The Flash logo

Apple will sell 50 million iPads a Year, on Business Insider
Top 10 Luxury Brands’ Sites Fail To Work On iPad, on PSFK
Flash and SEO — Compelling Reasons Why Flash & SEO Still Don’t Mix, on SEOmoz
Things to Know About Flash Websites, on Don’t drink the koolaid
Don’t Build Your Site With Flash, on Hobo-Web
Flash, iPad, Standards, on
An Adobe Flash developer on why the iPad can’t use Flash, on RoughlyDrafted

Flash set for mobile exit, on .net magazine

*15M figure obtained by doing the maths from here, here, and here.

The Flash logo via Shirtoid.


April 14, 2011


Jquery/Javascript is a great way to overcome the lack of fancy animations on mobile browsers, however I don’t believe we should forget how to use Flash altogether.

The Flash situation means that web designers have to find an alternative way to make their designs appealing to the average user…for the moment, but I believe it’ll only be a matter of time until Apple resolves this hiccup.

The I-Phone 5 is soon to be released and we never could hold a solution to displaying flash graphics on a mobile browser…or so we hope.

I still think Apple not supporting Flash on their iOS devices is indicative of the closed system they are really pushing hard right now. There are a number of things wrong with how Apple is doing business, but they make great hardware and great interfaces on mobile devices and have positioned themselves to do so. Now they are just taking advantage of that position.

That being said, designing a website solely in Flash today is just asking for problems. Websites should be built first with content in mind in HTML, so that every browser can see it all. If you really need fancy animations you can add them in using JavaScript frameworks and CSS3 animations that will degrade gracefully, not just break.

I think Flash is still useful, mostly for gaming, but at this point if you want to reach the widest audience possible it is ill advised to use Flash just because you can make it “prettier.”

I agree with your affirmation: don’t use Flash to build websites but I don’t agree with the reasoning behind.

Behind Apple’s choice are just commercial reasons… the same reasons for not offering USB, just an aggressive business philosophy.

Flash is not good for web design because it was not designed for webdesign, it was designed for making interactive applications.


We’ve switched almost entirely to Jquery — it’s easier to program and edit, plus it works on more devices. Flash has its place for certain things, like web games, etc. But the majority of websites can do without it. I view this as Adobe’s problem to solve — when Flash isn’t so resource- and processor-intensive, when it can load quickly and without hanging, then Apple’s devices will welcome it back.

Actually this title reflects the situation very well:

Top 10 Luxury Brands’ Sites Fail To Work On iPad.

It’s just the opposite, Ipad fails to render Top 10 Luxury Brand’s Sites and hundred thousands more.

I published my opinion after searching for a good hotel. The one I booked has a website built with 100% Flash, and because my browsing was mainly on an iPad, I almost missed it. TripAdvisor reviews prompted me to check on my iMac. Granted, that’s one small example, from just one person, but I think the same scenario will be happening over and over.

Sergio, I’ve read the same comment in many other places. It’s obvious why Steve Jobs will disagree, but he makes a similar point about Flash being the “closed system.”

“Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.”

I’ll counter that by asking why a top-quality hotel can’t afford to have a companion site optimized for mobile devices? Flash-based sites are designed to be viewed by one person with a desktop or laptop. I think with the demand for quickly loading sites on mobile devices, and a burgeoning demand for web access on TVs, cars, and anything else you can cram a touchscreen on, Flash-based sites are going to lose traffic to sites optimized for devices which aren’t workstations. I’d be interested to see what this hotel’s web traffic patterns have been since the advent of tablets and smartphones.

iPad’s and iPhone’s don’t support Flash, however they do support HTML5. Most new browsers are still catching up with HTML5, the older ones don’t support it at all. It’s swings and roundabouts, you can’t please everybody. I don’t entirely agree that you shouldn’t build a site using Flash. Flash has it’s place, there’s a some absolutely stunning websites out there that wouldn’t exist without it.

I agree with the poster above who mentions it’s Adobe’s problem to sort, the popularity of Apple’s mobile devices surely demands that they come up with a solution.

I feel the same way you David but for different reasons. Creating something in Flash is an expensive and time consuming process to resource. It’s simply not cost effective enough.

So Flash don’t let Ipads redering it’s content? It sounds like quite the opposite.

Ipad is a closed system not just because it restrict its capabilities by refusing to render Flash content. The fact it doesn’t include an USB port says a lot about its marketing strategy.

Also, what about all the other Flash applications? For example games?

Apple is acting just like a bully. He arrives the last one, block the competitors screwing developers and users by saying it’s something good for all of us.

Maybe it’s something good, but like an user I want to be able to choose.

Aside from what can and can’t view Flash websites, anywhere I have to sit for more than five seconds while it loads is left for dead. And I’m not the only impatient browser around. Not everyone has superfast (or even “regular” speed broadband).

I agree with the sentiment but your point is rubbish. What is 15M, 65M, 105M compared to the global internet audience… its nothing.

I asked the hotel a similar question, Neil. It’s website will be changing soon. I’m sure a lot of businesses are doing the same.

Abbas, I’ve never worked with Flash, but if the results take anywhere near as long to create as I think they do, I can see why you mention a lack of cost-effectiveness.

Jaz mentioned this Flash site, Monet 2010. Clearly lot of work went into it, but the load times for some pages were around 10 seconds, and online attention-spans have been trained to jump ship long before that.

Sergio, I’ve never seen the appeal in Flash-based games. I’m basing the post on how companies make profits online.

Jason, 15M, 65M, 105M people with enough disposable income to purchase a mobile device that’s likely in addition to a household computer or laptop. I prefer to rule those customers in.

I think flash has had it’s day in the web and is over. Why use flash when you can things that are just as cool using javascript/jquery and css3? Not to say flash will never be used, but I think flash will be used soley for flash games and apps.

David, I think you are missing the point., It’s not about liking Flash games it’s about freedom.

Once we replace the personal computer with a closed-platform device such as the iPad, we replace freedom, choice and the free market with oppression, censorship and monopoly. Imagine what life would be like if your personal computer functioned like the iPhone. You’d have to buy all your programs through Apple, and if Apple didn’t want you using something like, say, Google Voice, Abobe Flash or Microsoft Word, then you’d be out of luck.


Hello David,

Long time reader; very first comment (Yay!).

Flash allows developers to create extremely visually appealing websites and designs. And while I have an appreciation of aesthetics, there are limits. Seconds can seem an eternity and unless the content is really important or interesting status bars are met with a mental expletive and a swift close of the tab. Sign of the times we live in but I have little patience on the internet.

I dislike flash as much as the next person, but when you look at the nominations for webby awards this year, and many previous years, almost all of them have flash on their homepage as the main feature.

