We built the FarmVille-engine using AS3 and I still think it's one of the best programming languages I've ever used. Static typing, access modifiers, and performant. Low friction for new users (most people had the plugin, we could stream the main binary and assets)
0% chance we could have built the game using any other client-side tech stack available at the time.
BUT, AS3 was not a great language. The VM was pretty slow (that GC! I'm sure you game devs optimized the hell out of it with object pools and all, but still, modern JS VMs could run circles around Flash's), the static typing was extremely limited: you could only type "Function", not the actual arg and return value types; type inference was non existant, Vector was invariant, etc. Let's face it, Adobe wasn't the best at language design.
Typescript is today so much better than AS3 ever was.
Just needed to say that.
Now it can die happily.
2) tsc --watch # rebuilds every .ts file on save
There is no step 3.
You are right, I forgot about installing typings. Instead of require you should use ES6 "import" (which TS compiles to require anyway) to get more type checking. But when you do that you'll see more of my missed step, which is `npm install @types/XYZ` for each XYZ package you use.
As soon as you start introducing a separate build tool (like gulp or whatever) things get super messy super fast but not for any interesting reason. Using `tsc --watch` also means it does caching across builds so it's faster than using gulp unless you're careful to configure it.
hm... i reckon that if one doesn't need to edit a 'default' config file, perhaps the file doesn't really need to exist.
You can type args and returns. One of the biggest things I relied on when I coded AS3
e.g, see the signature of Array.map:
map(callback:Function, thisObject:* = null):Array
Haxe is probably something you'll be interested in:
Also, Adobe made a big-ish mistake in that it didn't keep the runtime separated from the VM - a lot of the VM abstractions (like pointer tagging) leaked into the runtime, and this is why a lot of things were harder to optimize in the VM than they should've been. Fortunately, the browser vendors didn't have this problem, that's why their GC could "run circles around Flash".
You still have Adobe AIR to target desktop and mobile GUI apps.
And you have a also the open source project Redtamarin
for shell scripts, command-line tools, server-side, etc.
in 32bit/64bit for Windows, macOS and Linux
It's a shame it's going away. Glad the pros from that time feel the same way I do about it.
Of course, so is Factorio...
The worst part is that I feel productive while playing it. It's so close to the satisfaction I get from actually building something that it's just too dangerous for me to play these days :)
Peaker satistfaction: Using mods to up the complexity and difficulty, and using all of AAI + all of Bob's + all of Angel's. New ores, vastly more complex refining, and you don't start with shit (literally makes like 2-3 hours to catch up to where you normally start tech wise on vanilla).
I was involved in developing a really simple video editor in the browser that would have been impossible (or at least incredibly difficult) to accomplish without AS3 and the graphical abilities that it allowed.
But... it really did used to suck power from laptop batteries like nothing else.
I'll miss you flash. Thanks for shaping what we do and use now.
It's really not comparable. Flash + AS was a RAD environment, many a game developer got their start (and even built full-fledged games) through it. I'd argue that its biggest contributions were not web-bound, and I don't know of any other environment which is both as easy to get started with and as flexible.
 it's famously the primary expressive environment of Edmund McMillen: Gish, Aether and Binding of Isaac are all Flash though the later got rewritten natively in Rebirth, Super Meat Boy is the native successor to the Flash Meat Boy, The End is Nigh may well be his first game which did not start in Flash (and even that's unclear as it grew from a 2-weeks game jam)
 except insofar as they were being embedded/distributed through it e.g. newsgrounds or armorgames
Well okay. That's insane. But there's a part of me that wants to know how far it would go.
Follow haxe.io for news, etc. : https://haxe.io/
Some popular typed languages, notably Java, do type erasure on objects as well. Extending that to value types feels right in a strange way, more consistent at least.
One thing I'll mention to make The a better experience... The compiler, even on the strictest options, will still let you do a lot of hacky old school JS crap. I HIGHLY recommend integrating TSLint with almost all rules turned on and Microsoft's contrib extension. It makes Typescript code almost bulletproof.
