Raytraced 3d in Flash? Apparently so. Krist Temmerman says he’s built an AS3 ray tracer.

Matt Booth uses Flash to create hyotrochoid designs.

Justin Windle makes an amazing sound environment using Flash.

Using code to visualize video in three dimensions in Flash (by Satoshi Horii or openFrameworks (by Daito Manabe. via CreativeApplications

Flash based recursive polygon subdivision by Justin Windle.

Genesis, a realtime Flash landscape generator by Jon Caplin

The web up to this point has had a nice balance between accessibility and innovation. Technologies like Flash are important catalysts of a better web. Current trends in standards-driven web design have been highly inspired from the Flash landscape. Flash raised the bar and standards-centric technologies rose to meet it. Flash was a necessary evil to achieve the things we wanted on the web. Now, many would say it simply is not necessary anymore – with myself leaning heavily in that corner. This is something I have been alluding to for years. In the past, Flash offered solutions for needs that HTML could not meet which is why I historically supported Flash. That day is proving to quickly be over.

Flash has always had a contentious place on the web. However, it pushed the internet kicking and screaming into a richer realization. Much of what we see in the HTML5/CSS3 specs look like they were pulled directly from the Flash playbook – and we are all happy for it. However, for one reason or another, Flash has not been able to leap-frog HTML as it had in the past. This could likely be that our needs have now been met. In a more optimistic take on it, Flash has accomplished its mission of “bring[ing] the Internet to life”. Its job is done.

What made Flash the go-to technology in the past is that it accomplished things that HTML just could not do. Flash existed out of needs from designers and wants from (some) users. A few examples include:

Video

HTML5 video is looking very promising, with YouTube and Vimeo already having HTML5 video players.

Vector graphics

Canvas seems to be able to do much of what one can do in Flash with vectors.

Typography

CSS3′s @font-face now allows custom font embedding.

High motion

New Javascript engines are frighteningly fast and can hold their own on the equivalent of typical motion in Flash.

Rich graphics (opacity, gradients, etc.)

Support for transparent PNGs and new CSS3 rules have come a long way to narrow the gap.

Asynchronous data transfer

AJAX anyone?

From my view, these were the core distinguishable features that made Flash the hard pill that was necessary to swallow. Many developers embraced Flash despite being closed because it offered unique solutions. Users installed Flash (many against their desires) so that they could consume content that most often could not pragmatically be viewed in any other way. Yes, there will be some growing pains with HTML5, but it can be done and, in theory, with less effort. Any technology that loses the qualities that make it needed is not long for this world.

Now, enter the iPad. It is shiny, affordable and at the very least looks fun to use. Here’s the difference, the iPad already is not a necessary evil. Other devices achieve the same functionality, just in a different, if less polished sort of way. We do not need the iPad, therefore I think it would be unwise to let it determine how we use the web or consume media. With Flash, we had to make the compromise to install a proprietary browser plugin to view rich media on the web in a way that we otherwise could not. With the iPad we will have to make the compromise to buy a device with a closed application platform where Apple chooses what we can install, a closed 3G market with only one carrier, media formats which may or may not be protected with DRM and the ability to browse the internet with only Apple’s browser. All this to do things that we already do, just in a debatably more enjoyable way. Simply put Flash served an inarguably vital service to the progression of the web. The iPad does not.

All that said, I am excited about what the iPad could do for media consumption. What concerns me is the trend that Apple takes more and more control from users with each new device. We need to let users and web publishers decide if Flash is an unnecessary technology. There are still certain areas in the browser where Flash is optimal, such as games and complex data visualizations. Additionally, no one seems to be considering the scenario where Adobe steps up Flash’s game and comes up with the next big idea that we simply cannot live without. Does it still make sense to block Flash entirely? It has long been considered that Apple’s decision to not support Flash lies in part with the fact that Flash offers direct competition to many apps produced for the iPhone/iPod/iPad. If Apple truly is concerned about the web user experience, why are we not talking about an ad blocker? An ad blocker would filter out the vast majority of negative instances of Flash (banner ads) while preserving the (potentially) positive instances. Blocking Flash seems just too close to how they blocked Google Voice.