SOME flash I think is almost a necessity right now until javascript and css develops further , especially when it comes to giving clients that extra bit of “wow” factor they are always looking for on their websites.

Sergio, I don’t see the iPad as ever replacing iMacs, desktops, laptops. We’ll continue to have the freedom we want online, in addition to the ability for visiting any single website in the world on an iPad (regardless of whether the website is geared-up to function as we’d expect). My point isn’t about the restrictions of the iPad. It’s about the unnecessary restrictions caused by entirely Flash-based websites. The iPad serves as just one of many reasons to avoid Flash.

Natasha, thanks for your first comment. Always a pleasure. I’m right with you on load-times. Big hindrance for reaching the desired audience.

Brian, have to disagree there. Some Flash content isn’t almost a necessity. I think it’s far from it.

Curious about your impression of the Webby Awards. My only real thoughts on the scheme is how I groaned when Crowdspring was featured as a nominee, and how I receive unrequested PR emails from time-to-time.

Nice article, definitely an interesting and controversial one. I design sites in Flash quite a bit but I have also done a good amount of just HTML / CSS / Javascript sites too.

I understand the argument of both sides but for me there are just some things that can’t be done without Flash. You can try to mimic animations or rollovers with Javascript or css but with Flash it just gives you an ability to create more of a experience for the user. Without Flash many sites start to look the same such as the whole web 2.0 phase or design community sites like behance, cargo collective, index exhibit, etc.

Andriod utilizes flash and I think at some point Apple will too, for me I think this is more of a money issue from the two companies than anything else. Anyways like I said nice topic to write up on.

David, I don’t mean Ipad will replace anything. If you read the whole article I linked you will get the point.

You don’t have freedom, can you browse the Hotel’s site you mention in the post? NO. Why? Because Apple chose for you.

How long before it blocks movies, TV shows, songs, books and even web sites?

You can do on the iPad only what Apple allows. And if you are allowed to do something, you have to go through iTunes or MobileMe to do it.

I suggest you read this article:

Hi Adam, there’s no doubt about how Flash can add to the user experience. Ultimately, though, when making a purchase decision (unless you’re hiring a Flash developer), do the extra bells and whistles make a difference?

Think about buying a home. Does it matter if the estate agency has a non-Flash website? I think agency sites are better without. You can copy and paste or bookmark specific links (a very worthwhile time-saver).

Sergio, I read the article before responding to you. I also read some of the comments, where these points are in line with my thinking.

There is nothing wrong with Flash in and of itself. The problem is people over-using it. Way back in the day I was watching a video on web design and the presenter made a comment about using flash in your web designs (note: this pre-dates Flash Video). He said that when you use it, it should be done in such a way that people should not be able to tell that the element(s) are done in Flash).

But I do find Apple’s behavior a little hypocritical. Quicktime is not the best movie format in the world. What would happen is Microsoft decided “Well, it is an inferior product so Windows will no longer be allowed to run it.” Apple would have a full legal complaint delivered to all 51 Attorneys General in the nation (1 for each state plus the federal one) before the sentence was finished.

My favorite riddle:

Apple doesn’t like me. Google doesn’t like me. Users don’t like me. Designers love me.

What am I?

You guessed it…

David, what would you think if Apple one day decides that Photoshop and Illustrator are not good application for Apple standards and they block them on their new Imacs?.

Saying that Illustration and Photoshop fails to work on new Imacs would be crazy.

There are thousands of Flash applications on the web that Ipad just ignores, this is a reason for not using Flash anymore? No, Flash is good for certain tasks (though I never would design a whole site)… this is a good reason for not buying an Ipad anymore and buy Android based tablets that offer me an open system where I choose.

This is the whole point… I don’t need anybody that choose for me. If there are better alternatives offer it to me and I will judge… otherwise it is just monopoly.

Hm. Ignoring the argument about whether they’re closed systems or not, I agree that it makes good business sense to opt for a website that can be viewed on the largest range of devices.


For someone so insistent and adamant about freedom to choose, you seem extremely hostile to David’s use of his iPad.
No one is forcing you to use an iPad or an iPhone and I think you should research exactly what monopoly is. As was stated before, Flash is a proprietary software owned by one company with no competition, and therefore no incentive to be improved & enhanced. It’s available however Adobe feels like delivering it. Isn’t that contrary to your declarations of technological freedom?
If Flash is seriously that important to you, may I suggest NOT buying an iPad or iPhone and allowing those who do purchase an iPad/iPhone to make that decision themselves?
And no, a website should not be designed solely in Flash because even on my Dell laptop, Flash websites take far too long to load, are not SEO friendly, and are definitely not Handicap-Accessible.

Well after years of being a keen reader, I finally disagreed with David on something. ;)

Just to use your last example of choosing a house on a website. What if the estate agency uses flash to give you a 3d tour of all the houses they have on offer. Something like that would make that agency jump out above their competitors. I personally know someone who makes video tours for agencies like that. I think it can definitely help to get more potential clients interested in your products.

Imo boycotting flash is wrong, if one or another device does not support it then it’s your responsibility as a designer to figure out a way to make it work on that particular device. Thus build a flash version of the site for desktops and an html version for ipads for example. Sure it’s more work and more money, but that’s just a downside of choosing flash for your concept nowadays. And if you’re a designer or a webbuilder, it will mean more work for you but also more income. So turn the disadvantage to an advantage imo.

Kind Regards,


p.s. Love your site David, it’s at the top of my fav list. Love the book too, looking forward to something new soon.

Sergio, I agree when you state it’d be crazy for Apple to block Illustrator/Photoshop on iMacs. That’s why it hasn’t happened.

Disregarding any security flaws that Symantec uncovered with Flash, here’s a worthy quote from the conclusion to Steve Jobs’ piece linked above:

“Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short.”

Art, to counter your point about house-tours, isn’t that just the same as presenting the tour using a simple video embedded from YouTube or Vimeo? There’d be no problem watching that on an iPad.

It’s a designer’s responsibility to say why Flash isn’t a good idea. It’s like when a potential client wants a new brand identity. If I like the current design, I’ll first ask what’s wrong with it rather than pushing ahead for the sake of payment.

Thanks very much, by the way, for reading my book. Very glad you found it of use.

Ali, all good points — load-times, SEO-friendliness, accessibility.

Blair, I thought about your riddle, then tried Googling it, then gave up. Maybe it’s just too early in the day (at least, that’s what I’m telling myself).

Ali J Taylor,

No my friend, it’s just the opposite, David is free of using an Ipad and I’m free to rebate an opinion I think is wrong… this is a debate, this is freedom.

Flash is not so important to me, again, that’s no the point.

The point is I don’t like Apple forces me to do whatever they like… and of course I never will buy an Ipad, because is a really expensive product that I don’t need, but this is not important in this debate neither.