Use the Typescript language service and experimental plugin for VSCode to show both Typescript errors and TsLint errors live with intellisense. It's a pain to set all this up at first but the experience is slick.
Anyhow, it does support it just fine. Even tsx/jsx (react-extended js/ts).
It supports pragmas so you can turn off assertions in production everywhere except in critical files.
I wouldn't say AS3 is the best programming language, but that's just my point of view. I, for one, don't have a favorite language because i think that each language has it's pros and cons and each language excels in a certain area.
Out of curiosity what is your language of choice now days?
Web Backend - Elixir/Phoenix (we used PHP for FV), Python in some cases
Web Frontend / Native Mobile Apps - React & React Native
JS has effectively caught up to what AS3 offered back then minus type safety (which TypeScript offers).
Would that have been a major loss for humanity as a whole ?
Farmville improved the life of how many people ? how many hours wasted, people made miserable and money lifted from cash cows ?
I'll slightly mourne the passing of Flash.
There are lots and lots of artists and developers out there who learned Flash's toolset and got good at it -- and now all that knowledge is useless. And there aren't even better tools to replace it.
It could have been different. Too bad they let it fail.
The SWF format, and the plugin that plays it, is going away.
The program that started life as FutureSplash Animator, and became Macromedia Flash, then Adobe Flash, is not going away. It got rebranded as Adobe Animate last year.
Animators working on stuff for Youtube or TV probably haven't touched a .SWF in years. You export a .MOV and post that to Youtube. Or you drop it in a video editor along with the .MOVs of all your other scenes for this project. The Los Angeles TV animation industry still uses Flash for some projects; check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Flash_animated_televis... sometime, you'll probably recognize a few shows you or your friends love.
If you're using it to make interactive content? You can export to HTML5 now. And to WebGL and WebAssembly. I haven't ever done that myself, I dunno how much hassle it is to convert an old Actionscript/.SWF project to those platforms. I would assume that the 'Animate' rebranding coincided with Adobe feeling that the HTML5 capabilities for interaction were on par with .SWF's; they've been working on that ever since Jobs refused to let the Flash plugin onto iThings.
.SWF is dead, and good riddance. Its plugin was a CPU-hogging binary blob that needed regular updates. It was amazing back in 2000 when it was all we had; it's a lot less amazing now.
The program that compiled a bunch of art and code into .SWF files will live on. The penultimate sentence of Adobe's press release? "...we’ll continue to provide best in class animation and video tools such as Animate CC...". The tool ain't going nowhere. The tool's just distancing itself from its now-much-loathed first export format.
But I would bet money that Animate's file format - the .PSD to its Photoshop - is gonna continue to be called .FLA for the next ten years.
that said, i'm really curious as to what's going to happen to actionscript. Starling really ran with that and it's an otherwise really nice language (as3, that is). i'm glad they open sourced it and I hope it still gets developed.
i also hope they keep developing and supporting AIR
Flash support within AIR is going to continue:
Others include FFmpeg, libtorrent,toast ports as well as porting of the C extension interface to C# and Swift.
You won't get audio from it, but a lot of other stuff works.
Many animation studios still use Flash .. to make their YouTube videos.
It ran on three platforms (Mac, Linux, Win) and was a much better portable web app platform than Java applets.
I suspect the crappiness of the Mac/Linux versions was not because of developer incompetence, but a severe lack of developers/resources for those teams.
Hopefully there are some managers at Adobe who realize that, if they hadn't shipped a crappy product for so many years used by every Mac user, they could have made an actual case for their ability to support high-quality Flash on iOS.
The Linux version was really badly maintained for ages.
Circa 2014, I had to do weird stuff like sed on the .so flash plugin to bump artificially its version string from 11 to 12
This was to work around a requirement for VMware VCenter UI which required flash versions newer that
the one available for Firefox at that time (11.2 IIRC).
