I've tried on occasion to remove Flash from my desktop and see how long I can go without it. Whilst I don't remember the details of the particular sites, its never long before I add it again.
Anyone NOT have flash installed on their main computer?
I have never went and installed it on purpose but I do use chrome so I assume I have it by default.
Flash works fine on Android 4.2.1 but I agree that its not really required any more, just the odd site.
I'm not sure I agree that it's the odd site and not wishing to harp on about it but video content within the BBC is still flash. So, I hardly think it is sidelined as seems to be suggested.
I have never went and installed it on purpose but I do use chrome so I assume I have it by default.
Already discussed in this thread. Chrome desktop has flash installed by default. Chrome for Android does not and doesn't support flash even if installed.
I'm not sure I agree that it's the odd site and not wishing to harp on about it but video content within the BBC is still flash. So, I hardly think it is sidelined as seems to be suggested.
Already discussed in this thread. Chrome desktop has flash installed by default. Chrome for Android does not and doesn't support flash even if installed.
I'm aware of this, I was replying to a post about flash for desktop.
Ahh, I use Chrome on an android tablet (and we are in the tablet and ereader forum) so don't need the mobile version.
I must have missed the reference to mobile chrome, the OP is using a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 so should be able to run Chrome I'd have thought, my cheap 10" Superfly 8 does.
Ahh, I use Chrome on an android tablet (and we are in the tablet and ereader forum) so don't need the mobile version.
I must have missed the reference to mobile chrome, the OP is using a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 so should be able to run Chrome I'd have thought, my cheap 10" Superfly 8 does.
I think I'm going to unsubscribe to this thread because if I wasn't confused before I certainly am now as to what version of Chrome we are talking about!!
Ahh, I use Chrome on an android tablet (and we are in the tablet and ereader forum) so don't need the mobile version.
I must have missed the reference to mobile chrome, the OP is using a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 so should be able to run Chrome I'd have thought, my cheap 10" Superfly 8 does.
Android runs the mobile version of chrome, doesn't matter if its a phone or tablet.
Windows x86 and OSX run the full version that comes with flash.
Just looked and the tablet is on Chrome 18.0.1025469 and Flash Adobe flash player 11.1 is on the system.
Sorry, I'm still going to harp on here after all. If you go to the BBC News website and try to play one of the video news items it will not play in Chrome whether or not flash is installed on the tablet.
No point in arguing, the point is that virtually the whole internet runs on Flash, you need a browser which supports it to do video streaming.
That is not going to change anytime soon.
The reason Flash works is because it runs the same on everything it is installed on, it is a browser with a browser, but because there is one company who owns it, it works the same on everything it can be installed on.
Flash is needed because everyones implementation of HTML is different, you can't write a web page and expect it to work the same on different devices and different browsers. So you write your content in Flash and it works the same everywhere.
HTML5 is not going to be any different while different people are allowed to implement their own versions.
You only have to look at the HTML5 video tag that is supposed to replace flash, there are different codecs specified and there is no one browser that supports all of them so there is no guarantee that a HTML5 video will play on your device.
There will never be a replacement for flash so long as there is no single gatekeeper controlling the implementation of it.
Ahh, I use Chrome on an android tablet (and we are in the tablet and ereader forum) so don't need the mobile version.
I must have missed the reference to mobile chrome, the OP is using a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 so should be able to run Chrome I'd have thought, my cheap 10" Superfly 8 does.
No doubt it will run Chrome, but I prefer Firefox.
No point in arguing, the point is that virtually the whole internet runs on Flash, you need a browser which supports it to do video streaming.
That is not going to change anytime soon.
A slight exaggeration but still necessary.
Rumour has it that Microsoft has now completely removed the Flash white-list requirement from Windows RT mobile tablets.
They will now simply blacklist sites as they please, maybe for those with intensive Flash games that would not be suitable anyway.
I've always been near certain Adobe had to acquiesce and finally blacklist Google. They rely on OS/X and Windows for their main income.
Yes, the BBC News website videos, via Safari on iPad, all play fine. I'm talking about the page with the grid of categorised videos. All (well, the half dozen or so I just tried) play.