Why are you bringing this up again? I’m sorry to see you put so much thought into a useless cause:

– Flash should be available on the iPad, it works well enough on android devices (i.e. the energy consumption, hover arguments don’t stand).
– yes, developers should try using HTML5&CSS3&JS instead of flash (if only for SEO reasons), whenever possible, but that is not always possible (you’d be alienating way more than 15mill people, who don’t have html5 capable browsers / want to use video, webcam, microphone etc.).
– flash does touch devices ok. developers just need to rethink the UX a bit (not to need hover effects).

Best case scenario for websites: a desktop version, a mobile and a tablet version. This is the trend that’s emerging anyway, since screen sizes and interfaces differ so much. What you build them with, should be irrelevant, quality is important. Now please, can we move on to more productive things?

Jobs article is so biased and so out of touch with facts that I almost lost respect for the guy.

The kind of experiences that you can build in Flash are completely different from normal websites. Games, interactive video, 3D, visual information, and lots of other stuff is possibly only in Flash. Javascript and CSS3 is catching up but Flash is still ahead (Check the Molehill demos for an example).

The point where you are confused is using Flash for which it is not meant for. Of course if you are going to make a WordPress like blog or a hotel/airline reservation site, it’s going to suck. Flash is not meant for that. It’s pretty much the same argument as saying that Photoshop sucks because whatever you designed looks horrible.

Also, Flash can’t work with hover devices is a stupid argument. CSS hover menus won’t work either. If you are designing for touch based devices do not use the hover state or offer an alternative. The same implementation of the website in Javascript/CSS would suffer from the same drawbacks.

One has to apply the same constraints both in Flash and Javascript/HTML websites. It’s just that the misuses of Flash are more prevalent among high profile websites.

I’ve installed Flash Blocker on my laptop so that any Flash sites or ads can only be shown on my say so. This has given me noticeably better battery life while on the web (i.e. Flash is a resource hog). Yet another reason to not use Flash.

David, you believe the touch technology can do the same as Flash, it’s ok.

But there are developers and users that don’ think the same or just don’t want to switch. If you use an Android based tablet you can choose… if you use an Ipad you can’t.

You agree that Apple is doing good blocking Flash but what happens if they choose for you again and block any other application that you like? How can be you so sure that Illustrator or Photoshop or whatever application you like won’t be blocked? Just because it didn’t happen yet? Flash was supported by Apple for years.

Replying to your question: how do you translate the Flash-based hover/mouse-over? I bet just like you translate the html-based hover/mouse-over? Or maybe using a technology adapted to the medium (instead adapting the medium to your devices)… for example Wacom resonancy.

Even mobile devices that support Flash don’t do it very well. It’s still super clunky because Flash is based on the click of a mouse.

Why push Flash when jQuery and Javascript can accomplish most of what you would ever need to do with Flash and can do it with more ease?

Additionally, more and more businesses are blocking Flash altogether, and a lot of people have missing plugins.


An opinion is neither wrong or right; it just is.
However, the facts and data that lead to that opinion can be wrong/right and debated.
My honest opinion is that you’re debating something that is outside of the larger point and philosophy that David was addressing: web designers have a responsibility to build a site that can be accessed by as many people as possible of the client’s targeted audience.

I’ve already mentioned some of the negatives of a completely Flash-based website that are independent & irrespective of the device one chooses to use. As I mentioned before, I use a Dell laptop and I advise all of my clients against Flash, especially when the effects and features that they want can be achieved with HTML5 & CSS or jQuery.

It’s tantamount to the age-old discussion of IE vs Every Other Browser. Do we design for IE’s limitations or do we design for the best experience possible in every other browser and allow/compensate for the graceful degradation of elements for those who continue and CHOOSE to use IE?

I believe the conversation needs to change from “do/don’t do” to “Who? What? And what?” As in, Who is this site meant for? What is this site’s purpose? And what is the best way to achieve/accomplish/answer those first two questions.

– as previously stated, the hover action really just depends on the developer, i has no inherent importance in the platform.
– if you can what you need to, with jQ and still use Flash, you’re a bad developer or just want to squeeze more money out of your client.
– Flash is still the most wide-spread plugin, with close to 99% install-base.

Really, this discussion shouldn’t be of Flash vs. no-Flash (that’s for developers to decide, on a per-project basis). Rather, critique developers for using it when they shouldn’t, without a fallback.

Why aren’t we having the same discussion about PDF in print?!

Ali J Taylor,

please, read my first comment in the post.

I’m completely agree with David’s affirmation but not with the reasoning behind it. Anybody who knows just a little bit about web design wouldn’t consider doing a mainstream website completely in Flash (before and after Ipad age)… but Flash is the best choice in other cases.

The problem is Apple block Flash for 100% of the uses and don’t let the user choose…


hehe, of course… Steve Jobs is not that powerful yet.
But this is not an argument against Apple’s monopoly strategies.

Following your reasoning: when you design a device it needs to be for the widest range of users possible… you never wouldn’t design a website that blocks IE… no matter how bad is that browser.

Do you really think that an Ipad with Flash unistalled but with the option of being installed by the user wouldn’t be a more reasonable choice?

I don’t know why Apple would have a major issue with Flash, other than the iPhone and iPad are designed to make content available to the user in an easy, fast and slick ‘Apple way’.

My feeling is having somebody sat staring at an iPad/iPhone waiting 20 seconds at a time for a page laden with Flash to load over a 3G connection with a 500mb data limit isn’t what they built them for. Not something they’d be rushing to sell in with the whole experience that’s for sure.

jQuery/HTML5/CSS3 take less time to get to the user and are more lightweight, therefore ideal for both pieces of kit, which is probably the main reason why Apple are championing it.

I’m not buying the ‘closed system’ argument. If people want Flash on their mobile devices then get an Android phone. It’s a simple choice. Nobody is forced to get an iPhone or and iPad. I’m gambling most people are probably like me, designer types, with a nice little piece of kit that looks good on the desk next to my Pantone cup, better than most of my mate’s phones, it gives me a slightly smug feeling inside and does a few good things that my old phone didn’t – end of.

Saying that, the ain’t lighting my iPhone up.

To sum-up, I’m simply reminding designers and business-owners that millions of people with disposable income will make purchase decisions while using an iPad. As such, why not let them see your website?

That’s pretty obvious David, as developers we need to be flexible and adapt our businesses to the market.

But as users we need to think what Apple philosophy is bringing us.

On a related note, I’m interested to see Adobe’s Wallaby that attempts to convert flash into HTML5, CSS3, and Javascript files.

If I recall, I think the Android outsold iPhones last year therefore more people are starting to be able to access Flash on their phones.

