Why I don’t use Flash

July 5, 2006 By

Why don’t I use Flash for my Web sites? Here’s a good reason.

I have a brand new Windows Vista machine. Loaded Firefox on it. And visited PodShow (a podcasting competitor of PodTech’s).

This is what it looked like. Now, if a “normal” person (non geek) hit this site, what would they do? I’ll tell you what they’ll do. They’ll hit back and get out of there. Note the title tag. Be Patient? No, I click that little green back button and leave before I get hurt. Thank you very much. Have a nice day.

Lesson: always have HTML first before you get to Flash content.

Filed Under: 1
← Older Comments
Newer Comments →
  • http://websitedesignfx.com Ney

    Flash is the future of video on all types of devices… tvs, screens, hd-dvd. etc, etc… Can’t you see that? The future is interactive television and not html or else… time to move on.

  • http://websitedesignfx.com/ Ney

    Why should I use Quicktime, Real Media, WM player when I have flv? Fast playback, interative, great image quality, and more. Don’t use flash if you want to make the video for yourself. Adobe sees that flash is a big killer on the media players out-there and it will get better over time.

  • http://websitedesignfx.com Ney

    Why should I use Quicktime, Real Media, WM player when I have flv? Fast playback, interative, great image quality, and more. Don’t use flash if you want to make the video for yourself. Adobe sees that flash is a big killer on the media players out-there and it will get better over time.

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Ney,

    Would you like your video to play on any portable video devices like the following: http://portablevideo.engadget.com/

    What would you do if Adobe decides to start charging for the use of their player?

    Do you want to stream your video rather than use HTTP download? How much does that cost?

    Do you feel confident enough in this solution to tie yourself to only one vendor for video delivery?

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Ney,

    Would you like your video to play on any portable video devices like the following: http://portablevideo.engadget.com/

    What would you do if Adobe decides to start charging for the use of their player?

    Do you want to stream your video rather than use HTTP download? How much does that cost?

    Do you feel confident enough in this solution to tie yourself to only one vendor for video delivery?

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com/ Ney

    Good Point Erik! I don’t think Adobe would be that stupid to charge the flash player from us. Now, think like Microsoft of what they did comparing to Mac… How many software’s are out there for PC OS? And how many programmers will create software’s if you didn’t have the freedom of windows? I guess only 3% globally! Got it? Flash became to big like windows and I hope someone out there besides Microsoft is working on a similar player or technology. Got have a competition and so far none. Like I what I wrote, the future is interactive television and not web, the internet is only a part of visual information that delivers what is becoming the next amazing creations of freedom displays… I mean we are going to see amazing ways of motion graphics that will be totally interactive, in all shapes and sizes… Bye Bye 4:3 or 16:9 video sizes and welcome circles, triangles, whatever sizes you may like… New software’s like flash professional will need to be created for the very soon technologies that most of you don’t even imagine will come true… More and more we want videos to be part of our daily life, and that will be in a liquid forms of navigations and videos embedded on the shape of any products. Now, flash opens the door for the next generation of information display and because of the millions of designers and programmers out there uses everyday Adobe knows that today they are in control. The true is that flash is the only player out there for the best video intregation to your site and CD-roms because it is FREE, small size to download, no pop-outs windows or players, Interactive, and etc, etc, etc… It is so great player that people thought that they should use instead of html pages. If it get fast, again, bye, bye html website sites. I guess, stream or download will not matter soon, it will have to be all stream because they are opening the pipes, finally! Costs will very!!!!

