YouTube Ditches Flash For HTML5 Video By Default 225
An anonymous reader writes: YouTube today announced it has finally stopped using Adobe Flash by default. The site now uses its HTML5 video player by default in Google's Chrome, Microsoft's IE11, Apple's Safari 8, and in beta versions of Mozilla's Firefox browser. At the same time, YouTube is now also defaulting to its HTML5 player on the web. In fact, the company is deprecating the "old style" Flash object embeds and its Flash API, pointing users to the iFrame API instead, since the latter can adapt depending on the device and browser you're using.
Now if only... (Score:5, Informative)
Now if only Bell Media/CTV here in Canada would do the same. They are the ONLY family of websites I know of that won't work with the Linux versions of Flash, complaining that you need an update because they check for the WINDOWS version numbers.
Re:Now if only... (Score:5, Informative)
I had that issue with Pogo Srabble, there are a few work arounds:
1. Use a Hex editor and edit the Version number to one the site likes
2. Use FreshPlayerPlugin with the Chromium version of Flash. That really does work.
3. Use Google Chrome/Chromium.
About D%^& time. (Score:2)
Now if google would just announce no more flash allowed in ads, we'd be set.
Re:About D%^& time. (Score:5, Informative)
> Now if google would just announce no more flash allowed in ads, we'd be set.
If you are using Chrome you can set "Click to play" policy for all plugins in chrome://settings/content - as result you won't see any Flash ads (or any other plugins) without clicking on the placeholder. This way you get rid of Flash ads and it is also way more secure to just do not run plugins if you don't explicitly want to. You can also turn on plugins on a white list per site basis.
Mod parent up (Score:2)
Cause I got no points and that's a handy tip!
-Rick
Re: (Score:2)
I hereby nominate you for sainthood.
Re: (Score:3)
Now if google would just announce no more flash allowed in ads, we'd be set.
Why would you willingly watch ads?
Re: (Score:2)
Now if google would just announce no more flash allowed in ads, we'd be set.
Since I don't have Flash installed, I've been delighted that so many ads are Flash-based.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably because partner videos and claimed videos tend to use Flash even on PCs set to use HTML5.
Re: (Score:2)
"Forcing" in what way? For me, only recently did Firefox start allowing the HTML5 player for videos that roll ads.
Ads (Score:2)
Music Key (Score:2)
That depends. Do you live in a country where Google's Music Key service is available?
Re: (Score:3)
Ads are actually coming from Google's ContentID. ContentID scans uploaded media against signatures. The signatures are of licensed artwork like f.e. "Rick Astley - Never Gonna Give You Up" - so if you are Rick Astley and upload your signature video to Google then you can set policy if somebody f.e. posts video in which the licensed artwork is used and ContentID matches it. The policy can be AFAIK to: just inform you about match but do nothing; block the content entirely or display an ad before the content -
Re:Ads (Score:4, Insightful)
All I care about is can we lose the ads?
Actually this is going to make things worse.
When the annoying, music playing, flashing punch the monkey ads were in flash, it was trivial to block them using something like flashblock because you simply stopped the plugin from running.
Now adblockers are going to have to parse the code making it very easy for ads to avoid detection and masquerade as content.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes
https://adblockplus.org/ [adblockplus.org]
flash updates (Score:5, Funny)
But, but, who is going to remind me every 36 hours that a new version of flash I need to download (along with crapware) is available?
Re:flash updates (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
How will I be able to block HTML5 videos like Flash videos? :(
Re: (Score:2)
On a more serious note: Just use Chrome for all things Flash. I use Firefox for everything else, but when I need Flash, I fire up Chrome...
Now just bring back (Score:2)
channel customization to remove the bland look like it is now.
3, 2, 1... (Score:5, Interesting)
Just uninstalled Flash minutes ago. I'd been thinking about it for a while, but this pushed me to take action.
Now if I run into any site that requires it, I'll just go away.
