Haven’t we been here before? I didn’t think using HTML5 and JavaScript for interpreting Flash was anything all that new. I guess The Register’s story on Smokescreen differs from Gordon because it is a proprietary development much more specifically aimed at Apple’s mobile platform.
The article mentions the company will eventually open source the interpreter at which point it will be interesting to see if anyone combines it or parts of it with Gordon to advance the state of Flash replacements. As far as I can tell after just a few minutes playing with demos for both, they seem pretty comparable. I am skeptical having both available openly will improve either one.
Doing a bit more digging into the Smokescreen site, I think I found the difference, which The Register buried a little in their story. The company behind Smokescreen is specifically looking to bring interactive ads to the iPhone and iPad with its interpreter. Not developing a general drop in replacement for Flash. In that instance, I suspect The Register’s view on the slow performance and limitations of Smokescreen, a trait Gordon shares, as being less of a handicap is apt. Their point about Apple’s forthcoming network for interactive ads is also well made–if Smokescreen is serious, they need more than a technology demo.
0 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.