Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
It's funny.  Laugh. Media Software The Internet

Occupy Flash? 507

mcgrew writes "CNN is reporting another Occupy movementOccupy Flash. Their aim: get rid of Flash completely. They explain: 'Why does it matter when HTML5 has clearly won the fight for the future of our web browsing? Well, as we've seen with other outdated web technologies (most notably the much-lamented Internet Explorer 6), as long as software is installed on machines, there will be a contingent of decision makers who mandate its use, and there will be a requirement of continued support, the plugin will live on, and folks will continue to develop for it.' In response, a group of Flash developers have started Occupy HTML in Flash's defense. Popcorn, anyone?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Occupy Flash?

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:43PM (#38087032)

    Clearly the "Occupy" meme is being abused now. Every dipshit with any pet cause is slapping "Occupy" on it and co-opting solidarity with the OWS movement. "Occupy" is teetering on the edge of really jumping the shark here. If it goes much further, we run the risk of "Hey, remember that whole 'Occupy' fad? What was with THAT, huh?" becoming a segment on VH1's Hey, Remember The Teens? episode on 2011.

    Therefore I propose we Occupy "Occupy" before it's too late. We must stand up to those who would steal our term. Because if we don't make a stand today, tomorrow we may be faced with Twilight fans wearing "Occupy Edward" and "Occupy Jacob" t-shirts, which can only lead to nostalgic Gen-Xer's wearing lame "Occupy Empire" and "Occupy Rebellion" Star Wars shirts.

  • Unfortunate (Score:5, Insightful)

    by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:44PM (#38087042)
    I think the Occupy Wall Street movement is tackling an important issue, and co-opting the name for a trivial issue like this is unnecessary and unfortunate.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      What issue are they takling? You talk to people and they have no clue what they are demanding... it is simply a disorganized mess.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        That's an insult to disorganized messes. Even a disorganized mess makes more sense than the Occupy movement(s).

        • Re:Unfortunate (Score:5, Insightful)

          by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:55PM (#38087284)
          I feel like I get the gist of the Occupy movement, just as people get the gist of the Tea Party. I agree that neither is definitive enough to be considered a political party, but pushing in a general direction and keeping some flavor of issues on the front burner can be constructive.

          If the press really wanted to understand the Occupy movement, it wouldn't just stand back and complain that the movement is not producing a manifesto. Rather, they would take an empirical approach, by conducting surveys with the protesters, to see which attitudes best characterize them, statistically. (Quick, somebody write an app for that).

          • Re:Unfortunate (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:31PM (#38087818)
            Occupy is a result of what happens when enough people get sick of their bread and circuses - they might not be able to coherently word their grievances into a manifesto but they know they're generally unhappy with the way their society is heading. It usually degenerates quickly into governments struggling to keep control with police and then military violence against civilians, and then you either have a regime change or a bloodbath or both on your hands.
            • Re:Unfortunate (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Jeng ( 926980 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:46PM (#38088004)

              You cannot come up with a solution until you know what the problem is.

              If you tear down a government without a clear idea of how to rebuild it it is then likely that the rebuilt government will end up being worse than the original.

              • There are aspects of some of their complaints I can't disagree with. Where private concerns received public funds to stay afloat, the bonuses should have been squashed, and in all likelihood, the boards and senior management should have been thrown out on the street.

                But in general, where you have a private company that has not dipped into the well, that remains strictly the concern of the shareholders, providing those getting bonuses are not violating the law (ie. various forms of what amounts to fraud and

              • The immediate problem is that income inequality in U.S. is at it highest point since the end of WW2, and still growing steadily. That in itself is really just a symptom of other problems, of course, but, generally speaking, the most obvious ways of treating this (like raising income tax back to where it was during the "golden age of capitalism") will also treat those other problems.

        • Re:Unfortunate (Score:5, Insightful)

          by kelemvor4 ( 1980226 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:59PM (#38087338)
          It's really bad. I saw an interview with one of the occupiers who had been given the boot the other day and when they asked her what she thought of the coppers evicting her and the other protesters she said "maybe it was what we needed." I think she is right.
      • Re:Unfortunate (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:21PM (#38087666) Journal
        Maybe I missed something, I was under the impression that they were protesting against the concentration of wealth into the hands of a small percentage of the population, most of whom did nothing to create that wealth. What they lack is a good solution to this problem - part of the point of the protests is to draw attention to the problem in the hope that someone will solve it.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Jonner ( 189691 )

      Though OWS has fuzzy goals, they clearly seem to be against corporate control. What better symbol of corporate control is there than Flash? OWS's issue may be more important, but technology standards are not trivial.

