SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Only 4.9 percent of today's websites utilize Flash code, a number that has plummeted from a 28.5 percent market share recorded at the start of 2011.
The number, courtesy of web technology survey site W3Techs, confirms Flash's decline, and a reason why Adobe has decided to retire the technology at the end of 2020.
[...] On the client side, browser makers are expected to remove Flash support from their products altogether by the end of 2020 —Flash's end-of-life date.
2020 can't come soon enough.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Flash Used on 5% of All Websites, Down From 28.5% Seven Years Ago
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 58 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Grelb's Reminder:
Eighty percent of all people consider themselves to be above
average drivers.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Sunday April 22 2018, @06:01PM (5 children)
Delivery in source code or object code form is orthogonal to the point I was making.
What's better: a script delivered over HTTP or a source tarball delivered over HTTP?
What's better: a script that you can't run because you have disabled script in the browser or a source tarball for a native application that you n't compile, link, and execute because it uses the system libraries of a different operating system?
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday April 22 2018, @06:24PM (4 children)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Monday April 23 2018, @12:25AM (3 children)
I agree with you that HTTPS is safer than cleartext HTTP. My point is that if you deliver source code for a native application delivered through HTTPS instead of a web application delivered through HTTPS, you shut out users of native operating systems other than the one to which you target the application.
In addition, a far larger fraction of non-technical end users know how to execute a web application than how to build a native application from source code.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday April 23 2018, @12:34AM (2 children)
What you keep calling a 'native application' is a blob, yes?
Lack of support for blobs is a feature, not a flaw.
If the code does something important and does it properly then it's unlikely to be difficulty to port.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Monday April 23 2018, @12:41AM
Or a source tarball that the end user can build into a blob, provided that the end user is the user of an operating system that makes it practical to build an application from a source tarball into a blob.
Assume for the purpose of argument, a user wants to run five applications, each of which "does something important and does it properly", but each of which is made for a different operating system. The first application is made for macOS, the second for Windows, the third for X11/Linux, the fourth for iOS, and the fifth for Android. Did you mean to imply that it is more practical for such a user to buy and carry a separate computing device on which to run each application?
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Monday April 23 2018, @12:45AM
I acknowledge having misread one of the words in your prior post. Please allow me to try again.
Who bears responsibility for spending the time=money to port each application's graphical front-end to each operating system's own graphical user interface toolkit, particularly for the benefit of non-technical users who have no interest in learning how to (say) write a makefile?