Comments on: To Flash or to Open Web http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/ Technology, trends, and opportunities. Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:46:26 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jeremy Chone http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3893 Jeremy Chone Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:09:47 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3893 @Peter agree. @Peter agree.

]]> By: Peter Parente http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3890 Peter Parente Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:38:46 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3890 One follow-up comment: One of the fallback examples uses a Java Applet, yes. But the one I was really pointing readers to was the one that fell back on Flash and FLV, just above the Java example. Of course, the downside is that you have to host two encodings of the video. One follow-up comment: One of the fallback examples uses a Java Applet, yes. But the one I was really pointing readers to was the one that fell back on Flash and FLV, just above the Java example. Of course, the downside is that you have to host two encodings of the video.

]]> By: Jeremy Chone http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3889 Jeremy Chone Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:47:18 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3889 @Peter Ok, got comment. But, the fallback options you link to uses Java applet, which might limit the reach of your application. BTW, I am not against Ogg/Theora. I am really for openness, and I really hope that Ogg or something open will be available. However, I am saying that application developers need to be pragmatic, and realize that: 1) Adobe is paying the $xxx Millions / year license fee to provide free h.264 playback to the Web. 2) Google is paying the $xxx Millions / year to convert and store unlimited video to the h.264 HD video format. Now, again, I hope the Internet will find a solution to this solution. One step could be for Google to convert to and support the Video Tag/Ogg format. That will make a difference. Then, I would say that it is safe for developers to make the move as well. @Peter Ok, got comment. But, the fallback options you link to uses Java applet, which might limit the reach of your application.

BTW, I am not against Ogg/Theora. I am really for openness, and I really hope that Ogg or something open will be available. However, I am saying that application developers need to be pragmatic, and realize that:

1) Adobe is paying the $xxx Millions / year license fee to provide free h.264 playback to the Web.

2) Google is paying the $xxx Millions / year to convert and store unlimited video to the h.264 HD video format.

Now, again, I hope the Internet will find a solution to this solution. One step could be for Google to convert to and support the Video Tag/Ogg format. That will make a difference. Then, I would say that it is safe for developers to make the move as well.

]]> By: Flow » Blog Archive » Daily Digest for June 27th - The zeitgeist daily http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3887 Flow » Blog Archive » Daily Digest for June 27th - The zeitgeist daily Sat, 27 Jun 2009 03:58:24 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3887 [...] To Flash or to Open Web — 10:12am via Google [...] [...] To Flash or to Open Web — 10:12am via Google [...]

]]> By: Peter Parente http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3886 Peter Parente Sat, 27 Jun 2009 02:12:01 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3886 "With the latest support of H.264/mp4 video support of Flash, there is no good reason to really look elsewhere for now." IMHO, the support for the tag in the newest version of Firefox, Safari, and Opera provides a very good reason to start using open-web video today, even if the codec discussion is on-going. The fact that older browsers can easily fall back on Flash makes moving toward using the tag attractive and simple (e.g., https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_audio_and_video_in_Firefox#Fallback_options). If the Open Video Conference (http://openvideoconference.org/) is any indication, the momentum is certainly present to resolve outstanding legal issues ASAP. “With the latest support of H.264/mp4 video support of Flash, there is no good reason to really look elsewhere for now.”

IMHO, the support for the tag in the newest version of Firefox, Safari, and Opera provides a very good reason to start using open-web video today, even if the codec discussion is on-going. The fact that older browsers can easily fall back on Flash makes moving toward using the tag attractive and simple (e.g., https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Using_audio_and_video_in_Firefox#Fallback_options).

If the Open Video Conference (http://openvideoconference.org/) is any indication, the momentum is certainly present to resolve outstanding legal issues ASAP.

]]> By: Joseph Labrecque http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3879 Joseph Labrecque Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:06:48 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3879 "open web standards have zero up-front costs, whereas flash tools require the initial output of hundreds of dollars for development tools." If you are using the Flex SDK to build Flash content, you can do so for no cost using any of the free IDE tools out there: http://opensource.adobe.com/ “open web standards have zero up-front costs, whereas flash tools require the initial output of hundreds of dollars for development tools.”

If you are using the Flex SDK to build Flash content, you can do so for no cost using any of the free IDE tools out there: http://opensource.adobe.com/

]]> By: Jeremy Chone http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3878 Jeremy Chone Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:54:05 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3878 @JGreenberg Flash's ExternalInterface comes with a big impact on performance and at extra development/testing cost. But, it can work, sgweb is using this mechanism I think. So, yes, agree, you can work around Flash lack of scripting support. @JGreenberg Flash’s ExternalInterface comes with a big impact on performance and at extra development/testing cost. But, it can work, sgweb is using this mechanism I think. So, yes, agree, you can work around Flash lack of scripting support.

]]> By: JGreenberg http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3876 JGreenberg Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:26:32 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3876 "Unfortunately, Flash does not support the interpreted model, so Web developers will have to fully jump into the Flash development model and tools, which can be relatively high barriers of entry" This is not strictly true, as you can use Flash's ExternalInterface to create and manipulate Flash content dynamically from JavaScript. “Unfortunately, Flash does not support the interpreted model, so Web developers will have to fully jump into the Flash development model and tools, which can be relatively high barriers of entry”

This is not strictly true, as you can use Flash’s ExternalInterface to create and manipulate Flash content dynamically from JavaScript.

]]> By: Jeremy Chone http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3875 Jeremy Chone Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:26:59 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3875 @Tim Correct, this post just focused on raw capabilities, not on cost, community, and developer productivity. While these points are interesting as well, in the case of Open Web and Flash, they can become very subjective. @Tim Correct, this post just focused on raw capabilities, not on cost, community, and developer productivity. While these points are interesting as well, in the case of Open Web and Flash, they can become very subjective.

]]> By: Tim Inman http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/article/to-flash-or-to-open-web/comment-page-1/#comment-3873 Tim Inman Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:49:26 +0000 http://www.bitsandbuzz.com/?p=305#comment-3873 I'm surprised that my most important issue was not addressed: open web standards have zero up-front costs, whereas flash tools require the initial output of hundreds of dollars for development tools. That may not be a big deal for large outfits, but open web standards for video will lower the barrier and get more scrappy creative content out there faster. I’m surprised that my most important issue was not addressed: open web standards have zero up-front costs, whereas flash tools require the initial output of hundreds of dollars for development tools.

That may not be a big deal for large outfits, but open web standards for video will lower the barrier and get more scrappy creative content out there faster.

]]>