Barring some mind-blowing innovation by Adobe, Flash is on its way out as a mainstream web technology regardless of the success or failure of the iPad. What irks me is that I don’t want Apple deciding what I can or cannot install on my machine. Standards-supporters are cheering short-term victories for long-term defeats. This new Apple has a history of blocking technologies on their mobile devices once they deem it a competitor or a threat. Who’s to say they will be fine with standards if it ever ends up conflicting with their business interests? I could easily see a scenario where Apple’s mobile Safari only supports the H.264 codec for HTML5 video – putting us essentially in the same place where we are now for video. Yes, we need a standard, non-proprietary platform to start from. However, it is also highly beneficial for outsiders to push new concepts and technologies that do not have to wait for slow moving organizations agreeing upon final specifications. We need both these forces in balance with each other. What we do not need is a company artificially impacting that balance.

Adobe is not the good guy. Ultimately, they are not concerned about an open platform, they are simply irked that Flash was not accepted and are crying for an ‘open’ web to protect their interests. If they were truly concerned about an open web, they would have open sourced Flash Player years ago (yes, I know the SWF file format is open, but that’s far from the same – see the notoriously spotty Linux support) and/or accepted the fact that the web is just moving on. Additionally, Apple is not the good guy either. They are not concerned about an open platform, they are simply blocking out a technology that could potentially chip away at sales from their AppStore. If they were truly concerned about standards, I would like to remind them that standards go hand-in-hand with openness – something Apple has been devoid of with their mobile devices.

Make no mistake, this little spat between Apple and Adobe is a power struggle about how we consume media. Both are fighting tooth and nail to give users the best media consumption experience available, as long as it’s theirs. In conclusion, what is most sad to me is to watch the different development communities duking it out over what is almost certainly two companies vying for a larger stake in how we consume media. It surely doesn’t seem like either community wins in the end. As my colleague Justin Windle mentioned to me lately, we should concentrate on building great work rather than try to intervene on this corporate cat-fight.

HYPE + Papervision Flash experiments by Lee Probert

Update: All coordy updates will now be published at the coordy project page.

Background

Coordy is a light Actionscript 3 layout framework which offers a simple way to organize DisplayObjects into various different 2d and 3d layouts. The layouts are light, powerful and virtual organizers that simply manage x/y/z coordinates of DisplayObjects – meaning your objects are not tightly bound to any specific layout.

Some Reasons You May Like coordy

You don’t need Flex
While these layout organizers will work in the Flex framework, you do not need Flex to reap the benefits of this code.

Items controlled by layouts are not bound to any component
DisplayObjects are not tightly bound to layouts. They can come and go as they please.

Items can belong to infinite layouts
DisplayObjects can belong to as many layouts as one desires since they are merely abstract controllers.

Layouts are light
These organizers have far less features than Flex containers by design. Because of this, the footprint is much smaller.

Get Started

If you are interested in simply getting the code and digging in, here is everything that you need to get started.

• Google Code Project Page
• SVN Repository
• Code Documentation

Contribute

The release of this library was a long and overly-excruciating experience. At this point, I feel the library needs some fresh eyes and some unique fingers coding on this project. If you are interested, please drop me a line.

Update: This code base has now been released under the name coordy. Read more.

Below is a quick video of one of the expanded layout organizers. Using the layout organizer library, and with a little trickery, this whole piece could likely be created in 25 or 40 lines of code. What I have come to love about this library is that it removes the redundancy of generating basic layouts in addition to aiding tremendously in creating less standard layouts as well.

