Contacts
Eng: gr...@chromium.org, tomm...@chromium.org
Target
Q4 2016
Summary
Navigator.Plugins() and Navigator.MimeTypes() will only report the presence of Flash Player if the user has indicated that the domain should execute Flash, or if the site is in one of the Top 10 domains using Flash.
Motivation
While Flash historically has been critical for rich media on the web, today in many cases HTML5 provides a more integrated media experience with faster load times and lower power consumption. This change reflects the maturity of HTML5 and its ability to deliver an excellent user experience. We will continue to work closely with Adobe and other browser vendors to keep moving the web platform forward, in particular paying close attention to web gaming.
Details
Later this year we plan to change how Chromium hints to websites about the presence of Flash Player, by changing the default response of Navigator.plugins and Navigator.mimeTypes. If a site offers an HTML5 experience, this change will make that the primary experience. We will continue to ship Flash Player with Chrome, and if a site truly requires Flash, a prompt will appear at the top of the page when the user first visits that site, giving them the option of allowing it to run for that site (see the proposal for the mock-ups).
To reduce the initial user impact, and avoid over-prompting, Chrome will introduce this feature with a temporary whitelist of the current top Flash sites(1). This whitelist will expire after one year, and will be periodically revisited throughout the year, to remove sites whose usage no longer warrants an exception.
Chrome will also be adding policy controls so that enterprises will be able to select the appropriate experience for their users, which will include the ability to completely disable the feature.
(1) Where aggregate usage of a specific domain puts it in the top 10 domains using Flash, based on Chrome’s internal metrics. Those sites currently are:
YouTube.com
Facebook.com
Yahoo.com
VK.com
Live.com
Yandex.ru
OK.ru
Twitch.tv
Amazon.com
Mail.ru
Presentation
HTML5 by Default Proposal--
--
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromi...@chromium.org
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chromium-dev...@chromium.org.
(Adding blink-dev)Why would YouTube need Flash? Oh, the video manager? Can you work with them in order to replace that with an HTML5 alternative?> if a site truly requires FlashHow are you going to detect that? Flash checking scripts usually query navigator.plugins first, I think?
Presentation
HTML5 by Default Proposal
--
Thanks for your reply. I would like to avoid a Flash vs HTML5 discussion, but let me say this: Our company would not be where it is right now if it would not have been for Flash. We use the Flash runtime in Air to deploy to iOS, Android and Desktop and the Flashplayer on the web. Until a short while ago, there was no competing technology that would allow high quality content to be run in the web and on mobile with one codebase. (We forward mobile users in the browser to our Air (read Flash) apps in the appstore, which is the desired solution for games anyway. I am not talking about generic web services.) Unity *might* be a viable option today with export to WebGL, but it was not six months ago. Our codebase is huge, so moving to another technology would impact us (and other Flash based game companies alike) heavily. And what I would really appreciate is if our own descrete internal decisions would not be forced by Google or other companies that think they know best for everyone.
--
--
Highjacking a URL redirect is particularly evil
--
Navigator.Plugins() and Navigator.MimeTypes() will only report the presence of Flash Player if the user has indicated that the domain should execute Flash, or if the site is in one of the Top 10 domains using Flash.
Contacts
Eng: gr...@chromium.org, tomm...@chromium.org
Target
Q4 2016
Summary
Navigator.Plugins() and Navigator.MimeTypes() will only report the presence of Flash Player if the user has indicated that the domain should execute Flash, or if the site is in one of the Top 10 domains using Flash.
--
Q. Why Now?
A. With the shift to Mobile, many sites have built pure HTML5 experiences, which they use when Flash Player is not present. Internally we did a lot of testing and for most common browsing patterns, the web experience (when turning off Flash Player) is largely the same… This, in turn, informed our decision to do this now (i.e. we think that the web is ready). Try disabling Flash Player in chrome://plugins, we think that you’ll be pleasantly surprised.Q. Flash Player, HTML(5), and Gaming
A. Ultimately we think that the Open Web is the right platform for developers, especially as mobile devices become increasingly more prominent. We think that we currently have a compelling story for Ads and Media, and are looking to invest more in technologies that enable web gaming (e.g. WebASM, WebGL2, etc…) to further improve our story. Speaking of gaming, Mozilla has a great site to try out that demonstrates the capability of games on the Open Web.Q. Does this mean that Chrome is deprecating Flash Player?