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com Ney

    Good Point Erik! I don’t think Adobe would be that stupid to charge the flash player from us. Now, think like Microsoft of what they did comparing to Mac… How many software’s are out there for PC OS? And how many programmers will create software’s if you didn’t have the freedom of windows? I guess only 3% globally! Got it? Flash became to big like windows and I hope someone out there besides Microsoft is working on a similar player or technology. Got have a competition and so far none. Like I what I wrote, the future is interactive television and not web, the internet is only a part of visual information that delivers what is becoming the next amazing creations of freedom displays… I mean we are going to see amazing ways of motion graphics that will be totally interactive, in all shapes and sizes… Bye Bye 4:3 or 16:9 video sizes and welcome circles, triangles, whatever sizes you may like… New software’s like flash professional will need to be created for the very soon technologies that most of you don’t even imagine will come true… More and more we want videos to be part of our daily life, and that will be in a liquid forms of navigations and videos embedded on the shape of any products. Now, flash opens the door for the next generation of information display and because of the millions of designers and programmers out there uses everyday Adobe knows that today they are in control. The true is that flash is the only player out there for the best video intregation to your site and CD-roms because it is FREE, small size to download, no pop-outs windows or players, Interactive, and etc, etc, etc… It is so great player that people thought that they should use instead of html pages. If it get fast, again, bye, bye html website sites. I guess, stream or download will not matter soon, it will have to be all stream because they are opening the pipes, finally! Costs will very!!!!

  • http://www.cruciallimit.com/ Dave

    PodSlug (Erik Herz) – “What would you do if Adobe decides to start charging for the use of their player?”

    I think that has to be the most ignorant statement of all in this whole post. That would be corporate suicide. Why would they buy Macromedia for the Flash player if they were going to ruin the adoption rate by charging for it. Have they ever charged for the Acrobat reader?

    Coming from someone who spent so much time at RealNetworks (arguably the worst media player on the Planet)…For someone who is “very excited about the potential for online media” you sure have a very narrow minded, ultra conservative, paranoid view on things.

  • http://www.cruciallimit.com Dave

    PodSlug (Erik Herz) – “What would you do if Adobe decides to start charging for the use of their player?”

    I think that has to be the most ignorant statement of all in this whole post. That would be corporate suicide. Why would they buy Macromedia for the Flash player if they were going to ruin the adoption rate by charging for it. Have they ever charged for the Acrobat reader?

    Coming from someone who spent so much time at RealNetworks (arguably the worst media player on the Planet)…For someone who is “very excited about the potential for online media” you sure have a very narrow minded, ultra conservative, paranoid view on things.

  • burnsy

    Seems like a cheap shot at a superior software program, especially when it’s really the fault of the developer. There’s a lot of bad drivers on the road but I’m not going to stop driving a car.
    Now, a more appropriate article with critical merit would be one like “Why I don’t use Internet Explorer and wish no one else did either …”

  • burnsy

    Seems like a cheap shot at a superior software program, especially when it’s really the fault of the developer. There’s a lot of bad drivers on the road but I’m not going to stop driving a car.
    Now, a more appropriate article with critical merit would be one like “Why I don’t use Internet Explorer and wish no one else did either …”

  • cgraham149

    I feel the exact same way as you do…but it’s towards Quicktime. Everytime I hit a page with Quicktime, I “quickly” hit the back button.

    Why is this? Well, let’s see…

    1) Quicktime is a pain to download and install
    2) Once installed, it wants to take over as player for all media, unless you go through the custom setup and spend time unselecting all of the formats it wants to take over
    3) It parks itself in the Window taskbar and wants to always be running
    4) It doesn’t play nicely in the browser window like a FLV!!!

  • cgraham149

    I feel the exact same way as you do…but it’s towards Quicktime. Everytime I hit a page with Quicktime, I “quickly” hit the back button.

    Why is this? Well, let’s see…

    1) Quicktime is a pain to download and install
    2) Once installed, it wants to take over as player for all media, unless you go through the custom setup and spend time unselecting all of the formats it wants to take over
    3) It parks itself in the Window taskbar and wants to always be running
    4) It doesn’t play nicely in the browser window like a FLV!!!

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Dave,

    I agree that it would be corporate suicide if Adobe starts to charge for their player but I have seen companies with such free-product reach with no immediate monetization succumb to pressure to push pro versions and ads. I have no idea what Adobe has in mind but they must be thinking hard about how to make money off of YouTube and Google Video. What is your guess about how they will do this?