What doesn't play is the weather forecast from the Weather page - says I need Flash...
Edit: Vimeo and YouTube play on iPad (that's not to say they don't serve up the flash versions to the desktop, it's just less of a requirement these days on mobile).
Yes, the BBC News website videos, via Safari on iPad, all play fine. I'm talking about the page with the grid of categorised videos. All (well, the half dozen or so I just tried) play.
What doesn't play is the weather forecast from the Weather page - says I need Flash...
I think that statement "the whole Internet runs on flash" was a gross exaggeration
The are so few sites that require flash and any decent one has an app alternative.
Video can play on it because its just an Xbox/Vita type gadget.
You just don't have PC rights.
Google proposed a HTML DRM ages ago. But I think it's having a job getting support for the proposal from Microsoft and Apple.
Anyway, with Adobe being obviously warned off Android it's a win for Fusion Agent who have seemingly signed up the Beeb for iPlayer.
Comments
I have never went and installed it on purpose but I do use chrome so I assume I have it by default.
I'm not sure I agree that it's the odd site and not wishing to harp on about it but video content within the BBC is still flash. So, I hardly think it is sidelined as seems to be suggested.
Already discussed in this thread. Chrome desktop has flash installed by default. Chrome for Android does not and doesn't support flash even if installed.
I'm aware of this, I was replying to a post about flash for desktop.
Hence the confusion. This is Tablets and e- readers forum!
Ahh, I use Chrome on an android tablet (and we are in the tablet and ereader forum) so don't need the mobile version.
I must have missed the reference to mobile chrome, the OP is using a Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 so should be able to run Chrome I'd have thought, my cheap 10" Superfly 8 does.
I think I'm going to unsubscribe to this thread because if I wasn't confused before I certainly am now as to what version of Chrome we are talking about!!
Android runs the mobile version of chrome, doesn't matter if its a phone or tablet.
Windows x86 and OSX run the full version that comes with flash.
Sorry, I'm still going to harp on here after all. If you go to the BBC News website and try to play one of the video news items it will not play in Chrome whether or not flash is installed on the tablet.
That is not going to change anytime soon.
The reason Flash works is because it runs the same on everything it is installed on, it is a browser with a browser, but because there is one company who owns it, it works the same on everything it can be installed on.
Flash is needed because everyones implementation of HTML is different, you can't write a web page and expect it to work the same on different devices and different browsers. So you write your content in Flash and it works the same everywhere.
HTML5 is not going to be any different while different people are allowed to implement their own versions.
You only have to look at the HTML5 video tag that is supposed to replace flash, there are different codecs specified and there is no one browser that supports all of them so there is no guarantee that a HTML5 video will play on your device.
There will never be a replacement for flash so long as there is no single gatekeeper controlling the implementation of it.
No doubt it will run Chrome, but I prefer Firefox.
Rumour has it that Microsoft has now completely removed the Flash white-list requirement from Windows RT mobile tablets.
They will now simply blacklist sites as they please, maybe for those with intensive Flash games that would not be suitable anyway.
I've always been near certain Adobe had to acquiesce and finally blacklist Google. They rely on OS/X and Windows for their main income.
What doesn't play is the weather forecast from the Weather page - says I need Flash...
Edit: Vimeo and YouTube play on iPad (that's not to say they don't serve up the flash versions to the desktop, it's just less of a requirement these days on mobile).
I think that statement "the whole Internet runs on flash" was a gross exaggeration
The are so few sites that require flash and any decent one has an app alternative.
Video can play on it because its just an Xbox/Vita type gadget.
You just don't have PC rights.
Google proposed a HTML DRM ages ago. But I think it's having a job getting support for the proposal from Microsoft and Apple.
Anyway, with Adobe being obviously warned off Android it's a win for Fusion Agent who have seemingly signed up the Beeb for iPlayer.
http://www.insidesecure.com/eng/Products/DRM-Content-Protection/DRM-Fusion-Agent-for-Downloadable-Deployment
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/17/inside-secure-idUSnBw166526a+100+BSW20130417
Obviously it can't be worse than Flash, can it?