A little background on the subject.  Flash was first introduced in 1996 as a timeline based animation tool.  It was originally released as FutureSplash Animator, until Macromedia acquired it and renamed it Flash.  In 2000, Flash really started to emerge with the introduction of the ActionScript 1.0 language, a scripting language very similar to JavaScript that allowed for dynamic animations and full Flash websites to be created.  Flash MX pushed the envelope a bit further with the addition of video playback, and Flash MX 2004 introduced ActionScript 2.0.  In 2005 Flash 8 was released and Adobe purchased Macromedia.  In 2007 Flash CS3 was released and along with it ActionScript 3.0.  We're currently at CS4, and it appears that Flash will now be a regular update with the entire line of Adobe Creative Suite applications.  Enough of the history lesson, you can read all about the details on Wikipedia.

So, what does all of this mean?  Critics have often been quick to point out Flash's lack of search engine accessibility and long load times.  Proponents have always praised Flash's consistent appearance and design capabilities.  As a person who devoted close to 10 years building sites and apps using Flash, I've often found myself on the proponent side of these battles.  Arguing that the elegant interface Flash is able to provide far outweigh any potential shortcomings, especially for smaller boutique shops, or in-page apps such as photo galleries and slideshows.  Times are changing, as they often do in the technology world, and Flash is no longer my first choice, for a couple of reasons.

First, the iPhone is killing Flash.  

As the average web user become more mobile and connected, content needs to be available everywhere.  This is true for every media type - web, video, radio, television - everyone wants and needs to connect with their consumers all the time.  Users of the iPhone are shut out from connecting to Flash sites.  Will this change?  Maybe.  But its out of the hands of content creators.  So, do you wait for Apple and Adobe to provide a Flash player for the iPhone?  You could.  But every day that you wait is another day that your content isn't reaching these users.  And I'm sure there's a statistic somewhere that says iPhone users fall into your demographic, they seem to fall into everyone's demographic.  So, sure, you can wait, but I wouldn't recommend it.  

The alternatives: create two sites, one for Flash one for everyone else, or just create one for everybody.  

As a web developer, I would love if every client wanted to build two sites.  Twice the price for essentially the same product.  That's a great deal!  This is neither practical nor efficient.  I know some of you are saying, "what about skinning a WordPress blog with a Flash face, you get the best of both worlds."  True.  And Tim Wilson wrote a fantastic Flash app to accomplish this, which I've used on a couple of sites.  But, even Tim recently switched his blog to straight HTML.  Why?  Not because of the iPhone, but because of the slowness of Flash in Apple Snow Leopard.  Maybe Apple is trying to kill Flash?  

So, create one for everyone.  This is where I've been focusing my efforts.  And I must say, I hate Internet Explorer.  All browsers, actually.  At least with Flash, the site appears the same in every single browser.  Too bad it won't appear on every single platform.  So, I jump through some hoops to make the sites look right everywhere.  But slowly the world is becoming more standards compliant and maybe in another 10 years this won't be an issue (a little sarcasm here).  And, with some fantastic JavaScript libraries out there (jQuery, script.aculo.us, mootools to name a few) a developer can replicate just about all of Flash's animation capability.  Granted, its not timeline based, but most of the full Flash sites I've built didn't contain more than one or two frames on the timeline, everything else is already scripted.  And with AJAX, dynamically loading content to avoid page reloads is also possible.  So, developing iPhone friendly sites with great interactive design and animation doesn't require Flash, it just requires a little extra work to ensure it appears properly across all browsers.  Seems reasonable.

Second, Apple is killing Flash.

We touched on this above.  It seems like Flash performance degrades with every new version of Mac OS X.  Especially Snow Leopard (10.6).  As a Mac user, this is really frustrating for me.  Especially on my older PowerBook G4 laptop.  I know, I need to upgrade, but are you really going to tell your customers that?  Oh, you can't see our website? Upgrade your computer.  Not an acceptable response.  Does Apple have some secret plan to kill Flash and then release their own platform to compete with Microsoft SilverLight?  Maybe something like HTML5?  Some serious improvements need to be made to keep Flash a usable platform on the Mac.

Third, the usual arguments.

Up until this point, its been all about Apple users.  But, the usual Flash complaints still exist...inability to use the back button, lack of accessibility for visitors with disabilities, lack of search engine compatibility, slow to load, and taxing on system resources to name a few.  Granted, I've been able to look past most of these in past, justifying on a per-project basis why Flash was the right choice.  But combined with the inability to view the site on the fast-growing mobile segment, these start to become deal-breakers.

Okay, so where does that leave Flash?  I think its days of being used to build complete sites are numbered.  Granted, there are some really cool flash sites out there, like wonder-wall, but it still takes close to 30 seconds to load!  With the abilities of JavaScript and AJAX, I think most of Flash's "eye-candy" can be replicated using these more standard browser models.

What about web video?  I'm glad you asked!  I think this is one area where Flash will continue to be a player.  Delivering cross-platform web video is something Flash does really well.  This has always been an area of high-competition, and the players are sure to continue to change (anyone remember Real?), but Flash seems to be a solid content provider.  Its ability to stream Flash files (FLV), Quicktimes (mp4), and MP3 audio, to name a few, help to ensure that it will always be relevant.  Its not linked to any one format or platform.  There are other methods of embedding videos out there (Quicktime Player, Windows Media Player), but both of those are fairly platform specific.  HTML5 might become a player in this arena, only time will tell.  While all of this is being hashed out, Flash is still a good choice.

And web apps?  The Facebook games we've all grown to love (or hate) wouldn't be around if it weren't for Flash.  Farmville, Fishville, Bejeweled, Word Challenge - you name it - its probably built using Flash.  This is a good use of the technology that doesn't need to worry about accessibility, compatibility, or search engine access.  Possibly a perfect match.

Is Flash dead?  I don't think so.  But I'm pretty sure it won't be used to build full websites like it has been in the past.  I can't wait to see how Adobe responds to the changes in the marketplace as they continue to build new Flash releases.  For now, I'll continue to use Flash for my online video applications and certain custom web apps, but I won't build full Flash sites.

If you want more information about how EDOweb can help you or your business, contact us today.  We're happy to talk about how current web technologies can help make your business better.