Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Flash On Android Is 'Shockingly Bad'

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the not-so-flash dept.

Android 657

Hugh Pickens writes "Ryan Lawler writes on GigaOm that although many have touted the availability of Flash on Android devices as a competitive advantage over Apple's mobile devices, while trying to watch videos from ABC.com, Fox.com and Metacafe using Flash 10.1 on a Nexus One over a local Wi-Fi network connected to a 25-Mbps Verizon FiOS broadband connection, mobile expert Kevin Tofel found that videos were slow to load, if they loaded at all, leading to an overall very inconsistent experience while using his Android device for video. 'While in theory Flash video might be a competitive advantage for Android users, in practice it's difficult to imagine anyone actually trying to watch non-optimized web video on an Android handset,' writes Lawler. 'All of which makes one believe that maybe Steve Jobs was right to eschew Flash in lieu of HTML5 on the iPhone and iPad.'"

cancel ×

657 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Breaking news! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33457844)

Flash on any platform is shockingly bad.

Re:Breaking news! (1)

miknix (1047580) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458070)

in practice it's difficult to imagine anyone actually trying to watch non-optimized web video on an Android handset

Ricer!

Re:Breaking news! (2, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458078)

You got that right.

"The Bones episode seemed more like a slideshow when viewed on the Android," read the article. What a coincidence! It looks the same way on my Pentium 4 desktop. My G5 PowerPC Mac has similar slide-like qualities when viewing syfy.com. Flash is one of those programs that suffer from bloat and therefore run slowly on older CPUs.

Not that HTML5 is any better. I tried to run a new "test" movie that Google created with HTML5, and it too ran like a snail.

Re:Breaking news! (4, Interesting)

guruevi (827432) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458208)

HTML5 depends on your browser actually. I have a Nokia N800 and I could've told you years ago that Flash on mobile devices sucks badly. HTML5 on the Mobile Firefox platform also sucks somewhat (but not as bad as Flash) but if you get a WebKit browser, it works quite spiffy for an older mobile processor.

Re:Breaking news! (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458142)

Or as Julia Sawalha says in a fake Australian accent on Time Please Gentlemen: It's fucking shocking!
People in Australia don't really say that, do they?

Re:Breaking news! (5, Funny)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458262)

No, a real Australian would find a way to fit "cunt" into the sentence.

Re:Breaking news! (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458292)

Or as Julia Sawalha says in a fake Australian accent on Time Please Gentlemen: It's fucking shocking!
People in Australia don't really say that, do they?

I would say Bloody awful or possibly Fucking shit house.

Re:Breaking news! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458284)

You beat me to it! Yes, Adobe Flash is poor no matter how you slice it. Adobe is heading the way of MS and will soon see its way out of all my endeavours.

Re:Breaking news! (5, Funny)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458314)

Am I the only one bothered by the parent failing to use the title "News Flash!"?

Silly (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33457860)

There are other things you can do with flash than just watch videos.

Re:Silly (1)

joeflies (529536) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457942)

Nevertheless, it probably is the most important

Re:Silly (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458088)

Not just videos (and ads) are being done in flash, but also navigation. a lot of textual, graphic and specially interactive content, and games. And worthless animations too. Will be very happy if/when the web gets free of the need of flash for using it. While then, having no flash at all mean a good percent of the web sites out of reach.

Flash only sites (1)

MDMurphy (208495) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458156)

What's important varies with the person.

I was very happy to be able to make a reservation at a place that unfortunately has a flash-only web site. My Nexus One phone could do it where in the past I had to wait till I got to a PC to use their site ( or forget to as sometimes happens )

Many of the big video sites have alternatives for non-flash platforms, but there's still a lot of web sites that are sticking with flash only. Some are less likely to change this if they created an iPhone app for access, leaving any non-Apple device stuck with their bloated flash site.

My personal priorities are for flash only web sites to work with video and flash games much lower in importance.

