This question was made over 9 years ago. It made sense then, it doesn't make it now. Flash is hard on its way out; <video>
support is ubiquitous, including mobile devices. Almost anything that Flash could do, HTML can now do too. HTML won, Flash lost. If you're pondering on how to embed video in your page, just use <video>
and don't give it a second thought. This question is only preserved for historical value.
Seems like the new <video>
tag is all the hype these days, especially since Firefox now supports it. News of this are popping up in blogs all over the place, and everyone seems to be excited. But what about?
As much as I searched I could not find anything that would make it better than the good old Flash video. In fact, I see only problems with it:
The only two pros for a <video>
tag that I can see are:
So... what's the big deal?
Added:
OK, so there is one more Pro... maybe. Support for mobile devices. Hard to say though. A number of thoughts race through my head about the subject:
<video>
support? Even if it is available through updates, how many people actually do that?As for the semantics part - I understand that search engines might be able to detect videos better now, but... what will they do with them anyway? OK, so they know that there is a video in the page. And? They can't index a video! I'd like some more arguments here.
Added:
Just thought of another Cons. This opens up a whole new area of cross-browser incompatibility. HTML and CSS is quite messy already in this aspect. Flash at least is the same everywhere. But it's enough for at least one major browser vendor to decide against the <video>
tag (can anyone say "Internet Explorer"?) and we have a nice new area of hell to explore.
Added:
A Pro just came in. More competition = more innovation. That's true. Giving Adobe more competition will probably force them to improve Flash in areas it has been lacking so far. Linux seems to be a weak spot for it, cited by many.