1. 37

  2. 18

    The web sucks less without Flash.


    1. 9

      Good! Hopefully this will push other content providers (Pandora, Spotify) to create web players that work without flash!

        1. 1

          preloaded whitelist?

          1. 1

            Not sure what you mean. Whitelist of sites?

            1. 1

              Yeah. Or they’ll detect somehow that Spotify really needs the flash and auto play it. Just wondering.

              1. 1

                Could work. I have always tried from chrome on OpenBSD. The really annoying part is the preview stuff works fine!

                1. [Comment removed by author]

                  1. 3

                    JS, but performance is unacceptable.

                    I feel the not functioning is far worse than performing slowly.

                    All this said, I have a node app that re-serves the files from spotify to my browser for play back, it’s performance is quite acceptable (better than the official spotify mobile aoo) and it is using pure js to process the files / requests (protobufjs)

          2. 1

            Just checked play.google.com/music/ – it still doesn’t work without Flash.

            That is sad, considering that Songza, a service they assimilated into Google Play Music, used to work perfectly well without Flash.

            1. 1

              Heh, not sure if play.google.com/music is the same as music.google.com, but music.google.com works without flash :D (I used it on OpenBSD in Chromium)! You need to make sure you have HTML 5 playback enabled in labs.

              1. 1

                Hmm, turns out that music.google.com redirects to play.google.com/music/listen.

                And yes, it works without Flash in Chromium on Linux (I did not have to enable anything in labs), but not in Firefox. Wonder why.

          3. 3

            Sort of a shame that this will eclipse those websites that used Flash for what it really (still) shines: Animation.

            Thinking about websites like Homestar Runner or MSpaintadventures or even aggregators like Albino blacksheep. I wonder if one of those many SWF-to-HTML5 will be ready for when Flash will be history for good.

            1. 1

              Can’t say I’ll shed a tear for the demise of Flash. I do wonder what this’ll do for enterprise RIAs written in Flash - I’ve seen a few (bespoke and SaaS) - most organisations are finally catching up and rolling out frequent browser updates, but this’ll cause havoc if key applications no longer work…

              1. 1

                So it sounds like you’ll be prompted to turn on flash if its present on a page? I hope this isn’t an unconditional block, Lots of old content still uses Flash

                1. -1

                  I hate blocking in general, since it can only work as an action by a powerful entity to force behaviour on a population.

                  If something is so bad, the correct solution is to create something that is much better, and then everybody will naturally stop using the bad thing, because it is bad.

                  If people don’t stop using the bad thing, then clearly, in their mind, the bad thing isn’t so bad at all. So please don’t impose your own personal valuation of what is bad and good on me.

                  And because the thing is so bad, it should be very easy to make a thing that is much better. So you have no excuse.

                  1. 4

                    If something is so bad, the correct solution is to create something that is much better, and then everybody will naturally stop using the bad thing, because it is bad.

                    Much better for whom? In this case a better flash for everyone would have to be something like “doesn’t crash, doesn’t use high CPU, doesn’t track users, does track users, is available everywhere, can be uninstalled, can be disabled per browser/per site/per page, can view DRM free content, can also view DRM content”.
                    Ad companies and media companies typically want one thing, 20% of users want the exact opposite and 80% of users want some where in between.

                    1. 1

                      Much better for whom?

                      The same question can be asked for blocking flash. Is doing that better for whom?

                      1. 1

                        Removing flash might be a bit premature, but just turning on “click to play” for all flash might be a reasonable compromise. I think the writing is on the wall though, that eventually web developers won’t be able to rely on flash being installed for most users.

                    2. 2

                      You don’t have to use Chrome ;)

                      1. 2

                        You really live up to your username, huh!