Migrating from Flex/Actionscript to HTML5

[gregulator]

I know everyone hates Flash, but my business' bread and butter comes from an application I developed (with help) in the Flex environment (so actionscript). I love the fact that I do not have any browser incompatibility issues and that I have a relatively "fixed" sandbox so to speak. Either people have Flash or they don't. Also, the IDE is really easy to work with.

At some point I will probably replace it with an HTML5 version so it is available on all devices, and integration with a shopping cart will likely be easier (and all the Flash haters will love me). Any thoughts on porting to HTML5 (and an IDE)? Is it too soon to jump on this bandwagon? You can see the app on the site in my sig, click on the ConfigurEIGHTor button.

Thanks!

 

[sourceninja]

HTML 5 is ok if you want to target phones, but the standard is still new and I personally I don't think it's implemented properly in enough browsers yet.

But a little CSS + JavaScript and XHTML would be a good start.

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Far too soon to jump on the bandwagon. As it stands, HTML5 is really only used for targeting apple devices. It's nowhere near mature enough, and it isn't ubiquitous enough to be a self-contained solution.

Given your typical browser adoption rate, I'd count on another 2-3 years before it's something you can use without a fallback plan. Until then, it's just for people who want to target the iStuff.


With HTML4, I don't believe you have the graphical flexibility to do your representation without a server app doing the heavy lifting. That will affect responsiveness very significantly, not to mention your server load.

 

[Shilohen]

Far too soon to jump on the bandwagon. As it stands, HTML5 is really only used for targeting apple devices. It's nowhere near mature enough, and it isn't ubiquitous enough to be a self-contained solution.

Given your typical browser adoption rate, I'd count on another 2-3 years before it's something you can use without a fallback plan. Until then, it's just for people who want to target the iStuff.


With HTML4, I don't believe you have the graphical flexibility to do your representation without a server app doing the heavy lifting. That will affect responsiveness very significantly, not to mention your server load.

^ This. The HTML 5 specification is still in early draft status: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html.

Furthermore, the two main replacements for Flash are the video and canvas tags. While the latter is very well supported since it's the new cool thing of HTML 5, there's not many framework yet created to use it and it's far from simple. As for the video tag, there's still the codec issue of Ogg Theora (Chrome, Opera, Firefox) vs. H.264 (IE, Chrome, Anything Apple). As for the rest of HTML 5, and CSS 3, we're far from good support:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_(HTML5)
- http://caniuse.com/
- http://findmebyip.com/litmus/#target-selector

I'd say 2 years for good adoption. I'm a bit more enthusiastic than PhatoseAlpha mainly because IE is losing ground at about 15% per year and that other browsers get auto updated most of the times and IE 9 *should* support HTML 5 decently

 

[JACKDRUID]

HTML5 is NOT ready yet! don't fall into the Apple hype, they are going to fail due to the lack of flash support.

Flash is perfectly ok for now, don't recreate what is already working.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

HTML5 is NOT ready yet! don't fall into the Apple hype, they are going to fail due to the lack of flash support.

Flash is perfectly ok for now, don't recreate what is already working.

This is a joke. "They are going to fail"? Really? Get a grip.

As for the OP, I dislike your use of Flash because once you get into the "configurEIGHTor", the entire page is rendered within the Flash object. There are a million reasons not to do this. Alternatives would be a more conservative use of Flash, converting what you have into an XHTML/CSS/Javascript implementation, or maybe dabbling in HTML5. I agree with others that HTML5 being a draft spec makes it a little risky.

 

[Ka0t1x]

Just checking out the board configuration.. this could probably be done.. in... Javascript.

 

[Shilohen]

The OP has a working application, he should just stick with it until HTML 5 becomes mainstream and maybe even longer than that, iPad is not everything. I don't think it would be worth it to change it now, even with jQuery it would not be that straightforward.

 

[Ka0t1x]

Of course if its working now - don't break it, but there's no hurt in trying to convert it on the side if there's an interest.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Of course if its working now - don't break it, but there's no hurt in trying to convert it on the side if there's an interest.

"Working" is pretty ambiguous. Two good reasons among many to change this "working" site:

- Flash is a hindrance to accessibility. As one example, good luck making a 100% Flash-based site accessible to anyone using assistive technology like a screen reader. Insert joke here about handicapped snowboarders. But I'm betting anyone who uses a screen reader is SOL on this site.

- Mobile users can't use this site. This isn't just about Apple products.

 

[Shilohen]

"Working" is pretty ambiguous. Two good reasons among many to change this "working" site:

- Flash is a hindrance to accessibility. As one example, good luck making a 100% Flash-based site accessible to anyone using assistive technology like a screen reader. Insert joke here about handicapped snowboarders. But I'm betting anyone who uses a screen reader is SOL on this site.

