I’m agnostic when it comes to programming languages. I’m a former photo editor who now designs websites for the user/client experience, but I have no vested interest in any one programming language.
When I set out to start building sites I had certain requirements for the design and function. Flash was the only language that afforded these requirements. If another, better language comes out that meets these requirements, I would switch today.
Some people are saying HTML5 is a great new language to build sites with. Unfortunately it doesn’t meet several of my requirements.
1. Support for fonts – Art Directors love typography. It is important that our users can load high quality magazine and advertising fonts in their websites. In HTML5 you can only use a handful of web safe fonts
2. Scaling – The cornerstone of our design is the image scaling. It allows us to display images easily on monitors from 13″ – 30.” HTML5 does not support scaling.
3. Browser Independence – It’s important that our sites look the same in browsers built 10 years ago (IE7) and browser released today. HTML5 is not supported by most of the browsers people are using today.
4. Video Independence – It’s important that video on our sites displays correctly in every single browser. HTML5 requires that you encode your video in several different formats if you want it to show up in different browsers.
So, whats all the fuss for HTML5 all about? Apple decided it would not support flash in its hand-held devices (ipad, ipod-touch and iphone). But, guess what? That’s actually fine, because my requirements are not applicable on a hand held device, because it’s a fixed platform. We actually already build our iphone and ipod-touch mirror sites and our soon to be released ipad sites in HTML and will switch to HTML5 when it’s released (oh, and it’s not even been released yet so one more strike for the desktop experience).
Many experts think Flash will never be replaced on the desktop, because we’re long past the point where anything can be agreed upon as a group on the internet. You can be sure of one thing though, if anything does replace Flash as the de facto standard for a rich media experience on the desktop, we will adopt it.
Rob Haggart
APhotoFolio.com
You can read more here:
Giz Explains: Why HTML5 Isn’t Going to Save the Internet
The Future of Web Content – HTML5, Flash & Mobile Apps
PS- No matter what we will benefit from all this as Adobe makes major improvements to flash.
UPDATE #1: I found this statement from Hulu, a joint venture owned by NBC, ABC and Fox, is along the lines of what I’m saying here:
An Aside on HTML5
Those are the highlights of our new player. Before we move on to the other updates to our site today, let me address a related topic that’s been in the news a lot recently: HTML5. Plenty of users and members of the press ask about this topic all the time.When it comes to technology, our only guiding principle is to best serve the needs of all of our key customers: our viewers, our content partners who license programs to us, our advertisers, and each other. We continue to monitor developments on HTML5, but as of now it doesn’t yet meet all of our customers’ needs. Our player doesn’t just simply stream video, it must also secure the content, handle reporting for our advertisers, render the video using a high performance codec to ensure premium visual quality, communicate back with the server to determine how long to buffer and what bitrate to stream, and dozens of other things that aren’t necessarily visible to the end user. Not all video sites have these needs, but for our business these are all important and often contractual requirements.
That’s not to say these features won’t be added to HTML5 in the future (or be easier to implement). Technology is a fast-moving space and we’re constantly evaluating which tools will best allow us to fulfill our mission for as many of our customers as possible.
http://blog.hulu.com/2010/05/13/pardon-our-dust/
UPDATE #2:
The Google Chrome Browser now has Flash built in:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/25/google-chrome-flash/
News
Thanks Rob. Was actually posed with that exact question a couple of days ago. Great to have it explained in real world terms.
Cheers,
Damian
I suggest you do some homework before posting stuff like that. the @font-face attribute in CSS3 is just about having whatever font you want to be displayed in a client’s browser.
Browser independance… You can use hacking sheets for IE6 (which is not suported by most mainstream website anymore and now only represent about 12% of the overall websurf) IE7 and so on.
Most browser support most HTML5/CSS3 features, just take a look outhere: http://www.findmebyip.com/litmus/#target-selector
Your website will look awesome, but won’t be accessible at all, will crash FF, chrome and others if too heavy and opened too long.
@edouard,
I have done my homework. According to the CSS3 module describing Font Face attribute:
“Many commercial fonts presently do not allow web downloading of their fonts in any form.”
So we are back to the websafe fonts again. eh?
Regardless I’m not saying the issues I have will not eventually be solved, but until they are I see no need to lower my standards.
Thanks for going the extra mile so APF sites look good on iDontPlayWellWithOthers.
Great read on font choice for websites from the LA Times: The changing typography of the Web.
http://tinyurl.com/24lhcf9
As the article states: “It’s going to be huge. It’s going to be absolutely huge.”
Game changer on fonts.??
-Steve Skoll
@Steve Skoll,
Pretty exciting for sure. Not sure I’m ready to abandon high end typography just yet. I can still hear the Art Director laughing at the business cards using Arial.
Careful Rob,
“Dangerous Speech” like this will have the Apple security forces kicking down your doors soon!
Pretty funny that the old underdog company from the 80′s now attempts to tell the rest of the market how to act.
….one word for them: Android
You can use custom fonts RIGHT NOW (assuming their license permits it) with Safari, Firefox, Chrome, and even IE 6, 7, and 8! Take a look at FontSquirrel’s generator: http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fontface/generator
In addition, HTML5 (and 4, for that matter) DOES allow scaling. Simply changing the img tag’s width and height attributes scales the image.
Furthermore, browser independence is not as important as people say it is. I’m a firm believer in progressive enhancement: make sure that the site works in every browser, and better browsers get better features/looks.
Your video independence argument is, at this time, valid. However, there should soon be a single codec agreed upon by the major browser makers.
Yes, I’m aware that there are several ways to approach the font issue. My problem is that many of my photographers work with professional designers to build an identity and they use fonts that do not allow this type of thing. Why? Because I can go up to any html website, click view source and download the entire contents of a site (fonts, videos and pictures) including the design. Many people don’t realize this until it happens to them.
Browser independence is not important for many users but a pain in the ass for designers and developers like myself. I believe adopting HTML5 before it is a published standard will cause unnecessary headache when a perfectly great solution exists already in flash.
An agreed upon codec will not work in older Internet Explorer browsers making that solution 5 year away if adopted today.
My programmer showed me scaling on a new html mirror we’re working on. Not sure on compatibility issues with that but it’s exciting for sure.
Flash is still the best for the desktop and may be the best for Android phones and tablets but regardless we plan to innovate with the marketplace so it doesn’t really matter.
Rob
Glad to see that there is an explanation for the debate over HTML5 and Flash.
These are solid approaches and I appreciate your posting your perspective on why, for now, Flash is better for the portfolio sites.
Kudos for connecting with PhotoDeck! That partnership is going to be an awesome advance in photographers being able to license stock imagery direct.
C