File: running over html5.swf-(994 KB, 1536x1024, Loop)
[_] running over html5 Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:10:51 No.3273454
screw html5 flash is better.
I animated this myself
Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:42:00 No.3273457
>>3273454
are you the same guy who made kill html5
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:42:31 No.3273458
hey
what the fuck is wrong with html5?
>> [_] John Moses Browning 08/17/17(Thu)21:42:36 No.3273459
This is a good animation
I almost thought it actually happened irl
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:51:53 No.3273460
>>3273457
yes
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:52:41 No.3273461
>>3273457
If it is it's safe to say he has improved a bit...
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:53:40 No.3273462
>>3273458
it's laggy and removes end user control
larger file size, is really picky about what browser and operating system you have Down to the
hardware
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:54:11 No.3273463
>>3273460
Can you animate html5 getting stabbed over and over next time?
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:55:03 No.3273466
>>3273463
thanks for the suggestion!
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)21:56:13 No.3273469
>>3273454
>MFW I play this swf in Shumway, an html5/js implementation of flash
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)22:12:02 No.3273472
>>3273469
the thing with emulators of any kind wether it be a Nes emulator or virtual box is that it is not
the same as having the real deal it just emulates it.
dos box is not as good as using a real dos computer for example.
sure it might work but it's more likely to not work correctly because it's literally impossible
to 100% emulate something as if it were the real thing, it can be full of unseen bugs.
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)23:08:46 No.3273489
you know adobe getting rid of flash is going to make Chromebooks even more useless.
I can get more use outta a 21 year old laptop, because it has windows, a better keyboard and did
I mention It can execute EXE files(that are old enough to run on windows 95)
it's just better because of those reasons.
now obviously you could get more outta a think pad r500 running windows 7 but the main point is
Chromebooks suck ass and anything that runs windows (and now flash) are better just because it
runs windows (and now flash).
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)23:27:21 No.3273502
>>3273454
LOL
I got a chuckle out if it. Thanks Doc.
>>3273458
Pretty much everything,
>>3273462
nailed it.
>>3273469
>MFW you're using an incomplete tool named after a muppet alien from a bad 80s sitcom
>>3273489
>tips fedora
>> [_] Anonymous 08/17/17(Thu)23:51:34 No.3273512
Maybe all you 5 fanbois better read up
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_HTML5_and_Flash
BWAAAAHAHAHAHA we're fukt!!! (>w<)
>> [_] Anonymous 08/18/17(Fri)00:57:22 No.3273537
>>3273512
You what, mate?
All that just confirms that Flash is superior in every way and the only reason why it's being
phased out is because the cruddy jews at Google and W3C want more control
>> [_] Anonymous 08/18/17(Fri)01:16:30 No.3273541
>>3273537
W3C is one of the weakest organization I've ever seen. It failed during the browser wars and It's
failing now.
It's basically a puppet for various companies now.
>> [_] Anonymous 08/18/17(Fri)01:17:21 No.3273542
>>3273541
>now
>> [_] Anonymous 08/18/17(Fri)01:44:02 No.3273547
reminds me of those "punch osama bin laden" flashes
>> [_] Anonymous 08/18/17(Fri)01:59:03 No.3273550
>>3273537
What are you on drugs? That's EXACTLY MY POINT in that post.
HTML5 doesn't support SHIT next to flash.
I mean, we're fukt, for having Flash stripped from browsers.
>>3273541
This.
I keep saying, "standards" only serve the Royalty, not the plebs.
>> [_] Anonymous 08/18/17(Fri)05:28:20 No.3273574
>>3273512
>>3273537
>>3273550
Protip, HTML5 and Browser features are the same thing.
Whoever made that graph needs to be punched in all 17 of their throats.
Everything that says No in that list is supported in browsers.
The only exception is fucking Tab Stops. Fuck tab stops.
Nobody cares what WHATWG or W3C say, browser vendors implement shit they think is useful far
quicker than those pencil-pushing fucktards.
>> [_] Anonymous 08/18/17(Fri)05:36:03 No.3273576
>>3273574
>Flash has the ability to specify measurements in sub-pixel increments. This can result in a
crisper and generally more pleasant appearance of Flash web sites. When confronted with CSS and
HTML measurements on a sub-pixel scale, web browsers will round either up or down, depending on
the browser, which leads to inconsistency and unreliability in the display of those pages.
lmao, fucking wat
HTML5 added multiple different forms of anti-aliasing years ago.