    I am very torn about Flash Video. I really appreciate their commitment to Mac and Linux. I think the light footprint of their player has dramatically simplified the consumption of online video which has dramatically increased the audience of users who are willing to watch online video. All great stuff.

    My concern is that it is proprietary and non-interoperable. This means that if they become the de facto standard then they have too much power and content owners are too dependent upon one company for distribution.

    So, yes, I am paranoid. Companies must do what they can to stay in business and drive profit. If Adobe does not have a return on their Flash Video investment then they might seek some sort of monetization strategy for the client software. It might be suicide if they don’t do this at some point.

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Dave,

    I agree that it would be corporate suicide if Adobe starts to charge for their player but I have seen companies with such free-product reach with no immediate monetization succumb to pressure to push pro versions and ads. I have no idea what Adobe has in mind but they must be thinking hard about how to make money off of YouTube and Google Video. What is your guess about how they will do this?

    I am very torn about Flash Video. I really appreciate their commitment to Mac and Linux. I think the light footprint of their player has dramatically simplified the consumption of online video which has dramatically increased the audience of users who are willing to watch online video. All great stuff.

    My concern is that it is proprietary and non-interoperable. This means that if they become the de facto standard then they have too much power and content owners are too dependent upon one company for distribution.

    So, yes, I am paranoid. Companies must do what they can to stay in business and drive profit. If Adobe does not have a return on their Flash Video investment then they might seek some sort of monetization strategy for the client software. It might be suicide if they don’t do this at some point.

  • Pingback: PodSlug :: Media Rumors and Commentary » Flash Video Debate

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com/ Ney

    You guys are forgetting the you can not save stream FLV unless you have capture software’s like fantasia. Now that Adobe has flash and with flash comes all media types (Cell, PDAs, Navigators, etc, etc) the $$$ for adobe will come from everywhere… And when they start using FLV as their native video format for Adobe Premiere playback and archive… editors and designers will start using the FLV like never before because of media size, quality, interactivity, and it has much fewer problems comparing with other formats. Adobe is a very stable company and today their software are in every design company in the world… And comes flash… You can’t browser the internet without it. Time is money and I don’t want to wait 20 seconds to five minutes on Broadband for a QuickTime, Real, WMV to download… FLV start playing in seconds with no waits, check this site that I did with FVL siles comparing to other formats out there http://www.talentbeachmusic.com/html/english/artists/artist_001.html

    Best,

    Ney

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com Ney

    You guys are forgetting the you can not save stream FLV unless you have capture software’s like fantasia. Now that Adobe has flash and with flash comes all media types (Cell, PDAs, Navigators, etc, etc) the $$$ for adobe will come from everywhere… And when they start using FLV as their native video format for Adobe Premiere playback and archive… editors and designers will start using the FLV like never before because of media size, quality, interactivity, and it has much fewer problems comparing with other formats. Adobe is a very stable company and today their software are in every design company in the world… And comes flash… You can’t browser the internet without it. Time is money and I don’t want to wait 20 seconds to five minutes on Broadband for a QuickTime, Real, WMV to download… FLV start playing in seconds with no waits, check this site that I did with FVL siles comparing to other formats out there http://www.talentbeachmusic.com/html/english/artists/artist_001.html

    Best,

    Ney

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Ney,

    Your website looks great and the video is wonderful! I was very impressed with the quality. Flash-based features like the hover-over volume control are very cool.

    You said that “with flash comes all media types (Cell, PDAs, Navigators, etc, etc)” … I would be eager to see an example of this.

    Erik

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Ney,

    Your website looks great and the video is wonderful! I was very impressed with the quality. Flash-based features like the hover-over volume control are very cool.

    You said that “with flash comes all media types (Cell, PDAs, Navigators, etc, etc)” … I would be eager to see an example of this.