Re:Silly (1)

beej (82035) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458300)

I disagree. HTML5 video can come along and take the whole market, and it won't affect Flash adoption. If you bullet-list what Flash does, you'll have a lot more than "video", and a lot of it is very very important.

How much video in Farmville?

Re:Silly (2, Interesting)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458386)

Not really, i use my smart phone when i'm out running errands. I hate going to websites and being blocked with "requires flash" just because they chose to implement their site with crappy flash animation. I think it was well publicized that flash video was going to blow when it came to android, and I guess we're not disappointed. But it may let me order food ahead of time for pickup, check inventory & prices at store X etc. which is most of what I need.

Video is going to be nice, but it's not something I plan on using except when I'm really, really bored. For now I have book readers.

Re:Silly (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458036)

There are other things you can do with flash than just watch videos.

There are other things you can do with a spoon besides eat soup, for instance, you could gouge your eyes out with it.

Re:Silly (1)

michrech (468134) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458334)

But -- Why use a spoon?

Really? (2, Insightful)

lawnboy5-O (772026) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457870)

Is this really a shocking surprise? I don't mean to troll, but flash has brought us a lot of positives, but it runs so - so just about everywhere in my experiences.

Re:Really? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33457968)

Not true - flash runs great on all platforms on this site [goatse.fr] . It's spectacular.

Re:Really? (4, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458162)

Interesting.

I loaded that in my iPad. Rather than seeing the blue no-Flash cube on that site, I saw a man stretching his anus open to remarkable proportions. It must be that update to iOS 3.1.3 I did the other day.

Choice (4, Insightful)

bloosh (649755) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457878)

At least Android users have the choice to install and view Flash content if they choose. iPhone users aren't allowed that choice.

I have Flash installed on my Moto Droid and have found performance quite lacking as well.

Re:Choice (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33457972)

why add support for something that's going to cause a bad user experience?

Re:Choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458056)

Really? Do you even need to ask? There are cases where somebody might want or need whatever content is hidden beneath that blue lego block. Giving users an option is better than saying "Sorry, you can't have this content because it might create a bad user experience."

Re:Choice (0, Flamebait)

beelsebob (529313) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458196)

You have two choices:
1) Have flash not work
2) Have flash not work *and* cause your device to eat battery, slow to a crawl and heat up.

Which is a better choice?

Re:Choice (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458340)

It's "1) Have flash not work" of course. Saves me running Flashblock as I do on my Macbook.

Re:Choice (2, Insightful)

michrech (468134) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458354)

The choice itself is the better choice. I'd MUCH rather have the choice.

Re:Choice (1)

Nikker (749551) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458364)

Choice is the better choice ;) If I am truly stuck and need to access a site (reservations, tickets, etc) while I am on the road then if my 2 minutes of flash usage takes 25% of my battery then I will live with that, I won't use it on a regular basis but I will use it when I have no other alternative.

Re:Choice (3, Informative)

Superken7 (893292) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458388)

You forgot the Android way of doing things.

3) OPTIONALLY, have flash disabled and enable it on-demand with a single tap. Best of both worlds. You are welcome.

btw, flash on my N1 doesn't eat significantly more battery and sure as hell is not slow most of the time and doesnt heat up more than with regular video playback.

Re:Choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458390)

Having the choice between "Have flash not work" and "Have flash usually work and cause your device to eat battery, slow to a crawl and heat up" is better than being stuck with "Have flash not work." Not a single person in the world who owns an Android phone is going to say "Damn them for including the option to install Flash! I'll never buy an Android phone again!"

Re:Choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458210)

users really need to get to that video from their phone? users really need to play that cheesy flash game ASAP?

come on... if that's your argument why not just add support for every single little shitty browser plugin and halfass web standard in the world. you have to draw the line somewhere.

Re:Choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458328)

users really need to get to that video from their phone? users really need to play that cheesy flash game ASAP?
Perhaps, though unlikely. Good thing I said "want or need."

you have to draw the line somewhere.
That line seems to have been drawn at plugins which are(for the time being) relevant, eg. Flash. Though, for instance, if Microsoft wanted to develop a Silverlight plugin for Android, I wouldn't object - choice is a good thing. I still haven't seen a good argument for wanting the choice to use Flash taken away from you.

