[nye2k]

Why?

If a site chooses to have a flash experience, why inhibit that? Google is bullying an already narrowed market.

There are experience that Flash simply handles better, and HTML5 cannot emulate. Animated experiences are at the top of that list.

The correct user experience would be seamless for both the user and the content producer. This UX is essentially warning the user that they are entering unwanted territory, and using fear to narrow the flash market.

[toomanythings2]

Adobe has dumped Flash on mobile. A sure sign that Flash will be dropped on the desktop, too, as developers aren't going to want to have to maintain two workflows.

To support Flash means you are supporting a proprietary software tool and the company behind it, selling development tools.

The tools and implementations might not be up to par with Flash but that's today. The sun will come out tomorrow, bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow .....

[samsonradu]

I think it was the other way around, Adobe didn't dump Flash on mobile. Also until the "sun comes out tomorrow" why can't a part of the market (smaller/bigger) enjoy the better experience that Flash offers and HTML5 cannot? (animations, games, livestreaming and so on)

[toomanythings2]

From 2011:

Adobe ends mobile Flash development, will focus on HTML5

Adobe will no longer update its Flash plugin for mobile browsers, though it will continue to issue security updates and bug fixes. The company issued a statement to developers conceding that "HTML5 is now universally supported on major mobile devices, in some cases exclusively," adding "that makes HTML5 the best solution for creating and deploying content in the browser across mobile platforms."

http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/9/2549196/adobe-flash-androi...

[nye2k]

_Apple_ dumped flash on mobile.

[ygjb-dupe]

Adobe does not currently ship a mobile flash client. See http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/tech-specs.html for currently supported clients.

Apple didn't dump support for flash on mobile, they simply opted not to support it (for very good reasons).

[verandaguy]

Flash has had numerous, major security vulnerabilities over the years; its CVE portfolio is actually pretty impressive.

[nye2k]

Compared to what?

I'd argue that the Flash security argument is just a regurgitation of headlines people are reading. Every prolific web technology has a large number of CVE's.

[rictic]

In 2015, Flash had the largest number of CVEs of all web technologies: https://www.cvedetails.com/top-50-products.php?year=2015

[ygjb-dupe]

Yes, they do. The problem is that Flash adds a layer of risk and the associated costs of risk management onto the web stack.

Adobe does not bear the cost of maintaining flash integrations, and doesn't bear the cost of the liability for shipping these vulnerabilities. If a user gets hosed because of Flash in Internet Explorer, Firefox, or Chrome, they blame their browser.

This externalization of the costs of securing the product, coupled with externalizing the cost of maintaining browser integrations means that it is harder to build a secure browser.

Flash needs to die, and with a very narrow subset of functionalities, it is no longer needed. Best to let it go so that we can have one less vulnerable client downloading and executing untrusted on our computers.

[onion2k]

If a site chooses to have a flash experience, why inhibit that?

The site shouldn't be in control. The user should be in control.

[krapp]

The site should be in control of what it sends, the user should be in control of what they see.

[arnaudlaudwein]

It looks like a way to enable 'click-to-play' by default without over-annoying users (normal 'click-to-play' sometimes shows the Flash experience even when an HTML5 experience is available). It's also good for security as it makes it more difficult to exploit Flash vulnerabilities (especially in ads). It may be the first step before sunsetting Flash completely as you suggest.

[mtgx]

Flash is almost as big of a security problem as Java applets were, and it's only not as big now because most browsers have started putting Flash in a sandbox.

[dexterdog]

And many users have been putting Flash in a trashcan.

[nye2k]

The entire web is a security problem. Flash has a shrinking market for several reasons, security is not a main factor of this.

[ygjb-dupe]

You straight up don't know what you are talking about. Every browser development team wants flash to die because of the security risks, performance, stability, and usability problems it induces.

The reason the flash market has been shrinking is because browser vendors, starting with Apple have been moving towards deprecating Flash for many years because of these reasons.

[ygjb-dupe]

And yes, the web has deeply ingrained security problems, but so has every single platform for downloading and executing untrusted code. At least most of the major players are now actively engaged in standardizing and improving the security of the web as opposed to a single company with a fairly atrocious record on application security (Adobe).

[manigandham]

The poor security of Flash is most definitely a major factor.