HTML5 != Flash (split from iPad thread)

[Shock Tsunami]

Flash != HTML5 replacement. I could get into it... But most of Adobe's stuff is fbux0red beyond all hope. I agree though, Adobe's monopolistic irresponsibility is only really being fought by Apple right now. I'm conflicted, though, it pays the bills.

/Logged thousands (probably about 5k) of hours with CS1/2/3/4.
//5 will be worse.
///I remember when Macromedia and Adobe were different companies
////And it was called "Future Splash"
/////And when Autodesk didn't own everything
//////Get off my lawn.

[Kyo]

HTML5 > Flash.

I'm still quite happy with Photoshop.. I too have logged thousands of hours in every recent version.. I started using photoshop at 3.1ish I believe. CS5 has rumors of truly utilizing multiple cores.. I have serious doubts as to the ability of the software to do this, but we'll see I guess.

My big complaint with their software is that it has gotten really 'heavy' over the years, much like windows.. when you build and build on the same base without ever cleaning house, you get bulky software and it shows.

Kyle

[Shock Tsunami]

HTML5 > Flash.

HTML5 != Flash. Apples and Oranges. HTML is a standard and a language, Flash is an authoring tool and a plug-in, if you wanted to get more accurate (but still inaccurate), you might say HTML5>SWF or something like that... But really the argument rests on menus and loading videos right now. That's all anyone seems to be talking about at the moment anyway.

You're welcome to compare resumés with me, but trust me on this one, they're different. It's like saying Chinese is better than the American Southern accent.

I'm interested in seeing what HTML5 brings to the table, though.

[Isaac]

I think this might be applicable.

[[DDD] Set]

HTML5 != Flash. Apples and Oranges. HTML is a standard and a language, Flash is an authoring tool and a plug-in, if you wanted to get more accurate (but still inaccurate), you might say HTML5>SWF or something like that... But really the argument rests on menus and loading videos right now. That's all anyone seems to be talking about at the moment anyway.

He means that in the intersection of Flash's functionality and HTML5's - particularly video - HTML5 is superior. Frankly, all they have to do to be "better" is not leave enough gaping security vulnerabilities for one to be found every month. The lack of security in Adobe's products is disgraceful and speaks of the lack of alternatives. On this level, I wouldn't say Apple is "fighting" them so much as they're saying "we are not dealing with your security hole bullshit," which is certainly understandable.

CS5 has rumors of truly utilizing multiple cores.. I have serious doubts as to the ability of the software to do this, but we'll see I guess.

I don't get the big deal. There's a lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of parallelizing software like Photoshop... fourier transforms translate to multithreaded environments quite nicely. What's taken them so long?

My big complaint with their software is that it has gotten really 'heavy' over the years, much like windows.. when you build and build on the same base without ever cleaning house, you get bulky software and it shows.

MS actually discards a lot of code, but they bend over backwards for compatibility so some of the ugly stuff like 16 bit window pointers is still around.

Back when DOS was the way to go, the original SimCity had a memory bug. It would free some memory so that the system could recover it, but continue to use that memory. It just so happened that with the particular memory allocator SimCity was tested on, they managed to get away with it without ever knowing. Later, when MS was releasing a new DOS, they wrote a better memory allocator, only to discover that all of a sudden SimCity crashed left and right. The solution was basically "if program == simcity then use old allocator."

The old system call to probe the DOS version was basically a big table indicating what lie the operating system should tell, depending on who was asking. A lot of developers wanted to do clever things if newer versions of DOS were being run, but the cleverness very rarely resulted in correct behavior.

[aperson]

I'd love to see HTML5 bring and end to flash, but as long as sites are using H264 for their video codec, it's almost just as bad. Rant if you'd like about H264 being better than OGG, but the previous is a closed product, and that's all I care about.

[Yossarian]

Thanks for the link, Isaac. It seems like a good introduction to the comparison to me.

[Kyo]

He means that in the intersection of Flash's functionality and HTML5's - particularly video - HTML5 is superior. Frankly, all they have to do to be "better" is not leave enough gaping security vulnerabilities for one to be found every month. The lack of security in Adobe's products is disgraceful and speaks of the lack of alternatives. On this level, I wouldn't say Apple is "fighting" them so much as they're saying "we are not dealing with your security hole bullshit," which is certainly understandable.

right. :)

I don't get the big deal. There's a lot of low-hanging fruit in terms of parallelizing software like Photoshop... fourier transforms translate to multithreaded environments quite nicely. What's taken them so long?