      • What better symbol of corporate control is there than Flash?

        Well, Apple, for one. Adobe exerts control over but two things: Jack, and Shit, and Jack left town.

        Flash isn't going anywhere. It may end up relegated to corporate online training, but it's not dying by any sense of the word. It's just settling into its niche. The Flash player is only going to die when you can author a complete online training course in the Flash IDE and export it to HTML5 with no loss of functionality. That is still years away, at best.

    • Re:Unfortunate (Score:4, Interesting)

      by roc97007 ( 608802 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @02:12PM (#38088368) Journal

      The Occupy Wall Street movement descended into self-parody shortly after it started. The participants themselves trivialized whatever issues they had by their own actions during the protest. Like a lot of people, I cared about the issues, but had to cringe at how silly and empty the protest became, and now wouldn't be associated with them for a big bag of gold.

      The name had ceased to mean anything long before we started making fun of it.

  • I get that this is mainly humor, but does anyone actually think this is going to have any kind of impact. Most users don't even realize what it is they are installing when they click the "click here to install required add-on" button.

    I'm all for the quick death of Flash .. much as it is maligned, it enabled a lot of the really cool stuff we have today.. but it's time for it to die. I don't see this "movement" making any actual difference however.

    • by kiwimate ( 458274 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:54PM (#38087274) Journal

      Though the 15-year old technology is still commonly used for advertisements, videos and games, many developers have been moving toward more modern and universal standards like HTML5

      Well that's pretty impressive. It's been around for 15 years, and is still heavily used. That said, HTML5 is looking pretty sure to eclipse it, eventually.

      "We feel this move effectively creates two Internets -- the one you can use on mobile/tablets and the one you can use on the desktop," one of the founders of the Occupy Flash movement said via e-mail. "This is not good for anyone except Adobe."

      Now that I know it's been around for 15 years, I'm kind of impressed it's still working, and not terribly surprised that it hasn't morphed well into newer technologies that are being used in ways people were only beginning to think of at the turn of the millenium. I know 15 years is not that unusual for some technologies, like mainframes, but just think about the rapid pace of development in web standards, graphics cards and algorithms, etc.

      Huh, I wonder what Adobe thinks [].

      HTML5 is now universally supported on major mobile devices, in some cases exclusively. This makes HTML5 the best solution for creating and deploying content in the browser across mobile platforms. We are excited about this, and will continue our work with key players in the HTML community

      Seems reasonable. As does this:

      Our future work with Flash on mobile devices will be focused on enabling Flash developers to package native apps with Adobe AIR for all the major app stores. We will no longer continue to develop Flash Player in the browser to work with new mobile device configurations

      Fair enough. What about security fixes?

      We will of course continue to provide critical bug fixes and security updates for existing device configurations. We will also allow our source code licensees to continue working on and release their own implementations.


      Aren't there more important things these people could be spending their time on?

      • I've yet to see HTML5 as an alternative for casual flash games though. Granted, volume wise flash is used much more for videos than games, but there are many popular websites out there for casual gaming that are powered almost exclusively by Flash. Ignoring this segment of Flash's users and pretending that we can just make flash go *poof* and disappear without addressing that use case is pretty foolish in my opinion.

    • by mcgrew ( 92797 ) *

      does anyone actually think this is going to have any kind of impact.

      Some obviously do or they wouldn't have started it. Personally, I thought it was pretty silly, and it seems so do most other slashdotters. There are some good comments.

      I doubt Occupy Flash will kill Flash, and I think the Flash occupiers are wasting their time. It's like putting a man on death row who's already dying of cancer. I'm of the belief that flash will die on its own, like so many other obsolete technologies (and other technologies

  • Zap! (Score:3, Funny)

    by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:44PM (#38087060) Journal

    Just an electric chair so we can properly deal with Flash and Flash developers. The beast must die.

  • Thank goodness I hate flash- always have- worst thing to have happened to the web. OK, shockwave is worse.

    And what percentage of malware took advantage of flash flaws- it was quite a high percent if I recall.

  • But it still has the problem of not being able to link to the internal sections. Good job!

  • by RicardoGCE ( 1173519 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:48PM (#38087142)

    Game, set, match.