    Erik

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com/ Ney

    I believe Saab is using flash on their navigation system… I will try to find the right link for you. Also, Is WPF a “Flash Killer?” Check this video out… Maybe Microsoft is coming out with some amazing interactive flash like product… http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=115387

    Best,

    Ney

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com Ney

    I believe Saab is using flash on their navigation system… I will try to find the right link for you. Also, Is WPF a “Flash Killer?” Check this video out… Maybe Microsoft is coming out with some amazing interactive flash like product… http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=115387

    Best,

    Ney

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com/ Ney

    Erik,
    How long did take the video from my site to start playing? comparing to any other site using Quicktime, etc… ??

    Thanks!!!

    Ney

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com Ney

    Erik,
    How long did take the video from my site to start playing? comparing to any other site using Quicktime, etc… ??

    Thanks!!!

    Ney

  • http://podslug.com/blog Podslug (Erik Herz)

    Super fast! Are you using streaming or HTTP download? What do you think the advantages of streaming Flash versus HTTP download would be?

  • http://podslug.com/blog Podslug (Erik Herz)

    Super fast! Are you using streaming or HTTP download? What do you think the advantages of streaming Flash versus HTTP download would be?

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com/ Ney

    Erik, Stream FLV is much better for the simple fact that you can jump to any part of the video, It can use for live feed or as webcam feed, not limit to how many users can se at the same time, you can’t just copy the url or path to view the video (like what google is doing to FLV out-there), detect your internent speed and delivers the right compresion to the right user, it does stay on the local hard-drive, and etc…. Now, the progressive download FLV is just cheaper but you have to wait to end the download if you want to jump to the last scene o frame of the video and it stays on your local hard drive, also it is limited how many users can access the video at the sametime. Yes, the videos on that site that I did are progressive FLV, the Stream versions I have I can’t show because of classified projects. I know that Flash Communication Server is the best way to stream FLV files with video.

  • http://www.websitedesignfx.com Ney

    Erik, Stream FLV is much better for the simple fact that you can jump to any part of the video, It can use for live feed or as webcam feed, not limit to how many users can se at the same time, you can’t just copy the url or path to view the video (like what google is doing to FLV out-there), detect your internent speed and delivers the right compresion to the right user, it does stay on the local hard-drive, and etc…. Now, the progressive download FLV is just cheaper but you have to wait to end the download if you want to jump to the last scene o frame of the video and it stays on your local hard drive, also it is limited how many users can access the video at the sametime. Yes, the videos on that site that I did are progressive FLV, the Stream versions I have I can’t show because of classified projects. I know that Flash Communication Server is the best way to stream FLV files with video.

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Ney,

    Do you know how much it costs to stream flash video?

    Erik

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    Ney,

    Do you know how much it costs to stream flash video?

    Erik

  • http://websitedesignFX.com/ Ney
  • http://websitedesignFX.com Ney
  • http://www.cruciallimit.com/ Dave G

    Media Temple (http://www.mediatemple.net/services/webhosting/flashcom/shared/) offers FlashComm services for as little as $15/month in addition to your hosting costs.

    As for what will Adobe due to make money off of Google and YouTube…the answer is they already are without charging fro the player. They make money on the creation and distribution side, not the delivery side. You don’t think Google and YouTube are just forcing downloads right? They’re streaming. How do they stream?? FlashComm servers, lots of them. Not to mention the fact that Google and YouTube are using Flash for video, this just helps increase the ubiquity of the player. As adoptions rates increase, so does the comfort level of the paranoid to use the technology. The position you take about Flash being “proprietary”… isn’t QuickTime? Isn’t Windows Media? Isn’t Real? Just because the software is proprietary doesn’t make it any less desirable in my eyes as long as my target audience is okay with it. And it appears the vast majority of the world doesn’t have a problem with it. They can view my content, that’s what matters.