Re:Choice (3, Insightful)

SETIGuy (33768) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458176)

Add what support? Android doesn't "support" flash, it allows the user the option to install it. Likewise, Apple doesn't remove support for flash, it removes the option to install flash.

Re:Choice (1)

Tangential (266113) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458012)

Based on most reports, its doesn't sound like Flash is watchable on Android.

It might be more accurate to just say "At least Android users have the choice to install Flash if they choose" and leave the playing content part off.

Re:Choice (1)

HappyClown (668699) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458186)

I've been using Flash on my Nexus One for a couple of months now, and I find it pretty useful and flash video perfectly watchable for the most part. I also follow the tech/mobile press pretty closely and I'm not sure what the "most reports" you're referring to are - my impression is that the response in the press has been broadly in agreement with my experience.

Here's an interesting followup to the article:

http://newteevee.com/2010/09/02/is-flash-on-android-shockingly-bad-or-shockingly-great/?utm_source=newteevee&utm_medium=recent-posts [newteevee.com]

Re:Choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458188)

"Most reports"? Check the comments on the article - people aren't having the same problems this guy is. Flash video works fine on my android, butter smooth. Most reports?

Re:Choice (1)

thynk (653762) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458024)

I don't watch a lot of flash on my Nexus One, but it's a hell of a lot better than not having the choice to do so at all.

Re:Choice (0, Troll)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458174)

I also don't have the choice of running an insecure version of SSH or Apache on my phone, "because I feel like it" or because I should have the option available to me.

If I was looking at cars, and Ford had an option that would slow my car down, and impede it's ability to take corners, I'd rather Ford not give me that option.

Re:Choice (1)

Cwix (1671282) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458248)

What if the option was like 4 wheel drive, perhaps it slows you down.. it might even affect the way you corner... but you can get more places then you could otherwise.

Re:Choice (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458282)

save the center diff completely failing, I've yet to see an AWD/4WD system make a car crash horribly because it decided not to work that day.

Re:Choice (2, Informative)

vux984 (928602) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458396)

At least Android users have the choice to install and view Flash content if they choose. iPhone users aren't allowed that choice.

Pretty much... flash support isn't just about being able to watch TV on your phone browser. Its about visiting a site like this on your mobile...

http://www.parkplacewhiterock.com/ [parkplacewhiterock.com]

Can someone with a droid report whether this site works fine... or is it also 'shockingly bad'? iphone users don't bother... thanks to Steve you can't actually see most of the site, because the top menu is.. gasp... flash.

Not just Flash (1)

agent_vee (1801664) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457890)

Can't it be said that all non optimized web content is 'Shockingly Bad' when viewed on a mobile device? Still better than nothing.

Skyfire (1)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457904)

Bad? Streaming much of anything is bad on a mobile platform, at least OTA. As far as website use, Skyfire does flash on 3 different mobile platforms just fine.

Re:Skyfire (1)

Altus (1034) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458122)

this was over WiFi, bandwidth was not the problem.

Anyone familiar with watching flash video on a non-windows platform should not be surprised by this. The Flash implementation on the mac is so bad that it cant play simple videos while buffering without a stutter, even the video has many minutes worth of advanced buffer. You have to let a video buffer pretty much completely to get even decent performance out of most flash video.

Re:Skyfire (1)

FesterDaFelcher (651853) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458372)

I have the Netflix app on my iPhone and watched an episode of Family Guy while on the bus into work this morning. The picture was perfect and the video never skipped. OTA is working pretty well for me. Wifi loads faster, but the quality is so good OTA that I can say that is the only difference. i also watched the Apple thing yesterday streaming, and that was great video. I was on Wifi for that.

