This week I read a news article about the future of HTML5 now that Flash is now no longer being developed for mobile applications. It discusses the importance Flash has had, but also discusses the role it will now have. The article says, “Our use of the phrase “post-Flash” isn’t intended to mean that Flash is dead or going to die soon. We simply mean that it’s no longer essential to experiencing the full Web.” The article goes on to discuss that the HTML5 fallback experiences of sites that have a lot of Flash often aren’t as good, but this is quickly becoming less so.
In the context of video, HTML5 delivers much better integration with page content than Flash does. Due to the standardization and open systems, more people and smaller companies are able to put up just as much content as a large organization. This open source is giving people power who wouldn’t have it otherwise, and this seems to be a growing trend.
I’m interested to keep learning both about the future of HTML5 as well as a growing number of open source products. The Internet is continuing to become more expansive and giving people power through it fascinates me.
This week we were assigned to research and attempt to make our augmented reality. However, before this week I didn’t even know what an augmented reality was. After reading and watching several Youtube videos I am now in awe. An augmented reality created by the Discovery Channel was mesmerizing, as well as what Lego is creating in their stores. I immediately started thinking about where this technology is currently, and the potential for growth.
A little nervous, and with a little help from I friend, I was actually attempted to create an augmented reality of my own. The first image is a globe and the second is a rainbow. Both spin on their X axis. I was so excited to accomplish this and think the technology is so interesting.
I found this article very interesting about who’s to blame for the failure of Flash. One of the main reasons this article states is that the market was not read correctly. The future is impossible to know, and predicting where to take products is a hard subject. The mobile market (for Flash) was an area of many concerns and has ultimately the reason that Adobe has decided to stop funding further work. Flash had many problems running on Smartphones, only worked on PCs, and also it was unsure how to charge for the service or not.
As a person now in the interactive field, being aware of the future of a very important product like Flash is crucial. Just as Flash developers have struggled with predicting the future, we must also be aware of the issues they’re looking at. Our industry is ever changing and we must constantly be a step ahead.
What is the future of augmented reality? How will this new technology be used?
Is the “replacement” of the QR code that the second article discusses truly likely?
How do you learn to use AR technology and what sort of “real world” applications could we have with it right now or in future jobs?
Many of the questions that I had posted earlier this week don’t pertain to a topic that I am now more interested in now, so this may seem “off a little bit.
In the past, I’ve never really given games like Second Life much thought. They were for the “nerdy antisocial people” (and let them do what they want to do). However, after reading and discussing the topic more I believe that a great deal of attention should be paid to this group. Coming from a Capitalist perspective, “there is money to be had.” No matter the wrap these users are given, they are extremely involved and willing to pay to play these games.
One of the first topics having to do with money in these games is advertising space within them. Several giant corporations have attempted to penetrate into games like Second Life. Some of them have succeeded, where as others have failed. For those who have failed, maybe this group of users just doesn’t fall for the regular monotonous marketing our society has become accustomed to? I think it would be extremely interesting to study this topic further.
A second thought pertaining to money is the sheer amount of money being generated by both the users and the companies creating these games. I had no idea about the magnitude of either. First, the concept that people playing Second Life can make a million dollars, DEFINITELY made me rethink the whole “nerdy antisocial” thing. I can’t judge anybody who is being smart, using the game to their advantage, and making money. This also makes my highly consider joining (if only I had the time).
The amount of money that these businesses make is also astronomical. Having the ability to charge users in so many ways just makes basically like a never-ending stream of money. For example, each year Blizzard makes over $800 million. This is interesting for me, because I’d love to work for a business making that kind of money! I honestly never would have thought about businesses like this in the past, but I’m learning there are so many markets that I just don’t know enough about.
Alternate reality game users shouldn’t be ignored because of their “social standing.” Marketers (and people attempting to be marketers) should be aware of this group. More research needs to be done into what kind of marketing these users like and also what works. There is a lot of money to be had both for the users of games like Second Life, but also for the creators. Once more people realize this, I’m interested to see how much more this industry grows!
The article discusses how the transition into the virtual world can be “profoundly liberating.” Is this true for everybody and what are the reasons that some people feel this way?
I feel this author has many similar views to Jane McGonigal on gaming. How do these views differ and how are they similar?
As more people begin to create online avatars, how will this affect society? Will anything change?