I hope that at some points, Adobe will release the Flash source code. It's probably not the most beautiful code in the world, but at least, it would provide a reference implementation and help other implementations a lot.
Even back then you had to do hacks to get it to work. But after that it became very hard to get anything to work. Eventually someone came out with a service called pipelight that I used to use that would allow you to use windows only plugins in Firefox: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pipelight. It worked great until I didn't need it anymore.
We can hope but there were big-ish campaigns to get them to open source Freehand and then Fireworks and they just don't care and would rather you keep their monthly CC cheques flowing.
Especially on the video side where people stared to pick FLV as a format, we'd have been much better off just getting an MPEG in the QuickTime plugin, probably with better frame rates and definitely not crashing my browser so often.
As a portable web application platform, I suppose it was better than Java and I'm glad to have gotten access to those. But honestly that was a pretty niche use case.
"We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. "
All this means is that Apple was unable to figure out how to keep their OS from crashing. Sure, flash was crap, but keeping crap software from crashing your computer is one of the things the OS does.
Obviously a positive change in general, but the push to prioritize that and get it done must have been 99% aimed at problems caused by Flash.
And even after that was implemented, an ad crashing flash in one window would still bring down a video player in another, if I'm remembering right. Still a crappy user experience.
I really like that terminology though, it makes quite a bit of sense. When you witness a crash(you are not part of the crash, you were simply witnessing/interacting with the thing that crashed. You are not necessarily harmed), it is not like the whole world is falling apart. There was a crash, it is horrible and now you have to save what you can. This applies both digitally and in real life. Think crashing a drone or watching a plane crash. You rush to the scene and call for help, but you are not harmed.
Now when the OS fails, it stops everything and can potentially result in significantly more data loss than a standard application crash. Much like when a person is in an accident involving a vehicle. It is no longer just a crash, it is now a panic. When you end up in an accident you don't think "oh ya that crash" you think panic, not the word, the feeling.
Sorry for the rambling on, it kinda just happened. But ya that terminology is great.
As I said, I can't imagine that distinction having escaped notice in a PR piece such as this.
Yes, but he didn't say panic, he said crash. Crash is often used to refer to both application crashes, and os crashes, which are also often called kernel panics. Saying something causes "Macs to crash" when you mean applications running on a Mac, as people are suggesting, is very unclear.
"Sleep Wake Failure" comes to mind. When the 2016 MBP was new I'd get one literally every night that I left my computer asleep. It's now much less frequent (a couple a month, still more than it should be), but more often than panics (haven't had one yet).
To clarify, because I think people may be misinterpreting what I meant by that. I wasn't implying a definitive intent to the statement, but stating that the suggested interpretation is not what that statement means in English, as the the subject is a "Mac", which could logically be construed as the OS, the hardware, or both, but not an application running on a Mac. So either it means something other than the suggestions put forth (that he's referring to application crashes), or it's a misstatement, on purpose or not.
i invite you to learn about idioms! they're interesting.
equivocating over idiomatic language is basically a waste of time.
Then Jobs wrote "Thoughts on Flash" and magically a month or so later the Mac version ran a ton better and continued to get better for about a year.
Have little sympathy for such a reactionary approach to user experience when the majority of Flash authoring occurred in ad agencies running Macs.
Looks like it's possible:
Example: Record Flash:
An archived Java applet:
In this mode, the browsers run remotely and stream the video to your browser. We are still working on the audio support but hope to have audio support soon. It should be possible to archive Flash in this way, though we could use more help/research in this area.
Once the last version of Flash is released, we'll include the latest browsers that can run it.
If the Mozilla Shumway project or similar picks up again (we hope), Webrecorder can integrate that as well to offer a native JS based Flash-recording and replay.
If anyone is interesting in helping out, let us know!
