Is Flash dead?
Designer and developer Aral Balkan welcomes the change of Adobe's mobile strategy but argues that it's too late and that it spells the beginning of the end of Flash on the web
Adobe's announcement last month that it will discontinue support for the Flash Player on mobile devices and instead focus its efforts on tools and workflows that empower developers to build native cross-platform applications is definitely a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, it may be a case of too little, too late.
Flashback
To understand why Adobe has found itself in this situation, you have to look at Flash's history. When Flash was in its ascendancy, its main advantage was providing a consistent and rich user experience across desktop platforms and browsers. The key word here is desktop. At the height of the browser wars, when open web technologies like HTML, CSS, and JavaScript were in their infancy, it was nigh-on impossible to use them to create consistent cross-platform experiences. Flash was a very seductive alternative and, in those early days, Flash developers pioneered online experiences that pushed the boundaries of what was possible on the web, both visually and interactively.
Years before Ajax became a buzzword, Flash developers were building rich internet applications with state-maintaining clients. However, as I mentioned earlier, the key word here is desktop. The major difference in creating a cross-platform runtime in our smartphone present as opposed to our desktop past is that instead of having at most three major platforms (Windows, OS X, and Linux) and a handful of browsers (IE, Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and maybe Opera) to support, there are a plethora of platforms (Android, Windows Phone 7, iOS, Symbian, MeeGo, Blackberry OS) and hundreds, if not thousands, of different devices.
The only way to support such a diverse set of devices, operating systems, form factors, and feature-sets is to go for a lowest-common-denominator approach. And even then, the majority of your engineering effort is being spent on making sure your limited set of features works consistently across a rapidly evolving ecosystem with 18-month production cycles. In other words, you're spread thin and trying to hit a moving target while your more-focused competitors are separately outpacing you with user experience innovations and new features on different platforms.
A lack of focus
It was clear that Adobe's old strategy for mobile dominance, which relied on porting the Flash Player and AIR runtime to as many devices as possible, was not going to work. You might even have said – like I did in 2009 – that it was fundamentally flawed. Ironically, that's the year Adobe stumbled onto the correct mobile strategy, thanks to its pissing contest with Apple on getting Flash on the iPhone. Unable to get Apple to accept the Flash Player on iPhone, Adobe retorted by allowing Flash applications to be compiled into native binaries and distributed through the App Store. Unfortunately, Adobe was blind to the fact that this was the strategy it should have been following all along.
Adobe should have focused on the one or two dominant platforms and devices of the day and allowed Flash developers to reuse their investment in the Flash tools and workflow to create native applications for these platforms. After all, Adobe is a tools company and lost track of this because of rose-tinted daydreams of mobile domination through the Flash platform. I told Adobe as much in two blog posts in 2009 and was labelled persona-non-grata by one of their evangelists for my efforts. (This is one of the problems Adobe has – a 'with us or against us' attitude combined with an insular boys' club culture that results in valid criticisms of current policies being branded as heresy. Needless to say, this is not a long-term recipe for success.)
App to the future
So, finally, at least two years too late (perhaps four years, with a more visionary approach), Adobe is doing the right thing by changing its mobile strategy for the first time since the Macromedia years. This is a welcome change. It's a new lease of life for Flash designers and developers who've invested time in learning the tools and technologies of the platform. It also spells the beginning of the end of Flash on the web. In this day and age, it is expected that a web experience works across all devices: desktop, notebook, mobile. By ceasing development of Flash Player for the mobile web, Adobe has signalled that Flash is no longer a valid technology for creating web applications that run on all devices. Since there really isn't a separate mobile web, Adobe's announcement will result in developers not using Flash for the web at all.
This is not to say Flash will disappear – technologies don't just die. Heck, you can probably still get a really highly-paid job doing COBOL programming and maintenance on legacy systems if you can manage waking up every night in the throes of the silent screams of your night terrors! But let's just say that Flash on the web isn't going anywhere. We can safely go even further and say: if you're starting a new web project, do not use Flash for it.
However, even though the Flash virtual machine (the Flash Player) has had its day, the Flash tools and technologies (Flash Builder, ActionScript) will live on and evolve as tools for creating cross-platform native applications. Maybe one day Adobe will realise it can go one step further and create specialised tools for simplifying the creation of certain types of native applications, such as games.
