards, heck, the preloader is a mandatory function of any website and you can dress it up to not be so boring. Can you do this on HTML5? Probably, but be prepared to shed blood for it.

3:45 shows the CPU usage i've been talking about. You can push a lot more interactive content with flash than you do on HTML. And that fade effect he was talking about? That's one of the effects i had to take out when i ported a site into HTML because the iPod/iPad simply couldn't handle it.

 

[KaosDG]

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1556100