How fucking old is this article? Holy shit, the more I read the more wrong it is.
>> [_] 1) 08/18/17(Fri)07:57:23 No.3273597
To have the voice of a web developer here who has to work every day with javascript, css3 and
html5 (yes we don't develop for anything below IE10):
1) Creating anything with flash is much faster and much easier than with html, css and
javascript. With one exception, which is typical basic responsive website.
2) But anything code in flash renders faster than in html. HTML is a memory hog and extremly bad
for animation, because as example it uses strings for colors which have to be converted first
before they are usuable, and that has to be done in animations like games every frame which is
very slow.
Important: This is of course considered very bad code in any language except html. I would fire
any programmer that serves me numbers as string within the code like rgba( 244, 255, 0, 0.7).
3) Flashs ability to look and run the same on any system from just one file is an outstanding
achivement. And I don't know any coding language where you have that much hassle even when coding
for only 1 system. Many people do not understand how much work it is to code for (in order of
amount of css/html/js problems I exprienced) Firefox (least buggy and fastest), Chrome (not for
developers and has more problems than firefox, considers a html from the hardrive that tries to
access a file from the same hard drive not same domain(!)), Edge, IE, Safari. HTML never(!!!)
looks the same even on the same system in different browsers.
4) HTML is uncompiled. Code is always compiled for many good reasons. There is no reason that
HTML is needed uncompiled. Flash is compiled and it is still easy to access everything you needed.
5) HTMLs backwards compability is actually very bad. Flashs backward compability is perfect. You
have no problems running an old as2 file nowadays. The extra code you have to write for all the
html (even excluding anything below IE10) versions is again insanity.
>> [_] 2) 08/18/17(Fri)07:58:38 No.3273598
6) The liar steve jobs stated how html5 already replaced flash many years ago or something like
that. Safari is the worst browser. It is so bad to write html5 code for that shit ass browser we
almost threw it out of our production process. That browser is a joke, and absolutely not
working. Aside from alot of things that don't work here the two worst problems we have with that
browser:
animations like this do not work in safari because its broken shit browser:
animation: fade-in 1s 0s both, fade-out 1s 2s forwards, fade-in 1s 4s;
This does not work in safari, because safari can't handle the same animation-name two or more
times. THis is a problem for many years now in safari. Next insane problem because steve jobs is
cancer to humanity:
You usually can pause animations:
animation-play-state: paused;
Now if your animation has more than one animation-name in the list, say goodbye to your
animations... Safari can't handle this basic thing, for years now.
7) Canvas is very badly designed and a pain to work with. Making it render in a useful speed for
flash like games is nearly impossible and impossible for a normal human beeing. It is again a
crazy amount of professional work necessary to make games with canvas.
Unlike flash. Flash is the best program to make interactive animations. It makes it easy and I
won't go into detail here why because its too obvisious.
>> [_] 3) 08/18/17(Fri)08:00:32 No.3273599
8) Filesize: when we switched from flash to html5 the filesize for banner was magically raised to
1.5mb (70kb-150kb banner base +sevaral hundreds of kb additional scripts from the adservers +1mb
to load content after the banner loaded + fonts). Before that we were limited to 20-40kb for
flash banners and 18fps max. Html animations do not have a frame limit, they render at 60fps. If
you think HTML renders animations more efficient than flash and that's the reason why it is
allowed 60fps that is not correct. The reason is that it's a huge hassle to change the framerate
of a css animation. Also the argument that html is compressed and thus the real filesize is
smaller than 130kb is not realy true. Because A) we compress the banner code as much as we can to
have a shitty animation like flash banners had.
9) A 20kb flash banner could have much better animation and effects than a 200kb html5 banner.
10) Fonts are very limited, hard to use and are huge compared to flash. In flash it was super
easy and efficient to use and embed fonts.
11) Svgs are huge. Swf vectors are tiny.
12) IE cant animate SVGs at all. They can't be rotated, scaled, anything...
13) ... that's not all for now from someone whos job it is to work with this trash called html5.
It's good steve jobs is no more around. He did alot of harm to the industry. But that's just my
opinion