Re: (Score:2)
I have both flash and java turned off. It's really surprising how much faster web pages load without all those autoplay ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I've been waiting for YouTube to drop Flash (and for Firefox to get up to speed with other browsers in terms of HTML5 video playback). I've avoided installing Java if I don't have anything that uses it (if only LibreOffice didn't use Java; alas!), I don't have Adobe Reader installed (previously there was Foxit, and now there's pdf.js in Firefox), and now I'm going to hold the same policy for Flash.
Flash (and by extension Shockwave) had their time as an extension to interactive multimedia back in the
So they've finally fixed Pause & Resume? (Score:5, Interesting)
1) lose sync, or just stop loading,
2) wouldn't let you pause/resume, and
3) didn't properly cache so you could "rewind" without streaming (download the same bits) again.
Or is YouTube yet another site that's now "Best Viewed in Chrome" (TM) ?
Re:So they've finally fixed Pause & Resume? (Score:4, Insightful)
No, this is Google we're talking about here.
Fantastic Ideas, Half-Assed Implementation, Terrible Follow-Thru, Limited Product Lifetime.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I dunno, the HTML5 feature in my Chrome is so CPU intensive that html5 video stops & stutters constantly. I had to disable html5 in Chrome just to be able to use the utoobz HTML5 isn't old-hardware-friendly. Nevermind that Google keeps taking the useful (for me) features out of chrome.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Using Chrome latest here.
Why??
Anything like Flashblock for HTML5? (Score:2)
Re:Anything like Flashblock for HTML5? (Score:5, Informative)
https://chrome.google.com/webs... [google.com]
Magic Actions for YouTube
Check box the following:
Stop Autoplay
Don't stop when in a playlist
Speed Booster - Better video preloading / buffering
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
create a playlist? Some of us are not logged in to youtube.
Firefox (Score:3)
The site now uses its HTML5 video player by default in ............... beta versions of Mozilla's Firefox browser.
So if one is using FireFox, does YouTube work w/o Flash? I thought it was stuck on the WebM vs Ogg Theora debate, which was why as far as YouTube went, FireFox had no option but to do Flash.
On a different note, how is GNU's GNASH?
Re: (Score:2)
I've been using HTML5 w/Firefox for a while now, and I also have Flashblock, which I have to click first to get the vids to play (despite their caching, which gets discarded upon clicking the flash to play).
Re: (Score:2)
Though it may not be using mp4, but rather webm, if you install the wonderful YouTube central add-on in Firefox, you can have it force HTML5 player. Seems to work but playback doesn't seem as smooth as with flash, ironically.
Come again? (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean the web you browse with Google's Chrome, Microsoft's IE11, Apple's Safari 8, and in beta versions of Mozilla's Firefox?
Am I missing something here, or are these sentences completely redundant?
Re: (Score:2)
YouTube = youtube.com
"Player on the Web" = embedded YouTube videos on non-youtube.com web pages.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the web you browse with Google's Chrome, Microsoft's IE11, Apple's Safari 8, and in beta versions of Mozilla's Firefox? Am I missing something here, or are these sentences completely redundant?
Its that dept of redundancy dept thing.
Also uses Media Source Extensions by default (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless its using binary encryption or codec bits, it should be possible to just modify the browser code (of Chromium, Firefox or whatever) to save the video file as it gets passed to the video decoder code.
Why Safari 8? (Score:2)
If I switch my user agent to "iPad", the videos play just fine in Safari 7 too.
Adobe has been prepping for this (Score:2)
They're concentrating on the other web formats it seems. Someone even created a
Photoshop, Lightroom, Premiere, After Effects and Audition being the ones
WebM/VP8 default? (Score:2)
The only reason Im using Flash on YT is Google insistence on forcing VP8 on my old Core2 laptop (intel GPU means no hardware video accel).
h.264 with mplayer plays perfectly in 1080p
h.264 with flash plays perfectly in 720p
VP8 with HTML5 stutters in 720p, and still drops frames in 640x480
If/when they finally remove Flash option I will be forced to script direct mplayer streaming of mp4 files from YT server bypassing their player altogether.
this is what i got (Score:2)
Yay! (Score:2)
Shitty video streaming for everyone whether you like it or not! Hurrah!!!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Without Flash, what's the preferred way to deploy vector animations of the sort seen on Homestar Runner, Weebl's Stuff, Newgrounds, Dagobah, and Albino Blacksheep, without bloating them by a factor of 10 by rendering them to WebM?