A. Flash Player is still widely used by many websites, we currently don’t have any plans to announce regarding deprecation. Any future plans that we make will be based on usage and what’s in the best interests of our users.Q. What about the whitelist?
A. Our whitelist will be based strictly on real usage numbers, the goal being to avoid over prompting users. The whitelist will expire one year from the Stable launch of the feature, at which time, users will need to directly approve the sites.Q. What about users (or sites) who still need Flash Player?
A. We’ll still continue to ship Flash Player with Chrome for the foreseeable future, we intend for it to be simple to enable on a per site basis and the preference will be a one-time choice for each site (i.e. we won’t prompt again).beside gaming there is another issue, no real solutions for DRM, Camera and Microphone support in HTML5, real time chats and online conferences.
--
Being a Flash game developer for the past 7 years this is unfortunate news. I think things like website layouts are best left to HTML5 and I do agree that Flash is probably best staying out of that scene. However I think Flash is still an amazing platform to develop games for and I don't think HTML5 is quite up to par with it. IMO, Flash is one of the best platforms to develop games for. Users can play your games in the browser without having to download or install a single file, and your games can also be exported to AIR for desktop or mobile. There is such a massive amount of games and portals that use Flash that this would really impact ALOT of developers and players. Hardcore players would still be able to play their games, but initially blocking users out of flash and making them right click in the area to enable it will really add an unneeded extra step in their experience, probably causing a lot of lost players. At VERY least, if this absolutely must be implemented, I think it would be much preferred that the user has to simply left click on a button to enable Flash, as inexperienced computer users will probably be confused and turned away by having to right click and enable something via a drop down menu.All in all I don't think the web gaming scene is anywhere near ready to get rid of Flash yet.
--
Let's talk about Flash
Usually when I talk to other developers, they have a complete misunderstanding of what Flash is and what it can do. So it might be worth spending some time on explanations. I hear the "but Flash does not run on mobile" way too often. It does! That what Adobe Air is for. I can easily deploy my Flash game to web, Android, iOS, Windows and Steam, MacOS and even Linux! With a single code base, and a mature, highly capable rendering engine, that will deliver identical results on any platform. Digest on that.
beside gaming there is another issue, no real solutions for DRM, Camera and Microphone support in HTML5, real time chats and online conferences.
--
--
--
--
today in many cases HTML5 provides a more integrated media experience with faster load times and lower power consumption.
Looks like IntersectionObserver will be supported in the next major stable release, Chrome 51 -☆PhistucKOn Tue, May 17, 2016 at 4:49 AM, Jeffrey Gilbert <jeffrey...@gmail.com> wrote:Does this mean that ads which measure viewability will be able to take advantage of IntersectionObserver before the roll out of this ambitious Flash killing feature? If not, the web is not ready for the Chrome team to turn off Flash support for instances smaller than 5x5.https://github.com/WICG/IntersectionObserver
--
The motivations for this change seem fairly muddy, and I'm a bit confused over what problem you're actually trying to solve with this.Are you trying to make HTML5 content show on a site by default when there's more than one option (in a case where a site has one Flash version and an alternate HTML5 version)? Or are you trying to steer developers and publishers away from using Flash at all, regardless of the situation? It seems to me that most websites have abandoned Flash for HTML5 whenever it's feasible already, especially since it's not supported on mobile. The main sites that still use Flash are likely using it out of necessity, because HTML5 doesn't offer a viable alternative at this time. Blocking Flash by default on those sites isn't going to make the site owners suddenly switch to HTML5 (if that's your goal with this), it's going to make them lose traffic and possibly just shut down completely. Others have already detailed the issues with bounce rates when the user has to jump through prompts to get to their content.
--
This is obvious a political game, nothing is perfect, nothing is free, and there is no "all win", I do not mean offensive, but what we Flash developers can do is to tell the end users that Chrome is no longer the recommended browser for our applications, it is owned by Google, it collects too much info( which I do no care even ), blah, blah ~~~ Firefox is opensource and true free( I do not believe that either ), just to make other browsers look better, once Chrome's market share drop down, they will change their mind, it is politics, you speak, you have a chance.