There is debate as to how much performance boost you can really get from it. Multithreaded processes are awesome for things like video redering where you can literally start working multiple frames at a time. For a single photo, the best you can hope for is splitting up the image into block sections and working that way. However, since it's not such an intensive process in most cases, the time taken to split the process and put it back together, almost negates doing it in the first place.

There can be a boost in huge images (as I typically deal with) but again a lot of the issue there isn't processors to begin with, it's memory and disk speeds.

There are also some areas of photoshop where things are sequential, they can't necessarily be split apart, done out of order, and slapped back together.

That said, yea.. they should have done it quite a while ago. Keep in mind though, this is adobe.. they just started using the gpu in the last PS version.

MS actually discards a lot of code, but they bend over backwards for compatibility so some of the ugly stuff like 16 bit window pointers is still around.

Back when DOS was the way to go, the original SimCity had a memory bug. It would free some memory so that the system could recover it, but continue to use that memory. It just so happened that with the particular memory allocator SimCity was tested on, they managed to get away with it without ever knowing. Later, when MS was releasing a new DOS, they wrote a better memory allocator, only to discover that all of a sudden SimCity crashed left and right. The solution was basically "if program == simcity then use old allocator."

I didn't mean they never toss anything, just that their base system structure is still garbage.

I get the compatibility thing and all that, heard it many times.. but it's an excuse more than a reason. At some point, they have to have the balls to do something RIGHT instead of just convenient. I mean I guess it's not like they have billions upon billions of dollars in cash laying around to develop with.. which funds hundreds upon hundreds of the supposed 'best minds in the world'.. oh wait..

Kyle

[Shock Tsunami]

In terms of multi-core performance, I've been using Nucleo Pro for that with After Effects and C4D for a while now... but CS4 implemented that just fine. In all practicality, it's not useful for anything but the final render, multiprocessing, since preview renders are hamstrung by multi-processing, completely offsetting the benefit of a faster final export. Don't get me started about Final Cut.

And I'd love to hear your real-world applications, your personal experiences in needing GPU utilization with Photoshop. Been working on billboards lately, or just optimizing documents incorrectly? What exactly are you doing that requires this level of involvement with HTML5 and Adobe?

[[DDD] Set]

I didn't mean they never toss anything, just that their base system structure is still garbage.

I get the compatibility thing and all that, heard it many times.. but it's an excuse more than a reason. At some point, they have to have the balls to do something RIGHT instead of just convenient. I mean I guess it's not like they have billions upon billions of dollars in cash laying around to develop with.. which funds hundreds upon hundreds of the supposed 'best minds in the world'.. oh wait..

On the last point, it's not a matter of convenience anymore. I interviewed at MS (believe me, it is an excellent place to work) and spoke to an alumn of my university informally afterwards. He says that they have this huge huge list of "compatibility-critical" programs, which they must have stable in their patches, or they can't push them, no matter how poorly said programs are written. The list basically translates to "companies that will sue us for vast sums of money if we break their software." My point is that MS's hands are tied up and double knotted. From the outside looking in, it's tremendously difficult to accurately place blame.

On multiprocessing, the benefits may not be that big now, but understand that processor cores are going to stop getting so much faster, and start getting more numerous. Performance gains that are marginal now may be massive on the 16, 32, 64 core machine of 3-years-from-now.

And I'd love to hear your real-world applications, your personal experiences in needing GPU utilization with Photoshop. Been working on billboards lately, or just optimizing documents incorrectly?

Presumably he just wants it to be faster. GPUs are basically massively parallel matrix algebra computers, which lines up very nicely with the needs of image processing. Used correctly (which is hard to do), they could generate substantial performance increases.

[Shock Tsunami]

But I'm asking what kind of applications would require that kind of speed. I'm tired of hearing prosumer/consumer types complaining about speed with unfounded requirements, and I'm curious to hear if it's vacation photos or deadlines that are driving the frustration and progression of the technology.