Re: Finaly. (Score:5, Interesting)
Javascript and SVG. How good the authoring applications are for them, on the other hand, I am not sure. Flash, may still have the better authoring tools?
Re: (Score:2)
Creative Butt (Score:2)
Edge Animate exists, but you can't buy it. You have to rent it on Creative Butt [mozilla.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Simple, when the user clicks the url, the browser opens the appropriate application for the urltype. That's how it should be anyway.
Provided such an app exists (Score:2)
when the user clicks the url, the browser opens the appropriate application for the urltype.
Which means "the appropriate application for the urltype" needs to exist for the user's platform. Not everyone wants to have to make 14 different apps for 14 different platforms, not to mention that several platforms require a long and involved developer pre-approval process. For example, the Flash Lite player in Internet Channel was the only publicly available game development environment for Wii before that console was cracked.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem really isn't and hasn't ever been animation sites. The problem is that Flash has often been used where it doesn't belong; forms on business sites, ENTIRE web sites built using flash so you cannot bookmark a page, and stuff like that, and Flash doesn't work particularly well on touch screens. Like BLINK, Flash has been used and abused to the point where it is an abomination.
Flash vs. HTML5 and onmouseover are separate (Score:2)
Flash doesn't work particularly well on touch screens.
Neither does HTML5 if you abuse onmouseover. The lack of hover is completely orthogonal to the SWF vs. HTML debate.
Re: (Score:2)
Without Flash, what's the preferred way to deploy vector animations of the sort seen on Homestar Runner, Weebl's Stuff, Newgrounds, Dagobah, and Albino Blacksheep, without bloating them by a factor of 10 by rendering them to WebM?
Animated SVG for the simpler stuff, HTML5 canvas with JavaScript for more complicated animations.
Authoring SVG and canvas animations (Score:2)
Animated SVG for the simpler stuff, HTML5 canvas with JavaScript for more complicated animations.
So what tools would you recommend for building these without, say, having to type all the (x, y) coordinates into a script file? I haven't seen any animation stuff in Inkscape, unless there was some recent huge update of which I'm not aware.
Re: (Score:2)
Otherwise, how are we supposed to show all the crappy Flash animations of the turn of the millenium to future generations?
By emulating Flash Player 11.2 for Linux in a PC emulator perhaps?
Describe the goal, not the step (Score:3)
Don't just pretend that your question was always "What authoring tools do I have?" when your question WAS "What do I use instead?".
I was trying to avoid causing the XY problem [stackexchange.com] by asking for tools to perform a step toward the wrong goal [catb.org]. Asking "What are usable authoring tools for animated SVG?" isn't helpful when animated SVG itself isn't a viable technology. So instead, I first asked for the right goal (what tech) and followed up by asking for the right step (what authoring tools). My question in full could have been phrased more formally as follows: "What is the most viable technology to replace SWF, and what are usable authoring too
Re: (Score:2)
Sprite tools could still help replace SWF (Score:2)
A lot of Flash animations are likewise sprite-based. Do you know of any good timeline-based sprite animation editors for DHTML or HTML5 Canvas?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The sites the parent mentioned are all based around animated Flash videos. That's the draw, not some silly menu stuff. Whether you find those sites annoying, though, is up to you.
Which better platform for vector animation? (Score:2)
Still, there's no reason you can't do stuff like that on better, more secure platforms.
In theory, I agree. But in practice, which "better, more secure platforms" for authoring and presenting vector animation on the web would you recommend? And how should we convince contributors to the aforementioned sites to remake their works using the new tech?
