Talk:Adobe Flash

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Filmmaking, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to filmmaking. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] Cultural Influence

I think there should definitely be something about the cultural influence of Flash-based media, the ease of creation of artwork, movies, animations, viral cartoons, annoying ads, and so on. Has anyone perhaps already written on this in a different section? --NeoThe1 07:00, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] prank flash

Is Prank flash that common?--Chealer 17:52, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)

IT SCARES ME!!!!!!!!!!! I hate it!- Wikk

Damn right, heh, I hate those too. Well, if you stay away from StileProject and various Animutations, you should be fine. ;) --NeoThe1 07:00, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] needs updating

There is a lot of info missing from this page, particularly new advancements that have happened in the last couple of years. ActionScript has matured into an object oriented language,(AS2.0) supporting many of the constructs that go with that, such as classes and interfaces. Not much here applies to versions later than Flash 4 (now at Flash 8).

[edit] NPOV?

It seems like the article's structure (and, to a lesser extent, the text itself) isn't very well balanced. The advantages section (which isn't actually a section) reads like a fairly well organized presentation, whereas the disadvantages section seems a good deal more haphazard and looks like everyone with something foul to say has just added it to the end of the list. Gripes about inconsistent scroll bars and buttons aren't balanced with a note that this sort of thing is even possible in the first place. The security points are misorganized and don't have any clear focus.

Can someone who is more familiar with the format take a look into this? I'll look again in a week or two, but I'd really rather someone who actually works with Flash make these changes. --Milkmandan 21:18, 2005 Feb 13 (UTC)

Hm... I'm not entirely sure most Flash authors actually pay attention to the disadvantages of the format. 146.186.145.37 14:53, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
To be honest, I think most (real) Flash developers would be kind of afraid to mess with the disadvantages list (combining topics and stuff), in fear of looking biased through the eyes of the 'flash==evil' crowd. I'll have a look at it though and provide a few links to add more information to that. Zeh 14:54, 11 Apr 2005 (GMT -3)
Okey, I've changed a lot of that advantages/disadvantages section. Rewrote many of the comments, added some, split some, merged some. I believe it's a bit more neutral now (on both accounts), although I think it's too big and it's getting a bit lost. --Zeh
As the article stands today, it still reads to me like a sales presentation. Where are the dissenting voices? Most people I know who despise Flash don't hate it because of a few minor security flaws, patched long ago. They hate it because the whole premise is "wrong", for the same reason they detest Web sites that do browser sniffing and shunt all non-"Mozilla" browsers to an error page. 121a0012 02:30, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

The current "Security" section looks really, really biased. I don't know anything about the subject, but the language is definitely slanted and the use of allcaps emphasis is pretty over-the-top. Joshf 11:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Opinionated and unsupported claims: Criticisms - Usage

"Like most new technologies that are easy to learn, Flash has often been misused in a way that lacks customer focus. Flash, particularly in its early days was used to create unusable and inaccessible sites. In recent years the Flash usage has matured and the quality is much higher"

I agree with this statement, but there is no data to back it up and saying that "the quality is much higher" seems very... pointy.

Also:

"These factors make Flash-based content unsuitable for indexing by search engines. However, this problem can be alleviated with correct web site design."

This is also true. Nintendo, for instance, is heavily misusing Flash to create things as simplistic as static image links (simple HTML) which are unuseable if Flash is unavailable and can only be clicked in one way resulting in only a single action (Left click, changes the page in the current window).

"Correct" web design in the case of proper search engine indexing would involve the use of alternative content for those unable to view Flash; the statement should be better explained.

[edit] OOo & Flash?

"...emergence of free Flash creation tools, most notably OpenOffice.org..."

OOo can make fla?.... I find that questionable. --Menchi 20:55, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Not .FLA, but rather Flash movies, that is, SWF files. Both their Draw (vector drawing) and their Impress (presentation) tools can create flash files. Check this out and search for .SWF: OpenOffice product description, OO DRAW, OO Impress --Zeh

[edit] organization

I cleaned up and organized the page quite a bit, but the pros and cons section could still be further edited...

