Filed Under (Flex, RIA, Standards) by jonr on June-21-2009

I just finished up a post on HTML 5 and Flash for InfoQ.com. The news post just covers the conversation happening in the community(s) (not my opinion). I am glad browser standards are finally evolving, and think all developers will benefit from the advancements. Being a Flex developer, I have obviously embraced the idea that third-party plug-ins are not a bad thing when trying to build real applications. It is too early on a Sunday morning to get to far into this debate, but I wanted to throw out a couple of points:

  1. Since the language around browser standards is very feel good, with terms like “open web,” I think it is often lost how much big companies, such as Google and Mozilla, stand to gain if developers validate their assertions around browser standards. In all reality, the open web vendors are no different than the vendors providing “third party runtimes,” they want / need people to use their platforms.
  2. The “open web” never existed. Let’s take a look at a quote from Ian Hickson, HTML 5 specification co-editor and Google employee:

    “It would be a terrible step backward if humanity’s major development platform [the Web] was controlled by a single vendor the way that previous platforms such as Windows have been.”

    Not only does the language seem a bit dramatic to me, but I think there is little risk of this happening (outside of the standards). Historically browser standards have been the main catalyst in bringing us down to the lowest common denominator in web development. We have all worked on projects where the management decided to just build the application to work in IE because the browser standards are unreliably implemented across browsers.

The reality is that the RIA space is currently experiencing wonderful competition across vendors (Flash, Silverlight, JavaFX) with applications being built and deployed on a number of different platforms. Frankly, none of the current platform advancements that are making developers lives easier have come from standards based implementations.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • DZone
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Comments:

[...] the original post:  Jon Rose's Blog » Blog Archive » The evil of Flash (according to … Posted in HTML, News | Tags: all-developers, and-think, community, covers-the-conversation, [...]

John Dowdell on June 21st, 2009 at 12:55 pm #

Thanks, Jon… I appreciated the neutral aggregation at InfoQ, and appreciate further your perspective above.

(When I read that “[the Web]” part I replaced it in my mind with “[Web search]” and it made a lot more sense…. ;-)

jd/adobe

Paul Uza on June 22nd, 2009 at 4:56 am #

Flash and Flex for example are built on ActionScript 3 which is based on ECMA-262 edition and includes support for extensions proposed in drafts of ECMAScript edition 4, both standards.

Flash features like video, networking, sound, etc. are no more but extensions to standard languages.

I agree that Flash, Silverlight and Flex are better off being from a single vendor, but their strength lies in being based on standards.

My 2c.

Ansury on August 14th, 2009 at 11:14 am #

YUP! A single vendor in control of the Internet? Please, don’t make me laugh. Clearly Mr Google employee (quoted) doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

The only way that could happen is if the government stepped in (presumably for “national IT security”) and started enabling a monopoly with some idiotic regulations. I don’t think even politicians are that stupid.

Sounds like anti-commercial fear mongering to me.

Post a comment
Name: 
Email: 
URL: 
Comments: