| 1 |
On Friday 24 Feb 2012 14:13:29 james wrote: |
| 2 |
> Mick <michaelkintzios <at> gmail.com> writes: |
| 3 |
> > The thing is that apple smartphones and tablets do not offer flash. |
| 4 |
> > Desktop volumes are in decline, while smartphones and tablets sales are |
| 5 |
> > increasing. This could be seasonal of course, but if the future moves |
| 6 |
> > away from the flash capable desktop, then flash will become increasingly |
| 7 |
> > obsolete. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I sympathize with where you are headed. But reality is FLASH is very |
| 10 |
> entrenched. Numerous sites, that I have no choice but to use, use |
| 11 |
> FLASH in a centric role. This is going to force folks to have a |
| 12 |
> doz system for reliable access. Hopefully by then Windos.x will be |
| 13 |
> easily setup in a VM on Linux, so the requisite browser can be |
| 14 |
> launched therein..... or some solution. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> For example, much of the State of Florida's online education |
| 17 |
> offered requires FLASH. No amount of complaints will |
| 18 |
> change that. No other alternatives. You cannot just 'will' |
| 19 |
> away Flash, imho. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Thanks to all for the input, as I shall just 'wait and see'... |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
If you go back a few years there was no flash. Then flash arrived and some web |
| 24 |
designers went mad at creating flash-only websites. Very very poor google |
| 25 |
rankings was not a problem for them, as long as the site looked errrm ... |
| 26 |
flash? Ha, ha! |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Then common sense followed where by flash elements were added, but websites |
| 29 |
retained (X)HTML, CSS and javascript. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
In the future it is likely that HTML5, continuously improving javascript |
| 32 |
functionality and perhaps some new technology will render flash redundant; but |
| 33 |
I agree with you that this won't likely happen overnight. |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Regards, |
| 36 |
Mick |
Archives