Adobe releases Flash to HTML5 converter | Hacker News Reader

Adobe releases Flash to HTML5 converter

thenextweb.com

106 pointssiddhant51 comments

Next up, endless complaint about how Adobe's javascript code is slow, or they're doing something horrible to the canvas or some other B.S.

(I can't wait for my quad core computer to grind to a halt with dozens of unblockable canvas advertisements wallpapering every website I go to from now on...sigh, the end is near)

NoScript to the rescue, it can block all kinds of embedded content, even custom fonts.

Or entire websites!

(Thanks for the javascript ball of mud, Gawker.)

Unblockable? No, you'd block them just as you block JPEG and GIF banners (and crappy iframes) now.

If anything it should be easier to block them as it's simpler to inspect the inside of a javascript/canvas banner than a flash one, from the context of a browser extension.

Currently Webkit only (uses CSS3 animation with the Webkit prefix). Did a fairly good job on a keyframe/tween animation I'd done. There were a few problems with masked images but I imagine that could be fixed.

Most features are supported where the HTML/CSS equivalent exists. No support for any Actionscript conversion (oh if only AS3 hadn't decided to reinvent itself as Java 2 this might have been possible).

Questions:

1. How modular is the code produced? Could I easily use Flash to create chunks of animation but then control them via Javascript?

2. Will Mozilla ever support CSS Animation? Last I heard they weren't too keen on it.

3. IE? Scratch that. I'm not even going to ask.

"Webkit only"

Most likely targeting certain mobile platforms that don't support Flash, so that they can still claim their tool is "write once, build everywhere," even if one build target isn't.

Kudos, I'm happy to see Adobe move back towards building tools rather than platforms.

2. Will Mozilla ever support CSS Animation? Last I heard they weren't too keen on it

There are some CSS animations in Mozilla's Demos: https://mozillademos.org/demos/dashboard/demo.html . They work just fine for me in 4b12.

Compiling Java to JavaScript is far from impossible - GWT manages to do it, for example. I don't know if Adobe is willing to go that far, though...

True. Compilation isn't an ideal solution however as you end up with code that's not human readable or editable. I wanted to make the point that Javascript and Actionscript used to be so similar that some form of conversion that left the code usable might have been possible.

> Compilation isn't an ideal solution however as you end up with code that's not human readable or editable

Sounds pretty ideal for Adobe.

Regardless of performance at this point, I still can't see how this can be a negative thing.

Hat's off to Adobe for now, as I can't see anything evil in this.

Two possible negative things :

1. It could be the Microsoft scenario : Embrace. Extend. Extinguish.

2. This tool could be used to spread FUD : "Look this is my project converted into html5, it looked much better in Flash"

How is 1 even possible when they don't control the platform?

1 is impossible because Adobe does not control the platform.

2 isn't really possible since Adobe could easily be proven wrong. Adobe is very much in favour of HTML5, and they only care about their development tools. By releasing a converter, they improve their expensive toos.

This could really easily happen, and I take your points on board.

Hopefully they are only doing the first 2 e's of point 1 and they can prove to be a notable addition to html5.

Maybe I am being overly optimistic.

Adobe makes authoring tools, and directly makes no money on Flash Player: If advertisers need a way to attack every iOS user with ads, Adobe wants to be there with a tool.

However I laugh at point #2 -- it is simply inconceivable that Flash, with over a decade of a head start in heavy animation, actually does look better in many cases (which it does) -- it has to be FUD.

I don't think the FUD was that things will look better in the original Flash. That really only would make sense. The FUD was that "Oh, this thing that converted my Flash into HTML5 looked like crap afterward; therefore HTML5 must be crap", when it could really be an issue of the conversion process rather than HTML5 itself.

Wow.. I wonder what extent the animations stay the same after the conversion. Can anyone throw up a before and after?

I can certainly throw up at the thought of a Flash to HTML5 converter ...

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/wallaby/

>"Wallaby" is the codename for an experimental technology that converts the artwork and animation contained in Adobe® Flash® Professional (FLA) files into HTML.

Not quite as exciting as a SWF -> HTML5 converter. I wonder about the feasability of that.

Would be probably similar to the HTML output from Microsoft Word.

uneditable html, probably.

Did you actually look at the converted HTML?

Testing it out, it seems to be a dialog that accepts .fla files and tells you it can't convert them. At least that's all I could get it to do with any of my Flash projects.

