Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #30315 > unrolled thread

Comparison between Flash and <canvas>

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  Comparison between Flash and <canvas> bit-naughty@hotmail.com - 2016-04-25 12:07 -0700
    Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2016-04-26 08:53 +1000
      Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> bit-naughty@hotmail.com - 2016-04-27 11:09 -0700
    Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-04-25 19:44 -0700
      Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> "Teodor V." <teodor-see-signature@invalid.invalid> - 2016-04-26 05:42 +0200
        Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> "Teodor V." <teodor-see-signature@invalid.invalid> - 2016-04-26 05:44 +0200
        Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2016-04-26 23:26 -0300
      Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> bit-naughty@hotmail.com - 2016-04-27 11:07 -0700
        Re: Comparison between Flash and <canvas> "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-04-27 17:34 -0700

#30315 — Comparison between Flash and <canvas>

How well do they stack up against each other? I have only a rudimentary knowledge of the <canvas> tag, but I've seen Flash sites, which, for example, had a "mini OS" _within the page_ - ie. boxes you could drag around the screen, maybe a "calculator" app within the thing, i.e. you click on a calculator icon, and it pops it up _inside the page_, AFAIR, undistinguishable from a normal desktop calculator....

Moreover, why does everyone want Flash to die? I personally think there will *always* be room for something that lets people create multimedia _without touching raw code_ ,ie. you create animation by *drawing*, inside a *creator program*, like you do in Flash. This is just more *human*, and will always fulfill a need....



What do you guys think?

(Btw, I know next to nothing about coding IN Flash :) )

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#30322

On 26/04/2016 5:07 AM, bit-naughty@hotmail.com wrote:
> How well do they stack up against each other? I have only a
> rudimentary knowledge of the <canvas> tag, but I've seen Flash sites,
> which, for example, had a "mini OS" _within the page_ - ie. boxes you
> could drag around the screen, maybe a "calculator" app within the
> thing, i.e. you click on a calculator icon, and it pops it up _inside
> the page_, AFAIR, undistinguishable from a normal desktop
> calculator....
>
> Moreover, why does everyone want Flash to die? I personally think
> there will *always* be room for something that lets people create
> multimedia _without touching raw code_ ,ie. you create animation by
> *drawing*, inside a *creator program*, like you do in Flash. This is
> just more *human*, and will always fulfill a need....
>
>
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> (Btw, I know next to nothing about coding IN Flash :) )

My gosh, your questions read just like the homework assignment.

Andrew Poulos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#30369

On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 4:23:22 AM UTC+5:30, Andrew Poulos wrote:

> 
> My gosh, your questions read just like the homework assignment.
> 
> Andrew Poulos


NONE of this is homework, trust me.....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#30324

On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 2:07:21 PM UTC-5, bit-n...@hotmail.com wrote:
> How well do they stack up against each other? I have only a rudimentary knowledge of the <canvas> tag, but I've seen Flash sites, which, for example, had a "mini OS" _within the page_ - ie. boxes you could drag around the screen, maybe a "calculator" app within the thing, i.e. you click on a calculator icon, and it pops it up _inside the page_, AFAIR, undistinguishable from a normal desktop calculator....

You can't compare Flash development and Canvas. You have to compare Flash development with Web development in general. Flash is irrelevant now as all of its functionality can be created or emulated in a standards compliant way in modern browsers.

Here is a cutesy example:

<http://www.windows93.net/>

and here is a more serious example:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTJRwKOFddc>


> Moreover, why does everyone want Flash to die? I personally think there will *always* be room for something that lets people create multimedia _without touching raw code_ ,ie. you create animation by *drawing*, inside a *creator program*, like you do in Flash. This is just more *human*, and will always fulfill a need....

Flash is subsumed by the web. If you want it so bad, there are ways to still get it either though the now abandoned Shumway:

<https://mozilla.github.io/shumway/>

or through a different compilation step such as one of those listed on the following page:

<https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/wiki/List-of-languages-that-compile-to-JS>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#30325

On 2016-04-26 04:44, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 2:07:21 PM UTC-5, bit-n...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> How well do they stack up against each other? I have only a rudimentary knowledge of the <canvas> tag, but I've seen Flash sites, which, for example, had a "mini OS" _within the page_ - ie. boxes you could drag around the screen, maybe a "calculator" app within the thing, i.e. you click on a calculator icon, and it pops it up _inside the page_, AFAIR, undistinguishable from a normal desktop calculator....
> 
> You can't compare Flash development and Canvas. You have to compare Flash development with Web development in general. Flash is irrelevant now as all of its functionality can be created or emulated in a standards compliant way in modern browsers.
> 
> Here is a cutesy example:
> 
> <http://www.windows93.net/>
> 
> and here is a more serious example:
> 
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTJRwKOFddc>
> 
> 
>> Moreover, why does everyone want Flash to die? I personally think there will *always* be room for something that lets people create multimedia _without touching raw code_ ,ie. you create animation by *drawing*, inside a *creator program*, like you do in Flash. This is just more *human*, and will always fulfill a need....
> 
> Flash is subsumed by the web. If you want it so bad, there are ways to still get it either though the now abandoned Shumway:
> 
> <https://mozilla.github.io/shumway/>
> 
> or through a different compilation step such as one of those listed on the following page:
> 
> <https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/wiki/List-of-languages-that-compile-to-JS>

I could understand it when Flash was still noticeably slower than
javascript, but not anymore, as you can do things faster in javascript
than in Flash these days.