It will be a matter of time when another tablet is better than the iPad and will utilize flash and outsell the iPad as well. That being said, I can’t argue that Apple products are much more attractive than their competitors.

I have no opinion regarding using Flash for games or videos, although some Flash video players are better than others. I’m still miffed at Comedy Central for changing theirs, because the new player skips around without any input and it’s incredibly frustrating to use.

There is already a tremendous market for iPhone/iPad apps even though you have to learn how to animate everything by code instead of doing it in Flash. Sure we may be limiting who makes apps because you do have to be a programmer to do so, but for one less designer able to submit an app themselves, there are probably 5 programmers willing to do so, and most are willing to work with said designers to make it happen. It isn’t hurting Apple any.

I DO have strong opinions for Flash usage on any site where you wish to get information – hate it hate it hate it! Flash, compared to HTML/CSS/Jquery is cumbersome, slow, and impossible to navigate properly. Good luck linking another person to something cool you saw on the site. You can’t. I was trying to look up info on Warner Brothers’ website and the sitemap is utterly useless because everything you click leads you back to the home page, which is, you guess it, Flash. In fact it’s past utterly useless and inspires seething rage, because they actually make you think that you’re getting somewhere.

Steve Jobs is a master at dictating consumerism and design on a world wide scale—and will be for quite some time. We are his puppets.

It’s The Real Thing. Period. Apple. Period. Any Questions? Of Course Not.

I personally don’t use it because I find it bothersome and irritating, as some sites take a very long time to load. Not only are you alienating iPad users (a very recent phenomenon), you’re probably also alienating countless others who can’t be bothered to wait for everything to load (a not-so-recent phenomenon).

In short, I agree with you, David.

I apologize in advance for the long post… but I happen to also be passionate on this subject.

I think some of you are wishing the reasoning behind Apple banning Flash (with a capital F) on their MOBILE devices as something other than it is. Apple doesn’t hate Flash, people :) Last time I checked, it still works on my Mac, in Safari (and works better in Safari than in most other browsers to boot). Apple has many reasons to hate Flash, and they all center around the consumer base (which is the entire focus of selling a product).

Flash is proprietary. See the capital F in Flash? It’s because it’s owned by one company. That one company then gets to dictate how Flash is implemented and performs. RIM’s tablet device, the BlackBerry Playbook, plays Flash, yes. BUT, the PlayBook came out way, way later than RIM had planned, and leaks of information seem to point to Flash being the problem. RIM spent so much time trying to get Flash to implement properly on their device that it has deployed later than planned and is missing key components expected from such a device because of the pain Flash caused (such as a native mail application).

Now let’s look at Apple’s mobile devices. Apple’s target consumer group is the everyday person. Is the everyday person going to want to install ROMs on their phone for customization? Probably not – that’s too tricky. The people Apple are addressing with their devices are people who want a simple device that just works (except for designers, who want their phone to be sexy). No frills, no super-advanced options (right out of the box). Now most of the time, these people probably aren’t the most in-the-know when it comes to technology, right? Not EVERYONE reads tech blogs, etc. So when Apple markets to these people, they want to give them a device that just WORKS.

Now give them an iPhone with Flash. Say the browser hitches up or crashes after visiting a Flash-based website. Say they are on it for a while and the battery drains like crazy. Is that person going to know that Flash is at fault? No. Apple and the iPhone are going to take the blame. Now, say you can hand a consumer a device that’s Flash-free, and thus runs a lot better. And, because of the consumer base you’ve built up, plus the image your devices portray, you know that SO MANY people will buy this device that the people who use Flash are going to have to update their method in order not to lose ground, and thus you (Apple) don’t have to do anything… which strategy are you going to choose?

Sergio, and others, this is why Apple dumped Flash. Flash is the Hummer of the internet. It may get you from point A to point B, but it takes way more resources and is a much less efficient way to get there than most other options. Apple didn’t dump Flash just because it could — there were valid, consumer-based decisions made that lead to that choice. This is what other posters are trying to tell you. If Apple dumped Flash just because it could, then yeah, you might have to worry about them dumping other things like you said. But that’s not why Flash isn’t present on their iPhones and iPads – it’s because the devices run way, way better without them, and in the long run, that’s what the biggest consumer base for Apple wants. Apple has no reason other than that TO dump Flash – it’s not like they have a competitor in the market. Heck, Apple still has Google making the Maps for their default Map app on their phone, and Google produces the biggest competitor to the iPhone. It’s there because it’s the best option for consumers who want the smoothest and best-functioning device, and that’s Apple’s entire motto.

I agree with you completely, David. I have not missed Flash at all on my iDevice, and I personally feel the internet is a better place without it. Every time I visit a website with Flash on my MacBook, no matter how pretty it looks, the fan still kicks on and it gets hot in my lap. Not very customer friendly. Now with Adobe’s Wallaby, the lack of Flash on iDevices is not a problem at all. I look forward to a Flash-free internet! ;)


I please reply this question:

Do you really think that an Ipad with Flash uninstalled but with the option of being installed by the user wouldn’t be a more reasonable choice?

It would be customer care… otherwise it’s just unfair competition, censorship and monopoly.

@Adam makes an interesting point regarding android devices rendering flash, I didn’t know that.

From a commercial point of view I feel using flash is detrimental and counter productive, the ethos of my employers is to be accessible to the masses and as David states, the possibiltiy of losing out on 15m + prospects isnt worth thinking about.

Creating websites completely in Flash has always been a bad idea. From the days when Google couldn’t index Flash websites properly (and it still can’t read text links in a Flash site) through to the today when it doesn’t work on Apple products – Flash has caused problems. However, some of the features it offers has it place. Or should that be “had” it’s place. Many of the effects Flash offered can now be done using Javascript far more efficiently.

This means web designers need not use Flash – but they do!

This means users pay the penalty. They can’t see some websites properly. Users don’t care about the tech, or how it works – they just want to see the website. Should they be made to pay for Apple’s closed system?

Apple deciding that they shouldn’t support it simply means they are denying choice. I can see why they would do this – defending their market and trying to force people to use other solutions – but I am not sure that makes it right for the user.

What’s the real debate here?

We have no control over what Apple vs Android does with the products they create, so why is that dominating the discussion?

Similarly, we have no control over how IE renders vs Webkit browsers.

The limitations & specifications are what they are and debating them in a forum focused on DESIGN will not change them.

Our job as designers is to focus on delivering a solution for our clients with regard to the limitations and specifications of the technology as it exists; not as we wish it could be.

Hey David…

I used to have a flash site….long ago…and I was told by a SEO guy that google did not spider well on flash sites….do you know anything about this? I was also told that flash intros are a big turn off for web surfers…that people only give a site a couple of seconds to give them what they are looking for….

