i've had problems today, two computers i was going to use to play didn't have flash installed, something is happening and it seems flash will be out soon.

what about warlight?
maybe it's not happening tomorrow, but i guess i'll find more and more computers without flash in the future

It's not going to be dead all of a sudden- it's just losing support and dying slowly. In the long term, Warlight's probably going to have to jump on the HTML5 hype train. It's not like the backend uses Flash, anyhow.

Flash isn't going away any time soon (unfortunately...).

WL is not (originally) written in Flash, it's in a language called "Haxe", which can target many platforms, one of them being Flash... another being HTML5. I'm unsure how much work it would be for Fizzer to migrate the entire thing, but it's not like it will require a from-scratch rewrite. Since he is in the process of porting over other parts of the site (such as semi-recently the tournament viewer), I'm confident WL won't go down together with Flash when it finally dies, countless years later than it should've...

TL;DR:
Like a very good book once said: "Don't panic".

haven't you heard of Chrome ... it comes downloaded.

Isn't Chrome dropping support?

Chrome's dropped support of Java and Unity already, and I've heard rumors about them planning to drop Flash as well. Which makes me wonder how many games are going to work with Chrome if they keep this up.

However, Chrome has never worked well with Flash anyways. It crashes left and right on Chrome browser. I use Chrome as my primary so I'm well aware of these two programs not playing nice together.

Well, the alternative is Firefox, and they're not very Flash-friendly either after the Hacking Team leaks. Three zero-days exposed that quickly is pretty bad for any piece of software, even one as widely used as Flash.

As far as Java goes, that wasn't a big loss. Unity, though, Unity is important. If you've ever tried to program for Oculus, for example, you'll notice that Unity's likely going to play a big role in VR because it's supported by all the right things. I think Chrome's eventually going to have to go back to supporting Unity.

You can still use Unity. You just need to download a "client" on top of unity itself. WebGL Unity is a type of client. Instead of working inside the browser, it will be inside your "computer". You basically need to download the client that will launch Unity.


I still don't understand the full emulation browser thing. Is it just better to run into the computer ? It is not like we play games through a phone (with browser support only).



As an example, Javascript & HTML5 is actually included with the browser. This is how the browser/navigator can read/support those things. If you download javascript, you can use it without a browser.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JavaScript can be used in other contexts than a Web browser. Netscape created server-side JavaScript as a CGI-language that can do roughly the same as Perl or ASP. There is no reason why JavaScript couldn’t be used to write real, complex programs. However, this site exclusively deals with the use of JavaScript in web browsers.

Excerpt from : http://www.quirksmode.org/js/intro.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The IEEE STANDARTIZATION Folks should remove all browsers and just let use download Javascript interpreters. :)







LONG LINK :

https://books.google.ca/books?id=eZQY4MCdjfoC&pg=PA176&lpg=PA176&dq=npapi+vs+interpreter&source=bl&ots=ihciDIww-i&sig=8J-7943wmbFG5XDqxszAfXzHtcc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAGoVChMI8brN9ob1xgIVCXg-Ch2DbAgv#v=onepage&q=npapi%20vs%20interpreter&f=false



JavaScript Interpreter is also included in ADOBE PDF along with other things.

I demand that the HTML, javascript, C++, Python and LEA languages to be included in the operating system with the GREAT piece of software that is .NET FRAMEWORK !

Edited 7/25/2015 00:49:33

Chrome dropped flash support for a portion of a day, it was a means of protest, it was not a permanent thing and won't likely be a permanent thing for a very long time.

But yes, flash needs to die. HTML5 is far superior.

And I disagree, it was not a very good book that said "Don't Panic". It was a fantastic book, perhaps the best book of its entire genre. (For those unaware of the quote it is from The Hitchhikers Guide to The Galaxy).

HTML5 is not superior. HTML5 has some features that were exclusive to Flash like sound in browser/windows for games/apps and such. Flash receives updates and is still a different thing.

Flash may be merged with HTML one day.

Edited 7/25/2015 01:49:21

the alternative is Firefox, and they're not very Flash-friendly either after the Hacking Team leaks

I very much disagree with this! Mozilla did not take any "Flash-unfriendly" actions, they took action to make sure everybody updates their plugin. Thanks to Hacking Team, we got into a situation where there was a very widespread (just about every Internet-connected personal computer on the planet) and gaping security hole, which had detailed instructions for exploitation readily available.