Or perhaps.... (5, Insightful)

oraclese (1039520) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457906)

"All of which makes one believe that maybe Steve Jobs was right to eschew Flash in lieu of HTML5 on the iPhone and iPad." Or perhaps this just means this is the first iteration of the Android OS to attempt Flash compatibility and it obviously needs more time to mature? I hate flash as much as the next guy, but with as much content as there is out there that is based on Flash, if Android gets it working properly, it will be a big advantage over the iPhone OS.

Re:Or perhaps.... (5, Insightful)

topham (32406) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457984)

Problem is, it's not up to Android to get it working correctly, it's up to Adobe, and they've had YEARS to get it working on mobile platforms.

Re:Or perhaps.... (2, Interesting)

grub (11606) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458074)

Rather than waiting for an improvement I'm all for just cutting Flash out like a cancer.

There are other things on the horizon which can (supposedly) do the job and replace Flash altogether. That's where my money will go.
[disclosure: I have an iPhone and iPad. Flash isn't missed.]

Re:Or perhaps.... (1)

oraclese (1039520) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458110)

I'm all for the purging of everything that is flash, as well. But as long as there is content out there based on it, I wouldn't mind the option of being able to view it.

Re:Or perhaps.... (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458302)

Unless they take so long to get it working well that everybody ends up using the term "Flash" as a geeky punchline.

Given the high profile nature of the debate over Flash, that Adobe released something that performs this poorly is really pretty bad, they're simply underlining Apple's points. It'd be nice if it had "time to mature," but if the overwhelming experience of using Flash on mobile devices starts driving users away while Adobe is "maturing" Flash, there won't be any point in continuing it's development for mobile platforms, because in the meantime, designers will have found something else to fill the niche, and right now, that "something else" mostly looks like HTML5, or native apps for each device.

car analogy (1)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457920)

I'll take limp home mode over being stranded 100 miles from civilization, any day of the week.

Re:car analogy (1, Informative)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457934)

So not having Flash is the same as being stranded 100 miles from home.

I've been stranded a 100 miles from home and I'll tell you, I don't get the same feeling from no flash on my iPhone as I did from that.

Re:car analogy (1)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458030)

Have you used it? Because I have and after doing so I prefer the second of those two options. The problem is that many sites that support HTML5 (which works find on my Droid) default to Flash (which in my experience is every bit as bad as TFA makes it out to be) if they detect it to be installed. I'll take halfway decent HTML5 on a fraction of the sites I visit over what I've experienced with Flash any day.

"None" is better than inconsistent? (4, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457922)

...really? I'd rather have the option than not, but I guess that's why I don't buy iStuff anymore.

Re:"None" is better than inconsistent? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458320)

You are absolutely right. If you *need* "inconsistent" don't buy the iStuff. But people who buy the iStuff are helping to force "inconsistent" out of the web by their sacrifice, so that someday you too can enjoy not having to deal with "inconsistent" :-)

Re:"None" is better than inconsistent? (1, Insightful)

Victor Liu (645343) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458350)

Yes, none is better. I'd rather not be given an option if I don't really like either. Furthermore, if you accidentally click on a link with Flash content, your browser may slow to a crawl.

Re:"None" is better than inconsistent? (4, Insightful)

Invid72 (1638287) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458360)

I'd rather not have the option myself. Having Flash available is a disincentive to creating a better HTML5 experience suitable for mobile devices. With Flash available, mobile site developers can just create their sites and call it a day, regardless of how poor the experience is.

Not having the fallback means that you have no alternative but to create suitable code in order to reach mobile users. Since Flash for whatever reason already encourages lazy development, it would be better that the option didn't exist at all.

Jobs' obstinance, coupled with iOS marketshare will lead to a better mobile browsing experience for all of us, at least that's my take.

Meh (1)

Snodgrass (446409) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457924)

I'd say 'predictably bad'.

Seriously, I knew it was going to slow my web pages down by about a zillion times, and so far it's delivered. So much of the web is rendered unusable in the default browser on my phone because of the flash plugin it's comical. Worse yet, there's no way that I know of to disable flash.

