Hacker News Reader

Comment by JonoW | Hacker News Reader

No options? Silverlight? WebGL? Sure they may not be perfect, but for 9% of revenue, companies will consider alternatives pretty quickly

View on HN

Why would they switch? These are new features they haven't been using and which probably aren't available on Silverlight or WebGL. Switch because they're adding an option you don't want to chose?

Silverlight 5 and WebGL offer hardware accelerated 3D graphics. So if you're making a new 3D game from scratch, SL or WebGL could be worth looking into.

If a company has no plans to use these premium features, then yes, I would imagine they will continue along as-is with Flash.

But a last thought; a revenue sharing plan like this will make big players nervous - what might Adobe starting charging for next? It will cause developers to start at least considering alternatives.

This. Development studios won't want to be locked into the ass-raping that iOS developers have been putting up with. With advanced browsers and WebGL gaining traction, along with the proliferation of iOS devices which don't use Flash at all, I'd say Adobe has completely screwed themselves.

If we're only concerned about Adobe's customers not leaving, it's very certain that Adobe is in a losing proposition. That's the position Microsoft is in and IBM was in for a long time. Why would anyone want to pay for Flash over WebGL or nacl if they're starting a new project?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com