Do you agree with Aral Balkan about Flash's future? Or do you think it has a chance as a desktop-only technology for rich-media experiences? Let us know in the comments!
Get the latest Adobe CS6 review from our sister site Creative Bloq.




16 comments
Comment: 1
This is the most revisionist thing i've read in this whole flash / html5 crapfest.
It was Apple, not Adobe, that pulled the rug from under Adobe's feet about using Flash to produce Apps for iOS. And they timed the release of the information for that particular gem to be right before the release of CS5, the main selling point of which (at least for Flash CS5) was compilation for the mobile OS's.
Comment: 2
- Adobe wants Flash Player on iOS, in Safari; Apple says no plug-ins for Safari in iOS
- Apple and Adobe blast each-other; the latter blames Jobs's ego, and Jobs writes his open letter, claiming that Apple asked Adobe to provide a workable Flash plug-in for iOS but that was never forthcoming
- Adobe cunningly enables people to export Flash content as native apps and Apple (stupidly) swiftly bans third-party compilers, throwing massive chunks of the iOS ecosystem into doubt
- Apple relents and Flash-based apps become accepted on the App Store
To that end, I largely agree with Aral here. Adobe did (somewhat unwittingly) chance upon the right path, and that's the path it's now taking. That Apple put another roadblock temporarily in the way doesn't change that.
Comment: 3
Comment: 4
Comment: 5
Comment: 6
Comment: 7
Comment: 8
Comment: 9
but saying that anybody that creates a site solely in flash should be banned from the internet. only once has there ever been a flash site that didnt suck and that was beatport, but that is now HTML, and rightly so.
Comment: 10
Aral is just a big Apple fanboi really, no surprise with what he's saying here, I doubt he can see my simple paraphrasing of his own quote applies equally to them.
Comment: 11
I think this is a very short-sighted thing to say. Flash still has an edge over HTML5/CSS3 etc to deliver true immersive web experiences that go beyond fancy parallax scrolling for example. This year I've been working on a few major online campaigns that rely on Flash, because it simply wasn't possible to execute the ideas otherwise. What would the alternative be? Water down the experience in favour of not using Flash, or using the right tools for the job? Yes, you lose the (Apple) device audience — but the majority of people still access the web via the desktop, so Flash is still a very valid tool to use. So, instead of saying what you said, I'd advocate to use whats right for the job, and helps you to realise your idea in the best way possible.
Comment: 12
I think many say Flash is dead because they haven't learned to use it effectively or do not want to learn it. I'm not talking about simple tweening effects that anyone can do after 10 minutes of playing around with the trail version I'm talking about hard core Actionacript. Master Actionscript and you'd be amazed at what you can do with it. Use flash properly and intelligently and it's better than anything you're going to get today. Saying Flash is dead is like taking a step backwards and all because of a tiny mobile device which in my opinion will not provide a truly rich web experience as a desktop would.
At the end of the day you can still have your cake and eat it. You can serve up Flash for desktop and have a fallback to jQuery or whatever for those tiny devices. To abandon Flash for all future web projects is madness when you can offer both to the client and the visitor on whatever platforms. You simply explain the pros and cons and the costs to the client who mentions they would like a bit of animation. Mobile is mobile and desktop is desktop and never the tween will meet!
Comment: 13
Comment: 14
Comment: 15
Comment: 16
Flash is not dead, but it's certainly on it's last legs. If you are making a web based game in 2012 I would definately say use Flash, because at the end of the day the Flash player is pretty much everywhere and the end user doesn't really care how they are playing the game as long as it works.
I think people have been avoiding using Flash for web development for 2 years now so that's nothing new, so it really just comes down to game development. If you are doing a 3D game especially if you are looking to make it cross platform I would say use Unity (which can export to stage3D anyway). If you want to make a 2D game, then use Flash for this year, but HTML5 game libraries are making huge strides and by 2013 I suspect will be mature enough to allow most 2D games to be made with one of them (Easel, Crafty, Impact etc)
The interesting question is how Adobe reacts to all of this. If I were them I would buy up one of those HTML5 game libraries, re-brand it Adobe, push it further and release a tool that allows Flash game dev/designers to create games with it.