If you read any IT news in the last few years it has been pretty obvious that Flash is phasing out, even Adobe themselves called it dead. The future will be a world without flash - may it be in 2 years or even 10 years. If your hole business model is based on Flash you better adopt quickly or die slowly.Thaek
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 9:54:02 AM UTC+2, Ruben Gerlach wrote:May I kindly ask what is the long term goal for the Chromium team? Will you be satisfied with this step or is the long term stragety to completely eradicate Flash from Chrome? We have a successful gaming company built on Adobe Flash and both our users and us are very happy with the technology. Do you have plans to further decrease support for Flash in Chrome beyond this specific feature?
Thanks
if HTML5 was actually a viable alternative and developers could drop Flash, people would be happy to use it!
Please bring up specific technical issues in the right forums
Howdy folks,Thanks to everyone who took the time to provide thoughtful feedback about this feature, it really was greatly appreciated. E-mail unfortunately doesn't afford complex thread response chains, so we took a best effort at consolidating and trying to answer the key themes below, in a single e-mail.Q. Why Now?
A. With the shift to Mobile, many sites have built pure HTML5 experiences, which they use when Flash Player is not present. Internally we did a lot of testing and for most common browsing patterns, the web experience (when turning off Flash Player) is largely the same… This, in turn, informed our decision to do this now (i.e. we think that the web is ready). Try disabling Flash Player in chrome://plugins, we think that you’ll be pleasantly surprised.Q. Flash Player, HTML(5), and Gaming
A. Ultimately we think that the Open Web is the right platform for developers, especially as mobile devices become increasingly more prominent. We think that we currently have a compelling story for Ads and Media, and are looking to invest more in technologies that enable web gaming (e.g. WebASM, WebGL2, etc…) to further improve our story. Speaking of gaming, Mozilla has a great site to try out that demonstrates the capability of games on the Open Web.Q. Does this mean that Chrome is deprecating Flash Player?
A. Flash Player is still widely used by many websites, we currently don’t have any plans to announce regarding deprecation. Any future plans that we make will be based on usage and what’s in the best interests of our users.Q. What about the whitelist?
A. Our whitelist will be based strictly on real usage numbers, the goal being to avoid over prompting users. The whitelist will expire one year from the Stable launch of the feature, at which time, users will need to directly approve the sites.Q. How did we pick the top 10?A. We looked at the number of times that Flash was loaded, for a given domain, and ranked the sites by volume. After the 10th site, relative usage dropped below 1%, which was consistent w/ the line that we had held for the NPAPI wind down. The (current) top 10 sites represent ~28% of the total load volume, which we believe will have a material impact on the number of prompts that most users see.Q. Will the whitelist change, before Q4?A. Perhaps, though it's likely to decrease in size (or have members replaced), rather than expand. As an example, we're working w/ the YouTube team right now to see if we can't find a way to get them off the list before we launch the feature (given the volume of Flash activity, 8.26% of all Flash Loads were from YouTube.com, we wanted to approach that with an abundance of caution).Q. What about users (or sites) who still need Flash Player?
A. We’ll still continue to ship Flash Player with Chrome for the foreseeable future, we intend for it to be simple to enable on a per site basis and the preference will be a one-time choice for each site (i.e. we won’t prompt again).Q. Will sub-domains also be whitelisted?A. Yes, approvals are on per domain basis (e.g. apps.facebook.com would be under the approval for facebook.com).Q. Anything else?A. Yes, we're especially looking for feedback from games developers. In particular we'd like to understand the current set of challenges associated w/ targeting HTML5, whether it's platform capability, tool chain, etc... Having a better sense for the pain points will help us prioritize our development efforts.Thanks again!
Kind Regards,
Anthony Laforge
Technical Program Manager
Mountain View, CA
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:27 AM, zwetan <zwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The community is more than anxious to ditch Flash.ORLY ?which "community" are we talking about here ?the community of HTML5 developers ?one thing is sure, there is no shame in bullshit