i was reading this article on Tech Crunch.
it is interesting to see that there is no clear statement from Adler saying that they lagged with the engagement because of flash. however quotes further down show some pointing fingers.
needless to say that you must adopt the technology what is best suited for your readers. so therefore i am happy that they dumped flash. flash is not for images and text. however the article is full of “HTML5” yet i can’t find a single HTML5 specific tag on the site.
the title of the article is a reflection of a deep technological know-how and the body of it shows impartial very well formed information.
html is suited for scribds. i am not arguing about that but face it. they did the “switch” because of necessity. dumping flash was not flash’s fault, it was the fault of the inability of some devices. and there is another reason why. they point out they dump 3y of flash development. 3 years of flash development is a lot of time. i mean, i think they have developers that can’t put together a proper classic tweeen. and there is the statement
“Adler says the conversion from Flash to HTML5 was by far the greatest driver for his document sharing company.”
that proves the level of a developer quite nicely.
currently the site uses a tons of adds and documents appear as 1km page sending back the browser to the stone age.
but i must say i am HAPPY.
this is a cool example for what is the anti-flash html5 all good for.
bogus developers stop doing crap in flash (giving “reason” to dishonor the platform) instead they do big pile of bullshit in HTML5 (which is still 25yo tech. at it’s core). the only draw-back people praise them for it.
i have a word for this: