• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Microsoft is enabling Flash to run on by default on Windows 8/RT

Status
Not open for further replies.

MCD

Junior Member
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2013/03/11/flash-in-windows-8.aspx

Basically the white list blocks some websites that are not compatible yet instead of adding some websites and blocking everything else.

Starting tomorrow, we are updating Internet Explorer 10 in Windows 8 and Windows RT to enable Flash content to run by default. On Windows 8, all Flash content continues to be enabled for IE on the desktop.

As we have seen through testing over the past several months, the vast majority of sites with Flash content are now compatible with the Windows experience for touch, performance, and battery life. With this update, the curated Compatibility View (CV) list blocks Flash content in the small number of sites that are still incompatible with the Windows experience for touch or that depend on other plug-ins.

We believe having more sites “just work” in IE10 improves the experience for consumers, businesses, and developers. As a practical matter, the primary device you walk around with should give you access to all the Web content on the sites you rely on. Otherwise, the device is just a companion to a PC. Because some popular Web sites require Adobe Flash and do not offer HTML5 alternatives, Adobe and Microsoft continue to work together closely to deliver a Flash Player optimized for the Windows experience.
 
I wonder if this will lead to Flash coming to Android again, and perhaps finally on iOS (especially without Steve Jobs there)? Sounds like it'd be better if everything moved to HTML5 though, although Flash support would be good for older sites at least.
 
No. We must move forward, not backward.

Is it really moving forward to block things you don't like?

Why not just support what's out there until the content providers get their act together? Computing is about being open and compatible. Blocking flash on principle is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Have you seen an Html5 content authoring suite that provides all the functionality that flash currently does? I haven't. (I'm no web developer though.) It seems like Flash's Html5 export is one of the better packages going at the moment.
 
I wonder if this will lead to Flash coming to Android again, and perhaps finally on iOS (especially without Steve Jobs there)? Sounds like it'd be better if everything moved to HTML5 though, although Flash support would be good for older sites at least.
Windows doesn't have the power to bring back flash on mobile when google and apple are against it, their mobile marketshare is nonexistent.
 
Windows doesn't have the power to bring back flash on mobile when google and apple are against it, their mobile marketshare is nonexistent.
I was thinking more that a push to actually make it efficent for mobile use makes it relevant to add back to Android and to iOS at all. I don't expect Windows to accomplish this through marketshare alone, not unless you count flash on desktop/laptop computers and that's always been a factor anyway.
 
I was thinking more that a push to actually make it efficent for mobile use makes it relevant to add back to Android and to iOS at all. I don't expect Windows to accomplish this through marketshare alone, not unless you count flash on desktop/laptop computers and that's always been a factor anyway.
Well when adobe themselves says mobile flash is dead and they will no longer release the software I don't see how it is going anywhere.
 
i wonder if Adobe's interested in mobile flash again now that processing power has been so froggy.

anyway...


SrEKMJM.png
 
So here's the deal. Flash isn't coming back, but it's not going away.

Lots of sites use flash as a way of delivering DRM locked video. Saving a flash stream requires a lot more than just right clicking the video. It's also used widely to inject ads and other media. This is the backbone of web video as a business.

HTML doesn't really provide that support, or at least it didn't. Newest versions of Chrome (like 2 weeks old) have support for encrypted media streams. This is very, very new and not an actual standard, just a proposal and is only used by Netflix. And while it is an interesting step one could ask whether or not it violates the principles of the web as an open platform and whether or not an open source browser like Chrome can even guarantee protection anyway. I know Mozilla was not keen on the proposal.

So we're kinda stuck in the this awkward situation. We have flash now, we need something better but we're stuck with it for the foreseeable future.
 
So here's the deal. Flash isn't coming back, but it's not going away.

Lots of sites use flash as a way of delivering DRM locked video. Saving a flash stream requires a lot more than just right clicking the video. It's also used widely to inject ads and other media. This is the backbone of web video as a business.

HTML doesn't really provide that support, or at least it didn't. Newest versions of Chrome (like 2 weeks old) have support for encrypted media streams. This is very, very new and not an actual standard, just a proposal and is only used by Netflix. And while it is an interesting step one could ask whether or not it violates the principles of the web as an open platform and whether or not an open source browser like Chrome can even guarantee protection anyway. I know Mozilla was not keen on the proposal.

So we're kinda stuck in the this awkward situation. We have flash now, we need something better but we're stuck with it for the foreseeable future.
the REAL problem is these big media companies want copy protection on video when people who want to pirate CAN JUST GET THE PIRATED VERSION and the copy protection does nothing except annoy legitimate users.
 