But the beauty of Android is that I can just use a different browser. Which I do. (thank you Opera!)

Re:Meh (5, Informative)

HappyClown (668699) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458006)

Here's how to get the best of both worlds:

Open the browser on your phone then select: Menu -> More -> Settings -> Enable Plugins -> On Demand.

That means Flash is disabled by default and a placeholder will be displayed instead, but you just need to touch the green arrow to load and play the flash content if you want to see it. Works a treat, performance is fine, and if you really do want the content it's there with a single press.

Having said that, I find Flash performance to be fairly acceptable for the most part on my Nexus One anyway, and having it on demand like this is much, much, much better than being told you can't have it at all.

Re:Meh (0, Flamebait)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458246)

So instead of getting a consistent web experience you're basically deciding to play russian roulette with Flash content?

Brilliant.

It just works.

Except when the fucking browser crashes.

Re:Meh (3, Insightful)

MindDelay (675385) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458358)

So instead of getting a consistent web experience you're basically deciding to play russian roulette with Flash content?

Brilliant.

It just works.

Except when the fucking browser crashes.

What a ridiculous comment. All he's saying is you can disable it by default and browse the web as you would normally, with the option to play flash content if you want. All flash content is russian roulette, no matter what platform you use. What does it matter if it's on your phone or not? No matter what you're getting a consistent web experience.

Re:Meh (2, Interesting)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458014)

Flashblock is on most desktop browsers. And Opera will add it eventually. It's really one of the only things missing from their mobile browser, which is the best I've found for all other uses.

Actually.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458062)

Actually, it can be completely disabled or (my favorite) set to on-demand only. (think Flashblock)

Specifically, go to your default browser, hit menu and go to More... --> Settings --> System Settings --> Enable Plugins --> On demand (or Off, if you prefer)

Re:Meh (1)

KalAl (1391649) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458182)

After reading your comment I checked the built-in browser on my newly-updated FroYo Incredible just to confirm that you were wrong about the inability to disable Flash. Much to my chagrin, I found you to be the opposite of wrong.

This is disappointing as I would always browse in 2.1 with Flash turned off, and now I can't do that in the default browser anymore. I never installed any third-party browsers because I feared more use of the battery from an app that's not as tightly integrated into the OS. Are these fears at all justified?

Re:Meh (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458376)

What on earth are you talking about? Unless something was changed by HTC in the browser that ships with the Sense UI you most certainly can disable flash in the Android Browser in Froyo.

Flash On Windows and Linux Is Shockingly Bad (0, Redundant)

iYk6 (1425255) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457930)

Flash On Android Is 'Shockingly Bad'

Yeah. It's Flash. We're used to it by now.

mobile expert Kevin Tofel found that videos were slow to load, if they loaded at all, leading to an overall very inconsistent experience while using [flash] for video.

Yep. I get that too on my desktop computer.

shockingly bad is an exaggeration (5, Insightful)

Superken7 (893292) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457948)

I have been watching video without any issues from several sites, plus flash is not only video.

Its the OPTION of having flash that makes it so great. If you don't like it, don't use it. But you cannot negate the fact that many users actually enjoy it. Period.

"All of which makes one believe that maybe Steve Jobs was right to eschew Flash in lieu of HTML5 on the iPhone and iPad.""

You make it sound as if both were mutually exclusive. Maybe that was what Steve wanted you to believe and you bought into it? Wake up, Android DOES support HTML5 as well as the iphone, while having much better javascript performance - crucial for HTML5 stuff.

I am surprised such a gross simplified statement made it into slashdot. Yeah, I must be new here...

Re:shockingly bad is an exaggeration (1, Insightful)

imthesponge (621107) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458058)

Better to have "bad" Flash than nothing at all.

Re:shockingly bad is an exaggeration (4, Insightful)

maccodemonkey (1438585) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458180)

"Its the OPTION of having flash that makes it so great. If you don't like it, don't use it. But you cannot negate the fact that many users actually enjoy it. Period."