I agree that it's great for 2-d animation, one of the best tools around, and why it's still used for education/training. Flex/Flash Builder also wasn't bad at all, and AS3, while verbose was interesting. Having XML as a first class citizen at the time was nice, and paired really well with VB.Net on the server, where XML is also first class.
There are a couple Flash players in JS... I do hope that Adobe opens the format up so a lot of the stuff made in flash can be preserved... the content itself was so much smaller than video files, and the interactions are much harder to setup and match using JS alone. I'm actually a little sad when I see converted flash animations to video (youtube) only because the originals were significantly smaller, without all the noise compared to video.
When Adobe bought Macromedia, my hope at the time was that the output format would evolve into straight, browser runnable JS, vector, movie and audio assets in a zip file with a manifest. So that the actual container format could be built into and supported by browsers directly. Where Adobe could concentrate on the tooling, which is where they made their money anyway.
The funny thing is, I thought Silverlight was FAR closer to what I'd wanted Flash to be, but there was just no way it would take hold, as the tooling was nothing close to Flash.
But they're all dormant/dead. Compatibility is really hard.
Still annoyed Fireworks was killed, it was pretty much the feature set of Sketch and more with a decade of work behind it. Then they killed it and are now left scrambling to replicate Sketch not realising they already had it and lost it.
Meanwhile, it was (as you say) years ahead of standards and the most ubiquitous non-standard standard on the web. In early years it let web designers expirement. Most of those expirements went badly, but many ulitmately preceded and shaped the web of the "future."
Animated interactive UIs, video, audio, rounded corners.... These appeared as flash first and challenged html+ to keep up (with the better parts).
We've all been talking s--t about flash for years. But ultimately it was in use because it was useful and the web may have turned out worse without it.
On tools, this is inevitable. Tools don't last forever and professional these days need to retool periodically. As flash exits left, there is room for new entrants into the 'tools for ex-flash designers' segment.
I doubt it. The Mac had rounded corners in may 1981 (https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Round_Rects_Are_...), and the OS had windows with rounded corners when it shipped in 1984 (for an example, look at the calculator in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculator_(Mac_OS)#History)
My condolences to all web developers who had to use whacky hacks to get them working on older IEs.
The Adobe Flex thing had lot of css3 features early. Funny to see how 'easy' it is to release specs and implementation when you are the sole owner of the tech
I don't see this as being a flash thing. You could do that in paint, photoshop or fireworks or ...
It's not a big deal, but it's a fact.
This is only the death of the player software, not the toolkit.
In 2020 the Flash player shouldn't be needed any more, because HTML5 will hopefully be good enough in every browser by that point. All the rest of their tools are still going to be useful.
Why they didn't make this clear to everyone just baffles me.
One can say that about a lot of things. FoxPro made me a good living for probably 6-7 years, and it got me in the door at Microsoft. I would also argue that for creating a data-centric LOB application, there are not better tools to replace it (even to this day). But times changes, technology moves on, yada, yada. Now I do other stuff with other tools. I miss that little smirking fox logo, I miss slapping together a CRUD app in no time at all, but FP had it's shortcomings, too, so I try not to get too nostalgic about how it was better in the old days.
As for Flash, well, I try to stay away from web dev, but I won't miss it taking down my browser on a regular basis. In fact, I miss it so little that I haven't had Flash installed on a machine in years (and promptly rip it right the hell off there if a client's policy sticks it on the machine they hand me).
I was in a plane the other day sitting next to an elderly gentleman who saw me using Apple products. He then proceeded to tell me how he's been on mac since 1984, and absolutely loved Apple products before, but now he's stuck on OS X 10.6 because it's the last version that supports AppleWorks, a tool he's been using for over 20 years. No currently supported tool gives him the flexibility and power he had with Apple Works - embedding multiple documents of different types (spreadsheet, word processing, etc) within one another, not to mention the thousands of AppleWorks documents he's accumulated over the years. However, most websites and new products don't work on 10.6, so he has another modern computer just for browsing the web. (George R R Martin similarly has an old computer sitting around just to use his favorite 20 year old word processor of choice)
Flash is similar - I have animator friends who maintain an old copy of Windows XP because they love Flash's interface and no other tool comes close.