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, I've never heard of any of those websites.
Maybe you're outside of the general demographic that they served. 10-15 years ago, there were few people that I knew between 10 and 20 years of age that didn't visit one or more of those sites occasionally, or at least know of them. In some ways, they filled similar niches to what Youtube videos and smartphone games do now, but in a lower-bandwidth, resolution/device-independent way.
Many of the non-interactive videos can be found on Youtube now, rendered into raster video from the original vector source fi
Mobile game control on flat glass (Score:3)
without bloating them by a factor of 10 by rendering them to WebM?
Many of the non-interactive videos can be found on Youtube now
That's what I was trying to avoid.
Similarly, most of the game concepts have been replicated in one way or another to various mobile devices.
Many of the mouse-based ones have. But the keyboard-based ones, like the falling object parkour game Tetris'd [newgrounds.com], wouldn't port very well to an input device that's a flat sheet of glass. I haven't seen a smartphone with a built-in gamepad other than perhaps the outdated, overpriced Xperia Play.
Re: (Score:2)
Flash runs on PCs that can't run WebGL (Score:3)
I go to get.webgl.org using Firefox 35.0.1 on a laptop with an Intel IGP and all I get is "Hmm. While your browser seems to support WebGL, it is disabled or unavailable. If possible, please ensure that you are running the latest drivers for your video card." Badgers [weebls-stuff.com], on the other hand, still plays perfectly.
Don't use WebGL. Use what instead? (Score:2)
You appear to claim that both WebGL and Flash are "a giant security hole [that] should be avoided like the plague". If this is true, then which technology should be used instead for two- and three-dimensional vector animation?
Yay exposed and buggy interpreters.
I have the feeling you're about to say "native code". The problem is that native code all too often ends up being made for a platform other than the ones you have available to you.
Re: (Score:2)
what's the preferred way to deploy vector animations
HTML5 could include vector graphics on a canvas
Thank you. Now a follow-up question: Are there any good authoring tools for HTML5 canvas animations that aren't pay-per-month? If so, which?
Re: (Score:3)
Better question.
Who cares?
Re:Adobe (Score:5, Insightful)
I care. The death of Flash will be celebrated by many. Once YouTube stops using it there will be no reason to even install it any more. No more annoying updates, no more vulnerabilities.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Adobe (Score:5, Insightful)
There's still one: porn.
Re: (Score:3)
What porn site uses Flash still? The biggest ones all switched to HTML5 compatible some time ago.
Re: (Score:2)
xhamster
xvideos
cam4
Re:Adobe (Score:4, Insightful)
Porn and girlfriends / boyfriends are not mutually exclusive. Because, y'know, they are people too and might not want to exist simply to replace porn whenever you are in the mood.
Re: Adobe (Score:3, Insightful)
You comment that the parent is narrow minded and yet your view is equally narrow minded. I'm happily married (10 years now), together 17 years. I enjoyed porn before my marriage, and still enjoy it during my marriage. My wife enjoys it too, often times she'll watch it without me. We have an amazing sex life, but there is no reason that enjoyment of porn can't be a part of that. It provides ideas, fantasy, additional stimulation, an element of "dirtyness" and other elements that should always be welcome in a
Re: (Score:2)
And Adobe will become a distant memory. A company that was once on top but failed to keep innovating and fell into irrelevance along with RIM, Compaq, DEC, and the rest...
Re:Adobe (Score:5, Informative)
Anyone dumb enough to depend on cloud services for critical workflow deserves what they get.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The files "in the cloud" are no longer compatible with previous versions. Adobe has stated that their cloud software can "export" to older version of Adobe products (at least for now) but newer features may not be included. This practically means that if you have the CC files and Adobe fails to exist and you haven't exported to older versions, you're SOL.