I am hoping to get this library out by the end of the month. Since I use this library extensively, there will be frequent fixes and improvements in the months to come. I am hoping that some other developers may find it to be just as useful so I can get some help pushing it further. Check in by the end of the month — it should be up by then.

Update: This code base has now been released under the name coordy. Read more.

For more details on the basic premise of how this library works, make sure to read my previous post on this library. Really, nothing in the nuts-and-bolts has changed. Essentially, collections of DisplayObjects are managed by light objects that update the position of each DisplayObject. Now, with Flash 10′s 3d properties, I am merely adding the Z property to these new organizers. Papervision is a wonderful library to have at your disposal, but sometimes you just don’t need something that complex to create a simple thee dimensional grid or ellipse.

Below is a small preview of the three main layout organizers built at the moment. I am confident this list will be at least double by the time it is released, but I just wanted to give you an idea of what is to come. For a better experience, view the larger version.

For presentation purposes, I set a small x,y,z rotation to the parent of the DisplayObjects so you could see the grid more clearly. However, the rotation (x,y and z axes) of the ellipse is computed entirely within the organizer — meaning the parent of all the objects does not need to be rotated for the effect. I am trying to figure out the math to do this within the grid and scatter organizers, but at this moment, it is a little beyond me. You may also notice that the organizers seem a little “sloppy” when randomizing the layout. That is because I have added a jitter property for each axis to allow a more random/organic feel. Both the 2d and 3d libraries now have jitter controls.

This whole library, along with the updated 2d organizers are going to be made available on Google Code when they are a little closer to completion. The 2d library has a much larger list of organizers at this point and, as expected, performs much better than its 3d cousin. I would love to get some help in taking this library further if anyone is interested. There are a few foundational issues that would be great to resolve. Let me know if you are interested.

Flash paintings by Erik Natzke.

Silverlight Already Reeks of Microsoft

My wife and I have a subscription to MLB.com which uses Silverlight to stream their audio. Semi-unsurprisingly, the application did not work on either of our Macs – something that cannot automatically be attributed to the plugin directly, but it was not a good start for my opinion. However, what really got me was when I tried to uninstall it. I looked for an uninstaller, but nay, could not find one. I then found a Silverlight discussion board thread on the subject where the person was told they had to run commands through the terminal to get rid of the plugin. This, my friends, is the quintessential quandary of many Microsoft products – the technology is good but there is no polish or concern for outside cases. I do not run Windows and therefore do not have their uninstaller method, so I am stuck running commands through the terminal. Can you see why I, and many others, are skeptical about true cross platform support? If we cannot even get a simple uninstaller, how can we rely on anything of significance? It is not only cross-browser/cross-platform support that is necessary for success of a browser plugin, you also need cross-browser/cross-platform trust – something that still seems to be in short supply.

Drinking From a Shallow Waterhole

Simply put, technologies like Flash and Silverlight are getting squeezed. At this moment, games, video and audio are the three things on the web that fall securely in the realm of Flash/Silverlight applications, but how much longer will that be the case? Javascript has slowly eaten away at the need for Flash (and subsequently Silverlight) over the years. Ironically, as a Flash designer/developer, I am having a harder time suggesting Flash for projects which would definitely require Flash a few years ago. When you see John Resig’s Processing.js and current experiments with HTML 5′s video element, the writing on the wall should be evident. Sure, these experiments are most likely not ready for commercial use, but these projects have a history of advancing exponentially. The need for RIA apps on the web will always be there, but the demand is going to shrink considerably. I just do not see how two not-too-distinguishable RIA technologies will be able to thrive in such an environment – especially when one is just getting started.

By failing, am I suggesting that Silverlight will be blown off the face of the earth by Flash? Of course not. However, I do not see Silverlight taking over Flash’s market – a market which I strongly feel will continue to shrink in the following five years. Since when is Microsoft not interested in dominating the market with a new product rollout? On top of it, I do not feel any RIA technology will be the go-to solution until it gets support from a large number of designers/design-technologists – something that Microsoft and traditional Microsoft products notoriously do not get. To me, that signifies a failure.