    You mentioned that you “have seen companies with such free-product reach with no immediate monetization succumb to pressure to push pro versions and ads”. I would beg to differ. Name a product that has ever had the reach of the Flash plug-in? Name company who had a product with half the reach with the flash plug-in, as well as a significant product line (Flash, Flex, FlashComm) that relied on that FREE product for its livelihood. So I would take exception to the fact that Adobe in this scenario has no “immediate monetization”.

    I don’t mean to come across harsh, but the paranoid outlook just doesn’t seem to fit in an industry that evolves so quickly. How do you ever get ahead of the curve, or even maintain site of the curve if your always hiding behind your paranoia?

  • http://www.cruciallimit.com Dave G

    Media Temple (http://www.mediatemple.net/services/webhosting/flashcom/shared/) offers FlashComm services for as little as $15/month in addition to your hosting costs.

    As for what will Adobe due to make money off of Google and YouTube…the answer is they already are without charging fro the player. They make money on the creation and distribution side, not the delivery side. You don’t think Google and YouTube are just forcing downloads right? They’re streaming. How do they stream?? FlashComm servers, lots of them. Not to mention the fact that Google and YouTube are using Flash for video, this just helps increase the ubiquity of the player. As adoptions rates increase, so does the comfort level of the paranoid to use the technology. The position you take about Flash being “proprietary”… isn’t QuickTime? Isn’t Windows Media? Isn’t Real? Just because the software is proprietary doesn’t make it any less desirable in my eyes as long as my target audience is okay with it. And it appears the vast majority of the world doesn’t have a problem with it. They can view my content, that’s what matters.

    You mentioned that you “have seen companies with such free-product reach with no immediate monetization succumb to pressure to push pro versions and ads”. I would beg to differ. Name a product that has ever had the reach of the Flash plug-in? Name company who had a product with half the reach with the flash plug-in, as well as a significant product line (Flash, Flex, FlashComm) that relied on that FREE product for its livelihood. So I would take exception to the fact that Adobe in this scenario has no “immediate monetization”.

    I don’t mean to come across harsh, but the paranoid outlook just doesn’t seem to fit in an industry that evolves so quickly. How do you ever get ahead of the curve, or even maintain site of the curve if your always hiding behind your paranoia?

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    I do not believe that YouTube or Google video is streaming and/or coming from Adobe FCS servers which stream via a proprietary RTMP protocol. If they did they might risk being blocked by firewalls that don’t allow RTMP over port 1935. Here is a link about RTMP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTMP … so I still don’t think Adobe is making any money from Google and YouTube at this moment.

    Quicktime and Real (as well as open source players like VLC) may soon be able to support a non-proprietary stack of MP4 or 3GP files with H264 and MP3 encoding distributed via HTTP or RTSP. This will soon allow you publish content that can be played by a variety of vendor software packages on every OS and potentially every device.

    … Windows Media had a pretty dominant position recently. Back then folks wondered why I didn’t just adopt it as an exclusive format. Back then there was support for the latest WM codec on the Mac, now there isn’t and MS says that there wont be support for this in the future. I don’t think that Adobe will repeat this mistake. Would a different parent company of Macromedia do the same? Will Adobe be able to stay independent? I hope so.

    My hunch is that most content owners don’t want to spend time being ahead of the curve or spend time encoding their content into a bunch of formats to support multiple devices. They want to focus on creating great content that can be played back well into the future regardless of the outcome of the vendor wars.

    It is hard for me to criticize Adobe since the Flash team has worked so hard to support Win/Mac/Linux with a great and lightweight video playback solution. It is truly wonderful technology. I just think that folks should consider standards as they are considering their larger video distribution objectives. Folks want to publish to the web AND other platforms like the iPod, PSP, Tivo, and mobile phones … what if one format/codec could support all of these?

  • http://podslug.com/blog PodSlug (Erik Herz)

    I do not believe that YouTube or Google video is streaming and/or coming from Adobe FCS servers which stream via a proprietary RTMP protocol. If they did they might risk being blocked by firewalls that don’t allow RTMP over port 1935. Here is a link about RTMP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTMP … so I still don’t think Adobe is making any money from Google and YouTube at this moment.