The news yesterday about MSPaint potentially going away (I think MS back pedaled on it?) falls in the same category - powerful tools that pretty much can't be improved upon that get randomly EoL'd.
Another thing that happens pretty often - tools randomly losing functionality in an update because the developer felt that it should be removed for whatever reason.
Maybe there would be a niche for a minimal Linux distro that comes with a set of powerful, minimalistic creation tools (office documents, multimedia manipulation + viewing, etc - whatever covers the computing needs of 90% of the population) that gets updated with security updates etc but has 1) backwards compatibility and 2) a user interface that mostly never changes as primary goals.
More likely a Product Manager, rather than a developer, prioritizing certain "core" features in a rewrite/redesign to align with the product/corporate strategy better.
(Unless you meant "developer" in the very generic sense, or an indie developer.)
Also sometimes vision changes for whole company and existing products does not fit that vision anymore and company decides to kill it.
Regarding "never changing" software idea: it inherently is doomed because by default user base will be shrinking - majority of people would move on newer (with better features) software and only handful of users would continue using old "not changing" software. It's jut not worth it, and is too small niche.
MSPaint is a powerful tool? Do you also consider notepad a powerful editor?
Ads are as shitty as ever in HTML5.
Plus even back then Flash had a tendency to grind modest hardware to a halt (particularly if you were running OS X or Linux).
So Flash definitely made ads worse. However whether you want to blame Flash or the developers for that is really just a philisophical question. But suffice to say the most annoying adverts around that time wouldn't have been possible without Flash.
Making simple CRUD SPAs using HTML5/CSS3/JS/whatever frameworks is way more complicated than using AS3 to do the same thing.
It all feels like a giant kludge.
What have we gained by going into using modern web stack to make application like pages?
Perhaps source is shared more freely and code is more "open", but as the React licensing ruckus shows that is not clear cut.
We have certainly not gained more consistency over AS3.
There really wasn't anything wrong with the idea of flash compiler doing the heavy lifting for app like pages.
AS3 is one of the best languages I've ever used. Easy to use, dynamic but also statically typed when you want it with many of features from Java and C# which still aren't available in JS.
I wrote this a couple of months back:
Either could have been adopted. Would still love to see an HTML "package" format that was similar, where the whole content and assets could be downloaded as a single container, and run offline easily like flash could.
It was a risk not supporting Flash in 2007, one that has paid off in Spades. Apple made the right choice for Apple.
In retrospect, Macromedia would have needed to open source Flash, and aim it as a viable open web standard circa 2007 or 2008 (making it even more difficult for Apple to reject). This would have required starting the process in 2003 or 2004 at the latest. But IE6 was still dominant in 2003/2004, Firefox's success was far from assured, and open web standards were a joke.
The original iPhone was amazing in 2007, it was really a game changer for the open web. I don't think Macromedia could have anticipated the reasoning behind the death of Flash in 2003, never mind make the contemporary case to save it...
The real question I have is: Has Adobe ported their Flash dev tools to produce HTML5/JS/CSS? Are they as good the Flash version, and do they provide most of the same features? I ask because that shift has been foreseeable, and should have been a top priority (to minimize the rise of alternative platforms).
Additionally, I'll add that we can use Adobe AIR to build native apps for iOS or Android or Desktop computers and that's been around for even longer.
It was quite nice to use client-side in Flash and AIR for such things as SOAP etc. but it is also quite powerful when used server-side for web scrapping and HTML templating.
I see that every day with Redtamarin
it does only AS3 on the command-line, there is no GUI rendering of any kind, and yet the programming language that is AS3 shine.
AS3 was way ahead of its time when introduced, but browsers have moved past it since it stopped evolving.
Flex vs frameworks is more of a matter of preference and contextual requirements so I can't comment on that.