- Mobile users can't use this site. This isn't just about Apple products.

Sure, but making an accessible web site will be even harder and to keep the current level of interactivity he would have to use WAI-ARIA (http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria) which also happen to be in draft state and most likely wait for HTML 5 anyway. Also, unless legislation forces accessibility on them, I have doubts about the financial benefit of investing in a fully accessible application in the custom snowboard market since you cannot really offer that as a gift, it's way too specific.

As for the mobile, it depend on the market, I don't think many would shop for a custom made snowboard on their ipod touch, iphone, blackberry, android phones. Again, making a similar application to work on small screen would be quite hard. It all boils down to the potential extra revenue vs. development and maintenance cost.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

Sure, but making an accessible web site will be even harder and to keep the current level of interactivity he would have to use WAI-ARIA (http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria) which also happen to be in draft state and most likely wait for HTML 5 anyway. Also, unless legislation forces accessibility on them, I have doubts about the financial benefit of investing in a fully accessible application in the custom snowboard market since you cannot really offer that as a gift, it's way too specific.

As for the mobile, it depend on the market, I don't think many would shop for a custom made snowboard on their ipod touch, iphone, blackberry, android phones. Again, making a similar application to work on small screen would be quite hard. It all boils down to the potential extra revenue vs. development and maintenance cost.

The OP specifically said, "At some point I will probably replace it with an HTML5 version so it is available on all devices," so he is obviously already considering this. Even if he doesn't opt for an HTML5 implementation, he has options right now to expand the number of devices on which this site can be viewed. That's my point.

Also, I just don't like Flash, but I'm trying to leave that out of it. It's a point worth considering though: how about anyone who, like me, does not like to use Flash and may knowingly not have it installed? You might argue that these visitors are limiting their own experience, but if there are enough of them, you're also limiting your potential customer base.

 

[Markbnj]

The OP specifically said, "At some point I will probably replace it with an HTML5 version so it is available on all devices," so he is obviously already considering this. Even if he doesn't opt for an HTML5 implementation, he has options right now to expand the number of devices on which this site can be viewed. That's my point.

Also, I just don't like Flash, but I'm trying to leave that out of it. It's a point worth considering though: how about anyone who, like me, does not like to use Flash and may knowingly not have it installed? You might argue that these visitors are limiting their own experience, but if there are enough of them, you're also limiting your potential customer base.

But Flash is ubiquitous on eCommerce sites everywhere. I don't think it's very limiting. In the long run technologies like Flash and Silverlight might be supplanted by HTML5, but it will be awhile, and a ton of production code relies on those plugins.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

But Flash is ubiquitous on eCommerce sites everywhere. I don't think it's very limiting. In the long run technologies like Flash and Silverlight might be supplanted by HTML5, but it will be awhile, and a ton of production code relies on those plugins.

I don't disagree that Flash has heavy penetration and that many site developers may face a challenging decision about whether or not to continue using Flash. As you say, it may not be cost-effective to change a working site. But at the same time, I honestly can't think of even one major player in the online retail world that relies exclusively on Flash for the browsing and purchasing process. It's a bad idea, and huge retailers like Amazon know this.

I can understand conservative use of Flash in displaying product information or serving rich content in an interesting way. But to rely on it for the entire presentation of a commerce site is foolish in my eyes. If the OP has the resources to improve his site by moving away from Flash, I think it's a good choice.

 

[Markbnj]

I don't disagree that Flash has heavy penetration and that many site developers may face a challenging decision about whether or not to continue using Flash. As you say, it may not be cost-effective to change a working site. But at the same time, I honestly can't think of even one major player in the online retail world that relies exclusively on Flash for the browsing and purchasing process. It's a bad idea, and huge retailers like Amazon know this.

I can understand conservative use of Flash in displaying product information or serving rich content in an interesting way. But to rely on it for the entire presentation of a commerce site is foolish in my eyes. If the OP has the resources to improve his site by moving away from Flash, I think it's a good choice.

I don't disagree with that at all. Most sites use it for specific navigation or information display purposes.

 

[tatteredpotato]

If the OP has the resources to improve his site by moving away from Flash, I think it's a good choice.

While flash may not be the optimal choice, that app seems moderately complex, and he very well may be better off waiting until HTML5 tools mature and catch up the Flash.

I'm not a web developer myself, so I'm not sure how hard that would be to implement in Javascript/CSS/HTML5, however he might want to check out GWT... it seemed to be a good tool for simplifying web app creation (assuming the OP knows Java).