File: It has to be this way.swf-(9.09 MB, 480x360, Other)
[_] Dear /f/ Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)15:46 No.2639726
It seems the format is starting to die out, the only real new content is generally being made in
other formats and ported to .swf, often clumsily. Many other places are just making the
transition to webm or HTML5 formats.
What say you?
Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)16:19 No.2639748
>>2639726
The hell? They aired this?
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)16:21 No.2639749
>>2639726
There needs to be a transition into newer mediums of information. .swf as a format is archaic and
severely limited in scope of capability. Obviously it will remain relevant for years, but as you
said in the OP, .webm and HTML5 accomplish more than .swf could ever hope to while providing a
higher quality at lower file size.
The benefits of .swf over the others are quickly becoming outdated. Because the format is final
and will never change, I think we're drawing nearer to a time where we should just drop it
altogether and adapt to newer and higher standards.
/f/ desperately needs to change if it wants to remain a thing. By adopting these newer standards,
our range of material and content will easily increase for the better.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)16:24 No.2639751
>>2639748
Teaching children about the concept of death at an early age is actually a smart and important
idea. Rather than increasing shock value and upsetting children, the episode in question taught
kids about the importance of remembering and respecting Mr. Hooper, rather than grieving over his
death.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)16:36 No.2639762
>>2639726
It's true that the SWF file format is an outdated and archaic format. The problem with /f/,
though, is that it was built around that file format. 8 or so years ago, Flash could do things
that were amazing and were very hard to do with other file formats, so it was the go-to format
for animation and web games. Back then, this board was made so 4chan could host this kind of
content, and a community grew around it.
Nowadays, the community, while small, is still here, but it's still built around a now dying
format. And I feel that if the format changes, the community will change as a result. /f/ will
change the people that browse and post here, for better and for worse. On the other hand, if /f/
remains unchanged, it will eventually die. The people that post here will have to go somewhere
else, and the community will be destroyed.
/f/ will not stay the same for long, though. Time will pass, and /f/ will either change, or die.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)16:46 No.2639772
>>2639726
What do you guys think of allowing larger webms with sound and mp4s on here?
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)16:52 No.2639774
>>2639772
It would be appreciated, and likely lead to more diverse content. But such a sudden shift would
be problematic, as there would be a severe lack of proper archiving and cataloging. swfchan is an
invaluable source of information, but if it can't handle something like this then it'd be a waste
of time and effort.
Then again, I know nothing of the capabilities of that website. For all I know it is already
capable of handling that sort of thing. My only worry is whether newer formats can follow the
code and/or procedure as .swfs have in the past. The way it works now is excellent when searching
for a particular file's history. If we can't emulate that capability for .webms, .mp4s, etc then
I can only predict a more cluttered and messy environment.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:01 No.2639780
i wish you faggots would go away
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:05 No.2639782
I come to flash for interactive things, not stupid youtube rips or amvs.
The day that those other formats you talk about can be turned into a game or something, then I'll
accept it.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:06 No.2639783
Allowing different file formats won't, in itself, increase "video" quality to eg YouTube levels -
for that you'd need larger filesizes, and there's just no point in burdening the 4chan servers
(or our connections) with that when the HQ stuff is already so easy to find elsewhere (if you
care enough to want it).
Really I for one don't care what happens so long as swfs remain postable here, and people can
keep posting comments on them.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:08 No.2639784
>>2639782
HTML5 is already being used for games tho
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:10 No.2639786
>>2639726
This flash gets me right in the feels.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:13 No.2639787
>>2639784
I'm not all that familiar with the format; can you stick audio/graphical assets into a single
file with HTML5 like you can with SWF? I'd really like a link to an example.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:16 No.2639788
>>2639784
What could you play HTML5 files offlline with?
I don't know that format.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:20 No.2639790
just make /f/ into /webm/
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:21 No.2639791
>>2639788
If done correctly, .html files can contain video, audio, and interactive media in a single file.
Google "base64 img", "svg", "html5 canvas", etc for some examples.
Normal web devs would cry at having CSS, js, images, etc all in one file, but I think it would
work super well here.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:29 No.2639794
>>2639790
"what is [G]?"
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:40 No.2639799
>>2639791
So you can do it, but you have to stick to ASCII characters, inflating filesizes as a result.
So what can HTML5 do that's BETTER than SWF? Specifically, stuff that'd matter on f?
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:43 No.2639803
>>2639790
lolno. /f/ isn't the "videos board".
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:46 No.2639806
>>2639799
For starters, HTML5 is native to many mobile devices, whereas .swf requires flash player which,
in most cases, is unavailable to many smaller platforms. It also is compressed differently and
provides a more seamless download.