Sure, but that's the comparison invited when one says that AS3 is still better than what's out there today.
I built an app with Flex Builder that got me my first job. The application is still in heavy use every day, and I've never even once had someone report that something went wrong with it.
not bashing flash/flex though, my first job was making educational flash games. I wish I could be as productive and have as much fun when working in html and js.
AS3 was awesome for its time but TypeScript has surpassed it in my opinion.
After building up components directly in the language with React there's no way I could go back to using Flex.
I did find some object model inconsistencies annoying all the same, and some of the security implications in the early 00's frankly scared me. Even though I worked with it, I disabled it.
React + JS is nice, but the animation tooling in Flash itself was second to none. And still better than many options. If I still made a lot of elearning content, I'd be much more upset by the fall of flash.
In Flash, you can open up the program and make an animation without knowing any code whatsoever. I can guarantee a site like Newgrounds would never have existed if all those teenage flash animators needed to understand object-oriented programming paradigms first.
I tried to do some stuff with OpenFL back in 2014, and sometimes the problem was in the C++ backend, sometimes in OpenFL, sometimes in Lime...
It sounds nice on paper: write in Haxe and the magic will convert it to any target, but when each piece of a build chain that sustains the toolkit is maintained and developed independently (sometimes by a single dev) you really don't have assurances about long term support.
> The tools for 2D animations and games
People blamed Apple back in the day for not including it on iOS but given that how many critical bugs have been found in the time since then you can't blame them.
I paraphrase of course and I can't really vouch for the veracity of these claims, but I'm hoping someone with first hand information might be able to corroborate or deny. Sounds plausible to me.
Maybe they can still reach that state if they invest serious effort in making their tool able to export HTML5.
My guess is that they won't do it because there might be proprietary stuff they don't own, in the codebase. Macromedia wasn't that huge a company, I wouldn't be surprised to learn they embedded 3rd party components here or there. At that point, untangling legals might become very hard.
In reality, though, serious applications or games seldom used the Flash IDE other than for designing/managing assets and packaging them (and sometimes not even for that). It was pretty bad in many ways for serious work. I used to create fully animated Flash websites and my work was 100% using FDT (an Eclipse plugin) and the external compiler (Flex SDK). It was way more sustainable.
Stripping the Flash IDE itself (or whatever it's called today) down to the animation essentials and allowing it to export in a number of formats (SVG, GIF, etc) would be the best thing for the app. Not sure it's the direction they're going, however.
Very much this. The next-closest tech, HTML5, offers the same multimedia capabilities and runtime ubiquity as Flash— but no native tooling for designers/animators.
Instead, every design and interaction must be funneled from design tool through code, handed off from designer-brain to engineer-brain, across each and every iteration. Productivity and creative expression are a couple of the casualties of this "hand-off" workflow.
> There isn't a product on the market that comes even close.
Have you seen Haiku? https://haiku.ai (I'm on the Haiku team.) We're young but we've got some funding, a functional product, and some big-brand early users. We're going squarely after "modern Flash without the plugin," integrated deeply with modern design/dev tools & workflows.
It's a hard problem we're tackling, and we've still got some work ahead of us—but each of us on the team believes so strongly in the need for a solution (as you outlined here) that we're doing something about it.
I assume the Adobe AIR will live on, which is basically "Flash Player for Desktop and Mobile Apps".
That appears to be the case:
A huge variety of components from the Flash community. You were presented with an interface within Flash where you could configure the component's options, and very little code was needed to get professional results quickly.
Adobe Animate has nothing like that, and besides Adobe only makes their CC stuff available by subscription which is unappealing to a lot of people.
Some technologies are meant to come, leave their mark, and then go. That's just the way it is sometimes. But that doesn't mean Adobe failed.
Jobs' proposed alternative to flash, html5, did not solve the battery hogging problem, just made it move over to html5. If anything, it made it worse because you lost the quick fix of disabling flash (or rather click-to-play). That's why even iOS devices have ad blockers now, the mobile web is horrible without them.
