According to Steve Jobs sycophants the answer would seem to be "no".
I haven't read Job's detailed statement about it so I don't know if he is just
talking about the Flash Player as a plugin technology or Flash in general as
an interactive element of web pages (I am assuming the SWF files will still run in HTML5 using the <video> tag.)

JavaScript gurus will be quick to add that almost everything you can do in Flash you can also do with JavaScript libraries.
e.g. http://processingjs.org/
http://quasipartikel.at/tween/

I would say three things in defense of Flash.
1) Yes, you might be able to do all those things with javascript libraries, but for most rank and file web designers jQuery is the one an only library they use. So unless jQuery assimilates some of the advanced shape tweening functions of other libraries I would say the point is invalid.

2) For visually oriented people (as most designers tend to be) the Flash timeline still offers a much more intuitive way of working than coding loops and conditional statements in JavaScript.

3) I've not done it but apparently Flash can be exported into HTML5/XML/Javascript anyway. So as a development environment it still works. Interesting read here http://www.killersites.com/blog/2010...he-last-flash/


Whether or not websites actually NEED advanced animation features is another question. But I often see project briefs where the client is looking for "advanced interactive features" which is a euphemism for bright shiny things that move. So if you don't add the eye candy, you don't get the work

Originally Posted by TWD

I am assuming the SWF files will still run in HTML5 using the <video> tag.

Nope. SWF is a proprietary format owned by Adobe. There's no way they'll license browsers to run it without using a Flash player.

Flash will still be around for a few years to come, though it probably has a limited shelf life and technology marches on.

If you feel inclined to learn it then go for it and make hay while the sun shines

Adobe is going to fight tooth and nail to keep it on the shelf though. It's been a very profitable technology for them. I wouldn't be surprised to see it morph into something that is not just a web technology, just like Java did. Not that that's an exact parallel. I don't think we'll see it used as a server-side language for example, it's just too geared toward the display side of things.

Not half will they fight! I think you're right in thinking they will try to adapt/evolve the technology, it's too much of cash cow not to.

Personally I think Flash was the technology of the noughties, and javascript will gradually replace it over the next decade, that's where my 10p is anyway

I wouldn't give much merit to anything apple or adobe says; they both have their own agenda.

HTML5 replaces some of the functionality of flash, but not all. Sites like youtube are migrating toward HTML5 because it is sufficient for their needs. This isn't true in other cases however.

What I might consider doing if I were Adobe is to keep the current Flash syntax but have it compile to HTML5 for the features that overlap and to remain as a plugin for the small subset of features that HTML5 can't handle. It would be similar in theory to what Facebook did to PHP through HipHop. Of course, that's all easier said than done.

Originally Posted by NullPointer

Sites like youtube are migrating toward HTML5 because it is sufficient for their needs.

I wouldn't call it a migration just yet. It's more like they're choosing to support the iPhone.

Doesnt the "Flash is dead" argument largely rest on the assumption
that Apple will dominate the mobile web scene?

Yet according to some reports, Google Android (which DOES support Flash) is starting to outsell Apple in the US.
http://www.killersites.com/blog/2010...flashless-***/

Originally Posted by TWD

Google Android (which DOES support Flash)

Actually Android doesn't fully support Flash yet, and I'm not quite sure it's even been released on Android yet. And from what I read, most current Android phones won't have Flash on them, because Flash is simply too slow and heavy for most mobile phones.

Originally Posted by wayfarer07

Actually Android doesn't fully support Flash yet, and I'm not quite sure it's even been released on Android yet. And from what I read, most current Android phones won't have Flash on them, because Flash is simply too slow and heavy for most mobile phones.

Well at least some of them are and Moores Law suggests it wont be long
before all of them do.
http://tinyurl.com/3ydwekl

Flash will die in long run, but in next 2-3 years (or even more) you can still make big money (2-3 times what an average PHP or JS progger gets), if you know AS2/AS3.

Also - AS and JS are based on the same format, so when flash will die - you can happily move to JS app creation.

Personally, I hate websites with flash, although I like some small games.
For web, Javascript/JQuery are way better for animations...

Yes, you might be able to do all those things with java script libraries, but for most rank and file web designers jQuery is the one an only library they use. So unless jQuery assimilates some of the advanced shape twining functions of other libraries I would say the point is invalid.

fake sig spam removed

Originally Posted by scoott271

Yes, you might be able to do all those things with java script libraries, but for most rank and file web designers jQuery is the one an only library they use. So unless jQuery assimilates some of the advanced shape twining functions of other libraries I would say the point is invalid.
removed

Agree.