| 1 |
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 04:50:58PM -0600, »Q« wrote |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:47:47 -0600 |
| 3 |
> Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > Correct me if I'm wrong here. Isn't flash supposed to be dying |
| 6 |
> > anyway? Why are so many sites still using it if they should be using |
| 7 |
> > HTML5? Isn't HTML5 supposed to eliminate flash?? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> It's been *supposed* to be dying for years, and HTML5 video was hoped |
| 10 |
> to be the silver bullet that would finish it off. Mozilla certainly |
| 11 |
> wants it dead, and IIRC even Google and Adobe have paid lip service to |
| 12 |
> killing it off. Unfortunately (IMO, natch) Mozilla no longer has the |
| 13 |
> market share to drive things, and (IMO again) Google doesn't have the |
| 14 |
> will to deal with it, despite having taken steps such as using HTML5 |
| 15 |
> on YouTube. Mozilla recently announced deprecation of all NPAPI |
| 16 |
> plugins -- except Flash, because people whose news/sports/porn videos |
| 17 |
> stopped working would just switch to Chrome. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
The other problem is that HTML5 sucks up more CPU for video. My data |
| 20 |
point with an ancient underpowered Atom netbook watching a Youtube music |
| 21 |
video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwqhdRs4jyA |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Flash |
| 24 |
===== |
| 25 |
1) Regular (i.e. smallest) display plays OK |
| 26 |
2) Wide format display plays OK |
| 27 |
3) Fullscreen audio OK, but video stutters badly |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
HTML5 |
| 30 |
===== |
| 31 |
1) Regular (i.e. smallest) display plays OK |
| 32 |
2) Wide format audio OK, but video stutters badly |
| 33 |
3) Fullscreen; you don't really want to know |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> |
| 37 |
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications |
Archives