@ Sergio – Would it be customer care? Probably. However it can also be argued that they’re taking care of their costumers by not allowing potentially unnecesary bandwidth demaning flash applications.
Is if unfair competition? Not at all. By your reasoning, other tablets have the edge by supporting flash.
Is it censorship? Yes. And Apple is free to do as it likes. Then in return the public is free to stop supporting them as already happened in the past.
Is it monopoly? No. Last time I checked, there are lots of options in the tablet market.
And just to put things into perspective, do I like Apple products? No.

I just can’t stand flash dissing articles no more. If YOU believe Flash doesn’t work for websites then YOU don’t use it. Period.

Making such a bold statement of saying ‘DONT BUILD SITES WITH FLASH’ is very annoying and just too broad of a statement. I’ve spent a decade working on Flash and having worked on it so much, that articles like these just make little or no sense.

You can never say what’s better than what. The client decides. There are hotel websites I’ve come to know of ONLY because of the accolades they’ve won being Flash websites. If a flash site doesn’t work on an iPad, then I’ll just view it on a laptop, period.

Just stop dissing flash already. All HTML5 and CSS3 has ever done now is taken the internet waay back doing exactly what Flash did a decade ago.

Great ‘Job’, Steve!

It’s all a matter of market penetration; if you’re aiming for maximal coverage don’t build your sites using flash, end of. Don’t know why there has to be so much fuss :)

In that case similarly,

If you are aiming for a niche product which can showcase ‘interactive video’, ‘ground breaking animated visuals’, ‘interactive sound’, ‘web cam enabled’, ‘interactive 3d models’, ‘virtual tours’ high end microsites (such as UFC, Pepsi, Google Street view etc. ) that are perfect for corporates, then DON’T BUILD SITES USING HTML5 OR CSS.

Use Flash.

See my point?

I can certainly understand the pain and frustration of Flash developers. It’s kind of like being a saddle maker after the introduction of the automobile.

Yes, Flash-based sites can look nice. Yes, they have special functionality that other web tools can’t deliver. Is web traffic and demand moving away from Flash? Absolutely. I have no patience for Flash-based sites and neither do a lot of people. It’s generally a speed-bump for browsers. Time to either develop a more efficient horse or start making cars.

@Neil Kowalewski
Heard of Zynga, YouTube, Google video chat, StreetView and the countless other web applications which are meant for something other than reading text?

I really don’t understand such hate against Flash. As everyone is citing consumer choice here, the consumers who do not wish to use applications are free to choose to NOT visit these websites or use these applications. Right now all the above services are on Flash and they are still doing good.

The market will decide what’s good and what’s not. If Flash was so crappy to begin with it would not have been on 99% of the browsers. It wasn’t forced down anyone’s throat.

Yes, I’m familiar with those. Flash used to be awesome. I enjoyed working with it. But that’s the point here — it’s becoming irrelevant because there are alternatives for a lot of its functionality and there is a market-driven push away from desktop/laptop devices to mobile devices, something which Flash isn’t optimized for. Yet. If Adobe can figure out a way to make Flash way more effective for mobile devices and touchscreen usage, I’ll be happy to keep working with it and delivering it to clients who can benefit from it. Otherwise, I’m going to continue working without it and developing sites that won’t be compromised by it. To revisit my earlier analogy, can you still buy handmade saddles? Sure. But it’s a niche product. Most websites need to be accessible to the widest audience on the most devices with the least amount of difficulty. For my clients, that means not using Flash. Again, for now.

@Neil Kowalewski
The only alternative for Flash inside a browser is the HTML5+CSS3+Javascript combo and it’s still not powerful enough to deliver the kind of experiences you would find in the services/applications I mentioned in my previous post. The alternative that Apple is pushing here is the App Store.
A well performing Flash virtual machine, which would have to be developed by both Adobe and Apple together, presents a huge threat to native apps as it would let developers bypass App Store policies, the tools that they provide (XCode) and offer the same applications on other platforms.
Is Flash inherently slow? I don’t think so and I certainly don’t believe the biggest tech company on the planet with its huge resources and expertise can not implement a well performing Flash VM.
Flash can be made to work on mobile devices. Apple just doesn’t want to and they are free to do so. It’s in their best interest to have a closed system which makes the maximum amount of money for them. This is what even Jobs says in the last paragraph of his article.
The thing I dislike is the amount of misinformation they have spread about Flash which has led to uninformed debates all around the web.

I still think it’s foolish to exclude Flash. Both Flash and HTML5 + CSS3 + JS (I’ll use the buzz word HTML5) can exist together and play nice. I am glad that a lot of those JS & CSS hacks that i would use Flash for I no longer need to do anymore but I tried porting some of my flash games over to HTML5 and it just did not work. Only the simple games ported over flawlessly. Also I’ve done a lot of work on kids sites like Cartoon Network, and even PBS which are very flash heavy sites and there’s no way in hell that they would work in HTML5. Even doing complex animations ended up being longgggggggg lines of HTML and CSS and tweaking them was a pain that I think it would be foolish to do again especially when working with Flash’s timeline is so much easier and faster to edit. Not only that, I hated that it doesn’t behave the same in all browsers but when I code in Flash it works everywhere even on older browsers like IE6. So I think you should use each technology for it’s strengths and not abuse it when it’s not necessary (like dumb flash intros on restaurant sites). The fact that Apple doesn’t allow it on their iOS devices is just foolish. Nothing is stopping them from making it available on their device but give the user the option of disabling it if they want.

>>>but the load times for some pages were around 10 seconds, and online attention-spans have been trained to jump ship long before that.

Because people expect it to be as fast as a book page turn. They are mostly looking for information — like, ahem, from a hotel — not a Presentation.

I think Flash is being bullied for no good reason. Flash has a lot of potential to offer and Flash has given a lot of the web and Adobe continues to develop Flash. For example, Flash is one of the best solutions to view video on computers and mobile devices. I saw here many people giving information of Flash that simply does not apply anymore, e.g. Google CAN read Flash content.

If someone is annoyed by Flash, think of the designers and developers who made the website NOT Flash. People are annoyed by banners and badly made websites that uses Flash but it’s essentially not the technology’s fault. How many notices the good use of Flash? YouTube maybe? Google Street View maybe?

Apple dismissed Flash simply because of business reasons. Come on people, is it really Flash that annoys you? Can I complain to someone that HTML sucks if a website really annoys me?

Flash is a bullied.


Second that, Herman.


