Agreed. I've had two Android phones in a row with 'full flash' support, they were both more responsive with Flash uninstalled.

Regardless of what Adobe says, Flash does not work on mobile devices as of 2011.

I call bullshit. If you have flash disabled or set on-demand in your browser preferences, there is no change in the overall speed or responsiveness of your device, in comparison to flash not being installed.

I left flash enabled. Obviously disabling would do the same as uninstalling.

Go read the HN guidelines, too BTW.

The problem is I have yet to see a livestream solution, that isn't based on Flash. I watch soccer and starcraft livestreams quite often, and also did so on my Android in the subway. On a tablet that what be a must have for me.

This is Apple's solution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Live_Streaming

I haven't seen it get used very often, but during SJ keynotes, they have been using this. When I watched, it delivered really high quality video, and managed to stay way smoother than any flash stream I've ever seen under presumably heavy load.

Granted, Apple probably throws a lot of hardware at those events in order to make the tech. look good. So, not an objective appraisal by any means, but it's worked well for me.

Usually you replace an encumbent technology with a better version rather than taking ten steps back. Evolution is about progress, not regression.

The truth is, Adobe's engineering incompetence aside, Flash is a lot, lot better to make programs with than HTML5. Silverlight is a lot, lot better to make programs with than HTML5. Java, C#, Python, Ruby, C++ are all, as a whole, a lot, lot better programming languages than Javascript.

Imagine replacing DVDs with 8 tracks. That's what's happening. It's a perverse scenario, but I can't understand how you can say that it's evolution, evolution is about progress, not regression.

It's Adobe's own fault for neglecting the Mac and Linux for so long, crashing browsers, etc., added with the general menace that PDFs are too and Silverlight was just too late, but let's not pretend the technology's better. It's pretty pathetic and the snail's pace progress of html5 is embarrassing.

And where's ECMAScript 5? What the hell has happened to that, it seems to have dropped off the planet!

> The truth is, Adobe's engineering incompetence aside, Flash is a lot, lot better to make programs with than HTML5. Silverlight is a lot, lot better to make programs with than HTML5. Java, C#, Python, Ruby, C++ are all, as a whole, a lot, lot better programming languages than Javascript.

Your comment isn't very coherent.

-- Other than the fact that "better" is entirely subjective, how many modern web applications in widespread use are based on Flash rather than JS+HTML5? Gmail, facebook, twitter, google docs: no flash. Youtube: flash only for the video codec, not functionality.

-- "ActionScript is a dialect of ECMAScript": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ActionScript So what language features were you thinking of that make ActionScript/Flash better than Javascript?

-- Security holes in Flash vs. HTML5? hmm...

-- HTML5 on 64bit Linux? Check. Flash? still buggy.

Horses were replaced not by faster horses, but by cars.

Trains were not replaced by faster trains, but by airplanes.

Good First class travel experience from Europe to Australia will not be replaced by Excelent First class experience, but rather by Suborbital flight (even without meal) which will bring you there in 2hours.