Then there is the desktop. I honestly feel this is the greenest pasture for these technologies in the coming years. At this point however, I have yet to read anywhere that Microsoft is planning the same level of cross-platform desktop integration as Adobe has with AIR (please correct me if I am wrong). This is one area where Silverlight could swiftly pummel AIR (on the Windows platform). However, I am understandably skeptical of how any new Microsoft product will fair on other platforms. We will see how this plays out, but once again, Adobe has the head start.

Microsoft Domination is So 1999

The idea that immediate adoption for a Microsoft product is inevitable simply is an outdated notion. We are seeing growing adoption for Firefox, no plans for iPhone support of Silverlight (Flash looks to be on the iPhone soon) and mass consumer frustration of Vista. If Microsoft had been able to buy out Yahoo (which uses a tremendous amount of Flash/Flex that could have been moved over the Silverlight), then that would have potentially changed everything, but that did not happen.

With all the criticisms that I have spoke of concerning Silverlight, this does not even take into account the fundamental criticisms/concerns I have RIA technologies in general. All the concerns I have with Flash can be said about Silverlight as well. You take a technology (with Flash) that is increasingly embracing open-source and standards, has been in the market for what seems forever, has a history of solid improvements on the product and pit it against a competitor (Silverlight) which is new and still rough around the edges, notoriously proprietary, and has a history of poor support of internet products. You take all of that and throw in the reality that open-source technologies are eating away at both of their markets along with the reality that Microsoft’s peak of dominance is behind them and it seems clear to me that Silverlight has a huge (if not insurmountable) hill in front of it. In short, if I am skeptical about Flash’s future within the browser, how could I see anything but failure on the horizon for Silverlight?

1. The General Resentment It Brings From Its Use

I know this is a little meta, but this is easily my largest gripe. The problem with this issue is that it has less to do with the technology and more to do with the divisive history it has had with internet users – meaning there is no new feature which Adobe can release to alleviate it. We all have had plenty of tremendously wretched Flash experiences in our time on the internet. This obviously has left a bad taste in the mouth of many people. Due to this history, I find myself conflicted when suggesting Flash as a solution that could otherwise be done (perhaps with less polish) in Javascript. When working on many Flash projects, this concern is running around in the back of my head.

I would argue that most resent Flash when it is used incorrectly. The problem is, a great number of Flash projects out there represent just that.

2. Overall Separation From Browser

I could go into specifics, but the concern is greater than just one singular issue. Of course, there is the infamous context menu and loss of back/forward functionality, but those are just examples of a larger problem. As browsers are becoming increasingly sophisticated and more communicative with semantic code, Flash becomes more disconnected from a very connected environment. Even “standard” browser features we take for granted such as searching for text on a page or spell-checking are by no means standard in Flash applications. We are going to see that chasm increase with features such as browser-based Microformat detection/extraction.

Simply put, browsers continue to advance and normal HTML/CSS sites are able to piggy-back on those advancements. Flash unfortunately cannot – yet. My sincere hope is that it will in the very near future.

3. No Semantic Value to Content

Whether Flash can better integrate with browsers or not, there does lie the underlying problem that Flash conveys no informational context to content. This would not be tremendously concerning if the web was not, at its core, informational. While it still has a long way to go, HTML offers a semblance of context to the content laid out in it. H1 tags let the browser and search engines know that its contents have greater informational hierarchy than contents in H2 tags. Simple as this may be, our Google searches depend greatly on this notion. This simply does not exist in Flash.

4. The Expectations That Come Along With It

This is not a fault of Adobe, but there seems to be a general philosophy in the business that because there is extra slack offered by using Flash, that means we should hang ourselves with it. It is that general “because we can” philosophy which has helped fuel the resentment from many in the online community. We need to shift our thinking from “because we can” to “because we should”. That alone would be a significant step in the right direction for Flash. Ironically, I think it would be the most difficult to achieve.