    Quicktime and Real (as well as open source players like VLC) may soon be able to support a non-proprietary stack of MP4 or 3GP files with H264 and MP3 encoding distributed via HTTP or RTSP. This will soon allow you publish content that can be played by a variety of vendor software packages on every OS and potentially every device.

    … Windows Media had a pretty dominant position recently. Back then folks wondered why I didn’t just adopt it as an exclusive format. Back then there was support for the latest WM codec on the Mac, now there isn’t and MS says that there wont be support for this in the future. I don’t think that Adobe will repeat this mistake. Would a different parent company of Macromedia do the same? Will Adobe be able to stay independent? I hope so.

    My hunch is that most content owners don’t want to spend time being ahead of the curve or spend time encoding their content into a bunch of formats to support multiple devices. They want to focus on creating great content that can be played back well into the future regardless of the outcome of the vendor wars.

    It is hard for me to criticize Adobe since the Flash team has worked so hard to support Win/Mac/Linux with a great and lightweight video playback solution. It is truly wonderful technology. I just think that folks should consider standards as they are considering their larger video distribution objectives. Folks want to publish to the web AND other platforms like the iPod, PSP, Tivo, and mobile phones … what if one format/codec could support all of these?

  • http://websitedesignFX.com/ Ney

    Google flash videos are not streams… They are progressive. (stream videos you don’t see loading bars)

  • http://websitedesignFX.com Ney

    Google flash videos are not streams… They are progressive. (stream videos you don’t see loading bars)

  • http://websitedesignFX.com/ Ney

    I think Yahoo is using stream videos, see the difference from Google videos:

    http://9.yahoo.com

  • http://websitedesignFX.com Ney

    I think Yahoo is using stream videos, see the difference from Google videos:

    http://9.yahoo.com

  • http://www.rendition.net/ Brian

    Complaining about the user experience in this case seems valid, but complaining about Flash in general is a bit misguided. As several others have pointed out, the problem here is how Flash was implemented, and this particular implementation does nothing to help the user who does not have any Flash version installed.

    This is like complaining about your new toaster because it is still sealed in the box, and therefore makes the process of producing your toast a bigger hassle than it ordinarily would be. Does that make toasters a bad idea?

  • http://www.rendition.net Brian

    Complaining about the user experience in this case seems valid, but complaining about Flash in general is a bit misguided. As several others have pointed out, the problem here is how Flash was implemented, and this particular implementation does nothing to help the user who does not have any Flash version installed.

    This is like complaining about your new toaster because it is still sealed in the box, and therefore makes the process of producing your toast a bigger hassle than it ordinarily would be. Does that make toasters a bad idea?

  • http://websitedesignFX.com/ Ney

    That’s so right Brian!

  • http://websitedesignFX.com Ney

    That’s so right Brian!

  • http://websitedesignFX.com/ Ney

    Erik, Here is a sample of stream flash videos that I am working on: http://www.dme2004.com/DME_Podcasts/DMEPodcasts.html

    PS: Only the Podcast Web version is working, a video will start playing if you select… Let me know if it plays ok on your side.

    Best,

    Ney

  • http://websitedesignFX.com Ney

    Erik, Here is a sample of stream flash videos that I am working on: http://www.dme2004.com/DME_Podcasts/DMEPodcasts.html

    PS: Only the Podcast Web version is working, a video will start playing if you select… Let me know if it plays ok on your side.

    Best,

    Ney

  • wood berensky

    I hate Flash whether it be Mcromedia or Adobe Flash.
    Now that 99.9% of the advertising on sites like Yahoo is flash I definately UNINSTALLED it. Just so I could have my sanity back when using the “new” Yahoo Financial Message Boards.

    Its made a big improvement too. Although 1/2 of the ads on Yahoo are Yahoo style= yimg.com or bannerspace.com ads or ATDMT.COM ads at least you can stopp all the distracting Flash ones by UNINSTALLING the Flash Player.