Mozilla probably has no illusions about how quickly people usually update, so they essentially decided to tell people "Pay attention **** it; this needs to be fixed right the **** now!!", thus 'forcing' people to do what they would have done on their own in a perfect world: paying attention to patches and installing them quickly.

Note that Mozilla never "blocked Flash completely" (as some kind of punishment or something), they only ever blocked "every known-to-be-vulnerable version". Sure, for a short while that worked out to every version out there, but conceptually it's still a big difference. Besides, the moment Adobe released a new version, that new version was allowed right away ("unblocked" would be a bad way of phrasing it, since that new version had never been on the block list).

Given the seriousness of the leak, combined with the widespread knowledge about it among the bad guys, it was an entirely reasonable (and in my opinion: commendable) thing to do. For what it's worth, I didn't follow that part of it in detail, so I may have missed it, but I'm not aware of Adobe complaining about the way Mozilla handled this.

HTML5 poses less of a security issue on the client side (really just XSS) but Flash has a history of vulnerabilities and risk on the client-side. There isn't much of a difference on the server side, of course.

Quote block :

""

An alternative I discovered recently, using PowerShell:

$client = new-object System.Net.WebClient
$client.DownloadFile("http://www.example.com/file.txt", "C:\tmp\file.txt")
It works as well with GET queries.

If you need to specify credentials to download the file, add the following line in between:

$client.Credentials = Get-Credential
A standard Windows credentials prompt will pop up. The credentials you enter there will be used to download the file. You only need to do this once for all the time you will be using the $client object.

""

Source:
http://superuser.com/questions/25538/how-to-download-files-from-command-line-in-windows-like-wget-is-doing

Edited 7/25/2015 04:43:33

HTML5 is not superior. HTML5 has some features that were exclusive to Flash like sound in browser/windows for games/apps and such. Flash receives updates and is still a different thing.

"First" there was HTML4, which did a pretty good job at letting people write "simple" web pages. This forum, for instance, would work perfectly well using only HTML4. It was much less suited for highly dynamic pages though, especially since JavaScript interpreters at the time were far too slow to write games in.
That's the unique selling point for Flash: it allows real-time, complex and graphical interaction with the user (and without page reloads). Unfortunately, it's a rather hacky add-on, which bypasses large parts of the browser security model (thus burdening itself with the obligation to have its own security model... and having its own bugs). It also means that you're using two completely distinct languages (well... four actually: HTML, JS, Flash and something server-side, PHP for instance) and that pages consist of two parts (the HTML part and the Flash part) which are severely limited in the ways they can communicate with one another.
So, after years of Flash being a terrible solution, but (on account of being the only serious one) still being the best solution, some people finally got together and decided to "let's make this ugly kludge obsolete; let's use the 'don't-do-this' lessons from Flash, redesign things from scratch and solve the same problem (add the same capabilities) but get it right this time".
That's essentially what HTML5 is, a way to extend HTML in such a way that it becomes possible to create those same real-time, complex, graphical interactions with users, without the ugly abomination which is Flash. Sure, it had its uses, it paved the way and showed what was possible, but now that we have a far superior (from a coding and technical point of view, much nicer and "cleaner") way of doing things, it's time to tell Flash "thanks for all that you have done, now please go to the museum and take all the troubles you inadvertently caused with you".

Flash may be merged with HTML one day.

Ehm... if you mean that HTML might borrow a few ideas from Flash and implement similar concepts itself, sure. If you mean that there someday will be a language with major contributions (in syntax, programming model, libraries, etc.) from both Flash and HTML... I'm not sure how that could work (and I'm pretty sure it will never happen, even if it would technically be possible, of which I'm not convinced).

Can we all agree that warlight is gonna be here for another decade minimum?

I hate chrome.

Warlight's going no where for the time being.

Edited 7/25/2015 13:34:49

Fizzer said that he wanted to move most/all of Warlight to HTML5 eventually when he brought in the dashboard IIRC.

I have to use Chrome, as I can't remember my password. :(

All I know about Flash is:

• Easy to hack
  
• Crashes all time
  
• Does not co-operate with Linux very well
  
• 90% Dynamics that Flash offers for web is for commercial and advertisement and just annoys the eyes
  
• Endless security updates
  
• Too memory hungry
  
• User has small control over Flash compared to Javascript/popups
  
• Has no Cache like HTML
  
• Is private property out for profit

Bottom line
Looking forward for Flash to die! So old-decent looking web-pages, that I have control over could come back. So HTML that is free and fool-proof could prevail and make Linux experience much more pleasent.