5. No Support for Open Source Video Formats

Adobe has made great progress along these lines, but I would like to see them go further. I applaud their move to support the H.264 video format – now I would like them to move towards supporting codecs such as OGG and Theora. Adobe has put a lot of effort to make the Flash technology as a whole increasingly open and non-proprietary, this would be another very good step in my opinion.

6. No Native 3D

But it’s coming. I may rescind this annoyance when I behold the inevitable gratuitous abuses people commit with it.

7. Flex’s File Size Overhead

But they are working on that as well. Until then, it is pretty hard to justify the ~220kB overhead for most of the things I work on.

While many may argue otherwise, I believe a lot of the innovation on the web in general could be traced back to Flash – which I will write about in a future article. That said, a lot of the forces holding the web back have some relation to Flash as well. That is why there is so much contention around the technology – the upsides and downsides are equally high and both camps tend to dwell on which ever side makes their case. Flash is not going away anytime soon, but why should its stay cause so much frustration? If we can even begin to make stronger progress in these areas, I think a lot of the concern will diminish.

Recently I posed the question to myself of how many sites I visit on a daily basis that use Flash. When I really thought about it, the answer really shocked me. I would love to hear if my personal experience mimics yours.

Your comments are going to greatly impact how I direct my article, so please lend me your thoughts.

Update: – You can now read what annoys me about Flash.

Luckily, I ran across the simply stunning work of Robert Hodgin who just happened to offer up his source code. After looking through one of his projects and banging away at it, I ended up learning a quite a bit on how motion can end up looking more organic and sporadic. This particular project used the noise() method as its basis for motion jittering. I had not even known such a method existed. After hacking up Robert’s source, I came up with some really interesting form experiments using Robert’s general motion concepts.

Meander Video

Meander from P.J. Onori on Vimeo.

Update: This code base has now been released under the name coordy. Read more.

The example above is a simple example of 50 sprites – all subscribed to different layouts. Clicking each layout button applies those elements to that particular layout. That layout can be changed, which in turn changes the elements subscribed to it. Those elements can also be broken down into sub layout organizers – allowing for some pretty cool stuff. This method is pretty lightweight as well since there are no actual containers for any of these objects. The objects can be tweened (as per the example above) by defining a tween function or just directly set to their respective positions. In addition, each layout is pretty small – meaning large amounts of layouts can be created with little hit on memory. This still has a while to go, but so far it has allowed me to do some fairly interesting things pretty quickly and reliably.

Flash Player’s 95.9% (And Growing) Penetration

Make no mistake, this Flash/Silverlight feud is no comparison to Netscape/Internet Explorer. Netscape was the most popular browser before IE took over, but the user-base on the internet was far lower than it is now. The wild-west environment made it much easier for Microsoft to take the browser market – that is going to be much more challenging with a more stable software suite, and solid standing behind the Flash Player plugin.

When I say solid, I mean 95.9% of all internet users and 98.7% of users in mature markets. On top of it, the new versions of Flash Player are being adopted at an increasing rate. The speed at which Flash Player 9 has been adopted is absolutely mind-numbing… And Flash Player 10′s adoption should be even faster.

FLV

Few would argue that the FLV has become the de facto standard for video on the web. Adobe knows this as well and is pushing to make it a player off the web as well. Flash Video turned Flash into a mechanism for delivering media with far more potential than any other solution. Once video was added to the picture, the validity of the SWF took a much greater hold. Silverlight will (naturally) be using the WMV and I have no doubt that Silverlight will add to the use of the WMV file format. The problem is, from my perspective, is that using the WMV video format essentially makes Silverlight useless for the vast majority of video websites such as YouTube. Sure, online video sites could encode their videos as WMV as well, but why?