I would say the downside of this is that it allows web developers to be lazy. It's harder to move beyond Flash when Flash is still supported everywhere, even though it's supported very poorly.

It's the same thing that kept IE's stranglehold around for so long, especially when IE was on the Mac, so there wasn't even a cross platform argument.

When Apple decided not to include Flash on iDevices, Flash became no longer a standard, and started a move towards HTML5.

My experience as well (4, Informative)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457950)

This has been my experience as well with my Droid. I realize that the droid is a bit slower than other Android phones, but I hadn't had any trouble with watching HTML5 video on it, so I expected similar results with Flash. I was wrong. The few times I did get it to play, after let the player buffer for several minutes (on WiFi) it played in the single digit frame rates. I uninstalled it after a few days, as sites that had HTML5 video available still defaulted to Flash if they detected it. Having access to HTML5 video on only a portion of sites is preferable to me to having Flash for Android available on all sites. That should say something about just how bad it is.

Works fine on my e52 (5, Funny)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457952)

What can I say.

Leave the country, move somewhere with a 21st century mobile infrastructure.
Learn to smoke, casually.
Lose weight.
Wear better clothes.
Talk with an accent.
Use a Nokia.

In short, become European. Life is better.
 

Re:Works fine on my e52 (1)

maccodemonkey (1438585) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458204)

"Use a Nokia."

But that's Flash Lite, correct? Not Flash 10.1?

Flash Lite was a mobile dedicated version of Flash that isn't necessarily compatible with all content. Flash 10.1, which is what is being talked about, is an effort by Adobe to bring mobile devices to feature parity with the desktop clients.

Re:Works fine on my e52 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458370)

Lets see e52 ... "Flash Lite 3.0" which is Flash Viewer 7 + some video and security aspects of Flash Viewer 8... aka this is far from Flash 10.1

But...But... (0, Troll)

jeff4747 (256583) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457954)

But 2010 is the year of the Linux deskt^H^H^H^H^H phone!

... duh? (2, Interesting)

Kristopeit, M. D. (1892582) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457970)

i've been fighting this battle with idiots for the last 2 days... on a battery powered device, optimization has real world side effects... running code through an additional platform layer increases latency and response time and consumes more resources (CPU/battery). as long as the hardware and operating systems vary greatly between devices, the best solution will always be writing and compiling applications natively for each platform.

Anonymous Cowardhttp://mobile.slashdot.org/comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33457988)

Question?

Have u guys heard of the term 'Propaganda'

If the headline of this was not it, then I know of no other definition of propagander.

umm (2, Informative)

ak_hepcat (468765) | more than 3 years ago | (#33457992)

My HTC NexusOne with flash 10.1 works fine. I haven't found a youtube video that won't play on it.
I haven't tried many flash games, because i haven't had a need to.

Even Strongbad's sbEmail's works fine. i don't notice any issues or lag or anything.

Perhaps he should look at not only his OS, but also his hardware and his connectivity, and also his expectations.

A phone is not a desktop. And if you don't have a physical keyboard, you're not going to be able to do certain things.

Given all that, I still prefer Android over iOS. and my phone over any of the iPhones.

Re:umm (1, Insightful)

oraclese (1039520) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458086)

When playing Youtube videos, are you sure they are flash, or HTML5? I have Android 2.1 on my Samsung Galaxy S, and YouTube works without the ability to install a flash player. Forgive my ignorance if I'm missing something ;p

Re:umm (1)

Kristopeit, M. D. (1892582) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458126)

youtube already works on every internet phone...

Flash is crashy (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458048)

With the latest firefox, it reports when flash crashes the browser. Guess what, I get the errors consistently with flash heavy websites. Flash sucks for playing videos smoothly. I'm sure there's plenty of people who have zero problems with flash running fast, and efficiently, but those must be adobe employees.

Re:Flash is crashy (1)

Altus (1034) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458190)

Since I started using flashblock for everything I have noticed a considerable decrease in the number of browser crashes in firefox, unless I decide to open up a bunch of windows with flash games or videos, but I try not to keep those open after I am done with them.