What I found very hard was to explain the true nature of ActionScript 2 - from programming point of view, it is quite a true OO language, but it's the compiler that performs things such as type checking. When referencing dynamically in run-time those features lack utterly. --Skrim 08:09, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)


I think the specifics of ActionScript 2 should be left to the ActionScript entry. Ill try and get some more info up on it on that entry. --Mikechambers


I second what my says in that this is not the proper article to discuss technical details of actionscript. I added a link to main ActionScript article and removed some doubled information. joaoflash

[edit] Stock Flash resource

Flash is definitely having an impact on the web. Designers are using it in very elegant and also very horrendous ways. I've just run across a site www.stockflash.com that offers really slick animations and flash templates. There's also another site called Bigshotmedia (not sure of the URL) that offers similar but much more expensive clips. Seems like you don't have to design a flash site from the ground up anymore. Hopefully with resources like this the web will become a much better place.

[edit] OpenLazlo

It would be nice to include some information on http://www.openlaszlo.org

It is an open source compiler which compiles source code in XML plus Javascript to executables for the flash player. An Eclipse plugin for authoring is available. Hirzel 4 July 2005 07:18 (UTC)

Realize that there is a difference in this plug in - it is not a visual IDE like Adobe's FlexBuilder. Having such a tool is huge advantage from the process design-development point of view, especially in Enterprise situations. Having to code visuals in text is just a time hog, not to mention that if you're making such a leap from page-based technologies you don't want to have to keep to old "throw it over the wall" processes (give static designs to developers to translate). Without a visual IDE, lots and lots of tweaking must be done sitting "side by side" with a developer - quite inefficient. Additionally, User Experience teams should be able to "own" and edit the look and feel - which requires a better separation of the functional and presentation layer that a visual IDE helps with. -Uigrrl 19:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] most installed program?

According to Robert Cringely's June 2nd article: "Flash is installed on more computers than any other program." I can't find a source to back this up, but the author is certainly well respected. Cacophony July 4, 2005 16:35 (UTC)

Macromedia's own website[1] says, "Flash Player has become the most widely installed Internet video client", which is a lot different and hardly worth the mention here, I think. --Nigelj 19:26, 1 August 2005 (UTC)


Perhaps to counter-balance this pro we could also mention that this might not actually measure the number of people that want flash. There seems to be a demand for flash blockers and several plugins are available to restore control back into the hands of the end-user. A useful example link would be http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ for the popular mozilla firefox browser .

Right, I added mention of blocking tools and FlashBlock under "Influence"

Probably the biggest reason that Flash is the most popular browser plugin out there is because of the little vendetta between Microsoft and Sun regarding inclusion of Java Runtimes with stock Windows installs. --Allaryin 15:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please add link spam here

Maybe we should delete the section "Major Studios". It doesn't seem terribly useful, especially since there aren't any criteria defining "major". If they are major and leading studios, how come they don't have their own articles in WP? The section might as well be called "Please add link spam here". Rl 07:50, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree that probably the main use of listing them here is advertising by giving them a higher Google rank. As R1 says the open question is what the criteria to include them are at all. A criteria could be that they have a well populated download section with free templates, configurable flash movies or design instructions. That would justify the inclusion here. In the meantime I think it is best to remove the section alltogether (the content is not lost; it may be accessed through the history for people who want to move them back) Hirzel 10:36, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
I would like to add that we already have sub sections for sites that have free templates, examples, or tutorials. The section you removed was only ever used to advertize "major studios". Rl 10:55, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reorganization

I reorganized the article, most notably got rid of the pros/cons and distributed the items to other sections. I feel it's better this way; the pros and cons section seemed to lure quite biased comments (both ways).

The features section is still quite incoherent.

[edit] Consider removing extension pronunciation

I have never heard them pronounced like that; these pronunciations should not be encouraged.

[edit] supposed "influence"

I removed an entire paragraph that claims Apple's iPod advertisements, among other things was influenced by Flash. I defy anyone to find any substantiation for a claim like this. I suppose that the person who wrote this has never seen a James Bond film, or lived through the sixties where such stylisms were common. --Anon

Good edit. I wasn't sure why the article attributes so heavily the rotoscope effects to Flash. --Menchi 01:24, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I've been an industry designer for 20 years and it seems obvious to me that the clean vector artwork with minimal color used from exported video in flash (seen a lot in 2000 and 2001) has had a huge influence in advertising and other media.