I don’t agree this thread is pointless or should be deleted. There have been a lot of good arguments about the pros and cons of Flash — but I don’t think that’s what the discussion was supposed to be about. I think the intent was about the wisdom of continuing to rely on Flash-based web development knowing that it’s inaccessible on Apple’s mobile devices. Open system or closed, right or wrong, good or bad; these aren’t the point. The point is, Apple is moving away from Flash. They were the first to abandon floppy drives. They were the first to abandon CRT monitors. How many of those do you see around these days? And now they’re abandoning Flash. Apple has a way of getting its way. So ignore or reject these consumers — these buyers — at your peril. Based on Apple’s recent earnings report, I know which path I’m taking.


the issue is Apple still don’t have a real alternative to Flash in all the areas of application (gaming, interactive applications…).

The analogy is not valid… in this case there is no natural evolution like the cases you stated… going further with the analogy this is more like a genocide.

Genocide? For an application? Really?

And I think my analogy is valid — in both cases, Apple forced the evolution. It wasn’t natural. Plus Apple took a fair amount of criticism for these decisions, especially with the floppy drives.

And let’s be honest, does anyone really need an iPad or tablet device? Not really. But do these mobile devices represent a shift in how people access the Web? Yes.

Do I want my designs and the sites of my clients to be accessible on them? Absolutely. For me, that’s the bottom line.


If that’s the case then the article should not be BIASED and should only state that ‘Apple is NOT allowing Flash compatibility on their devices’. That’s it. But instead, it sounds like there’s a law introduced by the Interpol waiting to make its way to the constitution for W3C approval.

Read the title again, it says –

On the contrary I say, since EVERY other device on this planet does run flash, since the market share of the WORLD vs APPLE is a lot more,


See my point? Close this thread someone!


do you want your sites accessible? Yes, me too.
Do you have a technology other than Flash for certain uses? No.
Ipad traffic is relevant in this days? No.

Statistics in my site (based on 300.000 visits):

Android browser (PDA/Phone browser) = 10985 visits
Netscape = 5993 visits
IPhone (PDA/Phone browser) = 5003 visits.

Would be really helpful if David share his percentages since his site generate much more traffic.


With regards to the ‘Apple’s recent earnings report’ you mentioned, do you really really want to compare the earnings of –

Microsoft, Google, IBM, Dell, HP, Samsung, Motorola, Blackberry etc. to Apple’s?

Well, my employer uses Flash for a site designed before the prevalence of iPhones and iPads. The site’s redesign will, most likely, not have Flash. Please note all of the other scripted elements for the navigation where we didn’t use Flash.

Neil, may I know your traffic statistics by browser?

I bet your Ipad-Iphone users are less than 5% of your whole traffic.

You are using Flash in a wrong way because there are better alternatives, before and after Ipad-Iphone age. But for other tasks there are not a better alternatives… this is the point.

I have really liked the discussion here. I would still like to point out that Flash has been the pioneer in bringing multimedia to web. This is the gratitude we give? Moreover, Adobe continues to develop heavily on making Flash better. For example, making Flash much lighter, bringing 3D graphics, ability to view 720p HD video on mobile without lag on so on…

HTML5 standardizes what Flash has been doing all the time. I totally understand that Web wants several multimedia qualities to be open and standard, less reliance on plug-ins. However, as I see it, HTML5 is long way from what Flash is today. It takes much more resources from the system, they still have not decided what is the standard video codec. Does it make sense to have to make several versions of a video with different codec just so that it will play on everyone’s browser? Also, bringing new features to HTML5 is very slow. Take IE6 as an example.

Let me be clear. I think HTML5 is a natural step forward and necessary but the Web needs companies like Adobe who innovates new features. Without Flash the Web would be much less innovating and much slower in development.

Yes, you can make a single button mouse but I like a mouse with three buttons because it offers me more options…

No, I can’t release our traffic statistics. My point is that, while iPad and iPhone device traffic may be low NOW, we expect it to grow for ourselves and our clients. It’s similar to why we don’t recommend using image-based email; if images are blocked, the content isn’t read. Yeah, there are ways around that. But better to use copy-driven text with complementary images. Can Flash still be used in a limited basis? Sure. But going forward, we don’t see the need for Flash. Not for ourselves and not for our clients. The industry we serve doesn’t need it. As a designer, it will still be a tool in the drawer, but an increasingly dustier and unused one. Sorry, but I just think the future of web development will make Flash less and less relevant. I used to really enjoy working with Flash. But right now, and from now on, I can live, and work, without it.

Flash may not be available on iOS devices but it is available on other mobile/tablet devices. Unfortunately devs has to go back to days when certain content didn’t work on certain browsers and you had to create a bunch of fallback content and if…else statements so that it worked on everything. iOS may be the popular mobile/tablet device at the moment but it you want you content to be access by everyone you shouldn’t exclude the other devices. It sucks that we (devs) have to go back to creating fallback content but we have to play the cards that were dealt to us.

So do you think interactive applications are going to disappear from the web just because of Apple’s residual traffic?

As I stated some comments above, my current Iphone-Ipad traffic is under 1%, just a bit behind Netscape users.

What you guys don’t understand is that Flash is not a web development tool, it’s an interactive development tool and there are projects where no other alternative is possible…

@Sergio – “What you guys don’t understand is that Flash is not a web development tool, it’s an interactive development tool and there are projects where no other alternative is possible…”

Exactly, however the answer for Apple products is clearly the App Store. However you seem to not truly grasp that the main argument is not against web APPLICATIONS developed in Flash, but against web SITES developed in Flash (you’re clearly not alone there, tho).

What’s more, just because YOUR Ipad traffic is irrelevant doesn’t mean it will be irrelevant in other contexts.


my statistics are based in around 300.000 visits this year. I don’t have a big site but I think is representative enough.

The use of Ipad-Iphone in my site this year is around 0%.

Obviously if you are going to sell Apple products, this traffic could be important but for a mainstream sites, it’s just irrelevant… as important as Netscape users.

Regarding the uses of Flash: there are web based applications where you need interactivity… again… I never would design a mainstream website entirely in Flash… it’s just wrong… before and after Ipad.

But the title of this article says: Don’t build websites using Flash (I understand entirely or partially)… actually Ipad blocks every little piece of Flash…

In my opinion, a right title would be: don’t build websites using Flash if you target (the small group of) Ipad users… so obvious.


I agree too. David, I really think you need to change the title of this thread. It’s just too biased.

Atleast change it to something generic, ‘The Flash vs Apple debate’.

Else this thread will go on forever, unless that’s what you really want?

@Sergio and Nizam – Why should he change the title? Because you don’t agree with his opinion? Just something to think about…


Yes, the tone of the title is inappropriate. I’d opt for something much subtle than that considering there’ll always be opinions coming from either sides of the argument.