I suspect it's either people who write Flash apps who either lack proper
motivation to learn javascript or want to obfuscate what their code does.

Just my $.02.

/Teo.


-- 
Teodor Väänänen            | Don't meddle in the affairs of wizards,
teostupiditydor@algonet.se | for you are good and crunchy with
Remove stupidity to reply  | ketchup.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#30326

On 2016-04-26 05:42, Teodor V. wrote:
> On 2016-04-26 04:44, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>> On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 2:07:21 PM UTC-5, bit-n...@hotmail.com wrote:

... SNIKT ...

> I could understand it when Flash was still noticeably slower than
> javascript, but not anymore, as you can do things faster in javascript
> than in Flash these days.

when flash was still noticeably /faster/ than javascript.
Nothing else.

*facepalms*

> I suspect it's either people who write Flash apps who either lack proper
> motivation to learn javascript or want to obfuscate what their code does.
> 
> Just my $.02.
> 
> /Teo.
> 
> 


-- 
Teodor Väänänen            | Don't meddle in the affairs of wizards,
teostupiditydor@algonet.se | for you are good and crunchy with
Remove stupidity to reply  | ketchup.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#30355

On 26/04/16 00:42, Teodor V. wrote:
> On 2016-04-26 04:44, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>> On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 2:07:21 PM UTC-5, bit-n...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> How well do they stack up against each other? I have only a rudimentary knowledge of the <canvas> tag, but I've seen Flash sites, which, for example, had a "mini OS" _within the page_ - ie. boxes you could drag around the screen, maybe a "calculator" app within the thing, i.e. you click on a calculator icon, and it pops it up _inside the page_, AFAIR, undistinguishable from a normal desktop calculator....
>>
>> You can't compare Flash development and Canvas. You have to compare Flash development with Web development in general. Flash is irrelevant now as all of its functionality can be created or emulated in a standards compliant way in modern browsers.
>>
>> Here is a cutesy example:
>>
>> <http://www.windows93.net/>
>>
>> and here is a more serious example:
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTJRwKOFddc>
>>
>>
>>> Moreover, why does everyone want Flash to die? I personally think there will *always* be room for something that lets people create multimedia _without touching raw code_ ,ie. you create animation by *drawing*, inside a *creator program*, like you do in Flash. This is just more *human*, and will always fulfill a need....
>>
>> Flash is subsumed by the web. If you want it so bad, there are ways to still get it either though the now abandoned Shumway:
>>
>> <https://mozilla.github.io/shumway/>
>>
>> or through a different compilation step such as one of those listed on the following page:
>>
>> <https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/wiki/List-of-languages-that-compile-to-JS>
> 
> I could understand it when Flash was still noticeably faster than
> javascript, but not anymore, as you can do things faster in javascript
> than in Flash these days.

More than speed I'd say it was due to a lack of features and lack of
standardization on important ones.

> I suspect it's either people who write Flash apps who either lack proper
> motivation to learn javascript or want to obfuscate what their code does.

I don't think obfuscating is an issue with Javascript.

> Just my $.02.
> 
> /Teo.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#30368

On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 8:14:29 AM UTC+5:30, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

> Here is a cutesy example:
> 
> <http://www.windows93.net/>


That was UNBELIEVABLE!!! Blew me away totally!


> 
> and here is a more serious example:
> 
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTJRwKOFddc>
> 


And that was BEYOND UNBELIEVABLE!! It was MIND-BLOWING!! :) That guy looks like he's made Flash, the *authoring tool*, In The Browser!! My God!!
I noticed that that video was from 2012 - is there a commercial product around this by now?

Any idea if it does anything 3D graphic-y?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#30378

On Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 1:07:12 PM UTC-5, bit-n...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 8:14:29 AM UTC+5:30, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> 
> > Here is a cutesy example:
> > 
> > <http://www.windows93.net/>
> 
> 
> That was UNBELIEVABLE!!! Blew me away totally!

Here is the one I was looking for originally before I gave the above link. This is the real Windows 95 operating system being emulated in the browser:

<https://win95.ajf.me>

hopefully the server doesn't fall over as people try to view it.

> > 
> > and here is a more serious example:
> > 
> > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTJRwKOFddc>
> > 
>
> And that was BEYOND UNBELIEVABLE!! It was MIND-BLOWING!! :) That guy looks like he's made Flash, the *authoring tool*, In The Browser!! My God!!
> I noticed that that video was from 2012 - is there a commercial product around this by now?
> 
> Any idea if it does anything 3D graphic-y?

What was created was a shadow of the SmallTalk/Squeak platform. Dan Ingalls is one of the giants of the field:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Ingalls>

IRT 3D: I didn't look but wouldn't be surprised if it was one of the available packages. 3D is not difficult to implement with some basic training on the subject; especially today with modern browsers.

For example. Here is an off-the-cuff 3D cube I made some time ago:

<https://thenewobjective.com/demos/css-cube/>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web