

Chrome Dev build comes with Flash 10.1 beta "integrated" - JBiserkov
http://blog.chromium.org/2010/03/bringing-improved-support-for-adobe.html

======
not_an_alien
Unfortunately most of the real discussion will be lost in a flood of worthless
HTML5 x Flash war discussions by overexcited zealots, but this is great news
both for developers and users alike: not because of Flash integration itself
(although it's good to have a plugin always updated), but because of the new
browser plugin api being proposed. This is something that has been long
overdue, and something that will benefit users as a whole in allowing a more
tight control of what a plugin does, and how. Think of all the interface
integration problems we currently have with plugins (any plugin), from
performance problems (when a plugin can't have control over what kind of
resources it actually has allocated), to input problems (should/can the plugin
trap shortcuts and special keys, or the scroll bar?), to device control (who
controls the volume of the sound used by the plugin?). Hopefully, these will
all soon be a problem of the past, as Chrome (and others) adopt the new plugin
API, and we can all move on to a more well-integrated web experience.

------
daeken
Again and again, we're seeing moves from Google that are far more pragmatic
than those from other companies they're competing with (Apple and Mozilla most
notably). By supporting h264 (the dominant video format) and Flash (by far the
dominant general multimedia format on the web), they're positioning themselves
to be the one-stop shop for everything web software wise. This can only end
well for them.

~~~
angelbob
_This can only end well for them_

It's hard for me to ever read a phrase like this in a sincere way.

~~~
philjackson
"This can only end well for them" sound far more plausible to me than "This
can only end well for us" does...

~~~
sigzero
That is such a true statement.

------
pavs
Just so you know you can still remove flash from chrome if you want to, even
though its "integrated". Just go to about:plugins and disable flash or any
other plugins.

------
modeless
Here's hoping the new API allows muting audio in background tabs/windows.

Edit: It does! <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Plugins:PepperAudioAPI>

~~~
not_an_alien
That's indeed cool. Also device change events -- that's something we've had
problems for a long time... USB headphones have their own devices, so removing
one in the middle of a Flash experience would kill sound (and sometimes the
whole application) until it was restarted. Same with any other plugin, I'm
assuming, although I haven't tested Unity/Silverlight/etc to see if they're
constantly pooling the list of devices or what.

So awesome to see Adobe/Google tackling on this.

~~~
modeless
AFAIK sound wasn't part of NPAPI before and plugins had to use platform APIs,
so any sound problems were Flash's fault alone. Even so, Flash is hardly the
only program that behaves badly when hotplugging sound devices so you can't
really fault them too much.

Speaking of Flash problems, another one I want fixed is keyboard focus
handling; specifically how keyboard navigation between HTML and Flash is
impossible and browser keyboard shortcuts won't work when Flash has focus.
Also, finally killing the windowed/windowless mode distinction will also be
great.

------
sjs
Hopefully they do something about the performance next. Flash performs much
worse in Chrome than Safari (OS X 10.6).

~~~
mgcross
I haven't noticed, but I usually stick Firefox (for firebug). Using the Flash
version of the animation test posted a few days ago:
<http://themaninblue.com/experiment/AnimationBenchmark/flash/> I get 27-29fps
in Safari 4.04 and 48-50fps in Chrome 5.0 beta (maybe because it's the beta?).
Firefox gets around 44fps. [older mac pro - dual dualcore 3GHz, 6GB, 10.6.2]

~~~
usaar333
Nice test.

It does seem that chrome's flash support is quite fast. I pull 75 fps in
chrome and 65 fps on IE8 (windows 7 - Core2 Duo P9400); on my linux box,
chrome's flash support definitely feels faster than in firefox.

~~~
usaar333
I take that back; firefox's default plugin is significantly faster (on linux).
At a much higher resolution (this test is very resolution dependent) on my
Core 2 Duo 6600 running ubuntu 9.10, I get 25 fps in chrome and 30 in firefox.

------
camwest
This will be a great step toward fixing a bunch of the big problems with Flash
(for instance, how flaky the mouse wheel is in Flex applications). We're
building our product in Flex and this will hopefully help us a great deal.

------
middayc
kudos to google for being realistic and pragmatic instead of shouting with the
masses.

~~~
rimantas
Not having Flash on iPhone and iPad is just as pragmatic.