At least casual flash use for advertising doesn't kill my browser anymore, plus I don't have to deal with the distraction it creates.

Works fine on my Nexus One (1)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458060)

Flash is fine on my Nexus One. Its not quite the best experience and I'd imagine that really heavy players might not work well (hulu is abysmal, but their player seems to be really chunky), but it works out great when I'm reading a blog or following a twitter link, and someone has embedded a flash video. I know the iPhone does YouTube but there's plenty of other flash video sites, and my phone works on many more.

People also need to clean up their flash players for mobile use. Flash Video isn't the problem, that works fine. The problem is when people try to have a feature loaded flash player, and then it pukes. They need to have a simpler mobile version, but that's a lot easier than forcing them to write a whole new app, I think.

And when a player supports fullscreen video, its usually pretty nice. I actually prefer watching youtube videos embedded than loading the dedicated youtube app to watch them. Its easy to do either, but when its a short video I just like to click and go.
-Taylor

Another Apple fanboi type article (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458084)

What we have here is a new phone platform that provides a very common and desired feature the IPhone will never have according to their lord and savior Jesus....I mean Steve Jobs.....therefore this uninformed writer feels Steve was right because it doesn't work flawlessly?!?! Wow what if we were to say that about all technology on new platforms?? Totally insightful there buddy!!!

HTC Incredible (2, Insightful)

DrugCheese (266151) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458092)

Always worked fine for me. Including several flash games off websites I've wanted to waste a little time on. Maybe this guy needs a better provider if his videos load to slow. Reminds me of all the people who bought new computers in the late 90's early 00's only to complain that it was 'just as slow downloading stuff as the old one'.

Flash on maemo? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458100)

Any n900 owners want to comment on their flash performance?

Some sites require flash for menues (1)

Mike Zilva (785109) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458132)

And I have been happy to be allowed to browse those sites on my Nexus One

Run-on sentence (1)

jpmorgan (517966) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458148)

You know what else is shockingly bad? That run-on sentence in the summary.

For the love of god, there's more to punctuation than just the comma.

Works fine on my evo (1)

putch (469506) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458170)

I use flash on my Evo to watch zeropunctuation and dailyshow clips with very few problems. And, really, that's all I need it for.

Maybe? Maybe!!??!!??? (1)

frank_adrian314159 (469671) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458214)

There's no maybe about it. Of course, Steve was correct. Chairman Steve is always correct. People who don't believe this should report at the nearest re-education camp (or Apple store, whichever is closer).

A much better option for video (1)

Eggbloke (1698408) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458216)

Download Skyfire browser, it converts flash videos to HTML5 videos 'in the cloud' I have had good experiences with it so far.

Jobs is right (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458220)

Make web designers believe that, no more "interpreters" like flash or silverlight on web, and that its time to move to html5 when possible. Sometimes doing wrong math you get the right result.

Light on details (1)

niftydude (1745144) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458226)

Article is pretty light on details - what resolution of video was he attempting to stream?
Also, I'm not sure I agree with this assertion:

While in theory Flash video might be a competitive advantage for Android users,

You can do a lot more with flash than just watch video. The competitive advantage is just having flash at all.

What about non-video? (2, Insightful)

DdJ (10790) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458232)

I never thought it'd be any good for most video.

How is it for non-video? Games? Simple non-video animations like StrongBad? Very simple video like the Zero Punctuation stuff?

(Full disclosure: today, I happen to be an iOS user and am content with the lack of Flash right now -- I usually disable it on my desktop too -- but I'm interested in how this all plays out, and willing to be persuaded.)

Software playback? (1)

LaminatorX (410794) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458240)

Only some of Jobs's reasons for banishing Flash are crap. That software rendering of video in a browser plug-in whose performance is at best mediocre makes for a sub-par experience is not one of them, especially when most of the video wrapped in those Flash containers are already in a format that could otherwise benefit from hardware acceleration.