Flash-based websites are awful for SEO. It’s okay if you use some Flash elements, but having the whole thing in Flash is a big disadvantage. I imagine in the future either one of two things are likely to happen: there will be a version of Flash that can be indexed by search engines, or Flash will not be used as often. Or who knows, maybe there will always be a group of people who use Flash websites and don’t care about SEO.

Our web design company has long since told us to avoid allowing our customers using flash headers for the reason it puts people off when browsing.

Now all of our sites are being built using javascript instead.

Flash is a great tool. In essence, it’s taught me how to develop better JavaScript. Before I coded any HTML, CSS, or PHP I first drew in Flash. It’s amazingly powerful for interactive applications.

However, it should not be used as headlines, titles, or full Flash web sites. It should be used to enhance a web site with a Flash application, such as Google Maps.

For Steve Jobs to make a decision to take it away from its customers all together in its prime time is just wrong. It should still be made available to the customer. You don’t take away the bumper on a car because the brakes work. Android > Apple.

The one place in the world where flash websites are at a disadvantage is Africa. I am a web designer from Kenya and the biggest hurdle I face is when clients want animations and site intros on their website. The internet connection can be sometimes painfully slow. Some sites take more than 5 minutes to load the homepage. For me really, simplicity is the way to go.

I think that although it is not ideal, Flash offers a valuable and currently unmatched method of providing specialist types of content, to completely block or stop building for this platform while a viable alternative is not currently available is a step backwards!

I know HTML5 and CSS3 are coming leaps and bounds, but it is not ready YET!

Interesting discussion, however, I think a few other points can and should be made:

– While it is generally agreed that a website should be viewable on as many platforms as possible, this does not rule out a site design where Flash and non-Flash versions are built, and alternate content via re-direct or swfobject is used to gain the benefits of a Flash website while providing an alternate version for iOS devices, for example. Many HTML websites look horrible on my iPhone, so thinking in terms of alternate versions for mobile devices, etc. is a good thing.

– It is just as easy to create a website with bad HTML coding as it is to create one with bloated Flash content. In either case, reliability and compatibility issues can arise. Every project is different – and for some, a lightweight Flash website with external loading of elements, and a very simple level of content design can be created so that you have a very fast-loading, reliable Flash site.

– Arguing about the demise of Flash is sort of like saying that with more people buying electric cars and hybrids, we should close gas stations. The user-statistics of newer coding technologies still do not trump the installer-base and benefits of Flash, and campaigning against it won’t eliminate the current dependencies on this format or its usefulness. I build Flash websites for musicians and artists and others because of the benefits Flash has to offer; but I paid a design firm $10K to build my e-commerce site using HTML/PHP, simply because for that type of site, it was the better choice. Technologies evolve, but older technologies are still in use and often merit continued support.

1. Why would one buy a tablet or a phone that FAILS to show all websites?
2. Why couldn’t Steve Jobs DARE take Flash off all iMACS and Apple Notebooks?
3. Why couldn’t he DARE ban YouTube which is 100% Flash plugin from running on iPads, iPhones; whilst the latter is yet owned by Google his worst competitor.

When it comes to the tablet or phone which gives me the best for my buck in terms of accessibility to ALL WEBSITES that exist online, Apple IOS FAILS by 96+ million websites, over 1 million Virtual Tours, Games and Interactive sliders and banners that JQUERY/ JS has not been advanced to replace yet.

David, your argument is partly FLAWED just as Steve Job’s own thoughts on Flash was.
His disapproval of Flash was NOT technical but PURELY COMMERCIAL with a CAPITALIST (good) yet MONOPOLY(bad) agenda.
All the Technical reasons he stated at the time have all been proven false by Android, Playbook, Microsft, failing NOKIA and Motorolla phones and tablets.

I run my web studio in Toronto – Canada. I build both Flash and JQUERY/JS integrated Websites

Because of my ‘FREAKINESS’ to smart technology, I have iPad 2, just got my iPhone 4s (love it by the way), Dell Streak 7 phone and tablet, Galaxy Tab and Playbook (got it on sale for $199 at Walmart, Brampton)

All my Android and Blackberry platforms run as fast on Flash as they would with JQUERY.
Battery Power is no more affected/ effected on Androids and Playbooks than it would if I were playing a song or streaming live video via YouTube or locally on my iPad or iPhone.

Also iPad 2 streams a little bit static than Samsung Galaxy and even on the yet to be improved Playbook when it comes to some HEAVY JQuery tasks.
Now You can blame hosting servers and bugs but not when trusted web servers prove otherwise; sometimes (not all the time)

During a typical presentation to bid for web-projects I find myself using Galaxy or Dell Streak ( occasional back-up) more often.

Most questions and comparison made by my clients run from all types of competing websites built on both Flash and JQUERY/ JS Animation.

Apple has sold 15m iPads … VERY GOOD … I bought one too. But please don’t forget the over 100 million Android activations have been made after coming into the market almost 2 years later.

In that same LATE COMERS time, Android has an incredible 15 – 20 k more Free Apps than Apple. Same reason why Blackberry and NOKIA are considering Android market compliance on their OS.

You also acknowlegde that although Apple really whipped their butts because of starting early in the game, Android platforms are technically the fastest selling OS by ratio.


1. FLASH is here to stay whether Apple likes it or not.
2. You should ADMIT that the only smart OS in the world that is ANTI-FLASH is Apple.
3. All other Tablets are 100% FULL FLASH complaint. ASK YOURSELF WHY?

Also, Apple will start failing if they don’t embrace the same stance they rejected in the early 90’s that made them almost bankrupt. Why do you think Microsoft although struggling ins some areas is till a stronger BRAND than Apple. That’s because they have a universal compliance policy. Google is achieving this on the smart technology front using ANDROID. Facebook is about to do the same. Apple always starts FIRST but they historically finish BAD.


@NZ / Technically Android platforms are more effective, practical and useful than iPads, iPhones and iPod Touch.

They allow the user to browse EVERY WEBSITE online.
Apple smart devices fail to SHOW 96+ million websites PLUS flash elements in over 45million websites.

Why should the average Joe waste their money and buy these Apple products?

That is the point I want to make.
That is the AD Google, Microsoft, RIM, Motorolla etc. must run on TV.
” iPADs and iPHONEs FAIL to SHOW 96+ million websites …. FACT”

Apple is very EXCELLENT in suggestive advertisement. You go back into history a remember all the junk Apple has sold us until they become awesome in the Smart technology field. Apple has North America by the balls. They know what we want to see, hear and touch. They have one of the best Marketing Departments in Tech history and Yes they know how to sell.

If you are not tech savvy you would easily think that the iPad and iPhone are better than the rest. Practically, they are fail to show 96+ million businesses and products online.

That is the truth.

Thanks David for letting me use your space :-)

Purchase a product that doesn’t show the whole web and then blame it on the web rather than an inferior product.

