<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Flash&#160;2005</title>
	<atom:link href="http://shawn.medero.net/2009/08/23/flash-2005/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://shawn.medero.net/2009/08/23/flash-2005/</link>
	<description>An Online Notebook</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:24:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shawn Medero</title>
		<link>http://shawn.medero.net/2009/08/23/flash-2005/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Shawn Medero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 14:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shawn.medero.net/?p=58#comment-3</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Currently Flash faces an uphill battle in HTML user-agents because prominent browser makers don&#039;t feel comfortable giving 3rd party binaries anymore rope with which to hang themselves than necessary. If you look at what browsers are doing in the &lt;code&gt;&lt;object&gt;&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;&lt;embed&gt;&lt;/code&gt; area it is all about sandboxing them.  Because of the performance and security issues I wonder if there really is room for Flash to any grow further.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Note that I said &quot;currently&quot; and &quot;prominent&quot; with respect to browser makers. Adobe has tried to move the state-of-art forward with Air but I don&#039;t think the product is compelling enough for consumers to move to it en masse. Air also fails to address the existing deployment problems Flash has on mobile devices.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Currently Flash faces an uphill battle in HTML user-agents because prominent browser makers don&#8217;t feel comfortable giving 3rd party binaries anymore rope with which to hang themselves than necessary. If you look at what browsers are doing in the <code>&lt;object&gt;</code> and <code>&lt;embed&gt;</code> area it is all about sandboxing them.  Because of the performance and security issues I wonder if there really is room for Flash to any grow&nbsp;further.</p>

<p>Note that I said &#8220;currently&#8221; and &#8220;prominent&#8221; with respect to browser makers. Adobe has tried to move the state-of-art forward with Air but I don&#8217;t think the product is compelling enough for consumers to move to it en masse. Air also fails to address the existing deployment problems Flash has on mobile&nbsp;devices.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tinus</title>
		<link>http://shawn.medero.net/2009/08/23/flash-2005/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Tinus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:55:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shawn.medero.net/?p=58#comment-2</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I think flash is going the way of the dodo and that&#039;s a good thing. It might be around for 5 more years, maybe even 10, but eventually there won&#039;t be any reason left to choose flash if all functionality is available natively in the browser.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think flash is going the way of the dodo and that&#8217;s a good thing. It might be around for 5 more years, maybe even 10, but eventually there won&#8217;t be any reason left to choose flash if all functionality is available natively in the&nbsp;browser.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