    • by Jonner ( 189691 )

      Indeed, it's a beautiful site (though a direct copy of Occupy Flash []) with no Flash dependency at all. The only way it uses Flash is to detect if it's installed. I'm skeptical it's serious at all. I have a sneaking suspicion one person dreamed the whole thing up, including both sites.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by FumarMata ( 1340847 )
      You didn't understand a word. They are saying that for certain websites, it's better to use HTML and for other websites it's better to use Flash. To do all websites only in Flash or only in HTML is a mistake. One might think that it's a reasonable response... but well, some times you have to explain it twice for people to understand. Or people should read/listen before talking about something
  • Oh please, Flash vs. HTML is nonsense. There are some real issues at hand here, like who controls the software that we live on.
    See my site that talks about this []

  • This whole thing helps keep me occupied.

  • pissing contests (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tverbeek ( 457094 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:52PM (#38087234) Homepage

    HTML5 is not a superset of Flash.
    Flash is not a superset of HTML5.

    Get over the pissing contests and use the right tool for the job.

    • And that is always HTML5 right! ;)

    • Re:pissing contests (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Jonner ( 189691 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:11PM (#38087530)

      HTML5 is not a superset of Flash.
      Flash is not a superset of HTML5.

      Get over the pissing contests and use the right tool for the job.

      Saying Flash is appropriate for a web site is like saying IPX/SPX are appropriate protocols for a LAN connecting to the Internet. Sure, it can be done, but it's a stupid way to do it and thankfully went away many years ago.

      The right tools to create web sites are web standards. Even Adobe agrees with that; they've actually been promoting HTML5 for a while. They're still promoting AIR for desktop apps I think. I have no interest in that, but it is apparently the right too for some people.

      • Re:pissing contests (Score:5, Informative)

        by supersloshy ( 1273442 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:33PM (#38087834)

        Somebody forgot about Flash games and animations (like Homestar Runner), quite possibly the most legitimate uses for Flash in existence that HTML5 couldn't replicate nearly as well, what with varying implementations and a constantly changing standard.

      • AIR is basically like a redistributable type thing. Unless I'm mistaken, Microsoft does a similar thing with .NET and their other development tools. Similar also in concept to Java where there's a virtual machine to interpret your code.

        You are right about standards being the way to go, but the point of creating any sort of redistributable/virtual machine concept is to provide consistency and continuity where there is a lack of standards. Flash has provided a pseudo/quasi standard means of delivering video

      • The right tools to create web sites are web standards.

        What world do you live in that every piece of content created for online distribution is a "web site". How the hell are we supposed to produce decent and interactive online training courses without Flash? If you look at good vs. bad online training courses, you'll notice that the "bad" ones are basically glorified Powerpoint presentations, just page-turners with minimal interaction and nothing to engage the learner. Guess what technologies are used to produce those courses? If you look at "good" courses

    • by Artraze ( 600366 )

      Agreed. But part of the problem is that Flash's existence is a higher cost than HTML5. Flash a is closed source, singular implementation that exists outside the control of the browser. As a result, it increases attack vectors and can subvert browser managed privacy (e.g. having it's own cache and cookies). Sandboxing helps, but is more of a hack than a proper solution.

      So, even if HTML5 isn't a superset of Flash, it does offer clear benefits in it's implementation. So if Flash's unique benefits are _mos

  • by Superken7 ( 893292 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @12:55PM (#38087290) Journal

    As much as I hate flash, you gotta admit flash existed for a reason: it filled the gaps where HTML was more lacking. Unfortunately, that's still true today even with HTML5, although the trend towards HTML5 is very obvious and clear.

    Many browsers still can't playback HTML5 properly and there isn't even a single video codec which will work consistently across browsers just like flash does, AFAIK. (I'm talking about h264 license issues, WebM's lack of hardware decoding, etc..).
    Also, while rich media solutions are certainly possible with CSS3 and javascript, it still requires significantly more effort than its flash counterparts.

    Of course, that doesn't excuse many many (many) uses where flash isn't really necessary but still being used. THAT must go. And flash video should be avoided where possible if the browser supports anything else. I think the main issue with that is that many web developers are still being lazy (hey, megavideo, I'm looking at you!).

    But flash still accomplishes some things across browsers consistently in a way that HTML5 and CSS3 still can't - or at least not effortlessly for the web developer, which is what counts most of the times; let's hope Adobe helps with that with the HTML5 tools they are building.