When is Flash Not Shockingly Bad? (1, Troll)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458274)

Let's see, of my machines, flash sucks on:

My AMD Athlon 3.2 Ghz processor in my desktop
My old piece of crap Pentium driven Dell Inspiron 4100 laptop
My AMD Athlon 3.0 GHz media box attached to my computer
My roomate's AMD Celeron laptop
My parent's Intel Core 2 Duo driven Windows XP machine
My best friends Indel Core 2 Duo driven HP laptop

...

Am I missing any? Nah I don't think so. Granted I am running older hardware, but at least a couple of those setups should outperform a smartphone and, in the realm of Flash, they don't. I have to say Flash applications, movies, and games are the single most pain in the ass thing that I stumble across on the internet anymore. Do I still use them? Sure, most folks do. Do I yearn for the day when something less crappy that doesn't make my screen flash like a schizophrenic display unit gets set as a standard? You're damn right I do. Until then, I'll just keep taking more of the same...

At least the option is there... (0, Redundant)

MoldySpore (1280634) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458294)

...as opposed to Apple's devices that take it out of your hands completely by not giving you the option to view flash.

Also since flash on smart phones is relatively new, especially to the android platform, it is bound to get better with time and more powerful hardware.

Flash works great on my nexus one! (1)

zeroRenegade (1475839) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458330)

I am a developer, and I have to admit to my affinity for anime. I have tried flash on my nexus on most of the popular streaming sites (chrunchyroll, funimation, etc), and it works excellent, and their flash players are terrible. Most of the time, the player is the source of problems, not the framework. I think HTML5 is great as well (thewildernessdowntown.com/ [slashdot.org] ), but anyone who puts down Flash so adamantly is an idiot.

Bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33458344)

Ef, off, this is flamebait in its purest form.

Counterexample (3, Informative)

beej (82035) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458352)

Down in the comments for the story, someone has posted this counterexample to youtube. In it, he uses Flash to watch the video complaining about how badly Flash video works on mobile phones on his mobile phone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb9jfdltkUU [youtube.com]

If at first you don't succeed, give up? (1)

liquidhippo (988103) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458366)

Well, first of all, Flash on android has been out for the better part of a month, depending on what device you have. Sorry that you can't watch every video on the internet on a .1 release of something. Just because everything from the desktop platform doesn't translate perfectly to the mobile platform is not a reason to not include the ability to use it. Some > none, especially with the prospect of the platform *maturing*. "While in theory Flash video might be a competitive advantage for Android users, in practice it's difficult to imagine anyone actually trying to watch non-optimized web video on an Android handset," writes Lawler. "All of which makes one believe that maybe Steve Jobs was right to eschew Flash in lieu of HTML5 on the iPhone and iPad."" How is it difficult to imagine people watching web videos on their handset? Concerning optimized versus non-optimized, this is exactly why Adobe has guidelines to optimize videos for mobile flash player (http://www.adobe.com/devnet/devices/articles/delivering_video_fp10.1.html) and part of the reason this person had an inconsistent experience with trying to watch flash video on their handset. This quote seems to also be saying that if a software company can't deliver a feature 100% bug-free and perfect on the first version, then don't try at all. If that were the case, Apple shouldn't have allowed mobile safari to parse any HTML5 and just stuck with HTML4 - trying to run several chrome experiments (www.chromeexperiments.com) on an iPad when it first came out resulted in failure, while I was able to use them on my desktop computer. This whole thing just sounds like an uneducated half-nerd decided he'd get in on the flame war between apple fanboys and android fanboys just for the hell of it. I have a feeling they don't know that both flash and html5 aren't solely video technologies and it's kinda sad they are getting any press at all.

Flash isn't just for videos (1)

michael1221988 (1613671) | more than 3 years ago | (#33458378)

The main advantage to flash on mobile devices is to be able to create applications with all of Adobe's tools and have them run on the device. Flashtime is a good example. It is a p2p voip service developed through Adobe AIR. Just thinking about flash for video isn't what the advantage is and the OP missed that.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?