[edit] Removed biased and incorrect information

I reverted recent edits - sorry for the anonymous user for this - but I decided that the content was very biased and irrelevant. Most notably, the entire Security section was about Shared Objects, sandbox violation and the text was edited to give impression that the theoretical security holes in some previous version have caused actual problems. And so on. I do agree that privacy problems exist with Flash Player, and now they are mentioned with some proportianality. Flash Player has *very good* security track record, when compared to, for example, IE or Firefox. Skrim 06:48, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 64-bit Flash

In the 'Future Developments' section, it might be good if someone (I don't have the knowledge) could write something about the probable future 64-bit version of Flash, particularly as its non-appearance has annoyed Linux users to the extent that an online petition was started to demand its release. 203.59.123.73 03:14, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

How large is this petition? It would be also good to mention the proliferation speed of 64-bit desktops, as it would give a good estimate of the timeline Macromedia will assign to the 64-bit port of Flash. Jbetak 06:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Latest news on the possibility of a 64-bit port (Linux and otherwise) is mentioned in http://www.kaourantin.net/2006/07/random-bits-on-current-status.html --Allaryin

[edit] "mac" performance?

How about (non-x86) GNU/Linux, where it's not even available?

I can run flash in firefox on SuSE. If your talking about flash as in the development program, guess what you can do to run it in linux? uh huh, wine. download the windows trial of flash 8 , enter your serial, and it works ok. http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?versionId=3673&iTestingId=2772

[edit] Future developments

Flash 8 is here. Can someone please rewrite this section? Thanks! -- Perfecto Canada 19:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I added the link about macromedia labs. Would that not be enough about it? We could talk about some of the flex stuff.mrrealtime

Thank you. You guys are fast! :) -- Perfecto Canada 20:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New heading suggested: Flash industry milestones

First Fullscreen/full motion flash website in 1999: Balthaser.com ?

First Flash Cartoon: Batman by Digital Image f/x or Chilly Beach or??..1999?

First CDROM for major release(over 100,000 copies) built entirely in Flash (standalone executable), in Sept. 2000 for Little Golden Books(6 individual titles to over 1 million users).

First Learning Management System built in Flash and MS ACCESS in March 2001 for Trainingscape for over 20,000 users (one of the first RIAs)?

Flash becomes most downloaded plugin, beating Quicktime and Real player...when??

First corporate website to use flash?

First entertainment website to use flash? Pop.com?

First flash based simulation game...leisure suit larry?

First Television show produced using flash?

First exclusively flash based animation studio?

First flash resource website -flashkit?

First person to make their living entirely from flash outside of Macromedia? I was in June of 2000. Im sure lots of others were by then too.

Are these and milestones like them appropriate for this article? Am I incorrect on the claims? It would be interesting to note industry milestones like these and others to track the influence and rapid growth of flash.

  • Some info, or even better, a diagram about these milestones hsould be definitelly added... Or maybe a timeline with all the important dates--seifip 13:26, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] number of browsers with flash plugin

From the article page: Flash as a format has become very widespread on the desktop market. Through an NPD study, Macromedia claims that 98% of Web users have Flash Player installed [2]—90% having the latest version. Numbers vary depending on the detection scheme and research demographics

The demographics might not be representative on this site. It lists Google at over 80% market share and Yahoo! at less than 5%. A recent US study shows them much closer: both slightly over 30%. We should find a separate source to contrast Macromedia's claims, but I'm afraid Webhits might not be representative enough. Are you familiar with Webhits? How established are they in Germany? Any other sites aggregating similar numbers?

Webhits (German page) counts only 66% of Flash-enabled browsers

There is nothing wrong with a US study showing Yahoo and Google at 30% in the US, but Webhits is German and Yahoo isn't popular in Germany at all. I agree that we should cite not just Webhits, but multiple sources, but I know no other.--Hhielscher 13:34, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Too many external links

This article has way too many external links. I suggest removing all of them except those in the 'Macromedia' section. JeremyA 18:42, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

--I agree. This kind of advertising defeats the purpose of wikipedia. If people wanted to learn about those flash knock offs, they could simply do an internet search on "Macromedia Flash" in a commercial setting. If others agree to this, I am happy to help out by watching the link section and actively removing links to companies other than Macromedia or non commercial community groups such as actionscript.org. mrrealtime

This has been fixed. Overzealously by some. ;> —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.78.74 (talk • contribs).