    So don't blame everything on flash, the standards are advancing too slowly IMHO even with backers such as Apple and Google.

    • Except with less rationale to it. Why anyone gets worked up about a plugin that does what its supposed to do reasonably well and has some very comprehensive development tools I have no idea. Its probably the sort of people who really have nothing to complain about in their lives but are still at the age where they need a "cause" to feel worthy who are making the most noise about it.

  • by mmmbeer ( 9963 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:03PM (#38087398) Homepage

    Flash must live on! If Flash dies out then that means highly annoying and CPU-hogging advertisements will be converted into HTML5 and get around my simple flashblock. I don't like Flash as much as the next guy but when you can currently carte blanche disable flash and easily remove the most heinous of web content, I fully support its continued use.

  • by tomhudson ( 43916 ) <barbara.hudson@b ... u d s o n . c om> on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:38PM (#38087902) Journal
    The problems with "HTML5 has won the web"

    1. Its performance is crappy at best.
    2. It exposes too much of the source for people who want to make a living off their code. It's bad enough with Flash and Java decompilers ...
    3. Unlike Flash, Python, Perl, Tcl.TK, C, C++, Java, etc., HTML5 needs a browser - and browsers are themselves a crappy - and inconsistent - host environment, so you also inherit any security and bug problems from the browser.
    4. The standard for HTML5 is not yet even finished.

    Sure, you can write applications in HTML5 (I'm writing one now) - but it's a crappy way to write a program. The DOM might be okay for documents (hence the "D" in Document Object Model) but it's a real impedance mismatch for anything else.

  • by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @01:42PM (#38087942)
    Of course as soon as Flash goes everyone will suddenly realise how frigging awful the equivalent code in JS hooked up to a canvas is. At least with Flash the plugin had the potential to be rendering content on a separate thread and largely independent of anything else going on in a page. It was even better on Windows since a Flash anim could invalidate its plugin window and repaint without bothering the browser.

    Now if you hit a page with a few Flash-like HTML animations, they'll all be in contention on the same thread, running off timers and generally chugging. And hardware accelerated video? Screw that, you're stuck with WebM or whatever else can be called the lowest common denominator.

  • by n7ytd ( 230708 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @02:01PM (#38088234)

    'Why does it matter when HTML5 has clearly won the fight for the future of our web browsing?'

    A future technology still being defined does not solve today's problems.

    While we're at it, let's boycott all manufacturers of prosthetic legs as using stem cells and legal pot to regenerate lost limbs is clearly the superior technology.

  • by awjr ( 1248008 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @02:09PM (#38088318)

    So what we're really discussing is which Adobe product we will be buying/using, their Flash IDE or their HTML5 IDE.

  • by ArcadeNut ( 85398 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @03:16PM (#38089172) Homepage

    While I despise Flash, I realize that a lot of companies have a ton of money invested in Flash. Replacing it is not going to be free. Flash will eventually be replaced without the help of protesters if the benefits of HTML5 out weigh those of Flash and the cost of HTML5 is similar to Flash. Cost = Labor, Training and Development Tools.

  • by Arkhan ( 240130 ) on Thursday November 17, 2011 @05:35PM (#38090814)

    Flash may very well be on the way out as a browser plug-in (a distribution platform, if you like).

    It will likely live on a long time as an artists' tool.

    Flash as a platform, a plug-in, was a way to solve the problem of "I've made this cool animation in Flash, now how do I show it to people?"

    Adobe has gotten with the times, and turned Flash into a vector animation tool with the level of features for professionals you'd expect (think Photoshop or Illustrator). Sure you can make a "Flash movie", but you can also import your artwork from better creation tools, easily animate it with tweens (etc) in Flash, then export to any number of video or animation formats, or more importantly to frames or sprite sheets. Those exported formats find their way into your game, program, etc. The old "Flash movie" has nothing to do with this workflow.

    The plug-in is decreasingly useful every day. The tool is quite useful for the designer/artist and will live on. You just won't watch Flash-created content in a Flash platform plugin. You'll be watching Flash-animated content (likely created outside Flash) in some other platform and never know Flash was part of the picture.

    You don't look at graphics in a Photoshop or GIMP plugin, or play iOS games inside XCode, but the tools still exist and are useful, separate from the obsolescence of the delivery platform.

Recent investments will yield a slight profit.