Like I always say .. I love Apple products. I have all the Apple hand held devices for 2011. I am waiting in line on Rogers to purchase and LTE 4G iPad3 – 32 GIG.

However, Samsung Galaxy , HP, Playbook and most of the latest tablets are practically useful for me as a developer than the Stylish, popular, “fashion statement” Apple Tablets and phones.

I need my TABLETS and PHONES to show me EVERY SINGLE WEBSITE in the world like every laptop and desktop PC, Linux or MAC in the world does.

Why is this so freaking difficult for the folks at Apple to understand and grow some “balls” and do away with some of “WAR on Adobe” policies of the Late Steve Jobs.

By that argument and REALITY … iPhones, iPads, iPods Touch fail at almost 100 million websites and applications on the web…

I don’t know why the industry is scared to brand Apple tablets and phones useless on this front.

The idea that they want to bend the will of the public/ market to what they produce is why ANDROID is fast overtaking them on all fronts.

The iPAd3 will be a success … but 3 months from now watch the numbers on all Android Tablets sold … and they would have out-sold Apple IOS by 3 or 5 to 1.

Is there somebody at Apple who has balls to let Steve Jobs be buried with is Monopoly agenda.
I mean the guy was a good business guy ..

but there were times he was almost making decisions and behaving “bananas” – FACT
Read his book!

Our company built a flash website only a couple of years ago & it is no completely outdated & getting a much needed update.

It barely loads on a desktop PC or Mac never mind a mobile phone & most people will just lose interest after a minute or so. No matter how fancy a sit might look using Flash if it doesn’t load after a minute then I’m not interested & will probably move on. A lot of people’s attention spans seem to be going that way now so they have to be captured instantly as they don’t have the patience.

This is our website if you want to check out the Flash:

Chris, my Playbook and Galaxy Tab loads your site perfect just as my 5 PC’s and 2 Macs all via 3g and wireless.

I took a look at your site. It was built most probably following Action Script2.0 rules.

It does look OK .. but I probably know why it is loading so slow at times.
There are so many elements within the Scripting using AS2.0 that probably the designer did not take advantage of.

1. Things like Dynamic Device font plugins, rendering PNG images to low file sizes yet maintaining high resolutions whilst using smoothing tool. Swish-Max4 is perfect at that.

2. Using components for sound effects rather than loading sound on the timeline itself. If he were to script a component and iframe all sound effects from a folder on your hosting server .. each page will load as if the sound were not a part of the site yet plays perfectly well via the scripted component.

And then he could do the same for all image galleries.
That way your flash version of the site works just like J QUERY with an original file size below 500KB
Again, SwishMax4 is perfect at that.

This Facebook Flash iFrame I built using AS 2.0 3 years ago follows the same rule.

Every Flash web developer knows their “stuff” knows that due to changes in the source codes for current Chrome Browsers, IE and Firefox …. it is better to build Flash on the latest stable script Action Script 3.0

If your developer is able to script to Action Script 3.0 you should be 100% OK on PC’s and Macs


He can then use the SWF Object plugin to create an HTML5 or CMS version of your site so it automatically loads on all anti-flash devices. This plugin allows the device to automatically detect flash content and revert to ALTERNATIVE HTML content

I have an example of a DUMMY banner I am currently building for a client who instead on a Flash banner initially.
It is just a dummy but I know you can get my point.

If you have an iPad or iPhone and you go to the site below you will see a DUMMY banner in JQUERY.

But when you go on your PC/ MAc/ Playbook/ Android you will see the Flash Banner content.
SWF Objects fixes that easily.
Its the same reason why UFC banner is Flash on PC/Macs yet JQUERY on Ipads etc.

[link removed due to malware warning when clicked]

Chris, if the SADAFOODS link gives you a malware warning ..
please just delete your browser history and type in “SADA FOODS dot com”
I think this site “spams any strange url”


Thanks very much for your detailed reply, appreciate it.

Yeah we’ve had a few complaints about our website loading time & think it feels dated.

We are in the middle of putting a new site together so your tips will come in very very handy as we do so.

I’ll come back here & post the new site when it is ready & you can check it out & let me know what you think.

Thanks again.

@Chris: Anytime
I only wanted you to know that because of SWF Alternative HTML content for flash you can still have a regular Flash website and an HTML5 version. Also if you make your Flash Text content Dynamic it easily caches on Google because of the ActionScript platform.

YouTube follows the same rule on iPads, iPhones, Windows 8 mobile versions. Alternative HTML videos in place of Flash videos on the regular YouTube site.

Anyway … thanks for your response

@chirmer: It is OK to dump flash when there is a full and stable replacement for it. The HTML5 audio and video tag features cannot do the same as Flash can do. Also the standard is not finished yet (it is 2012 for sake) and all browser has an own implementation of the standard especially the audio and video tag. For example you cannot adjust the volume or mute the sound on iOS, sick right? For example the audio tag is a nightmare to use with javascript.

The customer part is a bullshit part and told to you by Apple itself, mr Apple Believer. You said that they want to create a stable product. Let me tell you that Apple Safari is not a stable product on iOS. Very often when a site use allot of/rely on javascript the browser crash without any notice to it’s user.

Userfriendly? duh! And also, when you want to install another browser it doesn’t make sense because it is required to use the crappy Webkit engine build into iOS. Apple don’t allow any third party implementation. So if a site is not working on iOS (because Safari fails) you cannot do anything else than wondering why it is not working. No message, no second opinion, no choice.

Apple want to beat competition even when it is better, that’s all and with their own rules. Having a solution without plug-ins is great but when there is no good and stable alternative it stinks. Apple got there own solutions to play audio and video (iPod, QuickTime) and they preffer to use that. Apple introduces webapps but can compete with the app market if these were very good in playing video and audio. No, that is not want Apple wants. If you want to build an app you have to pay for it. Expensive Developers Program and you will need a Mac to compile it and after that 30% profits.

Apple is a company that is not fear, not open, a moneysqueezer to the max and does not allow any freedom. Apple tells you what you allow to use, for the users and the developers. It is scary.

Forgot something to say. When you can use flash in webapps, you can build apps that are approx. the same as native apps. Apple don’t want that because of the appstore. And, when you using flash, they cannot track what is happening because it is a thirdparty plug-in, they want full control! also very scary.

As a web design and development company we decided that flash was dead to us due to the mobile and responsive marketplace. We believe there is still a place for flash but even our clients’ skyscraper ads and banners have been ditched due to the compatibility with devices.

For a good user interface Flash is a nice option. But if we want to make the site SEO friendly, Flash should be avoided because sites sometimes take more time to load, the user closes them, and we lose visitors with slow internet connections.

Share a thought