The same goes for most cloud-based apps including Office, Google Docs etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I tested it and it works. Using the latest CC photoshop i created a file, saved to my desktop and transfered it over to a computer with CS5 on it. Opened up right away. I didnt do any export on the original file, just saved as psd.
Can you link to an article with Adobe stating this?
Re: (Score:2)
http://helpx.adobe.com/creativ... [adobe.com]
New features added to the desktop applications after CS6 may not be supported in the exported file, or by the CS6 application.
Re: (Score:2)
The CC files in newer versions cannot be opened, they're in "teh clowd" after all. They need to be 'exported' according to Adobe's documentation. The problem is when Adobe leaves town and your CC files are in "the cloud" and you've been using the product for a few years, how are you going to export them and subsequently import them in other programs.
Re: (Score:2)
In Photoshop, you can still save back to Photoshop version 3 (that would be 11 versions back). When you do, it flattens any features you may have used that aren't supported in the older versions, but you can still open and modify the files.
At this point, I'm not very concerned with it. 99% of the features are still compatible with CS6, which is the last stand-alone version.
Re: (Score:3)
Adobe has a lot of products other than Flash. The writing has been on the wall for a long time. Flash is taking a long time to die, but Adobe must surely see that the future is in other technologies. They still have their Creative Cloud stuff, web analytics, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
their IDEs (revenue) switching to HTML5 (Score:5, Informative)
Adobe doesn't sell the plugin, they sell their development tools. Those development tools are slowly being switched to html5, so Adobe's customers can continue to use them as always.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They have photoshop, which is widely used worldwide by basically everyone involved with any sort of visual media.
And also they're walking on the HTML5 visual editors territory.
Re: (Score:3)
Adobe never made money off Flash Player - they made money from popular content creation tools which can now export to HTML5
Mainly correct, and worth pointing out. That said, I'm sure they made quite a few quid through their tie-up with McAfee, weaselling their trial crapware onto people's systems with that oh-so-generous prechecked "yes" box on the Flash Player installer.
Re: (Score:2)
That paid for the FP engineering and QA team. The entire project was pretty much revenue neutral -- and the CC apps (like Flash Pro and DW) were the money makers in that department.
Re: (Score:2)
That paid for the FP engineering and QA team. The entire project was pretty much revenue neutral -- and the CC apps (like Flash Pro and DW) were the money makers in that department.
I wasn't suggesting that Adobe made big money off Player, but what you're saying misses the point. It's free because that way more- *far* more- end users will have it installed, meaning content creators are in turn far more likely to buy the paid apps to create Flash-based content than they would be otherwise.
In short, Player being free is a necessary (or at least incredibly beneficial) aspect of selling CC et al, and should be factored in as part of CC's development cost, not treated as something that ha
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone still want to bitch about the lack of flash support in iOS?
How's that android plug in working for you? Oooh. Right. The one the stopped supporting and distributing years ago.
Speaking for my wife, who bought a tablet specifically to play videos from various TV channel and sports websites, only to discover they all used flash, they've been really sucky years. Regular users don't know or care why, they just know that it doesn't work. And I have to listen to her complain about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Flash player still has the camera and mic support. A change to HTML5 video was the huge step.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason why they don't just let you link to an mp4 or webm is that they're under this idea that their dynamic quality switching(which in theory should switch based on how good your connection is to youtube, but really just decides to pick between 240p and 1080p because fuck you) and their embedded player is a much better UX.
To that I say, fuck you Google. YouTube embeds on mobile give a direct mp4 stream and it beats the pants off watching it on their app or via their site's viewer.
Re: (Score:2)
Or the ability to screencast more than two youtube videos from their android app, without crashing? Or the ability to automatically retry after a buffering error? Or how about getting the setting to always play HD videos working?
There is so much they need to work on over there, but since it's google, I don't expect to ever see anything fixed. They're good at rolling out new stuff, but it's always left to rot.
Re: Sucks to be you (Score:2)
Going to pay to upgrade our apps and pay a few hundred thousand for consultants to test our websites? How nice