Talk:Criticism of Adobe Flash

This article was nominated for deletion on 29 December 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to Adobe Flash.

Flash blocking software

I think the main problem with Flash is that most people will want to block it. Since many people would not see the Flash contents, no web designer would put any important information in a Flash animation. This leads to a simple rule, for both web designers and users: Flash = Spam. Then the sooner the world will exterminate the Flash threat the better.

I suggest a section be added for Flash blockers. There is one very good for FireFox (FlashBlock), but for Internet Explorer there exist some but not open source, and some of them are Trojan horses. A good discussion of open-source Flash blockers would be very useful and instructive.

Gelbukh (talk) 18:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You exaggerate quite a bit there... I think you would find "most people" would not choose to forgo YouTube and NewGrounds and other popular Flash-based websites. Some guy (talk) 08:21, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that flash contents is useful on SPECIFIC sites that use it for specific purpose (and actually I think YouTube could be based on another platform if Flash is finally extreminated). On most other sites, Flash = SPAM. Technically, FlashBlock add-on to FireFox allows a whitelist of sites where the user might want to enable the Flash content (like YouTube) but to block the Flash content on the vast majority of sites -- precisely as a spam filter does with email. Gelbukh (talk) 22:30, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cost

hey guys,

just wondrin why my edit was decheated?

I said that another criticism of flash is its huge cost.

US$600 is a lot of money to be paying for a computer programme. i mean seriously. Am i the only one who feels this way?

Yes, but since it's easy to find serials and cracks... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.118.180.111 (talk) 12:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC) half a grand for one program? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feature124 (talk • contribs) 10:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative platforms

Until there is a W3C standard for a truly open Director/Shockwave/Flash, what alternatives are available?

Is client-side Java still practiced? Something needs to run on legacy hardware as well as MID (mobile internet devices). Try finding a 64-bit flash plugin for firefox, or a PPC version of the flash player for a PPC Linux, and you'll realize how difficult this is. Wikip rhyre (talk) 00:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flash support on non-x86

Flash support on ARM

I am confused. Flash is supported on various devices of all sizes. I have a Nokia 770 Internet Tablet which is Linux and ARM based and has Flash support.--65.241.15.227 (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

N770, 800 and 810 are the ONLY ARM devices I know of that run Flash. Period.--Kozuch (talk) 00:25, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flash support on PPC

What is the meaning of "Since Adobe has declined to support the PowerPC architecture, the latest Flash fails not only for Linux, but also for Sony Playstation 3"? That sentence sounds completely weird to me, since a) Flash is available for PowerPC Macs, b) the term Linux (without qualifiers) typically stands for an intel x86 OS and c) because the PS3's Cell is somewhat related to PowerPCs but certainly not compatible. --Repetition (talk) 04:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a petition on a Yellow-Dog Linux related site.