Just wondering why the Magix Music Maker website has not switched over to HTLM5. From a security standpoint alone, it makes a ton of sense.
HTML5 is becoming increasingly popular with companies (who have previously featured Flash and have made the change to HTML5) providing easy to use, interactive platforms to create presentations and websites that are beautifully designed with minimum work on the users’ end.
Anyone have any thoughts? Just checking...
Griff
Hi Griff
My 2 cents worth -
HTML 5 is not without its problems particularly in the area of video.
The issue I am having to deal with on our revamped website (not online yet) relates to video - video players on various devices are not yet standardised to use a single format.
Currently to cater for > 95% of devices and web browsers, including mobile devices, it is best to have three versions of each video available ie mp4, webm and ogv, also some mobile device players do not rescale HD video (720p) so you have to have at least 2 or more video resolutions to cater for these.
This means the web server must detect the browser and screen resolution and the deliver the correct video format and resolution.
. . . . providing easy to use, interactive platforms to create presentations and websites that are beautifully designed with minimum work on the users’ end. . . . .
For the majority of websites I have seen which have wonderful animation, presentations, single page sites etc, have nothing to do with HTML 5 but jQuery which is a fantastic toolkit for creating immersive interactive sites.
Then there is the issue of the different browser video players of the main 3 browsers the following are my observations when playing HTML 5 video - in this case 720p mp4's, 2:30 to 3:00 mins long:
Internet Explorer 11 - preloads (buffers) sufficient video to play with one or two pauses if any pausing.
Firefox - preloading (buffering) is abysmal, frequently pauses to load the buffers then continues.
Chrome - preloads / buffers well in advance - never had it pause yet.
Safari has not been tested, on our old site it was very good and rarely paused.
Mobile devices - Android and IOS - very variable results with HTML5 video.
Cheers
John EB
Hi John:
Based upon my most recent research on this question, it seems that Adobe Flash Player is on its way out the door. I've been reading articles that tackle the question of why Flash Player is even 'still' around. The most interesting answer seem to be the reluctance of many entities to change the familiar: The following article says it best (at least to my mind):
Why Flash won’t die:
Answering the question of why browser providers seem hell bent on continuing to support Flash is difficult. One Business Insider reader came close to hitting the nail on the head when he commented:
... The fact that it still exists is a monument to inertia, self-preservation, and politics in IT.
James Lyne a director at the security institute, SANS and global head of research at Sophos, has a similar theory about Flash's survival. Lyne told Business Insider one of the only reasons Flash is still so widely supported by web browsers is its age and place in IT history.
“Flash has a long legacy for use in producing certain types of media and players. Years ago it was really the only show in town if you wanted to produce certain types of animation, interactive content or streaming video,” he said.
“Today with modern browsers and standards, particularly HTML5 it has less clear delivery value. Even Adobe has admitted that Flash is a dead end, but it sticks around for legacy purposes.”
HTML5 is a core technology of the Internet and is becoming the coding language of choice for many developers when creating webpages and smartphone and tablet applications.
Big name companies like Google and Mozilla have listed HTML5 as “the future of the internet.”
Kaspersky Lab principal security researcher, David Emm agreed, adding Flash's ongoing existence is due to the fact it has been around so long it has become the default software for many sites and for the moment, is too big to fail.
“I think it comes down to the fact that it’s installed on many computers by default and people tend not to think about it until there’s a well-publicized problem,” he told Business Insider.
“While some popular websites are already replacing Flash with the HTML5 technology (e.g. YouTube), some others still rely on Flash, forcing users to enable/install Flash Player in their browsers to be able to see the content.”
The security experts are hardly alone in their belief. Outside of web browsing, many companies, government departments, and educational institutions have online products and services that are built on Flash – products they would have to invest time and money recreating were tech companies to kill Flash completely.
With all this in mind, it seems unlikely Adobe Flash will be laid to rest any time soon.
That last line is quite disconcerting, John...
Thanks again for taking the time to respond and explore this very important question.
Griff
Hi Griff
I agree Flash is not going to disappear overnight, it is just too well embedded on the Internet and while it may still have obscure security holes which Adobe should be patching it is still one of the best players, particulary as it supports not just SWF FLV, Sorenson and On2-VP6 video file formats but also mp4 with h.264 video codec.
Other players I use are JW Player and Flow Player on our old website for embedding videos in articles.
John EB
Thanks for the additional information, John. The further I delve into Flash vs. HTLM5, the more I realize that HTLM5 (currently) has many limitations. Those other formats you mention are critical to those who use them. HTLM5's super vocal proponents rarely mention its shortcomings; especially, along the video content lines. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
Firefox has been my browser of choice for many years. Recently, as you probably have heard, Mozilla stopped its official support for Flash, and by default, have turned it off. However, Firefox users have the option to activate it if they choose. Personally, I activate Flash on a webpage by webpage basis. And yes, as you've stated, many sites continue to require the use of Flash (in spite of Firefox's and other browsers' HTLM5 capability). So, as we examine this question, we are 'still' NOT in an either/or situation. We 'still' need both ("security" issues notwithstanding).
Griff