[[DDD] Set]

Well, my sister does a lot of art and image editing for fun. Whenever she uses a filter or an expensive transform like blend or blur, her computer slows to a crawl. Her computer is far from state-of-the-art, but so too are most people's. Better GPU use would make PS work much better on computers that aren't brand new.

Of course, one could argue that such users aren't Adobe's target, as they're written off as losses to piracy anyway... but then we're no longer asking whether PS would benefit, but whether Adobe would.

[Shock Tsunami]

Therein lies the problem, I'd say. Designing one program for the demands of unskilled versus professional users begs problems. I know for one thing, people might complain of the CPU usage of Gaussian blur in After Effects, but the professional thing is to use the fast blur option instead...

...So Adobe will waste time optimizing lens blur for people who don't know when to use it, instead of revamping their program's foundations and making it run stable for people that run it 6-10 hours a day. It should be a 2-birds 1-stone problem, but ugh. Just give me Autodesk Smoke and be done with it.

[Kyo]

In terms of multi-core performance, I've been using Nucleo Pro for that with After Effects and C4D for a while now... but CS4 implemented that just fine. In all practicality, it's not useful for anything but the final render, multiprocessing, since preview renders are hamstrung by multi-processing, completely offsetting the benefit of a faster final export. Don't get me started about Final Cut.

And I'd love to hear your real-world applications, your personal experiences in needing GPU utilization with Photoshop. Been working on billboards lately, or just optimizing documents incorrectly? What exactly are you doing that requires this level of involvement with HTML5 and Adobe?

You have taken a way defensive stance for some reason.. I'm not even really arguing with you, just commenting on photoshop at this point. The html5 vs. flash thing I've already made my comments on, the above post was clearly directed at photoshop specifically.. nothing more.

You clearly have no idea what I do, don't assume I have no idea what I'm talking about.

As far as PS is concerned, I never even said GPU was this massively important thing.. and -my entire previous post- was my doubts as to if multi-core is ever really going to benefit photo work. My only comment about it was that it's something that really should have been there before because the tech allowed it.

For the record, since it seems so important to you that I have a resume to qualify my thoughts.. I do photo work professionally (retouching, editing, restoration, etc) and I also alpha/beta test plugin software. That good enough for me to have an opinion?

DDD - As for multi-core performance, it's not the processors that are the issue.. it's not having things for them to do. Having more cores means splitting things apart further, more passing things around. Taking a relatively short process and splitting it 18 different ways doesn't do a whole lot. Video gets a huge boost from multicore because you can work multiple frames at a time.. but in photoshop sicking every bit of power on a single frame doesn't show nearly the same increase.

Kyle

[Shock Tsunami]

I'm asking for real world applications to understand your frame of reference. Too often I've seen people go out on extended, destructive, and ill-informed arguments with only a peripheral interest in the subject. It's annoying and it hurts the industry when the only opinions are pretty much ramped up in an echo chamber of ignorance.

And now I'm curious, which company do you work for?

[Kyo]

I work for myself technically.. I am freelance, but I work primarily with a few local studios. I do plugin testing for major software company.

Am I shock-tsunami approved to have an opinion on photoshop now? pleeeease?

Kyle

[Shock Tsunami]

Everyone's pre-approved for an opinion, they come packaged with belly-buttons and bungholes. But I'm wary of opinions when they're coming from ill-informed sources. I'm asking about industry experience because there's a very distinct line between people that do it as a hobby, and people that have been in the industry. They're just not the same.

I know how to approach people's opinions better when I know the difference. Since I know where you stand in the industry, I think I understand why you sound the way you do.

[Kyo]

The issue here is you sound like a complete arrogant prick.

I have worked in the industry, my opinions on technology aren't really changed by that.. hell I don't even have much opinion in this thread that isn't uncommon.

I wish adobe updated things more efficiently.. who doesn't?

I wish multicore tech benefited photoshop, but odds are it won't. CS5 seems to be claiming it will, which would be great.. I just haven't seen how they plan to do it yet.

I don't see any part of that which needs to be qualified..

Kyle

[Shock Tsunami]

Cool off! Industry versus non-industry is a very distinct difference. And it's a valid one, prosumers versus professionals have extremely different opinions.

And I agree on the Adobe problems, was that not apparent from the get-go?

[Vendetta]