[edit] format and macromedia

try to focus more on the format and less on macromedia it's about flash and not macromedia

for example the java(programming language) pages focus on the technology itself and sun isn't named at evry lines by the way the java has the same approach than this page with the java technology

[edit] Accessibility

Sites heavily relying on flash may violate accessibility guidelines. This is a consideration when designing sites.

[edit] Examples

These examples:

Are they really any good, you Flashies, or are they just cruft?

[edit] Programming

It would be a really good idea to have a flash programming wiki either as external wiki or as a subset of this entry.

- Probably not - this isn't really the place to learn how to program for Flash. There are plenty of websites that already provide that. It's also not the place to offer your services as a developer.

[edit] Actionscript image

I've made two simple Actionscript 2.0 sample screenshots. I've put up one of them in the article (Image:OSX10-2-actionscript2.png), but just in case you can find good use for the other one which is currently not being used anywhere, here's the link: (Image:OSX10-2-actionscript.jpg). --Michiel Sikma 20:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, nevermind, it was deleted for not being in use for too long. --Michiel Sikma 23:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Added a new and much better example. It can be found at Image:As2_bounceball.png. —Michiel Sikma, 14:00, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Semantics

What do you call a flash interactive animation? Is there an industry-standard noun used to describe such a thing? I know "website" doesn't fit, since it wouldn't neccessarily have to be online. "Flash animation" and "multimedia installation" seem too wordy, and "flash piece" is too general. "Animation" by itself isn't intereactive enough, so is there a word already existing? --Muckapedia 12h05, 19 Mar 2006

[edit] Shockwave Flash

Perhaps correct name for the format is "Shockwave Flash". Macromedia Flash is the name of of the program used to create Flash movies, but maybe the format itself is "Schockwave Flash". While that name is confusing, and Macromedia has stated that it is incorrect and is the result of confusing two of their products, the fact is that it was Macromedia who first called it that. In fact to this day some of the URI's on Macromedia website still refer to it by that name. Also some of the pages on the macromedia website refer to it as that.

Note that there are lots of references to "Shockwave flash", even inside the players themselves, but it may never have been truely official. (Even with the MIME type application/x-shockwave-flash)

URI's in support: www.macromedia.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_13422 www.macromedia.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_04160 www.macromedia.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_14235

URI's in opposition: weblogs.macromedia.com/jd/archives/2004/08/shockwave_vs_fl.cfm (somewhat convincing)

Tacvek 05:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shouldn't this article be moved to Adobe Flash?

With the purchase of Macromedia by Adobe, I would imagine that the product is now called Adobe Flash. Should the article not be changed accordingly? Arrenlex 05:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Maybe someday soon, but for now they still call the product Macromedia Flash. -- Barrylb 06:28, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
It is now Adobe Flash as you can see on Adobe's website --Astrowob 19:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
This has it called Macromedia Flash on the Adobe website. Do you have a link to a reference on their website to it being called "Adobe Flash"? If not, I'll move it back. Stephen B Streater 17:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
The official title for Flash, at least until version 9 is released, is Macromedia Flash 8 from Adobe.

[edit] Flash Player 8.5

According to this FAQ entry Flash Player 8.5 is now named Flash Player 9. Future development section should be updated.

[edit] What is AMF?

I was reading the page, and found: "Macromedia has released the specifications of the Flash file format (excluding specifications of related formats such as AMF)"... what is AMF? It should either be a wiki link to an article about it, or at least expand the acronym.

[edit] Kool Moves

  • This is a rather cheap and independent Flash like application. It can make SWFs and use ActionScript 1. So my question is, should applications like Kool Moves be mentioned? if so, here, on the SWF or ActionScript page? If here, it can be mentioned under "Programs similar to Flash". SRodgers--65.24.77.104 01:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Programs similar to Flash as ToonBoom Studio or Kool Moves should have their own article on Wikipedia and then added to See Also links... --seifip 13:24, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Security" section terribly POV

The "Security" section of this article is terribly POV. The very first sentence begins "Adobe, like Macromedia, claims disingenuously..." The section is filled with similarly damning language that's unbefitting of an encyclopedia -- "these silently invasive, privacy-threatening LSOs..." (emphasis mine), "The default (declared by Macromedia and open to at Adobe's whim)", etc. This section needs to be cleaned up -- has there been a discussion about it already? It's rather embarassing, quite frankly. 64.154.219.210 20:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I moved the information about Local Shared Object to it's own page and tried to change the text to a more mature form Skrim 07:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] But what exactly is Flash animation?