    New Yahoo Message boards are causing 50% of people to leave their service in search of a new MB that is not threaded. Google Finance & Lycos Ragingbull.com are 2 examples of up and coming ones.

    Bye Bye Flash..

  • wood berensky

    I hate Flash whether it be Mcromedia or Adobe Flash.
    Now that 99.9% of the advertising on sites like Yahoo is flash I definately UNINSTALLED it. Just so I could have my sanity back when using the “new” Yahoo Financial Message Boards.

    Its made a big improvement too. Although 1/2 of the ads on Yahoo are Yahoo style= yimg.com or bannerspace.com ads or ATDMT.COM ads at least you can stopp all the distracting Flash ones by UNINSTALLING the Flash Player.

    New Yahoo Message boards are causing 50% of people to leave their service in search of a new MB that is not threaded. Google Finance & Lycos Ragingbull.com are 2 examples of up and coming ones.

    Bye Bye Flash..

  • wood berensky

    # 57 quote:
    “Got it? Flash became to big like windows and I hope someone out there besides Microsoft is working on a similar player or technology. Got have a competition and so far none. Like I what I wrote, the future is interactive television and not web, the internet is only a part of visual information that delivers what is becoming the next amazing creations of freedom displays… I mean we are going to see amazing ways of motion graphics that will be totally interactive, in all shapes and sizes… Bye Bye 4:3 or 16:9 video sizes and welcome circles, triangles, whatever sizes you may like… New software’s like flash professional will need to be created for the very soon technologies that most of you don’t even imagine will come true… More and more we want videos to be part of our daily life”

    Wow what an Assumption. If we wanted the PC to emulate Telivision why wouldn’t we just use a Television ?

    Most people with Television want a TIVO or DVR/PVR so they can CONTROL the PROGRAMMING & ELEIMINATE the Advertising.

    Not the other way around. Flash Video’s embedded in CNN new Reports are the pits !!! I don’t watch them mainly because they have unblocked advertising for every clip you view. There is NO FUN in that.

    Video Software blocking has yet to be perfected yet.
    Computers are being run at their limit with plug ins by Microsoft! 5 SVCHOST.EXE programs run concurrently on every WinXP system communicating over the net.
    (Hit Ctrl-Alt-Delete) on any WinXP machine & you get 30-40 programs being run in TSR memory. Especially if you have Adblocking or AntiVirus software.

    At what point does this NONSENSE STOP?

  • wood berensky

    # 57 quote:
    “Got it? Flash became to big like windows and I hope someone out there besides Microsoft is working on a similar player or technology. Got have a competition and so far none. Like I what I wrote, the future is interactive television and not web, the internet is only a part of visual information that delivers what is becoming the next amazing creations of freedom displays… I mean we are going to see amazing ways of motion graphics that will be totally interactive, in all shapes and sizes… Bye Bye 4:3 or 16:9 video sizes and welcome circles, triangles, whatever sizes you may like… New software’s like flash professional will need to be created for the very soon technologies that most of you don’t even imagine will come true… More and more we want videos to be part of our daily life”

    Wow what an Assumption. If we wanted the PC to emulate Telivision why wouldn’t we just use a Television ?

    Most people with Television want a TIVO or DVR/PVR so they can CONTROL the PROGRAMMING & ELEIMINATE the Advertising.

    Not the other way around. Flash Video’s embedded in CNN new Reports are the pits !!! I don’t watch them mainly because they have unblocked advertising for every clip you view. There is NO FUN in that.

    Video Software blocking has yet to be perfected yet.
    Computers are being run at their limit with plug ins by Microsoft! 5 SVCHOST.EXE programs run concurrently on every WinXP system communicating over the net.
    (Hit Ctrl-Alt-Delete) on any WinXP machine & you get 30-40 programs being run in TSR memory. Especially if you have Adblocking or AntiVirus software.

    At what point does this NONSENSE STOP?

← Older Comments
Newer Comments →