I say: Then you need to change your handle, ‘engineer’, because you clearly fall into the non-engineer category–as based on the number and severity of mis-statements in your post!

Claim: “Flash is nothing more than a very lightweight, and poorly implemented scripting language.”

Facts: Flash is: 1) a virtual machine (VM) and run-time environment (the Flash ‘Player’); and 2) is also the name of the tool/application which one uses to create dynamic images which run in the VM. The Flash VM can execute AS3 & AS2 code. It executes _binary_ (byte) code and NOT _source_ code. Note: Java and the .NET languages (i.e., C#) use similar byte code and VM technologies. Flash AS3 code supports modern object-oriented programming constructs (classes, inheritance, interfaces, polymorphism), plus other mechanisms such as: generics, data binding, both static and dynamic typing.

Counter-claim: It would be no more accurate to call Flash AS3 code a “scripting language” than it would be to call Java or C# the same.

Informed Opinion: you called [Flash AS code] “…very lightweight, and poorly implemented…”. I would argue that Flash’s strongly increasing acceptance as a Web Application and Cross-Platform Application tool (using the Flex and AIR frameworks) would contradict your claim. Furthermore, it has seen great acceptance among software developers with an interest in strong software _engineering_ (for example, among leading-edge Java developers).

Claim: “Even Flash Video is obsolete now that h.264 is an open standard.”

Fact: The most recent versions of the Flash VM include H.264 support.

Question: So _how_ has Flash Video become obsolete? Please, be _specific_.

Counter-Claim: The Flash VM’s inclusion of H.264 is a solid indication of its continued relevance and popularity.

Claim: “The only thing Flash ever had going for it was…a bit more dynamism than existing html markup allowed.”

Fact: major applications have been built with the Flash VM as their underpinnings. These include complex things like word processors (Buzzword), image editors (Photoshop.com), Visio-like diagramming tools; and countless Enterprise/Line-Of-Business applications (being used internally by major corporations).

Counter-Claim: applications can be built on the Flash platform that are as portable as Java applications and potentially are as rich as Java/MacOS (Cocoa)/Windows (.NET) ones.

Claim: “Apple is clearly behind H.264 and HTML 5 both open standards that go to the core of the value that flash added to the web experience in the 1990s.” (sic)

Fact: HTML 5 is still a _draft_ standard. Furthermore, only SOME (really a few bits) of it has been implemented and only in _some_ browsers.

Counter-Claim: HTML 5 is (largely) irrelevant until (and unless!) it is widely deployed across the mainstream web browsers.

Informed Opinion: We now have over a decade of _actual experience_ in seeing how new technologies and standards get defined and deployed over the Web. That experience suggests that HTML 5 will take a long time (if ever) to become widely useful/to be relied on. Specifically:

– The standards setting bodies work _slowly_.
– Technologies that only work in _some browsers_ face an up-hill battle, particularly when those browsers don’t have sufficient market share.
– Technologies that work differently between browsers and even ones that are unevenly implemented face challenges in becoming widely used.
– The vendor of the browser with the pre-dominant market share has expressed, at best, only grudging interest in implementing HTML 5 features. Their _actual actions_, however, demonstrate little if any progress on that front.

OK, ‘engineer’, the ball’s over to you!

I think you need to look at this link: https://www.photoshop.com/

It certainly will, but will Google write their own? The current Linux flash plugin from Adobe is an awful performer, and the 64-bit version is highly unstable.