I come in here in hope of finding out what flahs animation actually is, and all is see is a long artice about how its history, what it is used for and other stuff that doesn't answear my question. This article would be much improved if this was mentioned in the intro. What differs it from traditional animation, how are the drawings made (mouse or tablet or something else), what advantages does it have compared to traditional animation, what advantages has traditional animation compared to flash animation, is there different ways to make the flash animation? And so on. 193.217.192.96 16:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I share the previous commentor's frustration: What's the architecture of a flash-based system? What are the components, where do they live, what are the interactions between the components and how are those interactions triggered? There is nothing in the article that tells me how a flash-based system works. A few diagrams of the implementation architecture would be worth a thousand words!

[edit] Entry on Flash Player 9 in this article is misplaced, and contains unsupported claims

The entry for the release of Flash Player 9 seems to be misplaced, as there is now an article specifically for the player (vs authoring tool) on Wikipedia. Also, the claims that v9 is buggy aren't really substantiated in this article or entry: "unlike past versions of Flash, it is buggy and unstable, leading to frequent browser crashes on various platforms. It is also a less seamless upgrade than previous versions, and is not fully backwards-compatible."

While we did experience extremely high server loads that decreased our QoS in delivering the install during the MySpace upgrades, we have not yet seen a high volume of customer reports or bugs filed that indicate to us that v9 itself is "buggy and unstable." Of course, that's not to say it isn't true so I encourage users and developers to report these problems to Adobe. Also, if developers are finding areas that they feel are causing the player to not be backwards-compatible we would like to understand these issues. We are always extremely careful to protect backwards compatibility whenever possible, but it could be that we did not make clear changes or updates that were necessary for our security model OR it could be a bug that we need to address.

Any details and repro steps will help us track these issues down and resolve them asap. Bugs and issues should be reported here: www.adobe.com/go/wish.

I won't correct this entry myself since I don't have an account and don't want the action to be misinterpreted. I hope that the community will see fit to edit this to be more neutral, as it typically does. ;-)


best regards,

Emmy Huang, Sr. Product Manager, Adobe Flash Player --216.104.211.5 18:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarifications. Unverified claims almost always get the boot, and it helps to have feedback from the subject of the article. Thanks, GChriss <always listening><c> 23:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Video?

I don't know enough about the subject to add it myself, but some information about the video system now included in Flash (and so popular with the likes of youtube) would be very interesting. Dan100 (Talk) 12:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows XP Media Edition

Why does Adobe prohibit product installation on a Media Edition version of XP? -Litefantastic 22:05, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm using it right now on media edition...the player works fine too, if that's what you mean. 216.37.131.119 21:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wrong Title

  • The page has wrong title. The product is called Macromedia Flash, not Adobe Flash, regardless of the acquisition of Macromedia by Adobe. Just check the official Adobe site. https://store1.adobe.com/cfusion/store/index.cfm?store=OLS-US&view=ols_prod&category=/Applications/FlashP&NR=0
    • I suggest the page name moved back to Macromedia Flash, which is the correct name of the product, not Adobe Flash as there's no product of that name (yet).
      • Flash 9 will be "Adobe Flash 9" so the current name is quite appropriate... --seifip 13:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
        • "The new version of Flash will be known as Adobe Flash after the recent acquisition of Macromedia." Yes, it will, but so far it is not known by Adobe Flash, but Macromedia Flash. Hiilidioksidi 22:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

--seifip 13:21, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

    • As well, most of the references to Adobe Flash in the text are inaccurate. Hiilidioksidi 21:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flash 9???

There is no information on Flash 9 on this page...

Does anyone have good information to add here?

Asharism 12:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] flash 9 and internet explorer

flash 9 closes down internet explorer. fixes? 82.12.86.64 14:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/d/o/Talk%7EAdobe_Flash_e32a.html"