Flex 3 and Tamarin

The largest (and most valid) gripe that many standards-centric web developers had about Flash was that it was built on proprietary pieces of software. Well, that is no longer the case with Flex 3 turning open source and a couple interesting projects moving Flash Player towards open source as well. Adobe’s movement towards open-sourcing pieces of the Flash suite has nothing to do with their love for the free, open software and everything to do with solidifying their presence within the web development community. Flex 3 is a very large olive branch to what was a very hostile segment of the development community. This gives many in the web development community just one less reason to choose a Microsoft product.

I think it is very safe to say that Microsoft will never open source any of their products related to Silverlight. I know how much the standards community has disliked Flash in the past, but it is time to stop.

LiveMotion Anyone?

Remember the last Flash competitor? Enough said.

Web Developers/Designers Are Through With Microsoft

If Internet Explorer 6 began the web developer/designer hate-fest towards Microsoft products, Internet Explorer 7 sealed the deal. Microsoft has shown time and time again that they care less about improving their product for front-end developers and designers. This is clear from their lack of improvement on standards-compliant HTML/CSS rendering. Designers and developers on the web would be fools to go down that road again – especially when Silverlight (unlike IE6) is not going to have a large initial user base. We were forced to support IE6, but this time we have a choice to not support Silverlight.

The past mistakes from Microsoft have left the web community feeling burned and frustrated. Those very web developers and designers became extremely vocal online which led to…

Web Users Are Beginning To Agree With Web Developers/Designers

The general public is beginning to show they prefer non-Microsoft browsers as well. From my perspective, I think this sentiment will carry over to Silverlight. Microsoft is dealing with an uphill battle in user-trust – something that Internet Explorer 7 could have helped mend if it would not have been such a failure. From a user’s perspective, why would you be willing to trust a Microsoft browser plugin when their last two browsers were so horrible?

One of Silverlight’s Most Distinguishing Factors Is a Sinking Ship

Silverlight’s use of the WMV video format will allow support for DRM (Digital Rights Management). While DRM may be looked upon very favorably in corporate board meetings, the general public detests it. There is no doubt that corporate media providers are foaming at the mouth for such technology – Netflix has already showcased such a Silverlight-powered video player with DRM. That being said, you can candy coat a bad idea all you want, but it will continue to be a bad idea. Apple has finally understood DRM is not in its best interest and seem to be attempting a slow move away from it. If Microsoft is hanging their hopes on DRM to push the success of Silverlight, I think they are going to be in for a very rude awakening.

Microsoft Just Does Not Get Media… Adobe Does

Microsoft still has a lot to learn about media in general compared to other software companies in the market. Windows has never had a solid native media player which, from my view, says quite a lot. Silverlight will no doubt have some great features, but I feel that, along with many other Microsoft products, the polish will not be there. If anything, Flash has become very refined through its new versions – I have a hard time believing Silverlight will even begin to compete in that regard for the first few years.

All That Being Said…

We are talking about Microsoft here. The amount of resources and PR they will be able to throw at this sort of project will make Adobe look like some fly-in-the-night business. The DRM capabilities of Silverlight are bound to get some media companies excited in the short-term and create plenty of buzz. Even with the recent disasters of the Zune and Vista, I guess with that sort of money, no one can count Microsoft out.

Update: Due to the discussion generated, I wrote a continuation of this topic that goes into more detail on my opinion.

Via Flash Obscura

This ability for rich media experiences to be delivered on the cheap is one more reason that: 1) Flash (or perhaps another future rich media delivery system) is going to become an even more integral part of the web/browser experience, and, 2) The TV, in its current form, is becoming more obsolete by the day. We all saw this coming, I am just utterly blown away at the pace that it is occurring. If you thought the public liked web video before, just wait until the next batch of video players to hit the scene that take advantage of all the features Flash 9/Actionscript 3 have to offer. It will make the current phenomenon look pitiful in comparison.

Via Flex RIA