The debate right now is one side saying you should use "HTML5" because it's more open than Flash while Flash is buggy, bloated, and proprietary. The other side is saying "I need Flash to give my clients what they want." Just like people started using CSS over table-based layouts when it was pragmatic, people will stop using Flash when Flash stops being the best tool for the job. There's nothing wrong with that.
I work with Flash and I don't think it's buggy or bloated - that's overblown. It's not perfect, but it's definitely much better than people paint it to be (specially people who don't work with it).
In the same vein, HTML5/canvas is unreliable both in terms of performance, adoption, and consistency among different environments. People like to think of "standards", but when it requires as much hacks as any other 'standard' work nowadays do, and when it's not even available in half the browsers out there, I wonder how can anyone think it's the golden goose people like to claim it is.
Depends if you're using Windows or not. On Mac and Linux, the performance and reliability are pretty bad (compared to other modern software, anyway).
We are looking at Flash solutions right now to solve that problem.
And all those people not using CSS layouts for non-pragmatic reasons actually held up progress because it stifled the market for tools (and skills and frameworks etc.) that would work in the new manner.
So good analogy, but I think it argues well for the opposite of what you intended.
But this will eventually boil down to a difference in opinion, and I agree with your point that it would be better for everyone if more people were quick to adopt technologies that are better in the long-run.
And vice versa. There's a nice table-based layout on the Google front page still!
I tend to fall on Apple's side when it comes to not wanting to be forced to support a technology that it is against. That being said, seeing the CPU usage on these simple HTML5/JS games was a bit shocking - no idea if that is due to sub-standard coding, or if it's inherent in JS, but it seems to blow a hole in the "Flash is a resource hog" argument.
I am wondering if better developer tools for creating graphical HTML5/JS and/or JIT compilation will help with this. Clearly an iPhone is capable of amazing things graphically, but that's all been on the native app side.
How is that Apple's side? Allowing something to be installed is not by any means the same as being "forced to support" it.
Ignorance is bliss.
Flash developers want the development experience that Flash offers. HTML5 doesn't offer it...yet. When it does, I personally would love to migrate to it.
Your assumptions are pitiful and illogical.
The fact is, for video playback, it does just fine today, even on limited mobile devices, and if sites were to only replace Flash with HTML5 for video and audio playback, we're talking about 90% of Flash's popular use right there. As HTML5 matures, including content creation tools and the performance of various browser runtime implementations, it'll eat into Flash's share for other tasks as well. Apple is creating a market demand for HTML5 development tools and expertise, which is the first necessary step in order to bring the platform to maturity. After that happens, Flash developers will jump on board and forget this thing ever happened. Until then, just keep coding your crappy Flash ads and leave the rest of us who actually want some progress for the open web alone.
The mature platform and an immature platform.
HTML5 holds promise but it's simply not capable of delivering anything close to what the flash platform can.
Just because something is new doesn't mean it's better. Let it naturally outperform flash once it's better, nothing hinders that.
So if you believe HTML5 will be better then let it prove itself.
So far it's no where near.