Google has also rolled out HTML5 for Youtube playback. It is generally faster and more compatible
than the flash-based code.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:46 No.2639807
Why not both?
We have a clear, viewable section or swfs. Why not just a webm one under that?
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:49 No.2639809
>>2639806
Fuck mobile devices.
>> [_] HOMOSECTUAL 12/26/14(Fri)17:49 No.2639810
>>2639726
>HTML5
yet another of steve jobs' wet dreams that came to shitty shitty fruition
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:50 No.2639811
>>2639806
How is HTML5 "compressed differently"? HTML5 is text.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)17:54 No.2639816
>>2639809
This, I dont give a shit weather or not some teenager can browse /f/ on his fucking phone at
school
>> [_] HOMOSECTUAL 12/26/14(Fri)17:59 No.2639820
>>2639749
>but as you said in the OP, .webm and HTML5 accomplish more than .swf could ever hope to while
providing a higher quality at lower file size.
>>size matters
Listen, those two are good for animation and video in short bursts, and HTML5 is okay for most
design but so long as I work with vectors it is not winning any awards in my line of work.
and when we are talking games, lets face it for majority of stupid bullshit actionscript 2.0 can
handle it better than html5.
and yeah you could say the real pros make their own engines and such and they do, but for those
that don't and lazy fucks swfs and fla i'd take over html5 any day
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:02 No.2639824
>>2639726
>hurr durr i come to a flash board to complain about how flash sucks
Kill yourself you fucking faggot.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:37 No.2639842
>>2639749
>>2639762
>>2639772
>>2639774
>>2639790
>>2639807
Hello newfirends. /f/ was made for something called "O.C." which stands for "Original Content".
The "f" actually stands for "Flash" which is a vector graphics editor with scripting abilities.
In it you can make short movies and small games.
Many people who browsed 4chan used to make these and wanted a place to upload them, for this /f/
was made. .SWF is the best file-format for this
If you just want to share funny videos there are plenty of places that does this better. Like:
4chan IRC, /b/ 8chan or reddit.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:40 No.2639846
>>2639842
>/f/
>hosting OC
When?
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:44 No.2639853
>>2639846
When it was created and for a while afterwards. Don't know when it turned into /b/ with sound
since I've never been a /f/ regular
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:52 No.2639857
>>2639726
>implying moot still gives a single rotten fuck about 4chan
>implying /f/ will ever be updated to include webms with sound
He didnt even put santa hats on /b/ this year I dont expect anything helpful to be done.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:52 No.2639859
Why isn't there a videos board anyway?
With youtube embedding built in.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:53 No.2639860
>It_has_to_be_this_way.swf
STANDING HERE I REALIZE YOU WERE JUST LIKE ME TRYING TO MAKE HISTORY
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)18:54 No.2639862
>>2639860
AND WHO'S TO JUDGE
THE RIGHT FROM WRONG
WHEN OUR GUARD IS DOWN
I THINK WE'LL BOTH AGREE
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:02 No.2639871
>>2639859
We already have /b/
And 4chan isn't really a site for sharing videos or images so it wouldn't fit in anyways.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:03 No.2639873
>seen this scene before
>thread has over 30 replies, expecting some kind of interesting discussion about the video
>this shit right here
Fuck you, /f/.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:04 No.2639874
>>2639862
VIOLENCE BREEDS VIOLENCE
BUT IN THE END
IT HAS TO BE THIS WAY!
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:07 No.2639875
>>2639873
No, fuck you, leather man!
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:10 No.2639878
>>2639799
>>2639842
I'd say HTML5 is becoming/will become the new scrub format for making and distributing OC,
regardless of whether or not flash is still useful, just as good, etc. Supporting HTML5 would
extend the life of my beloved /f/ imo.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:15 No.2639880
>>2639806
>native to many mobile devices
You mobilefags need to find a computer or fuck off. Sick of this entitlement. Go surf Reddit if
you care so much for mobile compatibility. This site wasn't founded around people who require
such devices in their lives.
>>2639859
X already has a link embed option. Use that.
>>2639873
>argument doesn't go his way
>complains more
I bet you wish you could downvote right now.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:18 No.2639883
>>2639878
/f/ was made for 4channers to post their flash creations. Nothing else.
What you want is another type of website/ board. That's why it's not going to happen here.
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:18 No.2639884
>>2639853
more like r/montageparodies
>> [_] Anonymous 12/26/14(Fri)19:52 No.2639897
>>2639880
What I'm hearing, re the mobile argument:
"Wah, change and increased convenience is stupid, why should a content site have to adapt to
improving technologies?"