Has anybody managed to find a subset of Flash that it will actually convert?

It worked pretty well with an animation from an old project: Html5: http://enwire.dk/Wallaby/Html5/ Flash: http://enwire.dk/Wallaby/Flash/

At least it works in Chrome but it looks kinda funny in IE9. For basic animations it could probably be useful.

Looking at it in Chrome (no love in FF3, but I suspect FF4 willchnage that) I'm actually impressed. That's a reasonable 1.0 effort.

FF4 isn't slated to support CSS animations AFAIK

Having some Chrome about:flags turned on this hanged my machine... Lesson learned!

Actually looks better to me in chrome/html5 than flash.

I managed to get one of my designers' fla animations to compile...

...into a very static (non animated) page.

Apparently it doesn't do dynamic masks, which pretty much rules out any Flash design project I have ever worked on since about 2001.

Also, how is this better than http://smokescreen.us/?

Also, how is this better than http://smokescreen.us/?

I'd say its current advantage is that it exists.

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly. smokescreen "exists" too - http://smokescreen.us/demos/js/smokescreen.0.1.3-min.js

Is it possible to do anything with that apart from run the existing Smokescreen demos? There's nothing on the site that refers to anything having shipped or even a target ship date.

I'm playing with the tool and it seems that actionscript 3 isn't supported.

How about Actionscript 2? Flash basically has two VMs . . . one is used to run legacy content (up to Flash 8, AS2), the other for newer content (Flash 9+, AS3). But my reading of the project page suggested it was just converting graphical and animation elements in .FLA files.

I have tried different .fla and if there is a line of actionscript (even if not used) the conversion fails.

http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2011/03/wallaby-flash-to-html5-...

Same here. I have tried all the samples from http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flash/samples.html - and everytime the result is "FLA version not supported"

Now we will have a great environment to work with when HTML5 gets solid acceptance.

Can we stop with the silly demos, people complaining "it doesn't work on my browser!" and articles on how a couple of tags would kill Flash?

I for one can't wait to have the best of both worlds.

EDIT: The adobe page on Wallaby links to a "release notes" wiki page and a forum board. Both are suspiciously empty.

http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Wallaby#Release_Notes

"Actionscript 1,2 - Unsupported"

"Actionscript 3 - Unsupported"

Then it's not Flash. I really don't have a need to convert any animations from 2002 into the hippest standards. I've never thought to myself "Boy, All Your Base is still really funny, but if only the underlying technology that powered it was open and modern....."

when action script will easily be converted to html5, then all mobile apps will finally move to the cloud

I have not read this article, but I would never use this.

I hate these converters that take one language and 'port' them to another one.

Especially any made by Adobe.

I'm actually a big fan of compilers, but maybe I'm just old.

What don't Adobe get? It's not that Flash is bad "just" because it's not HTML5, it's also bad because it enables crap things. HTML5 or not, that's always going to be the case.

This kind of knee-jerk anti-Flash thing is getting tiresome.

We get it. You don't like animated ads. I don't like them either. You can make annoying animations using any technology.

Are you seriously implying that animation/interactivity in general is a bad thing? I seriously doubt that. Stop blaming the tools. Use Adblock and get over it.

Flash is great when used for the right purpose. HTML is great when used for the right purpose, too. Some may overlap; no problem as competition is good for tech.

What bothers people is the fact that sometimes entire websites that would work perfectly in HTML are built in Flash.

I quite agree but Apple's anti-Flash play has almost certainly made this a thing of the past.

OP seems to be saying something different and altogether less defensible: "Anything made with Flash is bad". This is denying an entire range of applications that are currently unfeasible with HTML-based technologies.

I should have said "encourage" instead of "enable". And it's not a knee jerk reaction, I've been anti flash for years. I used to make my money exclusively as a flash designer/developer. And of course I'm not implying what you suggest.

I struggle to find a different interpretation of your statement even with the word substitution you suggest.

I've seen astonishing creativity from the Flash community over the years in the areas of games, UI experiments, generative art to name a few. Do you remember when Javascript had the same soiled reputation? DHTML anyone?

HTML (1 through 5) enable "crap things" too. As long as skilled users can create quality products, who cares what everyone else does?

But it's not skilled users using it? Nor is it an informed public using it. Even if those two ingredients did come together, Flash itself would still be a resource hungry, unstable dog.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com