Mobile app version of vmapp.org
Login or Join
Candy875

: Why do sites still prefer Flash video over the HTML5 video format? What is it about Flash video that makes sites still prefer it over the HTML5 video format? Why is Youtube's default format

@Candy875

Posted in: #Flash #Html5 #Video

What is it about Flash video that makes sites still prefer it over the HTML5 video format? Why is Youtube's default format Flash, even though they have HTML5 version and they allow you to use it? Why doesn't Facebook even want to show a video if you don't have Flash installed, regardless that they obviously have it in the HTML5 format (because it's available on the mobile touch.facebook.com subdomain of the same URL)?

10.04% popularity Vote Up Vote Down


Login to follow query

More posts by @Candy875

4 Comments

Sorted by latest first Latest Oldest Best

 

@Voss4911412

The main reason is codec support. Even though modern browsers support the most common codecs (H.264, VP8, Theora), the support is inconsistent. For example, VP8 is not supported in IE9 and Safari (due to Apple's involvement in MPEG-LA), Firefox relies on the OS/Hardware for H.264 support, and Theora suffers in both adoption and quality compared to the others.

Because of this spottiness, when a codec isn't supported by a browser, it's common for websites to use Flash as a fallback. JWPlayer and Video.js are popular among sites with self-hosted video, and both provide a Flash fallback if a codec isn't supported. It's like a codec polyfill.

Flash also carries RTMP (Real Time Messaging Protocol), which is still the go-to method for streaming live video for a lot of sites. Since Flash is cross-browser, you only have to encode video into one format. This saves bandwidth, and let's the site worry about load balancing instead. Both Facebook and Twitch use this for live streaming.

Edit: This also explains why these sites want you to use their native apps on mobile. They don't have to worry about format or protocol support if they don't rely on the mobile browser.

10% popularity Vote Up Vote Down


 

@LarsenBagley505

Flash tends to have higher compatibility with a lot more web browsers than HTML5 does. Flash has been around for several years, but HTML5 is relatively new. In order for companies to present multimedia to worldwide customers effectively, they would use the tools compatible with the browsers customers have.

10% popularity Vote Up Vote Down


 

@Connie744

Companies that use Flash have a workflow with it and have no reason to change, perhaps. They have the tools and the talent to use it so why change? Flash is readily available on Windows still but it's a heavy thing to have, often requires installation and updating and mobile devices can bog down (the reason Apple doesn't allow Flash on mobile).

It should be noted that YouTube now defaults to HTML5 video. My web dev company does not use Flash at all.

10% popularity Vote Up Vote Down


 

@Si4351233

The same reason they still support insecure connection modes.... Compatibility. Embedded OS's in some devices and things haven't been updated in a very long time. Perhaps some devices like kiosks are even ie8 on XP without any service packs. Generally, who knows what dinosaurs are out there.

Also I believe html5 player is a fallback. It's prob less code weight (and maintenance) for compat switches if it's a flash first schema rather than doing crazy checks to fallback to flash for the plethora of incompat devices.

10% popularity Vote Up Vote Down


Back to top | Use Dark Theme