Having my fans go on full blast because of Flash is something I remember happening quite often. Having my fans go on full blast because of html5 is not something I remember at all.
And your use of games here is a red herring. Nobody complained about games using up battery. The complaint was flash ads using up battery.
Then there's always Unity ...
But it still feels wrong on the Mac. Little UI details which just "aren't done" on the Mac. Plus Qt is always a year or two behind on everything means that when MacOS alters or refines a UI element that Qt apps will still be doing things the old way.
Safe to say I would never write a commercial consumer facing app with that.
The internet used to be less "flat". Every website was interactive, animated, had sound, had dimensions to it. Everything was a theme park. Maybe you had to learn a new UI every time but I was amazed a lot back then.
I learned a lot of programming with Action Script, it wasn't the best, but it was easy to get into.
I did my fare share of animating, just because it was so easy to get into. Xiaoxiao was just amazing to me (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw4wzwYeZ0Y).
I did my fair share of games as well, there were so many of them and publishing a game on internet had never been so easy. Orisinal is beautiful (http://www.ferryhalim.com/orisinal/).
Now where do people find such mini games? On mobile. The big mini-game market has shifted and we now have to pay, we now have to download each game individually.
I understand Flash has had a bad track of security vulnerability, but the internet used to be magical, it's the end of an era.
As methodover says it here:
> The tools for 2D animations and games in Flash are far beyond anything else out there from a creative standpoint. There isn't a product on the market that comes even close. Everything now is too technical, too specialized.
Interaction, animation, sound, and dimensions have their place in the web. That place is in a small percentage of websites. Very small. Flash was possibly a better tool for that small percentage of websites (games and something else I guess?).
I, for one, am glad I can read a fucking blog article these days without it being rendered through an animated page flip which makes the shrill sound of paper tearing each time a page is "turned" with no way to mute.
Yes, flat text suits me just fine.
There will always be some retarded "UX" designers for breaking things that work.
I personally started off animating in Macromedia Director. I played around with Lingo. I moved to Flash / Actionscript and loved the change. In a similar fashion, I'm totally excited about the future of Animation / Games (and how Canvas plays into that). There have been some huge strides by vendors and developers to improve animation and gaming on the web, and I suspect that will continue before Flash is EoL.
Flash being discontinued makes me sad, but purely in a sentimental way - I'm very excited about what comes next :)
You have just described what I profoundly loathed about practically every restaurant website in the early 2000s.
And then again when I clicked the "Home" link.
And then again when I revisited it a few days later to remember what their phone number was.
And then again, 6 months later, when I clicked the bookmark I had saved in an effort to remember what it was and why I saved it.
Adobes stance on backwards compatibility in Flash has always been "Don't break the web". Where does this leave all the existing flash content that still exists around the web after 2020? As far as I know, those JS emulators are way to slow for most content.
Flash wasn't the web. Opaque, unsearchable blobs break the web. Screwing around with controls etc break the web.
Adobe's hope was to replace the open web.
The saga behind media conglomerates, tech firms, pornography distributors and the W3C is pretty unpleasant, and (suffice to say) it has brought us to where we are today. As fast in-browser decryption hits broader swaths of the world's internet users, we should expect to see more and more sections of the web walled off to unregistered users.
Considering most/all users are accustomed to being required to register and log in to websites to view content, the outrage will be minimal and isolated to enthusiastic commenters like the parent above you.
Let's put this in a familiar context -- remember how Twitter decided to close off its platform to third-party apps? Now most users need either Twitter for Twitter-sanctioned apps.
This similar sequence of events can be replicated over all sources of content of the web with mini-walled gardens popping up.
Hopefully in their quieter moments they'll be reflecting on the wisdom of building on top of closed-source systems.
The majority of content that is still in flash and active use probably won’t get ported... the iPhone 10 years ago set that trend.