~~~
IcePill
How is it pragmatic?

~~~
GHFigs
It is pragmatic from Apple's perspective. They don't need it to support the
most popular video content. They don't need it to sell their product. They
don't want to depend on third-parties for anything they don't have to. So they
omit it.

Google can't do the same with Chrome and Chrome OS, because their product _is_
the browser. They need to support the web as-is or they stand to lose many
more potential customers than Apple has over the iPhone's lack of Flash. They
have no particular need or desire to omit it entirely, but it does have
problems, so improving support for it is a wise choice.

Both companies have chosen the pragmatic solution for them.

~~~
JMiao
You hit it. Best comment I've read in a while.

------
Sindisil
Sounds potentially pretty cool.

From a developer's standpoint, though, I'm hoping there's a way to swap in the
appropriate debug player. What would be even cooler would be if the new plugin
API makes it easy to write an extension to allow swapping of plugin versions
(a la Flash Switcher for FireFox).

If nothing else, it looks like they're making it easy to disable, so one could
install the debug player manually, and switch between them by toggling the
inbuilt-plugin enable in Chrome.

------
irae
This makes a lot of sense. Since Chrome OS plans to have a readonly root
partition, signed by them, they needed to tweek the plugin API a little bit to
conform to their standards.

------
PanMan
I hope the ClickToFlash chrome plugin still works. My mac runs a lot better
since I have installed it: lower processor usage thus way more battery time.

------
tseabrooks
This seems like it might work to set back the anti-flash pro-html5 movement.

~~~
daeken
If it does, it's because developers let it. If HTML5 is superior to Flash from
a development standpoint, developers will still have the option of going that
route with this. I believe that Google's announcement on this really only
benefits end users: either way a developer goes, they're going to get a better
result.

~~~
cookiecaper
HTML5 is not superior to Flash from a development standpoint. Flash comes with
a nice, integrated IDE that allows quick production of visuals and scripting.
I think it'd be hard to make an argument that HTML5 development is equally
assisted for most use cases.

The real question is whether developers hate Adobe/Flash/proprietary standards
enough to keep promoting HTML5. I think they do for now, but unless someone
comes out with a Flash-esque development environment soon, the fervor will
eventually die out and people will settle for the path of least resistance,
which is Flash.

~~~
rimantas

      Flash comes with a nice, integrated IDE that allows
      quick production of visuals and scripting. I think 
      it'd be hard to make an argument that HTML5 development
      is equally assisted for most use cases.
    

It's not hard at all. I can write my HTML with any editor I like. I can see
the source of any page I like. No need to buy Adobe tools or hunt for .fla.

~~~
tomlin
Ugh. I hate this fallacy of composition. I think you know what he means, but
it is easy to be the teacher's pet with a shiny apple of misinformation.

Making complex animations (not a sliding nav, for example) is not easy in
HTML5+JS. Sorry, it isn't. We can have this argument forever, have yet to see
someone produce the evidence of their accusations.

Flash IDE, with all of it's flaws, trumps any "HTML editor" for animation or
UX complexity. Sorry, that's just the way it is. No "Visual jQuery" exists.

~~~
rimantas
Making complex animations are not easy in Flash either. Unless Flash can draw
thing for you, can it? As for basic tweening, you do not need HTML and JS for
that. Now you can have CSS transforms, transitions and animation. Those are
extremely easy to use and while they are not enough for really complex stuff
they can and will replace most of the basic effect flash has been overused
for.

~~~
tomlin
It's extremely clear that you have not developed in Flash. Flash isn't an
extension of the CSI interface, so no, it doesn't do anything "for you".
Please, don't wax your "knowledge" as fact. You know exactly what I mean.

I do agree that Flash is used when it is not necessary.

However, on the flip of the same token there are those who would have you
believe that you should use JS when Flash is a clearly better choice.

~~~
pvg
"teacher's pet with shiny apple of misinformation", "wax your knowledge",
"flip side of the same token"... I think you have exceeded your daily quota of
metaphormixing.

------
kvs
Hope it's still in a sandbox.

~~~
angelbob
The OA makes it sound like it is.

~~~
aarongough
_With Adobe's help, we plan to further protect users by extending Chrome's
“sandbox” to web pages with Flash content._

Sounds like the initial release wont be sandboxed, but later versions will...

~~~
kvs
Thanks for reading between the lines. That was my poi t too.

------
technomancy
Ugh; I'm going to be in for a nasty shock when I upgrade. At least they make
it easy to remove.