So here's the deal. Flash isn't coming back, but it's not going away.

Lots of sites use flash as a way of delivering DRM locked video. Saving a flash stream requires a lot more than just right clicking the video. It's also used widely to inject ads and other media. This is the backbone of web video as a business.

HTML doesn't really provide that support, or at least it didn't. Newest versions of Chrome (like 2 weeks old) have support for encrypted media streams. This is very, very new and not an actual standard, just a proposal and is only used by Netflix. And while it is an interesting step one could ask whether or not it violates the principles of the web as an open platform and whether or not an open source browser like Chrome can even guarantee protection anyway. I know Mozilla was not keen on the proposal.

So we're kinda stuck in the this awkward situation. We have flash now, we need something better but we're stuck with it for the foreseeable future.
Netflix uses silver light, at least on pc. I dont see the problem with flash on desktop, its shit on mobile.
 
the REAL problem is these big media companies want copy protection on video when people who want to pirate CAN JUST GET THE PIRATED VERSION and the copy protection does nothing except annoy legitimate users.

Piracy is always an alternative, mostly, but an open media stream does little to discourage that. Streaming video which makes up most web video is a fair bit different. The performance offered by a service like Netflix is not easily emulated via piracy but also people gravitate towards these services precisely because they are instant and because the DRM is unobtrusive. And typical TV content served through the web (MTV, TBS etc.) is often free. This is a pretty petty argument given the circumstances, a quick look for torrents of House of Cards shows a webrip in the wrong aspect ratio which people will pirate to avoid paying $8. And this exists on a service that works on every device under the sun and DRM which is virtually transparent to users. The barrier doesn't get much lower sans giving it away. There will always be those people.

Netflix uses silver light, at least on pc. I dont see the problem with flash on desktop, its shit on mobile.

I think they're moving over to encrypted media streams in Chrome. At least on Samsung Chromebooks which were a facilitator of the move that's how it's served.
 
Flash is no different than running apps, they're both closed ecosystems. I don't give a shit personally as full flash sites are almost all gone now.
 
No. We must move forward, not backward.

tell me when i can watch twitch,justin,stickam(dead), blogtv and countless other streaming sites in html5 and get back to me

flash is still omnipresent
getting rid of it only pisses me off

untill html5 is a legit replacement it can gtfo
 
tell me when i can watch twitch,justin,stickam(dead), blogtv and countless other streaming sites in html5 and get back to me

flash is still omnipresent
getting rid of it only pisses me off

untill html5 is a legit replacement it can gtfo

Twitch and Justin both have apps, and I've watched twitch streams in mobile chrome before
 
If I could opt completely out of flash, I would. People should be blaming the content providers instead of the browser makers.
 
Does this mean we still need to install flash if we use another browser?
To me IE has always just been a Firefox downloader tool which I only really use once.
 
Does this mean we still need to install flash if we use another browser?
To me IE has always just been a Firefox downloader tool which I only really use once.

I don't understand that at all. I find Internet Explorer to be 2nd best to only Chrome on my desktop and Safari on my macbook.
 
I wonder if this will lead to Flash coming to Android again, and perhaps finally on iOS (especially without Steve Jobs there)? Sounds like it'd be better if everything moved to HTML5 though, although Flash support would be good for older sites at least.
Flash on mobile platforms through Air executables has seen some success, so I think that's there to stay. Some very nicely made games are made that way, and it works well with GPU 3D support etc. Browser plugin on mobile made little sense in the first place, so I doubt that's ever coming back.

No. We must move forward, not backward.
If you're making the browser game today, Flash is IMO still the best option. There's been a lot of evolution of what it can do in terms of GPU support, and various libraries for graphic, physics and structure that help out with game making too.
 
Microsoft skating to the where the puck is going, again. Always ahead of the curve.

No, they are giving users who purchased their products full web access. Hell, most html5 sites didn't even recognize ie10 to enable html 5 support so fuck em. Thanks, MS.
 
Flash on mobile platforms through Air executables has seen some success, so I think that's there to stay. Some very nicely made games are made that way, and it works well with GPU 3D support etc. Browser plugin on mobile made little sense in the first place, so I doubt that's ever coming back.

I've fought long running battles to get my application that runs perfectly in Air to run on iOS and the most infuriating thing is there's no way to tell what's wrong with it. For now I'll just stick with apps that run native on iOS until they improve it.

If you're making the browser game today, Flash is IMO still the best option. There's been a lot of evolution of what it can do in terms of GPU support, and various libraries for graphic, physics and structure that help out with game making too.

I agree Flash is a great platform for rich internet apps today, especially if you want to get something working for desktops without worrying much about compatibility.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom